Mr. YATES. I rise simply to say a word in reply to the Senfrom Connecticut. I think it is well to ascertain that there is a proper spirit of toleration in the South, and our view on that subject depends rather on the channels through which we obtain information than anything else. If we get our information through good loyal Union men, and through the loyal Press of the country in the southern States, the information is that there is no tol eration whatever of Union men in the South. That is the information we get from that source. But those men who are opposed to reconstruction upon the congressional plan, those men who were engaged in the war against the Union, those men who have, no desire now for the perpetuation of the Union upon the principles maintained by the Republican Union party, tell us that all is quiet and harmony and peace throughout the South ! They have said this in the face of the massacre at NewOrleans. They have said this in the face of the fact that, while there have been 1000s of arrests in the southern States of men engaged in criminal persecutions of loyal Union men, not a solitary conviction can be found to have taken place in the courts there under the rebel reegimee which there prevails. I am somewhat amazed at the statements of the Senfrom Connecticut, because my advices are through loyal Union men, and I have numerous letters from men who are familiarly acquainted with the facts of which they speak, and the loyal papers in Georgia and other States which I have seen say that the same spirit of rebellion, the same intolerance of Union men and Union sentiments pervades the whole South. “Facts are stubborn things;” and when we see this disposition to resist a reconstruction of the Government upon the plan that is desired by the men who sustained the war; and when we see that Union men at the South have no protection in the courts there, that in the trials which take place there are no convictions, how can we believe that there is a proper loyal spirit in the South'?