Mr. LANE, of Indiana. But, Mr. President, it has been said that we are already precluded, that our hands are tied, that congress hasal ready recognized the existence oft ese States. Let us, if you please, look for a moment atthat position. I have already shown ou that presidents Lincoln and Johnson in their proclamations recognized the fact that these States are dead, dead dejure, dead de facto, and that they have no rights under the constitution. They have no rights under their present organization otherwise President Johnson would not have appointed provisional governors for them; otherwise he would not have fixed the qualifications of their voters, and by telegraphic communication, conveniently arranged, le would not have said to them “ Thus far shalt thou go and no further, ” do this and be States, do that and be out of the Union, until these organizations come to be the creatures of the Administration and not the voluntary act of the free people of the rebel States. It is of the very essence of a RFG that i; shall have the approval of those to be governed it. Now, how has Congress regarded this question? You are told that congress has recognized the present existence of these States, and how? That we have passed an apportionment bill apportioning certain representation to the southern States: that we have passed a bill for the collection of a direct tax, and have apportioned that among the people of the rebel States under the constitutional ratio and basis. All that we have done. What do these acts mean? They mean simply this: that the census had been taken; the duty of Congress to apportion the representation among the States was upon us; and we legislated upon that subject, not so much with regard to the present condition and relation of these States, as with regard to an anticipated condition to exist in the future, when these States then in revolt against the U.S. should be entitled to representation, and when we should bein a condition to collect taxes from them. Forinstance, whenever the States were entitled to representation, their representation should be underthat bill; and whenever we were prepared to collect taxes they should be collected under that bill. Thus far and no further has the action of Congress recognized these people as existing States. Yet we are told that Congress have by their legislation precluded themselves and tied their hands, that they have said in the apportionment act and in the direct taxation act that these were existing States. I have shown you that that legislation had reference, and by possibility could have had reference, to nothing exceptthe future. For instance, when they were entit edto representation if. W215fixed; when we were prepared to collect taxes, that was the proportion in which it should he collected. But let me show you other acts of the congress of the U.S. proving that the existence of these States was totally and entirely ignored. By the constitution of the U.S. a majorit of all the representatives in congress in each House constitutes a By (Forum. the deliberate action of the HoRep and the Senate of the U.S., it was determined that a majority of the Sens&Reps of all the loyal States represented ere should constitute a quorum. Now, one of 2 things is true: either that law was just and proper and constitution al, or all our legislation or the last 3 years has been unconstitution al. The constitution fixes one quorum recognizing all the States; you fix another quorum recognizing simpl the States that have never gone into the rebellion. Then, so far as that act is concerned, both Houses of Congress are precluded from taking the ound now that these are existing States under the constitution. But let me refer you to another instance showin clearly the view which the Congress of the U.S. took upon this whole subject. Prior to counting the votes for President and VEEP in 1865, both Houses of congress passed a JtResolution that whatsoever candiate might receive or had receiveda majority of the electoral votes cast by the loyal States who had nevergone into the rebellion, should be declared the legal constitutional president and VEEP There are 2 express acts of Congress utter lyi oring, for the time being, the existence of these States, and the POTUS today holds his high office under Provi dence and underthat JtResolution of the 2 Houses of Congress, utterly ignoring the present existence of the rebel States. Yet we are told that the annihilation of a State presupposes the annihilation of the Unioxi. Is it so? yvirtue of the constitution itself, when 9 States ratified the instrumentwe became the U.S.A. suppose that 4 States had never ratified it, then the argument is that though the Government of the U.S. would have been formed if 4 States had never ratified the constitution, yet we are told the moment one State withdraws, that very moment the constitution is rendered void, the nation is destroyed, the Union cannot exist. It was only neceSsary to get the concurrence of 9 States, leaving 4 out, and we were a complete State under the laws of nations, having all the powers of a sovereign State even though 4 States had never entered the Union at all; and yet it is held that the annihilation of one single State would destroy the U.S and the Union formed under the Constitution. If it had pleased Almighty God to strike out of existence, and to have caused the waves of the Gulf stream to roll 100 fathoms deep over SCarolina in 1861, the U.S. would nevertheless have been a proud, prosperous, and mighty nation, entitled to all the rights of sovereignty under the laws o nations. But, Mr. President, gentlemen state the argument very plausibly they say that secession is unconstitution al, that rebellion is illegal, and therefore null and void, and that a null and void act cannot operate to take any State out of the Union. An act may be null, and far from being void. An act may be illegal and unconstitutional, and far from being vonl. This rebellion was illegal and unconstitution al, but it was fraught with terrible consequences to the people of the South and the people of the North. Butwe are asked, did the ordinance of secession carry a single State beyond the ale of the constitution? I answer on that tesimple ordinance of secession did not. They might have resolved, and resolved and resolve 1,000times, and it would not have operated to carry them out of the Union. It was not the act of secession, but the act of open, violent, and flagrant war made upon the Union. They might have resolved to secede every day in the year, and still have abided by the laws of the U.S., and their resolutions would have had no eHect. The moment they declared war and became not only domestic traitors but alien enemies and belligerents, that very moment, for the time being, eir constitutional relations to the U.S. were changed, and the can only be restored by the Congress of the H U.S. The people have too long looked to the President for a plan of restoration and reconstruction. They have looked to him for that which he has no power to grant. Look to Congress. Congress alone, embeding the will of the wholepeo la, in whom resides the sovereignty of the nation, can recall and restore these States to their proper relations to the General Government. Sir, that is the constitution. The Constitution says that the U.S shall guaranty to every State in this Union a RFG. How can the President carry out that guarantee? He may appoint his marshals with your consent; he may appoint his postmasters with your consent; he may appoint llS revenue officers; but suppose in the mean time an aristocracy is organized in anyone of these States, or an oligarchy, or a despotism, the Presidentis powerless to enibrce thi gnarantee of the constitution. It can only be done by legislation in Congress; and lest I may state t iat principle too strongly, I desire to refer to the Supreme Court decision in the case of Luther vs. Borden, not for the purpose (I disclaim all such purpose of endeavoring to shed additional ight on this decision after the able and exhaustive argument which we hdve heard from the Senators from Massachusets and Maryland, and other Senators, but simply for the purpose of preserving the consistency and continuity of my own argument. This is a decision of the Supreme Court that I refer to with much more pleasure than I shall have if I have occasion to refer to the decision in the Dred Scott case, for then the Supreme Court was the representative of the highest legal learnin, abiity, and integrity in the nation. Mr. Cilef Justice Taney, in Luther vs. Borden, in 7 Howard, said: "The 4th section of the 4th article of the constitution of the U.S. provides that the U.S shall guaranty to every State in this Union a RFG and shall protect eachof them against invasion; and on application of the Legislature, orthe Executve, (when the Legislature cannot be convened) agnmst domestic violence. Under this article of the fenfit"! on it rests with Congress to decide what government s the established one in a State; for, as the U.S. guaranty to each State a RFG, Congress must necessarily decide what government is established in a State, before it can determine whether it is republican or not in form and when the Sens&Reps of the Stam are admitted to the councils of the nation, the authority of the government under which they are ap pointed, aswe l as its republican character is recognized by the proper constitutional authority and its decision is binding upon every other Dept of the Government, and cannot be questioned in any judiCial trdmnal.” Here, then, is the broad ground asserted that Congress has the power to guaranty a RFG, and consequent y in the event of a conflict, as was the case In RhdIsland between 2 separate organizations, each claiming to be the State of RhdIsland, the Supreme Court says Congress has a right to decide, by the admission or the non-admission of members, which is the properState government in RhdIsland, and )that is a political question to be decided by CO ss alone. It is not subject to any appeal to the courts of the country or to the POTUS It is final, and conclusive; Congress alone has this power. Now, Mr. President, conceding as all law yers must the existence of the power, the duty necessarily results to exercise the power, and Congress is now called upon to decide whether there are any State organizations whichcan be recognized; and when Congress shall decide there is no appeal to the Supreme Court; there is no appeal to the President. The voice of the nation has been heard, and it is final, and final forever and it is well that this high power is reposed in Congress. otherwise you would make your President adictator; otherwise the voice of the people might never be heard. Sir, we have not run to meetthisissue; we have not forced it upon the country. It is upon us. We stand in the presence today of terrible realities. Timid counsels and illusory and speculative theories will no longer prevail. We to day are to stand true to our own grand mission, or we are to prove recreant to the high trust reosed in us. What is, under Provi deuce, t to sublime mission now devolved upon the Congress of the U.S.? “ To break every yoke and let the oppressed go free;” to batter downprison walls and prison bars; to declare the equality of all men before the law, as they are cqlual before God. This is the grand mission which is now upon us, which we may not avoid or evade. and, Mr. President, history is continually repeating itself. After 3 quarters of a cen tury, after we have run the round of long outs rage and oppression against the poor African, today we have come back to the proud stand point where our ancestors stood when they gave utterance to that proud, that noble enunciation which shook the despotisms of the world, that “all men are created equal, ” have inalienablerights. After making the whole circle of historyit has taken us 75 years we have come back to the proud position of the fathers, and we stand upon that principle, and there may stand with safety. Compromises, conciliations, temporary expedients, are evanescent and pass away, but principles are eternal, eternal as truth, eternal as the attributes of God himself. Then let us stand not upon expediency, but upon that grand principle enunciated by the fathers in the DeclarIndep. But, sir, I have been led aside from the investigation of the congressional and executive action upon this subject. I have shown you that some acts have been passed by Congress utterly ignoring the present existence of these States, as for instance in the quorum rule and the law regulating the electionof President. I have shown you that, while the taxation bill and the apportionment bill seemed to recognize the present existence of the States, they evidently look to the future for execution, and are provided not for apresent contingency, but for a possible contingency which may arise in the future. I have shown you that the presidential action on this subject on the one hand has recognized the existence of the States, and upon the other has utterly ignored that existence. The proclamation a pointing provisional governors ignores to a intents and purposes the constitutional existence of these States. The proclamation of the SecyState recently issued, stating that the constitutional amendment had received the sanction of 3/4ths of the States, counting the rebel States, seems to recognize the existence of the States. Then the action both of Congress and of the President on this subject has been contradictory. but for the purpose of my argument, I shall take it for granted that these States in their present anomalous and unanticipated position are not in such a condition as to participate in the government of the country., Then ow shall we restore them? You have listened to the presidential plan for restoration. I now propose to show you some plans which have been suggested in Congress, and to direct your attention to the various congressional plans for the restoration of these States. Some must vote under any plan of restoration, for the consent of the governed, exressed and known through those whom they select for the purpose, is the foundation of government. It has been said that the right to vote ves the power to rule, and under our system ofigovernment that is a truism which needs not to be proven. Ours is a Federal elective Republic; representation is recognized, and the right to select rulers is the right to rule. Hence the importance of the right of suffrage in this country. Now, suppose that the loyal white voters alone in the South are recognizeda plausible theory and not without its supporterslet us see how that plan would work. I have seen a calculation, which I accept as correct, that 9 out of ten of the white voters in the rebel States have partincipatd in the rebellion, excluding thpse excludedby the presidents proclamation. We shall then have only l about 120,000 loyal white voters, a number far too small to inau gurate and carry into successful operation a government. suppose you allow only loyal voters in the rebe States to organize government, and recognize simplythe loyal citizens as the State, then how oes it stand? You have in the 11 rebel States but 120,000 loyal voters1 basis too small, altogether too small, to answer the guarantee of a RFG. hen I take it for granted that no one will now contend that you can organize these 11 States with 120,000 voters; and if you could you would give those 120,000 voters as much power as onelmillion voters in the North. Then the ine unlity of the measure, aside from its impractica ility, would at once discard this as a basis of reconstruction. “e cannot rely on the 120,000 loyal votes alone in the midst of a population giving one milliOn 250,000 votes. Let us take another plan of reconstruction; let all the loyal and disoyal white voters vote; what then? The rebels outvote the loyal voters in the proportion of ten to one. If you let the loyalpwhites and the rebel white voters reconstruct, the rebels outnumber the loyal in the proportion of ten to one, as before stated; y0u give over, tied hand and foot and cast into utter darkness, the loyal whites and the loyal blacks into the control of the million rebel voters. Is that to be tolerated for a single moment? That which they failed to accomplish by force of arms they seek to accomplish by the ballot. Theybelcagnered the capital for long months, and their flauntin banner was seen in view of the Capitol. hey failed to take it. Now they propose to take it, and you propose to give it to them by means of reconstruction. n the act of triumph have we been defeated, in the hour of victory are we the vanquished? But we are told these gentlemen surrendered and they are entitled to magnanimous treatment and kind consideration. How did they surrender? When further opposition was perfectly hopeless. You owe nothing to negotiation. You owe nothing to compromise. This peace was achieved at the mouth of the cannon, was written in blood by the point of the bay onet upon asubugate conederacy; and yet gentlemen talk it out rights they have acquired y surrender! It was the triumph of force and nothing else. Let us look at these other, plausible plans of reconstruction, for bear in mind that in any plan devised somebod must vote, otherwise we cannot have: 1 federal elective republic, otherwise we cannot carry out the guarantees of the constitution. Somebqdy must vote, and if the States are to be admitted immediately, somebody must vote now, and who shall that body he? There is another inequality, a gross inequal i, in permitting all the rebels and all the loyal whites to vote. By the freedom of the blacks there is added one and a half million to the representative population of the rebel States. Under the ratio as contained in the present revision of the constitution 3/5ths of the Black slaves are counted for purposes of taxation and representation; they are chattels for one purpose, things for another; persons for one purpose, property for another. We have come to the point now when we propose to strike down this anomaly in the constitution of the U.S. One and a half million is added to their representative population. Do you propose to have them come in with that increased power? I thought you were to puni ish traitors and to make treason odious; and how do you propose to punish traitors? By an am nesty Wide and sweeping in its operation, and by inviting these rebels into the Halls of Congress with an increase of 14 members to their representation? Is not this a strange mode of punishing traitors and making treason odious? and yet without the amendment now proposed towthe constitution of the U.S., we not only receive them back with all their rights and privileges under the present constitution unimpaired, but it is proposed voluntarily to give them a representation of 14 more members in the HoRep. What have they done that they up eal thus mightily to our sympathies, that we should not only invite them back, consider the ast as utterly gone and obliterated, and ask t cm to share with us the equal privileges of this free Government, but with the privilege of 14 additional members of Congress in the HoRep? I take it for granted, then, that this plan of reconstruction has no friends asnd no supporters in the Congress of the U.S. By the freedom of the blacks, as before stated, one million and a half is added to the representative population of the southern States. Before the rebellion 6 millions in the South had the political power of 8 and a half millions in the free States, and if no amendment in the basis of representation as contemplated is made, the will have about the same political power with ten millions in the North, and then they would not represent their slaves as slaves, for every one has now become a free man and is counted for the purposes of taxation and Representation as a mana free man. Another Inn is to let all the loyal white men vote and half the rebels vote. Let us see how this will operate. This great inequality will still exist in the relative political influence of a voter, North and South, and the latter would have about double the power. Very nearly the same inequality as exists under the Presidents proclamation would still exist, and the rule would be in the hands of the rebels, they being lar ely in the majority. nother plan ropqsed is to let all the loyal whites and blue s vote, and as many rebels as these votes can control; and why as man rebels as these votes can control? simply because we do not propose to give this government, North or South, into the hands of rebel voters. We do not propose any such thin. There is another plan, now exp oded, of colonization, utterly impracticable, and so deter mined by the enlightened judgment of congressan the whole peopleo the U.S. will not disguise the ffict that I should prefer I a separation of the races if it were practicable. I well know that prejudice exists against the colored racea prejudice almost ineradicable; but it is wholly impracticable to separate them now. We have no territory for them; we have no means adequate to it, and we cannot force them as free men to emigrate whether they will or not. Then I throw out of the calculation entirely this whole plan of colonization. We are brought to the question, 11 onwhat safe basis cant e States he restore to their constitutional relations to the U.S.? It cannot be done upon the basis alone of the loyal voters, for they are inconsiderable, and would be. utterly overwhelmed by the rebel voters. It cannot be done by giving the rebel voters the power to control the legislation of the country. Now, suppose for one moment that you should determine that a reconstruction should take place based upon the votes of the rebels, what would be the result? What are the great questiops now engaging the at. tention of the people, and which Will engross the legislation of the country for the next half century? Questions of taxation and revenue. Do you suppose they will wrlhngly tax themselves to pay the interest upon the immense debt create for their subjugation and overthrow? There are otherquestions you will be called upon to decide. on will have to provide a fundfor the payment of our invalid pensioners. Think you that they will vote willingly to raise moneyto pay the pensions of your invalid soldiers when their own invalid pensioners are excluded? Can you hope for any cordial cooperation between the rebels and yourselves upon any of these great subjects of national legislation? Suppose you admit them here in the Senate, they not only vote upon all these high questions, but they counse in reference to executive appointments; they counselin reference to the confirmation of treaties; and their power for evil is almighty the moment you a mit them with all the privileges of regularly organized and constituted States. I tremble in view of the evil consequences which would result, from the admission ofrebel members, to your national debt, to the national credit, the plighted faith of the nation to your bondholders the plighted faith of the nation to your invalid soldiers, the lighted faith of the nation to your living and end heroes. For what have they contended during the last 4 years? The national Union and the integrity of the national territory and to what lame and impotent conclusion have you arrived when you say now, after the war is over, these men are to he called upon in council with yourselves to determine all t iis legislation, and to fix the very terms upon which they are to be admitted to participate in the Government of the U.S. I, for one, will never sanction any such plan., But. what is the remedy? I have already shown you that the rebels are not fit to vote. Let me show you further that they are not and cannot be fit to legislate. What is there in their antecedents, prior to the beginni of the rebellion, which can lead us to suppose they are at present qualified as voters? Ihey rebelled without cause against a Government which they had only felt in its beneffictions. They rebelled without cause against free institutions. They rebelled for the purpose of establishing an aristocracy of caste and color and wealth and blood Upon the free institutions of the U.S. It was the old war renewed 1,000times of pretended Democrats against democracy. This lay at the foundation of their rebellion. They had no single cause of complaint against the national Governmentnot one. They simply rebelled for the purpose of establishing an aristocracy fonnde upon slavery. Is there anything in the inception or prosecution of this War convincing you that they are now fit to participate with us in the government of the countryla How was the war commenced? Under the administration of that weak and wicked old man, James Buchanan, treason was batched in his own Cabinet. They commenced by betray in the country, by scattering your Navy, by taing possession of your arsenals, by stealing your arms, by violatin their oaths to support the constitution, abau ouing your service and your flag. This was the commencement of the war; and how, I ask you, has it been prose cuted?, At every step in open violation of the laws of civilized warfare; by the murder of pris oners in cold blood; by the starvation of your prisoners "in rison pens; and by trampling underfoot allpthe hiwh sanctions of national law and of morals. These measures have characterized the prosecution of the war. What is. their present position? How do they stand now? fYou find in the South various indications of their temperand disposition. You have a law 11 on your statutebook that no man shall hold o cc except he shall take a certain test oath that he has not willingl rendered aid and assistance to the enemies of the country. Under these pretended State Organizations they have held elections and in open defiance of that law the have elected rebe s to seats in the Congress of the U.S., men who boast of their services to the confederacy, whose only claim to support consisted in the fact that they were heroes of the rebellion. We find the same tone evinced in man of the southern Legislatures. What is their legislation in reference to the freedmen? The slave codes in substance still in force. Some, I grant you, have reealed the ordinancesof secession; some have declared them null and void, but not one of them has done justice to the colored freedmen these orphan children of the republic; these wards of the nation, whom you lire bound to protect, and whose freedom before God and man o“ are bound to maintain. Not a single one at: these rebel State Legislatures has protected the rights of the freedmen. They hiss your national airs, they 5 it upon your national flag, they celebrate recl victories, and they glorify rebel heroes; and yet you are asked to admit them into this body. Oh, yes; admit Toombs and Davis and “irvfall and Breckin ridge and all the redhanded traitors who left these Halls so defiantly in 1861. Look even to the State of Kcntuck, who has maintained her loyal standing in teUnion what is her present position? You were told recently that the operations of the Freedmens Bureau should not be extended to Kcntuck. Oh! no. Leave loyal Kentucky untouchc l She has filled her quota in the Army of the U.S. Yes, sir; and more than filled her quota in the rebel army. When the POTUS issued his 1st proclamation for troops how was it answered by the Governor of Kentucky? With insult, outra c ous insult, and a refusal to furnish a man. o people of Kentucky then placed themselves upon the ground of neutralitya ound as utterly unconstitutional and revolutionary as was secession itself; and recently, in the proud old Commonwealth of Kentucky, the Legislature has repealed all laws disfranchising rebel voters in that State. today they have a right to vote; toda they have a right to hold office; today their s have code rules with a rod of iron the freedmen in that State; and yet we are told that it is impro)er to n pl the provisions of the Freedmens Bureau lid to the State of Kentuck. v I say these things “more in sorrow than in anger. A native of that proud old Commonwealth, I glory yet in her history; but it is in her history in her palmier days, when the clarion voice of Henry Clay in defense of the rights of mankind and the rights of the nation was heard throughout that old Commonwealth. I listen now in vain for that trumpet toned voice which was like the buglecall to battle for the right. If in Kentucky the rebel element is in such a condition, what is it in the States lately in rebellion? Beforel pass from the noble Commonwealth of Kentucky let me say that 1,000s upon 1,000sof her sons and citizens have sealed their devotion to the Union with their blood upon the battlefield. NO braver and nobler troops have filled the armies of the Union than have one from Kentucky. I speak not of loyal Hcntucky in my censure, but of the rebel element in Kentucky, which I believe now predominates in that State: So much, then, for their present position. Are they in any fit condition to be invited here to participate with us in the government of this country? In my opinion they are not. I have spoken of the presidential plan of reconstruction and of other plans. now propose to speak of the congressional plans, and invite the attention of the Senate and of the people to these plans of reconstruction, for they alone will prevail. You will look in vain to the President to inaugurate a system of reconstruction. He has no power under the const. itution, however patriotic his intentions may be. What, then, are the congressional plans I shall 1st speak of the present proposed amendment to the constitution, which hasal ready passed the popular branch of Congress and is now before us. It is that the basis of rercsentation shall be the actual number of in abitants, castinl7 out of the account Indians not taxed and all those that shall be excluded in any State on account of race or color. This amendment, as I havealready endeav ored to show, will do away with much of the irregularitynow existin, and which wopld exist under aditierentstateo things, the blackshcing all free. So far as the amendment goes, I approve of it, and I think I shall vote for it, but with a distinct understandin that it is not all that We are required to do, that it is not the only amendment to the constitution that congress is required to make. Then there is a counterproposition, introduced by the distinguished Senfrom Massachusetts, [Mr. SUMNER] which proposes to declare by an act of Congress thatno one shall be excluded from the right of suffrage on account of race or color. If Congress had the undoubted and unquestionable authorityto pass such a law, it gets at the result more readil than does the constitutional amendment; but it is doubtful to my mind whether Congress has this power. I believe, under the constitution, the rightto determine the qualifications of clect ors is left with the several States. This law would o erate upon all the States. My State having orfeited by treason no one of her constitutional rights, do not believe that Congress has a right to intervene between her an her people and fix the qualifications of voters. however I mivht be wiling to yield the question that the rebelStates having forfeited all their right such a law of Congress would be constitution a as applied to them, I cannot recognize the proposition that such a law is constitutional as applied to States in, the Union who have forlbited none of their political rightsor franchises; and even if I were clear upon the subject I should not be willing to leave the legislation in this shape, for it would open an everlastin controversy in the courts as to its constitutionality, and the matter would always be in doubt. however good in itself, it is, as I think, ineffective in its operation, forthereasons so ably set forth by the istinguished Senfrom lilaiue lZSSENDEN] yesterday. It mr is a noble dec aration, but a simple declaration, a paperbullet that kills no one, and fixes and maintains the r hts of no one. Then the same thing is sought to be achieved by the amendment proposedb the distinguished Senfrom Missouri[A Mr. Hexnnnsoxfl which is a simple amendment to the Constitution of the U.S., that no one shall be excluded from the exercise of the right of suffrage on account of race or color. that begins at the right point. The only objection to it is that its operation cannot be immediate, and in the mean time the rebels may be permitted to vote, and its adoption by the various State legislatures is exceedingly doubtful. I should not doubt, however, that we might secure its adoption by 3/4ths of the loyal States who have never seceded, and I believe that when ever that question is presented the SCOTUS will determinp that a ratification bythat number of States is a constitutional approval of an amendment so as to make it the supreme law of land. I have no doubt about it. Mr. President, what do we propose to do? We see that it will not do to give power in the rebel States to the rebels. We seethat the Union white men are but an inconsiderable minority, and they cannot be trusted, there to organize States. Then if the States are to be organize. immediatel, the only question is whether the right of enrage shall be given to rebel white men or loyal black men. The amendment of the Senfrom Missourimeets at issue squarel in the face. Whatsoever desire to do I will not do by indirection. I trust I shall always be brave enough to do whatsoever I think my duty requires, directly and not by indirection. What is the orment in favor of this proposed amendment to the constitution? That by lim iting the basis of representationyou will induce the people of the South to give the rightof suffrave to the negro. [In the 1st place, I do not believe it will have that effect; and in the 2nd place, if it would, you are asldng me to do by indirection that which I as a brave and honest man prefer to do direct. Still, this amendment having been passed y the HoRep, and having received the up: probation of the distinguislie JtComReconstruction, and looking on it as a step in the right direction, I shall vote for it, but with the distinct understandingagain expressed that other amendments are to follow. What are some of these other amendments which, in my opinion, should follow prior to any restoration of the rebel States? You should 1st pass an amendment to the constitution forbidhin for all time to come the assumption of the reel debts and forbidding the repudia 1866. 741tion of the national debt. This should be approved by the Legislatures of the rebel States, and any amendments of the constitutions Of the rebel States should be approved by a vote of the people. The guarantees they have given in reference to the rights of loyal men and in reference to the rights of the freedmen are not enough. Though their conventions acknowl edge emancipation todny, they may call conventions the day after you admit them and fix their constitutions differently, or they may so legislate as to o ress the freedman and make his condition of pgeedom more intolerable than was his condition of slavery. Then there should be another constitutional amendment passed requiring and empowerin in express terms the congress of the U.S. to carry out and give effect to every guarantee of the constitution. Heretoforethe guarantee of a RFG has been a dead letter, I wish Congress, by a constitutional amendment, tofurnish power to carry out every sinfile guarantee of the constitution, most especia y that provision of the Constitution guarantying a RFG to every State. The framers of the constitution, the founders of the Republic, themselves recognized the existence of the separate States with these unrepublican provisions in their constitution s; but we are required now to begin anew. Old things are done away, and all thii s have become new when 4 million people rave been suddenly enfrauchised in this, our day. You are called upon to admit SCarolina, for instance. l at questions have u to decide preliminary to that admission? hat conditions precedent to admission exist in the constitution? 1st, you are to say upon our oaths and upon your consciences that SCarolina presents a RFG. Can any man in his sober senses, reared in the light of free institutions, in the middle of the 19th century; can on free American citizen, with one single impu e or aspiration of liberty warming his heart, say that that State government is republican in form which disfranchises a majority of its citizens? It is not republican in form according to any American definition of republicanism. The freedmen are citizens of ther U.S.; not citizens under the naturalization law, not citizens by virtue of any treaty, but citizens because they are born natives to the soil. That makes them citizens. To fortify this conclusion, let me read from Mr. Justice Storys Commentaries 0n the constitution:, It has always been Well understood amongjurists in this country that the citizensof each State constitute the bodypolitic of eachcommunity. culled the eo 10of the States; and that. the citizens of each gtafhin the Union are pm auto citizens of the U.S. "3Story. p. 565. Colored men have been for long years citizens in many of the States, and are fpsofacfo citizens of any State of the U.S. into which they may choose to go. Let me read another authority: “The citizens, of each State constituted the citizens of the U.S. when the constitution was adopted. The rights which appertainto themas citizens of those respective Commonwealths accompa nied them in the formation of the great compound Commonwealthwhich ensued. They becamccltizens of the latter without ceasing to he citizens of the former; and he who was subsequently born a citizen of a State becameat the moment of his birth a citizenship of the U.S. ”Rawleon the(hndituion, 1L. Chancellor Kent is still more explicit on the present point, for he says distinctly: “If asluve horn in the U.S. he manumit ted or otherwise lawfully discharged from bondage, or if a black man be born within the U.S., and born free, he becomesthence furward a citizen. Y [2 Kents (. Commmlaries 4th edition. p. 267, note. There is the direct declaration of Chancellor Kent that the moment the slaves are menumitted they become citizens of the U.S. Before manumission they were held as slaves and treated as chattels; the moment they are manumitted the become citizens to all intents and purposes. doubt not then, that, this construction of the constitution is true. But I was proceeding further to speak in ref stance to the congressional plan of restoratipn as considered not as antagonistic but as auxil iary to the residential plan of reconstruction. We have t icse various propositions for the amendment of the constitution of the U.S. We have a bill lately passed by this body for the enlargement of the powers of the Freedmens Bureau, giving protection to the freedmen whom we are bound to protect. By the most sacred of all obligationsobligations of gratitude, duty, and interestwe are heund to protect them. They are free by the proclamation of your President, by the amendment of gear Copstitution, by the valor and rowess an blood poured free y upon the butt efield. They are free, and it is ours to maintain their freedom. The bill to enlarge the powers of the Freedmens Bureau is one of the most important measures in the series of congressional acts for the restoration of these States, every provision of it. Then there is another act recentl passed by this body to secure the rights ofal the citizens of the U.S. where the grand declaration is made, in aliirmance of what was previously the constitutional enactment, that these manumitted slaves become citizens upon their manumission, and they are now to alintents and purposes citizens of the U.S. Shall you enfranchise them or shall you hold them as a subject race? You are told, and told with some confidence, thatifyon permit them to exercise the right of suffrage ou will invite a war of races which will end in their extermination. Let us look for a moment to that proposition. In allof the 13 colonies (withthe single excetion of SCarolina, whose treason able iistory has marked and marred the annals of the nation from the revolution down) they were citizens; they were voters under the constitutions of the States under the Articles of Confederation; they were voters and citizens in almost every State whose constitution was formed during or immediately subsequent to the era of the Revolution. Did any such results follow? Were there any riots and blood shed? Gentlemen tell us that the cases are not anal ogous, because there were but few and sparse and scattered pepulations of blacks in the midst of a large population ofwhites in the northern States where they were permitted to vote, and therefore it is not a fair test. I say they were errnitted to vote in NCarolina; they were cclared citizens by the supreme court of that State. They were permitted to vote intennessee. There was no outbreak or insurrection in either of those States. If you wish to avoid a war of races, how can that be accomplished? By doing right; by fixing your plan of reconstruction upon the indestructible basis of truth and justice. What lesson is taught. by history? The grand lesson is taught there that rebellions and insurrections huve grown out of of races! and you are told to look to the history of Ireland, and to the history of Hungary. Why is it that revolution and insurrection are always ready to break out in Hungary? Be cause, forsooth, the iron rule of Austria has stricken down the natural rights of the masses. It is a protest of humanity against tyranny, Oppression, that produces rebellion and revolution. So In the bloody history of the Irish insurrections. Suppose the English Parliament had given e on] rights to the Irish, had enfranchised the Catholics in Ireland in the reign of Henry VHI, long ere this peace and harmony would have prevailed between England and Ireland; but the very fact that a vast portion of a co, le are disfranchised sows the seeds of continua and everrecurring revolution and insurrection. It cannot be otherwise. These insurrection! and revolutions, which are but the protest of our common humanity against wrong, are one of the seourges in the hands of Providence to comcl men to do justice and to observe the right. It is the law of Providence, written upon every page ofhistory, that Gods vengeance follows mans wrong and oppression, and it will always be so. f you wish to avoid a war of races, if you wish to produce ha? mony and peace among these people, you must enfranchise them all. But we are told that they are not now fit to be voters. Grant it that they are not fit for voters, and what is the remedy? What are the elements which enter into the character of a man that makes him a fit. voter? Intelligence and love of country. These are the elements. Will you give the intelligent voter of the South who is a traitor the ballot and deuyit the putriotic voter simply because he is black and it may be ignorant? l ere is more safety in an unedu cated patriotic ballot than there is in a culti vated clan and sconndrel ready to destroy the Government at every moment by his treason. I grant that the blacks are uufitted at present to exercise the right of suffage. They have groaned for 200 years, more than 2 centuries, under oppression. It was a crime for them to learn to read and write; the word of God was scaled to them; they were regarded as more property and chattel; merchandise was made of their blood and bones, body and soul, and their manhood was utterly imored. Is it anything strange that they should not be now as well prepared to vote as the white citizens? I grant they are not; and my plan of reconstruction would be this: to pass an amendment to the constitution of the U.S. that after a certain length of time, say one 2, 3, or 5 years, all persons, black on white, without any distinction of race or color who could read the constitution of the U.S., should henceforth be voters, not disfranchising any new entitled to vote. I would give these people the inducement to learn and to cultivate themselves, and before that amendment took effect I would disfranchise the rebel voter just as long; and when the rebel voter wasal owed to deposit his ballot, I would arm the freedman with the ballot to meet him. That is what I would do. This implies delay, and delay is now what we want. The danger is of recipitate action. Delay is now what we need. he infant in its tiny fingers plays today with a handfull of seems, but 200 years hence, by the cfilux of time, those acorns are the mighty material out of which navics are built, the monarch of the forest, defin the shock of the storm and the whirlwind. Time is a mighty agent in all these affairs, and we should appeal to time. We are not ready yet for a restoration upon rebel votes; we are not ready yet for restoration upon colored votes; but, thank God, we are willing and able to wait. We have the Government, we have the constitution of the U.S., we have the Army and the Navy, the vast moral and mate rial power of the Republic. We can enforce the laws in all the rebel States, and we can keep the peace until such time as th may be re stored with safety to them and so ety to us. it real or supposed wrong and oppresstou. A war 11 There is another measure of reconstruction growing directly out of the necessity of the times, and that is the reconstruction of this District. I propose to reconstruct this district by voting tor the passage of the House suffrage bill. I should prefer to vote for a qualified suffrage, requiring education. I he s the Senate will take that view of it; bntif the Senate should not, and I am called to the rug ged issue, I shall go straight forward and carry out the convictions of my own sense of duty, regardless of opposition upon theright or on the leftnot exactly regardless for I should regret to find myself compelled to differ with friends here and elsewhere, for whose good opinion I have such high regard;but in this as in all other questions I prefer to walk at peace with the man within, to satisfy my own conscience. I have arrived ata time of life when I only desire to do right and look not to the consequences. Visions of glory flit less properly before me; I am not as I have been the ai halls which a youn imagination had people with gratified ambition arenow deso ate. Ipro use to leave such a recordss I shall not by ush hereafter when I revaew it, to place myself upon the rock of eternal truth, the rock of the constitution, the rights of man, and the rights of“our common humanity. Upon this rock I stand, firm as upon the earth be neath my feet, and the gates of hell shall not prevail a uinst it. But. Mr. President, gentlemen ask us when shall these States be restored. Not by my vote, until all these constitutional guarantees are placed utterly beyond all recall; not until the ending traitors in this rebellion shall have been punished, and shall have met the felons doom. Cains Marcius sent these words to the praator of Rome: “Tell the prsetor that you saw Caius Marcius sitting amid the ruins of Carthage.” I see JeffersonDavis sitti amid the ruins of 11 devastated and doseted States; but he was the artificer of this terrible ruin himself, and l have no sympathy or compassion for him. Mercy to him is cruelty to the Republic. Mercy to him is an insult to your living heroes. Mercy to him is a mockery of the dead. Justice requires that he should be punished, and punished sternly; and the rebels should be taug t to know now and forever that this is a Government able to govern, capable of government, ready to forgive, but if needs be, ready to punish. I believe that the cause of justice will not be thoroughly vindicated until some such example is made; not that I have any vengeance or any bitterness in my heart toward these people, but my heart is too full of compassion and sympathy and love for a bleeding Republic to entertain magnanimous feelings toward the trai tors and enemies of the country. But gentlemen ask us when shall this return take place? I answer the question thus: when the constitutional amendments shall all have passed Congress, and been ratified by a comctent number of States; when the State legisation shall be conformed to the changed condition of public affairs; when the colored man shall be recognized as a citizen and as a man, and his rights shall be protected; when the Freedmens Bureau bill shall have passed both Houses, and been put in practical operation; when the bill to preserve the rights of all the citizens shall have received the sanction of the President; when the State constitutions shall have been ratified by the Opular votethen, and not until then, shall Ipvote for the rere sentation of the rebel States; but to this dec aration I will make one or 2 excetions. I believe today, if I were calls upon to vote upon my oath and upon my conscience, I should vote for the admission of the representatives from Tennessee. I should do it on peculiar reasons, not applicable to the people of the rebel States generally. The loyal people of Tennessee had organized their State government without an interference from abroad; their Legislature admet, their constitutional convention had assembled and had put in operation a new constitution and all the machinery of a State government complete prior to the surrender of Lee, prior to the colpse of the rebellion. They were in my opinion in a constitutional relation to the L U.S., so far as they could be under the circumstances, before the supression of the rebellion and before the surrender of Lee. I know something of the history of that patriotic people. Those dwellers of the mountains and sons of the mist, proudly represented by President AndrewJohnson, of eastern Tennessee, stood by the flag, faithful among the faithless. Th by covered every rocky ravine and mountain 85310 Eastern Tennessee with the imperishable glory of Thermoylaz; they in proportion to population furnished a larger number of troops to the Army than any other people. Every singleman electedto either branc 0t Congress from Tennessee can take the oath prescribed by the congress of the U.S. 3 or 4 of them have borne the flag of the country in the very forefront of battle; 2 of them bearwounds on their bodies, the evidence of their patriotism. I should vote to admit Tennessee if she stood plbne today. I am prearedto do it. There is an organization in Ar ausas, looking to me very, much like a legal organization, recognized by resident Lincoln, recognized by President Johnson, having all the attributes of State life and State orgamzation, and I am not sure, but that I should vote for it. When I am prepared to admit that the condition of any State is such as to entitle them to representation I shall vote to admit their members, and lest I may be misunderstood I say now that when any Representative is called to that desk in the presence of God and these Senators ifho falters in taking the test oath, he is no Senator by vote of mine. But, Mr. President, not to detain the Senate longer, I be e that the time will speedily come when with a 1these guarantees and safeguards thrown around the loyal men and the freedmen of the South we may be permitted to bail them again as brothers, and to crmit their parti cipation in the councils of the nation. The storm cloud of war which so long has lowered over and darkened the land, excluding almost every star of hope, is now, thank God, spanned by the bow of peace and of promise, giving as surance that hereafter the rushin red ti e of war shall no more deluge the Inn in blood.