taining and have all the powers necessary for the maintenance of national life, dependent upon no state, upon no state legislature, and upon no power whatever except the

the nation itself. . . .

power of

We have had occasion to exercise the power of regulation both in regard to the election of members of the House of Representatives and in regard to the election of Senators. Congress in 1842 passed a statute to regulate the election of members of the House. It was found necessary in order to have effective and proper elections. It has passed repeated statutes since then, notably in 1872, and our elections are being conducted now under those statutes passed by the Congress. Congress has found occasion to regulate the election of Senators, and those elections are being conducted now under the statute passed in 1866. No man can say that the time will not come again when it will be necessary for the Congress, in order to secure uniformity, in order to secure effectiveness, in order to prevent abuses, to exercise its power in respect of regulating the times and the manner of electing members to each House of the national legislature.

But it was not my purpose, as I have already stated, to re-argue this case. I have stated the substantial grounds upon which I prefer that the substitute offered by the Senator from Kansas shall take the place of the original joint resolution. I shall oppose the resolution, then, on the ground that I think it is inexpedient and unnecessary to make any amendment of the Constitution at all in regard to the election of Senators. I believe that it will result in a deterioration of the personnel of the Senate. I believe that it will keep out of the Senate a large and important element well adapted to the performance of the peculiar and special duty of the Senate in our system of government. I believe that all the abuses which have led to such a desire for this change on the part of the people of the country can be cured by a simple amend

ment of the law, by amending the statute rather than by amending the Constitution of the United States.

Such a step I have already introduced. It was introduced at the last session and favorably reported by the Committee on Privileges and Elections. It has been introduced again at this session and is now pending before the Committee on Privileges and Elections. It provides for the election of Senators by a plurality, which is something that would be inevitable if we transfer the right of election from the legislatures to the people. It cures the evils which we have had by a simple amendment of the law. It affords an opportunity for a majority rule to control for a period which is stated in the bill as introduced at twenty days, after the first convening of the two houses of the legislature. After the operation of twenty days has failed to produce an election by the majority rule, it provides for the application of a plurality rule.

I fully recognize the fact that we have going on throughout a large part of the country a process of change, a process of experiment in the way of modifying our governmental institutions. I recognize the fact that the people of many states have become dissatisfied with the way in which their political machinery has acted and that they desire to change it. I have great sympathy with the feeling and take great interest in the experiments that are being tried. I believe that good will come from the awakened interest of the people of the country in their own political affairs and from their determination to take a part in their affairs and to make their will effective.

But it is a process of experiment. We cannot change the institutions of more than a century without long trial and consideration. Experiments will fail; experiments will not succeed. All of us will see opportunities for modification and improvement. No one of us can evolve from his own thought,

not all of us together can by conference produce results which we may feel sure are better than the methods devised by the framers of our Government, until the results have been put to the test of practical application.

The system under which we live has produced the best results that ever have come from the experiments of mankind in government. We have received from our present institutions manifold blessings, and in the providence of God have wrought out under those institutions results which have made for the happiness, for the liberty, for the advancement of all mankind. With all history strewn with the wrecks of government, with human nature still unchanged, I would hesitate long before assuming that my own judgment, or the judgment of all of us, can improve the system and framework of our Government, except upon experiment and demonstration by practical application.

I do not like to see experiments begin or proceed in their early stages by amendments to the Constitution in advance of their being tried out fully. Amendments should be the result of long deliberation and trial. They should not initiate deliberation and trial.

For these reasons, I shall take the course regarding the substitute and the joint resolution which I have indicated, whether the substitute be adopted or not.

THE CASE OF SENATOR LORIMER

ADDRESS IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

FEBRUARY 3, 1911

William Lorimer, of Illinois, after serving seven terms in the House of Representatives, was elected United States Senator from Illinois by the legislature of that state, May 26, 1909, for the term 1909-1915.

Mr. Lorimer took his seat June 18, 1909, and on June 20, 1910, the Senate passed a resolution authorizing and directing the Committee on Privileges and Elections to investigate his election. This Committee reported December 21, 1910, to the effect that his election had not been invalidated by corrupt practices, and a minority report was submitted January 9, 1911.

While these reports were under discussion, Mr. Root made the address which follows.

On March 1, 1911, a resolution declaring Mr. Lorimer's election invalid was defeated by a vote of 40 to 46. On June 2, 1911, the Senate passed a resolution appointing a special committee to investigate again the Lorimer case. The majority of this special committee reported in favor of Mr. Lorimer, May 20, 1912, and on July 13, 1912, a resolution of the minority that corrupt methods and practices had rendered Mr. Lorimer's election invalid, was adopted by the Senate by a vote of 55 to 28.

ON

N the twentieth of June last the Senate passed a resolution which directed the Committee on Privileges and Elections

to investigate certain charges against William Lorimer, a Senator from the state of Illinois, and to report to the Senate whether in the election of said William Lorimer as a Senator of the United States from said state of Illinois there were used or employed corrupt methods or practices.

The Committee on Privileges and Elections have now reported, not whether there were used or employed corrupt methods or practices in the election of William Lorimer, but that, in their opinion, the title of Mr. Lorimer to his seat in the Senate has not been shown to be invalid by the use or employment of corrupt methods or practices; and the committee request to be discharged from further consideration of the resolution.

It is a fair inference, from a comparison between the terms of the resolution and the report of the committee, that the