May 10, 1866 (2)

Mr. BINGHAM obtained the floor.

Mr. BANKS. I ask the gentleman to allow mo one moment to say a word of reply to my colleague.

Mr. BINGHAM. I am willing to yield if it does not come out of my time, otherwise I must proceed.'

The SPEAKER. It will come out of the gentleman s time.

Mr. BINGHAM. Mr. Speaker, I beg the House to remember that the three several measures reported by the committee on reconstruction must be considered together as an entirely in order to determine the merit of the question immediately involved before the House in the adoption of the constitutional amendment. I do not believe myself, sir, that the purpose for which this committee was organized by the House would be fully attained if nothing more were to be done by the Congress of the United States than simply to send to the people of the several States the proposition reported by the committee for the amendment of the Constitution.

There are three measures, Mr. Speaker, and not, as some gentlemen seem to argue, but one, that have been reported by this committee. The first of these measures is a conditionprecedent to the reorganization and restoration to political power of any State lately in insurrection. That measure has more than once during this debate been lost sight of by gentlemen who have spoken.

No State lately in insurrection, according to one of the measures reported, in case it shall become a law of the United States, can ever exercise political powers in this Union until the pending constitutional amendment shall first have become a part of the Constitution of the United States, by the consent of the Legislatures of three fourths of the States now maintaining their constitutional relations to the Government, and by the subsequent consent of the insurrectionary State itself, the State also conforming its own constitution and laws to all its requirements.

Additional to this there is yet another measure reported by the committee to which I attach great importance, and to which I doubt not the loyal people of this country of every section will attach great importance. That is the bill which disqualifies forever from holding any office of honor or trust within the Republic every leading and marked actor in the late rebellion. By that bill the president and vice president of the late confederate States so called 'will be excluded j. the members of the Thirty Sixth Congress who in any manneraided this rebellion will be excluded; all persons who were educated at the national academies, naval or military, who have been endowed by the people with the power of knowledge, a gift next in value to the gift of the understanding with which the breath of the Almighty has given them, are exc ded the persons who represented this confederacy of treason and crime in any part of the habitable globe are excluded; and above all and beyond all, all persons who in any manner subjected to untimely death by exposure or neglect or the slow torture of famine or poison the captive defenders of the Union, are forever excluded.

The mere statement and concession of the people s right to exercise this power, which is undoubtedly the sovereign right of the American people, by a congressional act, ought to have suggested to the honorable gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Basics] that if it is needful in this great work of reconstruction further to disfranchise the participants in this rebellion, it can be done in like manner by an act of Congress, and without a constitutional amendment.

The franchise of a Federal elective office is as clearly one of the privileges of a citizen of the United States as is the elective franchise for choosing Representatives in Congress or presidential electors. They are both provided for and guarantied in your Constitution. Why, then, prohibit rebels from the enjoyment of the first for life by an act of Congress and restrict the second for a term of years by a constitutional amendment? To be sure we all agree, and the great body of the people of this country agree, and the committee thus far in reporting measures of reconstruction agree, that the exercise of the elective franchise, though it be one of the privileges of a citizen of the Republic, is exclusively under the control of the States. But, sir, the committee never intimated and never intended to intimate by any measure they have reported that any State lately in insurrection can exercise either that power or any other until it is restored to its constitutional relation to the Union save by the express or implied consent of the Congress of the United States, nor that after being restored they can exercise that power contrary to the express conditions prescribed by Congress for their restoration. The power to prescribe these conditions is exclusively in Congress.

That is the philosophy of every measure of reconstruction now pending before the House. And that is wherein it is opposed to the opinions of gentlemen on the other side of the House who have spoken, I am sorry to say—and I say it without the slightest intention of giving offense to any man—not in the spirit of representatives of the people, but in the spirit of partisans. For myself, I cannot approach the discussion of this great question, which concerns the safety of all, in the spirit of a partisan. God forbid that I should approach this subject in any other character than that of a representative of the people—a representative of the people not unmindful of the oath which I took, sir, before your tribune.

Mr. WRIGHT. I rise to a question of order. The gentleman, by reflection, seems to infer that we do not represent the people, and that we are unmindful of our oaths.

The SPEAKER. That is not a point of order under parliamentary law, but an interruption without the consent of the member speaking.

Mr. BINGHAM. The want of the Republic to day is not a Democratic party, is not a Republican party, is not any party save a party for the Union, for the Constitution, for the supremacy of the laws, for the restoration of all the States to their political rights and powers under such irrevocable guarantees as will forevermore secure the safety of the Republic, the equality of the States, and the equal rights Ctf all the people under the sanctions of inviolable law.

I trust, Mr. Speaker, that after the roll shall have been called this day, and the departing sun shall have gilded with its last rays the dome of the Capitol, it will not be recorded by the pen of the historian that the sad hour had come to this great Republic which, in the day of its approaching dissolution, came to the republic of ancient Rome, when it was said Caesar had his party, Antony had his party, Brutus had his party, but the Commonwealth had none! I speak to day Mr. Speaker, to the party that is for the Republic; to the party that is for the Constitution; to the party that is for the speedy restoration to their constitutional relations of the late insurrectionary States, under such perpetual guarantees as will guard the future of the Republic by the united voice of a united people against the sad calamities which have in these late years befallen it.

Mr. Speaker, the final settlement of this grave question which touches the nation s life is at last with the people of the loyal States— the loyal people of the Union. To the end, therefore, knowing, as the committee did know, that parties must dissolve, that men must perish from the earth, but that the Commonwealth is for all time, if its laws be just and its people be faithful, they propose to the several States a perpetual covenant in the form of a constitutional amendment, never to be broken so long as the people adhere to their cherished forms of government which when ratified, will secure the safety of all and the rights of each, not only during the present generation, but throughout all generations, until this grand example of free government shall itself be forgotten. The amendment reported by the committee is as follows:

Article—.

Sec. 1. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Sec. 2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But whenever, in any State, the elective franchise shall be denied to any portion of its male citizens not less than twenty one years of age, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion or other crime, the basis of representation in such State shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens not loss than twenty one years of age.

Sec. 3. Until the 4th day of July, in the year 1870, all persons who voluntarily adhered to the late insurrection, giving it aid and comfort, shall be excluded from the right to vote for Representatives in Congress and for electors for President and Vice President of the United States.

Sec. 4. Neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation already incurred, or -which may hereafter be incurred, in aid of insurrection or of -war against the United States, or any claim for compensation for loss of involuntary service or labor.

Sec. 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce by appropriate legislation the provisions of this article. The necessity for the first section of this amendment to the Constitution, Mr. Speaker, is one of the lessons that have been taught to your committee and taught to all the people of this country by the history of the past four years of terrific conflict—that history in which God is, and in which He teaches the profoundest lessons to men and nations. There was a want hitherto, and there remains a want now, in the Constitution of our country, which the proposed amendment will supply. What is that? It is the power in the people, the whole people of the United States, by express authority of the Constitution to do that by congressional enactment which hitherto they have not had the power to do, and have never even attempted to do; that is, to protect by national law the privileges and immunities of all the citizens of the Republic and the inborn rights of every person within its jurisdiction whenever the same shall be abridged or denied by the unconstitutional acts of any State.

Allow me, Mr. Speaker, in passing, to say that this amendment takes from no State any right that ever pertained to it. No State ever had the right, under the forms of law or otherwise, to deny to any freeman the equal protection of the laws or to abridge the privileges or immunities of any citizen of the Republic, although many of them have assumed and exercised the power, and that without remedy. The amendment does not give, as the second section shows, the power to Congress of regulating suffrage in the several States.

The second section excludes the conclusion that by the first section suffrage is subjected to congressional law; save, indeed, with this exception, that as the right in the people of each State to a republican government and to choose their Representatives in Congress is of the guarantees of the Constitution, by this amendment a remedy might be given directly for a case supposed by Madison, where treason might change a State government from a republican to a despotic government, and thereby deny suffrage to the people. Why should any American citizen object to that? But, sir, it has been suggested, not here, but elsewhere, if this section does not confer suffrage the need of it is not perceived. To all such I beg leave again to say, that many instances of State injustice and oppression have already occurred in the State legislation of this Union, of flagrant violations of the guarantied privileges of citizens of the United States, for which the national Government furnished and could furnish by law no remedy whatever. Contrary to the express letter of your Constitution, "cruel and unusual punishments" have been inflicted under State laws within this Union upon citizens, not only for crimes committed, but for sacred duty done, for which and against which the Government of the United States had provided no remedy and could provide none.

Sir, the words of the Constitution that "the citizens of each State shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States" include, among other privileges, the right to bear true allegiance to the Constitution and laws of the United States, and to be protected in life, liberty, and property. Next, sir, to the allegiance which we all owe to God our Creator, is the allegiance which we owe to our common country.

The time was in our history, thirty three years ago, when, in the State of South Carolina, by solemn ordinance adopted in a convention held under the authority of State law, it was ordained, as a part of the fundamental law of that State, that the citizens of South Carolina-, being citizens of the United States as well, should abjure their allegiance to every other government or authority than that of the State of South Carolina.

That ordinance contained these words:"

The allegiance of the citizens of this State is due to the State: and no allegiance is due from them to any other Power or authority; and the General Assembly of said State is hereby empowered from time to time, when they may deem it proper, to provide for the administration to the citizens and officers of the State, or such of the said officers as they may think fit, of suitable oaths or affirmations, binding them to the observance of such allegiance, and abjuring all other allegiance; and also to define what shall amount to a violation of their allegiance, and to provide the proper punishment for such violation." There was also, as gentlemen know, an attempt made at the same time by that State to nullify the revenue laws of the United States. What was the legislation of Congress in that day to meet this usurpation of authority by that State, violative alike of the rights of the national Government and of the rights of the citizen?

In that hour of danger and trial to the country there was as able a body of men in this Capitol as was ever convened in Washington, and of these were Webster, Clay, Benton, Silas Wright, John Quincy Adams, and Edward Livingston. They provided a remedy by law for the invasion of the rights of the Federal Government and for the protection of its officials and those assisting them in executing the revenue laws. (See 4 Statutes at Large 03 2 33 No remedy was provided to protect the citizen. Why was the act to provide for the collection of the revenue passed, and to protect all acting under it, and no protection given to secure the citizen against punishment for fidelity to his country? But one answer can be given. There was in the Constitution of the United States an express grant of power to the Federal Congress to lay and collect duties and imposts and to pass all laws necessary to carry that grant of power into execution. But, sir, that body of great and patriotic men looked in vain for any grant of power in the Constitution by which to give protection to the citizens of the United States resident in South Carolina against the infamous provision of the ordinance which required them to abjure the allegiance which they owed their country. It was an opprobrium to the Republic that for fidelity to the United States they could not by national law be protected against the degrading punishment inflicted 011 slaves and felons by State law. That great want of the citizen and stranger, protection by national law from unconstitutional State enactments, is supplied by the first section of this amendment. That is the extent that it hath, no more; and let gentlemen answer to God and their country who oppose its incorporation into the organic law of the land.

The second section of the amendment simply provides for the equalization of representation among all the States of theUnion, North, South, East, and West. It makes no discrimination. New York has a colored population of fifty thousand. By this section, if that great State discriminates against her colored population as to the elective franchise, (except in cases of crime,) she loses to that extent her representative power in Congress. So also will it be with every other State.

Upon the third section of the amendment gentlemen are divided upon this side of the House as well as upon the other. It is a provision that until the year 1870 all persons who voluntarily adhered to the late insurrection, giving it aid and comfort, shall be excluded from the right to vote for Representatives in Congress or for electors for President or Vice President of the United States. This section imposes no other or further disability.

It seems to me, Mr. Speaker, that this section can bring 110 strength to the amendment, although I fully agree with the honorable gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Banks] in the words which he so fitly uttered, it is within the authority of the people of the United States to disfranchise these parties. But, sir, I submit to the honorable gentleman, and I submit to the House, that if we have the power by a mere act of Congress, (as is conceded by the committee,) to take from rebels the franchise of office under the Government of the United States for life, as is provided in the bill reported by the committee, we can as well take from them until 1870, by an act of Congress, the right to vote for Representatives in Congress or for presidential electors, as is provided in the third section of this amendment.

Mr. STEVENS. And have it vetoed.

ilr. BINGHAM. My friend from Pennsylvania says, "and have it vetoed." I am not fearful of any veto at the other end of the avenue. I believe no veto can defeat the final passage of either of the measures reported to the House, nor can a veto defeat the final ti i umph of this constitutional amendment before the people. The success of the amendment here depends upon no veto. It does not go to the President for his sanction. Touching, however, the other question, the veto of the bill, 'even with the provision of the third section added to it, I do not believe for a moment, that the President will veto it, and for the reasons suggested, which I have not time to enumerate now, by the gentleman from Massachusetts in the citations he made from the President s proclamation of the 29 th of May last and the just deductions he drew therefrom. I can vote for the amendment with the third section in as readily as without it. It raises no question of power; it imposes no unjust disability. It involves a question of policy, not of power. The sovereignty of the nation can unquestionably disfranchise the persons referred to, not only until 1870, but until seventy times seventy shall have passed over them, if it pleases God to allow them so long to live upon the earth. The question upon the third section, and the only question, is, what do we gain by putting it in the constitutional amendment? If thereby we endangerthe adoption of the amendment iij the Senate, or its final ratification by the requisite number of States, we should omit it. It has been said that the third section is incapable of execution if adopted. I beg leave to say to the House that in my opinion an amendment that is not to be executed to the full, and which is incapable of full execution, ought not to be put into the Constitution. My honorable colleague from the Columbus district, [Mr. Shellabarger,] in my judgment, suggested, in the few remarks which he made yesterday, the only method by which the Government of the United States can enforce the first clause of that section, and that is by making a registry law for congressional districts, and the election of Representatives to Congress all over the country, and appointing election officers to conduct the same. The first clause only of the third section can in that way be executed; but is there anybody here who proposes to send Federal election officers into Massachusetts or New York to control the elections of Representatives to Congress? The amendment, sir, is of universal application, and if adopted, it is to be enforced in every State in the Union. There are voters within the operation of this section in every State. I have no objection to their disfranchisement, but are you going to enforce the provision if adopted? If not, why retain it? Is it to be retained simply to furnish demagogues a pretext for raising the howl that we exclude rebels for four years only that we may control the next presidential election? Honest, intelligent, and reflecting men will scout such a suggestion, but the calculating and the careless or thoughtless may accept and act upon it to the hurt, the lasting hurt, of the sacred cause this day in your hands. How, I ask, can the last clause of this third section be enforced?

That clause of the section excludes until 1870 all rebels from voting for electors for President and Vice President of the United States.

I venture to say that by the very letter and intendment of the Constitution of our country, the great seal of a State, duly organized and exercising its functions within this Union touching the appointment of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, is final and conclusive upon Congress, except when the certificate shows that the. electors were appointed on a day other than that prescribed by the Constitution or the laws. The Constitution has provided that these electors shall be appointed by each State in such manner as the Legislature thereof may direct; that the Congress may determine the time of choosing the electors and the day on which they shall give their votes, which day shall be the same throughout the United States, and that the electors shall certify their action.

If the State and the electors' certificates show that all these provisions, have been complied with, Congress cannot go behind them and inquire who voted for the electors. If, on the contrary, the certificate from any State discloses that the electors did not meet on the day prescribed by law, as was the fact in the Wisconsin case, to which the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Banks] referred, of course the Congress could reject the vote from that State, but where the certificates are regular, where they show a due appointment of electors, that the electors were chosen on the day prescribed by law, and met and voted for President and Vice President on the day prescribed by law, Congress cannot go behind the certificates; neither can the two Houses of Congress, in joint convention or separately, investigate the question. The appointment of electors for President and Vice President of the United States is the act of a State and not of individuals." Each State shall appoint," says the Constitution; therefore the act can be evidenced only by the certificate of the State officials, under its great seal, which imports absolute verity. How could Congress say the appointment was not the act of the State against the certificate and seal of the State?

The remarks of some gentlemen to the effect that under the Constitution we could enforce the first clause of the section by inquiring into the election of members of the House or of the Senate, do not apply to the last clause, because the express language of the Constitution is that each House shall be the judge of the elections and returns" as well as the" qualifications of its own members." There is no like grant in the Constitution that each House or both Houses in joint convention may inquire into the appointment of electors; therefore the second clause of the third section of the amendment is useless.

I ventured say that clause is useless unless, indeed, by implication Congress is to declare the express text of the Constitution as I have cited it repealed by the proposed amendment when adopted, and. that by virtue of it Congress will prescribe by law the mode and manner of appointing electors for President and Vice President of the United States, in the face of the existing provision of the Constitution that "each State shall appoint the electors in such manner as the Legislature thereof may direct." Who will say, if this amendment is adopted, that the State Legislatures may not direct the manner and each State appoint electors? To what, then, are we reduced? This amendment does not disqualify any rebel or aider of the rebellion from votingat all the State elections for all State officers, nor does it disqualify them from being appointed presidential electors. It amounts, therefore, to this: though it be adopted, and madepartofthe Constitution, yet all persons "who voluntarily adhered to the late insurrection, giving it aid and comfort," may vote at all the State elections for State officers, and, being largely in the majority in every insurrectionary State, may elect the State Legislature, which may appoint electors for President and Vice President of the United States, and from aught in the amendment may appoint rebels as such electors.

It seems to me, sir, that it must by this time be apparent to members of the House that this clause of the amendment is never to be executed until that part, of the text of your Constitution is stricken out; or in other words, that it will require another amendment to the Constitution to enforce this clause if adopted. I trust, therefore, that when the vote comes to be taken on the pending motion to strike out which is offered by way of instruction to the motion to recommit, it will be adopted, and that afterward the House will, if it deems it important, put such a provision as to the election of Representatives to Congress as it has the lawful right to do in the bill of disfranchisement.

Mr. Speaker, there is another section which simply prohibits the United States or any State of this Union from ever assuming or paying any part of the rebel debt or making compensation for emancipated slaves. I do not believe that there is a man on this floor who can answer to his constituency for withholding his vote from that proposition. It involves the future fidelity of the nation. It is a declaration in solemn form, if accepted by the people, that the resources of this great country shall be used in the future, not to liquidate debts contracted in aid of rebellion, not, to pay for emancipated slaves, but to maintain inviolate the plighted faith of the nation to all the world and especially to its dead and its living defenders.

Mr. Speaker, I trust that this amendment, with or without the third section. will pass this House. I trust that the disfranchisement bill, with or without additions, will pass this House. I trust that the enabling act for the restoration of the States that have been in rebellion will, with amendment, pass this House; so that the day may soon come when Tennessee—loyal Tennessee, loyal in the very heart of the rebellion, her mountains and plains blasted by the ravages of war and stained with the blood ot her faithful children fallen in the great struggle for the maintenance of the Union—having already conformed her constitution and laws to every provision of this amendment, will at once upon its submission by Congress irrevocably ratify it, and be without further delay represented in Congress by her loyal Representatives and Senators, duly elected and duly qualified and ready to take the oath of office prescribed by existing law.

Let that great example be set by Tennessee and it will be worth a hundred thousand votes to the loyal people in the free North. Let this be done and it will be hailed as the harbinger of that day for which all good men pray, when the fallen pillars of the -Republic shall be restored without violence or the noise of words or the sound of the hammer, each to its original place in the sacred temple of otlr national liberties, thereby giving assurance to all the world that for the defense of the Republic it was not in vain that a million and a half of men, the very elect of the earth, rushed to arms; that the Republic still lives, and will live forevermore, the sanctuary of an inviolable justice, the refuge of liberty, and the imperishable monument of the nation s dead, from the humblest soldier who perished on the march, or went down amid the thunder and tempest of the dread conflict, up through all the shining roll of heroes, and patriots, and martyrs, to the incorruptible and immortal Commander in Chief who fell by an assassin s hand in the capital, and thus died that his country might live.

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. Speaker, I rise to conclude the debate, but I will not move the previous question until I finish what I have to I am glad, sir, to see great unanimity among the Union friends in this House on all the provisions of this joint resolution except the third one. I am not very much gratified to see any division among our friends on that which I consider the vital proposition of them all. Without that, it amounts to nothing. I do not care the snap of my finger whether it be passed or not if that be stricken out. Before another Congress shall have assembled here, and before this can be carried into full effect, there will be no friends of the Union left on this side of the House to carry it out as

Mr. LE BLOND. Members are crowding the aisles on the other side and the open space in the center of the House so that we can neither see nor hear what is going on.

The SPEAKER. Members must resume their seats.

Mr. STEVENS. I should be sorry to find that that provision was stricken out, because before any portion of this can be put into operation there will be, if not a Herod, a worse than Herod elsewhere to obstruct our actions. That side of the House will be filled with yelling secessionists and hissing copperheads. Give us the third section or give us nothing. Do not balk us with the pretense of an amendment which throws the Union into the hands of the enemy before it becomes consolidated.

Gentlemen say I speak of party. Whenever party is necessary to sustain the Union 1 say rally to your party and save the Union. I do not hesitate to say at once, that section is there to save or destroy the Union party, is there to save or destroy the Union by the salvation or destruction of the Union party.

The gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Bingham] who has just taken his seat thinks it difficult to carry it into execution, and he proposes to put it into a bill which the President can veto. Will my friend tell me how much easier it is to execute it as a law than as a provision of the. Constitution? I say if this amendment prevails you must legislate to carry out many parts of it. You must legislate for the purpose of ascertaining the basis of representation. You must legislate for registry such as they have in Maryland. It will not execute itself, but as soon as it becomes a law, Congress at the next session will legislate to carry it out both in reference to the presidential and all other elections as we have the right to do. So that objection falls to the ground.

Gentlemen tell us it is too strong—too strong for what? Too strong for their stomachs, but not for the people. Some say it is too lenient. It is too lenient for my hard heart. Not only to 1870, but to 18070, every rebel who shed the blood of loyal men should be prevented from exercising any power in this Government. That, even, would be too mild a punishment for them. Gentlemen here have said you must not humble these people. Why not? Do not they deserve humiliation? Do not they deserve degradation? If they do not, who does? What criminal, what felon deserves it more, sir? They have not yet confessed their sins; and He who administers mercy and justice never forgives until the sinner confesses his sins ami humbles himself at His footstool. Why should we forgive any more than He?

But we are told that we must take them back as equal brothers at once. I shall not agree they shall come back except as supplicants in sackcloth and ashes. Let them come back and ask forgiveness, and let us then consider how many we will forgive and how many we will exclude. All I regret is, this is not sufficiently stringent.

Sir, they tell us, I hear several gentlemen say, that these men should be admitted as equal brethren. Let not these friends of secession sing to me their siren song of peace and good will until they can stop my ears to the screams and groans of the dying victims at Memphis. I hold in my hand an elaborate account from a man whom I know to be of the highest respectability in the country, every word of which I believe. This account of that foul transaction only reached me last night. It is more horrible in its atrocity, although not to the same extent, than the massacre at Jamaica. Tell me Tennessee or any other State is loyal of whom such things are proved!

I regret that the true men of these States cannot be brought in, but they cannot be brought in with rebel constituency behind them. They would misrepresent their States. Therefore I can never agree to let them in under the present state of affairs. Let us have probation: let us be sure that something more than mere willingness to come in lias been felt by them.

Mr. Speaker. I do not intend to occupy many minutes. I was indeed astonished to find my respected colleague, I will not say so tenderhearted, but so lenient to those toward whom mercy is not rendered necessary. But I know so well his natural kindness of heart and his proximity to that eloquent divine who so lately has slaughtered whole herds of fatted calves, that I cannot be much surprised at it. But, sir, if he is so fond of such associates, let me suggest in all kindness to him that he can find better company nearer home. He lives very near Cherry Hill, .where there is a State institution containing several hundred inmates

Mr. THAYER. Will the gentleman allow me to correct him in his geography? I do not live near Cherry Hill. I live on the top of Chestnut Hill. [Laughter.] And I would like to know the name of the distinguished divine to whom he refers. I cannot recollect any one.

Mr. STEVENS. Jt is the late Henry Ward Beecher. [Laughter],

Mr. THAYER. I understood my colleague to say a neighbor of mine. Mr. Beecher lives about a hundred miles from me.

Mr. STEVENS. Well, that is in the neighborhood in this country, three thousand miles in extent. [Laughter.]

Mr. THAYER. The gentleman himself is about as near and much nearer to him in many things than I am. [Laughter.]

Mr. STEVENS. How near does my friend live to Cherry Hill?

Mr. THAYER. About ten miles.

Mr. STEVENS. Well, let him walk ten miles, instead of going two or three thousand South, and h« will find, as I said, three or four Hundred inmates, whom, if he wishes to forgive and enfranchise, he will find at present a little restrained of their rights, They have done nothing but err. There is no blood upon their hands; they have only erred in committing such little acts as arson and larceny. Let him go to one of those corridors and cause it to be opened and they will flock around him, and he will see men who are not half as bloody and have not committed half as many crimes as the rebels whom he wishes to see immediately admitted here.

Now, sir, for my parti am willing they shall come in when they are ready. Do not, I pray you, admit those who have slaughtered half a million of our countrymen until their clothes are dried, and until they are reclad. I do not wish to sit side hy side with men whose garments smell of the blood of my kindred. Gentlemen seem to forget the scenes that were enacted here years ago. Many of you were not here. But my friend from Ohio [Mr. Garfield] ought to have kept up his reading enough to have been familiar with the history of those days, when the men that you propose to admit occupied the other side of the House; when the mighty Toombs, with his shaggy locks, headed a gang who, with shouts of defiance on this floor, rendered this a hell of legislation.

Ah, sir, it was but six years ago when they were here, just before they went out to join the armies of Catiline, just before they left this Hall. Those of you who were here then will remember the scene in which every southern member, encouraged by their allies, came forth in one yelling body, because a speech for freedom was being made here; when weapons were drawn, and Barksdale s bowie knife gleamed before our eyes. Would you have these men back again so soon to reenact those scenes? Wait until I am gone, I pray you. I want not to go through it again. It will be but a short time for my colleague to wait. I hope he will not put us to that test.

Mr. THAYER. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. STEVENS. Yes, sir.

Mr. THAYER. This amendment does not affect the eligibility of the people to whom he refers. That portion to which I directed my remarks excludes them from voting; and I wish to ask my colleague in this connection whether he thinks he can build a penitentiary big enough to hold eight million people.

Mr. STEVENS. Yes, sir, a penitentiary which is built at the point of the bayonet down below, and if they undertake to come here we will shoot them. That is the way to take care of these people. They deserve it, at least for a time.

Now, sir, if the gentlemen had remembered the scenes twenty years ago, when no mail dared to speak without risking his life, when but a few men did do it—for there were cowards in those days, as there are in the e—you would not have found them asking to bring these men in, and Ponly wonder that my friend from Ohio [Mr. Bingham] should intimate a desire to bring them here.

Mr. BINGHAM. I beg the gentleman s attention one moment. I have not by one word or vote of mine ever justified him in saying that I consent ever to bring them in.

Mr. STEVENS. Never: but the gentleman wished to strike out a section and kill this amendment, the most popular before the people of any that can be presented.

Mr. BIN jHAM I ask the gentleman to indulge me a moment. The third section does not touch the question of their coming in.

Mr. STEVENS. Then why is it you oppose it? If it is going to hurt nobody, in God s name let it remain. If it is going to hurt anybody, it will be the men that deserve it.

Now, Mr. Speaker, 1 withdraw my motion to recommit, and move the previous question.

Mr. GxlRFIELD. In case the previous question is not seconded, will my motion to amend be in order?

The SPEAKER. A motion to amend will be in order if the previous question is no< seconded.

Mr. GARFIELD. Then I hope it will be voted down, so that I may move this amendment:

All persons who voluntarily adhered to the late insurrection, giving aid and comfort to the so called southern confcclei acy, are forever excluded from holding any office of tiustor profit under the Government of the United States.

The SPEAKER. The question is on seconding the demand for the previous question.

The question being put, there were—ayes 90, noes 59.

Mr. FARNSWORTH. I demand tellers on seconding the demand for the previous question. Tellers were ordered; and the Speaker appointed Messrs. Farnsworth and Stevens.

The House divided; and the tellers reported -—ayes 85, noes 57.

So the previous question was seconded.

The question recurred on ordering the main question.

Mr. DELANO. I demand the yeas and nays. The yeas and nays were ordered 5 and the question being taken, it was decided in the affirmative—yeas 84, nays 79, not voting 20 5 as follows:

YEAS—Messrs. Allison, Ames, Anderson, Banks, Baxter, Bidwell, Boutwell, Bromwell, Broomall, Chanler, Header W. Clarke. Sidney Clarke, Cobb, Conkling, Cook, Defrecs, dlxoii, Drie gs Dumont, ICcklcy, l5g lcston E drid e Eliot, Grid or, Grinnell, Aaron Harding, Abner C. Harding, Harris, Hart, Higby, Holmes. Hooper, llotuhkms, Asahel \v. llubhard, Dcmas Hubbard," Ingcrdoll, Julian, Kelley, Kelso, Kerr. William Lawrence, Lc 3 Blond, Loan, Lynch, Marston, McClurg, McCallough, Mclndoe, Mercur, Morrill, Mouiton, Nib! nek, O Neill Orth, Paine, Patterson, Perharn, Pike, Price, John 11. Kioc, Bitter, Rogers. Rollins, Ross, Rousseau, Sawyer, Schenck, iScoliold, Shanklin, Shellnbarger, Spalding, Stevens, Francis Thomas, John L. Thomas Thornton Trowbridge, Upson. Ward. Elihu B. Washburne, Welker, James F. Wilson, Stephen F. Wilson, Windom. and Woodbridge—84.

NAYS—Messrs. Alley, Ancona, Delos R. Ashley, James M. Ashley. Baker, Baldwin, Barker, Beaman, Benjamin, Bergen, Bingham. Blaine, Blow, Boyer, Buckland, Bundy, Coffroth, Cullom, .Darling, Davis, Dawes, Dawson, Delano, Deming. Dodge, Donnelly, Farnsworth, Ferry, Finck, Garfield, Glossbrenner, Goodyear, Griswold, Hayes, Henderson, Chester I). Hubbard, James R. Ilubbell, Hulburd, James Humphrey, Jenckes, Kasson, Kctcham, Kuykendall, Laflin, Latham, George V. Lawrence, Longyear, Marshall, McKee, Mcltuer, Miller, Moorhcad, Morris, Myers, Newell, Phelps, Plants, Radford, Samuel J. Randall, William II. Randall, Raymond Alexander 11. Rice, Sitgreaves, Smith, Stilwell, Strouse, Taber, Taylor, Thayer, Trimble, Burt Van Horn, Robert T. Van Horn, Warner, llenrj' D. Washburn, William B. Washburn, Whaley, Williams, Winfield, and Wright—79.

NOT VOTING—Me rs Brandegee, Culver, Denison, Farquhar, Hale, Hill, Hogan, John H. Hubbard, Edwin N. Hubbell, James M. Humphrey, Johnson, Jones, Marvin, Niehol on Noell, Pomeroy, Sloan, Starr, Van Aernam, and Wentworth—20.

So the main question was ordered.

During the roll call

Mr. STROUSE stated that his colleague, Mr. Denison, had been called away on account of sickness in his family.

The result having been announced as above recorded.

The joint resolution was then ordered to be engrossed and read a third time.

Mr. LE BLOND and Mr. ELDRIDGE demanded the yeas and nays on the passage of the joint resolution.

Mr. RANDALL, of Pennsylvania. I call for the reading of the engrossed joint resolution.

The SPEAKER. It is not on the Clerk s table.

Mr. HOOPER, of Massachusetts. I move the House adjourn, and upon that motion I call the yeas and nays.

The yeas and nays were ordered.

Mr. RANDALL, of Pennsylvania. I withdraw my call for the reading of the engrossed joint resolution.

Mr. HOOPER, of Massachusetts. Then I withdraw my motion to adjourn.

Mr. FARNSWORTH. I desire to inquire of the Chair if it is in order to move to recommit this joint resolution with instructions to amend.

The SPEAKER. That is not now in order pending the execution of the previous question. The previous question will not be exhausted until the joint resolution has been read the third time. 39th Cong. 1st Sess No 160.

The joint resolution was then read the third time, as follows: A joint resolution proposing an amendment to the

Constitution of the United States.

Be itrewhedbytheSenate and IlouieofRepresentatives of the United States of America in Congress cmc nWcrf (two thirds oi both Houses concurring,) That the following article bo proposed to the Legislatures of the several States, as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which, when ratified by three fourths of said Legislatures, shall be valid as part of the Constitution, namely:

Article—. sec. 1. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. Sec. 2 Representatives shall be apportioned among the several Stateswhieh may be included within this Union according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number ot persons m each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But whenever in any State the elective franchise shall bo denied to any portion of its male citizens not less than twenty one years of ago, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion or other crime, the ba ds of representation in such State shall be reduced m the proportion which the number ol such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens not less than twenty ono years of asre. sec. 3. Until the 4lb day of July, in the year 1870, all persons who voluntarily adhered to the late insurrection, giving it aid and comfort, shall be excluded from the mlit to vote for Representatives in Congress and for electors for President and Vice President of the United States. sec. 4. Neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation already incurred or which may hereafter be incurred, in aid of insurrection or of war against the United States, or anyclaim for compensation for loss of involuntary service or labor.

Sec 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

Mr. STEVENS. I call the previous question on the passage of the joint resolution.

The previous question was seconded and the main question ordered.

Mr ELDttiDGE andMr LEBLOND called for the yeas and nays On the passage of the joint resolution.

Mr. ASHLEY, of Ohio. Does not the Constitution require that the vote upon the passage of an amendment to the Constitution shall bo taken by yeas and nays?

The SPEAKER. 'The Constitution requires that the vote shall bo taken by yeas and nays upon the passage of a measure over a veto. But it only says that the passage of an amendment to the Constitution shall be by a twothirds vote of each House of Congress, but does not say that the vote shall bo by yeas and nays.

The yeas and nays were ordered.

The question was taken; and it was decided in the affirmative— yeas 128, nays 37, not voting 19; as follows:

YEAS— Messrs Alley, Allison. Ames, Anderson, Delos R. Ashley, James M. Ashley, Baker Baldwin Banks Barker Baxter Beaman, Benjamin Bidwell, Bingham, Blaine, Blow, Boutwell. Bromwell Broomall, Buckland, Bundy, Reader W. Clarke, Sidney Clarke. Cobb. Conkling, Cook, Cullom, Darling, Davis, Dawes, Defrees, Delano, Deming, Dixon, Dodge, Donnelly, Driggs, Dumont, Eckley, Eggleston, Eliot, Farnsworth, Ferry, Garfield Grinnell Griswold, Abner C. Harding, Hart, IXnyes, Henderson, Higby, Holmes, Hooper, Hotchkiss, Asahel W. Hubbard, Chester D. Hubbard, Demas Hubbard, James R. Hubbell, Hulburd, James Humphrey, Ingersoll, Jenckes, Julian, Kasson, Kelley, Kelso, Keteham, Kuykendall. Laflin, George V. Lawrence, William Lawrence, Loan, Longyear, Lynch, Marston Mc Clurg, Mclndoe, McKee, McRuer, Mercur, Miller, Moorhead, Morrill Morris, Moulton, Myers, Newell, O Neill Orth, Paine, Patterson, Perhom, Pike, Plants, Price, William H. Randall, Raymond, Alexander II. Rice, John H. Rice, Rollins, Sawyer, Schenck, Seofield, Shelfabarger, Spalding, Stevens, Stilwell, Thayer, Francis Thomas, John L. Thomas, Trowbridge, Upson, Van Aernam, Burt Van Horn, Robert T. Van Horn, Ward, Warner, Elihu B. Washburne, Henry D. Washburn, William B. Washburn, Welker, Williams, James P. Wilson, Stephen F. Wilson, Windom, Woodbridge, and the Speaker—128. NAYS—Messrs. Ancona, Bergen, Boyer, Chanler, Coffroth, Dawson, Eldridge, Finck, Glossbrenner, Goodyear, Grider, Aaron Harding, Harris, Kerr, Latham, Le Blond, Marshall, MeCullough, Niblack, Phelps, Radford, Samuel J. Randall, Bitter, Rogers, Ross Rousseau Shanklin, Sitgreaves, Smith Strouse Taber, Taylor Thornton Trimble, Whaley Winfield and Wright— T

NOT VOTING—Messrs. Brandegee, Culver, Denison, Farquhar, Hale, Hill, Hogan, John Hubbard, Edwin N. Hubbell, James M. Humphrey, Johnson, Jones. Marvin, Nicholson, Noell, Pomeroy, Sloan, Starr, and Wentworth—19.

So, two thirds voting in the affirmative, the joint resolution was passed.

When the name of Mr. Raymond was called, his response in the affirmative was received with applause on the floor and in the galleries. During the call of the roll the following announcements were made:

Mr. TAYLOR. I desire to announce that my colleague, Mr. James M. Humphrey, is paired with another colleague, Mr. Pomeroy.

Mr. DEMING. My colleagues, Mr. Beamiegde and Mr. Hubbard, are both absent. If they were present they would both vote for this joint resolution.

Mr. ANCONA. My colleague, Mr. Jonxsox. is still detained from his seat by illness.

Mr. RADFORD. My colleague, Mr. Jones, is absent on account of sickness; if he was here lie would vote against this joint resolution.

The announcement of the vote, as above recorded, was received with applause on the floor and in the galleries.

Mr. ELDRIDGE. I rise to a question of order. I want to know if it is understood that the proceedings of this House are to be interrupted by those who come here and occupy the galleries.

The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Eldridge] makes the point of order that expressions of approbation or disapprobation from persons occupying the galleries are not in order. The Chair sustains the point of order. Members upon the floor and spectators in the gallery will observe the rules of the House and maintain order.

Mr. ELDItlDGE. I do not want our proceedings to bo interrupted by the "niggerlieads" in the galleries. [Hisses in the galleries.]

Mr. STEVENS. Is it in order for members on the floor to disturb those in the galleries? [Laughter.]

The SPEAKER. Members upon the floor should not ineultihe spectators in the galleries.

Mr. STEVENS. I move to reconsider the vote by which (ho joint resolution was passed; and also move that the motion to reconsider bo laid on the table.

The latter motion was agreed to.