Mr. SAULSBURY. If the gentleman will just be easy and quiet for a moment, I will explain it all to him, sp that he who runs may read. The Senator has been so polite as to, remind me of my record. I did not know that he record of so humble a Senator had attracted;he attention of so distinguished a one; but, air, I hold that there is a perfect symmetry.u my record. This is a digression not ocea sioued by me, because the Senator has referred to my record and I must rejoin. Sir, when, in 1860, it was apparent to everyone that unless there could be some terms of compromise or ngreementbetween the contend.ng sections war was inevitable, I said that war was not the preper mode of settling your differences; that you ought not to be wrser than your fathers; that you ought in an emergency of that kind when you saw thatnar was inevita ble, awar which you I do not refer to the senator individually, but Is eak with reference to the political opinions 0 those who acbd with him helpedto bring about by advocating doctrines which you knew if practically carried.nto operation would of necessity lead to adis solution of the Union; when men advocating those sentiments, and men advocating just as Foolish things down in the Gulf States, a coop erating for the accomlishment of the same purpose; when men with inflamed passions and may dened brains in both sections of the coun Lry were striving to bring about a dissolution of the Union, it was then, when you determined:hat if the South undertook to secede ou would invoke the sword and the cannon, that I said Lhat was no way to preserve the Union. Idid not say just at that time, although I believe I did so it afterwards, that you could not conquer the South, and I did think at one time that you never could. I believe that if they had been all in earnest, if they had all gone into it, that that people could not have been conquered even bye 1 your importations from foreign countries. That people fought fhe whole world. I am lad thatt e Union is not dissolved. I am glad the South did not bring ubouta separation of the country. I am just as glad of it asyou are. I never wanted to see a separation of the country. But I said then as I say now, that war was no way to preserve the Federal Union; and I say now, sir, that on have not preserved the Federal Union. h’ou have destroyed it tom orarily. Its res toration will have to be the work of men entertaining principles like the founders of the Government. If it is ever restored, it will have to be restored by the action of that good old great Democratic party that studied the master minds ofAmerican history. Talk about preserving the American Union with 22 vacant seats upon this floor and 11 States not represented here! The Constitution of your country says that each State shall be entitled to 2 Senators, and provides for membership in the other House from each State. And yet, sir, you come here, 2/3rds of the American L nion, 'on call yourselves the Congress of the U.S., and you shut and bar the doors against whom I you please. The southern States are perfectly reconstructed for the purpose of seaing constitutional amendments to them that they may vote upon them; but when they propose to come here to participate in making the laws by which they as well as you are to be governed, they are not reconstructed exactly; you do not know exactly whether they are m the Union or not! You have succeeded in conquering the ph sical force of the South; and I am glad thatt ey have submitted as glad as you are. I have as much interest in the preservation of the Federal Union as you have. Myancestors have lived upon this continentas long as yours have. You have children to live here after you and so have I. Therefore I am glad from the bottom my heart that the country has not been so arated by any geographical line. Otherwise, I) say in response to your question, 9u have not preserved the American Union. on have struck down constitutional liberty wherever you could lay your hands upon it. In carrying on your war, which you mig it have avoided by peaccable measures in adjusting your differences as your fathers did, there was no principle of constitutional liberty which you on those who acted with you did not ruthlessly lay your hands upon and utterly destroy; and this day you yourselves say that the Union is not restored. But, sir, this is a digression. When interrupted by the Senfrom Kansas I was coming to the consideration of the 2 points only involved in this case.