Mr. WADE. I do not know that the Senator does so claim, but I know that it has been generally considered that he was more familiar with the views of the President on this than the rest of us. Perhaps this may be a mistake, but it does not make much difference how the fact is. I listened vesterday attentively to his able argument, in which he put forth undoubtedly all the views in favor of the policy he advocated that occurred to him or that he could muster into its service, and his speech was morel remarkable for what it did not say than for what it did. I do not remember that in the whole course of his speech he spoke of the fate of those 4 million human beings whoscritsare involved in this controversy rights whiich to him are dearer than life; nay, sir, he would sooner sacrifice his own son upon the altar than consent that he should not stand upon an equal footing with his neighbor upon the nestion of suffrage. If there were no such e ement involved in this controversy, I, like him. perhaps, should find no very great difficulty in the way. but would allow things to go on smoothly and quietly. It. would be a very harmless and unimportant controversy if it was barely to settle the question whether the rebel States in a meta physical point of view are in the Union or out of it. the Senator cited Mr. Lincolns last speech or dying declaration. as he called it, in which Mr. Lincoln himself alluded to that very question, and said that it (which was so emphatic and so large a part of the Senators argument) had in hisjudgment. little or nothing to do with the subject. I do not pretend to note Mr. Lincolns exact words, but he said, Enough that the seceded States do not maintainsue a relation to the Government that they can be admitted without congressional aid, ” or to that effect. The Senator did not quote that portion of Mr. Lincolns speech. But, Mr. President, I care very little what great names say on these subjects. No man honors the memory of Mr. Lincoln more than I do. but I do not invoke his opinions here as controlling. upon the floor oft. a Senate of the U.S. look all around for counsel; I am willing to be enlightened from any quarter which can give me lightwith regard to my duty; and I would as soon look to it from an humble source as from the President or any other man standing in high official position. They are but oor, mortal men at last, and a Senator of the U.S. has no right to yield his opinions tomortal men. Heis senthere for nosuch purpose. I like to have the aidof the Executive, according to the constitutional idea. to advise me as to the measures and principles that he thinks ought to be adopted; and no man will listen to him with a more willing ear than my self: but unless his advice squares with my idea of duty, I discard it as a Senator as I would that of any other man standing in any other position. Sir, the great question that it now devolves upon us to settle is one from which we cannot at rink; it is for Congress and nobody else to settle. If we settle it and it be wrong, we cannot justify ourselves by saying that we took the advice of the POTUS, or of Mr. Lincoln, who is now dead. Although his memory is revered by all, his counsels Will be no justification to us ifwe make a mistake npont is great and erilous question that is looming up before us in portentous magnitude. I say, Senators, look to yourselves, take conn sel of your own judgment and conscience, of our duty to God and your country, and look ess abroad and less to great men, because if there were ever a question before on that was peculiarly your own it is this. here in the constitution can be found any authority given to the President to irovide for bringin Slates ilito tidyUnion? howhere:"blit we, lierep resemattves of the people of the U.S., in Congress, assem led), sent here to do their will underthe constitution of the U.S., sairoentohefaonly tribunal to decide as to the admis; State. Wcfletlfe dulybodymit on lit in a free Government to declare upon what principles a State that is outside of the legislative Dept shall be admitted to participate in it. I do not care for that purpose whether the community is a Territory of the U.S., 01 a State which has forfeited all right or all ability toact for itself. such questions are ours; they do not belong to the POTUS; and if they did this free Government of ours, of which we boast so much, would be the most concentrated despotism upon the face of the earth. While we eneroach. not a hair upon the province of the Executive, let us stand firm upon our basis under the constitution, and do that which is our dutybefore the people of the U.S. Now, Mr. President, a word upon the subject which the Senfrom Wisconsin did not touch. Here are 4 million people to be ostracized from this Government, to be made serfs forever, notwithstanding the declaration of their freedom, unless some way be contrived by which their rights shall be guarantied. I was one of those who carly advocated the bringing of colored men into the Army and invokin t ieiraid to put down the rebellion. Over an over and over again I urged it upon the Executive, as a member of the committee on the conduct of the war, and in my private capacity, and in every other way, long before that policy took effect. Ifeel that according to the powers with which I was invested I did as muc as I could to bring the Executive and Congress up to the mark of invokin to the aidof the Union the colored people in to Army and Navy and where ever else the could assist us. what was implied in all that? Did it not force upon me a duty? Would I lend my voice and in vote to seduce or compel that people to jeopardize their lives in defense of the ir country, and then turn them over to the mercy of their enemies? Sir, the man who would do it, deliberately and knowingly, is the meanest of all Gods creation. Having tempted them into the struggle, having induced them to fight through the war and hazard their lives in your defense, having by this course incensed the whole rebel popnation against them, will on desert them and leave them in the hands of their vindictive enemies to be destroyed? The Senfrom Wisconsin did not. allude to them; all his sympathy was with the rebels, the men who endeavored to destroy your constitution. the men who buried 3 or 400,000 of your bravest sons. My friendfrom Nevada Mr. Srnwaar] s inpa thizes with them, too. e brave colored men, weak and uninfluential in themselves, but who gave you the strongest aid, and without whom I do not know thotyon could have got through successfully, have no part in these gentlemens sympathies. Those who lew our brethren, scoundrel traitors to God and man, are now the objects of their sympath. In all their long speeches they cannot thin of the 4 millions whom we brought on our side, and who imperiled their lives to give us most important aid. They sympathize rather with those who, instead of sympat y, deserve a halter! There is another question which the Senfrom Wisconsin did not touch. I do not remember that he said a single word as to the temperand disposition of the people whom he seeks now to bring into the Government. All he had to say was that a promise had been extorted from them that they would abolish slavery, or that they had abolished it in form; but how are you going to guaranty that? What provision have they made to make that secure? I shall never desert them. My honor, my sense of justice, is aroused upon this subject. I have invoked their aid in the Army; I have agreed to protect them in their freedom, and so far as my exertions go they shall be, whatever else may come. He said nothing about all this; he did nottell as precisely what it was that he would do; and now, after having listened to his elaborate speech, I do not know whether he would let these States right in now without any further inquiry on the subject or not. He argued to show that these States had never been outside of the Union, but that the moment the insurrection was put down or suppressed they were in their original place, and apparently lind nothing else to do than to come up here and legislate for us; and for all his speech told us, our old enemies on this floor, whom we banished for treason, may come back ihere today if their people see fit to send them. Permit me now, sir, to say a word on the question of constitutional law, asto whether the seceded States tvere out of the Union or in it. I agree with Mr. Lincoln. in thinking that in settling the question before us it is not very mm terial to decide this point; forif, as he said, their relation to the Union is such that the cannot participatein the Governmentwithoutt eaction of Congress, it matters little whether you call them outside of the Union or in it; the question will principally turn upon whether their temperand disposition are such that it is safe to trust them in the councils of the nation. I have but a word to say about that question, because I do not consider it a question of very great importance; but I think the distinction which the mind of any statesman would make is very obvious. If aportion of the inhabitants of a State of this uion have raised their arms against the General Government and the State, for they cannot op use the one without opposin the other, and t ie State is all organized an intact, aiding the Union to put down that rebellion, the State is not out. of the Union, does not lose her organization, but stands in tact, and the moment such an insurrection is at. down the State stands as she did before. but. when the whole State becomes contami nated, when it is so permeated by treason that all its officers, from the Governor to the lowest officeholder, are displaced and thrown out of their position under the Government, if the people have organized their State on a basis of opposition to the General Government and declared war upon it, so that resistance to the rebellion within the State has entirely ceased, the State, as such, loses its riflht to be considered as an integral part of the General Government. It will not do to tell me that there are scattering men in those States who did not agree to all these proceedings, for there never was a war, either civil or public, in which there could not. be found some men in both nations who were o posed to the war, and who so expressed themse ves. We know that during the war of the Revolutionmany of the most eminent states men of great Britain sided with us in the British Parliament, and sympathized with us through out that strn le; but were we less at war with England, or s c with us, because some of her statesmen and man oflier middle classes were with us, believing that we were right and their own country wrong? Would a publicist, dealing with international law, or even munici law, pretend that you were any the less a nation at war because here and there a man out of Office could be found who did not believe that his Government was right? That is not the way that statesmen treat such subjects. on must take the people of a State as you find them in fact; an if they are rebels, if the State organization has lost its power as a part of the Union, if its old loyal government is rooted up root and branch, and a new vernment formed on its ruins hostile to the beneral Government, I say then it is out of the Union to all intents and inrposes. Then all is unarchy, except by Virtue of their new State organization, which is atreasonable organization; and whether there be more or less of the people who favor it is not a question for statesmen to look to. Statesmen look to the organization, look to those in iower, see who the governors are, see who the legislatures are, see who makes the laws. When treason has so triumphed over a State that her governor and her legislative councils are all organs of treason. eiiactingtrea son into law, and raising armies for the destruction of the old Government, to tell me that in such a State thatvgovernment is not displaced is nonsense. If the State is able to maintain its old organization and put down the insurrection, the individuals are guilty of treason, the State standing intact: but when the State organization has yielded to the storm. has ceased all resistance, we have to look upon its people as they are, public enemies, and nothing else. That, sir, very briefly, is the view I entertain on that subject; but I have said it makes no difference what theoretical view may be taken, for I do not know that anybody supposes that those States are in such a condition that imme diately upon the rebellion being quelled they I could come right in to Congress and demand participation in the councils of the General Government. If they cannot, it then devolves upon Congress to say how they shall come in, to prescribe the rule, and to define upon what conditions they shall be permitted to come back. Therefore, whether you call them out side of the Union or inside makes very little difference; they are helpless; they are conquered they are incapable of any act of their own. That would bring us to consider what is their temper and disposition now. Is it such that, according to the great principles of human i action and human experience, it is safe to permit them to come into the councils of the nation on an equal footing with the old members, of the Republic that have stood by your old flag throughout? That is the result to which I wish to come. I would not legislate on any vindictive principle any quicker than these gentlemen, and I am willing to consign the ast to oblivion if it can be done. You must judge of the characters of men by what they have done hereto fore. Did ever a nation on the face of the earth which had been so merciful as to save the lives of traitors that sought to destroy it, on the very next day after wrenching the arms out of their hands, invite them into its councils to participate iu its deliberations? Would a man who was not utterly insane advocate any such thing? Will you intrust the burglar with your keys? Surely nobody will advocate that. The Senfrom Wisconsin himself would not admit that these States may come here at once and thrust their representatives upon us without inquiry on our part. hardly supposed that it was necessary to raise a committee to inquire into this subject, "allimportant as it is. I supposed that every man who had arrived at an age which enabled him to be qualified for a seat in the Senate would have had sufficient human experience to know that a whole nation of traitors of the most ving dicive character that were ever heard of on the face of Gods earth, men who had resorted to most haleful atrocities against our people, would not on the next day after their arms had been. wrenched out of their hands against their will, be in atemperand disposition to participate in the old Government which they had been for years endeavoring with their lives to Overthrow and were invoking European despotisxns to aid and assist them in overthrowing. Is that hu man experience? Are your penal laws enacted with a view to such a trait in human nature? Do men change so quickly? StPaul himself, as we are informed, was like these men for a time; he breathed fire and destruction against the Christian church, and on his way to Damascus it is one of the most notable miracles recorded in the Bookhe was changed in the twinkling of an eye., But, sir, you contend fora miracle infinitely greater than that. You contend that a whole nation has changed in one night from the most vindictive enemies to be the fastest friends, with whom it is safe to trust political power. This is the greatest miracle of modern or ancient times, ifmen believe it. The conversionof StPaul was a small incident compared to it. In deed, it does not require a miracle, according to gentlemans notions, to convert the vilest trai tor into a political saint. I want no committee of investigation for such a matter. I know that if I were to enter into Iit could produce abun dance of evidence showing that their temperis just what might have been expected. I need not however pointo it. The Senfrom Massachusetts, 1;. Mr. Scrotum] some 3 or 4 weeks ago, in an elaborate speech, furnished evidence sufficient to show that their fell purposeand intent had not been relinquished one Jot or tittle et. That was unnecessary; it was only what almen would know without any evidence. It is human nature, and if a man is not a judge of that so as to solve such a proposition as this, he does not know enough to be a member of the Senate of the U.S. [Laughter.] Talk not to me of conversions of that kind. Another gentleman will tell you that very few of the southern men were engaged in the rebellion, that most of them were good Union men who were dragged into this internal scheme to destroy the best Governmentin the world, that they perjured themselves and descendedto the degradation of human crime. Ifyou could establish such a fact, it would be no compliment to the southern people; it would only show that the great mass of that people are infinitely be low the Africans of whom we hear so much. Who dra ged the people of the southern States into revdlt against their will? Their natural leaders, on say. A people that (Sandie s led are not reci ientslof political power. will not trust men that can be thus le. When you argue against the intelligence of the African and tell me of his incapacity to exercise the elective franchise fOrthat reasonfis not our argument agreat deal worse against the whites of the South? Were they dragred and forcedI into the southern armies and their property sa 10 carr on a rebellion against their will and desire? hen do not contend for white suffrage.