Mr. HENDRICKS. My distinguished friendfrom Kansas, Mr. LAM2] at the last session, or the session efore, introduced a proposition here in the Senate to separate the races. He brought a measure before the body to send the colored peole to western Texas. Then, if it is supporte by so distinguished and able a senator as the Senfrom Kansas, and if it was the battlecry of the Republican party in Ohio at the last election, and the election resulted in the success of General Cox, how can the senator say that it is an absurdity? But I wish to ask the question again, would the Senate, for any political coniniunity separated to itself, enact such a constitution as this would be? In the 1st place, they have no selection of the officers. Men are appointed that they know nothing of, without any restrictions upon their power. The bill thatis before the body is entitled “A bill to enlarge the powers of the Freedmens Bureau.” Will any Senator be good enough to tell the body what are the powers of the freedmens Bureau? I have read the law of last session; I have read this proposed amendment; and I am entirely unable to say what are the powers of the Freedmens Bureau. I did, to some extent, understand the powers proposed to be given in the bill advocated by the Senfrom Massachusetts at the last. session, for it undertook to define the powers; but here is the definition that is given in the law of last winter; here is the definition of power and the only restriction, so far as I know: “That there is hereby established in the War Dept to continue during the present war of rebellion and for one year thereafter, a Bureau of Refugees. Freedman, and Abandoned Lands, to which shall becommitted, as hereinafter provided. the supervision and management of all a and oned lands and the control of all subjects relating to refugees and freedmenfrom rebel States.” The management of the lands and the control of all subjects relating to refugees and freedmen are the matters committed to it. What definition is that of the power of a government within a Government, organized and endowed with power by general words to take care of all an jects relating to 4 million people? Does that extend to the contracts these people may make? Does that extend to their personal rights or privileges? Does that extend to wrongs committed upon theirperson and their property? Does that extend to the power of fixmg their status in the community to which they are bound? What is the power that is given to this Freedmens Bureau? think I may safely say that no Senator can define it, an the effect of this sort of legislation is seen in GenlGrants report. He says that in many localities this bureau has been badly managed, some agents holding one doctrine and managing its affairs upon one principle, other agents acting upon over principles and upon other powers. Yow, sir, I submit the question to any Senator, would you pass such a law as this as a constitution for a separate political community? If you would not, if you would say that no GOVernment ought to be recognized anywhere or for any people with such a vague and uncertain definition of its powers, is the objection not yet stronger when it is to regulate the affairs of 4 million people mingling and living among the white people, especially as the action of this bureau is not to affect alone the colored people, but it is to affect the white people so far ast e have intercourse with the colored people? I could not vote for any bill at the last session or at the presentsessioa which conferred in such a genera way the power to control the affairs of a race of people. One other point is made by the Senfrom Maine. He says that he knows no difference between the management of the public lands and the management of the money belonging to the Government, and he says that he has never observed that I have been very careful about the appropriation of public lands for western enter)HSES. I am very free to say to the Senator that my opinions are very liberal I in regard to the use of the public domain in the western States, for several reasons. In the 1st place, the constitution of the U.S. in exress terms gives to Congress the full control an disposition of the public lands. The poweris conferred clearly and plainly, and it is a questionof discretion and judgment on the part of Congress as to the manner of the disposition of the publiclands. congress owns immense tracts o lands on the bor er settlements. To develop its own lands and encour age the people in their purchase, it appropriates a portion of them to public works, to the construction of military roads and railroads. This Isay Congress may well do in the exercise of its discretion, because it is a wise use of the public lands. An individual would so use his own lands. If the Senfrom Maine were the owner of a large tract of land in the State of Minnesota, and it was proused to construct a railroad in the neighborhood of the land, I know that, as a prudent manager of his own affairs, he would subscribe a portion of that land to the construction of thatim ortant work, so that the remaining lands would be worth more to him. That is the policy of the Government, and the Government has never sustained a loss by it. The State of Indiana received some of the public lands as a gift or donation, but out of the people of the State of Indiana, the Government of the U.S., in the sales of the public lands, deducting the grants to the State, made a clear profit of nearly 15 million dollars. The ag riculture of Indiana paid that enormous profit to the General Government in the acquisition of homesteads for her people. The people of Maine had their lands.