Mr. HOIVARD.Mr. President, it is exactly 20 years and one day since the cession of that portion of the District to Virginia took effect, and during the whole of that time it has been just as easy for any individual or combination of individuals to bring this legal question to a proper test as it is today or will be after this bill) shall have become a law. What have the people of the District been deing during the past 20 years that they have notinstituted a suit in some form and obtained a decision of the Supreme Court upon this very important question ‘I I do not see that the reasons urged by the honorable Senfrom missouri for abstaining from the passage of this bill with a view to get a decision of the Supreme Court have more weight at this time than similar reasons have had during the last 20 years. We have as yet no decision on the subject; and I think, sir, if there be any real ground for such a judicial inquiry we should be more likely to bring it before the proper court b the passage of this bill than y abstaining from its passage. For my own part, as I remarked a few days ago, I'entertain no doubt about the unconstitutionality of the act of 1846, commonly known as the retrocession act. I do not believe it was competent for Congress to make that retrocession, because by the Constitution itself, when the U.S. acquired this District, they acquired it for a particular purpose; and that purpose was, that it should be used by the government as the seat of Government, and as the ermanent seat of Government. It has always eeuso regarded and so treated in our legislation and by our supreme tribunals. The U.S., therefore, as a nation, as.a Government, having received the District in trust to use it as the seat of Government, are not only bound in law, in my judgment, but bound upon every principle of honor and equity so to continue to use it as the seat of Government until the people of the U.S. in constitutional form, shall have relieved us from that obligation. One word right here respecting the removal of the capital an event which, perhaps, may be anticipated in the distant future as population shall become more dense and interests more‘ weighty in the western or central parts of the continent. I have this to say, that, construing the Constitution as I do, I do not see where the power is at present in the Constitution to remove the seat of Government; and, that if it shall be removed, in my judment the removal must be necessarily effected y an alteration of the Constitution giving to congress that power. The Constitution declares that Congress shall have power, among other things“To exerciseexclusivelegislation in allcaseswhat soever over such dist[ict. not exceedingten miles square. as may, b cession of particular States and the acceptanceo Congress.becomethe seat of the Governmentof the U.S." The language plainly implies a trust and confidence on the part of the ceding States as well as on the part of congress that the tract ceded shall be held and use by the U.S. as the permanent seat of Government. The reasons for it were very strong at that time, and we have seen during the last few years that they have been equally strong at this period. Sir, I look upon the act of retrocession as unauthorized by the Constitution and therefore totally void; and I look upon it in another light, as having been one of the initiatory steps in bringing about the civilWar from which we have recently emerged. It was undoubtedly the purpose of the original schemers that introduced the bill to retrocede a part of the District to use it for military purposes when ever the proper occasion SliOfilg present itself and as a means of attacking and destroying the Government; and we know quite well the inconveniences under which the authorities at Washington labored on the breaking out of the war in consequence of the possesson of the right shore of the Potomac mm by the State of Virginia. I think the time has come for us to resume the proor jurisdiction of Congress over this retroce ed tract. It possibly may produce some confusion in the private affairs of ind'widuals in that part of the District; but I do not see now how a court acting upon private interests could fail to recognize the authority of the government existing there defacto whether it was that of Virginia or some other government. I hardly think a court would undertake to assume in a matter betwefin private persons, that proper jurisdiction of rat portion of the District was not in Virginia. They would be very likely to recognize the anthqrity of the government defacto in all matters pertaining to individual rights. At all events we have not space enough without that small tract upon the right bank of the Potomac for our seat of Government. It was wisely and properly arranged by the fathers; it received the sanction of General Washington, than whom, I suppose, no better judge of the necessity of sucii a seat of Government and of the particular extent needed for it has ever lived; and I shall with the utmost cheerfulness vote for the passage of this bill to resume the jurisdiction of the Government over that tract.