Mr. SHERMAN. Whenever loyal men present a State organization, complying with such terms and conditions and tests of loyalty as you may prescribe, and will send here loyal representatives, I would admit them; and when ever rebels send or come here I would reject them. The President in his veto message, to which I intend to refer presently, states this point as strongly and as well as I can make it, and I will read it in reply to the honorable Senator: “ I hold it my duty to recommendto you, in the Interests of once and in the interests of UnionI the admission of every State to its sharein public legislation, when, however insubordinate, insurgent or rebellious its people mayhave been.it presents itself not only in an attitude of loyalty and harmony, but in the persons of representatives whose loyalty can not bequestioned under any existing constitutional or legal test." Define loyalty in your own terms; show that you have at least a generous appreciation of the position of these men; prescribe what on call a loyal man, if you choose; and then when these loyal men send here loyal men who can be tested by your oath or by any other mode or manner you choose to prescribe, let them come, in the name of God and humanity, and share our councils as they have shared our hearts; and I believe it is the irritation occasioned by this dela that has caused much of the excitement in the mind of. the President. You may say that the Presidents idea of loyalty is not yours, and you may differ upon that. Why do you not define your idea of oy alty, and send it to him, and if it meets his approval, well? If not, then he makes an issue with Congress, and then you can fight it out; but until then you cannot. VeTO MESSAGE. Now, Mr. President, I come to the veto message. It is well known that I not only voted for the freedmens bill, butI voted foritagainst the Presidents veto. I would vote for it over and over again. I considered it carefully; I find nothing in it but what I can approve; and I am surprised that an one who is willing to support the present freedmens Bureau is not wi ling to vote for this modification of it; but I do not wish to discuss at any length its merits. The honorable Senfrom Illinois, in an elab orate and very able speech, has exhaustedthe whole subject. I am willing to let the veto of the President, with the answer of the Senfrom Illinois, go to the people of the country, and upon that I am wiling to defend my vote at an time and at all times. But what then? The POTUS has constitulional powers and rghts; he has the same duty imposed upon him to vote for or against that bil that rests upon any of us. The Constitution declares that every bill shall Ibfe submitted for his approval or disapproval. he does not approve it he sends it back, and i“t is nothing more nor less thana vote by him of no" against the passage of that bill. e sends it back with his reasons. Suppose those reasons are not sufficicnt. That is a question that he must judge as well as you. He alleges that this bill is unnecessary, and I must confess that a recent construction put upon the bill through Gbneral Howard very muc takes away from the immediate necessity for its passage. I supposed myself that the original Freedmens Bu reau bill expired by its own limitation in May, 1866, because I so posed that the President considered the rebellion as over in May last. He certainly did as to Tennessee. I supposed that the year of the duration of that bill after the war would commence, say some time in May, 1865, and therefore there was immediate necessity to supply some temporary act by which the freedmen in the southern States should be protected. It seems that in that we mistook the construction of the President, and I have here before me the order recently issued by GenlHoward, in which he says that“ The President has assured the Commissioner that he regards the present law ascontinuing the existenceof the bureauat least a year from this time.” That is, as no proclamation has been issued fixing the termination of the rebellion, until one year after that proclamation the present Freedmens Bureau continues. If so, we have all the benefit of that system under the care of the most excellent manager of it now for one year for the protection of the freedmen. There are but very few powers couferredin the 2nd bill that are not included in the 1st. TIhtchrinek are 3 sections of the 2nd bill that ought to be passed in the form of a law. One provides for the poor negroes on the lantations set apart by GenlSherman fort em. It did seem to me that it was but reasonable and right for us to secure to them a military possession for a short period of time. They came into possession of that property lawfully under military rule; they were placed upon it when it was abandoned by its owners, and when its owners were fihting this Government. Their title was legal, their possession was legal; and I say there was nothing but a reasonable condition that you should not turn them out without at least 2 years preparation. I could see no objection to that. It is true the expense of a Free mens Bureau may be iar e; but how can we help that? We have ourselves, in pursuance of our policy, emancipated the slaves; and whether it costs much or little, we are bound to ease their way from a condition of servitude to a condition of assured freedom. I tell ou the people of Ohio do not care as to that. Whatever is necessary to be expended for this great purpose they are willing to pay their share. ll hile they are reasonally economical in all questions, yet when it comes to the question of takin care of a race of people whiom we ourselves have emanncipatd, they are willing to bear their share of the burden. he 6th section of the bill, I must confess, seemed to me rather arbitrary; I refer to the power given to the President to buy lands at pleasure and without limit. I was disposed to vote to strike that out; but as the whole sys tem was a tem orary one, I did not believe the power would O abused by GenlHoward, and I trusted the President. I was willin to vote for it with that clause in but that is neither here nor there. He had the right to veto it. What he says about taxation without representation I look upon very much like a stump speech that had no pertineucy to the veto. That we have the power to lo islute for the southern States is admitted by t 10 President himself. In all the proclamations to which I have re ferred he by terms extends the Treasury laws over the southern States. He has admitted over and over again our power to legislate for these States by a proving and indorsing and ratifying laws we have sent to him; and therefore all he said about taxation I look upon merely as one of those make weights in an argument that with the people would not have any material influence. I he meant by that part of his veto message simply to say that as a general principle of American constitutional law every coplle who are affected by laws passed by congress should be represented, I say that is right; but there are excetions to that as there are to eve other ru e. We legislate for the people of this District and they do not vote and cannot have the right to vote. We will not even let them be heard here. We legislate for the Territories and do not give them the right to vote. We legislate for foreigers, who are not represented here, except indirectly, and who have no political power. We legislate for the women an children of our country, who have no vote. We legislate for a great many people who do not vote. The are all inferentially represented, but not directly re presented by members of their own choice. herefore I regard this part of the veto message simply surplusage not to be considered, but whether it is considered or not I am willin to stand by that bill; and let me say, sir, that if any POTUS, I do not care whether it is AndrewJohnson or his successor, shall fail or neglect to protect from lawless violence the men who have been freed by this Government in the operations of war, that man will be cursed forever and forever. Our obligation to protect them is even more sacred than to protect the white people. My Democratic friends may think that is a very strong expression, but the reason is this: the white people can take care of themselves; thoy have been trained for generations as freemeu; they will defend an maintain their rights; you cannot hold them in slavery. All the powers of hell could not keep in slavery the American people who have once tasted the sweets of freedom. But it is different with the freed people of the southern States. They are very poor, helpless, dependent upon our bounty and our protection, and are there in the presence of their masters who hate them because they have lost their services. We dare not trust their protection to the white people of the southern states, because we know the instinctive prejudices that govern and control in the southern States. I clieve, and I will take the President at his word when he tells me, that his earnest desire is to protect them in all their rights. In the very veto message in which he sends back the measure we sent him, he tells us in most une quivocal terms“I share with Conmss the strongestdesireto secureto the freedmen the full enjoyment of their freedom and property, and their entire independence and equality in making contractsfor their labor." Then he goes on and states his objections to the bill. While he stands by that declaration, while he protects the freed people of the southern States, I will not quarrel with him about the means. Let him fail to do that, and I will denounce him as freely and as bitterly as any Senator on this floor. wan res exios run r venues or run PRESIDENT Mr. President, I feel that I have already detained the Senate too lon, but there are some other observations which I shall take this occasion to make so that I may not hereafter feel called upon to trouble the Senate on these various questions of reconstruction. In my judgment, the Union party of the U.S., whose representatives we are, demand both of the President and of Congress grave and important duties. I do not think either of us can avoid the fair performance of these duties by any excuse or equivocation. What they demand of the President, who accepted the nomination of the Union party, and w, o is the agent and representative of the Union party, and who is bound in honor to carry out its principles, is a faithful observance of the principles upon which he was elected. I look u pon the common declaration either of a Presicut or a member of Congress that he is the representative of the whole people, and is not under any obligation to the men who elected him as as false in honor and false in principle. The President, it is true, is POTUS, but he is the chosen representative of the Union party of the U.S and he is under obligations to that party which he cannot in honor de. art from. Now, sir, a debt of honor iseven a higher obligation than a debt which can be enforced in a court of law, simplybecause it rests upon honor alone. No Hebt can be of higher honor than that which the representative owes to the constituents who elected him. I think therefore that we have a right to expect that the POTUS shall fulfill his promise upon which he was elected, that he would do al he could to make treason odious and to punish traitors. There is a growing feeling in the public mind that he is forgettin this cardinal principle of his early proclaimed policy. We have a right to expect that in the various Depts and agencies of this Government he shall exercise the power intrusted to him through those men who aided and contributed to his election. He is bound as a principle of honor to select as the agents of the Government those who shared with him the political feeling that gave rise to his election. They are numerous enough to form the foundation of any Administration and if he seeks fellowship, counsel. aid, or association from or with those who either took up arms in the recent contest, or who, regard:ing the war a failure, would have passively yielded to rebels, he commits that offense from which no man occupying his high position can or will recover. Tolerance of opinion within a political party is indispensable and choice of agents within it is a necessity, but it must be a grave exigency that will justify a betrayal of those by and through whom we obtain trust and power. The Union party, in my judgment, is the most powerful political organization that has ever controlled the Government of this count. Darin the last fall it carried every one of the so ca led northern States northern no more, I be e. The Legislatures of all those States are in a harmony with the Union party. Nine out of ten of the soldiers who carried our flag are adherents of the Union party and sustained us at the election as the did in the field of battle. The great body of the officers who led the soldiers through all the perils of war are of the same feeling. The great Union party is a sound, conservative, healthy political Organization demanding only of its agents what is reasonabie and right. I think its members demand, and have a right to demand, of Mr. Johnson a strict, earnest, faithful adherence to the principles which led to his selection as a candidate or the Vice Presidency, and placed him side by side with the lamented Lin oln; and they demand of him trust and confidence in those who placed him in power. WHATIT DEMANDSOF CONGRESS and sir, this party demands of Congress some tings. also. It demands of Congress a prom t restoration of some of the rebel States, or at cast a prompt plan of restoration of the rebel States. If on account of their present condition any of these States cannot yet come into the Union; if because they are still rebellious, or will not in spite of our laws select men who have not stained their hands with the blood of our countrymen, let them stay out. While the State of Georgia or any other State of the South can find no citizen within her bosom to represent her except those who, more almost than all others are responsible for the blood that has been sed in the recent war, I will never vote for the admission of its Representatives or Senators. They must 1st show by their conduct an obedience to the law. Among the laws that stood on the statute book when they were the force to which they appealed was that law which prescribed a test oath; and I, for one, will never yield that test oath to enable any man whose hand is stained with the blood of my fellow countrymen to take a seat on the floor of the Senate. But, sir, I am desirous to see some mode by which loyal men from the southern States, in States that are organized on a secure and safe basis, may be romptly admitted on this floor. The people of) the U.S. demand of Congress some such plan and that rightspeedily, and they demand a change of the asis of representation. By the revisions of the Constitution of the U.S. there are 4 million people of the southern States who, denied all political rights, will still be re presented in Congress, and the strange anoma y will re sent itself of these rebel States, who have one all they could to overthrow the Government coming back here with increased political power. I think that our constituents will emand of us that before they are admitted we shall have at least adopted a Inn by which the basis of representation may e put upon a secure and safe footing. Let us take some cases disclosed by the census tables and let us make a momentary comparison. The State of Alabama has a total population of 964, 201; she is entitled upon the asis of representation to 7 Representatives; butt e State of Alabama has only 435, 080 white people who exercise any political power. The State of Wisconsin has a poulation of 774, 710, or nearl twice as many whiite people as the State of labama, and yet unless you change the basis of representation, Alabama will come back here with 7 Representatives while Wisconsin has but 6. So with Virginia and Illinois. Virginia has a total population of 1, 696, 318, and a white population of only 1, 047, 411, while Illinois has a white population of 1, 704, 323, or nearly twice as many as the State of Virginia; and yet unless there is some change in the Constitution, Virginia will come back with 12 Representatives while Illinois has but 13. I might go through the list. This is a condition of inequality to which our people will not submit new when they have the power to remedy it. The honorable Senfrom Pennsylvania [Mr. Bucustaw] the other day in a very ably prepared arglument demonstrated, as I think, very clearly that the inequality of representation in the Senate is even still more marked than this; but he must remember that that inequality is beyond the power of recall; that no change can be made in that respect except either by revolution or by a national convention. Be sides, this inequality of representation in the Senate does not really amount to very much, for the reason that the small States are mainly distributed side by side with the large States, and they have a community of interest with the large States. I have myself watched the vote upon the various propositions to see whether this inequality of representation of States in the Senate as operated hard, and I find almost always the large and small States mix and mingle in their votes. It very rarely makes any difference, as whenever the popular majority carries the HoRep that same popular majority carries the Senate. This in equality, while it cannot be changed, really does but little harm. The only section of which any complaint can fair] be made is NewEng land, where a group 6 small States stand together, and sometimes have peculiar interests of which they are very tenacious; but the West ra idly growing into giant power, strengthenm by new States every year, and where there is a community of interests of great States and small States the eat West can soon hold NewEngland in c eck whenever she unduly avails herself of her unequal political power here. THE BASIS Of RePBISINTATION VOTIBS Mr. President, the real question of difficulty is how this change in the asis of representation shall occur. The committee of 15 have reported a plan that I shall probably vote for, but I must express my preference for another. I do it now, so that I shall not take up the time of the Senate hereafter. In my judgment the true basis of representation in this country is voters. I know this was discussed in the other House, and I have read the debate there, but the result was not satisfactory to me. Allthe objections that have been made to that system were objections that might be easil obviated and easily answered. Suppose the asis of representation was the very one suggested by AndrewJohnson, that all men above the aeof 21 years, citizens of the U.S., who by the laws of the respective States are entitled to vote shall be the basis of representation. What then? What is the objection to thatplan? It is simple, uniform, applying to all sections without any appearance of legislating against a particular interest or a particular sectiOn. It is fair, manly, and honorable. The true basis of representation are men who cast the votes. All the others who stand outside of this circle are voted for by the voters and are represented by the voters. But one of the objections made to this plan is that in the border States by their laws they exclude a large portion of their population from voting on the ground of disloyalty, having taken share in the rebellion. suppose they do; suppose Maryland has exclude 1/3rd of her population because they were rebels, ought the loyal men of Maryland to vote for those rebels? hether they are excluded on acccount of color or crime they are equally to be excluded from the basis of representation, and this argument, which applied only to a narrow interest and of a temporary character which will soon disappear by the march of events, is now made to stand in the way of a just and fair basis ofrepresentation. So it is said that in the State of NewYork where there is a large reponderance of foreigners, the State of NewYork will lose, because foreigners not bein voters will not be counted. Suppose it is, won d not that be right? Foreigners are not citizens, but may become such. They pass through apupilage and then are citizens and may be counted. Because they happen to have the most of them in NewYork is that a reason why they should be included in the basis of representation? The States ought not to look upon this question as it effects their own particular interests for the time, but as a question of equality, of right, and of justice in the Electoral College and the HoRep. So of NewEngland. It is said that NewEngland will lose something because she has a great number of beautiful women and children more than she has men. That is true; but I ask you, Mr. President, yourself a distinguished representative from NewEngland, where the men are who represent these women? They are the best bloo of your country who go west ward and there soon give tone to society, and come back here to represent themselves and the mothers and sisters and kindred they left behind. NewEngland is at this moment not only represented fiy her 12 Senators, but by 6 or 8 more who are sons of NewEng land who moved to the West and carried with them their religion, their principles, and in some cases theirwives, or where theydid not we provided wives for them. They came back are as Senators, and now stand here to vote NewEngland ideas and NewEngland principles. Suppose NewEngland should lose a member or 2 because the young men have gone West, are her women and children unrepresented I No, sir, they are represented by men from every State in the Union. I say, therefore, that this rule, proposed 1st I believe by Professor Leiber, is in my jud gment the fairest basis of representation. lhat a change of the basis is emanded there can he no doubt. This in my opinion is the best propposition, but I do not profess to be among the impracticables, and i I cannot get what want I am willing to take that proposition which was reported from the committee of 15, which does at least take away that singular feature by which the South would gain representation by the rebellion. UNIVERSAL SUFFRAGE. Sir, perhaps I ought not to say an hing further in regard to a proposition made y the Senfrom Missouri, [RIa Haxnnnsoxd so eloquently and ably defended and maintained in a long and elaborate oration by the Senfrom Massachusetts, that we ought now to start de novo, to go back to 1st principles and base representation on population, and take away from the States the power to fix the qualification of voters, and proclaim that nobody should be excluded from voting on account of color. It has always seemed to me best to attempt that which is attainable; and when I say to you that no man can really believe that we can kee these States out from representation here until we can educate the people of the U.S. up to a change of their Constitution so as to compel any State to adopt negro suffrage, it is a proposition so clear thatI need scarcely discuss it. If we propose to exclude those 11 States from the Iliiion until we can compel 3/4ths of all the States to vote for negro suffrage, then these 11 States will be a Hun gary, a Poland, an Ireland, to be ruled over by the military rod for years to come. You may depend upon it the people of the U.S. will not acquiesce in that demand. They will not waste their ener ies and their money in enforein so impossible a proposition. Therefore, without goin into its merits, I say it is simply proposing that which we cannot adopt. I beg Senators not to let the protection that is due to the negroes of the southern States depend u n the narrow foundation of a congressiona enactment. Suppose you were to pass the law proposed by the Senfrom hiassachusetts, how long would it remain on the statute book, in the mutations of parties in this country, where nothing is more unstable than party power, especially where no great principles are immediatel at stake? How long would it be before a ominant majority in congresswould re eal your law, and then you would have wasted a l your power to change the basis of representation on to protect the freedmen of the southern States? Vhat I desire now is to secure a just and fair basis of representation so that the South may have a reasonable share of political power, no more, no less. Then after their representatives have been tried by the tests of loyalty that you may prescribe let them be reasonable, moderate, kind, for bearing then I hope to see these States come backinto their old places in the Union, shorn of their treason, shorn of their power; equal with us, no better, no worse; white men and white women and white children, on the same foot in, side by side, acting in harmony with each other in adoptinglegislation for the good of our great country. LET us an ironies ire. such is my view of the subject, and although I shall probably take no part in the debate upon it, but will votefor almost any basis of re re sentation that changes the present one, do say it is the dot of Congress to adopt some mode by which the basis of representation may be put upon a safe foundation. Sir, the people of the U.S. new demand of us wisdom and moderation. This is not the time for extreme counsels. It is not the time to attempt great reforms and works. We have just gone t rough a terrible war, with an overwhelming debt staring us in the face. We have to tax our people to a greater extent than the have ever been taxed before. We have comp icated political relations growing out of the condition of the southern States. Do the best we can, we shall have trouble and contention and strife. We know that lawlessness and crime are spreading with giant footsteps all over the southern States. We know that the race that we have redeemed from bondage is now held in fierce terror all over the South. We know that we owe them protection, and we are bound to protect ourselves against undue power of traitors in the southern States. We have to guard our councils against the machinations of traitors here and elsewhere. I say now is no time to quarrel with the Chief Magistrate of the U.S., unless we are compelled to do so by his base betrayal of the obligations be imposed upon himself when he became our candidate. It is a time for moderation and for wisdom. Sir, I would not plead for it, but I believe it is absolutely necessary, not only for our existence as a party, but for our existence as a nation. Ifear testorm. I fear struggles and contentions in these 11 States, unless there is some mode by which the local power of those States maybe put in loyal hands, and by which their voices may be heard here in council and in command, in deliberation and debate as of old. They will come back here shorn of their undue political power, humbled in their ride, with a consciousness that one man bred)under free institutions is as good at least as a man bred under slave institutions. I want to see the loyal people in the South, if they are few, trusted; if they are many, give them power. Prescribe your conditions; but let them come back into the Union upon such terms as you may prescribe. Open the door for them. I hope to see some great spectacle of punishment, some grand tribunal erected to try, not merely JeffersonDavis, but in his person to try the rebellion, to condemn it before the civilized world; the sentence to be recorded in the pages of history, not as the sentence of death merely against “ an old man broken with the storms of state, ” but as the ignominious sentence of a free people against the worst rebellion ever inflicted on mankind. But that over I do hope that without more bloodshed, of which we have had enough, we may see har mony restored in this great Union of ours; that all these States and all these territories may be here in council for the common good, and that at as speedy a moment as is consistent with the public safety. OHIOANDINDIANA. Before I conclude, allow me to read 2 sets of resolutions framed since we have been enEaged in this debate, and which receive my early approval: one passed by the Union party of the State oflndiana, and the other reported to the Union members of the Legislature of Ohio, and which, I believe, will receive their sanction. The Indiana Union convention passed the following resolutions: “ Resolved, That it is the province of thelegislative branch of the Government to determine the question of reconstruction and |n the exerciseof that power Congress shouldhave in view the loyalty of the people of those states.aud theirdcvotion to the Constitution and obedienceto the laws. Until the people of those states prove themselvesloyal to the Governmenttheyshou notbe restored to the rights enjoyed beforethe rebellion. “Resolved, Thnt no man who voluntarily participatedin the rebellion ought to be in Congress and under the admittedto a seat Constitution of the U.S.the powerto determine the qualifications requisite of electors rests With the States respect woIfemlved. That the Union of these States has not pirgicpnnotb. e dissolved exceptby successfulrevolu I now present and read kindred resolutions reported to the Union members of the Ohio Legislature recently by a committee of their own number: “Resolved, That the President, Andrew Jchnson. in demandingof the revolted States the repeal of their ordinances of secession the repudiation of their robel war debts, and the adoption of the amendment of the Constitution abolishing slavery beforehe wouldmth draw the militarycontrol of the provisional governments, wisely inaugurated the necessary measures of reconstruction. that can only be completed by congressand the Statesby the adoption of a further constitutional amendment apportion in representation in congress among the States accoring to the numbers o hose classes thereof who. by the laws of such States, have a voicein such representatipn: and that while the safetyof the nation and justice to all its parts require that these States should be only with such representation, wodeemit ine admitted an unnecessary topressuponthem edient to other conditions a full restoration to their place and rights in the m" en. Remloecl.That wedeem it. the duty of Congressto provide by just and prudent but effective legislation for the protectionof the freedmen. "Resolved, That we respectfully and earnestly urge upon Congressnnd the president to waive extreme opinions, and that in the discharge of the great trust confidedto them by the nation they harmoniously provide for us the ways of future concord and the moderatebut effectualmeasuresof a.lasting reconstruction.” I Will also read from a private letter which I have received from a distinguished citizen of my State, expressing an opinion in which I heartily COHCIJI 2 “Our party is new in the hour of its trial, and it needsto gain strength by prudence rather than prodigally wasted by the very extravagance of rashness. We can nevermaintain ourselves agaipstthe President or a nybndyalso upon a policy of indefinite and unconditioniil exclusionof the southern States establishipg a Iungary or Poland in the midst of the Republic. We must rather, in m Judgment, offer immediate admission to the rebel tales upon terms clear.distinct and announced, and show to our people that it is not revengebut safety that we want. nfisniiii. I have thus, Mr. President, endeavored to show that to this hour no act has been done by the President inconsistent with his obligations to the great Union party that elected him. Differences have arisen, but they have arisen upon new questionanot within the contemplartion of either the Union party or the Union people when the President was nominated. I have also shown that he has acted in pursuance of a policy adopted by Mr. Lincoln, and approved by the people, and that no event has yet transpired that Will preclude him from n eaity cooperation with the great mass of the Union party in securing to the count the object for which we conducted successfully a great war. That events have transpired, that utterances have been made tending in that direction, no one will deny. The surest evidence is in the joy of the worst enemies of the country over our divisions. I find in a recent paper this significant para graph: democratie demonstration at Dru Yon. Darren. Ouio. Frbruan 20. The Democracyof Dayton had ajolliflcation over President Johnsons veto of the Freedincns Bureau bill this afternoon firing 100 guns. Mr. Vallandigham made a brief speech, saying the Do mocrncy did not elect President Johnson. but it is now their duty to stand by him. He announceda massmeetin in future for exultation. A flag floats from Mr. Viilandighains window.