Mr. WILLEY. This amendment proposes to classify the voters. I think it won d be unjust to deprive of this right any who have here The amendment extends the right of suffrage to all who have been in the service of the country during the rebellion and have been honorably mustered out, whether they can read or write or not, or whatever other qualifications they may possess. Then the 3rd classification imposes the qualification of rest dence, payment of.taxes, and ability to read and write their names. Is there any valid objection to these restrictions? I think not. There is no exclusion or discrimination on account of color; although, as I have shown, such exclusion or discrimination might well be made, if the welfare or safety of the community required it. But this bill secures perfect equality. The principle, therefore, of negro suffrage is as completely recognized and established as if the enfranchisement was universal. If I am not in error in supposing that every community may rightfully exclude from politicalauthority all.persons whose incorporation l in it would imper its prosperity and security, then I think it is plain that a large proportion of the freedmen of this District should be excluded. Who are these freedmen? Wheuce do they come? What is theirmental and moral condition? I do not pause on the fact that they are the descendants of tribes who were savages of the worst and lowest type not more than 2 cen turies ago, and that the progress of mankind in civilization in all ages and under the most favorable circumstances has been slow. But I refer to the fact that these freedmen were slaves less than 4 years ago, the descendants of slaves, having all the servile habits and instincts of the most inveterate slavery, coming from States whose laws forbade their bein taught to read, not only the Constitution an history of their country, but also the very ora cles of salvation; debased, deded, as igno rant as it was possible to made them. Are such beings as these the safe depositaries of the political power of any community? I repeat the question, are the peace, order, prosperity and perpetuity of a State secure in the custody and administration of such citizens as they would make? Would you intrust to them any private business or personal interest of importance? Surely not. How, then, can you ask the people of the DistCol to confide to such voters the welfare and safety of its people? Recurring again to the fundamental. maxim that all justgovernment rests on the consent of the governed, I inquire, what is consent? It must be an intelligent consent. It implies that the party consenting understands and appreciates what he consents to. Do these poor creatures, I mean the majority of them, know what suffrage is? Can they up reciate the nature and importance of this big privilege? Do they understand our laws and constitution, or the spirit of our laws and Constitution, or the spirit and principles of civil and political liberty? It is impossible. And yet it is a received and incontrovertible maxim that free institutions are safe only in the hands of an intelligent people. You say they will soon learn. Very well, sir; let them learn. The amendment proposed imposes no such in hibition on them in that respect. Nay, it holds out the strongest motive tomental culture and improvement. And this is one of the advan tages of the restrictions imposedin the amendment. It says to the freedmen, you shall vote if you comply with a certain condition, and that condition is only to aeduire the fundamental qualification of a voter, namely, intelligence.siifiicient to appreciate the right and execute it safely and beneficially to the public. Ought they, or any others, to have this great right on any other condition? Surely not. There are, it seems to me, several advan tages in this process of gradual enfranchisement. In the 1st place, it would avoid the mischief of the sudden influx of so large a number of incapable, ignorant, and irresponsible voters into the District at once. In the 2nd place, it would meet with less hostility from the people. In the 3rd place, if it succeeded, as I hope it will succeed, in demon strating the capacity of the negro to discharge discreetly this high function of the citizen, it would disarm public preconception and prejudice, iind kiiii ly and safely open the way for the enfranchisement at no distant day of the race here, elsewhere, and forever. And in the 4th place, it would obviate the very serious objection raised by the result of the late vote taken in this city to ascertain the sense of the people upon the question. It may be true, air, that said vote was taken without any law ful authority for it. Nevertheless, it did unquestionably ascertain the fact that at least 7 8ths of the people of this District are opposed to unlimited negro suffrage. It is hardly a fair answer to say that Congess is not responsible to the people of the district and has unrestricted powe over the subject. I do not controvert the fact. But I do controvert the moral right of Congress to legislate for the people of the District in a manner repugnant to the fundamental principles of our American institutions. Who of us, in our own State, would dare to impose a law upon the people known to be contrary to the will of a clearly ascertained majority of them? Shall I be answered that we are to reflect the will of the whole American people? Then, I ask, what is the will of the American peoplei this behalf? Let the fact that the fundamental awe of 3/4ths of the States expressly prohibit the right of suffrage for the negro alto gether answer. And now, Mr. President, I have to say that the late constitutional amendment abolishing slavery in this country did no more than carry into effect the teachings and principles of the great founders of the Republic. Mr. Madison objected to the incorporation of the word “slaver ” into the Constitution, because he said he oped the day would come when there would be no slavery, and he did not wish to leave in an instrument so important anythin which would remind posterity that there ha ever been any slavery in this country. Emancipation, therefore, was no new conception. In ac complishin it we did only realize the ardent hopes of the eat men who established 1211' Government an ordained its fundamental w. So, too, Mr. President, I may say that by conferrin the right of suffrage on the qualified free man we shall likeivise be acting in conformity with the prece ts and example of the same illustrious founers of the nation. In the case already referred to of Dred Scott vs. Sanford, the same eminent judge already quoted declared that "At the time of the ratification of the Articles of Confederation all native. free born inhabitants of the States of NewHampqshire, Massachusetts, NewYork, NewJersey, and NCarolina. though descended from African slaves.were not only citizens onfetcheossseary States.but such of them as had the other qualifications possessed the franchise of electorsonequal termswith other citizens." And we have the authority of Judge Gaston, as may be seen by reference to his opinion in the case of the State vs. Manuel, that in NCarolina these free negroes “ claimed and exercised the franchise” until about the year 1835, when the constitution of the State was amended. In Pennsylvania, the constitution of 1790 guarantied the right of suffrage to “ every free man over the age of 21 years.” And ifI am not misinformed the free negro of that State continued to vote until the year 1838. In Maryland, too, I believe, free no oes voted until 1800, and perhaps still ater. Maryland had provided, August 4, 1776, that"All freeman nbove 21 ycars‘of agehaving a freeholdof 50 acresof land in the count in which they offertovote.andresidingtherein; an all free men having property in this State above the value of 30 poun s current money, and havin residedin ihe count in which theyofferto vote, rhal haves right of suffragein the election of delegates for such county." On referring to the declaration of rights and fundamental rules of Delaware, made September 20, 1776, I find the following provision: “ That the right in the peopleto participate in the Legislature is the foundation of liberty and of all free governments;andfor this endall clect onsought to be free and frequent; and every free man having sufficientevidenceof a permanenteommon interest with and attachment to the community, has a right ofsuffragc.” NewYork, in 1777, adopted the following constitutional provision: “ That eve male inhabitant. offnll agc. whoshall have personally weldedin ope of the couritiesin this State for 6 months immediately precedingthe day of electionshall. at such election, 9 entitled to vote for representatives of said county in Assembly; if, during the thug aforesaid.he shul have been a free holder. Possessing a freeholdof the value of 20 poundswithin thesaid county or have rented a tencment therein of the yearly value of 40 shillings. nd have votedandactuallyypaidtaxestothis State.” Soc constitution of NewYork, article 2. Revised tatutus.vol. 1. p. 123.) NewHampshire: " Every male inhabitant of each town and parish Swtiathte, town privileges in the severril countiesin this of 21 years of age and upwards, pay ing for himself a poll.tax, shnl have n. right, at the annual or other meetings of the inhabitants of said towns and parishes.to be duly warned and holden annually forevsr in the month of March. to vote in the town or parish‘whercin hedwells for senatorsin the county or district whereof he is a member." "Connecticut: The qualificationsrequisiteto entitle a personto vote in election of the officers of government are maturity of years, quiet and peaceable behavior. a civil conversation, and 40 shillings freehold or 40 pounds personal estate." NewJersey: “ That all theinhabitantsof this colony, of full age, who are worth 50 pounds proclamation money, clear estate in county the same and have resided in the in which heyclaim a votefor 12 months immediatelypreedingthe election. shalble entitled to vote for representativesin Council and Assembly, and also for all other public officersthat shall be 311?) by the people o the county at large." (July ii I “Pennsylvania, September 28, 1776: Every freeman of full age of 21 years. having residedin this Statefor the spaceof onewhole year next beforethe dayof 8|Bfll 10fnor representateimv ocys, tahnedripgahitdo public taxes during that time, shall elector." NCarolina, December 18, 1776: “That all freemanof the ageof 21 years, who have beeninhabitants of anyonecount within the State 12 months immediately precing the dayofany election and possessedofa freehold within the same county of lift acresof land for 6 months next before and at the day of election, shall be entitled to vote for a member of the Senate. That all freemanof the ageof 21 years, who have been inhabitants 0 any count within the State 12 months immediatelypreceing the day of an election and shall have aid public taxes shall 0 entitled to vote for members of the House of Commonsfor the county in which he resides.” I might furnish other proofs of the political enfranchisement of the negro in the earlier days of our history; so that it is true, as I have already stated, that in granting the right of suffrage to the negro now in this District, we are fo lowing the recedents of the earlier if not better days of the Republic. Still, Mr. President, we are warned by senators of the dangers of introducin different races into the enjoyment of equn political franchises under the same Government. We are told that a conflict between them will in evitably ensue. We are admonished that we are the superior race, and the negro must go down before us. I have not denied our supe riority our sufferiority intellectually, numer ically, physical y, morally our immeasurable superiority. What then have we to fear in a conflict? It is the negro who must go down, if either shall In relation to redoininance of race, therefore, we run no ris. Sir, in my opinion, the question is reduced either to the ballot or to banishment, either to enfranchisement, colonization, or slavery; or if to none of these, then to violent extermination, or to still greater demoralization and gradual u tinction. Sir, the races may not be homogeneous. I have already repeatedly admitted the force of the argument based upon this fact. But has it never occurred to Senators that the existence of the negro among us, in the condition he will occupy deprived of the elective franchise, will render the organization of society still more heterogeneous? According to my conception of the spirit and principles of our institutions, such a relation to the ‘tate is at terl illo ical and irreconcilable. To be entire y a save or entirel a citizen is plainly comrehensible. Butt e hybrid, purgatorial condition, midway between these extremes, involving all the obligations, burdens, and duties, and especially tecapabilities of citizenship, and yet excluding the right of suffrage, is a solecism in government. such a posture of affairs, instead of tending to the conciliation of harmony and eace, would, it seems to me, be the source 0 inevitable rup ture and confusion. Mr. President, the slave of the African race in this nation has been t because of nearly all the discord which has disturbed the public tranquillity. “The irrepressible conflict” has passed from the volume of prephecy into the ! loodiest chapter of actual history in the book i of time. Slavery has been abolished, not by l the will or the wisdom of man, but by the folly of its friends and the providence of God. Shall we superinduce a repetition of the sanguinary history of the last 5 years in another form? Shall we laythe foundation of another insurrection? I think I may confidently anticipate increasing agitation in this Hall, and in all the councils of the country, and thron h every avenue reaching the public mind unti the political enfranchisement of the negro in is District is accomplished. “The tide has set that way.” It may ebb, but it will flow again as ceaseless as the sea. For the sake of the public peace, therefore; to avoid a conflict as irrepressible as that through, which we have passed; to prevent the sorrows and desolations of another civilWar; to complete the harmony and symmetry of our political system, and rec oncile the logical demands of our cherished principles of civil and political liberty by exibiting a practical recognition of the DeclarIndep, let the experiment be made. Our race can well afford to make it. It imperils none of our rights. It curtails none of our ‘privileges or power. I cannot appeal to our. ears, but it oes challenge our magnanimity. If it fail, then the strife will be ended and the question forever settled. If it succeed, who is there so bascly recreant to the high behests of his own humanity as to say he would not rejoice? Sir, we are admonished against the radicalism of the times. Perhaps there is some necessity for the admonition. But let us not be so cautious as to err in the opposite direction. This is an age of progress progress of ideas, of science, of philosophy, of civilization, of law, of liberty. The truth does not change; the fundamental principles of government as proclaimed by our fathers may not change; But their application may be made more complete. It would be unwise, it would be ludicrous, to stand still, steadfastly adhering to the same policies and measures which were appropriate to the radically different condition of affairs existin a century ago. Slavery is abolished. It is gforeverprohibited by our organic law. Shall our feelings, our prejudice, our policy, our laws relating to the freedman be the same now as when he was a slave? " Tempora mutantur, et nosin illis mutamur." The only worthy interpretation of the tremendous conflict which has just convulsed the nation, but which has been crowned with such resplendent victory, is progress progress especially in the principles of human freedom. et us not refuse the providential hand extended to lead us onward and upward toward a more exalted destiny. The great rebellion proclaimed that slavery was to be the chief corner stone of its treasonable organization. And thus it was a revolt not only against legit imatejiuman authority, but it was also a rebellion against the law of God. The result is announced by a fundamental decree of univer sal emancipation. This revolution will not stop there. It has awakened a spirit that will never slumber again until all laws and all statesmen shall recognize the authority of the heavenly precept uttered by the divine Law giver on the mount more than 1800 years ago in tones which, however gentle and sweet, have sounded along down through the successive centuries, commanding an eager responsive echo from every liberal human heart: “Therefore, all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them;” which was republished. in effect, by the great apostle in the midst of Mars hill: “And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on the face of the earth;” and which, at last, was essentially incorporated into the great national charter of American independence at Philadelphia. In America this Christian principle of humanity and free ! a practical political recognition. In America consummation.