"_Mr. President_,--When this subject was proposed, I candidly confessed I did not understand it, and I was informed by Mr. Longworth and Mr. McDermot, that either of them would explain it, at any leisure moment. But, sir, they seem to have taken very good care, from that time to this, to have no leisure moment. I have inquired of both of them, repeatedly for an explanation; but they were always too busy to talk about it. Well, sir, as it was proposed by Mr. Longworth, I thought he would certainly explain it in his speech; but I understood no more of his speech than I did of the subject. Well, sir, I thought I should certainly learn something from Mr. McDermot; especially as he promised at the commencement of his speech to clear away the mist that Mr. Longworth had thrown about the subject, and to place it in a clear, intelligible point of light. But, sir, the only difference between his speech and Mr. Longworth's is, that it was not quite as flighty as Mr. Longworth's. I could n't understand head nor tail of it. At one time they seemed to argue the question, as if it were this: 'Is it better to have law or no law?' At another, as though it was, 'should factions be governed by law, or be left to their own consciences?' But most of the time they argued it, as if it were just what it seems to be--a sentence without sense or meaning. But, sir, I suppose its {292} obscurity is owing to my dullness of apprehension, for they appeared to argue it with great earnestness and feeling, as if they understood it. "I shall put my interpretation upon it, Mr. President, and argue it accordingly. "'_Whether at public elections_'--that is, for members of Congress, members of the Legislature, &c. '_should the votes of faction_'--I don't know what 'faction' has got to do with it; and therefore I shall throw it out. '_Should the votes predominate, by internal suggestions or the bias_,' I don't know what the _article_ is put in here for. It seems to me, it ought to be, _be biased by_ 'jurisprudence' or law. In short, Mr. President, I understand the question to be, should a man vote as he pleases, or should the law say how he should vote?" Here Mr. Longworth rose and observed, that though Mr. Craig was on his side, he felt it due to their adversaries, to state, that this was not a true exposition of the subject. This exposition settled the question at once on his side; for nobody would, for a moment contend, that _the law_ should declare how men should vote. Unless it be confined to the vote _of faction_ and _the_ bias of jurisprudence, it was no subject at all. To all this Mr. McDermot signified his unqualified approbation; and seemed pleased with the candor of his opponent.