Mr. FESSENDEN. Mr. President, Ire et sincerely, as the honorable Senfrom ll as sachusetts [Mr. Sniixsa] did, that I find it necessary in my judgment to say something more upon the question under consideration. I do not intend, owever, to present again the argument that I have already had occasion to make; but somethings have been said and some rounds taken by honorable Senators since those views were presented which, in my judgment, require a short reily. It is not my intention to consider the subject at my very considerable length; and perhaps I may be obliged to speak rather upon matters and things in general than upon the Tuestion under consideration: and I hope if shall do so that the Senate will not judge me too severely. Mr. President, I have been taught since I have been in public life to consider it amstter of proper statesmanship, when we aim at an object which we think is valuable and important, if that object, in our judgment, is unat tainable, to get as much of it and come as near it as we maybe able to do. It was with views something ike these, actuated by considerations of this descrition, that the committee of which I have the mum to be one, presented the resolution which is now under consideration. As I before took occasion to state, it was not all they wished, it was not in some particulars exactly what they might have desired. So far as my own judgment was concerned, and is concerned now, the resolution is defective; and that is, in my mind, the objection to it. It is not defective, as I think. in principle. the principle a on which it is founded is asafe and wise one; at I think it comes short of what ought to be attained, and I think, too, that as it is drawn it may be liable to evasion, and that it may not aebomplish what on its face it may seem to accomplish. The honorable Senfrom Indiana, [Mr. Hsxoai exs] in the address which he made upon this subject, commented somewhat severely, as I thought upon an expression used by me on a former occasion, that as I could not accomplish by direct action what I wished to accomplish in this regard, namely, to bring about a I such colored men as were proper persons to 1 exercise it, since I could n it accomplish it in u the way I would like to do, by directly abol i ishing all distinctions of color, I was willing to reach it by this resolution, which in my judgment won d, after a series ofyears, greater or less, accomplish the same puriose indirectlv; and he asked me very distinctly and very sig nificantly whether it was proper to accomplish by indirection that which we could not accomplish directly. I have yet to learn that where a legislator avows his object and his purrose, states what he wishes to accomplish an the mode by which he is to accomplish it. he is to be charged, although it Operates indirectly, with what is properly understood by the term “ in direction, " which conveys the idea of a trick, a contrivanee, to do something by takiu advantage of others which you cannot do it you make plain to their senses what is the object. Iput no such construction upon it, and I do not hold myself as at all amenable to such a charge. Legislators may often with great propriety pass bills which do not lead directly ton particular result with a view and intention that they shall finally accomplish it, and I think it its is part of wisdom so to act in many cases. Sir, if I may be allowed to say so, when the Saviour of the world came upon earth He found many abuses, many errors, many corruption! existingwhich He would gladly have terminated at once. He did not deem it wise or prudent to attempt to put them down by the strong arm of power; but He laid down a set of principles, and lo gaveinstructions which, if they became acceptable to the people, and were finally takenas a rule of action, would inevitably, by the etfect they would produce upon the minds of men tend to banish all those errors, to destroy all those corruptions, and to make the world what it should be. The action of such legislation, if I may call it so, was not direct, but indirect; and I have yet to learn that such action was not eminently wise and good. being calculated to effect the object that He had in view the improvement of the world. I have no more to say upon that subject. I wished simplyto relieve myself of the imputation which i the honorable Senfrom ludi ana seemed to desire to cast upon me for using that expression. I adhere to the same position; and I think, with regard to the presentquestion, it is better to accomplish it indirectly than by force. The question is a great one, involving the right of a large numberof people to exercise suffrage. Many of them, perhaps, would be lit to exercise it today; many of them may be unlit to exercise it today; many more may become fit to exercise it in the process of time, when they shall have enjoyed their freedom and received instruction. A system aiming at their development and at the full exercise, as they become capable of using it in process of time, of this great privilege of suffrage, which aims to accomplish it gradually, kindly, mildly, and not at once by forcible imposition, against all the prejudices and feelings and habits of the people with whom they are connected and among whom they live, would be better, in my judgment, and tend more to the once of the community and the eventual ub ic good and safety of the nation and will say to the honorable Senator, if it can be accomplished by the indirect action of an amendment of the Constitution which op cals to the interest of those who have hit erto been and who are yet probably the ruling class among whom this large population is situated, and With whom they Iive, it will be far better than to run the risk of all the difficulties that might arise from a forcible imposition, which would create ill feeling, generate discord and produce, perhaps, undying aniiiiosities. Ihis, owever, is my own private opinion, and perhu s it is of little value. The honorable Senfrom Indiana seemed to feel very strongly upon this subject, and he placed his opposition to this measure upon 3 grounds. The 1st was that it was intended for a party purpose. Had the Senn, tor any right to soy t at? Has he any right to attack the motives of a committee of this body in introducing an amendment of the Constitution? Has he any right to attack the motives of those who support it? Must it necessarily Ibfe attended with benefit to a particular party? I so, it is necessarily attended with injury to another party, of which the honorable Senator is a prominent member; and it would as well become me to say that his opposition to it is for part purposes and for party objects as it became him to say that its introduction and its support were intended for party purposes. I say it would as well become me to say it, because I have precisely the same right to attack the motives ofhis action that he has to attack mine for any action that I choose to take. I do not do it, and I omit to do it on this particular ground: it is well known here and out of this Senate that the honorable Senfrom Indiana is n. gentleman who never in any of his addresses ere says an thing that is in the slightest degree calculate to clfect a party purpose, and has so little of that party feeling which presses itself upon other men as to be hardly suspected of being a party man at all. {Laughter} The Senator objected to this measure upon another ground, and that was, that in one sense it was intended as a punishment, and that was wrong; and in another sense it was what he calle a bribe, a reward, and that was wrong. If he considers it a punishment, he differs very much from his leading associate on this question, the honorable Senfrom Massachusetts, [ML SUMNEB] for he does not consider it a punishment at all. The Senfrom Massachusetts says there is nothing punitive in it; on the contrary, it is a reward to these States; it is conferring power upon them; it isstrength enin power in the hands of the whites of the Seat and only oppressing the colored race. Behold how doctors disa reel They operate upon the same atient an are operat in at the same time. with different remedies an in different directions. suppose it is a punishment, and suppose it is:1 HM, a reward: it does not differ very much from the principle upon which all crim, inal legislation is founded, to say the least of it. We punish men when they do wrong. I never heard that it was an objection to legislation that it punished those who perpetrate a wrong. never heard that it was an objection to legislation that it held out rewards to those who did right. If we believe it is wrong in the States to deprive this race of the right of suffrage, they having become free men, if they are fit to exercise Iit, do not see that it is any eat breach of morality to provide that if they O it, a political punishment shall follow, because it is the exercise of political power, and if we provide that if political power is exercised in a wrong direction, certain political consequences shall follow lessening the power which is thus exercised, I do not see that we depart from the great principle which lies at the oundation of all our action upon such subjects. If we hold out a reward and say, provided you do this or do that, which we believe tovbe beneficial, which we believe to be right, you shall receive such and such advantages from Iit, see nothing injurious in it to the public morals, and nothing contravening the great principles of legislalion. but the honorable Senfrom Indiana had another ground of objection to this measure which struck me as very curious, and that was that it was a.blow at the agricultural interests of the west for the benefit of the East. There was nothing of a party aspect, I take it, or cal culated to affect t it: prejudices of the western people With a Wart view in all that. I never could suspect this ionorable Senfrom Indianaof thinking of such a thing. The argument is so obvious, it is so striking, it is so well addressed to the sense of the mt n about him on both sides of the Chamber, and to the think filed by this war, which grew up, perhaps, moreing men of the country, instead of to their prejudices, that certainly it could not fail to strike everybody with great force. [Laughteu] The Senator said and I marked his language NewEngland has been largely benefrom the action of NewEngland than from, the action of any other part of the country; I l will not say purposely. Did he mean to intimate that it might be said with any propriety that this war had been patronized and sustained by NewEngland because of the advantages to be gained by her? Did the honorable Senator in using that exression mean to tell his constituents of the ilest, “Look at NewEngland; she sustained the war because she has been making money out of it?” It is astonishin to me that the Senator should have allowed himselffor a moment to hint at the possibility of such a thing. As I said before, knowing that it could not be for any party purpose or to affect the minds of men with reference to anything of that description, I am a little at a loss to know why he allowed himself to make an imputation of that kind. But he said this measure was intended as a blow at the agriculture of the West. Why? Because it is eeping out all the representatives of the agricultural interests of the South, and as long as they are kept out the commercial and manufacturing interests of NewEng land, and of the eastern and middle States Generally, will have the advantage over the agricultural interest. I hope I do not misrepresent the honorable Senators argument. It is very as tonishing to me that so many gentlemen on this side of the Chamber, representatives of the West, do not see it. It is astonishin to me that the representatives from Iowa an Michigan and O i0 and other States of the North west do not feel that, in sustainin an amendment which has for its object to nfiow suffrage to a largerportion of the southern people, the are particu arly attempting to subject the agricultural interests of the West to the commercial and manufacturing interests of the North and Northeast and East. Sir, what is there in this argument except a desire for I will endeavor to say nothing that I on ht not to say to imress upon the people of is own State, and those who may listen to him, the idea that when we are attempting to give power to a large mass of people who are entited to exercise it because they are men, instead of ein actuated by those high considerations which should always actuate statesmen, particularly on questions of this kind, we have only in view the etty, miserable consideration of whether the ast or the middle States shall retain a lit tle more power, or whether they shall lose it? Does not the Senator know that if this amendment should be adopted the effect will be, not togive power so much to NewEngland and the middle States as to the Northwest? But it does not immediately enable gentlemen of a particular political stripe in that region to have the support of the Southwest here and thus, perhaps, carry what they might wish to carry, not so much with reference to the ordinary legislation of the count on questions affecting its good, as upon at er things which here mun; not be mentioned. I was not impressed with the argument of the honorable Senfrom Indiana as really affecting this question. Not one word of it was addressed to the question of right. Not one word of it was a dressed to the question of whether men of one color were entitled to the same rights and the same immunities, the same privileges as men of another color. Indeed, ie expressed the opinion that the South never would allow colored men to vote, in his judgment; and I think he added they ought not to allow them. ThereforeI look upon him, in the argument which he presented, as appealing simply to prejudice, to considerations affecting party, and leaving out of view any of those that look to the future of this country as an entirely free country, with all men (to use an expression that has become very fashionable) having the same rights before the law, and entitled, as they become able to exercise them, to the same privileges under the institutions which we claim to be f rec and equal. I propose to say no more in reference to the speech of the honorable Senfrom Indiana.