Mr. MI LER. Mr. Speaker, much has been said in regard to reconstruction, and as it is one of the most momentous questions that has ever devolved upon Congress since the formation of our Government, it is well that it has attracted the serious consideration of both Houses of Congress. The wicked rebellion having been crushed, the next great question for us to legislate is, to try to prevent a similar outbreak; and to this Congress the nation looks for a guarantee of permanent security. The Union, in le lcon ternlation, is perpetual. it is much other than the constitution formed by the Articles of Association of 1774, matured and continued by the DeclarIndep of Jul 4, 1776. It was further matured, and the faith of the then 13 States expressly plighted and engaged that it should be perpetual, by the Articles of Confederation of 1778, and finally in 1787 the declared objects for ordaining and establishing the Constitution were “ to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquillity, provide for the common defense, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterit.” Thus the original 13 States were y solemn compact cemented together and the 3rd section of the 4th article of the Constitution provides that new States may be admitted by Congress into this Union. Has any State which formed a part of this Union a right, under the Constitution, to secede? That right is nowhere admitted in that sacred instrument, but the very contrary is inculcated. Chief Justice Marshall, in the case of Cohen vs. Virginia, 6 Wheaten, 390, says:. “ The people made the constitution and the people can unmake it: it is the creature of therr W1“and lives only by their will. But the supreme invisible power to may O or uninuke resides only in the whole ody of the people; not in any BubdlVlSlOXolf them. The attempt of any of the parts to exercise it is usur pation and ought to be repelled by those to whom the people have delegated their power of repelling it." Mr. MadisOu in his letter to Mr. Trist, in 1822, says: "I partake of wonder that the man onname shonld view secessionin the light mention. The essential differnnee between a free Governmentand a Government not free is that the former is founded on compact, the parties to which are mutually and equally and by it: neitherof thein. thoreforc, avea zreater right to break ot!from the bargain than the others have to hold them to it, and certainly there is noth in: in the virginia resolutions of 17218 adverse to this principle, which is that of common senseand common justice. The fallacy which draws a different conclusionliesin confounding a single party with the garties to a constitutional compact of the U.S. the latter having madethe coin set may do what they will with it, the former, as on y one of the parties, owes fidelity to it till released by consent or absolved by an intolerable abuseof the power created. It is high time that the claim to secedeat will should be put down by public opinion.” Also Mr. Madison, in his letter to Mr. Ever ett in 1830, said: " It [the Constitution] was formed by the governments of the component States, as the Federal government for which it was substituted was formed; nor was it formed by a majority of the peopleof the U.S. as a single community, in the manner of a consolidated Government. It was formedby the States that is by the people in each of the States acting in their highest capacity, and formed consequently by the same authority which formed the State constitutions. “Being thus derived from the same source as the constitution of the States, it has within each State the some authority as the constitution of the State and asmuch a coustitution in the strict sense of the term, within its prescribed sphere, as the constitution of the States are within their respective spheres. but with this obvious and essential differenoe, that being a compaet among States in their highest sovereign capacity, and constituting the people thereof one people for certain purposes, it cannot be altered or amendedat the will of the State individually, as the constitution of nstate maybe at its individual Will." General Jackson, in his letter to Colonel Hamilton, of November 2, 1812, and the one to Mr. Crawford, of May 1, 1833, takes strong grounds against the right of secession. In the latter he uses this patriotic language: " Takeoare of yournullifiers; you havethemamon you; let them meet with the indignant frowns O every man who loves his country. llaninns gallows ought to be the fate of such ambitious men." Mr. Lincoln very properly said in his inaugural address of March 4, 1861: " Physically speaking.we cannotseparate; we cannot remove our respective sectionsfrom each other, nor build an impassable wall between them. A bus band and wife may be divorced and go out o f the presence and beyond each other. but the diflerent arts of our country cannot do this. They cannot at remain face to face.” and in his 1st message to Congress on the 4th of July, 1861, he Stated that “The Constitution provides, and all the Stateshave accepted the provmons, that.the U.S shall guaranty to every State it RFG, but if a State may awfullyjzo out of the Union. having done so, it may also discard of RFG; so that to prevent its going out is an indispensable means to the end of maintaining the guarantee mentioned." and finally, in his message of 2d of March, 1862, be repeated that “The Union must be proved and hence all indispensable menus must be employed." I need not, however, consume time inciting authorities against the right of secession, for even Mr. Buchanan, under whose administration the rebellion was matured, in his last mes sage, deliVered on Tuesday the 4th day of De cember, 1860, denied that “secession” could be justified as a constitutional remedy, and asserted that.the principle is wholl inconsistcut with the history as well as the e aracter of the Constitution, but said he could not find anything in the Constitution to coerce a State into submission which is attempting to with draw from the Confederacy, (notvnthstanding the Constitution which he had sworn to an ort required him to take care that the laws aithful y executed) and for this derelictipn of duty his country, on which his adminis tration inflicted so much misery, Will hold him resonsible. but again, the seed of secession for many years sown broadeast in the then slave States and especially in SCarolina (which was the nest of treason) has been eradicated by the blood of more than 300,000 as brave men as the world ever saw who fell battling in defense of the flag of this great republic; and another great moral victory was achieved by this bloody conflict, which was the overthrow of a system conceded by eve true strict to be incompatible with a republican arm of government, and that is slavery. There are 11 States that the leaders of the rebellion claim to have acceded, and the question has been raised in the discussion as to ilie present status of these States. The honorable chairman of the ComReconstruction [Mr. Srnvnxs] in an able speech de livered in the House on the 18th day of December last, takes the ground that these rebel States severed their original comnet and broke all ties that bound them to the nion, and are to be treated as conquered provinces, or, to use his language “Unless the law of nations is a dead letter. war between 2 acknowledged belliuerents severed the original compact and broke allties that bound them toircther;the li1ture condition oftho conquered Power depends on the will of the conqueror. They must comeip as new States or remain as conqueredprov tncus and he again remarks in the same speech“I cannot doubt that the late confederate States are outiitthe Union to all intents and purposes for which the conqueror may choose to consider them"and cited several authorities which he claims to sustain his position, among which are Vat tel, Phillimore, and 2 Blacks U.S. Supreme Court Reports, and in a gre measure assumed the same position in his speech of the 10th of March. Though I have great respect for the learning and statesmanship of my distinguished colleague. I cannot subscribe to all the doctrines enunciated by him. It may, however, be proper tostate here that the honorable gentleman did not pretend to express the views of the reiib lican iarty, for in the speechiirst delivere he, with is usual candor and tairness, says: " I trust the Republican party will not be alarmed at what I am saying; I do not professto speak their sentiments. nor must they be icld responsible for them. I speak for myselfand take theresponsibility for them." Nor can I agree in all the views of m learned colleague, [Mr. Wir.i.isiis] althoug his speech, forits learning and research, reflects great credit upon its distinguished author, nor can Itn all contained in the able speech of that distinguished Gentfrom Ohio, [Mr. SHEUABARPER] in which is displayed much legal learning, and was delivered with great force. The authorities. however, cited by him do not, in my opinion, sustain his position as applicable to the socalled rebel States. The 2 latter gentlemen do not profess to go the same lengt as the former. am certain that neither ot these distinguished gentlemen will concede the right. of secession under the constitution to any of the States of this Union. Then, if no such right exists to peaceably with draw. can the citizens of any State or number of States by force, short of a successful revolution, take such State or States out of this Confederacy? I hold that no rebellious not can force a State out of the Union; that notwithstanding the rebellion, it still remains ii part and parcel of it, as much as an arm is an integral part of the human body; though, owing to the rebellion, it may fora time be somewhat paralyzed. I would accord to the rebels no such honor as having been successful in taking the 11 rebel States, or anyone of them, out of the Union, and now to be treated as conquered rovinees. But suppose we should admit these States had forced themselves out of the Union, and no constitutional prohibition adopted, how would we stand in regard to the rebel ebt! In Wheatoiia Elementary International Law, pagev 63. it is laid down that “ As to public debts. whether due to or from the revolutionized State. a more change in the form of government or in person of the ruler does not affoct the obliution. "Tbe essential form of the State that which constitutes it an independent community remains the same.its accidental form only ehan ed. The debts bein: contracted in the name of the State by its authorized agents for its public use.the nation continues liable for them. notwithstanding the chance in its international condition. The newGovernment lucceeds to the fiscal rithts and is bound to fulfill the fiscal obligalions of the former Govomm nt. It econics eniitlod to the cpublic domain another property of the State. an is bound to pay its debts previously contracted. " Icite this authority merely to show the increased diificultiea we might have to encounter i by adopting the doctrine of the rebel States having been out of the Union. Considerable has been said as to what is required to constitute a State and attempt to show that the rebel States, as they are called, cannot be “States.” In Wheatous International Law, pages 57 and 58, it is said: “A State. as to the individual membersof whichit is composed.is a fluctuating body. but in res act to societyit is one of the samebody oiwtheli tic existenceis perpetually kc t up by a constant successionof newmembers. T iisexistence continues until it is interrupted bysome change affecting the being of the State. Ift in; change be an internalrevolution. merely altering the municipal constitution and form of iroveminent. the State remains the same: it neither lose i iany of its rights nor is it discharged from any of its O iliuations. “The habitual obedience of the membersofany political society to a superior authority must have onceexisted in order to constitute asovoreiirn State. But the temporarysuspensionof that obedienceand of that authority in consequenceof civilWar does not necessarily extinguish the being of the State. although it may alioctfora time its ordinary relation with other States." and in Vattel, 423, one of the cases cited and relied on by my colleague, [Mr. SravnNs] it is said: “A civilWar breaks the bands of society and Government or at least suspends their force and edoct." There is no doubt that the civil operations of the Government were for awhile suspended as regards the rebel States, but that would not prevent the Government from exercising that right as soon as the rebellion was crushed, nor would it be any acknowledgment that these States were separated from the Union. Much has been said and authorities cited in regard to ancient Governments which have but ittle application to a Government like ours. We may look in vain into ancient history to find one constituted like the U.S., for even in the most enlightened days of the Grecian republic piracy was regarded as an honorable employment. The law of nations, as understood by the European world and by us, is the offspring of modern times. It is truly said in Phillimore on International Law, page 188, (33 Law Librhry, 133;) “That the U.S. of North America furnishes us the greatest example which the world has yet seenof a ecleral Government: that its Constitution difiers materially from the Germanic Confed eration; the latter is a leagueofsoveroilrn Statesfor the common defense against external and internal vmioelnetn;ciet.r athineffaocrtmaecormispaossuitper Setmatee Federal Govern ofwbich affectsnot only membersof the coUnnsitoitnutbiount all its citizens both in their individual and corpo rate capacities.” and the same doctrine is recognized in Wheatons International Law, page 92. But it has been said that during the 4 years of bloody conflict the socalled rebel States were acknowleded by the U.S. as belligerents, an to sustain this theory 2d Blacks U.S. Supreme Court It eports, which is known as the prize cases, has been cited and relied on. It cannot be denied that the rebellion against the Government of the U.S. assumed a gigantic form; that the rebel government had enforced obedience to its authority over a large region of country and over many millions of people; that it had by force excluded temporarily the operation of the laws of the U.S.; and that our Government has in many ways recognized the contest as a civilWar, and from motives of policy and humanity could not afistrictly upon egal principles, but exnecessit e rei adopted so much of the civilWarfare as would prevent indiscriminate slaughter and the infliction of unnecessary pain and hardship. This was done withoutin any manner recognizing the rebel leaders or their organization, but constantly denying them to be a Government defaeto or dejure. On examinationpf all the proclamations of the President. beginning with that of the 15th of April, 1801, and all the principal laws of Congress, I havenot been able to find a single executive or legislative act which conceded a governmental status to the socalled rebel conlederacy. The whole ground of legislation has been aimed to suppress insurrection, punish treason, and confis cate properly of reels. The most important bill on that subject that passed Congress is the one approved July 17, 1862, entitled: “A bill to suppress insurrection. to punish treason and rebellion. to seizeand confiscate the property of rebels and for other purposes." The socalled southern confederacy certainly was not a Government do ure; all its actions were agross violation of rights. It. was nowhere is recognized Government. It was never admitted into the family of nations. Every rebellion or insurrectiop is in reality a war, and it becoines more evidently such when it bring i 100s of 1,000s of men into the field; still, it is only a rebellion, and the citizens of the rebellious portion are only rebellious citizens, over whom the Government possesses not only all its legal rights, but all those powers which a state of war confers upon it. As regards the U.S., all. the ordinances of secession were null and void, and the socalled southern confederaey was an entire and complete iiullitv, and the rebellious people may very properly have been treated as rebels an enemies. they may be tried as traitors and punished. The Supreme Court, in the prize cases. decided no more than this, that bein engaged in a war with rebels the President ha a right, jure belli. to blockade ports in oasessionof states in rebellion, which ueutra s were bound to regard. There is no intimation of an abrogated vonstitution or an outside status. Had this question been before the court no doubt Justice Grier would have adhered to his own opinion in case of the pirates, in which that eminentjudge said: "Every Government is bound by the law of self preservation to suppress insurrection and the fact that the number oft o insurgentsmay beso great as to carry on a civil par Mainst their legitimate soverciiznwill not entitle them to be consideredaState. The fact that a civilWar exists for the purpose of snppressinirarsbellion is conclusive that the goveminent of the U.S. refusesto acknowledge their right to beconsideredsuch. Consiquentl this court. Hlttlnl hero to executethe laws of the U.S. can view those in rebellion in no other liight than traitors to their country and thosewho assume by their authority a right to plunder the property of our citizenson the high sons, in pirates and robbers." My colleague, Mr. Srnvnxsd in his speech. recites a few wor s of what Justice Grier said in the prize cases, when speaking in relation to insurrections against Governments, as follow“ s: When a.party in rebellion occupyor hold in hostilemanner neertainportion ofcountry. have declared their independence.have cast off their allegiance. have organized armies. have commencedhostilities against their former sovereign.the world acknowl edgesthem asbelligerents, and the contestis awar." But in the same paragraph that judge continues: “The claim to be in armsto establishtheirliberty and in cpendeneoin order to becomea sovereign State. while the sovereign treats them as insurgents and rebels who owe alleuiance and who should be punished with death.” This does not conflict with the opinion given by that distinguished jurist in the trial of the pirates, but is in confirmation of the fact that the U.S. did not acknowledge the rebel confederacy as a belligerent. It cannot be disputed but that during the rebellion the civil laws could not be enforced over those States, and consequently the functions thereof were in a great measure suspended. But this fact, as the authorities here intofore cited show, did not. place those States out of the Union, or destroy their status as States and turn them into Territories. During all that trying period there was still prevailing (though in a great measure suppressed) a Union elementin those States which did much in aiding to crush out the rebelhon. If there had been found in Sodom and Gomor rali ten righteous men, we are told that those cities of the plain would have been saved from destruction, and surely more than that number of true loyal men could have been found in each of the rebel States, even SCarolina not excepted and are we more unchuritable than He who holds in his hands the destiny of worlds and again, had not the loyal citizens of those States a right to claim that they were citizens of the U.S and entitled to protection under the Constitution, as did the inhabitants of Rome by claiming that they were Roman citizens? In Vattels Law of Nations, page 6, it is laid down “If a nation is obliged to preserve itself. it is no less obliged carefully to preserve all its members. The nation owesthis to itself. sincethe loss even of one of its membersweakensit and is injurious to its preservation. It owes this also to themombers in particular in consequenceof the very act of association; for thosewho composea nation are united for theirdefense and commonadvantage and none can justly bedeprived of this union and of the advan taizeshe or iects to derive from it while he on his side fulfills t 0conditions.” and the same author on the same page further says: “The body of a nation cannot. then. abandon a province a town, or evena single individual who is a part of it. unless compelled to it by necessity or "N dispensably obliged to it by the strongestreasons founded on t a public safety.” lt cannot be denied that East Tennessee had duruig the rebellion a large number of loyal citizens. Mr. Lincoln. in his message to congress on the 3d day of December, 1601, stated: “ I deemit important that the large reeion of East Tennesseeand westernNCarolina be connected With Kentucky and other faithful parts of the Union by railroad." On the 4th of Ma, 1864, the House passed a bill authorizing the President to appoint in each State in rebellion a provisional governor, With the pay and emoluments of a brigadier general, to e charged with the civil adminis tration until a State government therein shall be recognized, and prior to that time, to wit, on the 20th of January, 1864, President Lincoln ordered an election to be held in Arkansas for Governor, &c.; thus showingthat neither the action of Congress nor President Lincoln had any tendency to treat the rebel States as out of the Union or annihilated as States, but on the contrary shows the very opposite. President Johnson, in his annual message of the 4th of December last, says: “The perpetuity of the Constitution brings with it perpetuity of the States; thus mutual relations make us what we are; and in our politiealsystemtheir connectienisindissoluble. the wholecannotexistwithout the parts. nor the parts without the whole.So long as the Constitutionof the U.S. endures the States will endure: the destruction of one is the destructionof the other: the preservationof the one is the preservation of the other." But it is said by my colleague [Mr. Srn vnns] that “on the round O estoppel the U.S. have a O car right to elect to adJudge them out of the Union;” that “they are estepped both by matter of record and matter in pals.” and my able colleague, [Mr. BRO0MALL] in his speech of the “26th of January, says, in speaking of the rebel States: “ llaving set.up an independent government and woundwar asanation. theyareostoped frompleading theright ofcitizenship todefeatt 0right ofcon quest." If the latter gentlemans doctrine is tenable, then those residing in what are denominated the rebel States are no longer citizens of the U.S., and consequently not amenable to her laws, and in that event all laws of congress passed to punish rebels would be nugatory. But how do the records stand in regard to estoppel? It is true that the socalled southern contederacy adopted a constitution and passed laws, claiming to be independent of the U.S., and at the some time the U.S. Congress passed stringent laws which denied that those States were separated from the U.S., and inflicted upon them severe pen alties for their treason. So as regards matter of record the U.S. would be estopped from treating these States as out of the Union, as well as the rebel States would be by having asserted they were out. Then as to matter in park. The U.S. asserted that those rebel States had not.dissolved their connection with the Union, while the rebels on the other hand asserted they had. So as to matter inputs, they would be equally estopped. Finally, the contest was by wager of battle decided against the rebels. ln 7 Caseys Pennsylvania Reports, 834, Hill at al. vs. Eply, it is laid down: “If no one be misled to his hurt he will not be estcpped.” Also, in 12 Casey, 522, Brubaker es. Oakes, it is ruled that“It is essential to an estoppel by matter in pain. that he who setsit up is bound to show that he has been misled to his hurt.” and in 8 Hill.215, Dezell vs. Odel, it is laid down that to make an esto pel effectual it must show that the party me. e an admission clearly inconsistent with the evidence proposed to be given, and that the other party as acted upon that admission. The U.S. were not misled, for the actions of the rebels were well known, and both arties acted with full knowledge, and as alrca y indicated, were on an equality as to matterof record. So that upon no legal principle are the rules of estoppel applicable as contended by my 2 colleagues. Mr. Speaker, it has been said that if the States lately in rebellion were only put in abeyance during the war, then at its termination they were restored to all the rights they possessed prior to the rebellion, and the president had noright to direct provisional governors to call a convention to amend or form a constitution different from the mode desig nated in the constitution in force at the breaking out of the war and the honorable Gentfrom Ohio [ML Snsnnaaaaena] refers to the actions of the President in regard to NCarolina, and recites the clause in the old constitution pointing out a mode for alter in or amending the same. i ow, owing to the rebellion, great changes had taken place. As a war necessity, slaves had by proclamation been declared to be freed, and the 4th section of the 4th article of the Constitution of the U.S. requires that the U.S shall guaranty to every State in the Union a RFG, and in order to carry out that innnction it was indispensable that a change of, the constitution should be made, and the Government had a right to demand it in order that the civil laws, which had to give way to the military, could be revived and as to the mode of altering the constitution, though the Old one points out a method by which amendments or alterations maybe made, still that does not prevent the calling of a convention to adopt a new constitution or change the former, subject to the ratification of the legal voters. That is a right which the sovereign people of each State never parted with, and ence may as often as they choose, by convention, change their constitution so as not to be incom atible with that of the U.S. The cgislatnre, withouta convention, can make alterations only in the way prescribed by the constitution; but as I have already said, that is no bar to a change made through a convention, subject to the ratification of the voters; and for this procedure we have a case directly in point in regard to the Suite of Missouri. Article 12 of the constitution of the 10th of July, 1820 under which it became a State provides that"The General Assembymay at any time prepare such amendments to this constitution as 2/3rds of eachHouse shall deemexpedient. which shall be published in all the newspapersprinted in the State 3 several times, at least 12 months before the next general election, and if. at the 1st session of the General Assemblyafter such general election, 2/3rds of each llonse shall by ycas&naysrat ify such proposedamendments, they shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of this constitution: Provided, thatsnch proposedamendmentshall be read on 3 several da 21 in each House as Well when the sameare propos aswhen theyare finally ratified." Yet, notwithstanding this prescribed mode of amendment, the Legislature of that State passed, in the year 1865, a law calling a convention which continued in session a few weeks and adopted a constitution which was submit ted to the people for ratification, (the disloyal portion of the community being prohibited from voting) and under that constitution the present members of Congress from that State were elected and now have seats in this House. Tennessee also adopted u constitution in a similar manner. But it bps been said that the citizens did not all vote on these qpestions, that some of them were not allowed that right. If they committed such acts as to deprive themselves of the right of suffrage it wns a fault of their own, or if those who had a right neg lected to vote it would not invalidate a constitution which had a majority of those who did vote. All that is required when a matter is submitted to the people for their ratification is a majority of the votes polled. The Constitution of the U.S. provides that in order to make an amendment thereto valid it must ppss Congress by a vote of 2/3rds of both house s, and be ratified by the Legislatures of 3/4ths of the sevewl States, or by convention in 3/4ths thereof, so that in such an importantamendment asthnt abolishing the syste of slavery we cannot afford to theorize as to tes being out of the Union or losing their status as States, for there is no telling what the U.S. Supreme Court, as now or shall hereafter be constituted, may decide in regard to the States lately in rebellion, and if there should not be a ratification by 3/4ths of the entire number of States, (including those lately in rebellion) and it should be determined that in consequence thereof the amendment abolishin slavery was invalid, then all the lives an treasure sacrificed to eradicate from this Republic that accursed system which brought upon the nation so much misery would he of no avail. But the SecyState, that far seeing statesman, (lifr. Seward) who through the 4 years of terrible conflict managed the affairs of state so ably and kept us out of foreign wam, provided for the contingency so as to avmd all cavil. Thatgen tle man, in. his published certificate in form of proclamation of the 18th of December, 1865, recites the amendments, to Wit: " SEC. 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude. except as a punishment or crimewhereof the party shall have been duly connoted.s hall exnit within tihct U.S or any place lubyectto their Juris lO 10n “SEC. 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation." and then proceeds as follows: “And whereas it appears from official documents on file in this Dept that the amendment to the Constitution of the U.S. proposed as aforesaid.has beenratified by the Legislaturesof the States of Illinois. RhdIsland Micliixnn. Maryland. NewYork. WestVirginia, Mhinc. Kansas. Massachusetts.Pennsylvania. Virginia. Ohio Missouri, Nevada, Indiana. Louisiana. Minnesota.vWise onsin. Vermont. Tennessee.Arkansas. Connecticut. NewHampshire. SCarolina. Alabama, NCarolina and comin. in all 20 7 States: and whereas the whole number of States in the U.S. is 3sis: and whereas the beforespecislLv named States whose Legislatures have ratified the said proposed amendment constitute 3/4ths of the whole number of Statesin the U.S.: Now. therefore.be it known that I, William ll.Se w aril. SecyState. by virtue and in pursuance of the 2ndsectionof thenet of Congress.approved the 20th of April. lhl8.entitled An act to provide for the publication of the laws of the U.S and for other purposes.do hereby certify that the amendmentaforesaidhas becomevalid to all intents and purposes as a part of the Constitution of the U.S. " It will be seen, Mr. Speaker, that 7 of the above named States that ratified said amendment had been With what was called the “southern confederacy.” Surely it would not do for us now to say that the States so rati fying the amendment are not States within the Union. I might add that the Legislatures of California and NewJersey have some also ratified the amendment, whi e those of Kentucky and Delaware persistently refuse. Mr. Speaker, we have. heard on this floor, portrayed with zeal and eloquence, the bar arities committed by the rebels upon the Union soldiers, and the desecration of our dead, yea, even the murder of our venerable President. Now, sir, if it would restore to us again our much esteemed President; to the bereaved parents, their sons; to the Widow, her husband; to the Orphan children, their fathers l and protectors who fell in defense of this republic; to the maimed their amputated limbs, and restore to health the shattered constitutions of our surviving soldiers, I would be willing if the Constitution would allow it to ace the rebel States annihilated. But that restoration cannot be had; our nobledead must sleep until the sound of Gabriels trumpet. Though there are no marks to designate the resting place of some, yet their noble deeds will be enoraven upon the hearts of a grateful nation; while those who fell fight in to destroy our free institutions, if not totally forgotten, will only be remembered as rebels and traitors, and not as the honorable Gentfrom NewYork [Mr. Ravmosnril said, in comparing them to our dead, “The dead of the contending hosts sleep beneath the soil of a common country under the common flag; their hostilities are hushed, and they are the dead of the nation forevermore.n Sir, those who were trying to take the hearts blood of the nation cserve no such eulogy. Again. it has been asked, “How long may this nation survive with Senators electe by rebel Legislatures, or by treaties made by Senators chosen by rebel States?” This, Mr. eaker, is rather a patriotic appeal; but if the Senate and HoRep stand firm there will, be no danger of such getting seats in either branch. The 6th secti of the 3rd article of the Cgnstitution of to U.S. provides that "Bach House shall be the judge of the election, returns and qualifications of its members." We must not look at these questions as an advocate employed for his client, nor let our feelings betray our judgment, but view them as statesmen. Mr. Speaker, we.have been repeatedly told on this oor that we ought to be cautious about admitting Representatives from the States lately in rebellion, but no particular plan for their admission has been c early defined. It seems to me that if Congress would submit to the respective States a few important amendments to the Constitution of the U.S., they would be ratified, and all this comlication avoided. It would have been better if this course had been pursued immediately after the assembling of the present Congress. The framers of the Constitution contemplated that the time might arrive when amendments would be necessary, and therefore provided a method for its accomplishment. It would be strange if, after a period of upward of 70 years in this progressive age, amendments would not be found necessary; though I think they ought to be as few as practicable. Yet I do not agree with the honorable Gentfrom NewYork, [Mr. RAYMOND] who, in speakingof the Constitution, says he “looks upon all propositions for its amendment with hesitation and distrust.” How any statesman can “ hesitate and distrust” about the practicability of amending the Constitution to correspond with the times and circumstances I cannotimagme. Then, Mr. Speaker, I would propose; 1st, that the Representatives in Congress shall be apportioned among the several States according to the number of qualified voters in each State. 2ndly, that neither of the States of the Union shall ever assume or pay any part of the debt of the socalled confederate States of America, or of any State contracted iu carr in7 on war against the U.S.; and, t irdly, that the Constitution be amended by striking out that clause which savs: “ No tax or duty shall be laid on articles exported from any State." According to the estimate of my colleague, [Mr. Srzvnxs] a small tax on exportation of cotton alone would amount to $100,000,000, annually a sum which would do much toward paying off our war debt. It is not likely it would be laid on any other product. These are all the amendments I deem necessary. There can be no doubt that under the constitution each State has a right to regulate the qualifications of its own clectors, and Congress has no right to assume that authority. in the DistCol Congress has exclusive jurisdiction, and may there regulate the right of suffrage, which is of very little practical importance, as none but municipal oihcers are elective in the District. Accoring to the constitution of pennsylvania, none but “ white free men of the age O 21 years, having resided in the State one year, ” &c., are entitled to the right of suffrage, and before that can be changed there must be an alteration in the constitution of that State. As to the freedmen, the amendment already adopted gives Congress sufficient authority to legislate for their protection. I consider, Mr. Speaker, that the most important amendment needed is that of rere sentation according to the vote; for whi c it must be conceded that each State has a right to regulate the right of suffrage, yet if the colored man is deprived of a vote he should not be counted in the representation; to sim lify it, no other one ought to vote for him. these 3 amendments were adopted, and especially the 1st, and the States latelyiu rebellion should send loyal men as representatives, they ought to be admitted; and if this arrangement could be made, I see no difficulty in regard to representation from those States. But Congress ought never to admit to a seat any man who has vol untaril borne arms against the U.S., and of theirqualification each House is the judge. PresidentJohnson, in his annual message, says: " It is for you. fellow citizensoftho HoRepto judge, each of you for yourselves, of the election, returns, and qualifications of your own members." I have not time to review all the arguments from the Democratic side of this House, but if the gentlemen from NewJersey [Mr. Root ms] and the late member from Indiana (Mr. Voor bees) express the views of their party, they would be willing to admit to seats on this floor rebels whose hands have been stained with the blood of our Union soldiers. If we were to determine that the States lately in rebellion could only be admitted as new States, after presenting an acceptable constitution, and upon that basis receive them back, what would prevent them immediately after from changing their constitution in any way they saw fit, provided it was not inconsistent with that of the U.S.? So that the only safeguard is the amending of the Constitution of the U.S., which will be a sufficient barrier against all innovations; and if those States are sincere as to their returned loyalt they will have no hesitation through their hegislatures to join in ratifying the mate rial amendments, and especially that of representation. It is true a bitter feeling has prevailed against some of the rebel States for their treasonable course, and especially SCarolina, and that is not to bewondered at when we take into consideration the unpar leled misery they have brought upon the country; but it is hoped they have repented in sackcloth and ashes, and, as some evidence of that, we find even SCarolina ratifying the amendment abolishing their favorite institution of slavery, while Kentucky and Delaware, professing to be loyal States, refuse. I trust, Mr. Speaker, that the 2 Houses of COugress will see the vastimportance of having the requisite amendments to the constitution speedily passed and submitted to the States for ratification. Then, after being ratified by the Legislatures of 3/4ths of the States, without fear of not being able to carry out the injunction of gunrantying to every State in this Union a RFG, representatives from those States lately in rebellion who can take the oath prescribed by existinglaws can be admitted to seats in Congress; and it is due to such men as May nard, Colonel Stokes, Colonel Hawkins, Ar nell, Fowler, and others, who, in the nations struggle, stood up for right and freedom, tobe care for. the loyal States, surrounded by friends of the wIt was easy to be a Union man in Republic, (and even there I am sorry to have to say that some were to be found sympathizin with treasou) but in the rebellious States it required the nerve of a Socrates to be loyal to his country where his personal liberty, life, properg, and all that is dear to man were in peril. ven Alexander H. Stephens, who for a time so eloquently raised his voice against trea son and clung to the horns of the altar of libert, was, in the hour of trial and temptation, in need by. the offerof a vice presidency in the socalled southern confederacy to let go that which he professed to love and revere, and turned his ack against his country. When war was r ng it was necessary, for the reservation ofatie Union and to weaken the and s of the enemies of the Republic, to devastate the country in osse ssion of the insurgents; but as the rebelion is now ended it is the duty of the nation to foster and build it up; and by properencouragement, with the blessings of free labor, evidenced by true loy alty, those States will exhibit in afew years one of the brightest spots in this Republic. My distinguished colleague, [Mr. W11.I.u.us] in speaking of the States lately in rebellion, says: “ 11 of the columnar supportsof our political edificeare now lying around us, like the grand columnsof Tadmor and Palmyra. with shell and capital and architrnvo alikcshattered by themighty convulsion that has laid them all in rums. " and asks: “ Where is the hand that is to lift these columnsto their place?" Mr. Speaker, though the metaphor is beau tiful. I do not agree With the honorable gentleman that 11 of the States of this Union are lying around “like the grand columns of Ted mor and Palmyra.” The shock, it is true, was great, but they stood erect in the storm like the mighty oak of the forest, but came out somewhat scarred. But the leaders who caused this terrible conflict deserve condign punishment. The Government officials deserve great credit for causing the arrest, trial, and execution of Wirz, who was proved to be a monster, and for his barbarities to the Union prisoners deserved no better fate than that which was meted eat to him; still he was but a subordinate and it is not right that the chief Officers should ese ape punishment. I agree with what was said by an eminent judge in my State, that “ the greater the man, the greater the example.” Treason ought to be made O ions, and there should be no procrastination in the trial of such offenders; the leading spirits should be the 1st brought to justice, an it is hoped that that part of fire last annual message of President Johnson, in which he says “ It is manifestthat treason.most flagrant in character, has beencommitted. Personswho are charged with its commissionshould have fair and impartial trials in the hillhest civil tribunals of the country. in order that the Constitution and the laws may befully vindicated; the truth clearly established and affixmod that treasonis a crime, that traitors should be punished, and the offensemadeodious" may be speedily carried into effect, though I cannot well see why the leading traitors in the rebellion could not have been tried by 0. military commission as well as Wirz. I look upon John C. Breckinridge as one of the vilest trai tors, and I trust an effort will be made to have him arrested, tried, and punished; and I might say that Officers who hed high militarv positions under the U.S., and with the knowledge acquired as to the position of af fairs, turued traitors and joined the rebel army, ought not to be permitted to stalk about the country. Now, Mr. Speaker, though I differ somewhat with some ofour leading members of the Republican part yin this House as to the status of the States lately in rebellion, I agree with them that none but true, loyal Representatives ought to be admitted to seats from those States, and that we should have, as a safeguard, properamendments to the Constitution of the U.S. It is hoped that the JtComReconstruction may mature some acceptable plan, which will meet the approbation ofboth branches of Congress and of the President, for the speedy adjustment of the perplexed questions that now agitate the country. I do not agree with the honorable Gentfrom NewYork, [ML RAYnosn] that we do not get much information from that committee. It is composed of gentlemen of strict integrity, and experienced statesmen, who have been laboring assiduously to procure all the information possible to lay be ore Congress, and, when a full report is made, will no doubt give us definite information as to the situation of affairs in the States lately in rebellion, and be of great importance to the whole country. I would here remark that the honorable chairman of the committee, (my colleague) who has already passed the period of life usually assigned to man, for his evotion to and toil in behalf of his country deserves great credit; and I pray that his li e may be spared until the great questions that now so much interest the nation may be adjusted so that all the States can be represented in the councils of the nation. If, Mr. Speaker, this great Republic, now extending from the StLawrence to the Gulf of Mexico, and from (he Atlantic to the Pacific ocean, and from which the dark stain of slavery has been eradicated, and the Gospel, education, and civil rights extended to all classes, with a Constitution which, according to the language of Chief Justice Marshall, in Cohens vs. Virginia, (6 Wheaton, 897) is formed for ages to come, and is designed to approach immortality as near as human institutions can aproach it; and if the citizens are true and loyal: and put their trust in Him who holds in Ilis hands the destinies of nations, this Republic will endure as a shining light until the end of time, showing to the world that man is capable of self government, and that this is truly “the land of the free and home of the brave."