Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Speaker, in order that I maybe placed right with regard to the positionwhich I took in the committee upon this question, I state to the House that there was no agreement upon my part, either express or implied, that this debate should be confined to any particularnumber of persons on either side, and am here upon the Democratic theory that a question of this importance ought not to be passed upon by this House without allowing all peasons upon both sides full opportunity for e ate. Sir, this is a question different from those which have usual y been brought to the attention of the peo10 of this country. It is the 1st time since this formation of the Government of the U.S. that any proposition of this kind or of a similar character as ever been offered to the HoRep or to the people of the U.S. for their ratification. It is a proposition to change the organic law of the land With regard to one of the fundamental principles which was laid down by our fathers at the formation of the constitution as an axiom of civil and politicalliberty, that taxation and representation should always go together. If gentlemen will examine this proposed amendment of the constitution they will see that it is in violation of that great doctrine which was proclaimed by the fathers of the republic when they enunciated the Declaration of vndependenee, and protested a aiust the tyr anny and despotism of enland, because she attempted to tax the people of the colonies without allowing them representation in the councils of the kingdom. he amendment now under consideration proposes the ver some identical thing that the Parliament of England proposed when it attempted to inflict upon the American colonies taxation without a lowing the people of the colonies to have representativesin the Parliament of England to represent them upon the question whether they should be taxed by the mother country or not. When the constitution of the U.S. was made, our fathers, in pursuance of the object of the Revolution, and in the exercise of their wisdom, embodied in it the doctrine that representation should not be based upon the voting population of the country, but that it should he solely and wholly based upon the numbers of the people, without rega to sex or color, adding to those who were persons and citizens within the meaning of the organic law a representation for 3/5ths of the slave population of this country. This JtResolution now under consideration contains a proviso which scps the very foundation and principlesnpon which the ge nius and institutions of this country have rested from the commencement of its political existence. The proviso reads: Provided. That whenever the elective franchise shall be denied or abridged in any State on account of raceor color. all personsof such race or colorshall be excluded from c been;of representation. In other words, it inflicts upon the States a penalty for refusing to the colored pepulation an unualified right of suffrage which it does noti ict upon them for refusing the same thing to the white population. While it denies representation to the States for their negroes, it. inflicts upon them taxation without representation, and in that indirect way compels teStates to adopt unqualified negro suffrage in order to allow them their rights under the present organic law. The 1st objection I have to the passage of this JtResolution is that it is violative of the main principle upon which the revolution ary war was conducted, and which induced our fathers to enter the harbors of Boston and NewYork and throw the tea into the water. because the British people attempted to inflict taxation upon them with regard to that tea, and refused to allow them representation in the parliament of England, our fathers rebelled against their mother country. The present organic law has existed for more than 75 years, until it brought the people of this country to a state of prosperity at home and consideration abroad never exceeded and scarcely paralleled in the history of the world. Under it liberty was secured; private rights undisturbed; every mans house was his castle, and the principles I of liberty were handed down to the descendants I of the Revolution upon the basis that governed theiraction; and until the war power, imbedded in usurpation, trampled it under foot, it was a safe and sure bulwark of liberty and barrier against despotism and tyranny.” Woodman. sparethat tree Touch not a single buugh, In youth it shelteredinc, and Ill protect it now.” The present organic law provides that “Representatives and direct taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union accordingtotheir respective numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole numberof free persons. including those bound to service for a term of years, and excluding Indians not taxed, 3/5ths of all other persons.” Now, I ask this House what has happened since the adoption of it by the different States who were then within the Union that now calls for the adoption of a principle which nowhere in the lines, spirit, words, or letter of it, has any standing or countenance. What has come over the fortunes and happiness of the people of this country that the teat principle of the constitution should nowie vio ated: that principle for which our fathers spilt their blood to sustain the great axiom of American liberty, that taxation never should be imposed upon a people unless that people have a corresponding representation? fthis amendment tot o constitution should be carried into effect, it will prevent any State, North or South, from allowing qualified suffrage to its colored population except upon forfeiture of representation; and i if qualified suffrage should be allowed to the l colored population of any State in this Union l on account of race or color, and but one single negro should be deprived of his vote by failure to meet the requirements of the qualification imposed. that State would be denied representation for the whole of that colored population, men, women, and children. This pronso says: That whenever the elective franchise shall he denied or abridged in any State on account of race or color all persons of such race or color shall be excluded from the basis of representation. What does the word “abridge” mean? It means that if the State of Kentucky, SCarolina, or NewJersey should see fit to allow to its colored population the rightof suffrage upon a qualification based upon property, or intelli gence, or any other qualification which they did not, impose upon the white peole. each one of those States would be deprive of representation for every colored man. woman and child in that State. Take the State of Massachusetts for example;in that State every negro who comes within the qualifications prescribed for white persons is entitled to exercise the right of suffiiage. In NewYork the negro cannot exercise the right of sufffage unless he owns $250 worth of property. So that Massachusetts would have representation for every man, woman, and child of her colored poulation, while the great Empire State of New 1 ork, who in her wisdom has seen fit to forbid voting to negroes except they possess a certain amount of propergy, would not be allowed any representation or anyone of her colored population, because within the meaning of this amendment it would be an abridgment of the elective franchise to negroes, on account of race or color, to place any qualificationsupon them to entitle them to vote not imposed upon the white people. Why, sir, this will driveand this is the only object of the proposition every State in this Union, except where the negroes are in the majority, to allow to the negroes within the States unqualified suffrage to save them from the pen alty annexed to their refusal to concur in this dogma of the part in power, unqualified negro suffrage. The on v object and the only effect of the bill areto induce the States, in order to secure their rightful representation on this floor, to allow to the negro unqualified suffrage. without any condition or qualification, without regard to the degree of intelligence or education which he may possess. The State that attempts to require any qualification ofone single negro to vote will, under this amendment, be deprived of representation for every man, woman, and child of the color orrace of the person who may have qualified suffrage unless the same conditions are imposed upon white people. More than that: this bill attempts, in an indirect manner, to have passed upon by the Legislatures of the different States a question which the party in power dare not boldly and openly mcct before the people of this country, because there can be but one object lying at the foundation of this billan object which has been explained and expatiate upon in this House and that object, as I have said. is. through the Federal power, to force the States to adopt ununlified negro suffrage, by holding over them t ie penalty of being deprived of representation accordingto population. What is there more democratic and republican in the institutions of this country than that the people of all classes, without regard to whether they are voters or not, white or black, who make up the intelligence wealth and patriotism of the country, shall be represente in the councils of the nation? Every man in this House knows perfectly well in the several States a person under the age of 21 years cannot vote, unnaturalized citizens can notvote, and the whole class of females, constituting nearly 1/2 of the population of this country, cannot vote; yet for these persons the States are entitled to representation. Yet, because there nre in certain States negroes, men of an inferior race. men who by the laws of God are stamped with an inferiority so indeliblethat nothing can wipe it out, it is proused that such States shall only emoy their ful right to representation here on the condition that they will allow to these ne cos the unqualified right of snlfrage on a perect equality with the whin: citizen.