In fixing the quorum at a majority rather than any smaller number, our Constitution followed the law of business corporations, where a majority always prevails, according to an old maxim of the Common Law,--_Ubi major pars est, ibi est totum_,--“Where _the greater part_ is, there is the whole.” This rule is so reasonable, that it has been vindicated by an eminent authority as founded on the Law of Nature. Here are the words of the great jurist Savigny:-- “The will of a corporation is not merely the concurring will of all its members, but even that of the greater number. Therefore the will of a majority of all its existing members is to be regarded as being properly invested with the rights of the corporation. This rule is founded on the Law of Nature, inasmuch as, if unanimity were demanded, will and action on the part of a corporation would be quite impossible. It is also confirmed by the Roman Law.”[100] Thomas Jefferson, a very different person from the German jurist, has also vindicated the rule. “The _Lex majoris partis_ is founded in Common Law as well as common right. It is the natural law of every assembly of men whose numbers are not fixed by any other law.”[101] But the question still occurs, What is the major part of the Senate? Is it the major part of the abstract or theoretical Senate, or the major part of the real Senate? In other words, is it the major part of the Senate contemplated by the Constitution, with two Senators from each State, or the major part of the actual Senate, counting only those entitled to vote? At the present moment there is a wide difference between the two cases. Several clauses of the Constitution are applicable to this question. I group them together. “The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, chosen by the Legislature thereof for six years.” “_A majority of each House_ shall constitute a quorum to do business.” “The Congress, whenever _two thirds of both Houses_ shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution.” “A quorum for the purpose [the election of Vice-President] shall consist of two thirds of _the whole number of Senators_, and a majority of the whole number shall be necessary to a choice.” Probably “the whole number of Senators” is equivalent to the term “House.” But what is the “House”? The Senate _de jure_ consists of two Senators from each State. The Senate _de facto_ may consist of Senators actually elected and qualified, or of Senators actually elected. Whether the “House” shall be the Senate _de jure_ or the Senate _de facto_ is now within our discretion. The question has been raised, and the way is open to adopt either interpretation, according to the meaning of the Constitution as seen in the light of Parliamentary Law, and, I add also, of convenience. According to Parliamentary Law, the whole question is in our hands.