Mr. HOWARD. Mr. President, I a eewith the Senfrom Pennsylvania that t mm is a growing apprehension in the country that there is something wrong in the present state of af fairs; but I do not propose at this moment to go far into the causes of that wrong. I intend to address myself to the bill under consideration, and not to follow the Senfrom Pennsylvania in the devious course which he has pursued. Undoubtedl there are some thin which are wrong, and unhartunately, I think, or some persons, the people have notonly “ be un” to have an appreliension of that wrong. but actually possess a knowledge of it. It is impossible for us here to raise such a cloud of dust as to blind the vision of the people whom we represent upon these great and important topics. There is a condition of wrong, I apprehend, existing in some of the rebel States, and as one very small bit of evidence of its existence I begleave to say that I very recently saw a letter written by one of the most eminent of our cucrals now on duty in the State of Texas, in whrich he states that at about the time of the date of his letter, last December, such a curiosity was discovered in thenorthern part of Texas as a true outand out Union man; one of the old style of Union ists, who had maintained his integrity through outthe war, and who, aftertheelose of hostilities, wasso indonsiderate, so wanting intenderness toward the patriotic feelin of the people of Texas, as to raise the old stripes and stars over the roof of his house. This was but the signal for a meeting of a comWery loyal citizens of that nei hborhood, whoatonce called upon him and ordered him to take down the o d flag, stating to him that they could submit to be conquered, that they “accepted the situation ” but that for him to stick up the old flag over is house was a little too much for them to bear. He had the resolution, however, to resist the demand; and for that resistance he atoned with his life. He was deliberately mur dered by those lovely Unionists of the State of Texas, those reconstructed or semireconstructed Unionists, who, like too many other Unionists of the like stamp, “accept the sit uation l”. I should be very glad to see an exhibit made of the condition of that rebel State of Texas; and I take this occasion to express in regret, as far as I can. pprehcnd the nature of the subject, that the IPOTUS should have thought it his duty to withhold from Congress the facts for which he was called upon recently by a resolution. I think it is highly necessary that Congress and the people should be fully informed, and that at as ear y a day as practicable of the actual condition, social and political, of the rebel States, so that in adjusting our legislation in reference to them we may act with ue regard to their actual condition, with full light and knowledge of the whole subject. But, sir, I did not rise intending to go into the general subject, but rose more particularly to say sword in reference to the amendment of the constitution abolishing slavery, and to the true interpretation to be given to it. I happened to be a member of the ComJudiciary at the time this amendment was draftedand adopted and reported to the Senate. I recollect very distinctly what were the views entertained y members of that committee at the time it was under consideration before them and notwithstandin the very vehement style of the Senfrom Iennsylvania, in placing a narrow and utterly ineffectual construction upon iIt, take this occasion to say that it was in contemplation of its friends and advocates to give to ongress precisel the power ever the subject of slavery and the freedmen which is proposed to be exercised by the bill now under our consideration. It was easy to foresee, and of course we fore saw, that in case this scheme of emancipation was carried out in the rebel States it weald encounter the most vehement resistance on the part of the old slaveholders. It was easy to look far enough into the future to perceive that it would be a very unwelcome measure to them, and that they would resort to ever means in their power to prevent what they ca led the loss of their property under this amendment. We could foresee easily enough that they would use, if they should be permitted to do so by the General Government, all the powers of the State governments in restrainin and circumscribing terights and privileges which are plainly given by itto the emancipated negro. If understand correctly the interpretation given to the article by the Senfrom Delaware and the Senfrom Pennsylvania, it is this: that the sole effect of it is to cut and sever the mere legal ligament by which the person and the service of the slave was attached to his master, and that beyond this particular office the amendment does not go; that it can have no effect whatever upon the condition of the emancipated black in any other respect. In other wor s, they hold that it. relieves him from his socalled legal obligation to render his personal service to his master without compensation; and there leaves him, to tally, irrctrievably, and without any power on the part of Congress to look after his wellbeing from the moment of this mockery of emancipation. Sir, such was not the intention of the friends of this amendment at the time of its initiation here and at the time of its adoption; and Landertake to. sayth atitis not the conv struetie n which is given to it by he bar through 504 January 30, out the country, and much less by the liberty loving people. But lgt us look more closely at this narrow construction. Where does it leave us? We are told that the amendment simply relieves the slave from the obligation to render service to his master. What is a slave in contemplation of American law, in contemlation of the laws of all the slave States? eknow full well; the history of 200 years teaches us that he had no rights, nor nothing which he could call his own. He had not the right to become a husband or a father in the eye of the law, he had no child, he was not at liberty to indulge the natural affections of the human heart for children, for wife, or even for friend. He owned no property, because the law prohibited him. He could not take real orpersonal estate either by sale. by grant, or by descent or inheritance. He did not own the bread he earned and ate. He stood upon the face of the earth completely isolated from the society in which he ha ened to be; he was nothing but a chattel, subject to the will of his owner, and unprotected in his rights by the law of the State where he happened to live. His rights, did I say? No, Sir, I use inappropriate language. He had no rights he was an animal; he was property, a chattel. The Almight, according to the ideas of the times, had may e him to be property, a chattel, and not a man. ow, sir, it is not denied that this relation of servitude between the former negro slave and his master was actual! severed by this amendment. But the absur construction now forced upon it leaves him without family, without property, without the implements of has ban ry, and even without the right to acquire or use any instrumentalities of carrying on the industry of I which he may be capable; it leaves him without friend or support, and even without the clothes to cover his nakedness. He is a waif upon the current of time; he has nothing that belon s to him on the face of the earth except sole y his naked person and here, in this state, we are calls a on to abandon the corcreature whom we have emancipated. We are cooly told that he has no right beyond this, and we are told that under this amendment the power of the State within whose limits he happens to be is not at all restrained in respect to him, and that the State through its Legislature may at any time declare him to be a vagrant, and as such commit him to jail, or assi n him to uncompensated service. 0w, Mr. President, I ask these gentlemen I appeal not only to their knowledge of the true principles of construction, but I appeal to their amenityto say whether it is possible inno cently and sincerely to ascribe to the advocates of this amendment any such cruel and inhuman purpose as this? No, sir; I think they cannot ay their hands upon their hearts and sa that in advocating this amendment we inten edto leave the ne proin so hel less and destitute a condition. at if theirs e the true construction, then it is competent for the Legislature of each State to declare by law that no as rewho has once been a slave shall ever, within the limits of that State have the right or privilege of cumin and purchasing property; o having a home ander which to shelter him and his family, if he has one; of having a wife and family, or ofeating the bread he earns; thus leaving it in the power of these interested States to expatriate imat any moment and drive him beyond their limits; to derive him of a home, to deprive him of all the fruits of his toil and his industr, and finally to reduce him to a condition in nitely worse than that of actual slavery, h compelling him to labor at such priceas the odmaster may see fit to pay him, while at the same time, he not being a slave, has no claim whatever upon that old master forsup ort, thus treailing him as a nuisance upon the lipiceof the eart. No, sir, such was not the intention of the advocates of this amendment. Its intention was to make him the opposite of a slave, to make him a free man and what are the attributes Of a free man according to the universal understanding of the American people? Is a free man to be deprived of the right of acquiring property, of the right of having a family, a wife, children, home? What definition will you at tach to the word “ free man" that does not include these ideas? The once slave is no longer a slave; he has become, by means of emancipation, a free man. If such be the case, then in all common sense is he not entitled to those rights Which we concede to a man who is free? Mr. President, I do not understand the bill which is now before us to contemplate anything else but this, that in respect to a1civil rights and those are some of the civil rights which I have just enumeratedthere is to be here after no distinction between the white race and the black race. It is to secure to these men whom we have made free the ordina rights of a free man and nothing else. Its 1st section declares that: The inhabitants of every race and color. without regard to any previous condition of slavery or involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whercof thenartyshallhave been duly convicted, shall have thesame right to makeand enforcec ontracts, to sue, be partics and give evidence. to inherit, purchasc, lease, sell. hold, and conveyreal and personal rop crty and to full and equal benefit of all laws and proccedings for the security of person and property, and, shall be subject to like punishment, pains, and penalties, and to none other, any law, statute. ordinance. l regulation, or custom. to the contrary notwithstand ID8 There is no invasion of the legitimate rights of the States. It contemplates nothing of the kind; but it simply gives to persons who are f different races or colors the same civil right. That is itsfull extent; it goes no further; an I sincerely trust that this nation, having by a expenditure of blood and treasure unexample in the histo of the human race, having by their chief Executive declared the slaves i the U.S. forever emancipated and free, and in doing this great act a pealed to the and a proval of a just Go favgjl; having employ this class of persons to the numberof nearl 200,000 in the prosecution of out just and righteous war, will not now be found so recreant to duty, so wantin in simple justice, as to turn our backs on the race an say to them, “We set you ree, but beyond this we give you no protection; we allow you again to be reduced to slavery by your old masters, because it is the right of the State which has enslaved on for 200 years thus to do.” Sir, ct me tell you and the Senators who have advocated the opposite side of this question that if we fail in this high duty, if we fail to redeem this solemn pled e which we have given to the slave, to the world, and in the presence ofal mighty God, the time is not far istant when we shall reap the fruits of our treachery and imbecility in woes which we have not yet witnessed, interrors of which even. the civilWar that has just passed has furnished no example.