Mr. BALDWIN. Mr. Speaker, in what I have to say there will be some reference to the JtResolution concerning Tennessee. At the propertime the gentlemen of the committee from which that resolution was reported will undoubtedly give a full statement of their reasons for asking us to adopt it. I shall not interfere with their duty to the House in this respect by undertaking an elaborate argument either for or against the measure. I will give careful attention to what they may urge in its behalf, hoping it will be made clear to the House that Tennessee, which has been so sadly convulsed, disorganized, and desolated by treason, is now in a fit condition to reestablish her old relations with the Government. it is reasonable to believethat satisfactory reconstruction can be found there, if anywhere, for in Tennessee the work of restoring the State was placed entirely in loyal hands. I confess, Mr. Speaker, that I have not sympathized with that eager zeal which dreamed of seeing treason, all hot with the fierce fires of the war, suddenl lower its temperature, change its heart an its habits, throw off its chronic hatred of the Government, and restore the insurgent States to honest patriotism and properorganization during the 1st weeks or monthsafterthe overthrow of its armies. On the contrary, I have felt that in some of the insun gent States, if not in all of them, the effort to secure complete restoration was premature. It has seeme to me that this work, on which the future destiny of the nation so much depends, should have been undertaken without haste and with very great deliberation. I have thought l v l it should have waited until the mad passions of the war had subsrded; until the whole nation had been made to feel that treason is a crime, and not an excusable pastime; untilan amnesty bill had settled the policy to be pursued toward the conquered traitors, who had forfeited all their rights under the Constitution; until time had developed, in those insurgent communities, such preparation for the work of reconstruction as would have made it everywhere success ful; until the black and bloody spirit of bafiled treason had been changed and purified by the transfiguration of such returning love for the old flag and the old honor and glory of the lle public as would have brought with it all the sentiments of genuine loyalty. But we did not waitvery soon after the rebel armies surrendered provisional measures were employed to secure immediate reconstruction. The motive was patriotic; and this movement might not have embarrassed the situation if it had not very strangely led to a denial of the rightful authority of Congress over this question. The JtResolution to which I have referred brings us at once to a discussion of this question, and no man here should be will in to evade it. othing in all the proceedings touching the restoration of the insurgent States has moved me with such profound astonishment as the claim that congress has no dut or function in t“his case beyon judging, each House foritself, of the elections, returns, and qualifientions of its own members.” This is a enial of the authority of Congress nevtir before heard of since the nion was formed. Here for the 1st time we are told that it does not belong to Congress to decide questions and controversies that may arise toucing the validity, or the republican character of State governments. The President seems to have had no doubt in regard to this prerogative of Congress when he devised provisional measures to restore the in surgent States. He assumed necessarily that reorganization and new State governments were indispensable, and what he eemed necessary to the validity of anew State organization whs expressed distinctly in his communications to some of the “provisional governors, ” through the SecyState. July 21, 1865, Mr. Seward telegraphed to the provisional governor of Mississippi, as follows: "The government of the State will be provinional only until the civil authorities shall berestoredwith the approvalof Congress." That is very explicit. September 12, 1865, he wrote thus to Provisional Governor Marving of Florida: "It must however. be distinctly understood that theres torationto which your proclamation referswill be subject to the decumn of Congress." This prerogative of Congress was then seen and admitted without question. It was difficult to fail of seeing it, for, according to the national Constitution as interpreted by the Supreme Court, Congress is the only branch of the government that has authority to settle questions of this kind. The doctrine of these executive instructions a is in accordance with all the intimations of reason, as well as with the spirit of all precedent, and one feels that the writer must have had before him the decision of the Supreme Court the somewhat famous RhdIsland case. It is well known that the Dorr commotion in RhdIsland brought this question before the Supreme Court in the ease of Luther vs. Borden, et ul. Mr. Chief Justice Taney, delivering the opiuion of the court, expounded as lollows that provision of the Constitution which makes it the duty of the U.S. to guaranty to each State a RFG. The exposition is not new to the House. It has already been quoted here. But it is important, and Will bear quoting again. Judge fancy said: "Under this article of the Constitution it rests with Congressto decide what government is the established one in a State. For, as the U.S. guaranty to each State a republican government. Congress must necessarily decide what government Established in a state before it can determine whether it in republican or not and when the Sens&Rep of a State are admitted into the councils of the Union, the authority of the government under which they are appointed as well as its republican character, is recoanized by the proper constitutional authority. iid its decision is binding on every other Dept of the Government, and could not be questioned in a judicial tribunal. It is true that the contest in this case did not last long enough to bring the matter to this issuo and as no Senators or Representatives were elected cunder the authority of the government of which Mr. Dorr was the head, Conqess was notcalled upon to decidethe controversy. et the right to decide is placed there and not in the courts." Howard, vol. 7.p. 42. This language could hardly be made more pertinent to the present condition of affairs. language cannot say more unequivocally that it is the prerogative of Congress to decide concerning the authority or validity of a State government, as well as its republican character. In RhdIsland 2 State governments contended for supremacy, but the men conductin the Dorr movement were not hold enough, an perhaps not strong enough, to maintain the controversy and bring it to the national government for decision. Had this been done. not the Supreme Court, and not the President, but Congress, and congress alone, would have been authorized to decide it, and its decision would have bound both the President and the court. The authority of Congress is just as exclusive and paramount in every other case of this kind, and nowhere more so than in the case of the States disorganized more than 5 years ago b“y the treasonable endeavor to establish a southern confederacy.” Mr. Speaker, there is something worth attentive sta y in the cool deliberation with which some gentlemen put aside all this, while that pestilent creature, known as secession State sovereignty, crawls into this discussion, and undertakes to wind its slimy coils around the question at issue. Gentlemen talk to the House as if Congress had never heard, and never could hear, of the duty thus imposed by the Constitution and expounded by the court. They tell us with amazing assurance that Congress cannot assume such authority without violating the sovereignty of the States; that is to say, this outlawed and accursed doctrine, which was used to authorize treason, is now used as a sacred refu e from the consequences of treason. Meanwhi e, it is undeniable that some branch of the Government musfinterfere, demand reconstruction, and decide in regard to its validity. 2 things are constantly forgotten by the advocates of this traitorous doctrine of State sovereignty: 1st, that the Union was formed before any State was constituted; and 2nd, that the Congress representing this Union changed the colonies into States and moved them to form State governments. A careful study of the records of our early political history might enlighten such men. The Union, 1st known as “ the United colonies, ” was formed by the permanent establishment of the Continental Congress. To this Congress was committed the whole direction of affairs, with authority to negotiate for an adjustment with Great ritain, or to declare sep aration from that Power and recommend such measures of organization as might become necessary. Its 1st session began at Philadelphia September 5, 1774; it negotiated and petitioned in vain; finally, May 15.1776, it decided that the authority of the British Government must no longer be recognized, and recommended the colonies to organize regular governments. In the preamble and resolution by which this was done we have the original DeclarIndep. The great Declaration, made 7 weeks later, only completed and announced to the world what was here determined. As the declaration of May 15, 1776, is not as well known as it should be, although of the very highest importance in our history, I will give it entire. this as follows: “Whereas his Briton. with the Lords and Cordling odgndtgsttlsrbdffiiixfhigfiiiisil, by a late act of Parlament, excluded the inhabitants of these United Colonies from the protection of his QIOWH: n nd whereas no answer whatever to the bumble petition of the colonies f r redressof grievances and reconciliation with GreatBritain has conor is likely to be iien, but the whole force oft at king dom. aided by foreign mercenaries, is to be ourtq for the destruction of the good people of theseeo l onics; and whereas it appears absolutely irreconcilable to reason and RO0( conse iencefor the people of these colonies now to take the oaths and atfirmations necessary for the support of any Government under the Crown of great Eritain and is necessary that the exercise of every kind of authority under the said Crown should be totally suppressed mndall the powers of Government exerted under the authority of the peopleof the colonies for the preservation of internal peace, virtue, and good order, as well asfor the defenseof theirliies. liberties, and propertiesagainst the bestile invasions and cruel depredationsof their enemies: Therefore, “Resolved. That it be recommendedto the respective usemblies and conventions of the United Colonies, wherenouoverament sufficient to the origeneics of their affairs hath hitherto been established, to adopt such governmentas shall in the opinion of the representatives of the people, best conduec to the happinessand safetyof their y constituents in particular and America in general. The existence of the States of this Union began there. They were never, at any time, se wrote and independent. They were born Unite, and the Continental Congress brought them into existence. They were organized by direction of that Congress, and began their existence subject to its supremacy. Immediately on the publication of the foregoing preamble and resolution, the people of the colonies proceeded to establish the governments recommended, which, you will observe, were to be such as would not only promote their own welfare, but also the welfare of “America in general;” whole, and take such form as would fit them for their places in the Union. Those who established the 1st State governments left a full record of their recognition of the authority and supremacy of the Congress over the States. The reamble to the 1st constitution of SCarolina, adopted in 1778, declared expressly that the States had been “constituted” by the congress. Here is what it said: "Whereas the United Colonies have been constituted independent States, and the political connection heretofore existing between them and GreatBritain entirely dissolved by the Declaration of the honorableContinental Congress. Dated July 4, 1776, " it becomes“ necessaryto frame a constitution suitableto that great event." The preamble to the 1st constitution of Georgia gave as a reason for establishing the State government that the Continental congress had recommended such organizations. The same reason for establishing a State government is given in the preamble to the 1st constitution of NewJersey. In NewHampshire the provisional “congress” of the colony was authorized “to establish some form of government, provided, that measure should be recommended by the Continental congress.” Hoping for an adjustment with Great ritain they established a temporary organization to last one year, with u proviso that it might be continued longer by tiic people “ if the continental Congress give no instructions or directions to the coniraiy.” How different is all this from that disorganizing heresy of a later day, which represents that the States were originally independent sovereignties, and that they formed the Union by establishing a mere league between these sovereigntiesl and how distinctly it shows that from the beginning it has been the unquestioned prerogative of the Congress to have a certain control over the States and their organizations. The Union and its supremacy were the 1st facts in our national history, and they have stood from the beginning unmoved an immovable. Since that creative declaration of the Continental congress there have been many changes intende to perfect and strengthen the national organization, but in the course of all these changes there has never been even so much as a proposition to change the relation of the States to the legislative branch of the Government. Itbeloiigs to Congress, and to no otherbranch of the Government, to constitute and admit new States. It belongs to Congress, primarily, and to no other branch of the Government, to guarantee to each State a republican organization; and it belongs exclusively to Congress to de cide whether the reorganization of a State that 1 has been disorganized by any cause whatever that is to say, they must be parts of one great“, is republican in form and in all respects satisfactory. The national Constitution, the Supreme Court, all the precedents and teachings in our histor, and all the suggestions of reason, give this power to Congress and make plain that it cannot be taken away or transferred elsewhere without a radical and disastrous change in the Government. Congress would be false to itself, false to the Constitution, false to the Republic, false to our oaths of office, false to every sentiment of honor and justice, should it yield this power to the clamor of any dictation whatever or allow it to be used in any way to give impunity to treason and break down the defenses of the national welfare. For these reasons, Mr. Speaker, I cordially approve the JtResolution reported from the ComReconstruction so far as itasserts or implies the absolute authority of Congress over questions of this character. But this resolution is not free from objectionin some other respects. It has not been presented. to the House in the best form it can take. The resolution would be much improved by making it more simple and direct; and certainly a portion of the language used is calculated to mislead many peoplein regard to its actual meaning. I refer particular y to this portion of it: “Renolved. That the State of Tennessee is hereby declaredto be one of the U.S.A., on an equal footing with the other States." This language is similar to that of the act by which Tennessee was admitted into the Union. That act, passed June 1, 1796, was as follows: “Be it enacted, That the whole territory ceded tb the U.S. by theState of NCarolina shall beoneState and the same is hereby declared to be one of the U.S.A. on an O all footing with the original Statesin all respectsw at ever.bythename and title of the state of ennessee." The language of the resolution is understood by many persons to mean that Tennessee is now out of the Union. I am assured that no such meaning is intended, but I do not need the as surance, for I have not so posed “thise ould he meant by the committee from which the resolution comes. It appears to me that language liable to such mise onstruction should not he used in such a resolution. The resources of the English ton ac are very great. Without taxing them severe y we can find terms more appropriate and less likely to be misunderstood. “Vlien you say that the late insurgent States are out of the Union, ” and talk of admitting them again into the Union, many people understand you to mean that they actual y separated themselves from the nation, that by virtue of their ordinances of secessmu they actually went out of the Republic. JeffersonDavis maintained to President Lincoln that the republic had become “two nations;” that was tedoctrine of secessionism; butit was false doctrine, treason able doctrine, fit only to be spit upon and tram led under foot. Therefore, I think the resolution would be much improved by striking out the words I have quoted and putting in their place something like the following: Remlved. That the State of Tennessee is hereby declared to be satisfactorily reorganized, and in a lit condition to reestablish her old relations with the Governmentand resumeher representation in congress. There is not an acre, not a foot, not an inch of that southern region, where the nations right of sovereignty has ceased for a moment; and no assumption or proceeding of treason has repealed the act of congress by which certain specified territory was declared to be the State of Tennessee. We must either indorse the most pestilent doctrine of secession trea son, or maintain inflexibly that every “ordinance of secession” was, from the beginning, null and void. of this question of in or out of the (Union, mistake and confusion have been occasioned by an inappropriate use of words. If by the word “ State some gentle men mean chiefly the State organization, they will, of coarse, talk as if the State had disap peared, should the State government be de stroyed or in any way become invalid. it seems to me indispensable to avoid confounding the State with its political organization, if we mean to be understood. There is no such confusion in the act by which Tennessee was made n State, for it describes as the State, not a given political organization, but certain inhabited territory. There is no such confusion in the national Constitution. Read thatpro vision of the Constitution which makes it the duty of the U.S. to guaranty to each State a RFG and see how clearly the distinction is made. language could not say more plainly that the State and its government are 2 distinct things. One is very necessary to the other; but they are not identical. I am not saying thata State cannot be destroyed; nor shall I here under take to show what might be effected in this direction by an act or declaration of Congress touching the status of an insurgent State. I take the case as we now have it before us. Nevertheless, it is true and this is the great fact with which we have to deal that every insurgent State became utterly disorganized. The State governments were transformed into agencies of treason, and became, like the pretended southern confederacy itself, of no validity whatever, and no more entitled to consideration than any other lawless creation of treason. ThisuecessarilywithdrewthoseStates from practical relations with the Government, and it suspended their representation in Con; gress, for such representation implies an organ 129d State, with a government duly recognized by Congress as valid and republican. lhose States.did not separate themselves from the nation, but they were no longer organized States of the Union. Before they can return to the condition from which they fell they must be loyally reorganized, with forms of government duly recognized by Congress as satisfactory and all this with due regard to the fact that the nation has in those States not only the rights of sovereignty, but also, superadded to these, the belligerent rights of conquest. It seems to me impossible for the JtResolution to mean more than this; therefore, I insist that it should not appear to say more. Mr. Speaker, I repeat earnestly the expression of my hope that it will be shown, at the propertime, that Tennessee is acceptably reorganized and securely loyal. For the sake of the noble Union men of that State, who have fought no many desperate battles with the wild beasts and arrogant devils of secession treason, I desire this; and I desire it for the sake of the whole nation. But whenitis shown that a State which has been made insurgent, and desolated by treason, has been trul restored, some points should be made very p ain. I will specify somethings which in such a case should be shown clearly; but, instead of attempting to make out a complete bill of particulars, I shall indicatein 2 or 3 general propositions what seems to me necessary. In the 1st place, we ought to see that the work of reconstruction has been regulated by a due sense of the fact that treason is a crime to be punished and made odious. Nothing in this House moves me tomore wonder and amazement than the cool, audacious nonchalance with which this consideration is frequently disregarded. The tone and style, as well as the meaning, of some gentlemen on this floor in their talk of the conquered traitors and their present relation to the Government, furnish material for a new study of the mysterious possibilities of human nature. They perpetually discuss this subject on the assum )tion that the late insurgent communities are fu lof heavenly minded loyalists, who are rievously wronged and terribly ersecuted, and whose angelic de votiontothe nionisbrutallyinsulted, buffeted, tormented, and trodden into the dust by the great Union party of the loyal States. According to this ta k, the men who saved the nation are disnnion traitors, and impenitent rebels are godlike patriots; and all the venerable axioms of civil liberty are brought forth, repeated very dolefully, and befodled for their benefit in the most shocking way. I know of nothing to match this talk unless it be the audacity of JeffersonDavis and his associates, when they claimed a constitutional right to be let alone in their effort to destroy the Republic, and denounced interference with their agencies of mise hief as unconstitutional. Do these gentlemen foiget that bloody treason was organized in those communities? and do they no longer see that treason is a crime? Have they ceased to remember that traitors, reduced to the condition of conquered belligerents, have forfeited all their rights under the Constitution? I Not fort e sake ofvengeance, not for the sake of any ungenerous passion, nor to secure merciless exactions, should we keep alive the conse iousness that treason is a crime, but to save the nation from rain and give it permanent security. We are now establishing precedents for all the future; and shall these s“ay to the people and the States oftprisecUendieonnt, s [reason is a trifling affair; rebellion is an excusable irregularity; you may conspire against the nation, organize treason, marshal armies under its banner, and wage a desolating war against the Government for months or years with the full assurance that on being conquered or becoming tired of the war you may hauglitily return to our old places and your old influence in the non-without serious question, as if nothing important had happened?” I cannot believe that any true friend of the Republic desires this. for here is the way to disunion, endless civilWar, and hopeless ruin. By pursuing such a policy we should strikea far more terrible blow at the life of the nation than was ever possible to the confederate traitors we have conquered and disarmed. In the 2nd place, it should be shown clearly that effective guarantees have been established against a return of the rebel spirit to political control of the country, or of any part of it. Testimony, which no reasonable man should call in question, shows abundantly that in many of the southern communities treason, although conquered, is still quite unchanged in spirit. Baflied in its war against the Government, it now plots, conspircs, and waits to reach its ends by other methods. It could not easily be otherwise immediately after the overthrow of rebellion in the field, unless human nature should change its usual fashions and tendencies. Careful investiation will discover the extent to which this defiant mood of disloyalty is still prevalent. Doubtless it is much more menacing and dangerous in some localities than in others. For this and other reasons the case of each State professing to be reorganized should be considered and decided by itself; but any reconstruction that does not effectually restrain the rebel spirit, put it under bonds to keep the peace, and exclude it from political control of the restored States, fails to secure what the welfare of the nation demands. General Thomas is known to the country as one of the ablest, bravest, best, most judicious, and most trustworthy men in the Army. Read the following passage from his testimony before the committee, concerning the present mood of the rebel spirit in the localities where he has observed it: "Question. Have you any reason to believe that the rebelsstill entertain hopesof another outbreak, or that any considerableportion of themdo? Annoer. I have received coihmunicstions from variouspersonsin the South that therewas anunder standing among the rebels, and perhaps organizations formed, or forming. for the purpose of gaining as many advantages for themselvesas possibe; and I have heard it also intimated that thesemen were very anxious and would do all in their power to involve the U.S. in a foreign war, so that ifa favorable o )portunity should offer theymight turn against the U.S. I do not think they will ever again attempt an outbreak on their own account, becausethey all admit that they had a fair tril in the late rebellion and got thoroughly worsted. here is no doubt but what there is a universal disosition among the rebelsin the South to embarrass the government in its administration if they can, so as to gain as many advantages for themselvesas possible. “Question.In what would their advantages consist? In breaking up the Government? “Amwer. They wish to berecognizedase itizensof the U.S., with the same rights they had beforethe war. “ Quactiqn.How can they do that by involving us in awarwith England or France, in which theywould take part against us? "Anmer. In that event their desire is to rsestab L. forfeited. lish the southern confederacy. They have not yet if given upitheir desire for a separate government, and that they have an opportunity to strike for it again, " wilf do so. Question Droeease thhyeoiunftreollmigesnuccehainutrheegnatridetsootuhrecsees as uto command your belief of their existence? Ase wer. Yes; it comes from very trustworthy men. Mr. Speaker, is there in all this broad land an honest lover of his country who would restore such men to political power and place in their hands any great interest of the nation? This is not an ordinary political question, involving merely the success or defeat of a political party; it is aquestion in which are the issues of life or death for the Republic itself. To adopt any policy or sanction any adjustment that would open the way for these men to as sume again their old political influence, rees tablish their old machinery of intrigue, get control of the Government, and make the rebel influence supreme over all the great interests affected by the legislation of Congress, would be not only an act of supreme folly, but also an act of foul treachery to the nation and its loyal defenders. Observe carefully that we meet here a de mand of the conquered traitors for political power. They have been terribly defeated in the field, and not being able to overthrow the Government by force of arms they now haugh tily insist on a right to come back and rule it and they put forth this demand without an emotion of penitence for treason. without a sign of regret for the bloodshed and desolation they have caused; on the contrary, they are proud of what they have done, and in the communities they control a record filled with treason and rebellion is the surest assport to public favor. Shall such men have their will and dictate the terms on which they will henceforth live under the Government? Not unless we mean to make confederate treason victorious in the new field of its endeavor. No considerations of policy, no eloquence of magnanimity, no mesmeric charm of the siren expediency, can hide the overwhelming fact that it would be a crime more damnable than treason itself to make a final settlement of this terrible war with treason by such a submission to the enem. Men who have conspired antfwarred against the Government, and are still unchanged in spirit, men such as are described in the testimony of General Thomas, should be compelled to stand back and feel fora time the disabilities oftreason. Let them be content with no further molestation on account of the ast, and satisfied to enjoy in quiet the lives they have Impenitent treason is unfit to use political power in the nation it has sought to destroy, and certainly has no right to demand it. But it is sought in the spirit of menace and for the purposes of conspiracy. Who does not understand that the immediate result of an adustment that should grant this demand would be an eager alliance and organization of all the elements in the country that have been unfriendly to the Government during the war? In such a combinationthe disloyal southern spirit always has been, and always will be. the supreme director and oracle; and should this formidable combination succeed, should it gain all the political power at which defeated treason now aims, who does not know that every interest of the country, its credit, the payment of the public debt, the pensions, and other provisions for our disabled soldiers, every measureinvolving the honor, good faith, and welfare of the nation, and the very destiny of the republic, would be at the mercy of the men who controlled that “southern confederacy” of traitors? Under their malignant rule there would be a work of reconstruction at which every true patriot and every man who has the slightest interest in the national credit or the national honor mi lit well shudder and stand aghast. Then should we see the grand carnival of triumphant treason, allowed through our wicked fell and false maguaiiimity to rise from 0verw elming defeat to supreme victory. In the 3rd place, weaeed to see plainly that effective provrsion is made for protection of the rights and well being of all loyal men. By the words “loyal men I intend those who have never been traitors; I mean the heroic Union men of Tennessee and all others like them. A rigid exclusion of disloyal men from political power will do much toward securing this guarantee; but there ought to be in the reorganization of each State, or in imperativm obligations assumed in connection with it, something that will give this guarantee both certainty and permanence. We know ver well, because the evidence makes it undeni able, that faithful Union men who suffered fearful persecutions during the war are still intensely hated by those who represent the rebel spirit, and who lack nothing liut the power to revive the worst atrocities of the rebel domi nation. I do not. say this state of things prevails universally in the South; but it exists in many localities to such an extent that Union men could not remain in them safely should the Federal troops be withdrawn; and this should not be forgotten in any attempt to arrange a permanent adjustment. It would be an indescribable wickedness for the Government to sanction any scheme ofres toration that would leave the much enduring Union men of those States to the mercy of their enemies. Wherever the confederate traitors could reach them during the war these Union men were subjected to intolerable outrages. Yet the clung to the old flag through all the dark on bloody days, looking onward to the light and securit to be realized through the certain triumph of the Government. 1 he believed religiously in the national Union, an bore with fortitude the sufferings and perils incident to their trying position and have they suffered and waited in hope for the great victory of the Government over its deadly enemies onlyto be delivered over to whatever chance of life, liberty, and the pursuit of ha piness inay await them under the control an discipline of the unrelenting rebel spirit of the South? Itwould be infamous to deal with them in this manner. They must not be left to the possibility of such a fate. There is another class in those States more numerous, but, for many reasons, much more helpless. I mean the coloredlreedmen. They have been loyal to the Government far beyond its right to claim their allegiance. Man of them have borne arms in de ense of the (IOVernment; and could the history of the rebellion be written in all its details, it would be full of stories of the good will and fidelity of these men to our soldiers and our cause. We have decreed their freedom, and the people have duly ratified this decree. We now stand pledged by every consideration of justice and umanity to provide adequate protection of their rights and make this freedom real. Let the colored free man have the ballot; he is a citizen of the U.S.; give him the bal lot. In the ballot there is a wonderful power of protection; it is a talisman of unfailing Virtue; it makes and unmakes political successes and distinctions. The man who has it is sure of a certain degree of consideration, for by means of the ballot he can reach the law makers who trample on his rights. In giving it to the colored free men we should only return to what was established by the founers of the nation. The 1st constitutions of only 2 of the original States SCarolina and Georgia conhued the ballot to white men. We have swept away slavery; let us sweep away the bar barisms created by it since that period. But, Mr. Speaker, whatmountains ofobstruction are thrown up between these colored freedmen und the full enjoyment of their freedom! Even their civil rights are denied, or oppress ively limited; an the same evil spirit that makes haste to embody in laviall the malignant prejudices of caste, urges imperiously that the Government shall not undertake to defend them against oppression. Meanwhile, it is undeni ably the aim of the old pro slavery spirit to reduce them to a condition as nearly 1i c that of slavery as circumstances will admit, a condition that would yield all the advantages of slave without any of its incumbrances. The hatre which has declared the freedom of these people a calamity conspires diligently to make it so; the Government is angrily forbidden to interfere with its operations; and if there be an epithet of contumely and reproach that has not been hurled at those whowould allow these people the protection they need, it must be some lilackgnard epithet not yet invented. But the mountains with which barbarism blocks the way of justice will tumble down and disappear. The powers of darkness will not triumph in this contest; and whoever enlists in their service, be he high or he he low, will certainly discover that truth and justice, aided by divine Providence, move onward to their triumph with a resistless force to which ever obstruction must yield. In this matter of duty to the freedmen, we are on trial before the world, and cannot ese ape the judgment of mankind. Great occasions like this do not come often. Not every generation can do so much to make history. ot in every year, nor in eve age, is it possible to make so great a recor; and how noble it would be, how bright should we make this page of our history, if we could all be great enough to put aside every unworth influence and meet truly this great demand of justice! I say justice; but it is more than this, for one of the highest oblitions of the Government is that which binds it to protect the rights of every person from whom it demands allegiance and support. We cannot disregard it, and deserve national welfare and honor. We cannot nc cept and make valid an restoration of the insurgent States which ails to protect the rights of these cople, and either have or deserve security for anything. We cannot so violate obligation and defy justice, without destroying the foundations of the Republic itself.