Mr. Spalter, I am not an alarmist, but I cannot c use my eyes to what is going on around me, nor fail to note the “signs of the We have barely emerged from one of thteimgreeast.”c est and most bloody conflicts known to the annals of history. Millions of treasure has been spent, 100s of 1000ss of lives have been sacrificed, and whole States have been desolated by the ravages of war to put down treason and to maintain and uphold the constituhon and the Union. Sir, itimistake not, we are on the eveofa revolution thatportends as momentous consequences to the untold millions of the futurcas the conflict through which we have passed brought upon us. I cannot close my eyes to the fact that the very men who brought on this war of rebellion, and who strove through blood and persecution to overthrow this Republic, are striving today to get back into the places they igiiomiuiously deserted, and are endeavoring once more to control the Government they impiously tried to subvert. I cannot overlook the fact that in none of the States where treason was the most violent and vindictive and where traitors were the most wicked and defiant, has there been a single State government established. but that men whose records were the blackest for treason to the country have been elevated to the highestOffices by the people; while on the other hand, men who were true to the country, and who suffered persecutions and confiscation, and were at all times the stanch and unwaverin supporters of the Union, are set aside and laughed at and mocked for their loyalty. I haveyet to see wherein treason has been looked upon as a crime, or to find where any traitor i has been made odious. On the contrary. the tens of 1,000s of men who with devilish hate sought the life of the nation are as complacental. the sad wreck they have made, and as jubilant at the easy penalties theyhave incurred, as though they had been doing Gods work, and were receiving a crown of glory for their valor and devotion to the cause of treason. After the surrender of Lee to Grant these men were ready to agree to any terms. They thought that treason was a crime, and that there was a law in existence to punish it as such. They would have been willing at that time to concede any condition for future good behavior and security in order to save their lives and theirpro erty. But when the President, from the gemness of his heart. it may be, but certainly with mistaken clemency. gave them apardon for past. offenses, and they found themselves far beyond the reach of the law, they began to think that treason was not so great an offense after all, that it was onlya political mistake and not. a crime and today, instead of being humble and penitent, we find them open, bold, and defiant. They talk now of their rights in the Union, just as the used to prate of their“divine institution, ” an insist that we have no power to impose any terms upon them, and that all who do insist on terms are traitors and disunionists. I am inclined to think, sir, that if we were traitors we would have a better chance of easy times for the future than by standing forth as the advocates of our countrys right, to be branded by such as they as revolutionists. The President, in my judgent, made a great, a sad, and fear a fata mistake in the indiscriminate manner with which be granted pardon. I din satisfied he did it for the best, thinking that after these men said they had lost all, and that the Government, in its great clemency forgave them all, they would become penitent and be moved by the tender cords of love to the side of the country. But, sir, the President has been mistaken. He has been made the victim of misplaced confidence, and in stead of their becoming penitent, they are as defiant today as they were when Jeff. Davis ruled at Richmond as the great high priest of the confederacy. Treason is still as deep and as damning in their bosoms as the day the great southern heart was inflamed by the attack on Sumter. They will strive to make the President think otherwise, to induce him to stand by them, and after he has stood by them and they have once more got back the power they lost, they will turn on him to sting imas surely as the viperturned to sting the farmer after he had warmed life into it. It was but the other do that Alexander H. Stephens, the vice resident of the exploded confederacy, gave iis testimony before the ComReconstruction, and what does he say: “But the peopleof that State. (Georgia, )asI have said.would not wdlingly. I think.do morethan they havedoiieforrcstoriilion. The only vicw in their opinion that could ossihlyjnstify the war which wnse ar ried onbytho edernl Government againstthem was theideaof the indissolubleness of the Union; thutthose who hold the administration for the time werebound to enforcethe executionof the laws and themaintenance of the integrity of the country under the constitution; and sincethat war wasaccomplished.since thosewho had assumed the contrary principle the right of secessionand the reserved sovereignty of the Stator had abandoned their cause and the adminis tration here was successful in iuaintainiu the idea upon which war was reclaimed and wngm, and the only view in which t icy supposed it could be justified at all: when that was accomplished. I say.the people of Georgia suplposed their state was immediately entitled to all or rights under the Cons titution. That is my opinion of the sentiment of the peopleof Georgia and 1 do not think they.would be willing to do anything further as it condition precedent to their being permitted to enjoy the full measureof their constitutional rights. I only givo my opinion of the sentiment of the people at this time. icy expectedthat as soon as the confederatecause was abandoned that iiumediately the States would be brought back into their practienl relations with the Government as previously constituted. That is what theylooed to. They expectedthat the State would immediately have their representatives in the Senate and in the House and they expected in good faith as loyal men. as the term is fre ixuently used I mean by it loyal to law. order and the Constitution ifi support the Government under the Constitution. That was their feeling. They did what they did believing it was best for the protection of constituliuual liberty. Toward the Constitution of the U.S. as they construed it. the great mass of our peoplewere as much devoted in their feelings as any people ever were toward any cause. This is my opinion. As I remarked before. they resortedto recession with aview of maintainin more securely these principles and when they than they were not suco in their object. in perfect good faith. as far as I canjudge from mootin with them and conversing With them looking to t io future developments of their country in its material resources.as well as its moral and intellectual progress. their earnest desire and exeetation was to allow the past struggle. lamentable as it wasin its results. to pass by and to cooperate with the true friends of O Constitution. With thoseof all sections who earnestly desire the preservation of constitutional liberty and the perpetuation of the Government in its purity. They have been a little disappointed in t is and are sonow. They are patiently waiting. however and believing that when the passions of the hour have passed away this delay in restoration will cease. They think they have donc every thing that was essential and proper and myjudgment is, that they would not bewilling to do anything further as a condition precedent. They would simply remain quiet and passive." What will the loyal men of this country say to such reasoning as this? After caring on a war of 4 years to break up the government, and after having been conquered and compelled to yield to a superior force, we are coolly told by these reconstructed patriots that they exccted their representatives to be admitted as loyal men, ” and that when they went into rebellion the people thought it was best for constitutional liberty, and that they will not agree to any conditions that the American people impose upon them, and says with the most supreme impudence that the South ought to refuse all conditions and in case conditions are demanded and refused, he says: Should such an offerbe made and declined and these States should thus continue to be excludedand kept out. a singular spectacle would be presented. A complete reversal of positions would be presented. In 1843t]hose States thought they could not remain safely in the Union without new guarantees and now. when they agreeto resumetheir former practical relations in the Union under the Constitution as it is. the other States turn upon them and say they cannot permit them to do so. safely to their interest. without newguaranteeson their part. The southern States would thus present themselves as willing for immediate union under the Constitution. while it would bethe northern States opposed to it. The former disuuionists would thereby become Unionists, and the former Unionists the practical disuuionists. Surely, Mr. Stephens has been taking lessons from the PreSident, or the President has been learning from him. He says further on this subject: "I think. as the Congressof the U.S. did not consentto the withdrawal of the seceeding States. it was a continuous right under the Constitution of the U.S. to be exercised so soon as the seceding States repectively made known their readiness to resume flieir former practical relations with the Federal Government. under the contitution of the U.S. As the General government denied the right of secession. I do not think any of the States attempting to exercise it thereby lost any of their rights under the Constitution as States when their people abandoned that attempt.” Is it any wonder that these red handed traitors are such friends of the “ Presidents policy, ” when they see and know that “his policy, ” and his alone, is to give back to them all their rights as fully and place them in possession of the Goycrnment as comas before they went into rebellion? nledtelg i this “policy” be carried out, what pennlt is there, or can there be, for treason? and what inducements will be held out for loyalty? On the contrary, will not a premium be offered for disloyalty and treason made respectable? The Presidents policy, in my Judment, has done more to make treason respecte alltlllfll tors heroes than the establishment and indo pendence of the confederacy co uld have done; ccause, if the Presidents policy is fully car ried out, it not only places the 11 acceding or rebellious States in the hands of the rebels, but by giving them once more a vows in the Government, the time will not belong before these same rebels will have the complete control of the Government in all its Depts. No wonder, then, every rebel, from Dawn; to the met est subaltern in the confederate army, including bashwhse kors, jayhswkcrs, and guerrillas, copperheads, and whilom eace men, are the earnest and devote admirers of the “ Presidents policy.” It is Just the “policy” tor them, because they plainly see that it is the only one that they can ive by and one which, through their newspaper press, they profess to die by. The President may continue to be deluded; but I warn the American people today not to look with indifference at what is going on about them, not to imatine, because we have put down the war of rebellion, there is still no danger to the Republic. I saythere is danger; and unless the people of the North, the East, and the West arise once more in their might and proclaim to the South, you shall not be again invested with all the rights of loyal States until fundamental guarantees are given for future peace and security, you will see this Government, in less than ten years, in the hands of the very men who for the past 4 years have been trying to destroy it. But it is said the Presidenthas the advantage of Congress, because he has “a policy, " and Congress has none. It isa good thing for this country and the world that Congress has no “policy.” The day of “policy” has, I trust, passed awav, never to return. It was f policy” that broug t on this rebellion, and that was near making the rebellion a success. So long as Congress and the Executive acted on “policy” in the prosecution of the war, defeat after defeat was the result. But so soon as “ policy” was thrown aside, and principles, eternal and unchangeable, were pursued in stead, victory after victory perched upon the banners of the republic, until at last principle was made triumphant over policy in the total and utter overthrow of treason. It was “ policy” that induced the framers of the Constitution to recognize the existence of slavery. It was “policy” that made the missouricompromise of 18:20, and that led to its repeal. It was “ policy" that made the fugitive slave law of 1860, and it is “ policy” that would today yield to the spirit of slavery, and ive back to it more than it assessed when our million human bein swere told in bondage. No, sir; [want no po icy; I have done With it. I want principles principles that will live when you and I are dea, and that our children can live by and bless us for when they come in possession of the trust reposed in us. This war has already decided one principle. It has decided that hereafter, in this land of libert, there shall be no such thin" as a slave, and the American people have made this prin Xple a part of the organic law of the land. Mr. lexander Stephens, however, does not think that the American people had the right or the power to make this a part of the Constitution, although he says it was one of the results of the war. Hear the logic of this exVEEP of the confederacy: "Quulion. Do you mean to be understood in your last answer that thereis no constitutional power in the Government. as at present organised, to exact conditions precedent to the restoration of political to the 11 States that have been in rebel "“AMver. Yes. sir; that is my opinion. Question. Do you entertain the same opinion in reference to the amendments to the constitution abolis ling slavery? “Armour. I do. I think the States however. abolishedslavery in need faith as onc of the resultsof the war. Their ratification of the constitutional amendment followed asaconsequenco. I donot think there is any constitutional power oaths art of the Government to have exacted it as a condition precodent to their restoration under the Constitution or to the resumption of their placesas membersof the Union." Congress has decided another principle which it had the power to do under the constitutional amendment abolishing slavery, and that is that all free men should have the common rights of humanity to sue, testify, and hold property; thus, for the 1st time in the history of this Govermnent, making good the averment in the DeclarIndep that" All men are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights. Among which are life, liberty. Ind the pursuit of happiness." I propose that now, since slavery is no longer in exislenre, that the clause in the Constitution of the U.S. put there by “policy” in the interests of slavery shall be stricken out, and that hereafter the southern Slates, instead of having a representation here based on the negro population, shall be represented according to their white population alone or according to their voting population. I have heretofore given my reasons for this and do not propose to repeat them, but until a constitutional amendment of this kind is passed by Congress and ratified by the States I cannot vote to admit them to representation. Desiring that“ treason should be made odious, ” and knowing that it would be unsafe to again trust political power to such an engaged in rebellion against the Government; feeling tlmt I cannot safely trust such men in making laws for me, I wanta constitutional amendment proclaiming in effect that no person who has entered or shall hereafter enter into rebellion against the U.S shall ever be eligiblefor President, VEEP, or member of the Cabinet, or as a Senator or Representative in Congress. I know you have a law on your statute book, commonly called the “ test oath, ” thatexcludes such persons from being Senators or Representatives; but once allow the southern States to participate in legislation, and in conjunction with the men who serenaded the President on the 22d of February last, and who presented him with a set of resolutions in which this test oath is denounced, you will find that it is but a “rope of sand, ” and that it will be repealed as unconstitutional. I prefer, therefore, to make this a part of the organic law, so as to place it be end the reach ofany “ policy” that may hercater desire to repeal it. I know it will be hard for the southern people, who have engaged in this rebellion, to be taxed to pay off any public debt contracted in subdning them, and that it will be desirable, and even a point of honor with them, to tax her people to pay off the debt incurred by the rebel States in waging war against the U.S. In order, therefore, to protect the 100s of 1,000 of men an women who loaned their hard earnings to the Governmentto carry on the war, and who received bonds in return. on the express condition that they should be promptly and faithfully met, as well as to protect 1,000s of poor Union men in the South who do not want to be taxed to pay off the rebel debt, I desire a constitutional amendment that neither Congress nor any State shall pass any law whereby any part or portion of the debt contracted in uttmg down rebellion shall ever be repudiate, or whereby any part or portion of the debt, State or confederate, contracted in aid of the rebellion, shall ever be paid or assumed. I am aware that all the lately rebellions States have either passed laws or have inserted clauses in their constitutions, lookingto the same result, but I am at the same time impressed with the conviction that “policy” might lead these men hereafter to repeal their laws or alter their constitutions, and I prefer that the American people should place a prohibition in the Constitution thatwould be so high that ambition would never soar to reach it or cupidity dare to touch it. Besides, since they were so willing to put this clause in their State constitution, they could not object to aid as in placing it in the Constitution of the U.S. As our soldiers and sailors should be our peculiar care especially since the Presidenthas said that he intends to rely upon them exrcssly I think we owe it to the sacrifices they have made and the sufferings they have endured, that there should be a constitutional provision denying to Congress the right to ereafter pass any law by which any pension, bounty, or gratuity shall be given to any.person who served in the confederate army, or who went into rebellion against the Government. I know there is no fear of this or the next Congress passing any such law; but if reconstructed traitors ever get into power, and the Vallandigham Democracy should bewithin reach to aid them, I am disposed to think that they would refuse to give any pension, bounty, or pay to our soldiers and sailors unless you would agree to give the same to theirs. Why not? They think, in the language of the rebel exVEEP, thatwhen they took up arms to tear own the Government they were aiding “to rese ue, reserve, and pertuate the principles of the constitution;” an inasmuch as that is just what our soldiers and sailors thought they had periled so much to save, they (the rebel soldiers) will claim as much of the honor and gratitude as our own. These, Mr. Speaker, are the principles I would advocate, to be made a part and portion of our organic law. With them Ithin the country will be safe; without them you might as well prepare yourself at once to see this Government in the hands of the men who have been seeking to destroy it. congress owes it to the country to pass a on the propositions that Ihaye named and which I do not pretend to claim to be my own and to submit them to the States for ratification. Instead of being several, they can be embraced in one proposition. So soon as they are ratified by any or all of the 11 States, I would admit such of them to representation as adoptthem. such as do not adopt them I won d exclude from representation until 3/4ths of the States have ratified them, so as to make them binding upon all. In this way, and in this alone, in my judgment, can the honor, the safety, or the perpe tuity of the Republic be established. lknow there are some who do not apprehend any evil consequencesfrom allowing these States to be represented now without any conditions and without any changes in our fundamental law. I wish I could think with them, and could place that confidence in the honor and loyalty of the men who went into rebellion as would warrant me in trusting em without any guarantees. But, sir, I on not believe that men who conspired so long and secretly to bring on the rebellion, who fought so desperately and wickedly to make it a success, who starved and tortured so many 1,000s of our brave and heroic defenders in prison pens and in dungeons, who have taken so many oaths, and have violated them, and become perjurers before God and man, and who since they have been vanquished and compelled to cease their strife, are as open and defiant as they should be modest an humble I cannot believe, I say, sir, that such men are safe to be trusted with the destinies of a great nation and of an injured and magnanimous people. I may be mistaken. It is possible, barely possible, that they are sincere, and that they do not contemplate in the future to act in any other way than for the glory and honor and success of this mighty nation. lfI have made a mistake in not believing them tobe thoroughly loyal, it is one made on the side of my country and in behalf of her safet. The loyalty of men who have been engage for overfour years in breaking up the Government is at least doubtful. In doubtful cases it is better to give the benefit of the doubt to the side of the permanency of your country than against it. If these men are at once taken in full fellowship and granted equal rights and powers without any uarantees, and it should afterward turn out that they were not true and sincere in their loyalty, the consequences will be terrible, and nothing but the interposition of the all powerful arm of God could stay the anarchy that would be its legitimate results. Let us all, t on, unite in insisting on such guarantees as will secure a peace that is lasting and that will make the Constitution and the Union as impregnable from treason within as it is invincible from foes beyond its borders; and whether our course be indomied today or not we shall have the conse iousness of acting honestly and with a sole view of perstunting our institutions, and unnumbered millions yet unborn will justify our action and honor us for standing firmly and unflinchingly by the ark of our safety.