Mr. SUMNER. I am coming to that. That brings me then to the statute, and he says the statute enumerates as the 1st in the class citizens of the U.S., and my honorable friend himself is obliged to confess that in his mind colored persons are citizens of the U.S. e does not doubt it. If he did, it would be or duty to remind him df that opinion given byt e AttyGen of the U.S. in the winter of 1861 62, only a few months after the adoption of this territorial statute, declarin that all colored persons are citizens of the U.S. I refer to that opinion with something more than res act, I refer to it with reverence. I do think, humbly speakin, that that opinion was one of the most remarkable and one of the grandest acts in the history of the late Administration. I do not doubt that hereafter when the annals of these times come to be written, the historian will dwell with honest pride upon that opinion where one man as it were reversed the whole policy of the State. By that opinion be listed the law of this country forever: that all colored persons are citizens of the U.S and lint Opinion was emphatically the law of this distant Territory. It Was the law of Colorado. The Senfrom Illinois does not doubt it. Therefore when the Territorial Legislature inserted the words “citiZens of the U.S., ” it did not alter the case by a hairs breadth. The language was positive that all persons co112 vote without distinction of color. he Senuto s informed that no colored persons did vote. I have been in formed the contrar. But I insist that, beyond all question, by the territorial statute colored persons were a lowed to vote and this brings me to anotherquestion. “Then at a later ay, in 1864, the ena ling act was brought into the Senate, that act recognized positively the existing territorial statutes regulatin the franchise. cise wor 5: ll s, buy at the date of the passageof thisact, shall be qualified to boeleo ed; and they are hereby authorized to vote ior on chooserepresentativesto for a anwuntlon uurlrr such rules and regulations nsiihc ornor of sold Territory may prescribe." Therefore; sir, do I say that at the date of the enabling statute all persons in the Territory, without distinction of color, Were entitled to vote. The all had the electoral franchise constitutional y and legally. Is there anyone who can doubt it? The Senfrom Illinois cannot doubt it. He knows full Well that that is the Constitution and the law of the land. They Were all entitled to vote at the date of that enablin statute. I err when I say “ at the date of that enabling statute.” There was something1 like deception, if not fraud, that occuned etwoen the passage of that statute in this Chamber and its a proval by the Pros ident. The enablln act or the admission of Colorado passed the body, as I find by the Globe, Fe ruury 24, 1864. This ill omened territorial statute to which I have referred, which undertook to introduce the principle of exclusion, bears date March 11, 1864; that is, it was passed subsequent to the passage of the enabling act in the Senate. Therefore, when that enablin not passed this body, accordin to all the in ormation in our possession and according to the principles of the Constitution as expounded by the AttyGen, all colored persons were entitled to vote. I have been reminded by Senators that there is an inconsistency in having Sustained the enabling act and now in opposing the admission of this State. Sir, permit me to sa, there is no such inconsistenc; because at this time when that act passed the Senate, by that very enabling not al colored persons were entitled to vote. But I might go still further, and remind the Senatethnt it appears by the Globe, which I have before me, that this enabling not passed the Senate without discussion and without a division. It does not appear who was present in the Senate at the time it was acted upon. For myself, I may say I have no recollection of the vote that was taken, but I do hove a distinct recollection that I was informed that in the Territory of Colorado all persons, without distinction of color, were allowed to vote; and a recurrence to the statute which has been adduced on this occasion will show that I was right. It is vain for the Senfrom Illinois to remind us that in Colorado they did not consider colored persons citizens of the U.S. Constitutionally and legally they were citizens, and there was no power in Coloradopto deny them that citizenship. It was because there was no power there to deny them that citizenship that they undertook to set it aside by positive legislation.