206 



CONGRESS, UNITED STATES. 



The President of the Senate shall, in presence of 

 the Senate and House of Representatives, open all 

 the certificates, and the votes shall then be counted. 



" There is a plain duty imposed upon the 

 President of the Senate and upon the Senate 

 and House of Representatives assembled to- 

 gether. Can you say, sir, that you may limit 

 your powers or add to them by any legislation 

 here ? Can you bind your successors in any 

 matter of constitutional legislation? Turn to 

 the powers that Congress has. Congress may 

 ' lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and ex- 

 cises.' You might just as well undertake to 

 pass a law here pointing out how Congress 

 shall levy taxes and imposts, as to undertake 

 to regulate them in the performance of a con- 

 stitutional duty in regard to this matter. As 

 well might one Supreme Court undertake to 

 bind their successors as for one Congress to 

 undertake to bind their successors. It cannot 

 be done either by legislation or by any rule 

 that you may see fit to adopt. 



"I admit that there is an imperfection in 

 this part of the Constitution as to how the 

 joint body when assembled together shall pro- 

 ceed to get and determine the result of the 

 election. But as the duty is imposed upon the 

 Senate and the House of Representatives it is 

 for them and each body that is called upon to 

 act in that capacity to regulate rules for them- 

 selves. 



" There is another important matter that en- 

 ters into this consideration upon that point, and 

 I should like to hear Senators answer it. If 

 we pass this bill, in order that it may become 

 a law it must be signed by the President. The 

 President then to some extent enters into the 

 counting of the electoral vote. Suppose we 

 pass this bill and it becomes a law by the sig- 

 nature of the President with the intent to bind 

 some other House, not ourselves. I admit we 

 could pass a law here to regulate the election 

 if we were to act in the matter. If we were 

 to meet next week to count the electoral vote 

 we could by the concurrence of both Houses 

 pass a law to regulate our action in the mat- 

 ter ; but we cannot, I say, pass a law to regu- 

 late the action of a future House or future 

 Senate when they meet to perform a constitu- 

 tional duty. 



" But, as I said, suppose this bill becomes a 

 law signed by the President, how are you to 

 get rid of it in the future ? If it is binding 

 upon the Senate and House that meet next, it 

 requires, in order to repeal it, not only the 

 vote of the Senate and the House, but the ap- 

 proval of the President. Thus the President 

 enters into the consideration, when the 'Con- 

 stitution never contemplated any such thing. 

 It is a duty imposed entirely upon the Senate 

 and House of Representatives ; and if you pass 

 this bill, in order that it may be a law it re- 

 quires the approval of the President, and here- 

 after to repeal it and get rid of it also requires 

 the approval of the President, so that a future 

 Senate and a future House of Representatives 



may be entirely under the control of the Pres- 

 ident of the United States. 



"Did the framers of the Constitution con- 

 template any such state of things as that when 

 the twelfth article of amendment was adopted? 

 It was the intent that the people should con- 

 trol the election of the President, and not the 

 President of the United States. It was the in- 

 tent that the electoral vote should be brought 

 here and opened in the presence of both Houses, 

 and that they there, according to such rules as 

 they might adopt, should declare the result. 

 The President has nothing to do with it." 



The Presiding Officer (Mr. Carpenter) : " The 

 question is, Shall the bill pass ? " 



The roll-call having been concluded, resulted 

 as follows : 



YEAS Messrs. Allison, Boreman, Boutwell, Chan- 

 dler, Clayton, Conover, Cragin, Dorsey, Ferry of 

 Michigan, Flanagan, Frelinghuysen, Hamilton of 

 Texas, Harvey, Hitchcock, Logan, Mitchell, Morrill 

 of Vermont, Morton, Oglesby, Patterson, Pease, 

 Eamsey, Sargent, Sherman, Spencer, Washburn. 

 West, and Wright 28. 



som, Saulsbury, Sprague, Stewart, Stockton, and 

 Windom 20. 



ABSENT Messrs. Alcorn, Anthony, Brownlow, 

 Cameron, Fenton, Ferry of Connecticut, Gilbert, 

 Gordon, Hamilton of Maryland, Hamlin, Howe, In- 

 galls, Johnston, Lewis, McCreery, Morrill of Maine, 

 Norwood, Pratt, Robertson, Schurz, Scott, Steven- 

 son, Thurman, Tipton, and Wadleigh 25. 



So the bill was passed. 

 No action was taken upon it in the House 

 of Representatives. 



In the House on January 26th, Mr. Potter, 

 of New York, from the Committee on the 

 Judiciary, reported the following resolutions, 

 fixing the term of the presidential office to six 

 years, which was considered : 



Resolved by the Senate and Souse of Representatives 

 of the United, States of America in Congress assem- 

 bled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), 

 That the following article be proposed to the Legis- 

 latures of the several States as an amendment to 

 the Constitution of the United States, which, when 

 ratified by three-fourths of said Legislatures, shall 

 be valid as a part of the Constitution, namely : 



ARTICLE XVI. 1. From and after the next election 

 for a President of the United States the President 

 shall hold his office during the term of six years, 

 and, together with the Vice-President chosen for the 

 same term, be elected in the manner as now pro- 

 vided or may hereafter be provided ; but neither the 

 President nor the Vice-President, when the office of 

 President has devolved upon him, shall .be eligible 

 for reelection as President. 



Mr. Potter : " Whatever question, Mr. Speak- 

 er, there may have been upon this subject in 

 the public mind years ago, your committee 

 think that now, with the vastly-increased Fed- 

 eral patronage which has grown up of late 

 years, the time has arrived for such a change 

 in the Constitution as is proposed by this reso- 

 lution. At any rate it is a question which has 

 been much discussed, and probably every gen- 

 tleman in the House has fully made up his own 



