Mr. HENDERSON. That is certainly the true principle. aprinciple of common sense and republican right. at the committee, I presume, will tell mo they do not wish to deprive any part of the country of its due and just representation in con. On the other hand, they will claim a shine to do equal justice to each section. They will take the ground, then, that the object of the amendment is not to deny representation, but to coerce negro suffrage. I have already said that one or the other of these things must be aimed at; and I cannot suppose the committee intended to violate so great a principle. Then as o suffragein the acceding and border States is the purpose of the resolution. I say in the secedingand border States, for the resolution is so framed, that each one of the original non-slaveholding States may refuse to eufranchise its negroes, "ithout loss of political power. As to these States the penalty is operative. It is one of those strange penal statutes that, appearingto be equal, operate unequally, because of the unequal condition of the parties to which it is to be aplied. This begins by assuming that the objectto cattained byits adoption is wrong. The object is negro suffrage. But while a large number of Sens&Reps and a respectable portion of the newspaper press of the country claim the right of Congress, by a simple bill or JtResolution, to secure this right to the negro, this amendment begins by repudiating any such power. It does muc more. It admits the exclusive right of the States over the whole subject. It oes not stop there either; but the implication is clear, that the negro may and ought to be, in some cases, excluded from the ballot on account of the color of his skin. Then, of course, no Senator who believes that the Congress now has the rightto confer the suffrage can vote for the proposition without stultifying himself. If he votes for it he is esto ped there after from setting up the guarantee c nose or the antislave amendment as a warrant for legislation. O Senator who believes that the educated and intelligent negro, devoted to the institutions of his country, and qualified for the highest honors of life, should have the poor privilege, without regard to his color, of giving or with holding his assent to laws affecting his person and prorty, can vote for it, because it shirks the pe ormaiice of a plain duty from false ideas of expediency, and commits a great interest to the hands of its enemies. Hence, both they who favor a direct act of Congress on the subject, and they who believe that this is the proper time perhaps the last and only time we shall ever ave, to consummate an act of justice, by a constitutional amendment, de claring against all discrimination of color or race, must take their places against this proposition. Agaiu, ifsuffrage be the intention, this amendment does not accomplish it. It is as inefficient as it is evasive. To show what the enemies of the measure think of it, I quote from the columns of the Richmond Examiner: But, for the sake of argument let us even suppose that this amendment should prevail and becomea art of the Constitution. I What then I What would e its operations? Nothing would be easier for the States it attemptsto control to render it practically pull. by declaring, 1st. that all personsnow enjoying the elective franchise should continue to exercise it: and 2nd ly that all personshereafterndmitted to it. should be mittedon a prescribed educational or property qualification. In this way the political otipount, raot of the countrywould remain (for this genera; least.)as completelyin the white race as if no such amendment had ever been passed." Another objection, in this view, consists in the fact, alrcad perhaps stated, that it is partial in its good. f negro suffrage be desirable in the South, it is equally so in the North; but the amendment is purposely so framed that north era and western prejudices may run thateourse and northern and western injustice be perpe trated without punishment. This fact ofitself destroys the force of the measure. It leaves too much undone. it is not entitled to approval as a rent act of impartial good, but commends itsel to the etty passions of the hour. It assumes to cgvate the negro in the seceding States. not for the negros good, but to punish the whites. It comes from malice, and not from charity or a sense of right. In effect, it says I the people of the North and West need no chas tisoment, and negro suffrage mustnot be forced on them. The people of the South have sinned and this is their punishment. Mr. President, I am in favor of extending the suffrage in a modified, safe, and judicious way, not to punish the whites of the South, but to advance their interests, moral and material, and to insure the future peace of white and black. Instead of a punishment, the future will claim it as the greatest good. But it must not be partial. It must not be confined to a section. It must be as broad as our free country, as universal as truth itself. If the negro ought to be enfranchised, our duty as statesmen, our honor as men, our own sense of responsibility to posterity, all demand that we should do it now, and do it with the boldness of conscious right. We should make it effective and ap cal to an honest people to ratify it. It is admitted that under this amendment the South may refuse to enfranchise. Then your object is lost. It will not do to say that the ressure will be such as to force them to it. f the southern States find themselves in a minority in congress and that to enfranchise the negro would still leave them in a mine irty, nothing will be gained by yielding their assent, and your pressure ceases. If, on the other hand, they find that with the aid of the Democratic part of the northern States they can afford to exc ude the negro from the basis of representation and yet retain political supremacy, your pressure is equally ost. But another objection occurs. By attempting to cover up and conceal our realobject, we may lose forever that which we have in view. You cannot put a reposition before the people that will deceive them. If, by this amendment, you intend to secure negro suffrage, the people will understand your purpose, and if they are opposed to the ends you aim at, however disguised, they will defeat you. The people are just as intelligent as we are. If, on the other hand, they desire negro with: e, they cannot fail to see that this proposition is a sham and a delusion, and they may vote it down because of its inefficiency. This amendment implies that impartial suffrage may be a curse to the white race. It is therefore put forward in the form of an evil. Another evil is put forth with it, and choice between them is given. One must be taken, but the other may be reected. It is a choice between bitter cups, either of which is a penalty for past misdeeds. Do I state the proposition unfairly? I think not. I come now to the chief argument, indeed the only argument, urged in favor of the committees report. It is that the proposition can be carried. It is without merit, but it can succeed. A bold declaration of mans equality cannot be carried. I state it plainly. I hope I state it fairly. The distinguished Senfrom Maine in his speech the other da said, and I was glad to hear him sayit, that e personally was willing, instead of the proviso to the amendment now pending, to attach the following: “That all provisionsin the Constitution or laws of any Statemaking anydistinction in civil or political rights or privileges on account of race or color shall he ine perative and void."