Mr. HENDERSON. We discussed the question of the admission of Nebraska and Jolorado as States for I think 3 weeks in the Senate, and I really believe there is but little of a practical characterin the entire discussion. I presume, whether this amendment be effective or not, we shall not enfranchise more than 4 or 5 negroes in each of these proosed States by virtue of this doctrine. I E. be there are very few negroes in Nebraska, and perhaps the amendment, if effective for the purpose, will not enfranchise more than 4 or?. But really, if we admit the State upon any terms whatever, I believe that, in the course of a very short time at least, the right to vote will be conceded to the colored population there.. I have very little doubt that that will be the result, whatever action we take here. After the former discussion the Senate adopted the amendment offered by the Senfrom Vermont; which I really thought would avail nothing to secure the object intended, and yet I did not see fit to vote against the proposition to admit the State, because that amendment had been adopted. I saw that it could at any rate do no harm; and if the courts should decide that it was a valid condition, and effectuated the object, the result would be to accomplish an object I desired; and therefore I voted for the bill with that amendment attached to it. It went to the HoRep; and the House, in order to make it effective, propose to require that the condition shall be submitted to the State Legislature and by them. Now, I feel as I did origin ally in regard to the amendment offered here. If the Legislature adopt it it amounts to nothing. I do not feel that it will be obligatory upon the State: but at the same time I am willing to vote for the admission of Nebraska without any such amendment at all; because, in the 1st place, as I have said, it does not in my honest opinion affect 5 voters in Nebraska, and it will never affect more than a few, and in the 2nd place I honestly believe that with whatever provisions we pass a bill admitting the State the colored population there will be secured in the franchise as early the one way as the other. I have no question on that point, and therefore I have no hesitancy in voting for the proposition to admit these 2 States without any amendment whatever. I do not believe the amendment will be effectual to accomplish anything. n regard to the Missouri case I was inclined to agree with the Senfrom Indiana at 1st; but on referring to the constitution of the State of Missouri at that time I find that the provision which Congress required the State to give a different construction to was a provision clearly pointing to free negroes. The provision Was: “It shall be the duty of the Legislature, as soon as may be, to pass such laws as may be necessary to prevent free negroesand mulattoes fromcoming into and gottling in ever. this State under any pretext whatso It refers directly to free negroes and mulat toes. When the constitution came to Congress, Congress was unwilling to admit the State under that provision, fearing that the passage of such laws would violate the provision of the Constitution of the U.S. guarantying the g and immunities of citizens of all the States to citizens of the several States, and they passed this resolution: “Resolred, &c., That MissourI shall beadmitted into this Union on an equalfooting with theoriginal States, in all respects whatever, upon the fundamental condition that the 4th clause of the 26th section of the 3rd article of the constitution submitt on the part of said State to Congress” The intention was of course to strike at the section I have read, but Congress did not name it properly and missed the clause intended to be described; but the provision was that the clause “shall never be construed to authorize the passage of any law, and that no law shall be passed in conformity thereto, by whoh any citizen of either of States the in this Union shall beexcluded from the enjoyment of any of the privileges and immunities to such citizen which is entitled under the Constitution of the U.S.: Provided, That the Legislature of the said State, by a solemn public act, shall declare the assent of the said State to the said fundamental condition, and shall transmit to the POTUS, on or beforethe 4th Monday in Novem rbeecrenipetxt, an authentic copy of the said act, upon the whereof the President, by proclamation, shall announce the fact; whereupon, and without any further proceeding on the part of Congress, the admission of the said State into this Union shall be considered as complete.” The Senate will see that in the 1st place it is exceedingly doubtful whether, according to the public opinion then entertained, anything was accomplished at all by this declaration. It is true Congress said that a certain construction should not be given to a clause in the constitution of Missouri, but it is well known to the Senfrom Indiana and other Senators that at that period of time it was very generally understood by o American statesmen that the was not a citizen of the U.S., and it was so held until very recently, until even the beginning of the late rebellion. I believe the rights of citizenship were not then extended to negroes. It is very questionable, indeed, whether the Legislature of Missouri, under the construction then given, would not have had authority still to exclude free negroes and mulattoes from the State, and the truth of the matter is that the State exercised the authority and laws were passed by the State, notwithstanding this “fundamental, condition, ” to exclude free negroes from her bor ders. Up to the beginning of the rebellion there were laws upon the statute book of the State of Missouri excluding free negroes, not withstanding this fundamental condition, and it is a notorious fact that the best lawyers of the State, among them Mr. Geyer, who was in the convention and afterward in the Legislature, and subsequently a Senator in this body, always held to the doctrine that this provision was not binding upon the State; and there never was any attempt on the part of Congress to interfere with the legislation of the State free negroes from settling in it. y own impression is that that construction was correct. I do not pretend to say what would have been the construction of Mr. Geyer if it had been held that negroes were citizens. He always held that they were not citizens of the U.S. Perhaps if it had been then settled that they were citizens he might have held the contrary opinion as to the power of the State; but I do not know what, in that case, would have been the opinion of himself or of others.