Mr. BROOMALL. It is not my intention to make any extended remarks upon the subject now before the House, but rather to intimate an amendment which I propose to offer at the propertime, should that time arrive, to the proposition introduced into this House by the JtComReconstruction. On the 2nd day of the present session I had the honor to introduce one of the provisions which went to the committee that reported this JtResolution. It was the mode most in accordance with my predilections then, as it is now, of the 2 presented for our choice. I preferred then, as] prefer now, the proposition basing representation upon the actual voters. But I have so earnest a desire that the object which we all have in view shall he attained that I am willing to relinquish that predilection and go for an amended form of the proposition rought before this House by the JtCommee, if I can obtain it. If that cannot be done, then I will go for the proposition itself. I can, therefore, with the hotter grace urge upon the members of this House the reconciling of the various views presented here, and our uniting upon something, because I am willing thus to waive my own preferences and advocate a proposition based upon a digerent principle than that embraced in my own. Of the 2 modes presented here for our consideration, the 1st is embraced in the amendment of the Gentfrom Ohio, [Mr. Sonsnox] and which is similar to the one I myself introduced, to base representation upon actual voters. Now, it appears to me that that would be a fair mode for basing representation. It is true it might possibly work injustice between the eastern and western States, in consequence of the greater reponderance of persons under full age and offemalcs in the eastern States over the western States, and it is possible that that consideration alone ought to induce us to adopt the proposition of the committee or something like it. But I am by no means sure that the Last is entitled to count its women and children in its basis of representation unless it gives them a voice in the Government, any more than the people of SCarolina ought to count their negroes without giving them a voice in the Government. But I am not here now to advocate that provision. As I have said, I have conclude to support the principle of the JtResolution now before the House, in a modified form, if I can succeed in having it modified. The resolution reported by the JtCommee is open to one or 2 objections or more, some o which have been urged upon this floor with a great deal of force. I will reiterate them, and then state in what manner Ipro ose to obviate those objections. The 1st o jection is that so ablyurged by the Gentfrom RhdIsland, [Mr. Jsn exssfl that the people of the South, with their present animus, may reach the same result which we say they shall not no complish, by excludin no races, no colors as such. For example, tiicv may exclude all who do not own 1,000 acres of land or its equivalent in other property. This would reduce the number of actual voters in SCarolina to a more fraction of their population and yet the remedy proposed by the committee would not diminish their representation here. That is to my mind a serious objection. Another objection has been stated by the Gentfrom Ohio, RMr. Susansusnonm] who 1st addressed the louse on this subject yesterday. That is that by the provision “ that whenever the elective franchise shall be denied or abridged in any State on account of race or color, ” we seem to invite the people of the South to act upon our hint to continue to exclude people on account of race or color, and even go beyond that and exclude them on other grounds not embraced within the provisions of the resolution of the JtCommee. Now, I am not willing, if I can avoid it, to give any vote upon this floor that will ever consent to the principle that States may disfranchise entire races of men and yet if the resolution cannot he amended in that particular, I say again that my vote shall be cast in its favor. Another objection pointed out by the Gentfrom Ohio [Mr. Scusx ex] is that the proposed amendment excludes all of a race until the last one of that race shall be eufranchised; that is to say, if the people of the South choose to impose an educationa naliiication upon the electivefianchise among the negroes, by which all the negroes shall be permitted to vote but one 10th of them, the revision of the committee will exclude not only that one 10th, but the other 9 10ths also. This might or might not be a serious objection, according to the disposition and mind of particular viewers of it, to punish or not punis these populations of the South. To my mind it is some objection; and yet I have no very eat desire that they should avoid properpunisment for the crimes they have committed, or that they should not endure the full consequences of the state of things they have brought upon the country and themselves. There is still another objection, and one not et alluded to by any gentleman on this floor. this this: the resolution provides that whenever the elective franchise sha lbe denied or abridged in any State on account of race or color, all persons of such race or color shall be excluded mm the basis of representation. Now, there is a great deal of indefiniteness in both those terms, “race” and “color.” What is arace of men? Writers upon the subject of races differ very materially on this point. Some of the m would make 4 or 5 races; others 15; and one whom I might name seems inclined not to limit the number short of 1,000. I mvself am inclined to think that the Celtic race is a distinct one from ours. I think that any gentleman who has studied this subject attentively will at least have doubts whether or not the race that up cars to have inhabited Europe in the early giiSiOPIC cried, and has been partly dispossessed there y ours, isnot a distinct race from ours. Again, the word “color” is exceedingl iu definite. If we had a constitutional stanard of color, that of sole leather, for example, by which to test the State laws upon this subject, there might be less danger in incor crating this provision in the constitution. but the term “color” is nowhere defined in the constitution or the law. We apply the term to persons who are of African descent, whether their color is whiter or darker than ours. Every one who is filmiliarwith the ethnological condition ofthings here in the U.S.States, and who sees the general mixing up of colors, particular] in the eine cratic portion of the country I lude to that portion south of Mason and Dixons line must say with me that the word “ color” has no very distinct meanin when applied to the different peoples of the U.S.A. Now, these several objections are more or less formidable. If anyone of them or all of them united should prevent 2/3rds of the members of this House from voting in favor of the measure, I am sure the committee would be content to modify it so as to avoid these objections and I have in in hand an amendment in the nature of a substitute for the entire resolution, which I propose to offer upon the proper occasion. I will ask the Clerk to read my proposition, alter which I will point out how it obviates the difficulties which I have suggested and which other gentlemen on this floor have so ably enforced.