The Election Of U. S. Senators

Sonie critic of Representative Bishop, who is now a candidate on the republican ticket for congress in an adjoining district, in last Sunday's Detroit Tribune has some pertinent questions to ask concerning a resolution introduced by Representative Mills, of this county, favoring the election of U. S. senators by the people The Tribune in its reply, carefully guarded, tells only part of the truth concerning this matter and the Argus has interviewed Mr. Mills, who introduced the resolution, as to what was done with it. The resolution as it appears ia the Legislative Record was correctly quoted by the Tribune as fol lows: Whereas, The House of ReDresentatives of the United States congress haa recently proposed an amendtnent to the constitution of the United States previding for a change in the manner of selecting United States senators by the people of the several States, which said proposed amenduient is now pending before the United States Senate, and action is likely to be speedily liad thereon by that body; and Whereas, We believe such a change to be in accordance with the trend of advancing public sentiment on the subject; therefore, be it Resolved (the Senate concurring), That the senators in congress froui ;his State be and are hereby requested to aid by vote and infhience in the adoption by the United States senate of the resolution pending, proposing such arnendnient, and that the secretary of the senate be directed to forward immediately to each of the United States senators from this State i duly authenticated copy of this resoution. Mr. Mills gives the history of the resolution as follows: It came up as unfinished business on February ist of this year and was referred to the committee on federal relations, which consisted of Ewing of Hillsdale, Lyon of Houghton, Curtis of Getvesee, Mohr of Bay, and Mills of Washtenaw. The committee met immediately after adjournment at noon, and each member of the committee expressed himself as favorable to the resolution, and in the afternoon of the same day the committee reported the bill to the house with the recommendatiou that it pass. On the next day the resolution came up in its order, and Mr. Bishop made the motion that it should be referred to the committee on federal relations, which had just reported in favor of passing it. It was generally understood tnat this was only a dodge to smother the resolution without coming to a direct vote on it. The yeas and nays were demanded, and the only vote on record was taken. The vote was on strict party lines, every democrat voting against the motion, while every republican voted in favor of killing the resolution, even the republican maiority of the committee voting to refer back to themselves a resolution they had already reported favorably. Af ter this no appeal to the republican majority of the coramittee could induce them to consider the resolution. "You ask why this sudden change of heart," said Mr. Mills. "It was given to understand by the members of the committee that while they personally favored the resolution, the republican caucus had desired that they should not allow it to be considered. " A question for the Tribune to answer is why this sudden caucus of the republicans which resulted in smothering the resolution which the people wanted passed? Did Senator McMillan send sotne word which brought it about? Is not Senator McMillan afraid of a vote of the people? Does he not prefer to own Michigan as a pocket borough?