Mr. ROUSSEAU of Kentucky addressed the House. His speech will be published in the Appendix. Speech entitled Freedmens Bureau. February 8, 1866. The Home having underconsideration the hill (S.No.60) to enlarge the powers of the Freedmens Bureau. Mr. ROUSSEAU said: Mr. Srman: Although I have had no reason to question the veracity of the gentleman either then or now, yet I think he will hereafter have reason to doubt the accuracy of his memor. But he got about as near the truth as cop e generally do concernin such matters, having exerated the fact on y fourfold. ow, sir, I do not propose to justify here any of the wrongs alleged by the Gentfrom Pennsylvania [Mr. KELLEY] to have been committed in the State of Alabama. I do not seek to justify wrong of any sort. I know nothing about the instances of injustice cited by the gentleman. All that I will say is, that the data was exceedingly meager for an argument attempted to be founded a on it. propose here to discuss the prinnciples of this freedmens bill. I am ogposed to it; not in any partisan spirit nor om any prejudices, but because of the oppressions that such a law must lead to, and the injury that it must inevitably bring to the colored race. This bill emanates from a party with whichI have acted for the last 4 years. I am not a republican; I wha Whig and am a Union man, and belon to the nion party, and I am sorry to say that the Union party and the Republican party are not always convertible terms, in my judgment. My reasons for this statement may apear as I proceed. I have acted with the Re publican part in its measures to suppress the rebellion. I have given it a hearty support for the last 4 years. I have sustained itblindly, asking no questions, because I believed the Government of the U.S. was in the hands of that party, to be saved or lost. Iwas told at the outset of these difficulties that, representin the loyalty of the nation, that party undertoo to suppress the rebellion, to restore the Vl Ition, outrageous in all its features. It prdlp authority of the U.S., and reestablish the original statusof states in all the dignity and, rights which they had before the rebellion. It was said not only to southern men, but all over the U.S., that they owed a paramount allegiance to the U.S. Government, and that no man could be released from such allegiance to the Federal Gavernment. I subscribed to that doctrine. It is the doctrine of that man in whose principles I have believed, whose talents and eloquence we all admired. It was the doctrine of Henry Clay, of Kentucky, and not. for one moment since our troubles be gan have I thought of doubting it, much less of abandoning it. I believed, sir, that the Republican party in the outset of this war would save the Government. I had no doubt about it. Ihad no doubt that any party that represented the U.S. won d save the Government. The rebellion is now suppressed. We have peace. I care not what gentlemen may say; but, sir, there is not in the whole U.S.A. one single armed rebel today. How, then, can gentlemen talk about existing war? The existing state of thingsin the counaffords no excuse for the passage of a bill oft is descrip oses to confer powers such as never were hear ofas having been conferred by the congress of the U.S., either upon judicia Officers or upon regularly established courts; and here these were are proposed to be conferred upon mere irresponsible agents, military subalterns, lieutenants, captains, and majors of the Army, [A Vows. “And politicians, ”3 and, as suggested, politicians. lay the Lor save us from them! I mean no disrespect to the politicians upon this floor, [laughter, ] but ofal militar men, relieve me and the Army from the “mi itar ” man who wants to fill some petty office, for e only eats up rations that better and more serviceable men should have. [Laughter] I say, sir, that this bill is oppressive in all its features; and I wish to say to the House in justice to my own position, that I am for any and all measures, do not care what they are, that are just and necessary to take care of these unfortunate people. There is not one of them, the poorest and meanest and humblest in the U.S., in defense of whose rights, if I saw them assailed, I would not stake my life and the poorer and humbler the quicker would I do it. I would protect that people in every proper way, but we do not need to protectthem at the excnse of the rights of other people. I draw no distinction between blacks and whites so far as the rights of person and property are concerned. ll e have distinctions that we cannot today get rid of, and we have others still that we do not want to abolish. But this bill swee shall such distinctions pretty much away. I an ertake to say that if the enforcement of this bill is placed in the hands of prejudiced men who go South with their minds made up upon this subject, made up in the way that the gentlemen from Pennsylvania [Messrs STE vsivs and KELLEY] would have them, insults and outrages that no community on earth could bear willie of daily and hourly occurrence. You do not know, Mr. Speaker, gentlemen here do not know, what the loyal element in the South has to bear in matters of this sort. The Union cause in Kentucky has gone down; and wh has it gone down? Wh, from these abuses an oppressions which loya men cannot defend and which the community cannot hear. I tell on, sir, that gentlemen in this House ought to look to these things and have at least a little respect and a little kindly feeling for men who have stood true to the Government in its trials. Take care of the negroes, in Gods name, and I will helpyou, but O not ilade these extraor dinary powers in the ban s of a body of men who will oppress, insult, and outra e our people. What are those powers? Has the Clerk to read the 7th and 8th sections of the bill.