Mr. BINGHAM. the gentle man spoke of the government of that State representing a minority. He spoke of the disfranchised white male citizens as bein more than half of the'white male citizens o the State, and denominated them the 60,000 disfranchised rebels. Now, the gentleman declares the ound of his objection to be the disfranchised co ored people, and that he does not complain of the isfranchisement ofrebels. If he does not complain of the disfranchisement of rebels, if that is not the ground ofhis objection, then I submit there is no ground for the gentleman’s denial that the government of Tennessee is republican in form, or for his assertion that it is an oligarch. It is the government, sir, of a majority, an alarge majority, of all its loyal people. It represents certainly one half, ifnot more than one alf, the original white population of the State. 60 ‘3,00opmen, under the restrictions of.the new constitution and laws, supported by their votes at the polls this organization in the State of Tennessee. When we consider the ravages that war has made, these 63,000 loyal voters in Tennessee must represent 440,000 0 its white population. What, then, is the gentleman’s argument, now that he abandons the right of the rebels to vote? It is this, and only this, that the loyal white people of the State of Tennessee have not yet extended the elective franchise to the black population. Sir, there is no man on this floor who would have rejoiced more sincerely than myself if these loyal men in Tennessee had done that act of justice. The man who had the honor to report 1st in this House, when it was in the hands of the southern conspirators, a bill to repeal an existing slave code and the honor to'see his bill passed through the House despite the reproaches and the curses of men who but a few years afterward took up arms against the Republic, might well be supposed to rejoice at such an act of jus tice. ut, sir, remember that these 60 3,000 white loyal voters in Tennessee represent 440,000 of the white population of the State. They are, therefore, almost as 2 to one of the black population. Yet the gentleman says because this white population, largely in the majority, have not extended the elective franchise to the black minority they have not organized a republican State. The gentleman asserts that it is our duty to reject this State for this cause alone! Why, then, does not the gentleman move the expulsion of Missouri from representation in this House? That State has alike black population disfranchised; a.like white rebel population disfranchised; therefore that State is to 3 day in the hands of a white minority, andu very small minority if you count the disfranchised rebel population together with the disfranchised colored population. I cannot speak with certainty, but it is my impression that the disfranchised white population of Missouri is equal in numbers to its loyal white population. “ by not cry out against this injustice in missouri? Why not declare that the government of that State is not republican, but an odious oligarchy, and that her loyal free men are not entitled to representation in Congress? But, sir, this is not all. The Gentfrom California [Mr. HIGBY] has made a mistake, and I ask him to correct it. He says that he looks into the constitution of the State of Tennessee, and finds that the word “white” is retained. Sir, to the dishonor of my own State, to the dishonor of his State, to the dishonor of a majority of the States north of Mason and Dixon’s line, in the midst of this struggle and trial for the nation’s life, these loya men of Tennessee swept away that limitation in the text of her constitution, and by an amendment, sustained in the very storm of battle by the votes of more than 40,000 of her loyal men, declared that the Legislature of Tennessee may any day enfranchisa with the ballot every loyal black man in her midst. The word “white” is not, therefore, retained in the constitution of Tennessee as a limitation upon the rights of colored citizens. It cannot therefore be said of loyal Tennessee, as it may be of many States represented here, that a citizen who has battled or the republic through 4 years of war, who is covers with wounds received in its defense, is declared by the constitution forever disqualified to vote. When he shall vote rests with the people of that State. There I leave it.