Mr. Seward said in NewYorkli, on the 22d of February, when expounding by authority the views of the Administration: “Admit the southernRepresentativesat once. I thought it ought to have beendoneon the 1st day of the session.” The Gentfrom Kentucky, [Mr. Ross ssAU] who last addressed the House on this subject, assuming the championship of the President, declared that it had been in our power at any time during this session to have completed the work of reconstruction in 15 minutes by admitting the southern members, and complains that this was not done. Now, it is an indisputable fact, known to almost every intelligent man in the country, and clearly proved by officers of the Army and others who testified before the ComReconstruction, and so reported by that committee“That in the face of the law requirinlrthetestoath, theSens&Reps electedtoCongress from thoseStatesare, with ver few exceptions.men who had actively participatet in the rebellion and who insultingly denounce the law as unconstitutional.” Among them is the VEEP of the socalled southern confederacy himself. And yet, with these facts before them, the originators and supporters of this policy complain that these Sens&Reps were not “admitted at once, on the 1st day of this session.” They could not be admitted except by committing erjury, or the repeal of the test oath. It will hardly be contended that they were expected to signalize the 1st act of their return, as they did the last of their withdrawal, by perjury. Am I not, therefore, justified in assuming the position that this policy does demand the repeal of the test oath? But admit, if you please, that in this position I am mistaken, and that the President and those who sustain him mean that none but those who can take the test oath shall be admitted, it would still, in my opllll0ll, be amost dangerous policy, and would defer the admission of traitors but a very short time; and for this reason: it will be an easy matter for the South to select men for the present Congress who have not borne arms against the Government or voluntarily given aid and comfort to the rebellion, and yet who are at heart no more loyal than many who were in the rebel army. These men, thus selected, will take their seats, and together with northern Democrats will recal that oath. Their admission will establils l the right of their districts to representation, however disloyal the people may be. This right once established, and the test oath repealed, whatwill follow? At the next election every disloyal district will send men who thoroughly represent the feelings and sentiments of the people, those who have been most obnoxious for their treason having the preference. What shall be done then? “ Keep them out if disloyal, " you say; but how can you keep them out? The right of the district to representation having been established by the admission of men who could take the oath at this Congress, those who are elected to the next will demand that the Clerk of the House place their names on the roll to be called to vote upon the organization. This the Clerk will be compelled to do, and the vilest rebels and guerrillas of the South willhave an unquestionable right to participate in the most important act of the Congress, namely, its organization. They will then step up to the desk and take the oath to support the Constitution without any of those troublesome “ amplifications” and “details” concerning their past conduct, and will, to all intents and par oses, be members of Congress. What then 0 you propose to do? Expel them if disloyal, ” says another. But it requires a 2/3rd s vote to expel a member. They will all be upon the floor to vote in their own cases, an aided by their northern Democratic allies everybody knows Jthat it would be an utter impossibility to expel eff. Davis himself should he be elected. Io, sir; adopt this policy and in less than 2 years every disloyal district will be represented by a traitor, and traitors will control the legislation of the country. Instead of bein able to expel them for their treason on will have to apologize for having whipped them. The brave men who fought our battles and saved the Republic will have to conceal their honor “able scars lest they may give offense to the reconstructed South;” just as now the military authorities at WestPoint order the erasure of inscriptions from captured rebel cannon in order that when the young “ gentlemen " from the South return their pride may not be touched by witnessing the evidences of their defeat. Oh, magnammous policy! Magnanimous to enemies, cruel to friends! Another inevitable consequence of this policy will be that no changes of the Constitution, whereby guarantees will be furnished which are necessary for the safety of the Government, can ever be secured. It is an explicit declaration that we have no right to demand such guarantees as conditions precedent to representation. It is so understood everywhere, and especially at the South. A. H. Stephens, VEEP of the southern confederacy, and Senator elect to Congress from Georgia, so understands it when he declares that it meets his hearty approval, and coolly informs us that the South would rather remain unrepresented than to accept any terms as conditionsrecedent. If such amendments of the Constitution are not secured before the full restoration of those States we all know that they never will be, until they are obtained by another war, for it requires a 2/3rd s vote in conass to propose, and a 3/4ths vote of til the States to ado t them. This every sane man knows would 0 impossible. I am therefore justified in asserting that those who support this plan of reconstruction intend that no constitutional amendments, affecting the interest of the South, and guarantying the honor and safety of the nation, shall ever be made. What will be the consequence? By the Constitution (unamended) 2/5th s of all negroes who were slaves, but who have been liberated by the war, will be added to the basis of representation, thereby giving the South 13 additional Representatives on this floor; 13 additional Representatives taken from the loyal and transferred to the disloyal States; a number equal to the representation of more than 6 such States as innesota; a gain in this House to the South as against the North greater than the political power exercised by the States of Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, Kansas, Nevada, Oregon, and California, or c nal to all the NewEngland States combined. for it must be borne in mind that these 13 Representatives are not merely to be added to the South, but they are to be deducted from the North, making a relative difference of 26 in favor of the disloyal section of the country. Nor is this vast iolitical power to be taken from the loyal people of the i orth and given to the loyal people at the South, upon whose numbers it is used, but it is to be handed over to the traitors to be wielded for the oppression of our defenders who live among them, and against the welfare of the country. The vote of a SCarolina rebel is to be made equal to the votes of 3 soldiers of my own State, thus reatiirmin bylaw the old insulting boast that “one of techiv alr is equal to 3 northern mudsills.” Ivs this the way “ treason is to be put down and traitors punished ‘P’ Is this the way by which “loyal men, whether white or black, shall rule this country ‘2” Is this the way “treason i to be made odious?” Is this what Andrewnson meant when he said “the traitor cc ed to be a citizen and forfeited his right to vote with loyal men when he renounced his citizenship and sought to destroy our Government?” Should he not rather have said that loyal men by fighting for their country forfeited their right to vote with traitors? Ali, sir, is not that a novel mode of punishing traitors which rein vests them at once with all their former powers, and as a reinium for treason gives them an additions political power equal to that exercised by 6 loyal States? If the 11 rebel States were admitted now they would have 22 Senators. The other 5 States which belonged to the slaveholding class, name ly, Kentucky, Delaware, Maryland, Missouri, and WestVirginia, would doubtless add 5 more. giving them 27 Senators. It will be seen by reference to the census of 1860 and the apportionment of 1861 that the 11 confederate States have 58 representatives. Giving them 1/2 the represeutation from the 5 States just name, (they are reasonably certain of a much greater proportion and they will have 71. Ad the 13 Representatives which they will receive, as just shown, by reason of the abolition of slavery, and they will have 84 members and 27 Senators, making at least one hiindre and 11 votes in the Electoral College. They will thus have more than 1/3rd of both the Senate and House, and more than 1/3rd of the votes for President and VEEP. This power will be in the control of a white population embracing less than one 6th of the whole population of the country. So that the effect of this policy will be to give to less than one 6th of the people (a large majority of whom are disloyal,) more than 1/3rd of the political power of the whole. If by any means they can secure one 6th more of the representation they will have a majority in Congress and in the Electoral college, and will of course elect their own Presiident and make laws to suit themselves. Does anyone who has given the least attention to the working of political parties in this country believe for a moment that a compact, well drilled organization at the South, which needs only one 6th of the represcutation from the North to give it control of the Government, will have any difficulty in obtaining that 6th? I think not? That party at the North which is now willing, for the sake of political alliance with rebels, to thus disfranchise its own section and inflict so wicked an injustice upon the loyal people, may well be trusted to go far enough to reap the fruits of such an unholy alliance. If by such combination a majority could be secured in Congress, the southern wing of the party would have so large a “'0 portion of that majority that they would of course insist, as they always have done, upon controlling the organization of the House and dictating the formation of its committees. This being done, what may we reasonably expect?‘ 1st, either the assumption of the rebel debt or the re udiation of our own. No man not totally blinded by)artisan zeal can for a moment believe that the representatives from the South, with the control of Congress in their bands, will nicckly, year after year, vote appropriations and tax their constituents to pay interest on a debt contracted, as they affirm, in waging an unjust war upon them, unless the people of the North reciprocate by taxing themselves to pay the debt of the South, incurred, as they contend, in self defense. .The next thing we may certainly anticipate Will be a demand for compensation for the loss of slaves, amounting to a sum for greater than the entire cost of the war. This demand we Will have no more power to resist than the former, and it will be either paid or compromised by a consent to re'enslaveby some other name their negroes. Then will be presented the question of bounties to our soldiers and pensions to the disabled and the widows and orphans of the dead. With such a majority controlling the Government, how will this question be met? Precisely as we have seen in the case of the national and rebel debts. They will refuse to appropriate money to pay pensions and bonntics to our soldiers and to their widows and orphans unless similar provisions are made for theirs. They will demand, and the demand will be conceded, that those who fought in the ranks of treason shall be placed upon an equality with the patriot heroes who bore the ag of the Republic through so many bloody battles. And why not? If the “lost cause” was so commendable that we are willing to confer upon the South 13 additional Representatives as the reward of her efforts, will it be very difficult to show that the men who were disabled in defending that cause should be provided for as well, at least, as those who endeavored to overthrow it? But I am told that the South would be in a minority, and that none of these things could be done without the aid of the North, and that such aid could not be given. Away with this delusion, sirl I repeat that the party which today, for the sake of power tobe gained from rebel alliances, is clamoring for a basis ofrepresentation so flagrantly unjust and so obvious y exposed to the dangers suggested, may for the same reason be im licitly relied upon to‘ give all the aid that will)cre uired. The some men who sympathized with rebellion throughout the war, whose indignation was never stirred by any of the atrocities committed by the rebels, whose patriotism could rejoice at Union defeats and mourn over Union victories, who conspired with foreign Governments against their own country and who denounced the noble Lincoln as a.tyrant and our soldiers as his hirelings, will not be slow to obey the behests of their southern masters when they are once more installed in their places of power. But I must not dwell longer upon this much talked of “ policy.” I have endeavored only to suggest some of its more prominentfeatures, and to oint out some of its inevitable results. If anytiiing more than its mere statement he needed to secure for it the reprobation of all loyal men, it will be found in the character of its supporters. I do not deny that some good men, who have not taken the trouble to thor oughly investigate it, approve it. But I cannot doubt that such men will soon awake in utter astonishment at the company in which they find themselves; and that when the President looks about him and finds that in this House not a single man among all those who supported him for the Vice Presidency indorses it, and that the House truly reflects the loyal sentiment of the country, he will be induced to reconsider and reject it. While it is true that some good men approve it, it is equally true that there is not an enein of republican institutions, at home or abroa, who does not eulogize it and glorify its author. Every promi nent rebel whose hands are yet red with the blood of our murdered defenders extols it. Every keeper of southern prison pens, whose ears were deaf to the supplications of starving prisoners, commends it. The happy possessors of drinking cups made of the skulls of our fallen heroes drink to its success. Lee, Beau regard, Moseby, Forrest, Seniines, A. H. Ste plicns, and a host of other like worthies, pronounce it the only proper theory of restoration. Every aristocrat in Europe, who during the war conspired with our enemies and poured contempt upon our cause and our efforts, praises it. Northern sympathizers, who traduced and maligned Mr. Lincoln and his Administration, are in ecstacies over it. Why such commendations from such men? Is there nothing in their unanimous and enthu siastic indorsement to arouse the suspicion of the thinking and patriotic that some great mischief, some imminent danger, may lurk beneath it? When traitors praise, let patriots beware. It promises peace, immediate restoration, universal harmony, but beneath are concealed injustice, cowardice, treachery, and ruin. Antagonized to this is the policy of the Union party, sometimes called the “congressional policy." As enunciated by the measures already passed and those now pending, it declares: 1. Tibet the secession of a State and the rebellion of its people “deprives it of all civil government” and abrogates all its rights and privileges in the Union, but does not in any way affect its obligations to the Union. I 2. That such State can be restored only b the act of the loyal people, expressed throng their representatives in Congress, and until such restoration takes place its people have no right to demand representation. 8. That it is the duty of Congress to 1st ascertain whether or not the people of the South are in a condition to participate, safely, in administering the Government. If they are, to restore them at once. If they are not, to provide, as conditions precedent to their ndmission, such irreversible uarantees as will insure the safety of the Republic and prevent future rebellions. After a full and careful investigation, believing that the people of the South are not in a condition to safely participate in the Government without additional guarantees, and that amendments to the Constitution have become imperatively neeessar by reason of the changed condition of affairs, congress proposes to submit to the people of all the States, for their ratification or rejection, the following amendment to the Constitution of the U.S.: AnricLs. Resolved 1: the Senate and HoRep of the U.S.A. in Congrcuamcmbled, i2/3rds of both house. concurrmg.)That the fol owing articlo be proposedto the Legislatures of the several Statesas an amendment tot 9 Constitution of‘ the U.S.which when ratified by 3/4ths of said Legislatures shall be valid aspart of the Constitution. namely: Anricm: SEC. 1. All personsborn or naturalized in the U.S and snhject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the U.S.andof the State wherein they reside. h0 State shall make or enforceany law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the U.S.; nOr shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without the due process of law, nor dony to any eraou Within ‘llSJllflP‘tllL'ilOD the equal protection of the laws. Sec. 2. Representatives shall be apportioned union: the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of personsin each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to voteat any election for the choicc ofelectors for President and VEEP Representatives in Congress, the executive and jail cial officers ofa State or the members of tho‘Legislature thereof, is deniedto any of“the male iiihabi tents of such State, being 21 years of age and citizens of the U.S., or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reducedin the proportion which the number of such malecitizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens 21 years of age in such State. SEC. 8. No person shall be a Senatoror Represent.ative in Congressor elector of President and VEEP, or hol any offico.an! or military under the U.S or under any State, who having previously taken an oath as a member of Congress, or asan officer of the U.S or as a member of any State Legislature or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the U.S., shall have engagedin insurrection or rebellion against the same or given aid or comfortto the enemies thereof. But Congress may, by a voteof 2/3rds of eachHouse, remove such disability. SEC. 4. The validity of the public debtof the U.S. authorized bylaw, includingdebtsincurred for payment of pensionsand bountios for servicesin suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questionod. But neither the U.S. n nrany State shall assume or pay any debtor obligation in curred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the U.S., or any claim for the lossor emancipation of any slave, but all such debts.obligations, and claims shall be held illegal and veid. SEC. 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this artic c. These are the only changes proposed to the Constitution. Are they not 9.8 generous and just? The injustice, if any, of the 1st section consists in not including political as well as civil equality among its guarantees. The freedman who sued the life of the Czar of Russia was at once raised to the dignity of a nobleman. The freedman who helped us to save the life of the great Republic is still to remain a political pariah, without even the power to defend himself at the ballot box. And yet when it is proposed to so to the baf fled parricide, who has forfeited ife, liberty, property, and citizenship, “ Your life shall be spared, your liberty she I be unabridged, your property shall be protected, you may again enjoy the rights you have renounced and forfeited, ” he complains of severity and want of magnanimity, because he is required to respect the lifil, liberty, and property of the freedman. Is it not the negro rather than the rebel who has reason to complain of this section? Is there anything unjust or nngencrous in the 2nd section, which provides a basis of representation equitable to all sections, and corrects the glaring inequalities which we have seen will otherWise exist? The propriety and necessity of this section are so apparent that its mere statement is the strongest possible argument in favor of its adotion. It oes not propose to humilitate the oath or deny her a single right. It demands only that she shall stand on an exact equality with ourselves. Nothing more and nothing less. I would like to see the man who can stand before a 10 all constituency and contend that a southern rebel shall be clothed with twice as much political power as a northern loyalist. Let our Democratic friends who voted against this section go home and tell their constituents the lain truth, that under the Constitution, and y reason of changes effected by the war, each and ever rebel vote counts as much in the election of resident and members of Congress as the votes of 2 northern soldiers, and that they refused to let the people have an opportunity to amend the Constitution in this respect. Tell the working men of the North that they are to be robbed of 13 Representatives in congress in order that the “c ivalry” may have that much additional power as a reward for their treason, and that you would not consent to a remedy for this injustice. Tell them these simple, obvious facts, and that you desired to confer as much power as possible upon the South, to the end that, by combining with traitors, you may attain political power, and I apprehend the next Congress will not see you here to combine with any party. The people are des perately in earnest on this question. They see the existing injustice an the impending danger, and are determined to remedy the one and avert the other. Woe to him who attempts to‘ hinder them in the execution of their righteons will! The 3rd section, providing for the exclusion from Office, State an Federal, ofcertain classes of prominent, perjured, and dangerous traitors, meets my unqualified approval. The test it applies seems to me to be an eminently proper one. The assertion that he who has once taken an oath to so port the Constitution and voluntarily violated that oath is not to be trusted, ehallenges the assent of every right minded man. ts propriety is seen also in the class of persons whom it disfranchises. It strikes at those members of Congress who lotted and instigated the rebellion; those 0 'cers of the Army and Navy who were educated by the Government for its defense, but who in the hour of danger bas'ely betrayed their flag and country‘; those members of State Legislatures and other officers who led the misguided masses into treason. It is just what the true men North and South demand, and yet I doubt not it will be assailed by the Opposition with the most intense mali nity. It touches a tender oint. For if leaing rebels are to be excluded from office, State as well as Federal, there is a reasonable probability that the loyal men of the South will control it, and in that event the long anticipated political millenium, in which the secession lion and the Democratic lamb shall lie down together on downy beds of power, will be as far removed as ever. But notwithstanding this opposition it will prove the most popular amendment proposed. Its justice, its safety, its propriety, as well as its enerOsity toward the misguided masses of the South, will commend it to all who have the interest of the country more at heart than the interests of a political party. These men who are to be thus disfranchised, have justl forfeited every right they once possessed. ii any other Government on earth they would he hung or banished, and their property would be confiscated. We only propose that, havin attempted to ruin, they shall not now rule. 'hey may remain in the country, retain their property, and enjoy with us the equal protection of the laws, but they shall not govern loyal men. Here, as in every other proposition contained in thisamendment, nothing is demanded for vengeance, but everything for security. Public safety and national honor require their disfranchisement. Conscience an the common sense of mankind approve it. But observe with what care this section is guarded to avoid unnecessary severity. If at any time their good conduct shall prove that they have repented of their treason and can safely be trusted with the exercise 0 power, it is provided that this disfranchisement may be removed by a 2/3rd s vote of Congress. At present they are to be required, in the language of AndrewJohnson, “ to take a back seat in the work of reconstruction, ” but if hereafter they bring forth the fruits of repentance, they maly be permitted to “ come up higher." he 4th section is designed to prevent a repudiation of the Federal debt, and to insure the payment of pensions' and bounties to our soldiers and sailors. It also prohibits the as sumption or payment of the confederate debt, or 0 any claim for compensation for the loss or emancipation of any slave, thereby guarding the loyal people against taxation to pay the expenses of an effort to destroy them. I will not insult the intelligence of this House or of my constituents who maybe good enough to read my remarks, by discussing the proriety and justice of this section. Its necessity have already shown. The finances of the country demand not only that the payment of these debts and claims shall be made impossible, but that the question of possibility shall be put beyond the reach of discussion. The mere agitation ofsuch a proposition will prove ruin ous to our credit. A very large portion of the rebel indebtedness is held b our enemies in Europe, who willtake especia pleasure in using it to cripple and embarrass our credit abroad, and who will also cooperate Eowerfully with our enemies at home in the effort to compel its assumption by the Government. Hence, I desire to place the prohibition where it will be forever beyond the reach of agitation. In addition to these proposed constitutional amendments, the bill reported by the reconstruction committee and now pending declares that whenever the constitutional amendments, before referred to, shall have become a part of the Constitution of the U.S., and any State lately in insurrection shall have ratified the same and shall have modified its constitution and laws in conformity therewith, the Sens&Reps from such State, iffound duly elected and qualified, may, after taking the required oath of office, be admitted into Congress as such, and that such State may assume its proportion of the direct tax under the act of 1861, and the payment thereof may be postponed for a period not exceeding ten years. This is simply an enabling act expressing the terms and conditions upon which Sens&Reps may he admitted, and is designed to hasten as much as is possible and consistent with public safety, the return of those States to their places in the Union. I regret to learn that there is a disposition anywhere to postpone action on this bill. Having agreed upon the constitutional guarantees which we deem essential, let us now give to the country a completed plan of reconstruction. Let us declare boldly and unequivocally upon what terms the insurgent States may return. Believing, as I do, that the amendments we have proposed are eminently proper and indispehsabl necessary, it seems to me that this bill, which makes their ratification a condition precedent to full restoration, is equally proper and necessar. In this measure, as in the others to which I have alluded, the generous spirit of the Government is manifested toward the people of the insurgent States. The loyal people of the North, carrying all the heavy burdens of the war, have paid their share of the direct tax under the act of 1861. But the South is car. She has made herself so by trying to destroy the Government, and yet the North I? says to her, “ Come back and enjoy the protection of the same laws which protect us, and our burdens shall be made as light as possible; your share of taxes, long since due, shall be postponed for ten years. Not only shall there be no confiscation of your property, but fearin your just debts may be too burdensome we will postpone their pament to suit your convenience." Again, I as. under what other Government on earth was generosity like this ever exhibited to traitors 'I Radical as is the difference between these respective policies of the Union party and that of the Executive, it is, after all, not so much a disagreement in regard to the powers of the Government as in regard to the extent to which those powers shall be exercised. At the close of the war the President held that the relations existin between the insurgent States and the Union TIMI been disturbed and that those States had been “deprived of all civil government” by secession and rebellion. Acting upon this opinion he required, as a condition precedent to their restoration, the ratification of the great antislavery amendment, and the repudiation b State action of the rebel in debtedness. fie still holds, I believe, that the Government had the constitutional power to exact those terms. But havin done this much, and thereby conceded to the fullest extent the power of the Government over the subject, he now contends we shall go no further. I approve of what he has done in this respect, but claim that it falls far short of what is necessary, and insist that the safety of the Republic demands other conditions and guarantees. The last 6 months have furnished iiidubi table evidence that a majority of the southern people are quite as disloyal at heart today as they were at any time during the war. Witness their lamentations for the “lost cause, ” their insults to the national fla; their toasts and public demonstrations inionor of the most obnoxious leaders of the rebellion; their ostentations honors to the rebel dead, exhibited by processions bearing flowers and strcwing them upon their graves; their mobbings of black loyalists who attempted to bestow similartokens of respect to the memory of our fallen heroes who seep in southern graves; their violent efforts to drive out the few Union people who remain among them; their murders of Union ists, and destruction of their dwellings, school houses, and churches, and their almost universal expressions of hatred, made in every form and in every place, of the men who have been most, active and prominent in crushing the rebellion. They have demonstrated to us, also, by the re'enactment of vagrant laws and slave codes for freedmen, with how much sin cerity they agreed to the abolition of slavery, and how readily that institution, abolished in name, may be reestablished in fact and with increased cruelty. The have by State laws repudiated the rebel in ebtgdness, but we all know that the same Legislatures, or State conventions, which repudiated them, may to iuor row wipe out that act of repudiation and tax the loyal peeple to pay them. In fact they have given us timely notice of their intentions on this subject as well as on many others.