Mr. SAULSBURY. I want to test that very fact. I may be mistaken, but for 20 years I have had to use the law as an instrument, as the workman uses his instruments, to make a living and I do hold that under the words “civil rights” the power to vote is given because it is a civil right. The honorable chair man of the ComJudiciary who has this bill under charge says he does not mean to confer that right. His meaning cannot control the operation or the effect of this law, if the bill shall become a law. I believe that if this bill is enacted into a law your judges in most of the States will determine that under these words the power of voting is given. The honorable Senator cited an authority the other day, from Maryland I think it was. in which it was decided that that right was conferred after domicile had been acquired according to the laws of the State. Sir, I wish to exclude that very idea; and if you do not mean to confer that power I want you to say so. However highly Iesteem the learnin of the honorable chairman of the ComJudiciary, I am not will iii; to trust to his declaration that that power is not to be conferred, and I want this congress to say that in conferring these civil rights they do not mean to confer the right to vote. talk to me, sir, about the words “civil rights" not including the right to votel What is a civil right? It is a right that pertains to me as a citizen and how do I get the right to vote? I get it by virtue of citizenship, and I get it by Virtue of nothing else. When this act is passed into a law, and I find a Republican judge in an of the States of this country deciding that an or it a negro has the right to vote, I am not going to quarrel with the opinion of that judge, because I believe he is deciding the law correctly. Sir, if you do not intend to confer that right, say so. If on do not mean to invade the States of this nion, and take from them the right to prescribe the qualifications of voters, say so. That is all I ask. Do not leave it in doubt. As I said the other day, I know but 2 fippdations of right that an man has: one is ght founded in nature; the other is a right founded in law. Under the law of nature I have got no right to vote. Under the law regulating society and government I have a right to vote. I get it simply on the ground of my citizenship; and your bill confers that right. It will not do for the honorable chairman of the Judieiary Committee to say that by specifing in other lines of the 1st section the rightto sue and be sued, and to give evidence to lease and to hold property, he limits these rights He does no such thing. He may think that that is the intention but when you come to look at the powers conerred by this section, and when you consider the closingj words of the section, giving to everybody, without distinction of race or co or, the same riwhts to protection of property and person and thbergy, when these r1 hts are given to the negro as reely as to the white man, I as, as a lawyer, that you confer the right of engage, because, under our republican form and system of government, and according to the genius of our republican institutions, one of the strongest guarantees of personal rights, of the rights of person and property, is the right of the ballot. Now, gentlemen, let us deal fairly, squarely, and honestly with each other. If you do not mean to confer this power, say so. Ionly ask you to say, by my amendment, that you do not mean by this bill to confer that power. If you vote down my proposrtion, what will be the interpretation put upon your law? If it shall go before an judicial tribunal of this country, and they fin that you voted down this amendment, what is the interpretation the will put upon it? That you meant to confer the power simply because you refused to say that you did not. But, sir, I will not argue the question. It is a foregone conclusion that this bill is to pass, apd I shall not detain the Senate. I want a distinct vote, however, upon my proposition, and I ask for the yeas an nags. The yeas&nays were ordered; and being taken, resultedyeas 7, nays 39; ABSENT 4. So the amendment was rejected.