Mr. WADE. I am in hopes Isall convince the gentleman, loath as I see he is to be convinced of anything against his side of the question. I do not propose to go over the arguments I have made on this subject twice before with regard to the constitutionality of the act of 1846 upon general principles of law op which I sought 1st to place it. [believe they stand firm yet against all the arguments that have been made. I have heard nothing to‘ shake my confidence in the position that‘ was assumed by the Sc tor from NewYork, [Mr. Hanson] the Sena or from Nevada, [Mr. STEWART] and the Senfrom Michigan, [Mr. Howann] and therefore it is unnecessary for me to undertake to re'enforce their arguments by anything that I can say upon the general subject. Butthe Senfrom Del awure wishes to know, on the end position that their arguments are unsound an that the ori ginal act was constitutional, how it is that conress has power now to repeal the act and to ring back those people into the DistCol again. I am astonished that he did not see that there was a principle of law that would sweep away all this stii we have been talking about and at itelearly within the power of Congress to place this part of the District wherever they pleased, and that, too, upon principles of the highest public law. Suppose that in 1846 for I am only making the suplposition the arguments of the gentlemen that go. against me upon this question Were all right, and that the law was strictly constitutional then, that all parties concurred in it, and that Congress had a right to undo what the had done at the origin of the Government, as do not admit, however, does the gentleman forget the principle of law that where there are comacts between diTTerent nations and war brea s out between them the compacts are all annulled? Did you ever hear of such a law? Did you not know that your act ofrebellion in the State of old Virginia put it in our power, at our will, to annul everything we ha done, even if it had been constitutional at the time? Can you den that there is such a principle of lawns that? Do you want me to go to the oks and look up authorities to show that the breaking out of n war between nations annuls every compact and places the arties, as it were, in a state of nature, clear from anything, putting an end to all compacts or agreements that have been entered into? It is in this way, sir, that I answer you, even ifyoiir arguments were just and your logic true, it is notwithstandin in our power, nay, sir, it is our highest duty that we owe to the loyal people of thatdistrict, to place them back where they were before. If this compact was made with the State of Virginia in 1846, was it not made upon the hypothesis that that State should remain faithful to the Constitution and to the Government of this nation? Would you, sir, would the men who it has been shown voted for that proposition, ever have thought of doin it if you had told them that in less than 15 years after they transferred these people over to the State of Virginia she would) be in violent, flagrnnt war with the nation? What did this grant presuppose ‘I Only perfect faithfulness on the part of Virginia; mean provided all the preliminary steps were right, which I den. Nlbw, Mr. President, I am told by the etitioners, and I am assured by 100s oft ose who do not etition, that the conduct of the State of Virginia toward the Union men of that portion of this District is perfectly unbeara le, savage, rude, outrageous; they are treated with contumely, their rights trampled under foot through the prejudices of that old State underwhose jurisdiction you have placed them. That State has made war upon them, and for their Unionism they are persecuted. Their petitions are exceedingly numerous, and I am informed by some of the best men in that part of the District that there is no doubt a majority of the people there who.are prompt, eager, anxious to be brought back into the District again because of the persecution of that State. They are deprived of their rights; it is impossible for them to hold up their heads there against the overbearing insoleuce of the State 0 Virginia. It thus being put in our: power by a right that nobody ever controvertet, what is our duty? Shall we turn the cold shoulder on those just men who were transferred by you like cattle to a jurisdiction to which they objected for I do not suppose that at the time this vote was taken there was a single man of the minority who did not dread to go under the jurisdiction of that old and prejudicial State as they dreaded the gates of eath and hell. I say, sir, you have departed, yea, widely departed, from the great principles of American freedom and American law when you 'suffered a majority to transfer the minority of free men into a foreign, hateful jurisdiction. It is not in accordance with the principles of American law nor the spirit of our institutions. Besides, it was flagrantly unconstitutional. Now, let me ask the Senfrom Delaware, is there anything in the law I have laid down that you cannot understand; are you answered? Even if all you have said is true and your logic is just, are you not answered? Virginia has made war ii on the Union people of this portion of the District; they have been subjected to her insoleuce, her terrible persecution, her unwarrantnble jurisdictiou' you placed them there against their will. Had you a right to do so? Even if you had, when this war broke out, when the State of Virginia waged unwar rantable, violent war on this nation, did it not release those loyal people, did it not confer upon the Government the right at its will to end this compact, if it may be socalled, and bring back this territory to where it properly belonged? Most assuredly it did. gs there any gentleman in the Senate so craven spirited as to say that he will leave these loyal people under these accursed persecutions? Will you from Delaware do it? Oh, on do not believe they are abused! Never the ess, just men, true men, Union men, men who have become mar tyrs for standing up for the rights and jurisdiction of the U.S., whose truth never was doubted, tell me tales of tyranny and oppression that prevail in that portion of this District such as have not been Visited upon any Union people in any other part of this Union. If you decide against them, if you turn them coldly away, if you leave these just men in the power of their enemies, they have got to flee from the homes of themselves and their fathers. They cannot live there. They are trampled under foot; and the prejudices of the old State of V irginia are such that they cannot get their rights in her courts. say there is full right, full liberty in congress, on dyour own principles to pass this bill. You nee not go back to that sophistry we have heard here to prove that this original assigning away of American citizens was just. You cannot lay hold of that as a bridge over this abyss of iniquity. Eyen if the compact was a truthful and a righteous one, it is within our power to say to Virginia, “ You have broken it, you have violated it, you have trampled down the rights of American citizens there whom we trusted to our generosity and your equity and your righteous dealing; you waged war against them and against the Union, and thereby gave us jurisdiction over the whole subject, and having that jurisdiction, we will use it. to protect men that have a right to the protection of American law.” This view is in my judgment so conclusive that it is entipely unnecessary for me to follow all the sopliistry we havelicard to prove that the act of retro cession was constitutional. I endeavored to show upon ordinary principles of law that it was clearl unconstitutional; but when we come to this great principle lying at the bot tom, is there a gentlemau here who doubts the right of this Government to relieve these men from up ression and take them out from under the fait less control of that State to whom you consigned them 'I No, sir. You not only have the right, but it is our paramount duty before God and man to 0 this; it shall have my vote, and I hope will receive the vote of a ma'ority of the Senate.