Mr. BINGHAM. Yes, sir; and the State of Vermont was formed in the same way from part of the territory of the State of NewYork, with the consent of the Legislature of NewYork. Having had the honor to take some humble part in the formation of the State of WestVirginia, and her admission into the Union, I wish to say that in doing what I did, I but followed the exampleof the men who made the constitution, an among them, of him whose eerless name is 1st attached to that great instrument. Mr. Speaker, having said this much, I desire to repudiate once for all the statement of the venerable Gentfrom Pennsylvania, [Mr. SrnVENSd that in the exercise of this power, I, as one of the majority of this House who admitted the State of WestVirginia, did it as an act of sovereignty over a conquered territory and a conucred people. I deny that the armies of the nion have ever made one loyal citizen the enemy of my country or one rood of the original Republic conquered territory by suppressing this unmatched and atro cious rebellion. The soil of the States that engaged in the rebellion remained through all the storm and darkness:1. part of my own, my native land in spite of the treason which was enactedu on it; and now that that treason has been subned, it remains stilla part and parcel of the native land of every naturalborn citizen of the republic. The loyal people of SCarolina, the loyal people of Wirginia, are no more conquered subjects than is the venerable gentleman himsel. They were all the while under the protecting shield of the constitution. The armies of the Union struck to maintain the supremacy of the constitution and to give effect to the laws, that the loyal might be protected and the disloyal crushe. I deny ever having countenanced any such dogma as that the loyal people of WestVirginia ever were conquere by our arms. The armed rebel was conquered. In accordance with the principle laid down by him who is sometimes called the Father of the Constitution (Mr. Madison) 300,000 of the loyal citizens of the State of Virginia, by reason of the rebellion and treason of the remaining l700,000 of the citizens of that State, had the exclusive right of A civil magistrac within the limits of the entire Commonwealt. No matter whether the loyal people of Virginia met in Richmond or Wheeling, in the persons of their chosen representatives; they asserted thereb their right, under the constitution of the U.S and in accordance with the statute law of the State of Virginia. When the majority of the State of Virginia turned traitors the minority of citizens therein who rejected the treason, being sufficiently numerous to constitute a State, had the right to assemble in any part of the State and exercise all the powers which pertained to them as citizens of the State, subject to the approval of Congress, but without question of the rebel majority. Why? Because in such loyal minorty the entire sovereignty of the State abides, for the simple reason that the rebel majority in arms forfeited every right which belonged to them, whether as citizens of Virginia or citizens of the U.S., by their treason. The traitor can never again exercise political rights in Virginia but by the will of the people of the U.S. I repudiate, as the gentleman does, this miserable contrivanee here in Richmond called the Legislature of Virginia, for the sim le reason that it has never been sustained and is not now sustained by a sufficient number of loyal men to constitute a State; but when a sufficient number of loyal citizens do petition in what is known as Virginia for reco ition as a State, I say no man on this floor as a right to deny to t cm the right of local legislation, simply because, in the language of your Declaration, “the legislative powers of the people are in capable of anniilation” save by their own crime. Surely the traitor majorit, by their gzeat treason, cannot annihilate the right of the loyal people to local selfgovernment. That right sacred to the people of every State cannot be forfeited save by the act, the criminal act of the body of the community. So long as a sufficient number of the citizens of an insur gent State remain loyal to the constitution to constitute a State, the Congress may and ought to recognize their right of selfgovernment. WestVirginia is a State. She has consented to the annexation of the counties of Berkeley and Jefferson. The people of those counties have consented to it. It remains for Congress to consent to it. I care not for the consent of Virginia, because she has no organized State government. WestVirginia is a State. Her admission by the act of Congress into the Union concludes every Dept of the Government, so long as she is faithful to the constitution and laws of the Union. There is no Dept of the Government today which may lawfully disate the rights of WestVirginia. as a State of the Union. Sir, permit me to so that the Federal judicial officer who official y questions and denies the authority of WestVirginia as a State of this Union, so long as the present action of Congress stands unrepealed by the sovereign power of the American peqple, sim lysubjects himself, in my opinion, to impeacment, and ought to be driven in contempt and disgrace from his office. For the annexation of these counties to WestVirginia nobodys consent is needed except the consent of the people thereof and of the State of WestVirginia; and that consent has been given. It only remains, therefore, for the people of the U.S. to say whether the people in the counties of Jefferson and Berkeley shall be transferred to the jurisdiction of WestVirginia. The preamble, as I remarked before, has nothing to do with the purpose of the bill, and I shall vote to strike it out. What remains is perfectly intelligible. Congress thereby consents and declares that the 2 counties shall be transferred to WestVirginia. I call for the previous question.