Mr. WILLIAMS. If all these explanations and annotations Of the honorable Senator could accompany this proposed amendment through out the U.S., he might be able to sat isfy the people that it does not mean what it says; but it is as broad and as comprehensive as the English language can make it, and it is intended to prevent any State from making discrimination between white men, Indians, negroes, or persons of any color or of any race. pass, however, from that objection, and I insist that the fatal and conclusive objection to the proposed substitute of the Senfrom Missouri is that it cannot be adopted. All the impassioned declamation and nl the vehement assertions of the honorable Senator do not change or affect the evidence before our eyes that the people of these U.S. are not prepared to surrender to Congress the absolute right to determine as to the qualifications of voters in the respective States, or to adopt the proposition that all persons, without distinction of race or color, shall enjoy political rights and privileges equal to those now possesse by the white people of the country. Sir, some of the States have lately spoken upon that subject. Wiscbnsin and Connecticut, northern, loyal, and republican States, have recently declared that they would not allow the negroes within their own borders political rights; and is itprobable that of the 36 States more than 6, at the most, would at this time adopt the constitutional amendment proposed by the gentleman 2 He says that he is right, and therefore his constitutional amendment should be adopted by Congress as a substitute for the one reported by the committee. If it be always expo ient it is not always practicable to do exactly right. Slaver before the rebellion was as wrong and as wic ed as it ever was. It was just as right to abolish slavery in 1860asit was in 1865. But suppose before the rebellion occurred some one had made a proposition here to submit to the several States an amendment to the Constitution abolishing slavery, would there have been the ghost of a chance for its adoption? Would not the people of the country have laughed such a proposition to scorn, and would not the honorable Senator himself have joined heartily in that laugh? He could have gone before the people. as he may now, and say “this is right, but that would have availed nothing, for the supposed interests, to say nothing of the prejudices, of the people would have scoffed at the argument. Congress cannot by its legislation compel the people to adopt that to which the public sentiment of the country is generally opposed. The time had not then come for the adoption of the constitutional amendment abolishing slavery. It was ne essary that the events of the war should edu the the public mind and prepare the people for its adbption; and now, as the war has just closed, it is necessary that events should be allowed to educate the public mind before this constitutional amendment can be adopted, if it can ever be adopted, and it is not ancient to justify us, in submitting a propposition to amend the Constitution to the people, simply to say that in our judgment it is right. Many things are right, but it may not be expe dient to try to do them without any delay. It is no doubt right that the U.S. shOuld claim of GreatBritain reparation for the dam ages done to our commerce by her privateers during the late war; but would it be expedient for Congress to involve this country under existing circumstances in war to enforce that claim? To put down the rebellion was no doubt right but suppose some madcap colonel had hurled1,000 of our heroes upon the bayonets of 10,000 rebels and caused them all to be slau htered, would that colonel have been jus tifiin his conduct by saying, “I was right, and therefore it was not necessary to exercise any judgment as to the ways or means to secure that right." "Are men to discard all reason, judgment, and foresight as to the means to accomplish a given end 7 Suppose the honorable Senator wanted to go to NewYork. He has expressed great contempt here for any indirect way of attaining an object. He has a right to go to NewYork. Suppose that the direct route is obstructed by high water in the Susquehanna so that it cannot be crossed, but he can go to NewYork by a more circuitous route, would it be the part of wisdom for the distinguished Senator to rush along over the direct route into the Susque hanna and drown himself, or would it be more advisable for him to go a little way round and accomplish the object he had in view? I object, then, to the proposed amendment because it will avail us nothin. Put it, before the country and commit the nion partyto it, the amendment will be defeated and the Union party overwhelmed in its support and the control of this Government would pass into the hands of men who have more or less sympathized with the rebellion; and I say that it is of more consequence, in my judgment, that the control of this Government should remain in the hands of the men who stood up for the Union during the late war than that any constitutional amendment should be adopted by which the right of suffrage should be extended to any person or persons not now enjoying it. I ask the honorable Senator how his proposed amendment is to be executed? The constitution will declare that there shall be no discrimination on account of race or color if his amendment be adopted. Suppose the State of NewYork still retains its present constitutional provision providing that negroes shall have property worth $250 to be qualified to vote. Ill what are you going to do about it? Will conss make war upon the State of newYork to engdfce the constitutional provision? What is the rem edy to the voter who is rejected? He may have the right of courseto sue the judge and test the validity of the law; and it may be, at the end of a law suit decided that he had a right to vote; but would that be of any avail to him after the law suitwas ended? Besides, the decision would only apply to the individual case, and the State might still persist in the exclusion of persons on account of color or race. In that respect the proposed amendment of the committee has the great merit of executing itself. There is no escape from it. It is to be observed that the senators amendment is a mere limitationu on the power of the State; it does not operate irectly upon individuals. Another proposition has been submitted by the honorable Senfrom Wisconsin, Doomrrns, ] as a substitute for the report gMr. of the committee, providing that Representatives shall be apportioned according to the white male electors above 21 years of age in the several States. I ask those who favor that prop 0sition if it is necessary to strike out of point ical existence all the women in the U.S and all persons under 21 years of age in order to reach the condition of the lately emancipated negroes? Adopt that substitute and you at once declare that more than 1/2 of the white people of these U.S shall be deprived of any right of representation in Congress for the purpOse of providing for the negroes in the southern States. That violates the fundamental principle adopted by our fathers when they framed the constitution, and it seems to me that it would be great injustice to adopt such a constitutional provision. Many good objections have been stated and urged to it. I will not repeat them; but it would operate unfairly, as it seems to me, because those States where the males exceed the females would have an undue proportion of the representation in Congress., Moreover, that amendment undertakes to fix the qualification of voters in the several States by declaring forever that no person shall ever vote in any State, under any circumstances, unless he be a man over 21 years of ago. Is it necessary in an amendment to the Constitution so to enact in order tomeet the exigency that has grown out of the late convulsion 1n the country? for we all acknowledge that the primary object of all these amendments is to pro.vide for the new state of things that has arisen. out of the abolition of slavery. Some Senators object to any constitutional amendments. Sir, latelyaconstitutionalamendment was adopted by the people abolishing slavery, and that constitutions amendment has created a new state of things in the U.S. It has abolished a vast amount of property it has overturned an aristocratic and powerful system; it has restored millions of people who were slaves to their rights as free men, and changed the whole aspect and condition of things in the latel rebellious States; and it is reasonable, there ore, that some change in the Constitution should be made to meet the circumstances that have grown out of this revolution in the political and social system of the South.