Mr. WILSON. Mr. President, there are in dications not to be mistaken that this amendment is doomed to defeat. To me this result will be a subject of sincere and profound regret. My heart, my conscience, and my judgment approve of this amendment, and I support it without qualification or reservation. I approve of the purpose for which it is introduced; I approve it because I believe it would sweep the loyal States by an immense majority; that no public man could stand before the people of the loyal States in opposition to it or oppose it with any force whatever. I approve it because I believe if it were put in the Constitution every black man in America, before 5 years could pass, would be enfranchised and weaponed with the ballot for the protection of life, liberty, and property. Senators on the other side of the Chamber pronounce this measure unjust to the States recently in rebellion. Some of them tell us that we who are pressing it are willing if we can secure franchise for the black men to let all other races go. We are quite as careful of the rights of other races as are the Senators who reproach us. We are also told that it is immoral and indecent, an offense to reason and to conscience. Sir, this measure came into Congress with the sanction of the ComReconstruction, composed as it is of men of individual honor and personal character, and as true to the cause of the colored race as any other men here or elsewhere. It comes to the Senate by an overwhelming vote of the HoRep. It is sustained by 99 out ofevery 100 of the publicjournals that brought the present Administration into power, and were it submitted to the American people it would I am quite sure be sustained by men in the loyal States who believe that the soldier who fought the battles of the Republic is the equal of the traitor who fought against the country. It would be a question of man hood, a question whether one rebel in SCarolina shall count as much in the Electoral College and in the HoRep as 2 10:11men of NewEnglan, or of the great centrai States, or of the West. Fighting the battle before the people on the question of the equality of the basis of representation, it would triumph, go into and become a portion of the Constitution of the country. Being incorporated in the Constitution, the practical effect would be this, and only this: it would raise up a party in every one of these States immediately in favor of the enfranchisement of the colored race. That party might be animated and influenced by the ove of power, by pride, and by ambition. These men might begin the contest, for they would not like to yield the power of their States in congress; the might begin the battle animated y no big and lofty motives; but as soon as the discussion commenced, it would address itself to the reason, to the heart, and to the conscience of the pmciple. The advocates of nevro enfranchisement would themselves speedily grow up to belieii in the justice, e nity, and right of giving the ballot to the black men. here would bidiscussion on every s uare mile of the rebel Staten. Appeals would made to their pride, to their ambition, to their justice, to their love of fair play, to their equity; all the interests and passions and all the loftier motives that can sway, control, and influence men, would impel them to action. They would cooperate with the friends of freedom throu bout the country; would seek their counsel an aid. They would be the left wing of the great army of freedom, of elevation, and improvement in the country. We would give them our influ once, our voices and our aid in fivliting the battle of enfranchisemeut. They wouId have the support and the prayers of the poor black men of t ie South; and before 5 years had passed away, there would not be a rebel State that did not enfranchise the bondman and when they did triumph, they would have made a public sentiment by which every black man could go to the ballot box in safety with his friends, vote with his friends and under the protection of his friends, and without“ having his head broken.” Force suffrage by positive law upon Virginia or the Carolinas or any of these States today, and the negro would go to the ballot box almost at the peril of his life; but let there be 4 or 5 years of discussion by liberal and just men in any of these States, and let them trinm h and ive the suffrage themselves, and they wi make it as ens for the black men to vote without molestation as they vote today in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. I believe if this amendment were placed in the Constitution it would bring suffrage to the black men of the country within 5 years; I entertain not the shadow of a doubt about it; and that when suffrage did come under those circumstances, it would come, in the words of Mr. Lincoln, “to stay;” it would be fixed forever in the general policy of the whole country. Believing this, I must give my vote for the proposition. If I were to contribute to the defeat of this great measure, and nothing should be done for the enfranchisement of the men who have fought the battles of this country, and of this race to which the country owes so much, I could not go back to my State and answer the people there or answer my own conscience. Senators on the other side of the Chamber have been pleased to talk about these proposed amendments to the Constitution as though we here were “innovators” and “radicals, for that seems to be a phrase that falls glibly from the lips of gentlemen in our time. Do not Senators know that the framers of the Constitution of the U.S., mindful of the imperfections of humaninstitutions, prescribed a mode for the amendment of the work of their hands? Do they not know that the 1st congress under the Constitution, guided by men who were in the constitutional convention, proposed 12 amendments to the Constitution, ten of which were incorporated into that instrument? Do they not know that the 3rd congress proposed another amendment, and the 7th Congress another, which were adopted? Do they not remember that eminent statesmen from that time until this have proposed amendments to the Constitution without subjecting themselves to denunciation as “innovators” and “radicals?” Do not these Senators remember that 5 years ago, when these Halls rang with angry menaces of incipient treason, 5 amendments to the Constitution were proposed in what is called the Crittenden compromise: an amendment to recognize and establish slavery, and protect it south of 36o 30 5 an amendment forbidding the nation to prohibit slavery where it possessed exclusive jurisdiction; an amendment forbidding congress to abolish slavery in the DistCol without the consent of Maryland and Virginia; an amendment to allow the slave masters to take their slaves with them and range all over the loyal States, and hold them manacled and chained in the face of o. Chris tian people; and an amendment to ay for fugitive slaves that had escaped from the U.S. marshals or were taken from them by any mob that might be raised up in any part of the country? Do not Senators remember that the men who now taunt us with a proposition to amend the Constitution voted to place these inhuman and unchristian amendments in the Constitution of this country? Sir, the propositions embodied in that Crittenden compromise were the wickedest measures that Were ever presented to a nation since the morning of creation. Sir, we have passed through this war. It has tested alike the weakness and the strength of our institutions. B the framers of the constitution, persons hel in bondage numbered 3/5ths in the basis of representation. That concession to slavery gave the slaveholding States undue power and influence in Congress, and was ever a just cause of complaint. By emancipation these persons formerly accounted as slaves are free, thus giving additional Representatives to the late slaveholding States. By the Constitution as it is, 4 and a half million slaves recently emancipated are added to the free population of the country, adding 13 Representatives to the emancipating States. By the Constitution as it is the States are clothed with power to prescrie the qualifications of electors. The emancipated slaves that would give to the slaveholding States some 30 Representatives in congress are wholly denied the right of suffrage. y adding to the basis of representation these freedmen, the power of those who deny their rights in the gOVernment of the country would be strength ened. By the Constitution as it is, one rebel in SCarolina or Mississippi is equal in power in the HoRep and the Electoral College to 2 loyal men in NewEng land, the great central States or the States of the West. such inequality is unjust and wholly indefensible. When the Constitution of the U.S. was framed the States controlled this subject of suffrage. “e have had quoted to us the Opinions of the eminent statesmen of other days. Sir, whatever mayhave been their utterances, the statesmen of that period were the men who made the State constitutions, and under those State constitutions it is a question whether 1/2 of the men who foughtthe battles of the American Revolution could vote or not. In the State of Massachusetts, to be a voter under the constitution of the State at the time the Constitution of the U.S. was framed the voter must be in possession of $300 worth of property. I have no hesitation in saying that when the Constitution was framed 50t%. of the men of Massachusetts who had Einght in the ranks during the Revolution did not possess the $300, an could not vote in that State. In Connecticut $200 worth of property was required. In RhdIsland there was a property qualification, and it continued until the on rebellion. In NewYork there was a property qualification, a freeholder or an annual rent of 40 shillings; in NewJersey $250; in Indiana 50 acres of land were required; in Virginia a reeholder; in NCarolina 50 acres of land; and in SCarolina filly acres of land. Do Senators believe that in these States the men who fought the battles of the country during the revolutionary war could vote under those constitutions? If you will look at the number of votes cast in those States at that time you will see that not one 4th of the men who would be entitled to vote, if allpersons over 21 years of age were allowed to vote, did vote. The men who framed the Constitution of the U.S. made these State constitutions. They called them republican in form, and inserted a provision in the Constitution of the U.S. guarantying that the should continue to be republican in form. hey also provided in the gonstitution that the electorsunder it should be the electors of the most numerous branchof the State legislatures, and they well knew what those qualifications were. Every State constitution provides for electors, prescribes the qualifications for suffrage. The laws of the States provide for qualifications of electors. Every i State, from a adoption of the State constitutions to this hour, has claimed the authority, and exercised it, to settle the questions pertaining to suffrage. They never supposed that the Federal Government had the power to change it. They never gave that power; they never intended to give that power; and I do not believe that a respectable vote could be obtained in the States to give the Federal Government this power.