February 8, 1869 (2)

And there shall bo no discrimination in rights on account of raoo or color.

Of course the object of this is to broaden the proposition, not merely to make it a guarantee of the right to vote and to hold office, but a guarantee of equal rights universally.

Mr. DRAKE. I would ask the honorable Senator from Massachusetts what is the necessity for that, in view of the language of the first section of the fourteenth article of the amendment to the Constitution, which sayss

Nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without duo process of law, nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

Mr. SUMNER. I should answer the Senator s question by putting him another. What is the use of the constitutional amendment on ■which you are now to vote?

Mr. DRAKE. Just the very use that it expresses on its face, to secure the right of suffrage to these men whose personal and legal rights we had guarantied in the previous amendment, but had not guarantied to them the right of suffrage.

Mr. SUMNER. I differ radically and entirely from my friend, and I think there is just the same necessity for the supplementary provision that I propose as there is for the provision which has his support. If the clause to which he calls attention is inadequate to protect persons in their rights of citizenship, including the right to vote, it is inadequate to protect them in anything; the clause is so much waste paper. Now are we in earnest? Are we disposed to close this question up so that no petitions hereafter shall come to US' asking equal rights protected either by Congress or by constitutional amendment? I say I want to make complete work and finish it so that hereafter there shall be no question. It is on that account that I would make the addition to the proposition of my friend from Michigan. The PRESIDENTfwo tempore. The question is on the amendment of the Senator from Michigan to the amendment of the Senator from Nevada.

Mr. EDMUNDS. I hope the Senate will not agree to that amendment. It does not, as it seems to me, stand on any principle. It limits Constitutional privileges to persons of African descent, selecting one particular and peculiar nationality. It does appear to me that there is nothing republican in that. It may do as an expedient for to day It may be said that it covers all that to day embarrasses people in the United States, and we ought to put into the Constitution, if we are to put anything in, something which will be broader than one race and be longer in its duration and application than any limited period of time. I do not wish to occupy time, of course, but these are objections which to me are perfectly insuperable to the amendment of the Senator from Michigan.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The question is on the amendment to the amendment.

Mr. HOWARD called for the yeas and nays; and they were ordered.

Mr. FERRY. I am in favor of the proposition of the Senator from Michigan, because it meets and remedies the one existing evil with regard to which there is yet an omission in the Constitution of the United States. I think that when we propose to amend the Constitution we should carry our actions just so far as the evil extends, the necessity for remedying which exists, and that we should not project beyond that into theoretical amendments. Now, the amendment of the Senator from Michigan reaches to the full extent of the evil, the wrong done to a certain class of citizens which is now proposed to be remedied. There, for the present, I am willing to stop. If a new evil shall develop itself in any future step of the history of the nation, then it will be time enough to meet that.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Before the Clerk calls the roll, 1 was requested to say that Senators Morton and Fes senden had paired off with the Senator from Connecticut, [Mr. Dixon,] and that Messrs. Fessesdes and Morton, if here, would vote for the amendment, and Mr. Dixon would vote against it.

Mr. EDMUNDS. Does the Chair mean this particular amendment now under consideration?

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. On the passage of the joint resolution. The adoption of this amendment is so material that perhaps they would like to have it stated

Mr. STEWART. I do not think this amendment will be voted for generally, if it is examined, as it now stands. It is a different amendment from what it was when offered before. I do not think it is as good as it was before, but there were objections to it, and in the attempt to avoid them there are others that may be perceived.

Citizens of the United States of African descent shall have the same right to vote and hold office in States and Territories as other citizens, electors of the most numerous branch of their respective Legislatures.

It is a little indefinite whether that means citizens of African descent, whether twenty- one years old or not, who possess the other requisite qualifications. Would not the literal construction confer suffrage on females and minors of African descent?

Then there is the other objection, that it is not based on the theory of the amendment that there is to be no distinction on account of race and color, that none shall be predicatedon either race or color. You say there shall be no distinction as against the African. Why a distinction against the descendants of other countries? I think the limitation is unnecessary. I prefer the amendment of the committee.

Mr. SUMNER. I propose, if this should be adopted, to move this addition: "and there shall be no discrimination in any rights on account of race or color."

Mr. WILLIAMS. I hope this amendment will be adopted, because it is explicit and declares just exactly what we mean. We either mean to enfranchise the African or not in this country by means of this amendment. If we mean that, we say it, and it is understood by everybody." If we mean to provide that all foreigners of all races and conditions and classes, whether from Asia or Africa, shall come in here and enjoy theprivilegesof this amendment, then weoughtto adopt some language to accomplish that purpose; but, as suggested by the Senator from Connecticut the practical evil in this country at this time is that persons of African descent are disfranchised. Wepropose to provide a remedy, and we do not exclude anybody else by this amendment, but we provide that those persons shall have the right, to vote and to hold office, if it becomes necessary, as I have no doubt it will.

1 regard this amendment in any form as wholly inadequate to the end of extending universal suffrage, and we are to have another agitation as to the amendment of the Constitution to follow this; they are to keep coming, and it is impossible by this amendment, as reported by the committee, ta quiet agitation as to the extension of suffrage. The only effect of the amendment, as reported by the committee, will be to extend the right of suffrage and the right to hold office to Africans, while it leaves open the amendment to various constructions in different parts of the country, and to various objections. I hope, therefore, the pending proposition will be adopted.

Mr. CORBETT. It seems to me that if we are to have an amendment to the Constitution this proposition will accomplish the object desired. It will give to the African race the right to vote, that they may protect themselves in the southern reconstructed States. It is proposed to grant it to them on the ground that there is something due that race for their loyalty during the war and for their assistance in putting down the rebellion. They were pretty much the only people in those States who were loyal. As I understand it, it is the desire of the Senate to meet that particular contingency, and if we are to adopt any amendment I am in favor of this amendmentto meet this particular contingency at this time, and no other. As I have before stated, I believe that the fourteenth constitutional amendment provides for all that the necessity of the case requires; but if we are to adopt another amendment I hope that the proposition offered by the Senator from Michigan will be adopted.

Mr. COLE. Hitherto I have not participated at all in this debate, and I have but a word or two to add to what has been said in the discussion on this floor. I am in favor of the amendment of the Senator from Michigan which has just been read. It will effectually leave out of the question the subject of the Chinese immigration which has excited so much feeling on the part of Senators not from the Pacific coast. I am not myself apprehensive of any great difficulty arising from that source. The Chinese, to be sure, in some numbers come to the Pacific coast, but not with the intention of becoming citizens. I presume no application on the part of a single one of them has been made to become a citizen of the United States. So wedded are they to their native country, the Celestial empire, that even the dead are taken back there. This proposition of the Senator from Michigan goes to the extent of enfranchising native born Americans. It is entirely different in its scope and extent from one which would include the Chinese. I am, for the reason thus briefly stated, in favor of the amendment of the Senator from Michigan, believing as I do with the Senator from Connecticut that other questions can be met when they arise, and we are not called upon to anticipate difficulties which do not really threaten us.

Mr. EDMUNDS. Mr. President, we are now coining to an important practical question, and I shall be excused, for one, I have no doubt, for expressing my views briefly upon it; because I regard this amendment, ifadopted, as fatal in its consequences to the very ends that gentlemen wish to attain. I wish gentlemen to bear in mind that all that we propose to do to amend the Constitution is to confer upon citizens, not upon aliens, certain rights that, we suppose them now to be deprived of either legally or illegally. It has nothing to do with the question whether the Asiatic race should be received into the family of this nation as citizens. It only speaks as to the political status of citizens of the United States. Now, I should be glad to know what sort of a spectacle we shall make in history, dealing with our male adult citizens, if we declare in the fundamental law which regulates the very substructure of society that the citizens of African descent shall be entitled to certain privileges by name.

Mr. FERRY. Entitled to the same rights with other citizens.

Mr. EDMUNDS. Yes, entitled to the same rights with other citizens; and then the question arises, what are the rights of other citizens? Taking the view that in the present state of constitutional law it belongs to the States and is with them, the rights of some citizens of Connecticut are one thing and of other citizens another thing. Which class of citizens of Connecticut is to furnish the standard of compari-

Mr. WILLIAMS. The amendment provides that they shall have the same political rights as electors of the most numerous branch of the State Legislature.

Mr. EDMUNDS. If my friend would have waited I should have proceeded to that. Now, what are the qualifications of electors of the most numerous branch of the Legislature in Connecticut? One is that they have got to be white, I believe, is it not?

Mr. FERRY. Yes, sir.

Mr. EDMUNDS. Therefore, we say that negroes shall have the same rights and privileges as the white electors there. Very well. Now, you go to another State, for instance New Hampshire, and you find a different rule prevailing. Then you go to Rhode Island. There the question of the CelL or any other alien comes in, and if the negro possesses a certain qualification of property he may vote, if he is to be put upon the grade of the naturalized citizen. If he does not possess a certain qualification of property, if you make the natural born citizen the standard, then he may vote. Now," Under which king, Bezonian?" as the proverb is. Why, sir, it leads you to infinite confusion and difficulty. But what is worse, it undertakes to leave with the States, after all, the regulation of suffrage, the conferring or withholding it entirely, and therefore you merely turn the African alone, to speak of nobody else, over to every State of which he is an inhabitant or a citizen to fix qualification of property, of intelligence, of religion, of landholding, of anything that may reduce a State government to an aristocracy, as it has been in South Carolina and many ot the other States under old influences; and where is the benefit to the African, then?

Mr. WILLIAMS. I should like to inquire of the Senator if the amendment reported by the committee does not leave the entire power in the hands of the States to provide any educational or property or other qualification that they see proper for voters?

Mr. EDMUNDS. Very likely it does under one construction; but it does not invite it. It does not undertake to take one particular class of people in this country who happen to have been born in one zone of the earth rather than another, and say that they, and they alone, shall be entitled to the political privileges that are accorded to the electors for the most numerous branch of the Legislature. that is the answer. I do not maintain that under the amendment as it has been reported absolute security is obtained for the ignorant and unintelligent and poor negro or poor anybody else. I do not know whether it ought to be or not; but the point of this specific amendment is claimed to be— that is said to be the virtue of it—that it enfranchises securely and completely the African. I say it does not do anything of the kind. I say it undertakes to dispose of him in the fundamental law when you leave the native of every other country under the sun, the descendant of every other race under the sun, entirely to the mercy of the States. Sir, if this question is important enough for the national will to be invoked and the consent of all the States to be invoked in adjusting a fundamental law as to the principle upon which political rights are to be secured and based, then, I say, and I shall be excused for the expression, that it is little less than an outrage upon the patriotism and good sense of a country like this, made up of the descendants of all nations, to impose upon them an amendment of that kind.

Mr. WARNER. I hope this amendment will not be adopted. I hope the Congress of this country will not single out one race for protection; but that we shall go at once to the broad, grand, affirmative proposition which shall secure the object the Senator from Vermont so well states—that of securing to all the citizens of this country their rights. I think this proposition to single out one race is the weakest one that can be put before the country. If we want to strengthen it and give it a chance of adoption, we ought to amend it and insert the Irish and Germans. I think to single out one race is unworthy of the country and unworthy of the great opportunity now presented to us. We ought to go to the root of the matter by putting in the fundamental law a provision which will make the Constitution beyond doubt mean what the Senators from Vermont and Massachusetts now understand it to mean.

Mr. PATTERSON, of New Hampshire. I hope that this proposition will be adopted; for of all the amendments which have been offered I think it is the best. Our object is to meet a wrong done to a class of black native citizens; to give them the same privileges that other citizens of the United States possess. The Constitution gives to the United States the right to establish a uniform system of naturalization; so that Europeans and Asiatics coming to our coast may bo naturalized upon the same conditions in California and in New York. So by the passage of this proposition we shall relieve these black citizens, native to the soil, from the wrong which is done them, without doing any wrong to the Asiatics who may flow in upon our western shores. I prefer, for one, to leave that question open, so that if a war springs up in Asia and these increasing tides of immigration from Asia pour upon our Pacific coast in such numbers as to endanger the welfare of those States, they may have it' in their power to guard themselves against the threatened evils, and then, if any evil should result, it will be in our power to remedy it. "Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof." Let us meet this evil, and not in attempting to meet it provide others that we know not of.

The PRESIDING OFFICER, (Mr. Welch in the chair.) The question is upon the amendment of the Senator from Michigan.

Mr. WARNER. If it is in order, with a view to test the sense of the Senate on the subject, I will move to substitute for the pending proposition

The PRESIDING OFFICER. An amendment is not now in order. There is an amendment to an amendment pending

Mr. WILSON. Is it not in order to move to amend the original resolution before we vote to strike it out?

Mr. EDMUNDS. No; this m an amendment proposed; we- are not striking out anything.-

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on the amendment of the Senator from Michigan to the amendment of the committee.

Mr. YATES. I wish to ask the Senator from Michigan what answer he has to make to the question of the Senator from Vermont, which to me will be an objection; and that is, if the colored people are to have the same qualifications as electors for the most numer-■ oris branch of the Legislature, whether in Connecticut, for instance, the negroes could vote at all? Will it not enable the State Legislature to decide as to the qualifications of the electors? I should like to have an answer td that question.

Mr. HOWARD. The effect of my amendment will be to put the citizens of African descent upon precisely the same ground as other citizens in respect to voting and holding office. The qualifications for voting and holding office in the States are matters of course pertaining to the State Legislatures.

Mr. EDMUNDS. The State constitution you mean.

Mr. HOWARD. The constitutions or Legislatures, as the case may be. It is a State power; a State right, at least. I do not now propose to disturb that right any further than it may be affected by that amendment. If the States see fit to enact qualifications which will exclude large portions of citizens that exclusion will operate equally upon the whites and the blacks, and must necessarily do so.

Mr. STEWART. I should like to ask the Senator from Michigan if they could not do this under his amendment: suppose that in a section of country where there is agreat prejudice against colored men voting the community should resolve to attach a qualification of 10 000 of real estate to the electors of the most numerous branch of the State Legislature, allow everybody to vote for all the other officers, but put this qualification so high that a select few would elect that lower Branch, would they not do that to avoid the colored vote altogether?

Mr. HOWARD. I should not apprehend any such result.

Mr. STEWART. They could do that.

Mr. HOWARD. They could do many other very absurd things if they saw fit to attempt them.

Mr. WILLIAMS. They could avoid one amendment as well as another.

Mr. HOWARD. Of course they could avoid one amendment as well as another.

Mr. TRUMBULL. What do you mean by "African descent?"

Mr. HOWARD. I mean by African descent what is popularly known as such. Certainly I cannot give the honorable Senator from Illinois any knowledge or instruction on that subject. By one of "African descent" is understood a person who has African blood in his veins.

Mr. TRUMBULL. Ever so little?

Mr. HOWARD. No, sir; not ever so little. That is a matter to be decided sometimes by a court of justice. It is a popular phrase, well understood by everybody. It designates what is commonly known as the negro, orsomeperson having colored blood in his veins to the amount of at least one eighth. I believe it is settled by the courts of justice that when the quantity becomes less than one eighth, m law and in jurisprudence he is called a white man,

Mr. TRUMBULL. That is so in some States; in others it is not.

Mr. WILSON. I desire to make a suggestion. We are trying to get the best proposition; and I suggest that we amend the proposition of the committee by stnkmg out the words" orprevious condition of servitude' and inserting certain other words, so as to make it read:

Xh© right of citizens of 1111■ United States to vote and hold office shall not be denied or abridged by the United State? or by any State on account ot race, f color, nativity, property, education, or religious belief.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. It is net in order now to offer that amendment, an amendment to an amendment being pending.

Mr. WILSON. I know it is not in order to offer it at present; but I merely suggest it as an amendment which. I think is better than the others, and which covers all the points.

Mr. SAWYER. I should like to ask a question of the honorable Senator from Michigan. If his amendment were adopted, would it not be competent for any of the States lately reconstructed, should they fall into the hands of our .political opponents, to make such qualifications for suffrage, without violation of the terms of this- amendment, as would practically disfranchise four fifths of the citizens of African descent?

Mr. HOWARD. Doubtless the honorable Senator from South Carolina is as competent as myself to answer the question which he puts; but it is to be remembered, at the same time, that whatever regulation or restriction may be established in this regard by a State, it must operate with equal severity upon the white and the black races. I call his attention further to the fact that the amendment reported by the Judiciary Committee contains in itself precisely the same principle. The people of those States can do it now. As I said before, neither the joint resolution reported by the committee now before us nor my amendment contemplates disturbing or meddling with, in any way, the right of the State to regulate the qualification of voters and officeholders further than concerns the people of African descent; putting all classes of both colors on precisely the same level.

Mr. DOOLITTLE. Mr. President, it seems a little hard that the minority should be compelled to remain here all day and all night and help to keep a quorum of the Senate together when the majority seem to agree on nothing, and do not know what they do want. We hardly know in what shape they want this amendment. They do not know themselves. J think it would be wise for us to take a short adjournment, at least to get breakfast, and give the majority a little time to consult and see what kind of proposition they are in favor of. If the clock is right, it is now ten minutes to ten o clock and I move that the Senate take a recess until twelve o clock to give gentlemen an opportunity to get some breakfast.

Mr. SHERMAN, Mr. THAYER, and others. We have had breakfast.

Mr. DOOLITTLE. I suggest that the Senate take a recess until twelve o clock

The PRESIDING OFFICER. A motion to adjourn would effect the same object.

Mr. DOOLITTLE. Would the Senate then inset at twelve o clock

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Yes, sir.

Mr. DOOLITTLE. I move, then, that the Senate adjourn.

The motion was not agreed to.

Mr. DOOLITTLE. As it seems to be the determination of the Senate to go on with this discussion, and as we are now just getting to the point in the case, the Senate will indulge me in n, few observations upon this important question. I am very happy to be informed that some of the Senators, at least, have been to breakfast.

Mr. President, the amendment as proposed by the committee had something like generality, and in the discussion of the question we had to discuss itupon generalprinciples without reference to any particular race or nationality. But this proposition brings it directly to the point, so far as the African is concerned in the U nited States; and that, as a matter of course, raises the question at once as to the propriety and justice of this Government forcing upon the States by a constitutional amendment the African vote.

I believe all observing men agree, not only outside ot the Senate, but Senators will agree in private conversation, I have no doubt, if you sit down with them and talk itover, that while as a general rule white men are competent to vote, yet, as a general rule with some exceptions, the Africans are incompetent to vote. Some of our friends from the lately reconstructed States may perhaps demur a little to this general declaration.

Mr. THAYER. And others also.

Mr. DOOLITTLE. Some from Nebraska, where they have no Africans.

Mr. THAYER. We have plenty, and they vote right.

Mr. DOOLITTLE. But take the gentlemen from any of those States where they have practical knowledge of the African race as it is, and among the white men of sense in this country there is not one in ten who, if you will sit down by his side and get into his interior thoughts and conversation, will not tell you that, as a general rule, the Africans are incompetent to vote. We know it. Everybody knows it.

What is the occasion of that incompetency? It is not a matter of a day nor a year nor a generation. It is a matter of six thousand years and the whole history of the race. Men speak of the question as a question of skin. I have heard my honorable friend from Massachusetts hour by hour denounce the oligarchy of the skin, as if the skin was not mentioned simply as one of the incidents of the race, to distinguish it from other races; whereas everybody who knows anything on the subject knows, all natural philosophy teaches, all ethnologists, all historians, all men who know by actual experience anything of this race knows that the skin is by no means the greatest distinction between the African and the white man. From the hair on the top of his head to the soles of his feet there is not an organ in his body in which there is not as much distinction between him and the white man as there is in his skin. From the wool which grows upon his head to the soles of his feet, in his interior organs, his kidneys, his stomach, his bones, his body, his interior mental and moral organization, he exhibits throughout just as great distinctions as the skin. The fiat of the Almighty has written it, and the experience of the world proves it. He cannot be amalgamated with the white race and produce a third race or a yellow race. Amalgamation may go on illicitly; there may be offspring, but the whole history of the medical world shows that this offspring is enfeebled, with neither the power of the white man nor the power of the black man, and that in a short period he ceases to propagate his species. It is the fiat of the Almighty which is stamped upon this very idea of forcing an amalgamation of the races against nature and against the laws of God. Those who attempt to do it are warring against all history and warring against the laws of Him that made history and made the races of men.

Why, sir, how does this race appear in the States of the South, and in Africa, too? We often quote here the language of Jefferson declaring for the equality of the rights of men. We all agree to that. But Jefferson also declares, with as much distinctness and with as much force as he declares the natural rights of men, that it is impossible for you to put these two races together and maintain them upon a footing of equality side by side in the same Government. Your experience has demonstrated it. In the States in the South you, sir, (Mr. Welch in the chair,) know, and there is not a man in the Senate who does not know that the irrepressible conflict of race—not a conflict in arms, for the power of the Federal Government prevents that, but a conflict of race, irrepressible, constant, eternal—is going on between the blacks and the whites, as it is going on between the whites and the Indians on the frontier. They may blind their eyes if they please to these facts, but they are as bright us the sunlight everywhere. Just so long as the effort is made to enforce an unnatural equality between the white race and an alien and inferior race, an exotic race which does not belong in the temperate zones of the earth, which has been brought here from the tropics where God planted it and intended it to stay, and from which the cupidity of man has wrenched him from his native position and forced him into this exotic condition in the soil of the United States, so long will this warfare go on, because you are attempting to enforce this unnatural equality upon the States of the South against their will.

Mr. President, in the midst of all this trouble some events are transpiring which may bring a solution to this conflict of race, as I hope it may; without any bloody conflict of arms. Upon our southern border there are tropical climates already inhabited by the colored race and where the colored man is adapted by constitution' and nature to live. There are San Domingo and Hayti and Cuba, which will probably soon abolish slavery; and all the islands of the West Indies, which, in the process of time, may come under the jurisdiction of this Government, may be held under its flag, and I hope they will be. Those islands where the white race is doomed because the white race is not adapted to the climate and cannot live there may become, under the providence of God, a home for the Africans in the United States who have the intelligence and the enterprise to migrate to those islands, and there live among their own people by themselves, and thus withdraw from that conflict of race which is constant, irrepressible, eternal, while they undertake to live under the same Government with the white man, side by side, upon a footing of equality.

The newspapers speak, and therefore I am at liberty to refer to it, of a treaty negotiated between this Government and Denmark for the island of St. Thomas.- For one, I do not hesitate to avow that I hope, if such a treaty has been negotiated, it will be ratified and confirmed. The island of St. Thomas contains the best harbor almost in the Gulf of Mexico. It is the entrepot to the West Indies, the outside island and harbor which flanks them all, and its acquisition will secure to us in the end all the islands of the gulf of Mexico and the West Indies. I say, for one, I hope that such a treaty, if negotiated, will be accepted and confirmed by the Government of the United States; and, further, that the other islands of the Gulf one after another will be acquired by the Government of the United States.

Mr. HOWE. Will my colleague allow me to ask him a question?

Mr. DOOLITTLE. Yes, sir, if it is on this point.

Mr. HOWE. It is on this point. The question is, if both races are withdrawn from this world to the world above, will not that end this eternal conflict just as surely as to withdraw one of them to the island of St. Thomas?

Mr. DOOLITTLE. My colleague perhaps has been consulting the spiritualists lately. Ho is talking about other worlds than this, and I am not prepared to go into that discussion.

Mr. HOWE. No; I wish to consult temporal authority, not spiritual.

Mr. DOOLITTLE. 1 am talking about the temporal affairs of this earth and of the islands of the earth, and not of the islands beyond the earth or beneath it. I see that my colleague is in a humorous mood, but I trust, he will excuse me for not yielding to interruptions. I was arguing a certain point seriously.

Mr. HOWE. I understood my colleague to say that this conflict was eternal, and I wanted to inquire if there was not a way to terminate it short of sending one of the parties to St. Thomas.

Mr. DOOLITTLE. I said the conflict was eternal; I was speaking of course of tempore affairs; eternal on this earth so long as the races are brought in contact with each other.

I was saying, Mr. President, that I hope this Government will acquire these islands in the West Indies, and that they will become the home of the colored men of the United States, who can emigrate to them gradually, not all at once, not all in one year or in ten years, and perhaps never all emigrating to those islands, but where the emigration can begin, transferring our language, our influence, and our colored men to the building up in those islands of American interests and interests which shall be in harmony with the Republic of the United States; where we can establish territorial governments as we have established a territorial government or given a territory to the Indian tribes under our jurisdiction: where our flag can protect them; where a few of our own troops stationed in fortifications would give steadiness to the territorial governments which these colored men can administer for themselves under our guarantee and our protection; where they will be withdrawn from this conflict with the superior and dominant race, under whose influence, if you press forward the measures which you are presenting now, endeavoring to force them on a footing of equality everywhere with the white man—this weak, this feeble, this inferior, this subject, this dependent race will be trampled in the dust as certain as we see the red man of the forest being trampled under the foot of the Anglo Saxon

If we would preserve the colored man from destruction, we must open such an outlet that lie may escape from this conflict of race which is bearing him down everywhere. I know gentlemen may say he is not borne down now in the States of the South. Why? Because the whole power of the Federal Government with its armies is there. You defend him by force of arms. I do not speak of a conflict of arms between the blacks and the whites. I mean that other conflict, that moral conflict, that conflict in the marts of trade, in the marts of business, in the marts of commerce, where side by side with the white man he is not his equal in the competition of life, and where he must and will go down. Give to him a home in the tropical regions of the West Indies; give to him a country where the white man cannot live and labor, and there he will be secure. That, sir, may be the true solution of this difficulty in which we are placed; that maybe the solution of this conflict of race between the whites and the blacks. But it is not a solution of that conflict to undertake by force of arms to force him upon u footing of equality with the white men of the South or the white men of any other States in the Union, and at the same time it is breaking down what has been regarded as one of the rights of the States from the beginning, as sacred and secure as any other, to wit: that each State for itself should control this whole question of suffrage.

But, sir, there is another objection to this amendment. We know that with the completion of the Pacific railroad our commerce between our western shores and Asia will be doubled, trebled, quadrupled; that with every returning ship hundreds and thousands, it may be hundred of thousands, of laboring men from China, and Japan, and the great fountain of human population in Asia, will be brought to the United States. There are one hundred thousand Chinamen now on our western coast. In ten years there may be a million. In ten years there may be as many Chinamen as there are white men there. Under the principle for which you contend of the equality of the races of men in the administration of the political affairs of this Government, how can you contend in favor of giving this power to the African race if you deny it to the Chinese? You know that the Chinese are far in advance of the African in point of civilization. You know that., in comparison with the Chinaman, the African is inferior. You know that in point of industry the testimony of all men upon the western coast in relation to the Chinaman is that he loves industry; that he loves to labor. He is trained to labor and habits of industry and habits of frugality and economy that are most, remarkable.

If we are to carry out the idea for which gentlemen contend of the equality of all races before the law and before the Constitution of the United States in taking part in the Government of the country, if we are to extend these privileges to the African, why should we not extend them to the Chinaman? Give me a reason, if you can. And yet we know that all the Senators from the western coast are unanimously opposed to extending any such rights to the Chinaman. You know that when the treaty with China was confirmed the idea of admitting Chinamen to naturalization, I believe, was unanimously opposed by the majority of the Senate.

How can you stand upon this ground, and yet insist on forcing the African in this country on a footing of equality with the white man? Why not stand upon the principle one way or the other? Either stand, as I stand, maintaining that while slavery should he abolished and every man should be protected in his rights, and we should give to the negro just as much protection as we give to an Englishman or to an Irishman or to a German, when he comes to this country, remaining here an alien .and a foreigner, giving him the same protection in property and person that we give to more than a million, probably, of foreigners who are now residing in the United States, half a million residing in New England who have no right to vote at all, and yet they are protected in every right, protected in their families, protected in their property, protected by the laws of the United States and by the laws of the several States. Put the negro upon that ground; make him a freeman; establish his freedom, give him the same protection which other men have under the law, but do not undertake to force the Government of the United States or the government of the States into his hands. Either do that or adopt the principle that you are in favor of giving universal equality and political power to all the races in the United States, including the Chinese.

Mr. President, there may, in the course of human events, arise some other questions and qualification which it would be very desirable to apply in the States of the Union, and therefore the necessity, in my opinion, of leaving this question of suffrage to be determined by the several States, for the States may differ in their situation. While I am opposed to the principle contained in the constitution of Rhode Island, I admit the right of the State to fix the qualifications of her voters, because I admit that on that subject she has a right under the Constitution to do it. What is the qualification in Rhode Island? No foreign born citizen is allowed to vote unless he is the owner of real estate. No man born in Europe can vote in Rhode Island until he becomes a freeholder in Rhode Island. That is a restrictive qualification on the part of Rhode Island that I do not justify, while, at the same time, I admit that Rhode Island has the power to impose such a restriction. Massachusetts imposes another, to wit, that no person shall be permitted to vote unless he can read the Constitution of the United States in the English language. That substantially excludes every foreign born citizen who does not read the English language. It excludes, as a matter of course, every negro who cannot read the English language. If you were to apply the qualification which is required in Massachusetts in South Carolina to day under this amendment proposed by the Senator from Michigan, I suppose four fifths, if not nine tenths, of all the negro population in South Carolina would be excluded. The State of New York applies to the colored man a different kind of qualification. If he is possessed and owns in his own right $250 worth of property he is permitted to vote, not because the property has any right to vote, but because a colored man who shows capacity enough to acquire and hold $250 worth of property shows that he is an exception among the colored race, and be being among the exceptions has a right to vote. This is the doctrine of New York. You may take the doctrine of Vermont. There are very few negroes living in Vermont, and it requires so much capacity on the part of a negro to get to Vermont and live there after he does get there [laughter] that the very fact of his living there shows that he is an. exception among his race and has some capacity which might entitle him to the privilege of voting. And so it is with all the other extreme northern States.

But, sir, when you come down to the middle States, where the climate is milder, or go into the southern States, where they can live and thrive almost upon the productions of the soil without much industry you will find a very different state of things; and in those States a different qualification may be necessary to be applied. If they were to apply the qualification of Massachusetts perhaps that would be all that would be necessary to exclude from suffrage the great mass of the colored men, and that they can do under the proposition proposed by the Senator from Michigan. I certainly do not oppose his amendment on that ground, because I believe in allowing the States to make those qualifications. So that in the State of South Carolina, if they choose to say that no negro shall vole unless he can read and write, as is said in Massachusetts, that would exclude about nine tenths, I suppose, perhaps more than nine tenths of the negroes in their present condition.

Mr. SUMNER. And how many white men? Mr. DOOL1TTLE. I do not know the number, but I suppose it would exclude quite a number of white people also. But those white people might consent to be excluded for the purpose of excluding this race from taking part in the political power; because the mass of the white people of the South object to the colored man taking part in the political affairs of the Government upon a footing of equality with the white men where the negro exists in such numbers that he can, by force of numbers, place himself in such a position as not only to bring on political equality, but to force social equality also. It is social equality which is to be forced on by the political equality in the States where the negroes exist in numbers equal to the white man that makes the white people of the South so persistent and peitinacious in their opposition to this proposed policy.

My honorable friend from Massachusetts cannot deny that in the State of South Carolina, or in any other State where the negroes are in a majority over the whites, political equality and universal equality, forced upon those States as it has been, must in the end, if they remain there as a part of its population, bring social equality also. If they can vote they can be voted for; if they can be voted for they can be elected members of the Legislature, as they are members of State conventions and Legislatures, as they may be members of Congress, and I believe one was said to be elected to the other House; members of the Senate of the United States; generals in your Army; and if by possibility they could hold the balance of power, and get our Republican brethren of the North, in their zeal to demonstrate that there is no distinction between the races, to nominate for the President of the United States a negro, they might perhaps in the end elect some negro as President of the United States, and living on social equality herein Washington, as well as in the States of the South. If negroes are to be elected Senators to this body you cannot refuse to meet them at your receptions, at your inauguration balls, at the President s table, and their wives with them, and their children also; and your children must meet them side by side, upon a footing of equality. Face the music, gentlemen; acknowledge the truth that this is the necessary, direct tendency, and the inevitable result which must come, in States where a majority of the population are colored, if you force upon the States unrestricted and unqualified negro suffrage.

1 therefore say, Mr. President, that I believe I see in the events which are transpiring around us, in the propositions which are even now being entertained and discussed in Congress of the annexation of San Domingo, the acquisition of Hayti, and other islands of the West Indies, a hope opening for the colored man where he can find a home; where, under a government substantially controlled by himself, he can be on a footing of perfect social equality with all who live there, where, under the: guarantee and protection of the flag of- the United States, under a territorial government which we may establish for them as We may establish a territorial government for the Indians of the United States the negro may find a home on this -continent and be saved from* absolute 'destruction. But to undertake to forcehim side by side upon p, footing of equality in States with anything like equal numbers with the white men, hoping or expecting that in the competition which must arise the negro will long survive, is a vain hope; it is an illusion- It will be the destruction of the race to undertake to forcethis unnatural social equality between races so distinct.

But, Mr. President, let me return to another point which has been considerably discussed in the course of the debate. The honorable Senator from Indiana stated that the very weakness of this race, its very incapacity, was the reason why it should have political power placed in its hands in order to protect and defend itself. Sir, this power of government should be placed in the hands of intelligence and virtue if we have the wisdom and capacity to place it there. Because the Indians of this country are weak in the presence of the white man; because the Asiatics on the western coast are weak in the presence of the white man, and because the great" mass of the Africans m the southern States are weak in the presence of the white men around them, that is no reason why political power should be placed in their hands. That is the difference between the white race and the colored race. While I admit, as the question of the honorable Senator from Massachusetts seemed to imply, that there are some white men who are utterly incapacitated to perform the high office of "taking part in the Government of the country, they are exceptions to the general rule, whereas with the African it is directly the contrary. There are but a few of them that are capable of taking part in the Government, and they are exceptions to the general rule. A few among them, if by any legislation you 'could select those few, might take part without danger in the Government of -the country.

But, sir, to give that power to the race, to give it to them as a mass, is to demoralize your Government; it is to sap' it at the foun; dationa; it is to strike down the bulwark upon which liberty rests; it is to Ho what has been done in other ages and countries of the world— to demoralize the ballot by making it so universal among the weak the degraded, the ignorant, the demoralized, that a designing and ambitious man comes at last and rules the empire with a rod of iron. It is so in France; it was so in Greece; it was so in Rome. Are we to follow their example? Are wo to cherish it, and to shout at the top of our voices," Universal suffrage without distinction of race or color, to the negro, to the Indian, and to the Asiatic?" Sir, extend your suffrage among such a number of ignorant, demoralized masses of men, and your whole liberties, Constitution, and Government will go down together.

I am -not in favor of this proposition, and for the further reason which I stated the other day and which I shall not repeat now, of the absolute necessity of defending the States in their just rights underthe Constitution against the gradual, insidious encroachments of the Government upon them.

Now, Mr. President, one word more in reference to the good faith of this transaction on the part of the majority. I am not speaking of any particular person, fori mean no offense to any one, and therefore I speak in general terms of the majority. The pledge which you gave to the people of this country, and upon which you carried the election, and without which you could not have carried it at all, was this; the Se ioTof wffrSl 7al States proper y belongs That subject properly belongs not to all the people of the loyal States, but to the people or those States; -Now, sir, but two constructions can be given to this language: one is that each State shall decide for itself; or the other construction, which is a forced one, the people of the loyal States shall decide whether negro suffrage shall- be established in those States.

If the people of all the loyal States were to vote together and vote in one particular direction, they would not constitute three fourths of the United States; they could not adopt the constitutional amendment. Therefore it shows how utterly fallacious this pretense is that you meant in the resolution that you passed, that it properly belonged to the people of the loyal States to determine who should vote until you could get an amendment of the Constitution to take it away. You did not mean any such thing.

Mr. NYE. Will the- honorable Senator allow me to ask him a question?

Mr. DOOLITTLE. Is it on this point, in regard to this resolution?

Mr. NYE. Yes sir it is whether the honorable Senator has the right to raise the question of good faith at all as between others and that platform. He was not fooled by it. If there was any fooling it was in another direction. The honorable Senator has no business with it. He was 110 party to it.

Mr. DOOLITTLE. Mr. President, to my facetious, able, eloquent friend from Nevada I will respond most cheerfully. I was not fooled by this platform. I saw it as it was then, as I see it now—that it was a doublefaced thing; that it looked with a black face to the South and with a white face to the North.

Mr. NYE. Then, I submit that the honorable Senator has no right to complain of bad faith, for almost anybody could see it as clearly as he did. Nobody was misled by it.

Mr. DOOLITTLE. I will show the honorable Senator wherein the bad faith consists. This white face which it put on toward the North was in fact nothing but a mask; the black face was under it, and they are now pulling off the mask. That is where the bad faith is. They intended to make the people believe that the white men of the States of the North should have the power to control suffrage in each State for itself. That is what they meant the people of the North to understand. They wore a white face toward the North. They put on this white mask to make the people think so. Now they come here, and the mask is thrown aside, and they say "We did not mean that you should regulate suffrage for yourselves; we did not mean that the State Connecticut should have negro suffrage or not just as she chose; we meant that if the State of Connecticut did not want negro suffrage, Massachusetts, Vermont, and Rhode Island should force it on to her," or in the same proportion. They did not mean, when they said to the people of New York "You shall determine the question of suffrage, whether you will have negro suffrage or not, for yourselves but they meant "New York shall have the right to control it until we can take it away from her; we said in our platform it properly belongs to you." Then how can you properly take it away? If anything properly belongs to me, how can you properly come and take it away from me? That is the question. It is a very simple question. If it is proper for me to have it, it is not proper to take it away from me.

Mr. EDMUNDS. That does not follow,

Mr. DOOLITTLE. It follows necessarily. In order that they would be satisfied to vote your ticket you meant to have the people of the North understand that while negro suffrage should be forced upon the South it was to be left to be settled by the people of the North, each State for itself. You knew very well that, growing out of the excitements of the war, and the passions and hatreds and prejudices enkindled against the people of the South, you could appeal to thepeople of the North to say "Well, it is good enough for those rebellious rascals of the South to force negro suffrage upon them; but as to forcing it upon the loyal people of the North, we -have not the slightest intention of doing anything of the sort."

My honorable friend from Massachusetts [Mr. SumweeJ saw the resolution as it looked then, with its double face to the North and South. He denounced it here yesterday on the floor; and, Mr. President, while I differed with him for many years,- differed fundamentally, differed earnestly; and have had many earnest discussions with him, I have to say that that Senator above perhaps any other Senator has always frankly stated here just what he believed. He states that this resolution was an unfortunate, dodging resolution, double-faced twosided, wearing a mask toward the North, showing a white face northward, a black face southward, a mere political dodge to tide over the election. He denounced it then; so did the brave old man then living and now dead, in the House of Representatives. Thaddeus Stevens denounced it as a fraud. Mr. President, I will not use such strong language as that, although I will say that I think there was a little want of that frankness toward the people of the United States which I think is becoming in a political platform, of a great and a successful party.

Mr. President, I will not detain the Senate any longer on this particular amendment. There are a multitude of other amendments coming up, and I may be compelled to take some part in their discussion hereafter; but on this particular amendment I will not detain the Senate any longer.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The question is on the amendment of the Senator from Michigan to the amendment of the Senator from Nevada.

Mr. EDMUNDS. Let it be reported.

The Chief Clerk. The amendment is to insert:

Citizens of the United States of African descent shall have the same right to vote and hold office in States and Territories as other citizens electors of the most numerous branch of their respective Legislatures.

Mr. HENDRICKS. Senator Dixon desired me to say that he was paired off with my colleague [Mr. Morton] and the Senator from Maine, [Mr. Fessenden.]

Mr. MORRILL, ofMaine. On this question?

Mr. EDMUNDS. On the general result.

Mr. HENDRICKS. I do not know exactly.

Mr. FESSENDEN. I think it may be considered a pair on this. I will not venture to vote on this question, as Mr. Dixon is absent.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. I was requested to state that on the passage of the resolution the Senator from Maine [Mr. Fessenden] and the Senator from Indiana [Mr. Morton] had paired with the Senator from Connecticut, [Mr. Dixon.] They would vote for, and Mr. Dixon against the passage of the resolution.

The question being taken byyeas and nays, resulted—yeas 10, nays 85; as follows:

YEAS—Messrs. Anthony, Chandler, Cole, Corbett, Cragin Perry Harkm Howard Norton, Patterson of New Hampshire, Sumner, Thayer, Tipton. Wade, Welch, and Williams—16.

NAYS—Messrs. Abbott, Bayard, Buckatew, Cameron, Cattcll, Doolittle, Drake. Edmunds, Frelinghuyscn, Hairis, Hendricks, Howe, Kellogg, McCreery, McDonald, Morgan, Morrill of Maine, Morrill of Vermont, Nye, Patterson of Tennessee, Ramsey, Rico. Saulsbury. Sawyer, Sherman, Spencer, Srewart, Trumbull. Van Wmkle, Vickers, Warner. Whyte, Willey, Wilson, and Yates—35.

ABSENT— Messrs. Conlcling, Conness, Davis, Dixon, Fessenden, Fowler, Grimes, Henderson, Morton, Osborn, Pomeroy, Pool, Robertson, Ross, and Sprasue—15,

So the amendment to the amendment was rejected.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The question is now on the amendment of the Senator from Nevada.

Mr. WARNER. Is my amendment now in order?

ThePRESIDENTpw tempore. An amendment to the amendment is now in order.

Mr. WARNER. I wish to move a substitute for the whole proposition.

The Chief Clerk. The proposed amendment is to strike out all after" section one" and to insert the following:

The right of citizens of the United States to hold office shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State1 on account of property, race, color, or previous condition of servitude; and every male citizen of the United States of the age of twentyone years, or over, and who is of sound mind, shall have an equal vote at all elections in the State in which he shall have actually resided for a period of one year next preceding such election, except such as may hereafter engage in insurrection or rebellion against the United States, and such as shall be duly convicted of treason, felony, or other infamous crimes.

Mr. SHERMAN. I suggest to the Senator from Alabama to insert the word "nativity" after the word" property."

Mr. WARNER. I will so modify it.

The amendment, as modified, was read.

Mr. COLE. I hope the word suggested by the Senator from Ohio will be stricken out. It seems to me it is not called for. The amendment sought to be embodied in the Constitution is intended to meet the case of negroes. They are native born Americans. They differ from other races. I think the word "nativity" might as well be left out. Itis perhaps paying some deference to a mere prejudice against the Chinese, who will not become citizens in any event. I think it had better be left out.

Mr. WARNER. I suggest that the vote be taken on the amendment I proposed first, and then, if it is adopted, the word "nativity" can be inserted afterward on a separate motion.

Mr. WILLIAMS. I would inquire of the author of this amendment if he has carefully considered its effect in the States? I suppose that if this is made a part of the Constitution every citizen will have an equal right to vote with every other citizen in every school district and in every municipality and in every sort of an organization that may exist in the States. Then there is another election, the election of United States Senators, which may, perhaps, be reached by the general term "elections" here employed. It seems to me that it is dangerous to say by a provision of the Constitution of the United States that in all possible or conceivable elections which may be held in the States for any local purpose every citizen shall have an equal right to vote. There may be elections held where it would operate greatly to the injury of all concerned to let every person have an equal right to vote. Sometimes it becomes necessary to regulate elections in school districts; persons who own property in the district pay taxes, and it is thought advisable sometimes that they should have the control of the elections. I do not undertake to justify such legislation as that, but I say there is danger that we may put a rule in the Constitution of the United States that will produce great embarrassment in the States. I am a little afraid to vote for it.

Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. President, I thought nothing would tempt me to say one word in this debate on the constitutional amendment, but Senators have already perceived the difficulty we are approaching, and .we might as well at once face the issue. There are five different causes of exclusion from the right to vote in this and other countries. The first is race. This cause of exclusion has existed in this country in nearly all the States until recently. The second is property, and that has existed in England since the foundation of their Government. The third is religion, which exists in almost all countries except our own. The fourth is nativity, and that exists in nearly all countries. The fifth is education, and that is an experiment of ours, I believe, in Massachusetts.

Now, Mr. President, if we are endeavoring to settle this question once for all, I think it would be wiser and better to declare that every male citizen of the United States, native or naturalized, above the age of twenty one years, shall have the right to vote, unless he is excluded for crime; and that no State Shall exclude any one from the right to vote because of his race, because of his property or want of property, because of his religion, because of his birthplace, or because of the misfortune of want of education. As this amendment makes the nearest approach to that, I have made up my mind to vote for it, or X shall vote fox the amendment of the Senator from Massachusetts, [Mr. Wilson.] i I do not like to apply a rule so narrow and limited as to guaranty rights to the African race which we refuse to the Asiatic race or to other races. I do not wish to include the ignorant masses of our southern population and exclude the partially intelligent classes of the State of Massachusetts. I do not want to include the negroes and exclude or allow a State to exclude foreigners who are declared to be citizens of the United States under the laws of the United States.

Therefore, it does seem to me that if we intend to now prescribe a rule for suffrage in this country, we ought to make it operate universally and withdraw from the States all power to exclude any portion of the male citizens of the United States, leaving them, if they choose, to regulate the length of residence, whether females shall participate in the elective franchise, atwhatagemalesshallvote, &c.; buttoexclude from them all power to deprive any portion of our male citizens above the age of twenty one years of the right to vote, unless where the right has been forfeited by crime. If the amendment of the Senator from Massachusetts is voted down and this amendment is voted down, then the next best proposition, I think, is that report of the Committee on the Judiciary, which I shall then vote for.

Mr. HOWARD. I have two objections to this amendment. The first is that it proposes to change the existing Constitution in reference to qualifications of President of the United States. If this amendment shall be adopted, then that clause of the Constitution which requires that the President of the United States shall be a native born citizen of the United States is repealed, and any person who has been naturalized and then become a citizen of the United States will be eligible to the office of President; and so of the members of the Senate. Now, sir, for one I shall never yield my consent to modify that clause of the Constitution which requires the Chief Magistrate of the United States to be a native born American citizen. I think the fathers judged wisely in annexing that qualification to that office. I think the public safety requires that the Chief Magistrate of the United States, at least, be a native born citizen.

Mr. WARNER. The Senator will allow me to correct him. There is nothing in this amendment which gives it the effect he attributes to it. The question of inserting the word "nativity" is not before the Senate. The question is on the amendment as printed. I withdrew the subsequent amendment.

Mr. HOWARD." The right of citizens of the United States —that is, all citizens, nativeborn and naturalized— to hold office shall not be denied or abridged by the United States on account of property, race, color, or previous condition of servitude." That is as to the right to hold office; and then," every male citizen of the age of twenty one years or over, and who is of sound mind, shall havean equalvote at all elections," &c.

I have another objection to this which to me is insuperable:

Every male citizen of the age of twenty one years or over arid who is of sound mind, shall havean equal vote at nil elections in the State m which he shall have actually resided for a period of one year next preceding said election, except such 11s may hereafter engage in insurrection or rebellion against the United States, and such as shall be duly convicted of treason, felony, or other infamous crimes.

I am not prepared to carry the principle of amnesty so far as is contemplated in this amendment. There is a certain portion of the recent rebels who, for one, I will never agree shall participate in the administration of this Government, directly or indirectly; men who have forfeited all claim to our respect and our credit by committing the double crime of perjury and treason against their country, deliberately, upon purpose, and with a view to destroy our Government and our liberties. J 0 that proposition I never can agree.

The amendment is open to the further objection that it declares that the right of citizens of the United States to hold office "shall not be. denied or abridged by the United Stages on account of," &c. That is in conflict with the third section of the fourteenth amendment of the Constitution, recently adopted, which provides that—-

No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vi ie President, or hold any office, civil and military, under tho United States or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State Legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid and comfort to the enemies thereof."

This amendment is in direct conflict with that clause of the fourteenth amendment of the Constitution, and I think it is rather premature, after so short a period has elapsed since the adoption of that amendment, to proceed to repeat this and press it through. The haste is rather too hot for me.

Tlierfe is another objection which I have also to this amendment. It does by a plain implication give to the Congress of theUnited States authority to fix and establish religious tests for holding office—a measure which to my feelings is very abhorrent, and one to which lean never yield my consent, at all. The right, itis said, of citizens of theUnited States shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State, &c., leaving the plain implication that for any other causes or any other reasons than those specified in the amendment the Congress of the United States, the law making power, may erect a religious test and exclude citizens of the United States from holding office. That is also in direct conflict with one of the ancient clauses of the Constitution.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I do not intend to prolong this discussion at all, but I want to call the attention of the Senator from Michigan to the fact that he has entirely misunderstood the purport of this amendment, as I think he will see on examination. It does not provide that rebels may hold office. It simply provides that the rights of citizens who hold office shall not be denied on account of property, race, color, or previous condition. They may be denied for rebellion or crime, or for other cause, and that does not at all reach the point to which the Senator alludes.

Then as to the implication that the right to hold office may be denied for other causes, that objection lies against every form of amendment that is now before the Senate and the one offered by the Senator from Michigan himself.

Mr. HOWARD. No, sir; not at all.

Mr. WARNER. By protecting a single class, those of African descent, the implication is as broad that others may be disfranchised.

Mr. HOWARD. Not at all.

Mr. WARNER. But I rose simply to call attention to the fact that this does not interfere with the provision of the Constitution which prevents from holding office those who have held office before and taken an oath to support the Constitution.

Mr. WILLIAMS.- Will the Senator allow me to ask him a question?

Mr. WARNER. Certainly.

Mr. WILLIAMS. The States ordinarily provide that persons to vote in counties and cities shall have a certain local residence. I he laws of the State of Oregon require that a nian shall reside in the county three months before he is entitled to vote there for county officers, and he is required to live in a city a certain length of time before he can vote there for the city officers. Does not this amendment as proposed abolish all these regulations and restrictions imposed by the State Legislature and allow any man in the State who has resided there one year to vote wherever he offers his vote without being subjected to any local restriction as to residence or anything of that kind?

Mr. WARNER. 1 will say to the Senator that I do not think there is anything in this amendment that will interfere with the right of State to establish periods of residence for local officers. The amendment only provides that every citizen who shall have resided one year within the State immediately preceding the election shall have ad' equal vote. The State may provide as to certain officers that th y shall reside in a certain locality, and that the electors shall have a residence for voting purposes for any Period not exceeding one year. Mr. CRAuIN. Is it not in order to offer an amendment to that amendment?

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Not at present. There is an amendment to an amendment pending.

Mr. MORRILL, of Vermont. May I ask the Senator from Alabama whether his purpose is to pass an amendment to the Constitution which will work general amnesty to all those who have heretofore been guilty of insurrection or have been convicted of treason? I see that the words are "hereafter involved in insurrection."

Mr. WARNER. I may say that the effect of it would be, as the amendment stands, to prevent the disfranchisement of men for participation in the rebellion.

Mr. ANTHONY. Then that constitutional provision would repeal the law we1 have here that excludes from this body and from the other House men like Jeff. Davis and John Slidell.

Mr. WARNER. Oh, no.

Mr. ANTHONY. Certainly; the right to hold office.

Mr. HENDRICKS. That is not this proposition.

Mr. WARNER. It only relates to voting. All it says in regard to right of holding officer is that it shall not be denied or abridged on account of property, race, color, or previous condition of servitude.

Mr. BAYARD. Mr. President, I do not propose lo prolong this debate or discuss the merits of the particular amendment now pending. I am satisfied that no argument will avail in this body to prevent the passage of this amendment in some form, or as to effect its particular object, the grant of the franchise of suffrage to the negro race.

The fiat has gone forth, and the fell spirit of party, the bane of republics, lias decreed its passage. 1 have yet the hope, however, that many of even Republican members of the State Legislatures will have sufficient sense of duty to regard the confidence and good faith which in allfree governments should always be maintained between the representative and his constituents, and that they will decline in many of the States to act upon the proposed amendment without first ascertaining the will of their constituents, and if that will is ascertained 1 have no fears as to the decision of the people. Sir, the mode and time at which this amendment has been introduced and the pressure for its passage in the last month of an expiring Congress show conclusively that it is intended to fetter the people—to throw a chain around the limbs of the giant while he slumbers. Whether you succeed or fail in your object, you may yet find that the people have more than the single eye of Polyphemus, and when the giant awakens many of you will seek in vain to escape his just vengeance by creeping under the bellies of sheep, like Ulysses and his companions.

I shall make no further opposition to the amendment in any form you may please to mold it, beyond my negative vote.

Mr. WILLEY. Mr. President, this proposition of the Senator from Alabama is one of universal suffrage and universal amnesty. 1 confess that 1 should like to feel myself authorized to extend amnesty and make it universal now, and I shall take pleasure in doing so whenever T can be convinced that the true interests, the welfare, the safety, the public peace of the country will justify it. The time has not yet come when we can venture so far as that. We have not fully justified ourselves yet in imposing this restriction in our previous legislation. 1 have not yet seen those fruits meet for repentance to justify me in responding to the inclinations. of my feelings and my heart. I therefore, while that feature remains in the proposition of the Senator from Alabama allowing those who have been so recently engaged in a most terrible effort to overthrow the best of all .Governments on the face of the earth to be reintroduced into the political control of the Government—I say at present 1 cannot bring myself to allow that to be done if I can prevent it. Therefore, though there are some features in the amendment of the Senator from Alabama that meet my approbation, while that feature of it remains I cannot vote for it or for any amendment that contains that proposition.

Mr. WHYTE. I merely desire to ask for a division of thequestion. There are two propositions contained in this amendment. One is regulating the holding of office, and the other is regulating the right of suffrage. I desire to divide the question and take the vote separately.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. It cannot be done at this time. A motion to strike out and insert is not divisible.

Mr. DOOLITTLE. This amendment I had not seen nor heard read until it was brought before the Senate this morning, and in some respects it is novel, different from any other which has been proposed, and 1 beg leave for a single moment to call the attention of the Senate to its provisions and to its effect. The first part of the section declares that the right of citizens of the United States to hold office shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State on account of property, race, color, or previous condition of servitude. Perhaps the objection made by the Senator from Michigan, that the effect of this would be to allow a Pi usident of the United States to be chosen who was not born in the United States, may have some force, but that might be prevented perhaps by an amendment to the language. But there is nothing in this contained which affects the fourteenth article of amendment, as it is called, which qualifies the right of certain persons who have been engaged in the rebellion from holding any office. That amendment would remain substantially the same as it is now. The fourteenth amendment which inhibits the holding of office by persons engaged in the rebellion is not affected by this amendment,, and therefore, so far as the question of universal amnesty is concerned, it is not the necessary consequence of the adoption of this amendment. It gives amnesty so far as voting is concerned, but on the question of holding office it gives no amnesty.

Mr. i ESSENDEN It overrules laws of the State in existence.

Mr. DOOIjIXTIjE. It is the fact, so far as voting is concerned, that it overrules the provisions which have been inserted in many of the constitutions of the reconstructed States which forbid

Mr. FESSENDEN. And Missouri and West Virginia?

Mr. D00L1TPLE. Yes; and Missouri and West Virginia, which forbid the right of voting to persons who have been engaged in the rebellion. In effect it gives universal amnesty so far as voting is concerned, but not so far as office is concerned. This is the substantial effect of this amendment, and while I cannot favor an amendment to the Constitution of the United States on this "subject, while I believe it should remain with the States where it is and ought always to remain, still I have no hesitation in declaring that in my opinion the proposition which is contained in this amendment is the best proposition which has yet been presented to the Senate, because while itforces into the States of the North negro suffrage where it does not exist now, it does give something which looks like some liberality or some compensation or some immunity in the provision extending universal amnesty in regard to the States of the South in spite of the restrictions which are contained in the constitutions of such States. The two going together would make an amendment more acceptable, in my judgment; and .yet I- am not in favor and I cannot vote in favor of any of these amendments to the Constitution of the United States. I did not desire to take up the time of the Senate, but in as short language as possible state what, in my judgment, is the effect of this proposition, and state my opinion as to its comparative merits. I think it is a much more acceptable proposition.

Mr. WILLEY. The Senator from Wisconsin says he would like to see some proposition that had something of mercy, something of humanity. Mr. President, I do not think that I am a very cruel and a very inhuman. man; that my breast is filled with feelings of revenge to any great extent. Mercy for whom? Mercy on what consideration? It is said that here is a proposition that has something of humanity in it! To whom is it proposed to extend this right of suffrage? To men who, he will acknowledge, without a jot or tittle of justification, lifted their strong right arms to strike down the flag that protected him and which his heart loved with its deepest and best devotion; men who, without any provocation, have deluged this land themselves with blood from one extremity of it to the other; who have filled our mountain homes and cabins with distress and gloom, with widowhood and orphanage; men who have created a debt, that is crushing the energies of this great people to the very earth; and yet, where do they stand to day The property of not a single individual confiscated; not one single individual thus guilty punished for his crimes, but one or two of them indicted; and the prince of all now at large upon the bail furnished by one of the leaders of the Republican party. No punishment, no confiscation; all of them allowed to enjoy their civil liberty; equal before the law, protected in their person, in their property; and now, when it is proposed to withhold from them a little longer the political power which they have heretofore abused, and when they hud only used it to overthrow the Government, the Senator from Wisconsin cries out against the inhumanity of such a proposition. Sir, such clemency was never written on the page of universal history before. Such mercy has never been displayed by any Government that ever had it in its power to punish traitors against rightful authority. I think it is mercy to restrain these men nnt il we see that they are willing and ready to yield dutiful obedience to the Government, and not to put again in their hands political power which they have already abused, and who, for aught we know, may abuse it again if they are intrusted with it.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The question is on the amendment of the Senator from Alabama to the amendment of the Senator from Nevada.

The amendment to the amendment was rejected.

Mr. WILSON. I desire to submitan amendment, to strike out section one and insert the following:

There shall bo no discrimination in any State among the citizens of the United States in the exercise of the elective franchise in any election therein, or in the qualifications of office in any State, on account of race, color, nativity, property, education, or religious belief.

Mr. ANTHONY. It is now within half an hour of the usual time of meeting for to morrow, and in order to make the Journal read correctly there should be an adjournment, and I think, Mr. President, something is due to the officers of the Senate. We are enabled to go out and refresh ourselves, and we are enabled occasionally to get a few minutes' sleep. These gentlemen, who serve us faithfully, have been here twenty four hours continually, except during the recess. I think we ought to adjourn until twelve o clock

Mr. SHERMAN. Give them more than half an hour.

Mr. ANTHONY. Give them a chance to get breakfast. They have not been able to leave their seats. At twelve o clock when we meet, we shall have the morning hour, and at one o' clock this will be the unfinished business.

Mr. FESSENDEN. Let it be after the recess.

Mr. ANTHONY. No; we will not take a recess, because then it will all be Monday s proceedings for two days, and that does not keep the Journal right.

Mr. FESSENDEN. We can take a recess again after we meet at twelve o clock

Several Senators. Move an adjournment.

Mr. ANTHONY. I move that the Senate adjourn.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator moves that the Senate adjourn.

Mr. SHERMAN. The motion to adjourn will bring us here in a half an hour, and it seems to me it is right that we should take that course. It does not delay the pendingbusitiess in the least.

Mr. ANTHONY. It delays it only while it gives usthe morning hour for morning business between twelve and one o clock and Ipresume if the Senator from Nevada desires to go on without the morning hour nobody will object. I will not, certainlv.

Mr. STEWART. If the understanding is that we shall' dispense with the morning business and go on with the constitutional amendment at once—we are all tired and do not want to go into the morning business—I shall not object.

Mr. ANTHONY. I shall agree to it, but cannot speak for others. It will require unanimous consent.