Mr. HALE. The gentleman will pardon me if I do not pursue that branch of the discussiou. It is outsi e of the line I have marked for m self. I do not mean an offense, either to the Gentfrom Iowa [Mr. Gmxsmm] or to the Gentfrom Wisconsin, [Mr. Bummer a] but entertain an equal respect for both. Mr. Speaker, let me go a little further here. If it be true that the construction of this amendment, which I understand to be claimed by the Gentfrom Ohio, [Mr. BINGHAM] who ntroduced it, and which I infer from his nestion is claimed by the Gentfrom Pennsylvania, [Mr. Srtrvsssg] if it be true that that is the true construction of this article, is it not even then introducinga power never before intended to be conferred upon Congress? For We all know it is true that probably every State in this Union fails to give equal protection to all persons within its borders in the rights of life, liberty, and property. It may he a fault in the States that they do not do it. A reformation may be desirable, but by the doctrines of the school of polities in which I have been rought up, and which I have been taught to egard was the best school of political rights and duties in this Union, reforms of this c ar acter should come from the States, and not be forced upon them by the centralized power of the Federal Government. Take a single case by way of illustration, and I take it simply to illustrate the point, without expressing any opinion whatever on the desira bility or undesirability of a change in regard to it. Take the case of the rights of married women; did anyone ever assume that Congress was to be invested with the power to legislate on that subject, and to say that married women, in regard to their rights of property, should stand on the same footing with men and unmarried women? There ishot a State in the Union where disabilityof married women in relation to the rights of property does not to a greater or less extent still exist. Many of the States have takeniteps for the partial abolition of that distinction in years past, some to a eater extent and others to aless. But Iappre end there is not. today a State in the Union where there is not a distinction between the rights of mar ried women, as to property, and the rights of femmes sole and men.