Mr. HOGAN. Mr. Speaker, as it is evident I shall not have an opportunity to make the speech I designed on the ending subject, I ask, by unanimous consent, that I shall be allowed to write it and print it in the debates. There was no objection, and it was ordered accordingly. [in the Appendix. Basis of Representation. SPEECH OF HON. JOHN HOGAN, or MISSOURI, January 30, 1866, On the propositionto amend the constitution of the U.S. apportioning representation and taxation. Mr. HOGAN.Mr. Speaker, this session of Congress has now continued for nearly two months. We have just passed thron h a war the most terrible in history, one in which immense armies have been gathered and dreadful battles fought. To meet its vast expenditures taxes hitherto unknown in our country have been levied, and for the accomplishment of the great objects had in view the whole people have cheerfully responded to all the vast demands of their Government. Uiicomplainingly they have acquiesced in all your measures ofexcise, tariffs, internalrevenue, &c., your issuance of paper credits, and the consequent enhancement of all values, until even the wealthy of your land have found your numerous taxes requiringa full tithe of all their incomes to pay your demands, and the medium and poorer classes are almost absolutely unable to live under their exactions. Yet all these burdens the people of this country have cheerfully borne, feeling that the great object had in View, namely, the preservation of our glorious Constitution, and the Union formed under it, as an inheritance for them and tbeir posterity forever, was worthy of the expenditure; and also because, they believed the de mands thus made upon them would be but tem porary, would soon, with the close of the “ war for the Union, ” cease, and although, from the magnitude of the operations, there would necessarily be a heavy increase of taxation for all time to come, yet there would be some amelioration of its burdens, and those least able to bear it would be freed in some sort from its onerous demands, and they with great propriety looked forward to this Congress, to this Union congress, having so large a majori of those claiming to be, par excellence.the I nion party, the friends of humanit, to do somethingto reduce the Oppressive bur ens. But, sir, during these two months of our session they have looked in vain. There are in this country over 20 million white ersous who have been paying the taxes and caring theseburdeus of the Government, and the members of this House are their Representatives; and yet they seem to be wholly ignored. not thought of, and no measure for their relief brought forward in this House during all this session. There are other questions of great and vital 1l interest to very many of the people. which row legitimately out of the war in which we iiove been engaged, which demand the attention of, this House. Look for a moment at the de imands for pensions. Those who were their ichief support now lie “beneath the clods of ] the vnlley.” Fathers. sons, husbands, fell in the deadly strife, leaving loved ones as dearto them I as life, dependent now upon the cold charities l of the world. They supposed when their last } dying thoughts reverted to the loved ones at l home that they would find support from the l paternal Government for whose glory and flag and the perpetuation of whose unity they sac l rificed life itself and then, again, look at your multitudes ofrnaimed and disabled and br en. down defenders who are found in all rts of I your land suffering, and many of them ging I from the passers by a little iittance to aid in supporting their extsteuce. What are you doing for these multitudes? I have felt humiliated when, passing through the streets of our large cities, I have been stopped by a maimed veteran wearing the uniform of my country and bearing on his breast the badge of his corps, yet begging each passer gy for something to meet his daily demands. et we, the peoples Representatives, have wasted precious time without apparently making any effort for relieving either of these most meritorious classes. Then, again, there is another class that require some consideration. Multitudes of men entered the service of their country in the beginning of the war solely from patriotic motives, firmly believing that their services were required for the safety and perpetuity of their be oved country. They volunteered in its de fense. They did not demand or even expect bounties; they left home and family and business and worldly prospects. cheerfully to endurh the hardships of a soldiers life, to aid in saving their country from peril. They endured hard ship as good soldiers, and for 3 years and more they labored for the accomplishment of the and they had in view at the beginning, the “preservation of the Union.” Many of these men were subjected to very great privations at the early period of this strife. because there was no adequate provision then made by the Gow ernment for their equipment and sustenance.) yet they bore it all, and went forth to battle for their flag. Manv survivors of these early regiments now ask that the bountjcs and ben efits conferred on those who, atn much later date and under more favorable auspices, entered the service of their countiy, be conferred on them. and, sir, do they ask too much? These were the men “who bore the burden in the heat of the day.” But. they are uiiheeded. Unfor tunately for them they are only white men. They have no great sympathizing party so sustain their claims. They are not “the wards of the nation." Their interests are all identified with the white race, and in this country now that race is only fit to be taxed and all these measures and interests are required to “bide their time, ” and stand without any consideration, while the great American Congress in both its branches attend to the more important and interesting and virtually absorbing subject of the better citizens, the African race, now just released from the fetters of slavery. There is still another matter by some re garded as important I mean the recuperation of the country from the waste and desolations of the war. The people of the U.S. have a right to expect that this Congress will devote itself to some effort at least to repair the waste of the past 4 years, in which millions of men were engagedin destroying. Sir, if this destruction has been confined chief! to one section of the country, “ if desolation, like a plowshare, ” has been driven all through the southern portion of the land; if from the Potomac to the Rio Grande farms and houses and agricultural imlaments have been burned and destroyed; stil, that is a portion of our: a country; its losses are the losses of the American Union; its prosperity was once part of our prosperity; its wealth was part of our national wealth, and now its desolation is a portion of the loss of the country by the war, which as statesmen and patriots we should now labor to restore bv every means in our power. I do not say that this war was not necessary, nor yet on the whole not beneficial in many ways to the country, but that now when it is happil over, when throughout the length and breadth of the land the people are rejoicing at once more beholding the dawn of peace, when strife has ceased and the burdens necessary to war heretofore cheerfully borne by the people may be expected to cease, the people expect their choSEn Representatives to spring to the work of so modifying the existing systems of taxation as to render them less Oppressive to the masses and more equitable in their adjustment. These great questions, however, are required to slee, pressed off until the session is far advance, and no time be allowed for calm and proper deliberation, while we gravely, from day to day, discuss the question of suffrage in this District, and amendments to the Constitution for African elevation. I entreat gentlemen to think of the necessities of the country, and as there is no imperative necessity for making this so absorbing a question, that we defer it until we have nothing more important. Sir, in the progress of this debate some strange things have been uttered and strange positions taken by gentlemen who favor these innovations. In t on great zeal for the colored, they seem anxious to decry the white race, and would lead the world to infer that this country is indebted almost wholly to the colored soldiers for the suppression of the “great rebellion.” Now, sir, these gentlemen cannot have thought much about the position they assume, or else in their zeal for the favorite they became blind to the merits of all the whites who came to the rescue and achieved successes before colored troops were even allowed to enter our armies in any form except as servants or teamsters. It was not colored soldiers who fought at Carthage, or Wilsons creek, or New Madrid, or Island No. 10. They did not storm the strongholds at Fort Donelson; nor yet aid in the repulse at Shiloh; nor were they in the lead at Chickasaw bayou nor did they capture Vicksburg nor Arkansas Post. They were not relied on to reclaim the Peninsula from York town to Williamsburg, nor did they achieve glory at the 7 Pines. The truth is, all of those early victorms were won by the indom itable courage of the white race alone, and in eat part by the bravery of those soldiers of perman birth whom the Gentfrom Illinois [Mr. FABNSWORTH]seems to regard as inferior to his great favorite, the negro, and whom in his resolutions he characterizes as “ignorant foreigners who do not understand our language.” Yet this very class of men were among the 1st to spring to arms as volunteers, not waiting either to be drafted or receive bounties, but lunged early into the fiht in defense of the nion, especially in the est, and chiefly remained in the Army until the close of the war. The gentlemen on the other side have no eucomiums to bestow on this class; they are not especial favorites; they are only spoken of as “ ignorant foreigners who do notunderstand our Ian age;” they are to be put below the negro, because these latter are “native and to the manner born.” and while the Gentfrom Illinois decries the German and the Swiss and other continental Europeans of our armies as less intelligent and deserving than the native born negro, other gentlemen assail the Irish as vastly below the negro in every particular. Thus the fanaticism of the Republican party havingJnade an idol of the African, determined to give him a monopoly of all good qualities; and the more effectually to do so degrade the character, the intelligence, and the manhood of the foreign born whites who in such numbers entered our armies and contributed so much by their bravery, skill, and intelligent endurance to insure victory to the arms of the Union. But, sir, if we believe the assertions of the advocates of African enfranchisement in this Hall, we will almost be led to believe that the pusillanimous whites of this country, native and foreign, would have suffered this republican Government to have been broken up and our country ruined, had not the noble negro sprung patriotically to the rescue and saved our country for us. Sir, I think this is all nonsense. [do not deny to the African race all the honor to which they are fairly entitled. [would not detract from them nor undervalue thein services, but I do not see that they came as volunteers to the rescue of the Republic. In the early stages of negro enlistment they were generally incited by lar eprospective bounties and privileges offered by Hiiassachusetts and other northern States to enlist, while in Kentucky and Missouri very many were literally captured and kidnapped into the Army; and finally when the conscription system was adopted, they were compelled, like others, to serve in the Union armies. But long before any of these things happened nearly one million whites, native and foreign born, had bared their bosoms to the deadly shot, the blood of 1000s had been spilt, and multi tudes had laid down their lives in the defense of the country which they loved, and left to their children a patriotic name. But they never supposed that in the Halls of Congress the time would come when they would be placed below the African and their self sacrifice ignored for the purpose of negro elevation. But, sir, it is not true that by your laws you have recognized even the equality of the Afri can to the soldiers of the Caucasian race, even to those of foreign birth, much less the present contended for superiority of the former; for in the organization of negro troops you have required they shall be officere exclusively by whites; and I believe it is a truth, thatin all this war no African has ever reached a higher elevation than a non-commissioned officerin our armies. Sir, this fact itself shows who t use were upon whom the safety of the Republic the maintenance of its integrity, devolved; an notwithstanding all the pathos of the advocates of the African race, all their assumptions, all their eulogiums, the people of all this country and of all the world now that it was the prowess and endurance of the white race that won this great victory and notwithstanding the attempted degradation of the non-English speaking portions of our armies by the Gentfrom Illinois, or of the Irish by the other gentleman, all these have full vindicated their martial bearing upon the batt e field, and have shown the world evotion to the cause of constitutional government by their persistent valor, which will challenge admiration for all time and they have not only illustrated their capa city to fight, but also to lead and to command. They have attained high position, and their bravery and skill have caused their names to be inscribed as high on the tablet of fame as those born on the soi. The names of Mulligan and Corcoran, and multitudes of Irish heroes who fought and bled in this war, will live in “ song and story, ” to illustrate the prowess of the sons of the “Emerald Isle, ” beside the name of Montgomery and others from the same land, who fought and fell in the earlier, I may say, all the wars of the Republic. and, sir, there are not wanting names of men who were chiefly “ignorant of ourlanguage, ” continental Euro; cans, like Osterhaus and many others, who like Be Kalb and LaFayette and many other foreigners, vindicated our original independence. True, they were not the ets of fanatics. They had not employed scribblers to write them up. They relied on their good right arm to vindicate them, on their own innate bravery to illustrate their deeds, and it is inscribed in imperishable granite; and the numerous general and field officers which foreign nationalities among us have given to the Republic in thisterriblestrug I gle clearly prove the vast superiority of these races over the now petted “wards of the nation, ” of fanatics. But there is one more point to which I desire to advert. The advocates of African enfranchisement are equally ardent in their advocacy of the disfranchisement of all the white race at the South. There is no term of commendation too exalted to be employed in behalf of the noble and devoted. unselfish, patriotic African race. Nor does our language, extensive as it is, furnish epithets of sufficient opprobrium to characterize the infamy of all the white people of the South. The bitterness displayed here 10 ward those of our race unfortunately domiciled in the South is to me in exceedingly strange contrast with the honeyed words an more than affectionate phrases employed toward a different race, held in all the pastas greatly inferior to our own in all particulars and I, for one have been led to inquire why this universal denunciation of the white and equally universal commendation of the black or African race why the one is absolutely anathematized and the other almost deified; why these gentlemen can find nothing too good to bestow upon the one, nothing too bad to heap upon the other? and the general answer given in all the speeches of most of those occupying the last few weeks in the effort to secure universal suffrage, or rather male suffrage without regard to color, is, the blacks all were loyal, were our friends, the whites were all our enemies, all disloyal and hence we should to them carry out the old Jewish rule, “Thou shalt hate thine enemy, " and this hatred must be nourished, cultivated, perpetuated, everything must be done to foster it and as the exaltation of the former servile race over our enemies will assuredly manifest most “hatred, ” we will take that course, and make our enemies “ bite the dust.” Now, I am not prepared to admit these premises. All the blacks in the South were not “loyal;” were not our “friends, ” did not rush to “our rescue;” did not “fly to arms” for “our defense.” Onl some 180 or 190,000 of all the Africans in the whole land were brought into the Army under all the appliances used, of bounties, impressments, conscriptions, fugitives from former ownersand every other means, while there were more than two million white men ended in the fight to put down the rebellion an give freedom to the slaves. But be side this there is another statement, which I am indebted to a major general in the Army for, and have seen stated by others, which is, that of the “white man” in the rebellious States, there were more voluntary enlistnicnts in “ the Union Army” than of all the colored people by every means brought into the same Army. Now, if this statement is correct, and I have not seen it denied, how shall we account for the zeal of gentlemen for the African and their hatred of the Caucasian? The plea that the blacks have “saved thisnation, and have so cured for us our liberty Ilia all mere nonsense. Better might we assume that the 200,000 or more soufheruers who came into our Army saved it. But they did not; they only aided in the work, as did a so the Africans. But surely if honor and ratitudo are due the blacks for what they did in the struggle, more honor and much more gratitude are due to the southern whites whocame to our assistance; for these latter came "voluntnrily;” came because of the “Union” and its emblematic “flag.” They encountered hazards of all kinds, endured privanons and hardships untold, gave upall prospects of home, preferment, and pecuniary gain. They did not ask for bounties or freedom but only for the privilege and honor of for their country and its unity; and soul hewould exclaim, “The Union dissolved! No, thank God, it is not, cannot be dissolved no whwhat is the reward proffered them for their toes, with its glories, its heroes, its monuments, toil and valor and suffering? Why, the major its triumphs, its troubles; the Union, with itsity of this House announced to them, Go back to the land you deserted to come to our aid. We hate you and all your viper race. We intend to remit our States below the grade of Territories. whe disfranchise all you whites and enfranchise the blacks, and sustain them in ruling over you, as in times past you have ruled over them.” and, sir, to accomplish these purposes more effectually, this effort to amend the Constitution is to be pressed and the southern States held from participating in the legislation of Congress or having any interest in the business of the country.Mr. Speaker, I am opposed to all this. I think it all wrong. I do not believe the Union is or has been dissolved and so believing, my oath of office, as I conceive its nature, precludes me from following in the lead of gent omen on the other side of this question. I do not enter into the argument which has occupied so much of the time of this House, and the attention of gentlemen, as to what Gro tius or any other learned publicist says about the law of nations, the powers of States, the relations of sovereigns, civil or uncivilWars, and all that. I am no lawyer, hence will not bring to bear on this question arguments de rive from these sources. These are plain, matter effect questions, and in a plain matter of fact way the people of this country will deal with them, and, in my judgment, the question of the people today is, who dissolved the Union; when was it dissolved? and to these questions the American people will bring their cp Representatives for an answer and the will not take their ideas from these learne foreign authors, who knew nothing of such a Federal Republic as ours with a written Constitution in which the lines and rights of State and General Governments are so clearly defined, and which possesses in itself no power of dissolution except by general consent. en and b whom was this Union of States dissolved? Gentlemen have talked about the southern States as being out of the Union, as being alien enemies, as conquered provinces, to be governed by the will of the conqueror, as subject to sequestration, confiscation, and every other evil which may be imposed upon them by this Congress. Sir, I ask still and again, when did these States get out of the Union? Was it when they attempted to secede? If they went out of the Union then and they had the right to go, by what right did we go to war with them, and for what did we fight? We have always acted on the doctrine that “governments are formed by the consent of the governed, ” and if the people of the southern States deemed it to their interest to “ dissolve the tie” that bound them to us, and if, then, secession accomplished the dissolution, then surely we had no right to prevent them from oing, much less to fight them back. But we did not believe theyhad the power thus to separate themselves from the Union. We acted on whthe assumption that the secession was a revolt, not of the masses of the people, but of some restless spirits, and hence the General Government, being by the organic law required to preserve all the States from “ insurrection, " came forth to suppress the revolt. The Government called upon the people to prevent the overthrow of the nion by the insurrection in the southern States and they responded. Sir, the Union was not dissolved by these ordinances, and the en is resolved that it should not he so disso ve. The preservation of the Union was the great object of the war. For this more than two million men went forth into the deadly strife, for this 100s of then sands offered up their lives as sacrifices upon the altar of patriotism. The Union, was their battle cry. For its preservation they left families and fireside joys and marched into the deadly breach; the Union, with its memen early battles, its Bunker Hill and Yorktown, its Sarato a and the Cowpens, its Brandywine and Cam en. The triumphs of its middle age were dear to all its sons. Ihcy sung of Lundy Lane and of NewOrleans. They saw its armies triumph and its flag emblazoned with more than t. irty stars. They saw its triumphs on the ocean also, and determined to maintain itster ritorial unity. For this Grant battled so perseveringly, and Sherman marched and fought, as only western men can march and fight, for the West is the child of the Republic, and its unity is to secure to the West its marlQts and its pOWer and when all the battles were fought, the insurrection put down, the forts reoccupied, the flu everywhere thrown to the breeze, its triumphant vindicators may now with propriety ask, who dissolved the Union? and I firmly believe, sir, that when these soldiers are by politicians informed the Union is dissolved, their answer will be it is not so and now, Mr. Speaker what is the true situation of the country? The southern States have repealed their ordinances of secession, have declared their former slaves all free, have repudiated their debts created by the war; they have done all in their power to restore their States to their former condition in the Union. The President has looked to the restoration of these States with an anxiety characteristic of his patriotic devotion to the unity and gIOry of his whole country. He found society almost dissolved. By the cessation of strife, and dissolution of both the civil and military power of the rebellion, there was no government left in all that country. As Commander in Chief of the armies, he appointed military rulers, and then provisional governors. He then proceeded in the work of restoration, opened the ports to foreign commerce, set all the machinery of government to work; collected, through the agents of the law, internal taxes. postoffices have been opened and postal service restored, and but for the desolations and losses of war, a stranger would not know that there had ever arisen a question of the existence of the Union even in those States. Still, the question recurs, is the Union dissolved, and how was it done? The President answers, I do not regard the Union dissolved. The rebellion failed and its failure left the Union intact. Had it succeeded, then this (lis solution would have been an accomplished fact; but the Union armies triumphed, and he is to day the President of the whole U.S., with none to dispute the authority vested in him by the people from the eastern boundary of Maine to teRio Grande, and all its laws are enforced and its taxes collected. Lieutenant GenlGrant, who opened up the Mississippi and caused its waters to “ flow unvexed to the sea, ” assures you that the Union is not dissolved. To prevent it he drew his sword, and did not sheathe itnutil the idea of dissolution had been driven from the southern mind, until its best army had surrendered; until its chosen and able leader had sued for once delivered up his sword, receiving a parole of honor, and a reeing not again to take up arms against the nion. Grant and his veteran and persevering legions maintained the Union and prevented its dissolution. You ask Sherman, is the Union dissolved, did you fight to sever or to restore it? Who does not know his answer? When in a few most eloquent words our accomplished Speaker 3 day ago introduced to this House that modest soldier whose renown and glory fill the world, whose march has no parallel in either ancient or modern history, when cheer after cheer made this Hallring, and every one felt leased to shake the hand of the victorious soldier, was it because he had done much todissolve the Union, he was thus received? and had