Mr. WILLIAMS. I desire to say that the constitutional nmendmentproposed by the honorable Senfrom Wisconsin positively and absolutely strikes women and mine rs out of political existence, while the proposition re pgrted by the committee does no such thing, 1: provides, according to the principles incor porated into the Constitution by its flamers, that the States shall regulate this matter, and if they do not regulate it according to the die States of humanity and justice, they shall be punished. The gentleman assumes that the amendment reported by the contmittee is equiv alent, in its operation upon the negroes, to the proposition proposed by the honorable Senfrom Wisconsin in its operation upon women and children; but in that he mistakes, for this proposition of the committee is intended to induce the States to confer the right of suffrage and representation upon black people by de claring that if they do not do that the States shall be without representation to that extent in the Congress of the U.S. I wish to say a word upon the amendment proposed by the Senfrom Massachusettsan amendment has been piled upon amendment, Pelion upon Ossa, until it is very difficult to determine exactly what is the question before the Senate; but the honorable Senfrom Massachusetts proposes to amend the committees resolution by declaring that persons of color, if States decline to allow them the right of suffrage, and so they become excluded from representation, shall be exempted from all taxation of every nature and description. I ask if that would be fair or just. Take the State of Maryland, if you please. There institutions of government are provided, courts are establilshed, and the law is administered; public institutions of various kinds are founded and maintained, roads and bridges are constructed, all by taxation upon the people; and the negroes in that State enjoy to a greater or less extent the benefit of those institutions, and therefore they ought to ay a reasonable proportion of taxes for the blessings and benefits they enjoy from these public expenditures and institutions, though they may not be directly represented in Congress. Direct taxes are to be apportioned among the several States, and the constitutional amendment proposed by the committee proposes simply to deprive those persons who are disfranc need in the State of the right of representation; but when Congress imposes a direct tax upon a State it operates equally upon all the persons in that State, and if the State is represented, the Representatives chosen by white people are as much interested in defeating any unjust taxation as would be the Representatives directly chosen by black people. Negroes without votes would be just as well protected from direct taxcsin Congress as white people with votes, but the power of the State would be reduced by subtracting the blacks from the basis of representation. I may be mistaken, but it is my opinion that the declaration which was quoted from Mr. Otis by the honorable Senfrom Massachusetts, “that. taxation without representation istyranny, ”, and which was made to have great weight in the discussion, did not mean that every individual who was taxed in a community should be represented; but at that time the colonies were without representation in the Parliament of GreatBritain, and Parliament was imposing taxes upon the colonies. I had supposed the meaning of that expression to be that it was tyranny for one Government to tax a State or a community or a colony without allowing that State, community, or colony representation in the Government imposing the tax. I never under stood that our fathers intended to say that any Government that did not allow every man, woman, and child within its jurisdiction, whose property was taxed, a right of representation, was atranny. Mr. President, the committee of 15 have proposed anamendment to the Constitution, which has been ably supported by the honor able chuirman of the committee, [Mr. FEsssenDEN] I do not propose to travel over the same and, but I am free to say that one object I have in supporting that resolution is to deprive the rebel States while the rebel element predominates there, as it must and will for some time whether you give suffrage to the black man or not, of as much power in Congress as the Constitution and circumstances of the country demand and allow, so that the men who have saved the Union can provide lastin securities for the future integrity, honor, an peace of the nation. I also advocate the amendment proposed by the committee because it provides eventually that the negroes of the southern States, after the have learned what it is to be free, and not to e “ likc dumb cattle driven, ” may come to the enjoyment of the elective franchise and I believe that if this constitutional amendment is adopted and put before the people and the requisite number of States rati y it, in the southern States a party will sprin up at once to advocate the extension of the elective franchise to the blacks. They will argue, “If you do this you increase the power of the State in the Federal Congress, ” and that party, in my judgment, will grow and become stronger untif it obtains the nscendency, and after negroes are to some extent educated and elevated the elective franchise will be conferred upon them by the action of the States themselves. Pass the nmepdment proposed by the Senfrom Missouri, or the proposed law submitted by the Senfrom Iassachusetts, make it o erative in the rebel States at once, and on malfe a line of demarkntion between the whM: and black races; white men will constitute one political party and the negroes will constitute another; and I think it is desirable for the sake ofboth races that some system shall be adopted that will divide and not consolidate the white men against the black, Or the black men against the white. The honorable Senfrom hlis souri declared yesterday that the adoption of the proposed law offered by the Senfrom Massachusetts would produce awar of races in the southern States. I do not accord with that view of the subject; I believe if that law was passed todsy it would tend to build up the rebel element in the South, becausethe negroes at this time are poor, homeless, destitute and dependent. They must look to the land ho ders for emplo cut and for a livelihood for themselves an their families, and although they did aid the Union cause in the late war, because they expected freedom, which was to them a promiseg land flowing with milk and honey, doubt very much whether these same negroes would decline to vote as their employer might indicate if they were put to the choice of doing that or being turned adrift upon the world to beg or steal or starve. I wish to say, too. for the committees amendment, that while it is better adapted than any other to the present exigencies of the country, it adheres to 2 principles of the Constitution most highly prized y the fathers of the Republic, to wit, apportionment of representation according to population and the right of the States to regulate the elective franchise. The proposed substitutes launch us upon an ocean of untried experiment. Mr. President, passing from the consideration of these constitutional amendments. allow me to make a few remarks upon one or 2 other topics. Much has been said here about the Presidents policy, and it is pressed upon the Senate as a necessity that Congress should adopt that policy. I do not know thatI exactly understand what. that policy is, but presume that it means generally pardon to all the men who have been in rebellion with few exceptions; the extension of the elective franchise to all those who will take the amnesty oath; the organization of State governments under the roolnmations of the President; and the immediate restoration of those Statesto the Union by allowing them their Sens&Reps at this time in Congress. Giving the President great credit for upright and triotic motives in the adoption of this policy, must be allowed and I hope I do not violate any rule of propriety to venture the opinion that in one respect he has made amistake, and that is in the a most unlimited exercise of the pardoning power toward the men who concocted the late rebellion. Iam anxious, and have been anxious, to cooperate with the president in the work of reconstructing this Union. I have been and am his friend. I was as active as I could be in my humble sphere to procure his nomination for VEEP upon the Union ticket. Many years ago I admired him when in the South he fought the gallant and glorious battle of the downtrodden poor against the landholding and aristocratic classes, and the measure of my admiration for him wn full when I saw him stand unshaken in his fielity to the Union in that black sea of falsehood and treachery and perjury by which he was surrounded in the State of Tennessee. I do not now advocate any substitute for the policy which he has proposed. I do not attack or assail that policy. Iain not yet prepared to exress any definite opinion as to the best {0 icy to be pursued; but I desire to say, and shall insist upon it. that the action of the President, whatever it may be, does not exclude the power of Congress to regulate the recognition or admission of the rebel States. I believe, with the light I now have, that the true policy would have beento have kept these States under strict] military governments till con, as could live convened. Congress could then have provided for the reorganization of these States according to law. Provision could then have been made for the exclusion of rebels from power and for the nscendency of loyal men. Time could have been given for things to settle. Is it surprising that men who, for 4 years, have been huntine each other from mountain to swamp and hue again, and try ing to cut each others throats, should not at once coalesce into political unity? There may be no blaze now. but I am apprehensive that the fire is not extinguished. The nation, no more than an individual, can take coals of fire iMo its bosom and not be burned. Charges have been made and repeated upon this floor, that the Union party was disposed to keep these States in their present condition from selfish or party purposes. Is there any foundation fort int imputation? Look at what transpired when the rebel armies were dispersed, when it was announced throughout the country that the cat and bloody conspiracy against the life oigl the nation had failed. Everywhere the people of the loyal States were thrown into a blaze of excited joy, and the chief source of their gratification was the anticipated speedy restoration to the Union of the discordant and belligerent States. I make no question that some change has come over the public sentiment in this respect. What has occasioned that change? Why do the nlsations of the public heart that then bouned with joy now, ike the beatipg of mufiled drums, ive sign of disappointment and sorrow? Is it because the nortern people desire to protract the present state of thin 5? Did they sacrifice their sons and their fathers and their brothers, and pour out their treasure and blood like water, to perpetuate a division, or was their object to secure a return of these States to a newly consolidated Union? Sir, when you consider what has been done, what acts of magnanimity and generosity have been extended to these undeserving and guilty people; when on consider the surprisingly berul terms O surrender propose by GenlGrant, the too generous terms offered by GenlSherman ; ivIien you remember the words of Abraham Lincoln, “with malice to ward none, with charity for all, ” which were caught up by the sympathies of the people and made a nations voice; when on consi or that pardons have been scattered y President Johnson through the camps of treason "like flower seeds by the far wmds blown;” when you consider althese acts of magnanimity and mercy and kindness on the part of the people of the U.S. who put down this rebellion, and then look at the manner in which these acts have been received, is it to be won dered at that doubts and fears and sorrowful misgivings to some extent have seized upom the ublic mind? I know that there are exceptions to whatI am about to en, but, sir, “tis true, andity tis tis true, " that generally these acts, instead of being received with feelin s of respect or expressions of gratitude have Econ received with feelings of hatred an malice, and expressions of contempt and de fiance. I know that history tenches that acts of m nanimity on the part of the conqueror towar the conquered will tend to conciliate and make peace; but it seems, sometimes, as though history was at.fault as to these people, and as though there was nothing that would touch their hearts or their actions but the irre sistible power of the Federal Government, the loam of its flashing swords, and the glitter of its conquering hayonets. Sir, do not wish to say an thing harsh or unkind of these people. l iIcsire that the should be restoredpas soon as they can be with safety to the country. I should rejoice to see them coming back penitent and reformed like the prodigal son, and the nation oing out to take them into its arms, sa ug, as did the father of old, “ The lest is foun and the dead is alive again.” I will say, in answer to the question asked me about Tennessee, that I am inclined to the opinion that under the circumstances it would be advisable to try the experiment of speedy admission with that State. I have very little faith in theories. Opinions are as diverse among men as are the faces of those who express them. But here an experiment can be made. Tennessee is a State in which there are loyal men, in which there are rebels, and in which there are negroes. Let that State resume its pesition in the nion, and let the experiment there be tried as to whether rebels are disposed or not to acquiesce in the authority of the federal Government, and accede to te loyal men the right to control; and also as to whether or not the white people there will treat their negroes in their new condition according to the ictaies of humanity and justice. Try that experiment. Experiment is better than theory. hat will prove whether what is said about these rebels is true or not; and if it should turn out that they maintain, after our recognition of the State, the same spirit which they displayed during the rebellion, then, sir, I am for crushing out that spirit by force, if necessary, or ving it time enough in which to die; and F ive notice now that whatever I may do as to Tennessee will not bind me as to any other of the rebel States. Conditions of recognition may be necessary for all the rebel States. Much complaint has been made here as to the course of Congress toward the rebel States, and considerable of it has emanated from the distinguished Senators from Kentucky; and while I wish to be entirely respectful, but with the view of showin in what spirit these complaints are made, I desire to say that it has been announced on this floor by one of the honorable Senators from Kentucky [Mr. Dans], in effect, that slavery had always existed in the cotton and sugar rowing States of this country, and always wou d exist, no matter what the constitutional amendments or the legislation of congress may be upon that subject and I re spectfully call the attention of the Senate to the fact that the 1st man in Congress since the rebellion who has undertaken to influence its legislation by a threat of dissolution, is the distinguished Senfrom Kentucky, [ML Gurnitiit, ] who reported in the Chicago convention the resolution that.the war for the Union was a failure. That disgraceful declaration was train led under foot by the loyal people of the North, while the confederacy, whose success it was intended to acknowledge, was tram led by our soldiers into the bloody mire of the at tle field. He said that the enactment of the F reedinens Bureau bill would be adissolution of the Union, and we could not help it. Sir, we can help it and we will help it. Is not the terrible experience of the last 4 years sufficient to satisfy the Senator?