Mr. RAYMOND. Mr. Speaker, I have no intention of following the gentleman who has jut taken his seat [Mr. BaoouALI] in his discursive remarks upon the general question of reconstruction, nor have I any purpose of discussin the bill itself at any length, or with any amplication of argument in regard either to its general scope or to its details. Indeed, if it were not for the fact that I have taken the reponsibility of offering asubstitute for the bill as reported by the ComJudiciary, I should say nothing upon it at this stage of the discussion; foriam free to confess that I am not prepared to say anything upon it at all worthy of its eat importance. Whether we consider it by itself, simply as a proposed statute, or in its bearings upon the general question of the restoration of peace and harmonyto the Union, I regard it as one of. the most important bills ever presented to this House for its action, worthy in every respect to enlist the coolest and the calmest Judgment of every member whose vote must be recorded upon it. The bill proposes 2 things: 1. To declare who shall be citizens of the U.S., and to declare that all shall be citizens without distinction of race, color, or previous condition of servitude, who are, have been, or shall be born within the limits and jurisdiction of the U.S. 2. To provide for that class of persons thus made citizens protection against anticipated inequality of legislation in the several States. Both of these provisions are of the utmost possible importance. I am thoroughly and eartil in ever of both, and I shall vote for both i I can convince myself or if others can convince me that they fall within the powers conferred upon Congress by the Constitution and are demanded by the emergency of the occasion. I have endeavored to separate the 2, and in the substitute which I have offered I have endeavored to provide thoroughly by the assertion of a great fundamental principle for the attainment of the 1st of these oijects. The substitute which I have offered declares.That all lpersons born, or hereaften to be born. Within the muteand under the Jurisdiction of the U.S., shall be deemed and considered, and are hereby declared to be, citizens of the U.S and entitled to all rights and privileges as That is the enunciation of a great principle which ought, and which under ordinary circumstances would, secure to every citizen thus introduced into citizenship ample and full protection in all the rights guarantied to every other citizen. It is not worth while, indeed I have no desire, to conceal the fact that the special.object of that substitute, as indeed the special object of the bill, is to introduce into dmerican citizenship the 4 million persons inst emancipated from a condition of slavery. do not know that any bill is necessary for that purpose. I am inclined to think that none is necessary, that the moment the disabilities imposed upon them by the condition of servitude were removed, that moment the became, by virtue of that act, citizens of the U.S., and are today entitled to all the rights, privileges, and immunities of citizenship. But we all of us know that this pointhas been doubted, has been denied in courts, in legislative halls, and in the executive Dept of the Government. Ithas been asserted repeatedly, and decisions are on our records to that effect, that they are not citizens because they are of the African race. Now, sir, the proposition that I have introduced proposes to declare, in behalf of congress and by the exercise of whatever power belongs to congress to accomplish that purpose, that they are citizens, and shall he regarded as such from this time forward. Some question has been raised as to the power of congress to pronounce such a decision. It has been said that the only clause in the Constitution that confers upon Congress any power in regard to citizenship is that clause which empowers congress to establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and the point has been taken here that that meanssimply to provide for the naturalization ofaliens. I confess my mind has not been wholi clearas to the legal scope of that clause. I now that jurists of high repute and courts of great authority have thus restricted the meanin of the term “ naturalization.” But, sir, ift at he so, and if there be no other power conferred upon Congress to declare who shall be citizens of the U.S., it introduces a curious anomaly into our system of government. All the laws which Congress has made in regard to naturalization have in them the word “ white." They are confined in their operations to whites alone. Congress has up to this time passed no law for the naturalization of anybody but free white persons coming from a foreign country. Now, I so. pose no one doubts that congress might iave left out the word “whiteH if it had seen fit, and that Congress might today pass a law to naturalize any colored alien coming to our shores. I take it that is universally conceded. Now, if Congress may naturalize a colored alien and cannot naturalize a colored native, we have colored aliens enjoying advantages that native colored persons cannot enjoy; the one class may be made citizens by not of Congress and the other is absolutely debarred from it. sit possible that the Constitution ever intended a distinction so invidious? It seems to me not. There is no reason for supposing that the Constitution ever contemplated or intended to confer power upon Congress to do for the alien what it could not do for one of its own native born citizens. I am inclined to think, therefore, that the word “naturalization” may very properly, so far as legislative purposes are concerned, be construed in a larger and more liberal sense; that we may fairly regard the power of naturalization conferred on Congress as am le, and as including the power to introduce into citizenship those who are now excluded from it, whether native or alien born. But not to dwell upon that point for I am not preared to argue it in detail even if that cannot e done by the direct authority of congress conferred in that clause of the Constitution, I do not see where we get any authority to except these native hem Africans from the General rule of law that all born upon the soil are subjects or citizens of the Government. That is the rule in England, it is the rule in France, it is, and always has been , the rule in this country. There are only 2 classes of citizens, so far as I can detect. provided for in the Constitution of the U.S. In the 2nd article, I think, it is declared that none but a “natural born citizen” shall be POTUS That clause, and the one relating to naturalization, implying that there may be naturalized citizens, are the only 2 clauses designating the classes of citizens within the contemplation of the Constitution of the U.S. Now, where is the authority to except the native born African from the application of the general rule of law that every native shall be a citizen of the country on whose soil he is born? Is there anything in the Constitution which excepts him? Is there anything implying or conferring on Congress the power to except him? Icannot find it. I can find no such power conferrgd, and no such power has ever been exercise. Now, sir, I do not propose to argue further this power of constitutionality. It will come up oiIen enough in debate if this bill should fail to become a law and the substitute I have offered be reported from the ComJudiciary, as I und rstand will be done and when that bill shal come up for discussion, I shall take great pleasure in examining this subject further and responding to any inquiry that gentlemen propose to put to me in regard to its principles. Now, sir, assumin as I do, without any further argument, that congress has the power of admitting to citizenship this great class of persons, just set free by the amendment to theionstitution of the U.S. abolishing slavery, I suppose I need not dwell here on the great importance to that class of persons of having this been conferred upon them. We have already conferred upon them the great, inestimable, priceless been of personal liberty. I cannot for one moment yieltfJtQ what seems to be a general disposition to disparage the freedom we have given them. I think the fact that we have conferred upon 4 million people that personal liberty and freedom from servitude from this time forward for evermore, is one of the highest and most beneficent acts ever performed by any Government toward so lar c a class of its people. HIaving gone thus far, I desireto go on by sue cessive steps still further, and to elevate them in all respects, so far as their faculties will allow and our power will permit us to do, to an equality with the other persons and races in this country. I desire, as the next ste in the process of elevating that race, to givet em the rights of citizenship, or to declare by solemn statute that they are citizens of the U.S., and thus secure to them whatever rights, immunities, privileges, and powers belong as of right to all) citizens of the U.S. I hope no one will be prepared or inclined to say that this is a trifling boon. If we do so estimate that great privilege, I fcar we are scarcely in the frame of mind to act upon the great questions coming before us from day today here. I for one am not prepared or inclined to disparage American citizenship as a personal qualification belonging to myself or as conerred upon any of our fellow citizens. Sir, the right of citizenship involves every thing else. Iake the colors man a citizen of the U.S and he has every right which you or I have as citizens of the L U.S. under the laws and Constitution of the U.S. He has the right of free passage from one State to another, any law in an State to the contrary notwithstanding. He has a de fined status, he has a country and a home: a right to defend himself and his wife and children; a right to bear arms; a right to testify in thesFederal courts: he has all those rights that tend to elevate him and educate him for still higher reaches in the process of elevation and it is not among the least of the advantages of conferring upon him the right of citizenship that it will have and constantly exercise upon him an educating process. Nor is it an advan e 2nd to that, that giving him the right of citizenship will teach all others of his fellow citizens of all races to respect him more, and to aid him in his steps for constant progress and advancement in the rights and duties that belong to citizenship. He will have access to the courts as a citizen of the U.S. the same as another citizen has and if in any State court iis rights under the constitution and laws of the U.S. are denied him, he has the right to take his cause into a Federal court an there have it tried under the Constitution and laws of the U.S. He can freely remove. if the occasion requires it, into another State and there commence original process. for wrongs he may have suffered, in the courts of the U.S. But I need not dwell upon that. All will perceive that it is of the highest possible value to any portion of the people living in this country to receive at the handsvof their Government the status of American citizenship and the rights belouing thereto. Now, sir, present these considerations rap idly, hurriedly. imperfectly. simply as the reasons which induce me to offer the bill which is now presented here as a substitute for the one pending and now. as to the particular bill which we are discussing. it is intended to secure these citizens against injustice that may be done them in the courts of the States within which they may reside. It is intended to prevent unequal legislation in those States a coting them injuriously. That is a high and a properobject. I will cordially coJperate with any portion of this House, or with the whole House. as I hope the whole House will favor so laudable an object, in secui in that right to them or to any other citizens by proper and legitimate means. My colleague. [Mr. DAVIS] who made some remarks just before I took the floor. declared his purpose also to vote for any bill which should be constitutional. designed and calculated to secure this common object. I was I will not say surprised, but somewhat gaieved, to hear the point made against him that he required a law to be constitutional before he would give it his vote. Not in terms, but in tone, that point was certainly made. Now, sir. I cannot, on my conscience and on my oath. however much I may think an object desirable, vote for attaining it by means which seem to me unconstitutional. I care not how pressing the emergency may be, acting here on my responsibility as a legislator, not under the stressof thence essitiesot war, but acting calmly, supposed to be actinr calmly whatever the fact may he, I cannot and will not vote for any bill that may be prtsented here unless my judment is satislied that it is a constitutional bil. So much, sir, for my own conviction upon the subject. Moreover, on grounds of expediency, upon which [will not dwell, Idesire myself, and [should feel much relieved if [thought the House fully and heartily shared my anxiety, not. to pass here any bill which shall be intercepted on its way to the statute book by well grounded complaints of unconstitutionalit on the part of any other Dept of the (sovernment. Now, sir, I confess that there is a section of this bill which I cannot as yetjustify to my own judgment. I shall be very happy to hear at the propertime any argument that wrll reconcile me to it. It is the 2nd seetion, which provides Tbat any person who under color of any law statute ordinance regumtiom or custom shall subjector cause to besubjected any inhabitant or any Territory Stateor to the deprivation of any right securedor protected by this act or to diticrent punishment. pains or penaltieson accountof such personhaving It anytime beenheld in aconditinn o slaveryor in Voluntary servitude, exceptasa punishmentfor crime wbyhereof tholparty shall have beendtily convictedmr reason O his color or race. than is prescribed for the punishment of white persons shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and on conviction shall be punished by a fine not exceeding$1.000o.r imprisonment not exceedingoneyear, or both, in the discretion of the court. Now, sir, unless I have entirely mistaken the purport of that section, itprovides that ifajudge or s icriff or any other officer of a State court should take part in enforcing any State lawmaking distinctions among the citizens of the State on account of race or color, he shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and punished with fine and imprisonment under this bill. Is not. this the lain intent and meaning of that section? In eed. that is its express language, its specific provision, and this is declared in debate to be the only way in which the apprehended injustice can he warded oll from this class of our fellow citizens. Now, sir, is it just, is it right, have we the power to saythat a judge of a State court shall l be punished by fine and imprisonment for en refusing to be controlled by any evidence unforcing a State law 1 Why, sir, if he does not less from an authentic quarter. You can find enforce it he is subject to punishment as an officer of the State by the government of ihe State. If he does enforce it, he is to be punished by the Federal Government for thus enforcing it. This seems to me a direct violation of the rights of every State and of every State court. 1 he Gentfrom Ohio [Mr. BM; u. ii l takes. Iinfer, substantially the same view of this matter, for he has just had read a substitute for that section. For that substitute, so far as Ine w see, I can give my vote. lt appears to me that that section will attain substantially the objects which we have in view. I shall, however, leave him at the propertime to speak for himself on that point. how, sir, one other point, and I shall conclude. It was urged at length and with great force by the gentleman who preceded me in this discussion that the condition of the southern States absolutely requires us to take some such strong, direct, punitive action as this, in order to secure the rights which this bill proposes tb confer upon the citizens of the southern States. If that were absolutely established, it would be a consideration entitled to great weight. But I have not been able as yet to convince myself that the state of the South is so wholly and irredeemably bad as it is thus represented to be. I have been waiting all this session for some authoritative statement of the condition of the South, some authentic record of its public action since the war closed. We have card it urged from all uarters as the reason for legislation of all ki.i s. We have heard it submitted as a reason for excluding Representatives on this floor. We have had it urged upon us on every occasion when the question of restoration is brought before us. We have all sorts of evidence presented to us except. that which seems to me entitled to weight. All the hearsay evidence, all the sto ries circulated in the papers, every outrage, every murder committed in the South, are brought in and charged to the political condition of the southern States. W call know perfectly well that a war like this leaves behiu ita great wreck, a greatdebrts of order peace and respect for law. It is so in the South. The armies disbanded there have in perhaps many instances broken up into bands O guerrillas. A spirit Oflawlessness pervades them to a greater extent than in the northern States, for our soldiers went at once to their homes, to their farms, or their professional or mechanical pursuits, and again became a part of the great body of society; and yet who does not know that all over the country, even in our northern States, there are more crimes of violence committed than before the war or during its prog ress? This is the effect of war, to dumoralize the public sentiment of all communities until all the people are again brought into subjection to law an order. In the South this must be the case to a greater extent than elsewhere. You remember, Mr. Speaker, the extraordinary evidence introduced by the Gentfrom Ohio [Mr. BINGHAM] in debate the other day, which almost took the House 05 its feet and startled this Congress from its propriety. Laughter.] That celebrated extract from the orfolk Post, which gave us in such gr. phic style the animus, as my friendfrom Connce ticut, [Mr. DZMING] would say. of the southern people. Those of us who knew what it was. recognized it at once as a caricature, a burlesque, and yet it was presented as gravely as any of the other great body of newspaper evidence which has done great execution on this floor from time to time, and it had a great deal of weight, and I have no doubt if the vote had then been taken the Constitution would have been amended. Our fundamental law would have been changed by acclamation. on the strength of the alarm aroused by that testimony concerning the temper of the South! But this is all aside from what [was about to say. Before we decide on the condition of the South we ought to have authentic information. The Gentfrom Ohio will excuse me from papers in the North and in Washington filled with like statements to that of the Norfolk lost.