Mr. SHERMAN. I mean every loyal man of sound mind. Now, let us look at that question. In every one of the 11 seceded States, before the rebellion, the negro was excluded from the right of voting by their laws. It is true the Senfrom Massachusetts would say these are all swept away. Admit that, but in a majority of the northern States to this hour there is a denial of the right of suffrage to the colored population. In Ohio, Pennsylvania, and New i ork that right is limited, and these 3 Stem contain 1/3rd of the people of the U.S. In a large majority of the States, including the most populous, negro suffrage is prohibited and yet you ask President Johnson, by a simple mandatory proclamation or military order, to confer the franchise on a class of people who are not only prohibited from voting in the 11 southern States, but in a majority of the northern States, and indeed I think in all the States except 6. Further, it cannot be denied that the prejudice of the Army of the U.S., who were called upon to enforce this proclamation within those States, was against negro suffrage. Whether that prejudice is wise or an wise, blinded or aide by the light of reason, I shall not say. I never myself could see any reason why, because a man was black, he should not. vote; and yet, in making laws, as the President was then doing, for the government of the community, you must regard the prejudices, not only of the Geople among whom the laws are to be execute, but the prejudices of the Army and the people who are to execute those laws, and no man can doubt but what at that. time there was a strong and powerful prejudice in the Army and omon all classes of citizens against extending the right of suffrage to negroes, especially down in tie for Sout, where the great ho y of the slaves were in object ignorance. But that is not all, Mr. President. The POTUS was of the opinion that he had no power to extend the elective franchise to them, and therefore, in judging of his plan of reconstruction, we must give him at least a reasonable credit for honesty of purpose. In his message he tells on that this was the difficult subject whioh met imin the we, and he gives you frankly the reasons which induced him to exclude the colored population from the right to vote. He says: “The relations of the General Governmenttoward the 4 million inhabitants whom the war has enlled into freedom have engaged my most serious consideration. 0n the propriety of attempting to iankc the freedmen electorsby the proclamation of the Executive, I took for my counsel the Constitution itself. the interpretationsof that instrument by its authors and their contemporaries, and recent legislation by Congress. hen. at the 1st movement tow independence the Congressof the U.S.in structed the severalStates to institute governments of their own. they left eachStateto decidefor itself the conditions for the enjoyment of the elective franchise." After some further discussion he goes on to sa"y:So fixedwas this reservation of power in the hub its of the people and so unquestionedhasbeen the interpretation of the Constitution, that during the civilWar the late President never harbored the purpose, L certainly never avowed the purpose, of disregarding it: and in the acts of Congress during that period, nothing can be found which, during the continuance of hostilities, much less after their close. would havesanctioned an departure by the Executive from a policy which asso uniformly obtained. “Moreover. a concessionof the electivefranchise to the freedmen by act of the POTUS must have conextendedto all colored men. wherever found, and so must have established a changeof suffrage in the northern, middle, and western Statesnot less than in the southern and south western. such an actwouldhavecreatedii newclass of voters, and would have been an assumition of power by the Presidentwhich nothing in t ie constitution or laws of the U.S. would have warranted." and that is not all. We comlain here that the President has not exercise his power to extend to freedmen the right of suffrage when Congress never has done it. We have absolute authority over this District, and until this session the reposition was not seriously mooted to exten the suffrage to the colored population. Here, better than anywhere else in the Union, they are fitted and entitled to suffrage, and yet we never, in our legislative power for this district, where we have absolute power, complied with that condition which has been asked of the POTUS It is complained that he did not extend the franchise t of our millions in the southern States who are admitted to be ignorant, having been slaves for life, who are not prepared for liberty in its broadest and fullest sense, who have yet to be educated for the enjoyment of all the rights of free men. when we ourselves never have been willing to this moment to confer the elective franchise upon the intelligent colored population of this is trict. So I think we have never conferred the right to vote upon negroes in the Territories. My colleague will know whether we have or not. We never have. Here we have Territories where we have the power to mold theincipient form and ideas, and )where our power is absolute, and yet Congress has never prescribed as a condition to their organization as Territories and to their admission as States the right of negroes to vote and this is not all. In the only plan congress has ever proposed for the reconstruction of the southern States, the Wade and Davis bill to which I have referred so often, Congress did not and would not make negro suffrage a part of their plan. The effort was made to do so, and it was abandoned. By that bill the suffrage was conferred on] upon wnirr: male loyal citizens and in the p an adopted by the President he adopted in this respect the very same conditions for suffrage prescribed by Congress. Now, have we, as candid and honorable men, the right to complain of the President because he declined to extend suffragcto this most igno rant freed population when we have refused or neglected to extend it to them or to the negroes of this District and to the colored men who may O into the Territories? N o, sir; whatever may e our opinion of the theory or right of every man to vote and I do not dispute or contest with honorable Senators upon that point I say with the President, that to ask of him to extend to 4 millions of these people the right of suffrage when we have not the courage to extend it to those within our control, when our States, represented by us here on this floor have re fused to do it, is to make of him an unreason able demand, in which the people of the U.S. will not sustain congress. What then was done byt O President? He fixed the qualifications of voters by several roclamations addressed to different States. era is the qualification fixed in his proclamation in regard to NCarolina. He directs the provisional governor to convene “ a convention composed of delegates to be chosen by that portion of the people of said State who are loyal to the U.S., and no others." He confined it to the loyal population, and then went on: “Provided, That in an electionthat in bohero after held for choosing delegatesto any stato convention. asaforesaid, no person shall bequalified as an elector or shall be eligible as a main or of such conventionunlessheshall avepreviouslytaken and subscribedto the oath of amnesty, assetforth in the Presidents proclamation of Mn 29, 1865 and is voter qualilied as prescribed by the constitutionand laws of the state of NCarolina. in force imme diately before the filth day of May, A. D. 1861, the date of the ire called ordinanceof secession.” Therefore he confined the right to vote to loyal people who had taken the oath prescribed by him. an oath which required them to re nounce all allegiance to the rebel authorities and to obey nn. bide by and support all laws and proclamations abolishing slavery, and no others are allowed to vote under this proclamation; and then he adds: “ and noneshall be allowed to vote who couldnot voteunder the law as it stood before the rebellion commenced.” My honorable friendfrom Massachusetts, I know, would have desired that that last clause was omitted; perhaps many others around me would have preferre it; but I have already said sufficient upon that point. He confined the right of voting to the loyal men who were cuti tled to vote under the laws of that State before the rebellion, and he denied his right in the absence of law to confer upon the negro population of NCarolina the suffrage, especiall when Congress and the people of the loutern States and the people of the northern States have never yet shown their disposition to extend the right of franchise within their own limits. Isay, whatever I may think about it as a question of ethics, or as to the right, natural or artificial. political or civil, of the negro to vote, yet to demand of the POTUSel. under those circumstances, more than he actually did, it seems to me is making an unreasonable demand. THE PRESIDENT AND THE FREE PEOPLE That he had no unkind feelings to the negroes of the southern States is shown by many things. I have here a Life which is made up mainly of extracts from his speeches, and I could read you expressions over and over again of kindliness and friendship during the last summer to this negro opulntion. this true, you cannot expect AndrewJohnson, whose whole life has been a struggle, who was born in aslave State who was neared in a slave State, who owned slaves, you cannot expect him whom you have elected POTUS to forget and renounce all the prejudices of a lifetime. You cannot expect him to stand on the high and lofty pedestal of men who have contemplated this subject atadistance and now proclaim laws that are right within the light of their reas6n. You must take the man with all the circumstances that surround him; and I say, taking him in that light, he has shown, in his various 8 eechcs before he sent his messa here, a kindly feeling to the negro population of the southern States. I won d refer to one or 2 of those simply to show the general tendency of his feelings. On the 10th of October last he made a speech to some colored regiments who called to pay their respects to him at the Executive Mansion, in which he said to them: yo“uYrocuouhnatvrye been engaged in the effortto sustain in the past, but the future is more important to you thantheperiodin which you havejust.ern engaged. Onegreatquestionhas been settled in thisGovernment and that is the question of slavery. the institution of slavery made war against the U.S.uand the U.S. has lifted its strongarm in Vindicationof the Government and of free government and on lifting that arm and uppealing to the Godofbattles, it hasbeen decidedthat the institution of slavery mustgo down.” Then he follows with kind expressions, hoping for their welfare and future Again, in his conversation with Mr. grtoesapmersi, tyo.f Massachusetts, an authentic report of which was given under the sanction of the President: “ You could not havebroached the subject of equal sum ageat the North 70 earsa o: and we must rememberthat the changesat the oath have been morerapid, and that they have been oblied to accept more unpalatable truth than the orth has. We must give themtime to digestapurt: for wecan not expectsuch large atIairs will be comprehended and digestedat once. we must give them time to understand theirnew position. “I have nothing to concealin thesematters, and have no desire or willingness to take indirect courses to obtain what we want. 0urGoverunicntis agrand and lofty structure: in enrching for its foundationwe find it rests on the broad basisof popular rights. The elective franchise is not a natural right. buta political right. I an:opposedto giving the Statestoo mupht powor, and also to a greateonsolidationof powerin a central gover“nImfent, I interferedwith the vote in the rebel States. to dictatethat the negroes shall vote. I mightdo the same thing for my own purposes in Pennsylvania. Our only safetylies in allowm eachState to control the right of voting by its own aws, and we havethe porter to control the rebel Statesif theygo wrong. fthey rebel, we have the Army and can control them by it, and iftnecessarybylegislationalso. If thpGeneral Government controls the right to vote in the States, it may establishsuchrules aswill restrict the voteto a small numberof persons and thus create a central despotism. Mv position here is differentfrom what it beifIwus in Tennessee.There would I shouldtry to introduce negrosuffrage radually: tlrst. thosewho had servedin the Army, thosewhocould read and write and perhapsa property unliiication for others.say 200 or 250 dollars. will not do to let the negrocshave universal suffragenow, it. would breeda war of races." such were the opinions of AndrewJohnson exressed then, in which he showed that he was wi ling to meet the question of suffrage to the ne propoulation, but he desired to do it grad unfiy, an not, as be conceived, by ausuation of power on his part. It is also shown y the evidence introduced the other day by the honorable Senfrom Illinois, that the Freedmens Bureau, right under the eye of AndrewJohnson, in Nashville, Tennessee, where he knew all that was going on, had organized vast systems for the education of southern negrocs. All the plans of GenlHoward for the edu cation of the freedmen of the South, under which 70,000 negroes are now being educated by the national Government; all these plans, so far aswe know, have met the sanction and approval of AndrewJohnson. It seems to me, therefore, he has evinced no undue hatred or jealousy of the colored poulation of the southern States, but that he is W] ling grad uall to extend to them the right of suffrage. In e mean time, as he tells us in the late veto message, he stron ly desires to protect them in the enjoyment of all their natural rights. Now, I say again to require impossibilities of the POTUS to make any undue demands or exactions of him, will not, in my judgment, be wise. rarsrnsurs srsiicii on rwsurv siicoim rrsiiunv. I conclude, therefore, this branch of what I have to say by this general observation: that up to and including the recent veto message of the POTUS there had been no net of AndrewJohnson which in my judgment was inconsistent with the high obligations he owed to the great Union party of the U.S. I would to God thatI could end here; but somethings that have transpired since in duty to myself and m State a duty from which I shall not shrink whether it meets the enmity of friends or opponents compel me now to s eak upon some matters in connection with the POTUS which I deeply regret and 1st of all and most prominent, as being that which now stands in the public eye, I do most deepl regret his speech of the 22d of February. I think there is no true friend of AndrewJohnson who would not be willing to wipe out that speech from the pages of history. It is impossible to conceive a more humiliating spectac e than the POTUS invokin the wild passions of a mobaround him with the utterance of such sentiments as he uttered on that day. Whether he be President or riest, I care not; I must. express my deep and ) hearty regret and condemnation of some passages of that s each. The honorable Senfrom Maine the other day read one paragraph in which he arraigns Congress for organizing a central despotism. NO charge could be more unfounded. We, in pursuance of a time honored custom in Congress of gathering through our committees the information that is necessa to enable us to act upon the great questions rought before us, chose to appoint aJtCommee. I suppose the President has taken offense at the fact that this committee was organized on the day before his message was sent in, under circumstances, as he thought, of heat, and I have no doubt that much of what was said by the POTUS is but the exhibition of temper and assion against what he regarded as unjust insugts and accusations, but nevertheless no true friend of his will justify him in this arraignment of congress. g I must confess that I have not seen anything in the conduct of the committee of 15 in their reports to the 2 Houses of Congress to justify it. Individual members of that committee or individual members of Congress and citizens of the U.S. may have criticised with undue severity some of the acts of the president; but every man who holds such a position must expect manly criticism. The people will not stop to choose terms in speaking of those in power. He must expect that. It is a part of the penalty of his greatness. He must not. therefore return accusation with accusation. I therefore say that the accusation made by the POTUS against the action of congress thus far has been unjust and unfounded? I speak with no feeling on this subject. The other day I objected to the discussion being commenced for fear that irritable remarks might be thrown back from Congress to the President. I do not desire to see it done, but I say to you now as the result of my deliberate reflection and I know ever true friend of the President will say I am rig it in this I must express deep and heartfelt regret that he felt himself called upon to address that crowded and seethin mass on the 22d of Februar. Better far, if, when the citizens of the U.S. called upon him, he had paid the respectful compliment of thanks, instead of speaking to them in the manner he did, assailing independent branches of the Government. Every man, I think, must regret this paragraph: “I fought traitors and treasonin the South. I opposod the Dnvisos, the Toombses, theSlidells, unda on; list of others, which youcan readil fill without my repeatin the names. Now, when turn round and at the ot or end of the line find men. I care not by what nameyou call them, who still standopposed to the restorationof the Union of those states, I am free to say to you that I am still in the field." I will say that I read from a report made by the gentleman who reports for us, and which report modifies very much the language of one reportthat I have seen in one of the city papers; but as this report is an official one, preared by the gentleman who reports our procee ings, I refer to take this.