Mr. JOHNSON. This is the only o, nity which I have had of giving, as I shall do in a very few words, my reason for not being enabled to vote for the bill. My friend, the chairman of the committee by whom the bill was reported, supposes that the people of the DistCol are not entitled by any provision found in the Constitution to E. the of a government of their own, that they are placed entirely under the jurisdiction of the Congress of the U.S., that the Congress is their Legislature, and that nobody else, not even themselves, have a right to com: plain of the manner in which Congress shall exert their power. In what I am about to say I shall be found to differ with the opinions of men of distinction in the past, to whom the nation has been in the habit of looking with reverence and respect. It is true that, in my opinion, everything which Congress, from the very nature of our institutions, is not prohibited from doing, Congress can do by legislation with reference to the DistCol. The only limitations upon the powers of Congress are not to be found in the words of the clause which invests Congress. with the power, for they are very comprehen sive they are authorized to legislate for the DistCol in all cases but are to be found in the nature of the government, and the particular individual guarantees to be found in the instrument. Those guarantees of personal liberty, personal rights, rights of property, are equally operative upon Congress, in the discharge of its powers over the DistCol, as they are operative upon congress in the discharge of its authority in matters of legislation over the States. 30 or 40 years after the Constitution was adopted, a notion was entertained by the men to whom I have referred that, although there was no express prohibition upon the authority of Congress in its power to legislate over the DistCol, there was an implied one. The implication that was then made was, that having accepted from Maryland and from Virginia cessions of the territory which now compose the District, or did at one time compose the District, there was an implied obligation upon the part of Congress, entered into from the very 1st of those cessions, that they would not interfere with the institution of slavery. I never entertained that opinion, and certainly do not entertain it now; but it was entertained not only by Mr. Calhoun, who may have been considered somewhat prejudiced, and his opinions the result of that prejudice, because of his view of the benefits of the institution of slavery; but it was entertained by Mr. Clay, and it was measurably entertained by Mr. Adams. Mr. Adams, I think, in a speech in the HoRep, stated that he would never agree to abolish slavery in the DistCol without 1st taking the sense of the people of the District, and acting as they might decide upon the question whether the institution was to exist or was to be abolished. He seemed, therefore, to consider that because of the sources of the cession, and because of the inference to be drawn, which was that the persons who became residents of the District had the right to suppose that the institution itself would remain until they were willing to abolish it, it would be wrong to abolish it without their consent. He assimilated it to the authority which the States have over the same subject. The States unquestionably had a right to abolish slavery. hether that right was lim ited or qualified so as to compel them to give compensation to the masters of the slaves was a different question; but with reference to the authority to abolish slavery, no one everdoubted that it was possessed by the State governments. The State governments, however, were to exert it only as their people should will, and Mr. Adams' view was that, although not so expressly provided, it was but just and proper that the same legislation by do. in the District, when proposed, should be submitted to the judgment of the people. My friendfrom Maine as well said that there is nothing in the constitution which gives to the people of the district the right of self government in the ordinary acceptation of the term. That is so; but if he will refresh his recollection by reading the debates, particularly in the convention of Virginia, he will find that the objection made to the Constitution, because of that sweeping authority vested in Congress, was met by Mr. Madison upon the ground that Congress would at once give the people of the District a government for themselves. Instead of doing what it was supposed, and he said was properly supposed, would be an inconvenientif not imprac: ticable authority, the right to legislate in all local matters id: might occupy the greater }. of the time of Congress and take away om the Representatives in Congress somewhat of the time and the reflection which should be devoted to the great interests of the country, he said that Congress, as a matter of course, would give them some form of self government, Upon reasons of policy which are very obvious, the people of the District were not permitted to legislate upon any subject at all except with the authority of Congress, because otherwise Congress, itself might be under some local influence, or there might be some clashing of authority between itself and the municipal government. But subject to the right of congress at any time to interfere, either by repeal or otherwise, with any improper legislation which any local legislature they might authorize might fall into, it was but just. right, consonant to the principles on which our Government was ph. that they should have a government of their own in reference to their mere local interests and individual rights. if I am right as to this, and I know I am .historically, the honorable member from Maine is mistaken in supposing that the people of this District have not just as much right to be consulted about the government of the district as the people of Maine have a right to be consulted about the government of Maine. They cannot control it by their votes. That is quite a different question. They have no authority to interpose any veto to any legislation which Congress may think proper to adopt; but they certainly have a right, when you are about to legislate upon matters which, as they think, materially affect their rights and interests, perhaps their safety, to be heard, respectfully heard, not obeyed, because they are not constituents of ours, but followed, provided they satisfy us that the grounds, upon which they appeal to us are well founded. The question then is, is it right to impose upon them this measure? They say not. They say it in respectful terms. They have done it in the most solemn manner in which a people can act. Every qualified voter, as I understand, has voted against the necessity or the propriety of this measure, and has asked to be protected from it. Are their reasons sound, or can any other reasons than those which they assign be given? If either is the case, it becomes congress to listen and to be guided by the judgment to which they may ultimately come. Now, what is the condition of the District? I do not know how many slaves were here; there were comparatively few free negroes I believe at the time you abolished slavery several years ago.