Mr. BINGHAM. The gentleman will excuse me from further interruption. I am obliged to the Gentfrom Pennsylvania for his suggestion. I understand that e is not in the hit it of interrupting for the purpose of weak ening an argument, but for the purpose of strengthening it, and I am obliged to him for his suggestion. I doubt whether there can be found upon this floor a single man who will deliberate y say, if the insurgent State of SCarolina, through her corrupt and treasonable judiciary. had decreed for the use of the southern confederacy the confiscation of the property of that venerable man Pettigrew, who clung to the constitution and cherished the ho c of restoration as he cherished the hope o a better life, that the U.S. had not the power to reverse that decree and restore that property. If SCarolina all this while was a State, with all the powers of a State, within the Union, how can we reach any such case? My learned colleague, [Mr. HAYES] who doesmethe honor to listen to me, knows that the State of Ohio, when she legislates touching the transfer of real estate within her limits and among her citizens, and without impairing the obligation of contracts, is beyond the power of the Federal judiciary, and cannot be restrained therein by the Federal Government. With the explanation I have given his words I see no occasion to take issue with the president upon the status of the States in rebellion, but admit that these States remained States through the conflict for Federal purposes; that means that the State lines remained, that the judicial districts remained intact, so that when the war ceased in those States the Government of the U.S. could administer justice in every one of those States, and try therein allpersons for crimes against the U.S. therein committed. I do not feel disposed to admit, if a citizen of SCarolina were todny to commit treason against the U.S. at Charles tou, that he could not be there tried for his crime; nor if he committed his crime there last year that he could escape trial when arraigned, on the plea that the district of SCarolina, previously prescribed by the law of the U.S., had ceased, either by his treason or by the treason of others, to be a judicial district within a State. I never was of that class of persons who believed or assented to the position for a moment, and I do not know if there is anyone here who does, that all the people within the limits of that confederncy were alien enemies. According to the constitution and laws of the U.S. Government, every man is responsible for his own crime, and not for the crimes of others. So that when the sovereignty of the country comes to be restored in ir inia and the Carolinas, the judiciary of the Y U.S. are bound by their oaths to discriminate between those who contributed by the compulsion of the bayonet to the support of the rebellion, and those who originated it and are the guilty peretrators of the great wrong. There is a wi e difference between JeffersonDavis, the leader of the revolt against the Union, who, to enter upon it, voluntarily broke his oath to support the constitution of his count, and that poor, overtystricken conscriptw oserved the confc eracyoftraitors only because of compulsion, or to secure there by is daily bread. I have said enough, I think, on this subject to satisfy gentlemen that the President stands by the great body of this House touching the status of the States. They need reconstruction. Their functions are suspended. something must be done to give them an equalplace in the Union. That is what the President says and what the House says. Who shall judge whether that which it was essential to do has been done at all, and if done, whether it has been done rightly? Who is to decide it? Isay it, without waiting to quote authorities, that the loyal peopleof theisyalSMwho saved the Union, and are represented on this floor, are the ffnaijudges upon that question, and from their decision thexe fitiuo appeal. W" Now, Mr. Speaker, having said this much, and aeat deal more than intended to say when rose, without the slightest preparation, to reply to the carefully elaborated speech of the Gentfrom Indiana, I propose to bring this whole question to an issue before the House by offering the following as a substitute for the gentlemans resolutions: Strike out all after " Resolved, ” and insert: Resolved, That this House has an abiding confidence in the President, and that in the future, asin the pa: he will conperato with CongrLiiSn restorin to cqua poSitionand rights With the other States in the Union all the States lately in insurrection, and on that I demand the previous question.