Mr. SMITH.R. Chairman, ifthe doctrine was true in 1862, as has been asserted even to; dag by the gentleman, and has been asserted by 0ters upon this floor, that an organized government existed in Virginia at that time, whiilq war was raging, while rebellion was rampant, and the whole country south was flooded with armed forces moving to and fro, I cannot see how gentlemen can reconcile it to themselves to deny that it is a State now. The gentleman claims that the people when they have organized a State government are entitled to representation. I submit the ueswtion itall of t canStates lately in rebellion have not organized State governments, with Govern acre and Legislatures and judiciaries, and all the machinery of State governments, and do not present themselves today to the Congress of the U.S. as organized States in the Union, willing to conform to the Constitution and laws of the Union? The question of States in thB Union, of State organizations, is a very different thing from admitting rebels and those who were engaged in war against the Government, to overt row and dest it. I may be able to go with the gentleman, and I dare say I shall 30 with him, on the point that none but good and true loyal men. none but men who are willin to defend the interests of the Government an perpetuate it, shall sit upon this floor and exercise the rights of legislators under the national Government; but I cannot go with him. I will not go with him, or any other man, or party of men, who undertake to assert the doctrine that was asserted by the rebels when they began, that the States had a right to go out of the Union and can only comeback by reorgauization under an act of congress. There is no such idea in the Constitution. At this pointl desire to return for anioment to the Gentfrom Ohio, [Mr. Susunssnosn] for notice his vote is castin the affirmative on the bill admitting the State of WestVirginia, in which vote he committed himself irrevoca bly to the doctrine that these are States in the Union for practical, political, and gover purposes is vote a mitted in 1862 the villi:ity and authority of both of the Wheelin conventions, the Legislatures of Virginia and WestVirginia; and those ver Legislatures were in session, and enacting aws, which he recognized, while a large majority of the people of old Virginia were in actual rebellion and the Governor, Lieutenant Goverrmr, judges, and most of the Richmond Legislature had taken an oath to an ort the confederate States of Amer ica. did ie not know then that a "State was a multitude of people, ” as he quotes from Bur lnmaqui, “united together by a common interest and common law, to which they submit with one accord?” Did he not know then that there was a rebel Legislature in Virginia, every one of whose members had renounced their allegiance to the U.S and taken an oath to the rebel confederacy; that there was a rebel congress in the capital of that State, votingnien and money to carr on war against the nation? Did he not know t iey were killing and starving our soldiers there, and were placing their in fernal macliines uuder and around their prisons? Did he not know then that they had sworn eter nal vengeance and hatred against the life of the Republic? Was it not known to all the members of the 37th Congress, and those who voted for that bill and the admission of Representatives? Yes, Mr. Speaker, it was wellknown to all of them; but they knew another thin": than the State of Virginia was still there, in die Union, and had a loyal population who loved the country and its institutions; and they were the State, and entitled to be heard on this floor. Will these gentlemen contend theywere right then and wrong now, or wrong then and right now? Then, as I have said, rebel Legislatures were in session in all these States Virginia, Louisiana, Tennessee, and Arkansasknow, sworn against the U.S., and to maintain and uphold the confederacy. How is it now? There is no rebel legislature in any of these States; that is, the members of these Legislatures all have sworn to an portthe Constitution of the U.S., and have by formal acts of legislation repudiated the rebel government and everything connected with it. Hence the people, who were "ving aid and comfort to the enemy in these States when this legislation was being done in Congress, have assumed now a dlfferent relation to the Government, while the loyal peopleall who were there before are there now; and assert from my convictions of right, my judment of the law, and the precedent establishe, that these people are entitled to representation in Congrgfs. At least, sir, we should admit, without a word, the principle; and if they do not send such men here to legislate for them as on ht to and can take seats as members of this be y, who will legislate for the good of the whole country, it is their fault, not ours. But, sir, I am not done with the record yet. In that debate the present Speaker of the House then holding a seat on the floor, assumed an maintained with ability the very position I am now humbly advocating and the Gentfrom Ohio [Mr. Bisonliii] was strong and loud in his protestations against the charges of usur pation of power and the tyrannical action in the separation of Virginia, as uttered by Mr. Segar from that State, and in reply to that gentleman used the following language: It is the 1st time I have ever hearda Represent ativeu on this floor Ventureso fh; as to saythat an actout orized by the Federal Constitution, and within the express reserved rights of the people of every State.is an act of tyranny. The out man saysthat indie convention that convgn the Legislature of Virginia 11 01the countieswithin the proposed Statewerenot represented. What of that? Does the mtlman mean to say that it makesinvalid all that beendone under that convention? Let him re member, if he pleases.when he onan argument of that sort. that that convention, which was an original act of soveroignty of the people themselves in Virginia appointed the very Governor of Virginia under proclamation he ventured to becomea candidatefor ascat in this House and under whose certifieata hoventure rl to presenthimselflioreforadmission. Hecannot bonllowod to blowhot and coldin this way pponnquestion of this sort. If the conventionwas invalid, then their appointment of a Governor was invalid and his proclamation for the election under which tho gentleman claimed his seat was also i nvalid. The election proclamation of GovernorPeir point, if I recollect the rqcordaright. wasissuedba orothe people of Virginia were byballot on the question whether vernor Peirpoint shouldbe their. xecutive or n ot. It was the act of the convention itself that appointed the Governorof irginia. under whose proclamation the ontleman wu elected of that very conventionwhic the gentloinau from Virginia[. Seaarlstaudiiherethisday to“re udiate. era was one other objectionin the gentlemans argument. it: it may be called an argument.which I desireto notice an thatwasthat therg was not a sufficient numbero votes given at the election to iustify the Housein concluding that this constitutlon is the act of the people. It is the 1st time, I may be permitted to say that I have heard any men say that the neglect or refusal to vote of part of those duly qualified to vote invalidates an election which in other respects 1iii n1. If that were so.than it would be impossible fort e people in th a state of Virginia. As long as jheso rebels e ioose to remain rebels, torcassert their rights. As to the way in which the mine rlt may assert their rightsagainst a maJority of rebels shall havesome th"inIfgto say hereafter. the gentleman honestly entertains the view of the subject which he has expressed and to which I have just referred. that an election.leloll held is made invalid because the Great maionty of the voters choosenot to attend and vote, then with what proprior, did the gentleman comeherell from a district in which (here are 15 or 20,000 voters, backed by the pitiful voteof only 25citizens, and M1;a seat upon this floor? [Lang tor.) A man emitted to speak capable of playin that rfile might be enpablo of betrnying in his place a terho is admitted the reserved rights of the peoplewhomhe represents." The gentlemans speech makes about a column in the Globe, and in it he charged upon Mr. Segar that he was the only Representative permitted to take his seat hero by the votes of 25 men, while there were 25,000 in his district. Now, sir, these men come here through the action ofloyal Governors and loyal Legislatures, which have adopted the constitutional amendment, repudiate the rebel debt, and coincided in the whole policy of the national Government; and they come here by the vote of 1,000s and 1,000s of loyal voters electing them to seats inthis Hall; and yet the gentleman, to ether with the Gentfrom Pennsylvania, fMr. SrsvmvsJand his colleague, [Mr. Summa BARGER] says that those States are not entitled to representation, that these men are not to be admitted to seats upon this floor, that these peOple are not to be heard in the councils of the nation. You go ahead and collect taxes from them and hold them in perfect and complete subjugation so far as the Constitution and laws are concerned, and yet these men, no matter how loyal they may be, no matter how staunch they may have been in their support of the government and in the discharge of all their duties to it, are to beconsidered as outsiders, and turned away and not permitted to raise their voices here in defense of the country. While members were sitting herein theirarmed enshioned cliairs, with a salary of $3,000 a year, and retiring from this council Hall to their probably more comfortable rooms, with their stil softer cushioned chairs and spring mattresses, and surrounded by all the comforts and luxuries that the country at" fords, Stokes, of Tennessee, with a sword by his side, was in that mountaine us country defending the integrity, honor and dignity of the nation, driving the rebels back, so that the honor and lory of the nation might be maintained. Yet he is reed here as an “outsider, ” and not reckone fit to be among our number and Maynard, of Tennessee, was not permitted to sit by his own fireside with his Wife and little children; the only solace he had was to wind his way over the mountains of Tennessee, seeking an asylum among the loyal people of this country, without money, without assistance, and without bread almost; always willing to defend the honor and dignity of the nation and the integrity of the Government. Yet he comes here today, having served 2 years during the war, and is called an “ outsider, ” and must with draw and not participate in the action of this Congress. He was actively laboring for the integrity of the Union while we were enjoying the luxuries of our own firesides, hearing no muskets fire, no” cannous roar, sleeping not upon the cold and damp ground, with nothing but the canopy of heaven to shelter them. Who is Hawkes? A man who left his native State and went into the armies of the Union, and after battling the best he could for his country was unfortunately taken prisoner and carried to Charleston, where he was exposed to the tire of our guns for 60 days and 60 nights to shield the rebels of that city from the punishment they deserved. Yet he, too, is to be re garded as an “outsider.” and who was Coo er? A man who stood up for the Union in his State during the rebellion; and when, in the spring of18ti2, I was in that section of country in service, he was the only man I could refer to in Shclb ville as a reliable Union man and who was ampbell? A commissioned brigadier general of the U.S. Army. All these men are “ out siders” here; and not only that, but every man who takes the position I have assumed is to be considered an outsider, a copperhead, a rene gade, a latter (lasaint Democrat, because he chooses to defen the rights of the States lately in rebellion. [Here the hammer felt] On motion of