Mr. JOHNSON. It is not necessary to apol ogize, l will say to the honorable member from California, because he hardly ever says anyv thing that requires an apology, certainly as far as I am concerned. I have upon more occasions than one, Mr. President and I now bare] allude to itstated what I thought to be the present condition of the southern States. [he rebellion bein ended, in my view the Constitution of the U.S and its laws are justasoper ntive upon each of the States where the rebellion exrsted as they were before it was commenced. All of those States now are organized; all of them, I believe, except perhaps Texas, have their judiciary, their executive, and their Legislature, and they are now in the undisturbed exercise of the functions of each of these depts and the 3 embrace everything that a State has a right to do and they are organized upon republican principles. The SCOTUS recognizes them as existing States. The Executive of the U.S. recognizes them as existing States. This very amendment (for there is nothing on the face of it which excludes the necessity of appealing to the States which have been in rebellion to adopt it) recognizes them as existing States. Now, what are their rights under the constitution as it stands? The Constitution provides that a census shall be taken at periods of every ten years. You took your census in 1860, and the apportionment was made under the act of 1862. What is there to change that, looking at the Constitution as it is? The very purpose of the provision directing an enumeration of the inhabitants of the States to be taken at each period of ten years was to ascertain the number of the people in each of the States that was to constitute the basis upon which the number of Representatives from each of the States was to be ascertained. That was done by force of the act of 1862, under the census of 1860. Now you propose to change it, and to change it by force of constitutional provision. Why cannot you wait? Why is it not right and just that you should wait until those States are represented in this Chamber and in the other house. Your fathers consulted them, and the weight of their patriotic wisdom in forming the Constitution of the U.S. was universall admitted, and is known to us historically. hy cannot you wait now? On the contrary, you now deny them the right to a pear upon this floor, although they are wilTing to take the oath of loyalty which you have prescribed; and you undertake to submit a proposition fora change of the Constitution in their absence. How can on know but some man of the South miflht e found in the councils of the nation who would influence our councils and shape your deliberations as Hadison influenced the coun cils and shaped the deliberations of his asso ciates in the Convention of 1787? Do you not want aid? I should think so. You have not been able et to agree on any provision for.a change which has satisfied you even for a paMssri.nggraeys.ident, I have here and I have alluded to the condition of these States simply for the purpose of introducing it and bringing it before the Senate an opinion delivered by one of the judges of the Supreme Court very recently, who is one of the admitted lights of that great tribunal, whose patriotism has never been questioned, and cannot properly be questioned, in a case which involves the question, what is the condition of the States? A man by the name of Egan was confined in the State penitentiary at Albany, he never having been in the military service of the U.S or of the confederate States, under a sentence by a military commission held in the State of SCarolina to try him upon the charge of murder, and the sentence of the commission was confinement in that penitentiary for life. He made an application to Mr. Justice Nelson for a habeascorpus. The facts were returned, and the judge in the conclusion of his opinion says, tvhat fthink bears upon the question L am discussing, what I will road: “For ought that appears, the civil local courtsof the state of SCarolina wornin the full exercise of their judicial functionsat the time of this trial. as restored by the suppression of the rebellion. some 7 months previously, and by the revival of the laws and reorganization of the Stategovernmentin obedienceto and in conformitywith itsconstitutional duties to the Fodoral Union. “Indeed. long previousto this, a provisional zov. emor had been appointed by the resi'lynt. who is: Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the; U.S., ( and whosewill undermartial law oon stitnted the only rule of action.)for the special purpose of changing the existing state of things and restoringcivil governmentover the people. In pursuanceof this appointment atnew constitution had been formed. n. Governor and Legislature elected under it, and the‘Statein the full enjoymentor entitled to the full emoymentof herconstitutional rights an“d privileges. ho Constitution and laws of the Union were therebyncknowlediied and obeyed, and wereas nu thoritative and himing over the peopleof the State as in any other portion of the countr. Indeed. the moment the rebellion was suppressc and the government growrug out of It subverte, possessiona. uthority, the ancient and laws, resumed their accus tomed swny, subjectonly to the neworganization or the appointmentof proper officers to give to them operation and effect. This reorganizationand appointmentof thumb lic functionaries.which was under the superintend enccand direction of the President as Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy oft to country, who, as such. had previouslygoverned the peopleof the Slatwat, efrom imperative necessityby force of martial had already taken place, and the necessityno longer existed." Let me repeata sentence of that decision. The judge says that the State of SCarolina, at the time this trial was had, was “in the full enjoyment, or entitled to the full enjoyment, of fier constitutional rights and privileges.” One of those rights andf privileges was that of being represented in this body and represented in the other House. Now, we keep them out, unless they think proper at. least I suppose that is the course the matter is to take unless they will submit to adopt a measure which is contrary to what we know they would do if they were not by compulsion forced to take it. Mr. President, I have but a word to say in conclusion. We all have an interest in the peace of the country. We have a deep interest in the peace of the country because it is connected with the prosperity and good name of the country. We have a social interest in being together again as brothers, of presenting to the nations of the world ourselves as one, and exhibiting the characteristics of a great and mngnanimous people, who, forgetting recent animositics, discarding the prejudices out of which they grow, and looking to.the honor and glory of the nation, come together as broth ers, one and all. By the highest of moral considerations, therefore, the termination of the present state of things is demanded. But if we cannot raise ourselves to the elevation of being governed by moral considerations, lot more material considerations animatens; let interest, in its most vulgar sense, control us. Let us, therefore, bring back the South so as to enable her to remove the desolation which has gone throughout her borders; restore her industry; attend to her products those prod ucts which enter so materially into the wealth of the whole, so important to the North, and more important, if possible, to the North than to the South, but all important to the nationinstead of keeping her in a state of subjection,0f dishonoring subjection, and, as I think, without the sh htest necessity. Peacc once existing throng out the land, the restoration of all rights brought about, the Union will be at once in more prosperous existence than it ever was; and throughout the tide of time, as I believe, nothing in the future will ever cause us to dream of dissolution, or ofsubjecting any part, through the powerful instrumentality of any other art, to any dishonoring humiliation.