Mr. DIXON. I shall take authentic and written declarations of his opinion. When this Congress met there was, I understand, no difference ofo inion between the President and Congress. Vas ever a message submitted to a more approving Congress? Was there ever a Presidents message read by a more admiring public? I need not refer to what followed in either House of Congress. Ncarly 3 months have elapsed. It is said there is a difference of opinion at this time between the President and certain men in this body. What is the difference of opinion existin between the POTUS an those who are hOstile to his reconstruction policy in the 2 Houses of congress? I certainly disclaim, of course, any rightto state what are his opinions, except as they are given to us in authentic ublic documents. From these alone I obtain his views. That these are misrepresented, intentionally or otherwise, should not perhaps surprise those who consider how seldom a candid statement of the true question at issue is made by the advocates of conflicting doctrines and It would seem impossible, in view of opinions. tcfrank and explicit utterances which the President has often made of his opinions, to create in the pYublic mind a misapprehension of his views. et this, to a certain extent, has been done. He is supposed by many to urge the admission of disloyal men from the rebel States to the 2 Houses of Congress. He is charged with a purpose to brin into their former places in this body bloody llanded rebels. He is said to wish to “throw wide open” the doors of congress and fill those seats with traitors fresh mm the battle fields of the rebellion. What is his true position? I might refer to the ub lished statement of his views in his remar s to a deleation of Virginians the other day, in whichIie explicitly declared his opinion that only loyal men should be appointed to Office; but I prefer to take his latest authentic written declarations. I shall read from his veto message. I find in that document the following: “Ihold it my duty to recommend to you, in the interests of peaceand in the interests of the Union, the admission of every State to its sharein public lo gislntion, when, however insubordinate, insurgent,or rebellious its people may have been, it presents itsolf. not only in an attitude of loyalty and harmony, but in the personsof representatives whose loyalty cannot be questioned under any existing constitutional or legal tests." such is the language of the President in his veto message. Can it be misunderstood? Can it be misrepresented? What are existing constitutional and legal tests but the oath required by the Constitution, and the still stronger test oath prescribed by law? Having stated what he recommends, the Pm {dent then states what he is opposed to, as follows:. “It is plain that an indefinite or permanent exclusion of any part of the country from representation must be attended by a spirit of disquiet and complaint. It is unwise and danirerons to pursue a courso of measures which will unite a very large section of the country ainst another section of the country, however mufii the latter may preponderate. The course of emigration, the development of industry and business and natural causes will raise up at the South men as devotedto the Union as thoseof another art of the land. But if they are all excluded from congress; if, in a crmanent statute they are declared not to be in ful constitutional relations to the country, they may think they have cause to becomea unit in feeling and sentiment against the Government.” This is what the President is opposed to. We have, therefore, what he recommends and what he disapproves. He recommends the admission to Congress of loyal men who can take the required oaths, pronded they come from States which present themselves in an attitude of harmony and loyalty. He disapproves of a permanent or indefinite exclusion of all repre— sentation, regardless of the loyalty of the rep Representative or the people. Here, then, the issue is fairly presented. how could he state it more distinctly? Yet we are daily told that the President desires to throw wide open the doors of congress to bloody handed rebels. Go where on will—in the halls of representation as we as in the public press—you will find the opponcnts of his policy statin the question in t form.