Mr. TRUMBULL. I presume so, too; the Senfrom Indiana and myself agree precisel, and he has admitted now all I desire imto a mit. Then the Government having placed these people rightfully upon these land}; and they having expended their labor upon them, they had a right to be gotected in their possessions for some length, of time after peace on the principle of equit. That is all we propose to do by this bill. TYhe committee thong tit would not be more than a reasonable protection to allow them to remain for 3 years, they having been put upon these lands destitute, without any implements of husbandry, without cattle, horses, or anything else with which to cultivate the land, and having up to the present time been able to raise very little at the exease of great labor. Perhaps the Senator thinks they ought not to remain so long. I will not dispute whether they shall o off at the end of one year or 2 years. the committee propose 2 years more. The order was dated in anuary, 1865, and we propose 3 years from that time, which will expire in Jan uary, 1868, or about 2 years from this time. On account of that provision of the bill the Senator asks me the question whether the Government of the U.S. has the right in a time of peace to take property from one man and give it to another. I say no. v Of course the government of the U.S. has no authorityina time of peace, by a legislative act, to say that the farm of the Senfrom Indiana shall be given to the Senfrom Ohio; I contend for no such principle. But following that up, the Senator wants to know by what authority you buy land or provide schoolhouses for these refugees. Have we not been provid in g schoolhouses for years? Is there a session of Congress when nets are not passed giving away public lands for the benefit of schools? But that does not come out of the Treasury, the Senfrom Indiana will probably answer. But how did you get the land to give away? Did you not buy it of the Indians Are you not appropriating every session of Congress. money by the million to extinguish the Indian title, money collected off his constituents and mine by taxation? We buy the land and then we give the land away for schools. Will the Senator tell me how that differs from giving the money? Does it make any difference whether we buy the land from the Indians and give it for the benefit of schools, or whether we buy it from some rebel and give no, sir, use it for the benefit of schools, with a view ultimatel of selling it for at least its cost? I believe would rather buy from the Indian; but still if the traitor is to be permitted to have a title, we will buy it from him if we can purchase cheaper. Sir, it is a matter of economy to do this. The cheapest way by which you can save this race from starvation and destruction is to educate them. They will then soon become selfsustaining. The report of the Freedmens Bureau shows that today more than 70,000 black children are being taught in the schools which have been established in the South. We shull not long have to support any of these blacks out of the public Treasury if we educate and furnish them land upon which they can make a living for themselves. This is a very different thing from takin the land of A and giving it to B by an act o Congress. But the Senator is most alarmed at those sections of this bill which confer judicial authority 1. upon the officers and agents of the Freedmens Bureau. He says if this authority can be exercised there is an end to all the reserved rights of the States, and this Government may do any thing. Not at all, sir. The authority, as I have already shown to be exercised under the sev enth and 8th sections is a military authority, to be exerted only in regions of country where the civil tribunals are overthrown, and not there after they are restored. It is the same authority that we have been exercising all the time in the rebellious States; it is the same authority by virtue of which GenlGrant issued the order which I have just read. Here is a perfect and complete answer to the objection that is made to the 7th and 8th sections. But the Senator says that these sections, he supposes, derive their authority, in my opinion, from the amendment to the constitution of the U.S. Sir, I think that amendment ldoes confer authority to enact these provisions into law and execute them, not. through themil itary tribunals, but through the judicial tribu nals in any State of the Union. What was the objeet of the constitutional amendment abolishing slavery. It was not, as the Senator says, simply to take away the power of the master over the slave. Did we not mean something more than that? Did we not mean that here after slavery should not exist, no matter whether the servitude was claimed as due to an individual or the State? The constitutional amendment abolishes just as absolutely all provisions of State or local law which make a man a slave as it takes away the power of his former master to control him. If the construction put by the Senfrom Indiana upon the amendment be the true one, and we have merely taken from the master the power to control the slave and left him at the mercy of the State to be derived of his civil rights, the trumpet of freedom that we have been blowing throughout the land has given an “uncertain sound, ” and the promised freedom is a delusion. such was not the intention of Congress, which proposed the constitutional amendment, nor is such the fair meaning of the amendment itself. With the destruction of slavery necessarily follows the destruction of the incidents to slavery; When slavery was abolislhed, slave codes in its support were abolished a so. Those laws that prevented the colored man going from home, that did not allow him to buy or to sell, or to make contracts; that did not allow him to own property; that did not allow him to enforce rights; that did not allow him to be educated, were all badges of servitude made in the interest of slaver and as a part of slavery. They never would have been thought of or enacted an where but for slavery, and when slavery fallst ey fall also. The policy of the States where slavery has existed has been to legislate in its interest; and out of deference to slave, which was tolerated by the constitution of the U.S., even some of the non-slaveholding States passed laws abridging the rights of the colored1 man which were restraints upon libert. When slavery goes, all this system of legislation, devised in the interest of slavery an for the purpose of degrading the colored race, of keeping the negro in ignorance, of blotting out irom his very soul the light of reason, if that were ossihle that he might not think, but know on y, liket e ox, to labor, goes with it. Enlighten, and Christianize the negro; to make him it. k white person, the white person is equally e Now, when slavery no longer exists, the policy of the Government is to Iegislate in the interest of freedom. Now, our laws are to be enacted with a view to educate, improve, en an independent man; to teach him to think and to reason; to improve that principle which the great Author of all has impliinte in every hu man breast, which is susceptible of the highes cultivation, and destined to go on enlarging an expanding through the endless ages of eternity. have no doubt that under this provisibn of the constitution we may destroy a these discriminations in civil rights against the black man; and if we cannot our constitutional amendment amounts to nothing. It was for that purpose that the 2nd clause of that amendment was adopted, which says that Congress shall have authority, by appropriate legislation, to carry into effect the article prohibiting slavery. Who is to decide what that appropriate legislation is to be? The Congress of the U.S.; and it is for Congress to adopt such appropriate legislation as it may think proper, so that it be a means to accomplish the end. If we believe a Freedmens Bureau necessary, ifwe believe an act punishing any man who deprives a colored person of any civil rights on account of his color necessaryif that is one means to secure his freedom, we have the constitutional right to adopt it. If in order to prevent slavery Congress deem it necessary to declare null and void all laws which will not permit the colored man to contract, which will not permit him to testify, which will not permit him to buy and sell, and to go where he leases, it has the power to do so, and not on y the power, but it. becomes its duty to do so. That is what is provided to be done by this bill. Its provisions are temporary; but there is another bill on your table, somewhat akin to this, which is intended to be permanent, to extend to all parts of the country, and to protect persons of all races in equal civil rights. But, says the Senfrom Indiana, we have laws in Indiana prohibiting black people from marrying whites, and are you going to isrcgard these laws? Are our laws enacted for the purpose of preventing amalgamation to be disre garded, and is a man to be punished because e undertakes to enforce them? Ibe the Senfrom Indiana to read the bill. One of its objects is to secure the same civil rights and so ject to die same punishments persons of all races and colors. Hgw does this interfere with the law of Indiana preventing marriages between whites and blacks? Are not hot races treated alike by the law of Indiana? Does not the law make it just as much a crime for a white man to marry a black woman as for a black woman to marry a white man, and vice versa? I presume there is no discrimination in this respect, and therefore your law forbidding marriages between whites and blacks operates alike on both races. This bill does not interfere with If the negro is denied the right to marr a nied the right to marry the negro. I see now discrimination against either in this respect that does not a pl to both. Make the penalty the same on alcasses of people for the same offene, and then no one can complain. My object in bringing forward these bills was to bring to the attention of Congress something that was m, something upon which hoped we could agree. I have said nothing in these hills which are pending, and which have been recommended by the ComJudiciary and Iscak of both of them because they have both been alluded to in this discussion abgut the political right of the no go. On that subject it is known that there are fferences of opinion, but I trust there are no differences of opinion among the friends of the F constitutional amendment, among those who; are for real freedom to the black man, as to his being entitled to equality in civil rights. If thatv is not oing as far as some gent emen would desirefi say to them it is a step in the right direction. Let us go that far, and, going that far, we have the cooperation of the executive dept, for the President has told us in hm annual message: Ccrtainly the Government of the U.S. is a limited Government; and so is every State government:1. limited government. With us this idea of ltiimonit, a General State through every pfaolrman of administra rests on the great distinguishing principle of the recognition of be rights of man. he ancient republics absorbed the individal in the State. prescribed his religion, and contra led hip activity. The I am ericansystem restson the assertion of the eguulright of everymnn to life, liberty, and the pursuit of ha pious, to free dpm of conscience, to the culture on exercise of all his faculties. As a constigncnce. the State government is limited, as to the general Government in the interest of union, in to the individual citilen in the interest of freedom.” The President further says: “Good faith requires the securit in their liberty and their property, their right to labor, and their right to claim the just return of their labor. I cannot too stron l urge a dispussiona to treatment of this suluect. wh a should be carefully kept aloof from all party strife.” “The public interest will be best promoted, if the several states will provide adequate protection and remedies for the freedmen.” “ Monopolies, perpetuities, and class legislation are contrary to the genius of free government and ought not to be allowed. Hare there isno room for favored classes or monopolics at whse apnridnc freedom our Govern of industry. Wherever monopoly attains a foothold, it is sure to be a source of danger, discord and trouble. We shall but fulfillourdutiesns legislators by upeordinn equal and gxact Justice to all men, special privileges to none. such, sir, is the language of the POTUS in his annual message, and who in this Chamber that is in favor of the freedom of the slave is not in favor of giving him equal and exact justice before the law? Sir, we can go along hapd in hand together to the consummation of this great. object of securingto every human being within the jurisdiction of the Republic equal rights before the law, and I preferred to see for points of agreement between all the Depts of rather than to hunt for points of Government i of the freedmen have not said anything in my remarks about reconstruction. "I have not attempted to discuss the question whether these States are in the Union or out of the Union, and so much has been said upon that subject that I am almost ready to exclaim, with one of old, “I know not whether they are in the body or out of the body; God knpweth.” It is enough for me to know that the State organizations in several States of the Union have been usurped and overthrown, and that up to the present time no State organization has been inaugurated in either oft cm which the various Depts of Government or any Dept of the Government has recoized as placing the States in full possession of all the constitutional rights pertaining to States in full communion with the Union. The Executive has not recognized anyone, for he still continues to exercise military jurisdiction and to suspend the privilege of the writ of habeascorpus in all of them. Congress has not recognized any of them, as we all know; and until Congress and the Executive do recognize them, let us make use of the Freedmen 5 Bureau, already established, to protect the colored race in their rights and when these States shall be admitted, and the authority of the Freedmens Bureau as a court shall cease and determine, as it must when civil authority is fully restored, let us provide, then, by other laws for protecting all geople in their equal civil rights before the law. f we can pass such measures, they receive executive sanction, and it shall be understood that it is the policy of the Government that the rights of the colored men are to be protected by the States if the will, but by the federal Government if they will not; that at all hazards and under all circumstances there shall be impartialit among all classes in civil rights throughout 1: e landif we can do this, much of the apprehepsion and now existing in the loyal States will be aalnlaxyigtiy, and a great obstacle to an early restoration of the insurgent States to their constitutional relations in the Union will be removed. If the people in the rebellious States can be made to understand that it is the fixed and determined polic of the Government that the colored people in all be protected in their civil 1866. 323 rights, they themselves will adopt the necessary measures to protect them; and that will dispense with the Freedmens Bureau and all other Federal legislation for their protection.The design of these bills is not, as the Senfrom Indiana would have us believe, to consolidate all power in the Federal Government, or to interfere with the domestic regulations of any of the States, except so far as to carry out a constitutional provision which is the supreme law of the land. If the States will not do it, then it is incumbent on Congress to do it. But if the States will do it, then the Freedmens Bureau will be removed, and the authority pro"posed to be given by the other billwill have no operation. Sir, I trust there may be no occasion long to exercise the authority conferred by this bilig. I hope that the people of the rebellious States themselves will conform to the existing condition of things. I do not expect them to change all their opinions and prejudices. I do not expect them to rejoice that they have been discomited. But they acknowledge that the war is over; they agree that they can no longer contend in arms against the Government; they say they are willing to submit to its authority; they say in their State conventions that slavery shall no more exist among them. With the abolition of slavery all the badges of servitude which“ have been enacted for its maintenance and support. Let them anbe abolished. Let the people of the rebellious States now be as zealous and as active in the passage of laws and the inauguration of measures to elevate, develop, and improve the ne"ro, as they have hitherto been to enslave and degrade him. Let them do justice and deal fairlywith loyal Union men in their midst, and henceforth be themselves loyal, and this Congress will not have adjourned till the States whose inhabitants have been engaged in the rebellion will be restored to their former position in the Union, and we shall all be movingion in harmony together.