Mr. WADE. I do not rise now for the purpose of arguing this question at any length; and it is with very great deference that I offer an amendment to the proposition reported by the committee who have had this particular subject under consideration so long. I know that they are infinitely more competent than I am to deal with it; but there are so many conflicting views in regard to this whole matter and it is so Vitally importantto the interests of the countrv that we get the proposition upon which we shall unite as near rightas we can, that after all it seems to me to be properthat every Senator who believes he can by possi bility improve the plan which has been hroughtforward by the committee should offer is amendment for the consideration of the body. I do not know that the proposition which I have now submitted will be deemed an improvement upon what they have broughtfor ward; but nevertheless there are somethings in it that appear to me to be better, and an imrovement upon their report. n the 1st section of the proposition of the committee, the word “citizen” is used. That is a term about. which there has been a good deal of uncertaint in our Government. The courts have stumbed on the subject and even here, at this session, that question has been up and it is still regarded by some as doubtful. lrcgard it as settled by the civil rights bill, and, indeed, in my judgment. it was settled before. I have always believed that every person, of whatever race or color, who was born within the U.S. was a citizen of the U.S.; but by the decisions of the courts there has been a doubt thrown over that subject; and if the Government should fall into the hands of those who are opposed to the views that some of us maintain. those who have been accustomed to take a differciit view of it, they may construe the provision in such a way as we do not think it liable to construction at this time, unless we fortify and make it very strong and clear. If we do not do so there may be danger that when party spirit runs high, it may receivea very different construction from that which we Would now put. upon it. I find that gentlemen doubt upon that subject, and I think it is very easy now to solve that doubt and put the question beyond all cavil for the present and for the future. In the 1st clause of the amendment which have submitted, I strike out the word " citi Iens, ” and require the States to give equal vi and protection of person and property to al persons born in the U.S or natu ralized under the laws thereof. T but.seems to me to put the question beyond all doubt. The Senfrom Maine suggests to me, in an undertone, that iersons may be born in the U.S. an the U.S. be citizens of the U.S. unless they went to another country and expatriated themselves. if they could do so by being adopted in that other country by some process of naturalization thatI know nothing about; foribe lieve the countries of EuropHeruiinly it is so in England have always held that aperson born within the realm cannot expatriate himself and become a citizen of any other yet not be citizens of country or owo allegiance to any other couiitry. I think, then, the 1st. section of my amendment covers the whole ground.