Mr. WINDOM. Mr. Speaker, after the thorough discussion this question has received I can hardlyexpect to add anything new. But at a time like this silence is akin to cowardice; indifference is treason. The great struggle through which. we are passing is of a 2 fold c aracter it is a war of principles as well as of material forces. The latter isended and our triumph is complete; but the conflict of principles still rages with increased vigor. Rebels vanquished in the field are encouraged from unexpected quarters to renew the contest in other and more dangerous forms. Foiled in their mad attempt to overthrow the Republic by force, they now hope to accomplish it by political strategy. In 1862 modes of destroying the Government were considered by them. One was to rebel and by force of arms disrupt it; the other was to remain in their places of power, and, as they said. “ fight His hatred was turned to compassion, his disit from the inside.” would be the more efficient and practicable. The “inside” policy would doubtless have‘ prevailed had not a few hot heads precipitated the decision by inaugurating open rebellion, thus compelling the more discreet to follow. The promise of Democratic leaders at the North to aid and assist them in maintaining the right of secession did much to induce, the attempt; and the last Democratic President (James Buchanan) did what he could to manded the preservation of their Government. A storm of patriotic indignation swept overthe country. fhcse same Democratic leaders quailed before it and instead of armed support, gave only the aid and comfort of their sympathy and secret conspiracies. having failed through the inability of those allies to keep their p edges, the rebels now propose to try the other mode, namely, to take their seats in Congress and carry on the contest “from the inside.” In this they have renewed assurances of aid from the North. Once more the people are called upon to preserve the Republic against the treachery of pretended friends and the machinations of avowed enemies. Their response is by no means uncertain. Already it has been heard in tones which those in high places would do well to heed. What we have heard is only the muttering of the distant storm which will soon break with fury upon the heads of those who are false to their trust. The loyal people have suffered too much and understand too well the issues of the hour to be deceived by demagogucs or traitors. They will demand nothing for vengeance, but everything for security. Their generosity is unbounded, but it will not yield an iota of principle. The issues which now distract the country could have been easily avoided. The conflict of principles might have ceased with the conflict of arms. When Lee surrendered the rebels understood it to be an entire surrender of the "cause" and of the principles upon which it was based. They did) not doubt the right or the determination of the Government to insist upon this, and knowing that by treason and rebellion they had justly forfeited life and property, both of which were at the mercy of the victors. they were quite willing to purchase these by yielding to any just demands. They felt that, having staked everything upon the wager of battle and having lost, it was the right of the conqueror to impose terms and the duty of the conquered to submit. They under stood well the principles of liberty and equal rights, for which the nation had conten ed, and they anticipated such terms and conditions as would forever guaranty them. Had the President then called an extra session of Congress, and upon consultation with the people, through their Representatives, agreed upon and demanded such terms, they would have been gladly accepted, and the whole country would have long ago rejoiced in peace. Just here was' committed the fatal bluhder which has led to all our present troubles, and which bids fair to disturb and agitate the political elements for years to come. Reconstruction and reconciliation were then ilain and easy. Now they are complicated an difficult. The President’s intentions, as disclosed by his speeches, at that time were right. He hated treason, and declared it should be made “odious.” He despised traitors, and said they should be “punished.” Those were brave and patriotic words, and they found a hearty response in every loyal breast. But during all the last summer an autumn he suffered himself to be surrounded by pardon seeking rebels, who filled his audience room, crowded the antechambers, halls, and lobbies of the White House, and knelt before him, with well dissembled loyalty on their Ii 3, while treason rankled in their breasts. 0 believed their assurances, and was flattered and deceived. I Their councils were for. a time divided as to which of these modes 1 1pose it upon the country. ‘, the majority in Congress protests, and demands make good that promise. But the people arose " in the sublime majesty of their power and de Rebellion; trust to confidence. "Vice is a monster of such hideousmien, As, to he hated.needsbut to beseen: Yet seentoo oft, familiar with her face. We 1st endure.then pity, then embrace." Having persuaded the Executive and a portion of his Cabinet that their policy struction is the only of recon proper and constitutional one, the rebels now seek, through the aid of their old party associates at the i. orth, to im Agninst this policy one which is approved by the loyal people. Briefly stated, the real issue between the rebels and Congressis, shallthe principles for whichwe ‘, sacrificedaquarter ofamillionprccious livesand untold millions of public treasure.be abandoned at the dictation oftraitors? The rebelssay “yes;” congress answers “no.” Shallvanquished trai tors c permitted through their representatives in Congress to seize upon the Government they have tried to destroy, and thereby accomplish by political strate y what they have failed to do y courage in fine field? '1 he rebels insist upon it; Congress protests. Has the Government a right to demand of traitors, as a condition precedent to their full restoration topolitical power, such guarantees as will insure its own safety, guardits honor, and protect its hnin blest defender in all the rights of citizenship? Congress asserts that right. The rebels deny it, and insolently demand immediate and unconditional restoration as one of their constitutional rights. Shall the rebellious States come back with largelyincrcased political powers, as the result and reward of treason, or shall the Constitution be so amended as to make the basis of representation just and equitable, and thereby place the Northand South on an exact equality in this respect? Congress says itshall be so amended. The rebels say it shall not, and that they are entitled to come back at once without terms or conditions of any kind. How far the rebel policyhas been impressed upon the Administration may be seen by reference to the President's last annual message, his veto of the freedmen’s Bureau bill. his 22d of February speech, and his veto of the civil rights bill, all of which he has declared to be the authoritative eniinciations of his policy. Interpreted by these utterances, that policy declares: 1st, that inasmuch as the acts of secession are void and the withdrawal of a State from the Union is legally impossible, the rebellious States have never lost their places as States in the Union, and that they therefore are, and constantly have been, entitled to all the rights, privileges, and immunities appertaining to any State, among which is the right of the people to immediate representation in Congress without the exaction of any condition whatever; 2nd, that as representation and taxation are inseparable, Congress has no right to impose the one until it grants the other; 3rd, that it is a grave question whether any laws affectingthe interests of the people of these States can be constitutionally enacted so long as they are denied representation in Congress 4th, that the Executive alone is authorize to investigate and decide all questions appertaining to the internal condition and Federal relations of those States; that the people, through their representatives in Congress, are entitled to no voice on the subject of reconstruction, except that “each House may judge of the election, returns, and qualifications of its own members;” but that this right is no broader when applied to an applicant for a seat from a disloyal than to one from a loyal State; that, therefore, in appointing a JtCommee “to inquire into the condition of those States, " an into the loyalty ordisloyalty of the ir people, and their consequent fitness or unfitness to participate in the administration of the Government, Congress has flagrantly tran scended its powers, usurped executive prerogatives, and contumaciously hindered and obstructed the reunion of the States; 5th, that the freedmen of the South, whom we called upon to defend us in the day of our great gation resting upon us. peril, to whom we gave the solemn assurance of national protection as well as freedom, and who, trusting our plighted honor, fought with us for the nation's life, shall have no protection for their persons or their property, and no civil or political rights except such as the authorities of their respective States may choose to extend to them, and that they shall have no voice in the selection of those authorities; that loyal white men, who have suffered and fought for the Union, shall have no political advantages over rebels who have wic tedly attempted its overthrow. The central, governing principle of this pol icy, from which its other elements'sprinn' as branches from the parent trunk, is f'oun in the declaration that the rebellious States are, and constantly have been, entitled to all the rights, privileges, and immunities of any State, and that, consequently, the people thereof are entitled to demand immediate representation in Congress, without any conditions whatever. The President is good enough to inform us that he as Coininander in Cliief of the Army and Navy has required of them certain terms with which they have complied, namely, the adoption of the antislavery amendment, the repudiation of the confederate debt, and the abrogation of their secession ordinances; that no other terms are necessary or proper, and therefore he and the rebels‘have fully performed the work of reconstruction; that he has guarantied to those States a RFG, as required by the Constitution of the U.S. He further declares, through his SecyState, that reconcil iation and not reconstruction is now the obli That Congress has no duty to perform in the premises but to admit at once the Senators an Representatives from the South, and thereby complete the work of reconciliation. It is true that to Congress is generally conceded the right to examine audjudge of the credentials of an applicant for a seat, in order to ascertain whether they are in proper form, and also to inquire if he has a majority of the votes cast in his district, and ifhe is of proper age. But we are by no means to ask anything about the kind of government established in the State from which i he comes, or the character of the people who send him to represent them. Having ascertained that his credentials are formal, that he is 25 years of a e, and has a majority of all the votes cast in is district, we are to be permitted to administer to him an oath to support the Constitution of the U.S. When we shall have done this much, and brought. back all the southern Representatives, it is supposed we will be once more in the full enjoyment of the blessings of complete restoration, peace, and union. This grand panacea for all our political ills is based upon the theory that the people who attempted by violence and perjury to destroy the Government, who waged a most wicked and diabolical 4 years’ war for the establilshment of a slaveholding empire upon the ruins of the Republic, who murdered our soldiers in cold blood, who fired our hotels filled with women and children, who starved our soldiers to death in loathsome prison pens, within sight of storehouses groaning with confederate supplies, who polluted the fountains of life by knowingly ine culating prisoners with the virus of a nameless disease which will scour e them to their graves and entail untold sufferings upon their innocent offspring, who laid down their arms only when our victorious bayonets were at their throats, and who, when professing to acce t the issues of war, assassi nated the nation’s onored chicf thiitthis people without any evidences of repentance, but with every indication of sorrow for the “lost cause, ” and of bitter hatred toward the government and its defenders, have suddenly he come sufficiently loyalto be trusted with all the rights and franchises they have renounced and forfeited; that in “accepting the situation ” they have entitled themselves to step at once, unquestioned, from the rebel congress and the rebel camps into the halls of legislation to make laws for the Republic which they have so recently tried in vain to destro; to become the guardians of our widows, orphans, and disabled soldiers, and custodians of all the civil and political rights of the humble colored patriots whom they held in slavery as long as they could. But it is claimed by some of its supporters that this policy demands the admission of loyal Representatives only, without regard to the character of their constituencies. Unfortu nately the term “loyalty” seems to have acuired an exceedinflly doubtful meaning. The ‘outh use it to define a faithful adherence to rebellion and treason. A certain class of northern Democrats mean ly it all manner of opposition to the war for the Union, an unwavering sympathy with its enemies so long as they ha any hope of success in the field, and since their failure there a determination to restore them to power in the Government. The President in his 22d of February speech defines a loyal man to be one who acknowl edges his allegiance to the Government and swears to support the Constitution of the U.S., and adds by way of further expla nation, “ He (the rebel) cannot do this in good faith unless he is loyal. No amplification of the oath can make any difference; it is mere detail, which I'care nothing about.” By this definition, then, an acknowledgment of allegiance and an oath to support the Constitution purge the vilest traitor of all his treason, and convert him at once into a 1st class patriot. And this for the extraordinary reason that one who has been a rebel cannot take the oath in “good faith unless he is loyal.” The test oath which requires a man to swear that he has not borne arms against the Government, or voluntarily given aid and comfort to its enemies, is a mere “ amplification” and cannot “make any difference; it is mere detail, which I (the President) care nothing about.” Loyalty, asexpounded by this very high authority, consists simply in swearing to support the Constitution in the future, which, of course, any rebel, from Jeff. Davis down, can readily do, for they have done that many times already, and as was said by another, have sworn to support the constitution of the southern confederacy in addition. Sir, I have no confidence in the “good faith” of these constitutional oath breakers. Treason has debauched their entire moral na ture. Their oaths will be broken in the future with the same facility they have been in the net. I want some better guarantee for future oynlty than is to be found in the oath of a thrice perjured traitor. Nor is this the kind of loy alty which the patriotic people whom I represent desire should govern this country. 'Ihey do not believe the test oath to be a mere “ am plification.” If it be mere “detail” to require a man to purge himself of treason before he assumes to govern them, it is that sort of detail which in their opinion does make a material “ difference, ” and about which they do “care.” They were taught only a 12 month since that “treason is a crime and ought to be punished, ” that “loyal men” whether white or black, should govern this country;” that “the traitor who has raised a parricidal hand against the Government which protected him should be subjected to a severe ordeal be forehe is restored to citizenship” even. They believe what they were then taught, and in the honest simplicity of their hearts cannot discover the severity of that “ordeal” which merely requires a traitor to make a trip to the White House, ask a pardon, and then swear to support the Constitution, in order to entitle himself to make laws to govern them. They b“elieve, with the Andrew ohnson of 1864, that before these repenting rebels can be trusted the must bring forth the fruits of repentance.” at it is also insisted by a very few of its supporters that this policy does not demand a repeal of the test oath. It is certainly not so understood by the rebels themselves, or by the masses of the Democracy at the North. I think it is hardly fair to say that the President himself or his SecyState so understands it; for they both complain that these insurgent States are not now admitted to representation.