Mr. TRIMBLE. Yes, sir; but I trust the gentleman does not intend by that remark to stigmatize these distinguished and gallant men by saying they were in bad company and must bear the consequences. They were fightin for the Union, an are entitled to the consideration of the House. They were in company with the POTUS, and Colonel Hawkins was under fire at Charleston for 60 long days. That was very bad company! Sir, I am opposed to this amendment, and to all kindred amendments, and I have no hesi tancy in saying, upon this occasion, that I expect, while I remain true to myself and to the constitution of my fathers, which I have so often sworn to support, to continue to oppose the submission o all such amendments to the people. In my opinion, the amendment proposed is in violation of the reserved rights of the people of the States under that instrument. The object and purpose of this resolution isto enfranchise a milllion men in this country whom no political party in this country ever had the bo dness to propose the enfranchisement of prior to the present session of Congress. I remember that in 1860 and 1861 the party known in this country as the Union party took the ground, from one end of the country to the other, that neither Congress nor the people of the States had the power, under the constitution of the U.S., to interfere with slavery in the States where it existed; much less, sir, did they claim the power not only to destroy it, but to strike down the provisions of the constitution that protected me and my constituents in our right in our property. Sir, there was an amendment submitted then for the purpose of peace, for the purpose of restoring peace and quiet through out the count. It met at the time my hearty support, and Ilyregret from the bottom of my heart that the people, North, South, East, and West, did not agree to that proposition and make it part and parcel of the Gonstitution. I refer to the amendment proposed in 1861, declaring that Congress should never thereafteriuterfere with the question of slavery in the States. New, sir, what is the ggloposition presented here and to the country? by do not gentlemen come out and state it bold y? Power is the impelling motive with these men, and all these propositions of amendment to the constitution enfranchisin the negroes look to the securing of power. hey admit that it is an eXperiment; the admit that it has been heretofore untried, an they cannot parenthere or to the count what will be the result oiy the experiment. whwill you, my friends, upon a matter of so much importance, affecting your interests and my interests and the interests, I trust, of coming Generations through all time why will you imperil this Government, which has been the wonder and admiration of the world, by enfranchising these persons whom you have y your power and numbers made free but whom you have by your OWn solemn acts declared incompetent to manage even matters of the smallest concern affecting themselves? Why, sir, we have a Freedmens Bureau extending throughout this vast country, North and South, which shows that you regard these people as incompetent and unualilied to make even contracts fora few wee s work! That bureau costs this Government about 12 million dollars annually. Sir, these gentlemen blow hot and cold in the same breath. When they want to establish negro suffrage in this District, they say that these people are free men, and qualified to discharge the iighest privileges of an American citizen; and the next moment, through their Freedmens Bureau, they place these people, in my judgment, in a condition of slavery the most gelling to them that they have ever felt. Sir, if they are free, withdraw your Freedmens Bureau, and treat this unfortunate people like free men let them make their own contracts. Sir, this proposition and all kindred propositions, in my judgment, are in direct oppositionto the plain provisions of the constitution itself, to the reserved rights of the States, which are sacred, and should be so regarded by congress and the peole. What are the principles upon which this "overnment has tested? Sir, this Government was formed by coequal States, who delegated to the General Government all the powers necessary and proper to secure the great end of protecting the general interests of the whole, reserving to the States all powers not delegated by the constitution to the federal Government. Why doI say this? Because it is the language of the constitution itself. It declares that The powers not delegatedto the U.S. by the constitution nor prohibited by it to the States, aio reserved to the States respectively or to the people.” Hence the powers not delegated to the federal Government by the States still rest in the States, and there is no power on earth that can do rive the States of them. While I say that, I o not desire to be understood as defending the doctrine of secession. While I desire to maintain the municipal sovereignty of the States, their inherent and exclusive right to regulate, order, and control their Own domestic affairs. also the right to representation in Congress according to the constitution, 1 have ever opposed the doctrine of secession. When that doctrine was before the country I o posed it with all the power that I possessetf, an I intend to be an erstood as yielding to the Federal Government eve right and power delegated and necessary for her to protect the States and the people thereof respectively. Let herthe Federal Governmentexercise the powers delegated and peculiar to her, the States all power not surrendered to the General Government by the constitution. In that way there will be no question about which an State can make any complaint, or the rights o any citizen or State be invaded. Had there been no violation of the spirit of the constitution by the people of the North, in my judgment there never would have been a alaveho ders rebellion. But by the acts of those northern States, in the passage of personal liberty bills in violation oi the constitution, these men were enabled to seize on those unconstitutional acts as pretexts by which to fire the people of the South and recipitate them into rebellion; and well did ey work upon their prejudices for that purpose. In my judgment, in 1860 and 1861 in some of the States of the South, that mncabused section of country, there was a large majority in favor of the constitution and the Union; and if they could have been made to believe that their rights would have been secure under that constitution, they could not have been drawn into revolution. What were the issues presented in the South to the people in 1860 and 1861 I Said the men who proposed to precipitate the people into revolution, “Will you stand here and act with the party in power, with an Administration selected upon a sectional issue, selected for the avowed purpose of destroying the South, and striking own our rights, not only in the territories, but in the DistCol, in the navyyards and the arsenals, and in the States themselves?” Maynard, and other men like him, stood up and said, ” Gentlemen, the object and purpose of the party in power is to stand by the constitution and by the rights of the people North and South.” They repudiated this idea, and denied that these were the issues that were in nestiou and what did Congress then say upon that subject? and how different are the acts of the majori hero tnday from this resolution, which I will ad, expressing the will and pleasure of i Congre s in 1861: “Resolved. That the presentdeplorablecivilWar has beenforced upon the country by the lisunionists of the southern Statesnow in revolt against the constitutional Government and in arms around the capital that in this national emergency Congressbanishrs nll feelingsof mere passion or resentment and will recollect only itsduty to the whole country: that thiswaris notwageduponour partin any spirit of oppressionn or for any purpose of conquestor BllbJuBHHOD. nor purpose of overthrowing or interferin with the rights or established institutions of those States. but to defend and maintain the supremacy of the constitution and 00 reservethe Union with all the dignity, equality, an rights of the scveralStatesunimpaired; that assoonust eseohjectsareaccomplished the war ought to cease.” This was the declaration of the Congress of the U.S.; it was the declaration of every political part in this country up to the contest of 1864, when I believe there was a party met in convention in Cleveland, which proposed not to have anything to do with the t on distinguish d leader of the Republican party the Chief a istrate of the U.S. They proposed at rst to nominate a candidate upon the square issue of negro suffrage in the States. The convention that assembled in Baltimore, from caution or some other cause, did not put in their platform or present to the people any such issne; and so far as l knowno politicalparty in this country has ever gone before the people on any such issue. You, my friends, here, were elected in the midst of the most terrific and gigantic civil strife that ever existed; you were electedwithout regard to this issue of negro suffrage at the dictation of Congress in the States, against the will of the people in such States; you were elected upon the idea of maintaining the Union and staning by the constitution and why is not this spirit exhibited here today? Why not our oil upon the troubled waters and bring back these States with the rights and privileges under this constitution of our fathers? Why keep them out while you legislate and make a constitution for them? This matter of amending the constitution is every grave matter even when all to be affected by it are represented, and it should be considered with calmness and with consideration and the Representatives of the people, before they present this amendment, or any other amendment to the constitution, for their consideration and ratification, should go before them and argue these propositions proand con and then let them return here after that deliberation and consideration, and present their views upon the subject. This is a grave question, ans one which ought not to be entere upon without due consideration. Now, sir, as I have intimated before, the party in power have changed front; they have changed entirely their tactics. They are today in revolution against the constitution, ignoring, denouncing principles contained in their own acts in Congress, in their national and State conventions. Where, I ask, will this system of amendment stop? Some eighty amendments are now pending in the 2 oases of Congress. When and where will the party in power pause? Sir, a spectator coming into this House and observing the course oflegislation would be led to suppose that there are no others than the blue 9 to be legislated for. It is they who claim exclusive attention. A largeportion of the white citizens of this country. in abiting the fairest portion of god” s creation, are denied representation here, and no eloquent voice is raised in their behalf today; but t 9 African has numberless champions to plead in favor of his right to vote in theStates of the South at the will of congress. Sir, what was the position of the late president, Mr. Lincoln, who uttered the sentiment “Charity toward all; malice toward none 1". i read from his letter to Mr. Wood: “Understanding the phrasein the paragraph above quoted, the southern Stateswould send fiepresentatives to the n ext Con;zress. to be substantially the sumoas that the peopleotthe southern States would conseresistance, and would reiniingurnte, submit to, and maintain the national authority within the liipits such State under the constitution of the Uniates. I saythat in such can the war would ceaseo: the part of the U.S and that. if within a reasonabletime a full and lreneral amnestywere no cemary to such end. it. would not bewithheld.” This is the language of the lamented chief of that party. Do they stand by that doctrine today? Do they stand by those principles? Or do they deny to these people representation, pouring upon them at tesame time unmeas ured denunciation, nnlimited taxation, and seeking to force upon them negro suffrage? Is this the course of action that was to be expected of a great Governmentlike this in the triumph of its power? Why cannot members of this House rise to the requirements of this great era, and so act as to Wlll for the constitution and Government of our fathers the support of every good man, woman, and child in this road laTid, so that we may again witness the gladdening spectacle of a reunited and harmonious country, with the constitution and laws as our shield and protection against usurpation, cruelty, and oppression, from dangers of every kind, from at home and abroad? But that which seems at the present time to be pressing with greatest force upon the minds of many members of this House, is the factthat, by the notion of the party in power, some 3 or 4 million persons hitherto slaves have been turned loose upon the South, and in consequence of their having become free the southern States are entitled to a la er number of Representatives on this floor than they formerly bad. This is the difficulty which Gentlemen here seem desirous to remedy by this amendment to the constitution. Sir, it is a wellestablished principle that no one should be permitted to take advantage of his own wrong. f the party in power have succeeded in freeing the slaves of the South, ought they not atleast to allow the southern States to enjoy the increased representation to which, accordin to the rule established by the constitution, ey are now entitled? Or if the northern States sincerely desire that the negroes of the South shall vote and shall be represented in COn"ress, let them transport those negroes to the Iiorth and take them under their guardianship. They are wel come to them. I believe that the people of Kentucky, whom I in part represent, and I have no doubt the co e of the whole South, will submit in good gait to the constitutional amendment abolishing slavery. While they may believe that the amendment is revolutionary, and unnst, in violation of the rights of Kentuckyan the South still the southern States having in away yielded up this question, for representation and peace, they will stand by the constitution as amended. They will at the same time give to the negroes that protection to which they are entitled, protecting them in the enjoyment of their right to personal liberty and fhe enjoyment of the rewards of their own labor an industry.” But we are asked to vote for this amendment, at the same time that we are to have in Kentucky 3 “ Freedmens Bureau, ” passin upon all questions between a white citizen an a negro, over riding the laws of our State, setting at defiance the decrees and judgments of our legal and constitutionally established courts. Iregret I have not the last order issued there upon this subject, for I know it would startle my friendfrom Maine to have such orders executed by the bay onet in Maine. Mr. Speaker, it has been said upon this floor and again and again enunciated from one end of the country to the other by leading members of the now dominant party, that “the Union as it was, ” “the constitution as it was, ” the condition of things which existed prior to this unfortunate war, should never, with their consent, be permitted to return. But, sir, as for myself, I would to God itwere in my power today to restore that constitution, giving to every man in this country his rights and privileges under itl Sir, if I had the power, I would restore to life the 1,000s and 1,000s who have gone from fields of battle to “ that undiscovered counfrom whose bourue no traveler returns.” Sir, would haveareunion of friends and of States. In my estimation, such a sen1866. 389 timent. us this would not be unworthy of a patriot or a Christian; for the 1st Icannot in candor say so much. Mr. Speaker, if I understand it, this proposition is a direct attack upon the POTUS It is a direct attack upon the doctrines and principles taught by that distinguished man now holding the presidential chair. This amendment is in violation, in my ndguicul of ever principle that that man has old from his boyhood up to the present hour. He said in his message of the 4th of December lastandv I ask any friend of AndrewJohnson who believes he holds the sentiments he then expressed not to vote for the proposed amendm ent, when to do so you strike a stab at him; now, what does he say? After speaking of the rights and privileges underthe constitution, alluding to the fact that there were objections to his plan of reconstruction, alludin to the fact that it was suggested or required o him by proclamation to entranchise the blacks in the southern States, he uses this language: “On the propriety ofattompting to makethefreedmen electors by the proclamation of the Executive I took for my counsel the constitution itself. the interpretations of that instrument. by its authors and their contemporaries and recentlegislation by Congress. When. at the 1st moyeinent toward independence. the Congressof the U.S. instructed the several Statesto institute governments of their own. they left each State to decide for itself the conditions for the enjoyment of the electivefranchise. During the period of the Confederacythere pontinued to exist a very great diversity in the qualifications of electors in the severalStates: and even within a State a distinction ofqunlificalious prevailed with regardtotheOfficerswhowereto be chosen. The constitution of the U.S. recognizesthese diversities when it enjoins that in the choice of mciubers of the HoRepof the U.S. the electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State Legislature. Alter the formation of the constitution it remained. as before the uniform usage for each State to enlargethe body of its electors. according to its ownjudgment; and under this system. one State after another llllSproceeded to increasethenumber of its electors, until now Universal suffrage or somethingvery near it, is thezen or"al rule So fixedwasthis reservationofpower in the hands of the people and sounquestioned asbeen the interpretation oft o constitution. that during the civilWar the late President never harbored the purposecer tainly never avowed the purpose of disregardingit; and in the actsof Conness during that period nothing can befound which, tluring the continuaneo of hostilities, much loss after their close. would have sanctioned any departure by the Executive from a policy which has so uniformly obtained. Moreover. a concosnonof the elective franchise to the freedmen. by not of the POTUS must have been extended to all colored men. Wherever found and so must have established a changeof suffrage in the northern. middle and western States. Not less than in the southern and southwestern. such an act would have created a new class of voters and would have nbocctlniinuinzainssthuem otuiosntitouftpioonwoerrlabwy sthe of the POTUS would have warranted. " On the otherhand. every danger of Conflict is avoided when the settlement of the question is referred to the several States. They cun, eachfor itself. Decide on the measure and whether it is to be adopted at once and absolutely or introduced gradually and with conditions. In inyjudgment the freedmen, if they show patience and manly virtues, will soonerobtain it participation in the elective franchise throughthe States than through the General Government. Even if it had power to intervene. When the tumult of emotions that have been raised by the suddennessof thesocial changeshall have subsided. it may prove that they will receivethe kindliest usagefrom someof those on whom they have heretofore mostclosely depended.” Sir, the POTUS does not believe that the Congress of the U.S. has the right, or that the pee le have the right, to strike own the inaliena. le right of the States to settle for themselves who shall be clothed with that high privilege, suffrage. Now, while I say this much, I do not desire tobe considered as defending the POTUS He needs no defense at my hands. I do not desire to be understood to say that I indorse all the acts of the Chief Magistrate in regard to the questions now agitating the public mind, but on the question of giving the southern States their rig its of representation upon this floor, and the right to say who shall be voters in the States, I am with President John son, and will, so far as is in my power, give him a hearty and earnest support. If he will stand by the constitution, if he will stand by the rights of the States, he will meet witbnot only themppovtofgentlemeuoa D that side of the House, but of 1800 1,000 Democratic voters in the North or adhering States who have not bowed the knee to power. They will stand by him in this hour of trouble and trial. I believe they will do it. I believe there are 1,000s of Republicans from one end of the country to the other who will stand by him to prevent consolidation and destruction of the States.