Mr. BUC LEW. I desire to make one inquiry with regard to this preamble. The preamble carefully sets forth that under the authority of an act of Congress the State of Tennessee was declared to be in a state of insurrection. I suppose allusion is made to the proclamation of the late President issued in pursuance of an act passed early in the war. Now, sir, I should like to know why the preamble omits a very important circumstance connected with that which occurred on the 2d of April last, to wit, that the POTUS, in obedience to an act of coness, or by virtue of authority conferred upon: ini by an act of Congress, declared that. the i insurrection against the authority of the U.S. had ended and thatastate of peace, was restored throughout the U.S. with the exception, I think, of Texas. That would he a statement preliminary to the resolution. It would follow in natural and logical order after the statement which the Senfrom Illinois has inserted regarding the former proclamation of the Presient declaring the insurrection in existence. I inquire of him, then, why he omits the 2nd proclamation, issued by virtue of the some authority, declaring that insurrection to he ended. It is by reason of this omission of the Senfrom I line is or of his committee to take notice of that 2nd proclamation and of the important consequences in the argument to be derived from the fact of its, existence that they get the conclusion which, they appear to draw in the preamble that an' act of Congress is necessary to restore this State, to its constitutional relations with the Federal“ Government. In the preamble it is stated that the State of Tennessee was declared to be in a state of insurrection in pursuance of an act of congress. Then the committee proceed to state the logical conclusion which they draw from that fact, which is that an act of Congress is necessar to reinstate the State of Tennessee in her ormer position in the Union. The committee are enabled only to draw that conclusion, which is the point of objection with many members to this preamble, ccause the proclamation announcing the termination of the insurrection was omitted in the statement. If that were placed in the preamble following the statement of the original proclamation, the logical absurdity wouldgbe so patent upon the face of this preamble that I presume neither the Senfrom Illinois, who reports it, nor any member of the Senate who is disposed to vote for it, would entertain it for one moment.