Mr. WADE. Does the Senator look upon that as a justification for an attack upon the power of the people as expressed through a majority of their ongress, amounting to 2/3rds of it? Suppose I, in intemperate language. as you say, had assailed the President unwarrautably, would that authorize him to visit upon our head and the heads of other Senators the stigma of being disunionists, leagued with the enemy to break up this Union? Is that friendly counsel from your Executive? You say you are going to defend all his measures; you are his apologist for anything he has done, or anything he may do. did say, sir, that he seemed to have meditated a controversy with Congress from the beginning, and he has. He has treated our majorities as hostile to, the people; 2/3rdsotboth branchesof Congress are been treated by him as mere factiouists, disunionists, enemies to the country bent upon its destruction, leaguing with the enemy to destroy the Government. This is the way the President has treated Congress, and every bill they have passed which promised any relief to the men whom we are bound to protect has been trampled under the executive heel; and even when members of this body did what I say they ought not to have done for I do not approve of my brother Intxacims going upto the President, when he has a measure pending here as a Senator, to ask the President, in the 1st place, whether he will approve of it or not; even when he was asked if he objected to this measure, and made no objection. he still under takes to veto it. Your resident, in order to trample down Congress, if he could, and to destroy and override the rights of the States, has reached his executive arm into States in order to carry elections in his favor, and sent his myrmidons there to proclaim his will and his Wishes and to argue the question pending before the States of this Union, he professin to be a State rights man! There is a point want you, sir, to defend him upon. If you say our side went to him to get his opinion to carry into Connecticut, I say that they oughtnot to have done itif they attein )ted it. It was stooping from that dignity which ever should characterize Congress and the pride and intelligence of a State, to make any attempt to carry a State by executive influence or dictation. Nay, sir, if newspaperreports may be relied upon I do not know that they can be he as done worse than that; he has been tampering with members of legislative bodies in order to extend his influence there and to bring over men to sustain his side of this question there. This is all fair play, is it? When I say that he is endeavoring to override and slander and libel members of Congress and even 2/3rds of both Houses, and because I denounce that on the floorof this Senate, am I to be arraigned by an apologist of the President. by one who proclaims himself to be his defender, and who is commissioned, for aught I know, to defend him here and elsewhere“. 1 I spoke yesterday of the Presidents usur pation, and I ask a ain what business, what constitutional right as the POTUS to reach his executive arm into any State, seceded or not acceded, to set up What did he i l body can find any warrant for such an act in the Constitution, I will take back all that I have said about it. But, sir, you cannot find it there. The President is a mere executive officer, bound to obey our mandates and our behests in this particular, having no right to have an will of his own upon the subject. If during the vacation of Congress he thought it was expedient and urgently necessarythnt these States should be brought back into the Union, he should have convened the national Legislature to take that question into consideration. He had no power on Gods earth, no se intilla, no color of authority for undertaking to reor ganize them and bring them here for admission. What did he do? He let the whole long vacation run over without making any ctfort to convene Congress or in any way insinuating that he wanted the counsel of Congress on the subject; but behind their backs and in their absence we find him dictating to the States, for he calls them States, and he says they are in the Union and have neverbeen out of the Union. If they have not been out of the Union as he alleges, then he is the most bold usurperwho ever undertook to accumulate unwarranted power in his own hands. What. right has he to go into any State of this Union and displace the GOvernor that has been elected there? What right has he to put by and override the Legislature of any State of this Union? He has done it. There is not a State now south of us, except Tennessee, thatis not a mere creat ure of eXccutive power. The people there never moved to regain their relations with the General Government except as they were moved by the executive arm. They have sent us no petitions, they havehad no meetings to consider the subject among themselves; but your Executive Chief, holding these States under the military power of the Government, they being under martial law, and the habeascorpus being overridden, the military breath being there the law of the land. commanded them to form constitutions; and they were not even accorded the poor, miserable privilege of making them according to their own will, but under the ba onets of the conqueror they were ordered to make their constitutions, and he sent his orders to them telling them what provisions they must make in those constitutions. Do you deny that? Has he not told them over and over again, ifyou make your constitutions without such and such provisions you will not be admitted in Congress? Is that according to American principles? Bad as these men are secessionists as Fknow them to be mostly, I say you cannot make an American republican State out of that material, and in that way. Until these people can agree to assemble themselves togetter and make such constitutions as will accord to that of the U.S and ask to resume their relations with the General government under such constitutions, they can have none. If the President has found fault with Congress because they (lid not, at his breath, when the 1st assembled, admit these States into the nion and allow their members back into (long ess, and if we are to he constantly nnathematized by him for not doing it, it is because he intends to have them come in here resuming their old places. What has he done to discriminate? I ask the Senator to tell me.