Mr. LANE, ofIndiana. That is true; and if the Senator had waited one moment I should have so stated. I make no cha eof unfairness against the committee. The evidence is all reported, word for word; butthey misnpprehended the character of Governor Evanss testimony as the published facts will show to any candid mind. I have no doubt their report was perfectly fair. The report, however, charges governor Evans with prevaricution as a witness, in this: the charge was that the Cheyenne Indians wereafriendly tribe; that they had been brought to Fort Lyon under the invitation of Governor Evans and the Indian Bureau to make a treaty; and that they were set upon by a Colonel Chivington and murdered, men, women, and children, a char c well calculated to shock the moral sensibi ities of the whole people. The committee took it for granted, as it seems to me in their report that that charge was true; and because Governor Evans did not indorse the charge they accused him of prevarication. Now, what Were the facts, as shown by the report of the Indian Bureau and the SecyWar, which I have before me? Ifany Gentleman controverts what I say, I am prepared to prove every word that 1 shall say. u the 1st place, these Cheyenne Indians were not friendly Indians; they were at war with the people of the U.S.; they had. been enmgedinindise rimiuate slaughter, plunder, rob or Y, and murder upon the plains. To show that they were friendly Indians, the committee on the conduct of the war report the further fact that although they had 7 white prisoners with them the had purchased the prisoners. The roof to ten before the council is, that every prisoner had been taken from murdered trains upon the plains by the very men who had them, and there was no purchase in it. The committee assumed another fact, that Governor Evans offered a premium to the people of Colorado pto go out and soul Indians, men, women and children, frien y or uniriendl. I have the roclamation of governor vans here, wor for word, in which he expressly excludes all friendly Indians; and who else? All who had been invited to Fort Lyon to enter into treaty, where the massacre is said to have occurred. I have the further fact that Governor Evans was not in the territor at the time, and was no more responsible or that massacre than any member of this Senate. I have the further fact from the War Dept and the Indian Bureau thation be are this massacre Governor Evans ha. turned over the whole administration of Indian affairs in that Territo to the War Dept. As Governor of Colorado he was ea O do superintendent of Indian affairs; but on war broke out, when troops were se utto suppress Indian hostility, he very properly turned over the whole management of) Indian affairs to the War Dept, and Colonel Chivington was there, not under an order of his, but simply under the orders of the War Dept. He was in no way responsible for anything that happened at that massacre. He had not only the authority of the War Dept, but he had telegraphed to the ComrIndnAffr and resied the administration into the hands of the otheers sent there by the General Government. Now, you see the entire unfairness of an attack upon one of the Senators elect growing out of this state of things, and I am utterly astonished that the Senfrom Massachusetts, without having read these documents and lookedutthese facts, which are incontrovertible, should have gone out of the record to make an attack upon a Senator elect who has no right upon this floor to reply. I speak as an act of justice for one who has no right to speak for himself. I give voice to the dumb and voice to my sense of right and of duty in rebuking such an attack as this. I can see no possible reason for. it. Suppose there was a personal objection to one of the Senators elect, is that any reason why Colorado should not be admitted as a State? Try personal objections to the member when the member presents himself; but it does not in the slightest degree affect the right of Colorado pto a mission as a State upon this floor. I cannot see any possible object in it except as a mere make weight. The Senfrom Massachusetts, it seems to me, too, departed from his usual courtesy and prudence in another thing, when he said there were known and avowed arguments, and there were arguments whispered in this Chamber, that those men should be admitted because we needed their votes. Now, I know the Senfrom Massachusetts would not say that his fellow Senators, all of them, or anyone of them, would be influenced by an unworthy partisan motive to admit a State not entitled to admission simply to carry partisan measures. I know he would make no such charge. I have done but little whis ering since my wooing days were over, and speak here in language heard by all present. Vhatsoever I think to be right I avow it. I did say the other day that I should vote for the admission of Colorado for this, among other reasons, that they were organized upon a thoroughly loyal basis; and I shall vote in view of that very identical reason. If I thought they were organized upon a disloyal basis, I perhaps should not be quite so ready to admit them on this floor; neither, I am persuaded, would the distinguished Senfrom Massachusetts. They are organized on a loyal basis, and that, to in mind, is one reason why we should admitt em. We may need their votes; we may need the votes of loyal men; we shall need their votes, doubtless, before this great controversy is ever; and if they are entitled to admission on other grounds, that is surely no reason, to my mind, why they should be rejected, simply because they have been elected and their State has been organized on a loyal basis. The great controversy is transferred from the field of battle to this high Chamber, and we need votes and support here as much as we ever did durin" our military campaigns. I believe that Colorado should be admitted. I, shall vote to admit her for good and substan tial reasons, and among those reasons is the very fact that I regard her people as essen tial y and intensely and thorough y loyal. For no mere partisan purpose m purpose rises higher than party for the goodyolf the country, the safety of the country, and to prolong the lifetime of the nation, I wish loyal votes to be multiplied here. But the distinguished Senator, in order further to disparage this pamphlet of the Senators elect from Colorado, takes the ground that the surveyor general has said that agricultural interests cannot be successfully prosecuted in Colorado except by irrigation, and from that he argues that no reata ricultural population can ever exist in Colors 0. Does the history of the world prove that? Look at the agriculture of ancient Egypt, the granary of the world, 11 on which were built the great cities of Cairo, emphis, the bes, and Alexandria, which made that little peninsula the storehouse for the whole ancient world. Every grain raised and every vegetable sold there was the result of irrigation. That civilization which built those wou derful pyramids, the grandest concetions in architecture of human enius, which have out lived the mutations of 40 centuries and out lived even the memory of their founders, was based upon an agriculture the result of irriation. how was it with the agriculture upon ilie Euphrates, the original site of our civilization, perhaps the oriinal birthplace of the human mily; and Ba ylon, wonderful Babylon, with her hundred tes commanding the whole East for 500 years? All the agriculture that supported Babylon and the nations on the Eu hrates was the result of irrigation. The agriculture that built the great city of Mexico and that inaugurated acivilization, under Mon tezuma and his predecessors, higher in point of fact than the civilization of ilieir Spanish conquerors, was all the result of irrigation. The agriculture that sustained and built up the wonderful empire of the Incas, which resulted in those grand) temples dedicated to the wor ship of the sun at which scholars yet wonder, was all the result of irriation. Nor has that experiment failed here. he 100,000 people residing in the valley of the Salt Lake owe their daily bread to irrigation alone. Then supposing that irrigation may be necessary to develop the agricultural interests of Colorado, that is no reason why that cultivation should not be most eminently successful. I shall not refer to the “grasshopper” argument, because my distinguished friendfrom Nevada Bitir. NYE] has, I think, sufficiently bxhauste that subject. [Laughter] Mr. President, when I had occasion to address the Senate a few days since on this subject I gave very briefly my reasons for the admission of Colorado. I have not changed those reasons. Why is that admission opposed? Because there is not enough population there. That is a more matter of guess work and speculation; no one knows what the poulation amounts to, and each one comes to a iiferent conclusion. The mayor of Denver says the population is prohably 35 or 40,000 the Territorial legislature thinks it is as much as 50,000; some other gentlemen put it down at 25,000. Why do I vote, then, to admit them with this small population? Because even though they did not comply technically with the enabling act, they did comply substantially; and antin, in the language of the Senfrom iIassacEuse tts, that that enabling act is null and void and expired by its own terms, what had the people of colorado a right to infer from the passage of that act? That Congress was willing that they should organize a State governiiient; and although they did not comp y with the terms of the enabling act, States have been admitted without any enabling act at all; and we are so far bound at least by the passage of that enabling act, that it was an invitation to them to come, an intimation that their comingwould be welcome; and even though they had acted upon their own motion, taken their own plan and not ours, they had a right to infer that they would be welcome when they formed a State government. I suppose, however, the real objection is the word white” in this constitution. I have already said I should prefer that that word were not in the constitution of Colorado. I should prefer that that word was not in the constitution of any State in the U.S. But I will not vote to exclude Colorado simply because she does not permit negro suffrage. will not vote to exclude any of the rebel States simply because they do not permit negro suffrage. If I believe that they are essentially rigit and 10al in every other respect, and if they disfranc ise their rebel voters, I would not stand upon this qualiiication, because the whole practice of the government has been different. Vh is it necessary to strike out the word “white?” Because, we are told, it is in contravention of that provision of the Constitution which says that congress shall guaranty to each State in the Union a RFG. From the foundation of the government down to the present hour that interpretation of the Constitution has never for one moment obtained in Congress or in any other Dept of the Government. Every single Territory has been organized without questioning the right to determine the qualification of voters. very single new State has been admitted with the word “white” in its constitution. We have recognized them as republican in form for 3 uarters of a century. The grand triumphs of1 this country in 3 wars, and its grand improvement in material interests have all been brought out under this inter, pretation of the fathers that a State might be republican in form and still have the word “white” in it. I look forward in the future, and no distant future, when the force of public Opinion, mightier in this land than an army With banners, will strike the word “white” out, of every State constitutionbut I do not propose to make this a test in teease of Colorado when it has never been made a test in the case of any other State or Territory. I have no fancy for diing buckets into empty wells and grewing olil) drawing up noth in. I believe in a more practical statesman ship than that. Here you have a people of vast wealth and untold mining interests knockin at your doors for admission, with a full frame constitution and legally elected officers, claiming representation upon this floor, and representing from 30 to 50,000 people, and among that number there are, as I am told, some 70 or 80 negroes, all told; and because the negroes are not allowed to vote, they are not to be permitted to enter, and they are to be thrown across the pathway in the victorious march of this grand youiwern pire midway between the Pacific and the mississippi. We are to stop and have our hands tied because these 70 or 80 negroes are not permitted to vote. The distinguished Senfrom Massachusetts, as it seems to me, is still dipping buckets into empty wells, and will grow old drawing up nothin.