Mr. BANKS. Mr. Speaker, I do not vote for the admission of Nebraska except for the reason that I think the condition of the country justifies if it does not demand its admission at this time. There are many things in the condition of the Territory and somethings in the constitution presented which I do not like; but I waive them in consideration of higher and stronger reasons for her admission. I do not vote for the admission of Nebraska with the idea that the exclusion of colored men from the exercise of unrestricted political power is to be permanent. On the contrary, I am impressed with the belief indeed, it is in my mind a conviction that this disqualification must be speed ily removed. I regard this as an inevitable result. The exclusion is in deference to the tra ditions of the past. It has no foundation in positive reason or public interest. The time is not distant when all parties will concur in It would not add in all parts of the country. The situation of Nebraska, its increasing population, the devel opment of its material wealth, the loyal sources from whence its emigration must come, and the laudable ambition which prompts its people to assume the responsibilities and powers of a State, make it certain to my mind that they will voluntarily recognize the demands of the age and secure to all people, without distinction of race or color, by irrevocable public law, a complete and perfect enfranchisement. Hence, though it is an objection, it does not outweigh the stronger and broader reasons for admission. Mr. Speaker, there is more in this bill than appertains to the admission of Nebraska. It involves a principle which I concede is novel, but which is within the power of the General Government, and the exercise of which will hereafter be imperatively demanded. It is mainly to the discussion of that principle that I propose, for the few minutes I am permitted to occupy the attention of the House, to direct my remarks. The admission of a State to the Union, as has been well said, is one of the highest duties which can be exercised by Congress. It is a right entirely within the discretion of the 2 Houses of Congress and the executive dept of the Government; that is to say, within the discretion of the lawmaking power of the Government. And, sir, we have the power, in the exercise of that right, to refuse admission or to impose conditions, or to admit without condition. And that constitutional right has been exercised since the foundation of the Government. The State of Vermont was excluded from the Union of the States for several years, and was finally admitted on the condition that she should pay to the State of NewYork the sum of $40,000; the historical charts of that period state that Vermont was admitted upon that condition, and the facts justify the belief upon which the people of that State acted, that unless they had paid this sum to NewYork upon some disputed question of boundary, the justice of which Ver mont always denied, Vermont would not have been admitted to the Union at that time; and some of our people imagine that this payment was the ai. of the marvelous prosperity which has since blessed NewYork. [Great laughter] The most violent contest of our political history grew out of efforts to deprive States claiming admission of. privileges enjoyed by many States of the Union, exactly as we propose in this case. Missouri was not admitted, except in company with the State of Maine; and Maine was denied admission except upon condition that Missouri should become a State. Congress not only fixed this condition upon missouri, but imposed other conditions affecting the rights of future States in nearly half the territory we then occupied. For more than a quarter of a century this balance of irreconcilable political interests was maintained by the rejection of all States, South or North, unless their admission should be so regulated as to perpetuate the equilibrium between freedom and slavery, which had been established. The momentous results that followed the war with Mexico, the acquisition of the Pacific coast, the discovery of gold in California, the unprecedented creation of new States, and the prohibition of slavery by an uncontrollable popular will dissipated the equilibrium which had been maintained so long, and led us through the terrible history which is too familiar to us all, to the question now before the House, the condition upon which we are willing to admit Nebraska into the Union. These conditions, I will agree with gentlemen, are expressed in the act of admission; but they will be as palpable to the students of his.tory as that expressed so clearly in this bill if it shall become a law. Hitherto the terms of admission have been settled before the fact, and the statutory recognition of the new State marks only the result often reached through great tribulation and peril. the perfect enfranchisement of the colored race if But a new age enforces the necessity of new precedents and principles of action, and the time has now come when the conditions upon which a State shall be admitted to the Union, or restored to political power, must be made in express terms in the act of admission or restoration by the lawmaking power. And if I ever o: a solemn word in my life it is now, when I say the reorganization of this Government can never be safely effected except it be upon conditions irrevocable by the States which may be the subjects of its legislation and exressed in the act of admission or restoration. Take, for instance, SCarolina. Suppose she applies for admission to the Union, or restoration to political power. She exhibits to Congress a constitution that embodies every principle which may be regarded as necessary to admission, and she is admitted or restored by unanimous consent of Congress and recognized by all the depts of the government, and the very next day after her admission she changes every provision in her constitution and makes such a constitution as would make it impossible for any member of this House to give his consent to her admission; what, then, are we to do? Is the exercise of such power one of the reserved constitutional rights of SCarolina? No, sir; I think not. We have the right to say to SCarolina, in my opinion, or to any other rebel State, that when restored to power she is restored to power upon certain express conditions imposed by Congress or by the lawmaking power, which should be expressed in the act of restoration and made irrevocable by that or any other seeking admission or restoration; and ifshe violates such conditions at any time we have the power to proceed against her in such manner as in our judgment the public safety may demand. I notice, Mr. Speaker, that gentlemen debating this question carefully limit their objections to one consideration, and that is whether a condition of this character imposes upon the State an obligation or duty that can be enforced in a court of law. I will admit if we pass this bill the condition made fundamental, and in consideration of which many of us vote for this bill, cannot be enforced in a county court of the State of Nebraska; but I do not look for the interpretation of the political rights of the Government or the administration of public law to any county or State court, nor even to the judicial opinions of the Supreme Court. Why, sir, the very ground, taken in this debate will enable, if it does not justify, the courts in exercising political power to such an extent as to deprive the people of this country of the control of their own Government. If the people have no rights and Congress has no power except such as may be recognized and confirmed by courts of law, then we give to courts of law the political and administrative powers that belong exclusively to the people of this country, which are indispensable to the safety of their Government, of which they alone are judges, and which the courts of law ought to enforce and not to overthrow. There are 2 powers necessary to the efficient and wise administration of the Government: 1st, the power vested in courts, which operates between man and man, to which we i bow when restricted to its legitimate sphere; and 2nd, the administration of political power, which the courts of the U.S.: cannot and ought not to control, and that power is vested in the representatives of the people in the administrative rather than in the judicial depts of the Government, and can be applied whenever it is necessary to their safety in the admission of new States or the restoration of insurgent States to the Union. What is necessary to their safety it is the right of the people to determine. They cannot be held to the admission or recognition of States upon such conditions as will lead to the destruction of the Union, and this gives them the right to determine what is necessary to their safety. It is the mission of courts to administer the laws and not to organize or control governments; that belongs to the people. stion presented in this bill. I need not restate in exact terms the condition it imposes, but upon Nebraska gentlemen know what it is. They say this condition is invalid; that it is of no effect. I concede that it is not in the form of law, such as might be administered in the courts of Nebraska. It is not presented in the form of statutes which are submitted to. the interof lawyers and the decision of judges. but then it is not among the subjects submitted to this judicial arbitration. It is a clear statement of the conditions upon which Nebraska may become a State of the Union. It shows what Congress deems necessary to a republican form and to the safety of the government. Similar stipulations have been imposed, either in precedent, action, or in express terms, in the admission of other States. Nebraska is not compelled to enter the Union j.such terms; but if she accepts admission when so tendered she will be held to an observance of the act by which she is admitted. The act of admission is not by any means the finality to the power of the Government in this or in similar cases. If this bill be passed with this fundamental provision, and she does not conform to that condition, she can never be regarded as acting in good faith toward the Government and people of the U.S. What they would or should do I cannot say. It may be that no extraordinary measures would be taken in this case. The laws of Congress have some times been disregarded by States; but if any Congress hereafter should deem this observance of this condition essential to the public safety, and the State even after admission, should continue in violation of its provisions, or enact laws in direct conflict with the condition, Congress would have a right to declare such action a violation of solemn duty and an act of bad faith to the Government and people of the U.S., and to take such measures to enforce its rights as the people might deem necessary to their safety. }. rights of the Government in such case would be the same as if the State had accepted the condition previous to admission. She could not claim the rights of a State and disregard the solemn gotion of the act by which she became a State. Let me take the case of an insurgent State. Suppose we dition, had admitted Tennessee upon con. expressed in the act of restoration, that she should maintain for a limited period her laws which excluded the enemies of the U.S. from political power, and that after restoration upon this condition she should rein state in power implacable public enemies, would not the Government have the right not only to declare that she had acted in violation of the law, but to reject her Representatives and Senators, and if need be send the Army of the U.S. there to enforce the rights of the Government? Sir, if Congress represents the political and administrative power of the Government, and admits a State upon a condition indispensible to its safety, and that State accepts its privileges knowing the condition upon which they rest, and subsequently organizes a government in opposition to it, the Government has an indisputable right to resume the power which it conferred; without this the Government cannot maintain its authority or its existence.