Mr. SHERMAN. Senators will bear me witness that during this whole debate I have sat rather as a spectator than as a articipant. I have desirednot to commit myselftoo hastily upon any of the questions discussed, but to reserve m opinion and to act and vote understandin y without feeling or prejudice or passion. t was after full reflection that I voted for the 2 bills that have been so harshly characterized by the Senfrom Kentucky. I listened with some surprise to the remarks made by him the other day. He evinced a degree of feeling thatl thought was entirely uncalled for., I have uothiulg to say in remrd to the present position of entuclly and, Indiana, and the remark made by the Senfrom Indiana; and yet it is true that Kentucky at all periods of this war has been full of reels; that 100s and 1,000s of our brave soldiers have been killed by Kentucky rebels. It is also true that Kentucky has furnished brave Union soldiers and brave Union men. But Kentucky has probably furnished more men to the rebel army than any of the adhering States. The Senator will not deny that. Therefore, in legislating for the whole country we naturally do, sometimes, up ly rules to l ntuckythatwe do not apply to o! er States. e should not complain of this, because he has been from the be inning to the end of this war true and faith tul, loyal and obedient to the Government and to the laws. In the early portion of the war he certainly was ver active and efficient in aiding our troops and oing all he could to maintain the Government, and I believe has sustained that position from the beginning to the end. But e will remember also that his fel lowcitizens of Kentucky gave us more trouble than probably the same number of rebels in any portion of the country. Either because of their spirit, their devotion to their cause, or from the fact thatthey were Far North, occuping a strong military position, the rebels in entncky were the most dangerous rebels in the country, and, therefore, in legislatingagainst rebltels, we naturally look to the rebels of Kentuc y. The only reason whyI rose at this late period of the debate was to remove the impression from the minds of those around me of the character of the 2 bills that have been before us. I look upon this Freedmens Bureau bill as simply a temporary protection to the freedmen in the southern mtes. We are bound by every consideration of honor, by every obligation that can rest upon any eo le, to protect the freedmen from the rebe s of the southern States; ay, sir, and to protect them from the loyal men of the scat ern States. We know that on account of the prejudices in stilled by the system of slavery pervading all parts of the southern States, the southern people will not dojnstice to the freedmen in tiiose tutes. We know that in the course of the war these freedmen have been cmaneiputed that they have aided us in this conflict; and therefore we are bound by every consideration of honor, of faith, of public morals, to protect and maintain all the essential incidents of freedom to them. I have no doubt that in doing this we shall encounter the prejudices not only of rebels, but of loyal men; but still the able gation and guarantee is none the less bindin on us. We must maintain their freedom, and with it all the incidents and all the rights of freedom. With no other desire but to maintain this gnar autee, I have read this bill several times with a sincere desire to ascertain, if I could, if there were any serious objections to it, with a view to their amendment, and to remove the objections made by the Senfrom Kentucky and other s; but I can see nothing in it but an agency in the hands of the President, completely in his power and under his control, to maintain the freedom of the negro of the southern States. TheSenator says he as at confidence in the President; So have I. o singleact can be done under this Freedmens Bureau bill without the sanction of the President. Every officer under it is to be appointed by the President; every: 1 eat is to be appointed by the President. The whole bill is a mere machine in the hands of the president to maintain the freedom and the rights of the freedmen. As to the other bill about which so much complaint was made by the Senfrom Kentucky the other day, what was it? The 1st section of the bill simply declared that a negro emancipated by the constitutional amendment is a citizen of the U.S. I believe he was a citizen of the U.S. before if he was free; but to remove allambiguity or doubt about it this provision was inserted in that bill, and I think wisely. A portion of the same section, orperhaps the 2nd section of the hill, defines what are the incidents of freedom, and says that. these men must be protected in certain rights, and so careful is it in its language that it goes on and defines those rights, teright to sue and be sued, to plead and be imleaded, to acquire and hold property, and other universal incidents of freedom. The honorable Senfrom Kentucky in his remarks the other day said that there was not a single one of these rights but what he believed Kentucky wouldenforce. If Kentucky enforces those rights, that is the end of the whole cott troversy so far as she is concerned; but if Kentucky, or any other State, should fail to enforce those rights, then we are bound to do it. But I ask the honorable Senfrom Kentucky, with all his knowledge of the feeling and excitement created by this contest, whether he is willing to trust the natural rights of these freedmen to the rebels of Mississippi, Alabama, and other southern States? I as him whether he is willing to hand over to the tender mercies of the white population of those States, the whole of whom were engagedin this rebellion, the care and custody of flitso freedmen, who were made free in spite of their resistance. in spite of their war? I think I know the heart of the Senfrom Kentucky too well to require an answer. He fears that this bill will affect the feelings of the people of Kentucky; but in legislating here we are bound not only to regard theirfeelings, but the enmity that pervades whole masses of the community in the southern States, and we are bound to protect these freedmen against the public sentiment and the oppression that will undoubtedly be thrown upon them by the people of the southern States. Some one sent me a newspaperthe other do from Mobile, Alabama, an could not rea that newspaper, said to be a loyal and friendly paper, without feeling convinced that the best of the southern people ought not to be intrusted with the care and custody of the freed population of the southern States. The character of the legislation that is proposed in several of those States shows that the people there are not in a temperor tone of mind to legislate for these freedmen, and we are bound to protect 1866. 74s them. The other features of that bill only provide the legal machinery by which these rights shall be secured to them; and the last section, which was most complained of, simply provides that the POTUS may, if he sees proper, call into play the military and naval forces of the U.S. to enforce these rights; so that the whole bill isa mere ninchine in the hands of the Executive. The whole Operation of the 2 bills about i which so much complaint has been made is simply to place the powers of this Government in the hands of the POTUS, to enforce to the freedmen of the southern States what the honorable Senfrom Kentucky says Kentucky ought to and will secure to the freedmen in that State. I as then, so far as these 2 bills are concerns, it is my deliberate judgment that there has been no infringement of the constitution, no oppression upon any portion of the people. They simply provide a way and manner in which the POTUS may, in the exercise of his constitutional power, protect the freedmen of the southern States from Oppression and wrong by loyal or disloyal peole. 1 do not intend to go into the discussion of the other question that is now pending before us involve in the constitutional amendment. Upon that question, also, I intend to reserve my opinion, and hear all that can be said about it. It is the gravest and most important question, as I think, that hasever been ebatedin the American Senate. But one thing I know, and which I can aflirm in the outset, that never by my consent shall these rebels gain by) this war increased political power, and come ack here towield that political poweriu some other form against the safety and integrity of the country.