Mr. TRUMBULL. So, sir, I take it that it is competent for congress to declare thesepersons to be citizens. hey being now free and citizens of the U.S., as citizensthey are entitled, as I have undertaken to show, to thei great fundamental rights belonging to free citizens, and we have ought to protect them in the enjoyment of them. Now, sir, referring again to that other clause of the constitution upon which there have been judicial constructions, is it not manifest that it was competent for the Congress of the U.S. to have passed a law that would have protected Mr. oar, who went from Massachusetts to SCarolina for the purpose of testing a question in the courts? whould it not have been competent, underthese decisions, for Congress to have passed a law punishing nny rson who should have undertaken to deprive impof this right, and to have vested the proper authorities with power if necessary to ca liipon the Army and avy of the U.S. to protect him in this right? I apprehend it would. Then, linder the constitutional amendment which we have now ado. ted, and which declares that slavery shall no onger exist, and which authorizes Congress by appropriate legislation to carry this revision into effect, I hold that. Wehave a rightto pass any law which in our judgment, is deemed appropriate, an which will accomplish the end in view, secure freedom to all cop e in the U.S. The various State nws to which I have referredand there, are many other salthough they do not make a man an absolute slave, yet deprive him of the kights of n free man; and it is perhaps difficult. odraw the precise line, to say where freedom eases and s aver begins, but a law that does 0t allow a colored person to go from one county o another is certainly a law in derogation of the rights of a free man. A law that does not allow a colored person to hold propert, does notal low him to teach, does notal owhim to reach, is certainly a law in violation of the rights of a freedman, and being so may properly be declared v01. Without going elaborately into this question, as my design was to state rather than argue the grounds upon which I place this bill, IWill only add on this branch of the subject that the clause of the constitution under which we are called to act in my judgment vests Congress with the discretion of selectimr that “ appropriate legislation" which it is believed will best accomplish the end and prevent slavery. Then, sir, the onlquestionis, will this bill be effective to aecomp is the object, for the 1st section will amount to nothing more than the declaration in the constitution itself unless we have the machiner to carry it into effect. A law is good for nothing withoutapenalty, without a sanction to it, and that is to be found in the other sections of the bill. The 2nd section provides: That any person who under color of any law. stat ute, ordiiiniicc, regulation, or custom, shall subjcotor causeto be subjectedanyinhabitnnt of any State or Territory to the deprivation of any right securedor protectedbythis act, or todifferentpunishment. pains, or penalties on accounto f such enlonhaving at any time beenheld in a condition o slavery or involuntary servitude, except. as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have ecu duly convicted, or by rensoii of is color or race. than is prescribed for the punishment of white persons, shall be deemed guilty of ii misdemeanor and on conviction shall be punished by line not exceeding $1.000 or imprisonment not exceedingone year, or both, in the discretion of the court. This is the valuable section of the bill so far as protecting the rights of freedmen is concerned. That. they are entitled to be free we know. Being entitled to be free under the constitution, that we have a right to enact such legislation as will make them free, we believe; and that can only be done by punishing those who undertake to deny them their freedom. When it comes to be understood in all parts of the U.S. that an person who shall do prive another of any right or subject him to any punishment in consequence of his color or race will exose himself to fine and imprisonment, I think such acts will soon cease. I think it will only be necessary to go into the late slaveholding States and subject to fine and imprisonment one or 2 in a State, and the most prominent ones I should hope at that, to breik u this whole business. The t ird section of the bill provides for giving to the courts of the U.S. jurisdiction overiill persoiiilegnligjningofiensgaagainst the provisions of this act, and a so overthe cases of personswho are discriminated against by State laws orcustoms. ltprovides furtherthat no person whose equal civil rights are denied him in the State courts shall be tried by those courts for any offense, but that he shall have a right to remove his cause into the courts of the U.S., and be there tried if it be foran offense against the laws of the U.S., according to those laws, and if it be foranolfense which is not provided for by the laws of the U.S., then accordin to the common law as modified by the statutes an constitution of the State where the offense is committed, so far as they are not inconsistent with the constitution and laws of the U.S. The other revisions of this bill I shall not go over in detai. Most of them are copied from the late fugitive slave act, adopted in 1850 for the purpose of returning fugitives from slavery into slavery again. The act that was passed at that time for the purpose of punishing persons who should aid negroesto escape to freedom is now to be applied ti) the provisions of this bill to the punishment of" those who shall undertake to keep them in slavery. Surel we have the authority to enact a law as eflicient in the interests of freedom, now that freedom prevails throughout the country, as we had in the interest of slavery when it prevailed in a portion of the country.