Mr. ROGERS. I say the gentleman must not come here and vilify the people of the South in this way by comparin tiem with murderers, and by bringing in the argument that they are as deserving of reprobation and punishment as the monster Probst. I say the masses of the people in the South are not to blame for this war at all. It was the leaders of the South, such men as Yancey and others there, and the fanatical demo ogucs of the North, some of whom the resident has named, I of course except those upon this fioor) who are guilty of this war. Sir, you can never win the affections of people by treating them in the manner in whaieny you propose to treat those people by these measures. The Gentfrom Pennsylvania [Mr. Srnvsss] is an honest man; I give him credit for that for I have taken particular notice and studied his caliber, and believe he is honest in his opinions. Yes, sir, the honorable gentleman [Mr. STEVENS] says that these persons can come in after the 4th of July, 1870. This resolution does not guaranty any such thing. We must refer to the bill with which the committee accompany the resolution. That bill provides that every State in this Union that is now unrepresented must, before being allowed to have Representatives here, even though they can take the test oath, ratify this constitutional amendment. Though this constitutional amendment should be ratified by 3/4ths of the States, not one of the 11 States now unrepresented can have representation here unless each State itselfjoins in ratifying it. Is that fair? It has been said by the honorable Gentfrom Pennsylvania that 19 States 3/4ths of those that have never passed acts of secession are sufficient for the ratiitation of this constitutional amendment. Why, then, do you seek to compel each of the southern States to ratify the amendment and alter its constitution and laws in conformity thereto, before you will admit here, on taking the usual oath, such honorable and loyal men as are now presenting themselves as Representatives from the State of Tennessee and the State of Arkansas?“ Mr. FARNSWORTH. Mr. Speaker, in my half hour I shall confine myself to the amendments of the Constitution now under consideration. When the bill reported by the committee of 15 comes up for action by this House I may desire to say somehing in regard to it. I intend to vote for this amendment in the form reported, with the exception of the 3rd section. It is not all I could wish; it is not all I liOpe may yet be adopted and rat ified; for I am not without hope that Congress and the people of the several States may yet rise above a mean yrejudice and do equal and exact justice to all men by putting in practice that “self evident truth” of the DeclarIndep that Governments “derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, ” and giving to every citizen, white or black, who has not forfeited the right by his crimes, the ballot. But I do not think it is becoming in a legislator to o pose some good because the measure is not alhe wants. The 1st section of the amendment proposed is as follows: 8:0. 1. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the U.S.; nor shall any State do grive any personofllfe, liberty or property.wrt h. but ue process of law; nor deny to any person within its Jurisdiction the equal protection of its laws. So far as this section is concerned, thereis but one clause in it which is not already in the Constitution, and it might as well in my opinion read, “No State shall den to any person within its jurisdiction the equa protection of the laws.” But a reaflirmation of a good principle will do no harm, and I shall not therefor, 0" oppose it on account of what I may regard as surplusage. “Equal protection of the laws;” can there be any well founded objection to this? Is not this the very foundation of a republican government? Is it not the undeniable right of every subject of the Government to receive “equal protection of the laws" with every other subject? How can he have and enjoy equal rights of “life, liberty, and the pursuit of tap iness" without “equal protection of the laws? Thil is so self evrdent and just that no man whose soul is not too cramped and dwarfed to hold the smallest germ of justice can fail to see and appreciate it. be 2nd section of the amendments proposed is as follows: 850. 2. representatives shall be apportioned among the several Stateswhich maybeincluded within the Union according to theirrespeetive numbers. counting the whole number of persons in each State excludingI ndiansnottaxed. Butwheneverin any Stpto the elective franchise shall be denied to any portion of its male citizens not less than 21 years of ageor in any way abridged. Except for nrticipation in rebellion or other crime, the basis of representation in such State shall be reduced irithe proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens not lessthan 21 yearsof age. I like this better than the one this Honse adopted some time since, and which was defeated in the Senate. That amendment I declared then, as I do now, that I did not like. It received my vote in common with many other members of this House, but with hesitation, doubt, and protest. Iwill not reiterate the reasons now; but, sir, I have no sympath with nor approval for the denunciations which the Gentfrom Pennsylvania [Mr. STEVnxs has seen fit to hurl at those Senators who differed with him and defeated the adoption of that amendment. I rather admire their patriotism, their courage, and their sense. The amendment, however, now under consideration is free from what I considered the most objectionable features of the other. The Constitution now provides for the apportionment of Representatives according to the “whole number of free persons” and “3/5ths of all other persons." Consequently, before emancipation, 3/5ths of the slaves were enumerated, which gave to the slave States 19 Representatives in Congress, and as many electors of President, based upon a constituency of slaves alone. But now there are no “other persons, ” all are free; and when the other 2/5ths are added in the enumeration they will give the late slave States 13 more Representatives and electoral votes than before, making 32 Representatives and electors for the 4 million emancipated slaves. Now, this amendment says to those States this: “If the freedmen are so degraded and ignorant as to he unworthy of enfranchise ment; if they are not capable of governing themselves, but must be he (I in subyection to and governed by their late masters. then they are not fit to govern the country through the votes of others.” They shall not by any such prestidigitation, be dead at the ballot box, but alive here, dumb, without a voice for their own government, and with 32 voices on this fioor, and 32 votes for President and VEEP. They shall not be used to swell their rebel masters into giants and dwarf the loyal and patriotic men of the free States into Tom Thumbsl If you deny to any portion of the 10 al citizens of your State the right to vote for representatives you shall not assume to represent them, and, as you have done for so ong a time, misrepresent and oppress them. This is a step in the right direction; and although I shou (I prefer to see incorporated into the Constitution a guarantee of universal suffrage, as we cannot get the required 2/3rds for that, I cordially support this proposition as the next best. This amendment, too, I fully believe, will in a reasonably short period bring universal suffrage. The 4th section of this amendment, repudiating the rebel debt and claims for slaves, will be most heartily adopted and approved by every loyal man in the nation. Every man or woman who holds a Government bond, or who pays a tax, every crippled soldier or widow of adead soldier, who holdsapension certificate, and everybody who hates treason and rebellion, and prays for the prosperity of the Government, will rejoice at its adoption. The 3rd section excludes all persons who voluntarily adhered to the rebellion. giving it aid and comfort, from the right to vote for members of Congress, and or electors for President and VEEP until the 4th of July, 1870. I cannot regard this section as of any practical value. I believe it to be difiiw cult, if not impossible, of fulfillment; and I have fears that it may greatly embarrass, if not. defeat, the adoption of the other sections should we pass it through this House. If the recls are to be disfrunchised at all, they should be for a longer period. Again, some rebels are deserving of a total and lasting disfranchisement, while others who are cm braced in this provision are not near so crim inal. But sue a provision would be taken to imly that all shal have the right to vote after Ju y, 1870. Besides, there is a large class of men, both in the North and South equally, yea, and more, guilty than 1,000s of the misguided men who will be disfranchised by this provision, who will not be affected by it. I allude to those politicians and others at the South who, keeping themselves out of danger, set on the ignorant and brave to fight for what they were told by these rase als were “their rights;” and to other politicians, editors, “ cop perheads, ” in the North, some of whom were and are members of Congress, who encouraged them and discouraged our soldiers. How is it to be ascertained who “ gave aid and comfort” to the insurrection? s it by challenge and oath at the polls, or shall We have a registration throu bout the U.S. with Officers to settle an adjudge that question as to every voter? It seems to me, Mr. Speaker that this provision is worse than useless, an will very much mar the beneficent effect of the other mOst excellent revisions of this amendment. Why, sir, the almost universal testimony from the rebel States is that the soldiers who fought us in the field accept their situation of “defeated and vanquishe ” with a much better grace than the politicians and noncombat ants. They do not want to fight again. They are inspired with a wholesome respect for northern character and for the Government. They have ceased their braggln, and are willing to accept the position which the results of the war has placed them in. then , with the exception of the 3rd section, I am heartily for the amendment, and if in stead of that section we could incorporate a revision into the Constitution which should orever disqualify all the leadin rebels from holding any Office under the U.S., thus making “ treason odious" and traitors infamous the country would hail it with joy. But,