Mr. WILLIAMS. I think, in good morals and in good faith, it did conclude us. I think when congress has said to the people of aterritory, “gdu may go forward and form a StAte government, and when that State government is made we will allow you to become a State in the Union, ” and the people, upon the strength of that promise, proceeded to organize a State government and apply for admission and are rejected, they have a right to complain that they have been disappointed and not fairly, treated by Congress. It is said that this enabling act is functus officio, because the elections were not held in conformity with its provisions; but, sir, that is clicking in the bark. What difference does it make to congress whether the election in colorndo was hed in June or August or September? What difference does it make when or where or how a convention was held, so long as a constitution was formed and submitted to the people, and they adopted it, and upon that constitution ask for admission? The Only legitimate objection which Congress can make at any time is that the population is not sutheient; I say Congress has made a decision which on ht to conclude its action upon that question. Mr. President, I have helped to make 2 Territories into States, and it is in vain for any man to tell me that a Territory is in as good a condition as aState. It is asunreason able to expect that a Territory should have the same power, the same strength, and the some resources as a State, as it would be to expect of a child the strength of a man, or to expect that a community ten, 20, or 25 years of age should have all the power and resources of a community that has congrowing and improving for 200 years. This Territory, according to my understanding, has a people who are willing to undertake the burdens and resonsibilities of a State government. They believe that a State organization will promote their interests. They are the properpersons to decide upon that question; and it seems to me that when they ask to become a State, instead of meeting them with distrust and hostility, it is our true policy to take them by the hand, and say to them “Come up higher and go with us, and we will do on good. Sir, territorial organizations only result frOm necessity, and are incompatible with the spirit and genius of our Gavernment; for under them American citizens are ruled by a Government in the making of which the have no voice. They are in a state of colonid dependence and subjection; and whenever the people in such a Territory are cometent to maintain a State government, and osire so to do, it seems to tors ar me justice and good policy dictate the consent of ougress, for by the multiplication of new Slates we add to the greatness and power of the nation. Mr. President, I claim that there is enough before us to justify and require Congress at this time to admit Colorado us a State. Ihope, therefore, that the Vote rejecting the bill will be reconsidered, and that we shall soon have an oportunity to see another State added to the American. Union in assertions. Marianas if the question whetherColorado should be Admitted as a State depended upon the height of her mountains, the richness 9 her valleys, and the productiveness of her placers. I would admit that the Senfrom Nevada [Mr. NYE] has the force of the argument; but if it is to be decided upon the question whether 1st the Jroceedings organizing the State gQVernment are been reor orin conformity to law, and whether, in the 2nd place, there is such a po ulatbn there as entitles them to admission, think there was not that Weight in the Sena “ment; that we had a right to expect. O grass is now bound by the act whichwe passed m March, 1864, previdingfor the organization of a State government. am not able to see that, as the Senfrom Oregon says, we are in moi m and in good faith bound by the action of Genass at that time. What did Congress do? Congress provided that the people at a time speci d might elect delegates, that those delegates should convene and organize into a convention, and being thus organized, should frame a consfitution for the people of that territory, and that that constitution thus made should be submitted to the people for their up roval or rejection. such an election was he d; the convention met; a constitution was framed; it was submitted to the people, and by a large vote, 3 to one, the rejected it. how, I ask, was it competent for the people of Coloradopto proceed turther undert c act of Congress? ould the people take another step under the act of Congress?v They rejected the constitution that was formed pursuant to the act of Congress. Then, sir, what is the nature of the proceeding which were now called upon to mdorse? If the TerritOrial Legislature of Colorado had provided for the calling of another convention, I would have given that le slative rent respect and weight. but the preogcieseladtiunrge did no such thing. n no authoritative and legal manner was the will of the people expressed upon that subject; but the c airmen of the 3 political parties there, of the Deni ocratic party, the Xuti Slnvery party, and the Union entral Committee, not authorized even by a convention of their respective parties, but upon their ovvn motion, called a convention. I at convention was held, and they adopted a constitution irregular in every respect, not having the stain of legal authority in an respect whatever. "he convention was hcl; a constitution was adopted by that convention and submitted to the people; and what Was the vote? A vote giving a majority of but 156 in favor of the constitution thus so irregularly adopted. I ask Senators if there be anything in this proceeding that binds the conse ience of Congress. The constitution adopted pursuant to the act of Congress stands today reected by the people; and a constitution formedupon the motion of the chairmen of the political partiesof the Territory stands indorsed but by the small majorit of 155. Then, sir, I give no weight or authority whateverto the proceeding by which this constitution was adopted. That bring us to the next question, which I consider the important one in this discussion; and that is, has the Territory of Colorado such a population as entitles it to admission 1 Upon the other subject, the weight that should be given to the proceeding under the act of congress and a so upon the question of population, I call the attention of the Senate to the only information that was before this body. l propounded to him when the enabling rst question that naturally presents itself for our consideration is, whether conwhen the enabling act was passed in regard to population. When the analing act was before the Senate the distinguished Senfrom Ver mont, now dead, (Mr. Collamer) asked this. question: “I wish to inquire of the chairman of the Commit: toeon Territtn ieswhetherhe hns any information as to the extent of the population of this Territory?” What reply Was made? I read: I“ Mr. Want. Nothing that I can rely upon with af very moat deal of confidence. I have taken some the facts from the Del atei the p "is to ucertai 3 “ I House.an rom.Mr. Edmunds. of the an do.whom some inibrtnation on that subject! Understand there must be now about 60.130inhnb merits in Guitarsdo: wins think a gr t co! more than that at is the mallest num or find InIXf matedby thosewho procanto know anything about it. It is aTerritorp which is fillin up very raplrlly. Judge hldm nds teas me that he as not the least don t in the worl that before they finish 2:113: arrangementsand becomea State there will be sufficient population there for a Representative in congrass accordingto HF ratio of representation fix ytthelast census. hat is about the iniormation:0. That Was the resouse of the chairman of the ComTerritories to a question not Was before this body, expressin the opinion that at that time there Wow 6,000 people in the Territory, and that the Territory was rapidly fillin up and would soon have a population entiting her to a Representative in the other House. The Senate unquestionably acted upon that information. Was the chairman misled in regard to it? I think to daj he will admit that he was; that his statementf to the Senate, upon which the Senate acted, was not reliable. He relied upon information that he received from the Delegate and front another party that hementions, and that inter; motion now proves not to have been reliable. What have we now before us that is reliable"? In the 1st place, we have the census that was taken in 1861. At that time the population of the Territor was 25, 329; and upon that population the erritory at the 1st e cc,tion thereafter was enabled to give a vote of 10, 580. With a population of 25,000 a vote of 10,000 was cast. What does the vote since that time indicate? It shows the fact that at every election ffomthat time to this the population of Colorado has been decreasing instead of increasing, until when the vote was taken upon the constitution that is now belore us in September, 1865, the aggregate vote vvas 5, 895. Less than 6,000 votes were cast when it is claimed this constitution Was adopted or ratified by the people. It is claimed by the Senfrom h Nevada that a vote is not a very Satisfactory indication of the population. The vote in 1861, perhaps, did not very clearlyindicate the population. What were the people votingon then? Upon the election of a Del egate, the trifling matter of selecting one man for an office instead of another man. In 1865 they came to cast their votes upon the most interesting and exciting question that can ever be presented to any free people, the question whether they shall adopts. State government and what sort of a State government they shall adopt; and upon that question, that is calcu lated to call out the last voter of the Territory if they take any interest in their great questions at all, they could command less than 0,000 voters.