Mr. MORRILL. Mr. President, the bill has been so long before the Senate that perhaps I shall be justified in stating to the senate briefly, what is proposed by the bill, its scope, and its provisions substantially, perhaps with some observations touching the principle which is involved in the bill itself. It had some consideration in opposition by the opponents of the bill at the last session, but I believe nothing has been said on the affirmative side in explanation or by way of argument. It will be seen, sir, that the measure purports to be a measure to regulate the suffrage, the elective franchise in the DistCol. It is a little more than that. It not only regulates the elective franchise in this District, but it extends it and enlarges it. The principal feature perhaps of the bill, that which is of most interest to the Senate and to the country, and that which probably challenges the objection to the bill, is that it embraces the colored citizens of the DistCol. In this particular it is novel, and in this particular it is important. In this particular it may be said to be inaugurating a policy not only strictly for the DistCol, but in some sense for the country at large. In this respect it is, I suppose, that this bill has received so large a share of the public attention during the last session and the recess of the Congress of the U.S. if I were to define this bill in a single phrase, I should say that it is impartial restricted suffrage; that is to say, it proposes to be impar tial among all the male citizens of the U.S. resident in this District. To that extent it is impartial. It is restricted in that it is confined to the male sex; and in that it is confined to persons of adult age; and in that it excludes paupers, insane persons, persons noncompos mentis, and persons who have rendered themselves, by crime treason, felony, or otherwise infamous, and so not to be trusted in Foreign affairs. Therefore, sir, as a definition, say it is what may be called impartial restricted suffrage, as distinguished from univer sal and manhood suffrage, of which we hear so much in these, days. These principles are attempted to be enforced by appropriate provisions in the bill which make it really an election bill. And now, Mr. President, with this general statement of the objects and scope and provisions of this bill I content myself; but I trust I shall be pardoned for making a single remark in regard to the position of this measure before the Congress of the U.S., and possibly before the country. It will be seen by the bill that it was introduced into the Senate on the 1st day of the last session of Congress. I believe a similar bill was introduced into the other branch of the Legislature on the same day, which came to the Senate, which was referred to the ComDistCol, and which was not reported upon to the Senate. This, perhaps, may be regarded as a substitute for it. Allow me to say, and I think I am called upon to say, owing to the public misapprehension on the subject, that bill the committee considered anomalous in its character. While it was a bill proposing legislation, in fact, it was simply a declaration of a principle with no provision whatever for its enforcement. Therefore in effect it gave no right whatever, and enlarged no privilege whatever. While it declared that the principle of “white, ” which was an exclusion, and which deprived the col. ored citizen of his right to vote was wrong, it had no provision to correct the evil; and so, Mr. President, the committee of this body (agreeing with the sentiment of that bill, that the principle of discrimination or exclusion in that case was wrong, and if it were wrong, it was the duty of Congress that declared it to be a wrong to provide the remedy) as that bill did not provide a remedy substituted this for it. I feel called upon to make this statement on account of the misapprehension on this subject here and elsewhere. It seems to have gone out to the country that the other branch of Congress passed a suffrage bill which gave to the colored citizens the right of suffrage, and that somehow or other the Senate had not concurred with the House. It will be found upon examination that this bill is in harmony with the principle which was sought to be initiated in the House, but which failed of any effect at all for want of any provision in their bill to enforce it; and that, I submit, is a sufficient answer to any imputation or charge upon the Senate, that it had not acted in concurrence with the HoRep upon the bill. The HOuse has sent us no such bill. Mr. President, there has been a misapprehension in the public press of the country upon this subject which I feel authorized to refer to, and I take occasion to say, and I say it deliberately, that the misapprehension of the public press in regard to this subject is disreputable to American journalism. Sir, we publish the debates of this body accurately and with fidelity. There is no occasion for misapprehension and still less for misrepresentation of what is done in this body; and yet, since the last ses.sion of Congress began, on this subject the public press have not only misconeeived and misapprehended, but misrepresented this question, to the public detriment, as I think. I do not stand here to complain. I have no personal grievance to speak of; but influential and leading presses of the country who have undertaken to speak most on this subject have misrepresented and misapprehended most, and the congress of the U.S., particularly this branch of it, has been put in the attitude of withholding action upon the question of suffrage in the DistCol when the record. ". to the country shows that the Senate has acted promptly on this question, and acted in harmony with what were understood to be the sentiments of the other branch. Mr. President, with these remarks I proceed to notice some objections to this bill of a local character, and then I shall have occasion to advert to some of a more general character and to briefly state the principle on which this bill proceeds. Of course, in its most intimate relations, this bill is local. It affects the people of this District, and as you would expect, as it was reasonable to expect, these people have expressed their opinions to Congress upon the subject. Here is a communication from the mayor of the city of Washington, which perhaps I may as well send to the Clerk and ask him to read, which states the position of the corporation, the mayor and aldermen, and the electors of this District on that subject. The Scoretary read the following communication: WASHINgrox CITY, D.C., MAYor's Or Fico, CITY HA is, January 6, 1836. Sir:I have the honor, in compliance with an act of the councils of this city, approved December 16, 1835, to transmit through you to the Senate of the U.S. the result of the election held on Thursday, 21st December, “to ascertain the opinion of negtrhoe spuefforpalgee, o”f Washington on the question of at gated which the vote was 6, 623, setre as tollows: Against negro suffrage. For negro suffrage. Majority against negro suffrage. poTllheids vote, the largest with but 2 exceptions ever in this city, conclusively shows the unanimity ofsentimentof the op' of Washington in opposition to the extension of the right of suffrage to that class;and that its integrity may be properly apprencipatdby the Senate, I give the aggregate of the vote castat the 5 elections immediately preceding for mayor: 1855 1852 1864. No others, in addition to this minority of 35, are to be found in this community who favor the extension of the right of suffrage to : class and in the manner proposed, excepting those who have al ready memorialized the Senate in its favor, and who, with but little association, less sympathy, and no communityof interestor affinity with the citizens of Washington, receive here from the General Government temporary employment, and having, at the national capital a residence limited only to the duration of a presidential term claim, and invariably exercise the electivefranchise elsewhere. The people of this city. claiming an independence of thought and the right to express its given have thus a grave and deliberate utterance in an unex oway to subject. their opinion and feeling on this This unparalleled unanimity of sentiment which peryadesall classes of this community in opposition to the extension of the right of suffrage to that class engenders an earnest hope that Congress, in according to this expression of their wishes the respectand consideration they would as individual members yield to those whom they immediately represent, would n from the exercise of its absolute power, and so avertan impending future apparently so objection able to thoseover whom, by the fundamental law of the land, they have “exclusive jurisdiction.” With much respect, I am, sir, your own and the Senate's obedient servant, RICHARD WALLACH, Mayor. Hon. L. F. S. Foster, President of the Senate of the U.S.