Mr. SPALDING. I do not know how extensively this sentiment may prevail in the late rebel States; I have no question that the sentiment does prevail to some considerable extent; but I.not claim that Congress should rest content upon any such assurance. We must have some tangible evidence that shall satisfy us that this work of reconstruction is perfect and enduring. If the amendment to the Constitution should be ratified, we then may require something from those States which have incurred so fearful a oat the hands of this Government by their long continued rebellion. When we come to that subject for I confess it is only a work of time with me we will act upon it. My opinion is that, inasmuch as we have put this amendment to the Constitution before the people, and inasmuch as the people of these States have given it. their approby their votes at the late elections, we ought to suffer a reasonable period of time to & elapse before we adopt other ulterior and more violent measures. Now what I would suggest very respectfully would be this: that we let the constitutional amendment be in the train of adoption where it now is, until perhaps the 4th of March next, when the 40th Congress will meet, and if at that time we find that this measure is repudiated by the southern States and flung back with contempt in our faces, then let the Gentfrom Pennsylvania call up his reconstruction bill, and I will be one of the foremost to go with him in any practicable measure of reconstruction after the fashion which he indicates; and in doing that I should carry out the wishes of my constitquents as well as consult my own feelings in the matter. But I must be permitted to remark that we seem to have fallen on strange times. Here tofore independence of thought and action has been permitted in this honorable body on the part of its members; but now it seems as if every difference of opinion amounted to a desertion of the Republican ranks in the opinion of some. I am bold to say that it will take some time and no little trouble to get me out of the Republican ranks, for I was in at the inception of the Republican party, and was a Republican, in fact, long before. I left in the State of Ohio a o, dominant party in 1848, one which ruled in that State by 40,000 majority, and one in which I had served for 25 years. I. left it, too, when I laid down the honors of the highest judicial office in the State, because I ventured to differ with the Democratic party of my State on the subject of the rendition of fugitive slaves. Soon after that the notorious fugitive slave law was enacted. From that time to the present I have, in all my votes and all my actions, contributed, so far as in me lay, to the downfall of slavery and all the despotic institutions of the country. That, sir, has become with me a habit, and I cannot readily abandon it. But unfortunately we are misapplying just now the favorite term “radical.” Why, sir, I have often been called at home “the great Radical of Ohio.” And yet in this House I am today charged with being somewhat conservative. The Gentfrom Pennsylvania told us the other day, I believe, that he had come here a conservative at the present session. Now, what is the meaning of this term “radicalism?” It certainly does not mean despotism. Does it mean anarchy? For in avoiding the one we may run into the other. Are we prepared at the sound of the bugle blast to run into the ground all the cherished institutions of this popular form of Government? Are we, without a moment's consideration, to be made to follow our great leader and throw into the condition of provinces or territories old Commonwealths which entered into the glorious constellation of the 13 States that gave this Government birth? Having this great subject upon our hands the overthrow of these different State governments, which it would seem it might be enough for us to grapple with at one time are we to be called forward again and rallied at the sound of the trumpet to charge with impeachment the Chief Executive officer of the Government? Are we to do this at once, without any time for reflection or consideration? Mr. Speaker, I do not question that the POTUS has said and done a great many wrong things. I might perhaps say that some of them approach the “very verge” of what would form a ground of impeachment. I do not stand here for the purpose of applauding, much less excusing, in any degree, the conduct of the Chief Magistrate while he was traversing the country last summer, nor at any time since. But I do stand here, sir, to vindicate our popular institutions, our free institutions of government, against the rudeness of all these assaults at one and the same time. I am not given to fear without a cause. I am commonly reckoned as reckless as the most reckless man; but my age is such that I must be permitted to listen rather to the counsels of reason than the impulses of passion: and I do say it will be wise in this House and in the other branch of Congress to proceed in these matters with some degree of caution. Sometimes it is said, sir, that we should go into these matters with decision, with firmness, and without delay, because the perpetuity of our great party rests upon the adoption of radical measures. Sir, P". been a partisan long enough to know that extreme measures will not always promote the interests of a party. Suppose that we should in this House, at this moment, prefer articles of impeachment against the POTUS, we have a measure pending at the same time to establish governments by the exercise of the elective franchise by all the freedmen of the South in those States. What will our people at home think of these rank and radical measures? We have not yet had their vote upon this subject. But, sir, if Congress be not content with exerting and exercising its constitutional powers,passing laws by a 2/3rd vote over the Executive veto; if we are not content to rest ôurselves upon the exercise of this power, but at the same time seek violently to throw the President from his seat, and dispossess these socalled State governments of the South, what are we to expect from our constituents at home? Will not these matters react; and will not the President, by and by, begeta sympathy with the masses, which may do far more toward throwing the great Union party at the next election out of power than anything else? I only throw out this suggestion for the consideration of my friends those who have far more interest in this subject than I possibly can have. Again, sir, there is the test of Radicalism held out to us upon the subject of revenue or tariff upon foreign importations, and upon the subject the currency. It would seem that no man can come fully up in these days to the standard of Radicalism unless he be prepared to put a tariff upon foreign goods that shall amount to prohibition, and to open and extend the paper circulation of the country without any limitation. That I understand to be Radicalism in the State of Pennsylvania. While I advocate a reasonable tariff to protect our own industry at home, I am not prepared to denounce every officer of the Government who says that we must still derive a portion of our revenue from duties on imports. While I would disapprove any curtailment of the currency so as injuriously to affect the legitimate business interests of the country, I am with the SecyTreasury when he says that we should gradually feel our way to .payment.