Mr. WADE. I have no wish to interrupt the Senator, but I desire to suggest to him that it seems to me that all he is saying now has no reference whatever to the question before the Senate. He is talking about a State and what is a State and what a State may do. I am not so particular as to what a State may or may not do; but I say, here is a State erected, with a complete organization, with all its officers, everything necessary to a State government, and which all the other States have, and it asks to come into this Union. But the Senator is speculating on, the question whether a State committed a crime, or what it may or may not do. Sir, I suppose that thi. to into the . exactly we Other do no more, and no otes in o Y. the Union can agree that my honorable o Whetesti good lawyer has a right to ny object on the ground of irrelevancy; but my experience in the Senate of the U.S. has taught me that irrelevancy in argument is at least not out of order. I think if it were we should have much less speaking here than we have been obliged heretofore to listen to. But is this relevant, or is it not relevant? My honorable friendfrom Missouri [Mr. BrowNJ has undertaken to offer an amendment to this bill, in which he attempts to limit and to restrain the power of this incorporeal person which we are about to create; and when e offers that amendment, which is perfectly legitimate, perfectly germane to the subject, I have a right to speak as to other things which this corporation may, according to the theories of Senators upon this floor, do or which it may not do. My honorable friendfrom Missouri makes a point which I do not make because, being a free man as he is and being a free man as I am, we each entertain our own opinions upon that. The honorable Senfrom Missouri proposes an amendment in which he says that this State shall at no time have authority to debar anybody from the right of suffrage on account of race or color. I respect his convictions on that subject, although I do not entertain them. I have no sneers or jibes for him; far from it; but I desire to hear him calmly, dispassion ately, and carefully, and if his argument convinces my reason I shall vote with him. On the other hand, I want to know, and I want to know as an essential, particular thing in this debate, whether this being which we are about to create shall have the power to take the whole of the people of Nebraska out of this Union. I want to know whether the Governor and the Legislature and the judiciary of Nebraska or a majority of the people of Nebraska, acting through a convention regularly called, if you please, according to law, can take the whole people of Nebraska out of the Union; whether they can cut the tie of allegiance which binds them to the Union; whether they can absolve all that people from punishment for crimes done to the Union; whether they can make all the citizens in that State quasi foreigners and alien enemies? Now, Mr. President, I have always under stood that it was utterly impossible for a corporation to commit a crime. I never heard of a railway company committing larceny. I never heard of a turnpike company committing bur gl.ary.