Mr. Speaker, much is said, much has been said too much, sometimes, has been said about the difference between Congress and the Executive of the nation. Sir, I look upon this subject in a somewhat different light from some of m friends whose superior wisdom I am proud to acknowledge. feel that under our Government we owe some deference to the station of the POTUS; and I feel that, however we may differ in sentiment with the incumbent of that high office, we ought, at all times and under all circumstances, to treat him respectfully. Hence I would have preferred, from the 1st hour of this Congressto the last, that there should have been no personal abuse of the incumbent of the presidential chair. I honor my friends for standing up maufully to their own opinions. There is a difference between the President and Congress; and, as I conceive, that difference amounts to this: the mujority in Congress believe that it would be prejudicial to the best interests of our government and nation to receive back, immediately and unconditionally, the men who were latelyin rebellion. I believe this, as I believe any other great truth which was ever set before my mind for belief. I have no doubt upon the subject. Hence I cannot but be snr rised that a gentleman who has one throngi the rugged experience of the POTUS should be willing and ready to trust these men now without having some of these guarantees which we are insisting upon. It is a difference of policy, as gentlemen say. Let it be a difference of policy. We will admit that our policy is to receive back these rebellions States with suitable guarantees. It is the policy of the POTUS, in the faiththatthey will conduct themselves loyally and properly, to receive them without these guarantees. I su.pose these to be the respective systems of policy of the President and of Congress. While we maintain steadfastly what we believe to be the rights of the legislative branch of this Government, while we adhere firmly to our opinions and go on legislating for such measures as we suppose the public good demands at our hands, and do it firmly, decidedly, independently, may we not, at the same time, do it without casting personal reproach upon or indulging in personal abuse of the incumbent of the presidential chair? Sir, I believe I have the character among my constituents of being suffieiently radical for all useful purposes. I am prepared to vote here with my party friends, side by side with him who goes or the most extreme measures, but at the same time I deny the necessity of usingpersonal firvectives toward the Executive of the nation or the heads of the Depts. It cannot be necessary. It is not justifiable. We have all business to transact for our constituents with the President and the Depts. We must necessarily be brought into contact with them, and we expect to be received and treated by them as gentlemen. Why cannot we speak of them without indulging in vilification and abuse I I have already said that, believing in the wisdom, patriotism, and sagacity of the committee which has reported the measures under consideration, I shall avail myself of their praiseworthy labors and shall vote for one and all of their propositions. I am content to take the whole of them, and hope they will be put through both branches of Congress, so that the people may see that we have a policy as well as the President.