Mr. KUYKENUALL. Mr. Speakcr, I need not assure you that I approachethe investigation of the many grave and important subjects treated in the message of the POTUS, at the convening of the present Congress, with constraint and embar rassment. No deliberative body has ever had presented for their consideration subjects of more grave importance or requiring more cool or calm deliberation and in the discussion of these various subjects submitted, I feel a want of confidence in myself and fear my inability to rise to the height of their magnitude or in any way to be equal to the emergency. Yet I flatter myself that I feel and fully appreciate their dignity and importance, and that I shall be enabled on this occasion to merge the partisan in the patriot The great questions to which our attention is called In the message demand our most one highest and earnest consideration, and my most earn est desire is that I shall say nothing in this discussion which shall be on iccoming a member of this honorable body in., waking to his fellow Representatiies or the people of the U.S. What are the grave questions to which our attention is invited? First, I invite your attention to that part of the message pertaining to the relations existing between the U.S. Government and the State governments respectively, and of their mutual connection, in which he says: “The best security for the perpetual existence of the States is the supreme out iority of the Constitution of the U.S.; the perpetuity of the constitution brings with it the perpetuity of the States: their mutual relations make us what we are and in ouftpolitical systemtheir connection is indissoluhlc. whole cannot citist Without the parts, nor the parts without the whole. So long as the Constitution of the U.S. endures the States will endure. The destruction of the one is the destruction of the other. The preservation of the one isthe question of the other.” DICSCIVIP From this plain and lucid statement it is evident that he holds that the States lately in rebellion nre still in the Union, and have not been by the act of treason of a part of their citizens taken out of the Union, and thereby become “dead or defunct” States. Now, sir, let me examine and see if this position taken by the President is correct. I hold that. it is and in order to arrive at a propersolution of this question we must examine it and test it by the touch stone of the Constitution, and having in it no model, the simili tudes and analogies applicable to other systems of government, it must more than any other be its own interpreter according to its text and the facts in the case. We will hunt for precedents in vain, remembering that there never was a Government either in ancient or modern times that our RFG can bedikened unto. Hence all precedents laid down as to what.constitutes a State in other governmentsis no evidence either for or against the position taken as to what constitutes a State under our form of Government. Are the rebelStates stillstates in the Union? In order to come to acorrect conclusion on this point we must test it by the compact that brought into existence the nion of the States, and ascertain if possible the intentions of the framers of the constitution, and in that way we will be enabled to come to a correct conclusion. In the year 1778 aformal compact of Union was entered into; that compact was styled “Ar ticles of Confederation and perpetual Union” between the States, naming them. A art of the 14tharticle of the Articles of onfed eration is as follows: “And the articles of this Confederationshall be in violably observedby evoryState, and the Union shall be perpetual.” Under these Articles of Confederation the States composing the Federal Union solemnly plighted their faith to each other that the Union should he perpetual, and so existed and kept their faith, bound together by indissoluble ties, from the year 1778 to the year 1789, when our present Constitution was adopted. Sir, I will not take u the valuable time of this House, as I might o, by citing authorities or introducing arguments to prove that the object of the change from the rticles of confederation to the present Constitution was not to relieve the States from their perpetual oblitions orin any way weaken the federal Union, iit to have it greater strength. For take it, and it is admitted by all, that the leading object of Congress in recommending, the Convention in framing, and the people in adoptin the present Constitution, was to strengthentoUnion. and, sir, I am sustained in this view by the Congress of 1787 which recommended the Convention of 1789. Tu: State Legislatures which appointed the d1 legates to the Convention, and the people of tl 2 States who ratified it, declared their leading object to be to strengthen and perpetuate the Union in existence. Now, sir, I hold, as it has been held often be. fore by eminent statesmen, that since the organization of the new Government in 178.)the people of the U.S. have been living under 2 GOvernments deriving their power from the same source that source being the sovereign people of the several States. Each Government, owever, has a distinct class of powers. The U.S. possessing power over all matters relating to the public, in the due exercise of which all the States have a common interest, while the States retain all powers relating totheir domestic institutions, and each Government acting within its own sphere is as inde tendent of the other as if they were wholly foreign, and in exercising those sovereign rights given them by the people. If one should infringe on the incontestable rights of the other, the remedy is found in the U.S. courts that the sovereign people established for that purpose and again, the Constitution of the U.S. is a compact between the sovereign people of each State with the sovereign people of every other State, actin through conventions, which cannot be abolishe or changed in any manner without the consent of all parties to it, except in the maiiner prescribed in its own provisions and further, sir, the laws of the U.S. like the laws of the States reach and bind citizens high and low, and the U.S. cannot absolve an one from their obligations to obey the State laws passed within their respective spheres. So neither can the States absolve anyone from their obligations to abide by and obey the laws passed by the U.S. within their sphere. such, at least I think, is the true theory of our institutions. Now, sir, what is a State? The people composing it. What is the U.S.? The people composing them, in the sense of the Constitution, where it says, “We, the people of the U.S., ” and in that people is vested and merged the sovereignty of the people of the States, so far as it covers the powers granted in the Constitution. In reference to all the reserved powers in the Constitution, the people of the States remain sovereign, subject, however, to all the restrictions placed upon themselves by the grant of sovereign powers to the General Government. In the view I have taken of this question respecting the relations of the States to the General Government, I am full sustained by the following letter from that erudite statesman, Mr. James Madison: "In order to understand the true character of the Constitution of the U.S., the error. not uncommon, must be avoided of viewing it through the medium either of a consolidatedGovernmentor of n. confederatedGovernment.while it is neither the one nor the other but a mixture of both. and, having in no model the similitudes and analogiesapplicable to other systomsof government. it must, more than any other, be its own interpreter accordingto its text and the facts of the case. “From these it will beseen that the characteristic peculiarities of the Constitution are: 1. The modeof its formation. 2. The division of the supremepowers of goycrnment between the States in their united capacity and the States in their individual capacities “1. It was formed. not 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 peoplo of the U.S., as n.single community in the mannerofacon soliduted Government. it was formedby the States; that is. h the people in each of the States acting in their big cat sovereign capacity, and formed consequently by the same authority which formed the State constitutions. Being thus derived from the same sonrccas the constitutions of the States.it has. Within each State, the some authority as the constitution of the State; and is asmuch a constitution, in the strict senseof the term, within its proscribed sphere, as the constitutions of theStates are, within their respective spheres;but with this obvious and essential difference, that being a compact among theStatesin their highest sovereign capacity and constituting the people t creofone people for certain purposes. it cannot be altered or an nulled at the Will of the States indiyidually, as the constitution of a State may be at its individual will. “2 and that it diVides the supreme powers of government. between the Goveinnient of the U.S and the government of the individual States is stamped on the face of the instrument: the powers of war and of taxation, of commerceand of treaties, and other enumerated powersvested in the Government of the U.S. being of as high and sov crci n a character as any of the powers reserved to the t State governments.“Nor is the Government of the U.S. cre ated by the Constitution. less a Government, in the strict senseof the term.within the sphereof its now ers.than the governments created by the constitution: of the States are within their several Fpllcfkl. It. jluikdeicitahreymd. ocrpguarntmizoendtisn.toIltegoipsleartaivtees, elixkeecutthievem., an directly on personsand things and likc them, it ha! at commandii physical force for executing the power! Committed to it. Again Mr. Madison said, in his correspondence in reference to the ratification of the constitution by the different States, “it was uncon ditional and bound them forever.” Now, sir, I propose to examine the records of the legislative Dept of this Government and see if they have not sustained by their action the idea that the eiristence of the Union of those States is peretual, at the same time repudiating the idea that States could cease to have existence or, by the act of the war, could become “dead or defunct.” Iwill 1st call the attention of this House to a resolution passed the 24th day of July, 1861, by an almost unani ine us vote, which is as follows: “That this war is any spirit of oppression p, nroosrefcour taendyuppuornpoousreopfacrotnin questor subjnmition, nor purpose of overthrowing or interferon: with the rights or established institutions of those States. but to defend and maintain the supremacyot the constitution and all laws madein pursunnce thereof, and to preserve the Union with all the dignity, equality and rights of the severalStates unimpaired; that as soon as these objects are accomplished the war ought to cease." It may be said, however, that this resolution was passed soon after the commencement of the war, and at a time when the relations of the States to the General Government had not been so thoroughly discussed and were not so well, understood as at present. But, sir, this is not true; it was passed at a time when men were cool and inclined to take statesmanlike views of great and important questions, while reason held its sway and madness did not rule the hour. Would to God we could .sny as much in reference to the mannerin which we now examine questions in this House. The Constitution of the U.S. provides that "Representatives and direct taxes shall he apportioned aine ng the several States which may be included within this Union according to their respective numbers” and under this provision of the Constitution, in August, 1861, Congress passed an act apportioning the direct taxes among the several States, including the States in rebellion, thereby recognizing the same by name as States still of the Union, which said act is in the following words and figures: “And be a further wart ti, That i. direct in of $20,000, 00boe, and is hereby, annually laid n on the U.S and the sameshall he and is ereby, upportioncil to the States respectively and in manner following. To the State of Mainc. New llampsliir. Veruiont. 066 Massachusott Connecticut. 1 ork. NewJersey. " (I) Pennsylvania 33} Delaware. 3” Maryland Kit Virginia. 66} NCarolina SCarolina. Georgia. Alabama. Mississippi. 6M Lguisiana. 1 g: in, Kentucky. l. a“ 33 Tennessee. 1 (0 Indiana. Kansas. Arkansas Michigan. 33} Florida. (was. 66} Iowa. Wisconsin California. 53; innesota“. Urcuoii. Congress also, as late as 18b2, a in recognized those States as States of this Inion and entitled to rercsentation, by passing an act on the 4th of arch of that year, which by its terms was not to take effect until the 4th of March, 1863; which act apportioned the representationof the 11 rebellious States on thesamebasis as the loyal States of the Union. Thus, by the action of Congress in apportioning direct taxes and representation, the status of the 11 seceded States was fixed, and the States included within this Union. After the action of Congress in so many in stancesdeclaring these States to be in the Union, it seems to me a declaration now by thesameCongress that these States are out of the Union, having no political existence, not entitledto representation, is a proposition so monstrousthat it will fall upon the ears of the country, and especially those of the soldiers who fought to maintain the proposition that those States could not go out of the Union, with astoundin effect. Now, sir. I desire to present some of the views entertained by our lamented late Chief Magistrate, Abraham Lincoln, on the same. point, showing that he was desirous of carrying out the same plan of reconstruction and ntertained the same views that are found in fihe messageof President Johnson, to wit: That the 11 seceded States whose citizens have been engaged in a rebellion for the purpose of dividing this Union and setting up a.separate government for themselves have sig nally failed, and the legitimate and logical result of that failure is, that the Union is not divided; a separate Government is not in existence; the States are not out but in the Union. Instead of 2 Governments we have but one one Constitution and one flag; and in the name of the Constitution of this proud republic, the flag of this glorious Union, the t on sauds of bones of Union soldiers bleaching on southern soil, I do here retest against this House, by its legislation, blotting out 11 stars from that glorious emblem of our unity and strength; a thin that was tried for over 4 years by 100s of 1,000s of armed men in rebellion and which they most signally failed to accomplish. I will now ca 1 the attention of this House to the proclamation of President Lincoln, issued December 8, 1863, in which he fully sustains the position I have taken: "I do further proclaim. declare and make known. that whenever. in any of the States of Arkansas. GTeexoargs, iaL, Louisiana, Mississippi. Tennessec Alabama. "Florida SCarolina and NCarolina, a number O persons, not lessthan one 10th in number of the votes cast in such State at the presr dential election of the year of our Lord 1860, each having taken the oath aforesaidand not having since violated it, and being nqualified voter by the election law of the State existing immediately before the socalled act of seccssion and excludin allothers.shiill reestablish a State government which shall be republican, and in nowisecontravening saidoath, such shall be recognized as the true government of the State and the State shall receive thereunder the benefitsof the constitutional provision which declares that the U.S. sha l guaranty to every State in this pUrnotioeent a RFG and shall each of them against invasion.” You see from the reading of this proclamation that President Lincolns idea was to maintain these States in the Union, and to give to the loyal portion the right to control the State governments, thereby forminga nucleus around which the loyal and true might rally in opposition to the disloyal and untrue. A very differentfposition from that taken by some members O this House, who, by refusing to recognize loyal members elected by the loyal people, of one of those States, place them on a par. with rebels, giving no encouragement what. ever to the men who have been loyal and true during the whole rebellion in the southern lStates, whereby they might organize such a, strong and powerful party as would give full adeomlete protection to the rights of all, 0th black and white. 1 and again, sir, on the 11th day of April last President Lincoln spoke to the people of Washington, just 3 days before his assassination, from which I quote the following: “ acompnnying nnuparol cmliieusnsiatigoeno, f December. 1863, and I presented a plan of riPfCO:unlullpUtcllill0n, (:ISilICplllflFO goos.)wliiehl promised. by any State.lionld stiu(, s, ta ined by the executive Government of the na. I H t I the “ l This plan was, in advance, submitted to the then Cabinet and distinctly approved by every member be acceptableto and of it." “Every purtand parcel of the plan which has since been employed or touched by the action of Louisiana." “Some 12,000 voters in the heretofore slave State of Louisiana haye sworn allegiance to the Lnion; assumedto be the rightfulpoliticzil power of the State; held elections; organized ii. free governmentadopteda free State constitution. givmg the benefit of public schoolsequally to black and white and empoweringtheLegislature to confertheelective franchise upon the colored man. Ihcir Legislature has already voted to ratif the constitutiona amendment recentl passedby congress abolishing slavery throughout the nution. These 12,00opersonsare thus fully committed to the Union and to perpetual freedom in the States, committed to the very things and nearly all the things, the nation wants and they ask the nations recognition and its assistanceto make good that committal. “Now if we reject and spurn them, we do our utmost to disorganize and disperse them. We. in effect, say to the white man. You are worthless or worse: we will neither help on nor be helped by you. To the blocks we say his cup of liberty which these, your old masters.hold to your lips. We will dashfrom you, and leave you to the chances of gatherin the spilled and scattered contents. in somevnguoan up defiued when, where, and how. If this course, discouraizin: and paralypini both to white and black. has any tendencyto Louisiana into properpunc ticiil relations with the nionI I have. so ar. been unable to perceiveit. ne“w If goovnertnhmeceonntotrfary. we reco in and sustain the Louisiana. t oconverso of all this is madetrue. We encourage the hearts and nerve the arms of the 12,000 to adhere to their work and argue for it, and prosolyto for it and tight for it and feedit, and grow it, and ripen it to acoin ileto success.The colored man. too.sceing all united or him is inspired with vigilance and energy and daring to the sameend. Grant that he desires the elective franchise. Will he not attain it sooner by saving the already advancedstepstoward it than by running backward over them? Concodo that the new government of Louisiana is only to what it should be as the egg is to the fowl we shall sooner have the fowl by hatching the egg than by smashing repeat the question, ICnnLouisiana be brought into proper practical ltlllll0I1with the Union sooner by sustaining or by discarding her new state government? What has been said of Louisiana Wlll apply generally to other States.” “From the foregoing remarks of Mr. Lincoln, it is evident that the executive branch of the Government was and is committed to the policy that these States are in the Union as States. The evidence is abundant that Congress by its legislation; the President by his proclamation, had no other purpose than to perpetuate the Union with all the dignity, equality, and rights of the several States unimpaired. This same policy and principle was indorsed by the convention at Ealtimore that nominated Mr. Lincoln and Mr. Johnson; and was most triumphantly confirmed at the polls by the people who elected them POTUS and VEEP It will be remembered that the policy inau gurated by Mr. Lincoln, known as his reconstruction policy, and attempted to be carried out by Mr. Johnson, was as much ratified by the people as any other part of Mr. Lincoln administration. I may, however, be asked by what right has the President appointed provisional governors for the rebellious or acceded States? I think ithe President was justified in doing so, and that l it was his imperative duty so to do. The States had been in rebellion. The rebellion had been conquered; they were left without any State governments, and the duty devolving upon the Executive in the execution of the laws and the Constitution, and in guarantying to each State a RFG. It became a necessity in order to put the machinery of the State government in propershape and motion. The same as out of necessity grew the authority for the issuing of the emancipation proclamation, an inherent powei, residing in a government higher and above the Constitution the right of self preservation. As Chief Executive of the nation it was his sworn duty to enforce the execution of the constitution and the laws passed in pursuance thereof, and to prepare the way for the loyal peeple of those States to have that protection which our Governmentshould afford them; to have them protection in the exercise of an in erent right that is older than the Government itself; the right to regulate their domestic af fairs in their own way, subject alone to the Constitution of the U.S.; and that they might restore their constitutional relations with the Government of the U.S. by adopting for themselves a constitution and State government that would be republican in form. Now, Mr. Speaker, those who have followed the thread of my remarks will see that I claim our forefathers to have intended to make this Union perpetual, and that the late warwas pros. ecuted lor the purpose of icrpetuatingthat great principle. T ie blood O our brothers and sons was shed upon many a battle field for the purpose of preserving and saving those States as a part of the great whole, an not for the purpose of destroying or wiing them out of existence. Every act of the overiinient during this bloodyconflicthas recoized themasinsurgent States, with a view tot eir restoration to their former relations to the General Government, and not with it view to the ir destruction as States. Hence it will be seenthat I do not subscribe to the theory of “dead or defunct" States, but insist, in the language of President Johnson, that the whole cannot exist without the parts, nor the parts without the whole. I believe it is admitted by all that the Union must from necessity follow as equally true that the States are perpetual. I contend that the Government was administered during the 4 years of rebellion by Mr. Lincoln upon the idea of the peretuityo the Union an the States, and that Mr. Johnson shows clearly in his message that his intentions are to administer it upon the same loyal, legal, and properprinciple. This great principle has been cauonized in the hearts and minds of the loyal people of the U.S., and I am curious to know why it is the honorable Gentfrom Pennsylvania, [Mr. Stevenss] and those who hold to the same new fangled ideas are so extremely anxious to abandon the sa e line that has car ried us so successfully through so manystorms and over the boisterous billows of the Red sea of the rebellion and landed us safely upon the broad platform of the Constitution. There must be some reason for it that I cannot seo or understand that lies deep beneath the surface that will only show itself when their objects are accomplished. I wish I could believe that this new and starth ng doctrine of dead or defunct” States were the result of an honest conviction of the better judgment of these gentlemen. I could then have more charity for their views. But I believe their object to be. 1st, to reduce to legislate for them by Congress, and in that way, by act of Congress, declare universal suffrii c, or in other words, give the negroes the right to vote in those 11 seceded States. Io this [am opposed. 1st, because congress has no right to destroy the States. 2nd, Congress has no right to regulate the suffrage question in any State, that being a right guarantied to the people of the different States by the Constitution of the U.S. 3rd, I think it would be properin us of the northern States to change our own state constitutions so as to enfranchise the black man at home before we undertake to force this doctrine upon States with whose domestic affairs we have nothing to do, and who are not here represented and can have no voice in the affair. I may be asked, however, what action I would take in reference to these southern States? In answer I would say that I would treat them with as much kindness as their conduct from time to time showed them entitled to receive. I would keep a suilicient military force in each one of those States to insure a prompt and faithful execution of the Constitution and laws. I would aranty such protection to the freedmen as won (1 insure them against harm or violence, and give them full and complete protection in all their rights. I would a mit the loyal dele gates sent here from Tennessee, that State having been exempted from the emancipation proclamation of Bil. Lincoln as a loya State, the members elect from that State being loyal and true men, one or more of them scar worn vet erans, who have served during the whole WM in the Union Army, and being in favor of than those States to a territorial condition, and then was designed to be perpetual. If that be true, it admitting those loyal men, I suppose I differ with the great leader of the Radicals in this House, [Mr. Srsvi JNs] and his followers. I also differ with the copperhead persuasion of this House; they would repeal the test oath and admit an Representatives that might be elected from c southern States, be they loyal men or rebels. I am not in favor of repealing the test oath, but am in favor of its remainin there as a mon. ument of loyalty, to be subscried to and taken by every member who shall hereafter enter the councils of the nation, be he from what State he may, and whenever men are sent here from the rebellious States or from any other of the States who cannot subscribe to that oath, I would say to him, “ Go back to your constituents and say to them that the con"essof the U.S., bein the judges of the qualifications of its own memgbers, will not allow a rebel to enter their Halls as a member, any more than the would a convict from one of the State enitentiaries.” But if on will send us a loya man who has stood the test of the fires of this rebellion, he should be admitted and act as your mouth piece in the councils of the nation.