Mr. HENDRICKS. I do not a roe with some Senators that this isa more dangerous bill to the country than the one that was passed last week. If the amendment which have proposed should be adopted and the last section stricken from the bill, it will be a much less dangerous bill, in my judment, than the Freedmens Bureau bill, for the reason that that bill sends an army ofirresponsible officers among the people to control their affairs, and from their actions and their decisions there is no appeal to the courts; but this bill sends the people with their causes into the courts of the U.S., and if a great wrong he done in any of the inferior courts perhaps an appeal will lie to a court where justice Will be done. I am not so much afraid of any law that sends the people to the courts as I am ofalaw which places them under the control and power of irresponsible officials. But the section which I propose to strike out is an unnecessary and very dangerous one, and I submit it to the judgment of the majority of this body whether it ought to be enacted into a law. This bill is a wasp; its sting is in its tail. Sir, what is the bill? It provide s, ipthe 1st placc, that the civil rights o FHinen, without ream In color, shall c equal; and, in. the secompTacc that if any man shall that ErjHquilcbi his conduct, he shallWsi vle to the court; that he may hp r M enmmalliand EgEhgj0 e grime, 9;)“: may be sued in a civil, action and damages recovered by the party wronged. Is not that broad enough? Do Senators want to o further than this? To recognize the civil rig its of the colored people as equal to the civil rights of the white people, I understand to be as far as Senators desire to go in the language. of the Senfrom Massac usetts [Mr. Source] to place all men upon an equality before the law; and that is proposed in regard to their civil rights. Then, sir, we have the framework for the execution of these 2 sections. I recollect that during the holidays it was heralded to the country that a great achievement was to be expected from the Senfrom Illinois; that he was going to introduce a bill as soon as congress reassembled recognizing the civil rights of the colored people as equal to the civil rights of the white people; that he was goingto so frame his bill as that these rights should be positivel and certainly secure, and that to accom lis this he had adopted the framework an the fashion of the former fugitive slave law. That was regarded as a great achievement, and much credit was claimed for the Senatorbecause when he came to prosecute and follow white men he had adopts the language and the framework of a law which was intended to recapture run away slavesa law which in its framework and details was denounced as most unjust and dangerous and yet it was regarded as a feat and an accomplishment for the Senfrom Illinois to incorporate into this bill the language of that law. Why, sir, this bill provides that th cre shall be commissioners, notordinarycommissionersthat the courts in the exercise of their judgment and discretion shall appoint, but extraordinary commissioners, and from its language it seems to contemplate that there shall he a commissioner in every county of the U.S., and these commissioners are authorized to appoint as many agents or deputy marshals as they may see fit to appoint, and those deputy marshals may call upon the body of the people, for what purpose? To pursue a runaway white man. Oh, recollect how the blood of the people was made to run cold within them when it was said that the white man was requiredto run after the fugitive slave; that the law of 1850 made you and me, my brother Senators, slavecatch ers; that the posse comitatus could be called to execute a writ of the law for the recovery of a run away slave under the provisions of the Constitution of the U.S.; and the whole country was agitated because ofit. Now slavery is gone; the negro is to be established upon a platform of civi equality with the white man. That is the proposition. But we do not sto there; we are to reenact a law that nearly 1 of you said was wicked and wrong; and for what purosc? Not to pursue the negro any longer; not or the purpose of catching him; not for the or ose of catching the great criminals of the and ); but for the purpose of placing it in the power of any do duty marshal in any county of the country to ca 1 upon you and me, and all the body of the people to pursue some whiteman whoisrunningforhisliberty hecausesomenegro has charged him with denyin to him equal civil rights with the white man. ihhOllgllh, sir, that that framework was enough; I thought, when you placed under the command of the marshal in every county of the land all the body of the people, and put eve one upon the track of the fleeing white man, that that was enough; but it is not. For the purpose of the enforcement of this law, the President is authorized to appoint somebody who is to have the command of the military and naval forces of the U.S. for what purpose? To prevent a violation of this law, and to execute it. Let me read it, as I do not get the words exactly: $30. 10 and be if further mooted, That it shall be lawful for the POTUS, or such person as he may empowerfor th at purpose, to employ such part of the l:iil oriinvnl forces of the U. S or of the militia. as shall he IllGESSIHy to preEigtgi to violation and enforcethe due execution of What viuhfieni Phillie stasis! of equality, to the colored people. Some man disputes the proposition“; some judge proposes in his adjudication not to recognize the civil equality of the colored people. Now the military may be called in to prevent the violation of this law. Before there is a violation, before a crime is committed, the military may be brought to bear upon any person who is charged with a design to violate. the law. Then if there shall be a violation. if some judge of a court shall hold that the colored man is not entitled to equal civil rights with the white man, the militarv force may be called in to execute this law. how and why? Are we not in a time of eace? Where is society now disturbed? pon our honors we must legislate fairly for the country. We have no right, in the form of legislation, to go to punising men, and I cannot believe that senators intend any such thing. If you create an army of officers to execute this law, and if you authorize the deputy marshals everywhere to call upon the whole body of the people to exc cute it, why is it that the militar shall be brought in to execute this law of a l the laws of the U.S., the only law relating to the civil atfairs of the people? Is it right? Are you willing to do it in reference to other laws? Are you willing to say in your laws declaring and protecting the civil rights of white men that they shall be enforced at the point of the bayonet? I know you would not. You would say that the military must not he brought in except where there is an insurrection, or when there is such an interference with the enforcement of the laws as justifies the interposition of the military power of the country. In the State of Indiana we do not recognize the civil equality of the races. I refer to Indiana, as the Senfrom Maryland [Mr. Jons sos] referred to his State the other day, as a mere mode of illustration. The policy of that State was to prevent the further immigration of colored peopleinto the State after 1852 and as a means of preventing that we denied to the colored people who might come into the State after that date the right to acquire real estate. Suppose that during the past 13 years some colored man has come into the State of Indiana and has urehased real estate. He brings his action of eje ctment after the passage of this law to recover that land. Our supreme court has decided that law of the State to be constitutional. That decision of the supreme court is the rule of decision for all the inferior courts of the State. The trial of the ejectment comes off before the circuit or common pleas court of the State, and the judge instructs the jury that under the law and constitution of the State of Indiana this man could not acquire an interest in real estateand that he cannot recover. Here is a denial of a civil right, it is claimed; but it is a question of law; and you make that judge not only responsible in the civil but in the crimina courts ofithe U.S. for his adudication. You make him a criminal for following the authority of the supreme court of the State. You make him a criminal because he obe s the constitution of the State. You make ima criminal because he enforces the law of the State as it is plainly written before him. You are not content with capturing him, but you call in the military power of the country and you stop his court. pYou will not allow that case to o to judgment, but when it is an nounced to tejury that this is the rule that must govern them, suppose the military must be brought in to prevent a verdict and a final judgment. That would be preventing a violation of the law. Is this law to make a good title in Indiana? Is this law to have the force of vesting in the colored people who came into that State since 1852 a good and sufficient title to land when the constitution and the law of the State denied that right? You are not content that this judge may be pursued by a host, an army of marshals, and the body of the people, but a military Chieftain is to be called in that this may not go into the judgment of the court. I am giving an extreme case, but it is a case that all Senators will admit might occur under this law. A court may be stopped midway in the investigation of a cause; and to prevent its judgment, the military are authorized to interfere. Do Senators desire that? I thought the time for military government had passed. It may not have passed here, but this military control, I believe, is about passed. I believe, taking the course pursued by the Administration in disbanding the armies, that it has substantially passed at the other end of the avenue, and a desire for its continuance has passed away from the hearts of the people. 2 years ago it was a very easy thing anywhere through out the North to maintain a military force and to repress a public sentiment that was offensive to the authorities in power. It is not so now, sir; and I am very glad of it. I never want to see a return to the time when a mans house may be surrounded by armed men in the night time, and he may be carried 08 to a distaut portion of the State