Well, it’s well and nice fthat you hold that opinion, but it is still wrong. Here’s the full historical analysis from the Congressional Research Service: for every Speaker election from 1789 to 2013: http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/202873.pdf
The table does not take into account the number of vacancies existing in the House at the time of the election; it therefore cannot show whether or not any Speaker may have been elected lacking a majority of the then qualified membership of the House.2 If no candidate obtains the requisite majority, the roll call is repeated.
The precedent has always been a majority of those present who are qualified. Thus, the four instances cited cannot be shown to have resulted in a the election of a Speaker where those voting present affected the outcome.
Thus the number of those voting present has always been so small as to be insignificant, and no way were 40 people going to vote present.
The precedent is clear, from your source on page one, that the Speaker is elected upon reaching a majority of those present and voting.