April 6, 1864

Then, sir, to show that they were separate and independent States, how was the present Constitution formed? They sent delegates to a common Convention to form a Constitution. Itwas thereupon agreed that if nine of their number could be found to secede from the old Confederation and setup a new Government, they should become united -for certain great common purposes. My State seceded right off; New Jersey followed; then Pennsylvania; and finally the State of my honorable friend from New Hampshire seceded, and made secession complete. They seceded separately as States, and as separate independent States framed this Constitution. Then if the States were never separate and independent, 1 ask what became of Rhode Island> She was left out. W ith whom was she united? Noi th Carolina was left out. With whom was she united? New Yot kand V irgtniu were left out, New York and Virginia soon seceded and united with tl e rest, and then North Carolina; but there was Rhode Island standing out by herself, no ptut of the Union. I ask if she was not a separate and independent State? Was she bound by the Constitution before she ratified it? .Certainly that will not be contended. Was she bound by the original Articles of Confederation? All the parties to it except herself had ^one of!* and left her. If we never had any other independent State in what was once the United States of America, certainly proud little glorious Rhode Island was separate and independent, and had too much sense to go to war to force all the rest back. This is my answer to that portion of the argument of the honorable Senator from Maryland.

Mr. President, my object in rising was not to enter into any thing like a speech on this question, because I briefly addressed the Senate once before on this same subject. I oppose this amendment, not because my people are particularly interested in the question of slavery; we have no slavesinourmidsttomake itof any importance to us andnosuchconsideiation therefore governs my action; but it is from a high sense of duty to my country; because I believe, in the first place that if you were to submit it to three fourths of the States, and they were honestly, by a majority of their votes, to declare in favor of the ratification, and they should ratify it, as you do not propose it to the other fourth whose interests will be affected by it, and to whom you cannot submit it, it would not be binding upon them; secondly, because I believe the time is unpropiuous. The great fundamental law of a free people should never be altered in times of high excitement like these. It is no time to change your oiganiclaw while warisraging. We should waituntil peace, heavenly descended peace, shall again bless the land, when the judgments of men shall he calm, when reason shall resume its throne, and when a common sense of the common interests of the whole people will influence your action.

1 oppose it again, sir, because I honestly believe that even if reunion should be now barely possible, the adoption of this amendment would prolong this war beyond the lifetime of any "member of this Senate. I know it is said that the South are doing all they can. 1 presume that ka so. Others are more buoyant in hope m reference to the future than i am. I ha e never dreamed from the commencement of this struggle that it was the child s play that it was attempted to make the people of this country believe. The promises of its suppression in sixty days, in ninety days, in a year, in two year s in three years, I always thought promises idly and inconsiderately made. The history of the world does not show in oil the annals of past time where so many people scattered over that extent of territory have been conquered in two or three years. Adopt this amendment in addition to your acts of legislation already passed by the Congress of the United States, your confiscation bills, and your laws for the punishment of treason, and what inducement have they to return? The alternative presented to them is submission, and to be despoiled of everything and hung, or to fight to the last with the possibility of saving something.

From the commencement of this whole struggle 1 have been opposed to all this species of legislation. I know that my motives have been misconstrued. I care as much for that as I do for the idle wind which I regard not. I believe that in the commencement of this struggle, had a different policy been pursued had the Constitution and the rights of the people of the adhering States been respected, had there not been a mani estattempf to make every freeman bow in submission to this Administration, had the struggle been prosecuted wi accordance with those high and elevated principles, of moral and constitutional law which should characterize the struggles of a great people, when southern men saw that their rights, their lives, liberty, and property could be better protected in the old Union than out of it, a revutaion in southern sentiment and opinion would have taken place, and in course of time reunion might have been had. But, sir, pursue this system of legislation, and in my honest judgment—though it may not be entitled to any very great respect—you and f will molder in the dust before the Union of these States is reestablished.

Again, sir, why should this amendment be attempted now? This is not a proper time for another reason: I presume the people of this country, that portion of them among whom slaverydoc s not exist, do not wish to have his amendment adopted i right or wrong, whether thiee fourths of the States agree to itor not. I presume the Senate and the House of Representatives honestly wish that if it shall be ratified it«ehall be ratified by the honest vote of the people of three fourths of the States. I submitit to you, Senators, is there a possibility tiiatif yousubmit it to the peopleunderthe present circumstances that vote can be had even in the States professedly and knowingly in the Union? I ask you, do you believe that he who is your chosen chief, with an army of a million and a half of men, is going to allow men who are a thousand fold better Union men than he is to vote? No, sir; that is not his purpose, in my opinion; and I judge of his purposes in reference to the future by his acts in the past.

Then, sir, without entering any further into a discussion us to military interference, I ask you whether, if you want this amendment honestly adopted, it would not he "better to waituntil there can be a free exercise of the voter s right? Do that, and the people of those States which give ,t their sanction certainly can have no just cause of complaint as a practical question, and can only question it in reference to its obligatory character as an amendment of the Constitution.

With these remarks, 1 will not detain the Senate longer.

Mr. HALE. Mr. President, I had not supposed until within a very short period that there were any possible circumstances that could induce me to make a speech, even a shortone, upon the question now before the Senate. I say without any arrogance, or affectation, or anything that is unbecoming, that l have made as many speeches upon this question as I ever thought 1 should make, a great many years ago, some dozen or twenty years ago nearly. I do not know that any practical good can result from anything I am going to say now, which I hope will uotbe much; but I was admonished once by an incident in my own experience that we do not know precisely to what uses the speeches that we make may come. Some eighteen years ago I was traveling in a private carriage in a retired part of the State of Maine. My horse became somewhat weary, and about five o clock on a Saturday afternoon 1 found it inconvenient to proceed any further, and stopped at a small hotel in Penobscot county, I think on the Passadumkeag river, found that I had to spend that evening and all day Sunday there. I looked around to see if i could find something to lead, something to amuse me. I went to the landlady and told her I should like even an old almanac of last year, if she had nothing else. She looked around, and at last she came to me with a large sheet, an extra of some newspaper there, and upon opening it 1 found it contained a speech made by John P. Hale in the New Hampshire Legislature, on the abolition question, a year or two previous; and that was all the reading that that house contained, and the best. [Laughter.] It occurs to me that it is possible some of the speeches on this question may amuse the .solitary hours of some lonely traveler at some wayside inn in some future years, and therefore I am induced to say a few words.

In the first place, let me say a word to our friends who oppose this resolution. They die hard, very hard, i remember reading that when the British Parliament sat in judgment upon Charles J, and sentenced him to lose his head, they were apprehensive that when it came to the last, and he was actually required to bow down and put his head under the ax, he might resist, and the Commons, with great prudence and prcscience, had prepared pulleys and machinery by which if he resisted he should actually be drawn under the ax, and his head severed from his body. That is history that i think is not without its teaching in the present day. I think that the judgment lias gone forth that slavery must die. The commons have passed that sentence; and I teii you, sir, if slavery is refractory, and does not quietly submit, the commons will prepare pulleys by which to bring the victim under the ax 4

Mr. President, permit me to say that this is a day that I and many others have long wished for, long hoped for, longstuven for. It is a day when the nation is to commence its real life* or if it is not the day, it is the dawning of the day; the day is near at hand. The day is to come when the American people are to wake up to the meaning of the sublime truths which their fathers uttered years ago and which have slumbered dead letters upon the pages of our Constitution, of our Declaration of Independence, and of our history— a day when the nation is to be disembarrassed of the inconsistencies which have marked its history and its career, patent to the world and to ourselves when we have had the courage faithfully, fairly, and boldly to look the truth in the face.

Sir, what is the truth? We have had upon the pages of our public history, our public documents, and our public recordssomeof the sublimest truths that ever fell from human lips; and there never has been in the histoi y of the world a more striking contrast than we have presented to heaven and earth between thegrandeurand the sublimity of our professions and the degradation and infamy of our practice. Thatday is topassaway, and to pass away, I trust, right speedily.

I am glad that the conduct of the theological branch of this discussion lias been handed over to a man who can so ably handle it as my distinguished friend from Iowa, [Mr. Harlan;] but let me congratulate him that in conducting that theological discussion very great progress has been made. A. little while ago a man who argued this scriptural question had to begin with" cursed be Canaan," at Genesis. We have got by that; Genesis is laid aside; and we have got so far through the Bible that we have actually finished the reading of the epistle of Paul the apostle to Philemon. [Laughter.] Weshall soon get through the Testament when we have got thus far. If my honorable friend takes up that question, and accepts the challenge that is thus made to him, I •suppose he will illustrate some differences that may be found in the slavery to which Onesimus was sent back and that which we are about to abolish that are somewhat curious. But 1 will not dwell upon that subject.

But J desire to say a word, in all sincerity and in all kindness, to those gentlemen who still linger here, the representatives, or rather the «admims tratois de bonis non, of what was once the old Democratic party. [Laughter.] They pretend to think—and I am not the man to stand here and say they do not believe what they pretend to believe—that it is in their power, if they had the control, to save the country and restore the Union. I am willing to concede, for the purposes of all that I have to say, that they actually believe it; that that is their faith; and I apprehend from some things that have fallen from some gentlemen even in this neighborhood, that my honorable and venerable friend from Kentucky [Mr. Davis] is not far from entertaining similar opinions, that the Democratic party might, by some possibility, save the country and save the Union; and what is more than all that, save them solves, too. Sir, it is a delusion, an utter delusion. Let me ask their attention for a moment or two to some considerations which induce me to believe that it is an utter delusion.•*

How can they do it? Patrick Henry, the great orator of the Revolution offense to Massachusetts, laughter —said that he knew of no other lamp to guide his feet but the light of experience. Taking that a« a maxim or as a text, let me ask what there is in the history of this Democratic party that gives countenance to the idea that by any possibility, even if they had everything their own w iy they could save the country and save the Union? This rebellion, revolution, or whatever you please to call it—1 believe H has been judicially decided that we are not at war—commenced under James Buchanan, a DemociaticPresident They had a Democratic Senate, a Democratic House of Representatives, a super Democratic Supreme Court of theUnited States, and a huge majority of all the officers of every organization, moral and physical, in tin; country, including the Army and Navy and ministers; i mean taking the whole country. They had a large majority of the States, of the Governors of the States, the representatives of the States, and they had majorities everywhere that majorities were worth counting. The could not keep (he peace with all that. They lost it, Nay, more than that, they had a little love feast of their own down at Charleston; there was no abolitionist) no Federalist £here to veac and plague them j and they could not keep family peace. The^ could riot keep national peace, and they oould not keep family peace, but split, broke, wentasunder, every man his own way, and the present is the result of it.

Plow are they going to do any better now than they did then? They lost eleven States at one; slide that they had then. They areall gone; ami I say it with great respect and great kindness to them they have lost, besides, pretty nearly every respectable man they had in the free States that gave character and stability to their party. I need not go out of the Senate Chamber to prove that. Well, sir, they have lost all that; and now in the days of their dissolution and weakness, when their preaching here sounds in one respect something similar to that of John the Baptist— 44 the voice of one crying in the wilderness,"

[laughter;] for there is only here and there one of them—they are still impressed with that insane delusion that if they had the power they could save the country and save the Union and save themselves.

I do not desire to argue this question, but merely to suggest the palpable, prominent, indisputable facts of history. It is said to be a hard thing for an individual to find out when his mental faculties begin to fail him. It is not difficult for him to find out when his physical strength fails him, but it is very rare that a man finds out when his mental vigor begins to fail him I supr pose what is true of individuals is true of parties and of collections of men. But let me ask ray friends, do they not feel in then* own experience when they read the newspapers, do they not begin to find some indications that the day of the strength of the Democracy has departed, that it has gone or is going? It seems to me that they must. 1 appeal, then, to all who hear me', is it not the part of wisdom to submit to what is inevitable? Charles I did not compel the Commons to put the pulleys on to haul him under the ox; but when he found the ax was up and that the Commons had decreed that his head should go under it and the ax should come down, like a sensible and well bred gentleman as he was, he put his head under. If royalty could learn that lesson from coming events, and could learn to act with becoming prudence, is it too much to ask the Democratic party when the ax is up and the inevitable sentence from which there is no escape has been pronounced, like that good Christian gentleman, Charh s I, quietly to put their heads under and submit to what must come?

Mr. President, what is to be cannot he avoided; and if there is any one thing which, it seems to me, the indications from every side everywhere teach us, it is that the day of this power is over; and these is no indication more indicative of it, more satisfactory, more conclusive to my own mind, than the Christian and statesmanlike effort made by the honorable Senator from Maryland yesterday. When from such quarters and from such sou ices, such exhibitions of true and inevitable consequences are portrayed before the people of this country, there is no great difficulty in understanding the signs of the times or predicting what is speedily to follow. 1 ask everybody who hears me, do you not rejoice that the day has come? Are you not glad that this nation, blind and deaf so long to the teachings of history and the commands of God, has at length aroused itself fi oin its lethargy, listened to the voices which heaven and earth, God and nature, are proclaiming, and is preparing to put itself in alliance with the Power which cannot be resisted and whose lint will most surely be executed.

Sir, when the great founder of the Dutch republic, William the Silent, 1 think he was called, alter losing his armies, his treasure, his finances, and everything but his own indomitable courage and his Christian faith, counseled his followers again to rally and again to strike for freedom, they asked him, ei Have you secured any alliances? Are there any of the potentates and Powers of the earth that you could associate with, that will aid you in thestrnggle in which you propose to engage?" His answer was, "Yes; i have allied myself to the King of kings, and in His strength I invite you to go to battle." Sir, that is the position and the only position this nation can occupy. If we cannot do that, if we cannot put away from us the great sin and the great crime which has separated us not only from th<| sympathies of the Christian world, but from the blessings of the Goei of the Christian world, then indeed is our cause hopeless and our struggle desperate.

But, sir, whenever unconditionally and without equivocation we come up to the mark and place ourselves on the high standard of Christian duty and resolve that despite of all extraneous circumstances, of all doubtful contingencies, of all questionsof expediency, we will place ourselvesfirmly upon the everlasting rock of duty and our action shall be in accordance with our conscientious convictions, then, and not till then, will that pillarof cloud by day and fire by night which led the chosen people from the house of bondage to the land of promise be ours. Then we shall indeed and in truth be worthy of our genealogy and our history. Then the sublime teachings of the Pilgrim fathers who left everything behind them that they might come hither and plant in this wilderness a temple of liberty and throw wide open its doors for the oppressed of earth to enter and be at rest—then will all that be realized. Then without shame, without reproach, and without apology, we can stand in this nineteenth century, soldiers of the new civilization and of an old Christianity, going forth to battle with every impulse of our hearts and every purpose that we entertain in full accordance with the best wishes and hopes of the good on earth and of the God in heaven; when we take this position and take it firmly and ably, then and not until then shall we .triumph; then and not till then shall we see the beginning of the end.

Sir, i do not read papers very often; but I tell you that yesterday and to day I, for one individual, have fcft more confidence, more hope, more assurance that we were on the right way, that we were on the way to victory, to peace, to honor, to safety, and renown than 1 ever have since this rebellion commenced.

Mr. President, let me say one word more, and I shall not detain the Senate longer. When the Saviour of man with the sympathy and pathos with which He loved the chief city of His native land wept over Jerusalem His lamentation was, 14 If thou hadst known in this thy day the things that belong to thy peace l" Sir, that is what this nation ought to know: that is what the nation ought to understand. It is what I believe; and by a vigorous prosecution of this measure we shall evidence to heaven and earth that we do understand and mean to perform the things which belong to our nation s peace. When we have done that, and not till then, can we look forward with any confident hope to the termination of this Mr. McDOUGALL. Mr. President

Mr. HENDRICKS. If the Senator prefers to speak in the morning, as it is late now, I shall move an adjournment.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from California yield the floor to the Senaator from Indiana for the motion indicated?

Mr. McDOUGALL. I am willing to consult the pleasure of the body. It will suit me as well to go on m the morning as now. I have not much to say.

Mr. HENDRICKS. I move that the Senate do now adjourn.

The motion was not agreed to.

Mr. McDOUGALL. Mr. President, it is not my purpose to undertake an elaborate discussion of a subject that has been worn threadbare for twenty years, but rather to define my exact position m relation to the question presented to the Senate.

We have had now three years of war, terrible war; rnoie than one hundred thousand of our friends and brethren have gone down on the red battle field there are circumstances attending about this present question that should challenge grave consideration, and not permit of the loose jest; and it has seemed to me that the Senator from New Hampshire, in his jibing discourse, commencing with comedy and ending with tragedy, changing the uilc of the administration of the theater, has been playing fantastic tricks before high Heaven that should make angels weep. This question is nu question for loose debate, It is no question for je it It is a question for grave consid ratiou I am surprised that gentlemen get up loosejy in their p aoe in this Senate Hall and talk of settling this controversy by the passage of a series of resolutions, when we have against us in arms, in their own country, in their own fastnesses, behind their own defenses, an army equal to our own. They should know, if they remember history, how a few Indians in Florida resisted the American arms; and that a great power in the South is not a power to be trifled with, nor to be made the subject of common jest. These things are too grave for jesting, and demand the grave consideration that was supposed in ancient times and in the betterdays of our own Republic, to be the characteristic of Senators.

We have engaged in a war that now has employed our armies for three full campaigns. We have achieved as yet no great success. Richmond is not yet ours. Some question whether we command the current of the Mississippi. We have got a great war before us. I came into this Senate Chamber at the opening of the last Congress, willing to lend my aid in maintaining effective war, and I asked for a million men and full appropriations. That was not the opinion of the other side of this Chamber then; and consequently the war has lingered on, hundredsand thousands of millions have accumulated as the debt which we have to pay as well as its current interest. These are grave things, independent of the blood that has flowed from our kindred, and demand grave consideration.

I thought when I came here that the business of the Federal Congress, the business of the Executive of the Federal Union, the business of this Government, was by the exercise of its full power to put down the rebellion; but whathas been the fact? From the time I took my place here until this day, until these last ten minutes, hardly a quarter of an hour has passed that has not been occupied by discussing the status of negroes in the southern confederacy. Our home policy, our finances, our legitimate business, our foreign relations, have all been ignored.

I, as I said on rising, do not propose to discuss this question here: my argument ia an affirmation that we have no business with meddling with so grave a (Question of fundamental and elementary law while we have a war to maintain for the purpose of reestablishing the Republic. I have from the first protested against the continuous discussion of this question not belonging to armies, not belonging to forces, but belonging to a sentiment or opinion which could not be made use of for any legitimate purpose in the conti oversy before us. I have asked the Senators on both sides of the Chamber to assert the strength of the Republic and compel obedience to the Constitution and the laws, and so I shall say as long as I occupy my place in this Chamber; but I protest against occupying the time of the Senate of the Republic of North America entirely in discussing subjects that have nothing to do with the reestablishing of the Republic that has been disintegrated by hostile forces having no faith in the system as it exists.

I shall myself, and I would were I alone, vote against these amendments, not because I am not in favor of freedom, but because they have no proper office at this time in this body, and their tendency is to aggravate the war. I am confident that this provision being passed it will add twentyfive or fifty per cent, to the vital forces of the southern confederacy. We have been inviting those accumulated forces ever since the war commenced. I have opposed that policy. Isitpossiblc, with this measure passed, that the men of the South will not fight to extremity; and if they fight to extremity when will they be compelled to yield? It is said that Rome did not take the men of the north of Britain with all their defense** It is said that neither Edward I nor any of the! succeeding kings of England with three times the force over conquered the fastnesses of the north, it is history that England had to accept a Scottish king in order to secure peace between those two departments of a single island. Now it is a vain thought and a vain hope that by this system of subjugation, by this system of force, we can compel the men of the mountains of the Alleghanies as they extend south, through South Carolina and Georgia and through Alabama, and as; they radiate through the country, to yield to us. The men of the mountains will maintain the land against us. It is av in thought that the result at which we aim can le accomplished by this pressure of legislation. What strength is there in any Senator s arm? What can he compel and what is the force of your resolution? It achieves nothing that tends toward victory, it only arouses the fierce animosity of now a present violent foe. There is no peace in this. There is no triumph in this. There is no settlement in this. And as things tend now, we shall have to leave to our children, and perchance to our children s children, a legacy of war. I came here unwilling to leave the legacy of controversy to my children, and I have done my best to maintain a strict course of policy that peace might be established in the land and leave no legacy of that kind on my part.

I am compelled to say, Mr. President, that as the year has rolled round, I have seen but little to afford us hope. Only once did I read that melancholy poet who said:

Let the heavens be hung in black

And let the earth put mourning on."

And in my judgment it may well be said of uss

"Let the heavens be hung in black

And let the earth put mourning on,"

for in the history of no free people, since the time the Persians came down upon Athens, have I known as melancholy a period as this day and year of our Lord in our history; and if we can by the blessing of God and by His favor rise above it, it will be by His special providence and by no act of ours. I shall vote against the resolution.

The PRESIDING OFFICER, (Mr. Foot.) Is the Senate ready for the question on the amendment reported by the Committee on the Judiciary?

Mr. POWELL. I have an amendment to offer to the amendment, to come in as an independent proposition at the end of the proposed article: Art. 34. The President and Vice President shall hold their offices for the term of four years. The person who has filled the oflice of President shall not be reeligihle.

This is a proposition which I hope will meet with the approval of the Senate. It will be observed that it is independent of the amendment proposed by the committee. If it shall be approved by the Senate and by the House of Representatives, and ratified by the proper number of States, it will of course become a part of the Constitution; but it will notin any way interfere with the proposition of the committee. One may be ratified by the necessary number of States, one may be rejected, or both ."may be adopted. It is not necessary, and I shall not at any very great length, state to the Senate the reasons why this provision should be incorporated into the Constitution. I believe that no man has been in the presidential office for the last twenty years, who has sought a reelection, but has used, to a greater or less extent, the power and the influence of the office for the purpose of securing his reelection. A free nation mustprotect itself by the virtue and the force of its own laws, otherwise it will sooner or later perish. When we clothe a citizen of this Republic with the office of Chief Magistrate he should not be tempted to use the power of that office for the purpose of securing a reelection. Whenever he does so lie prostitutes the high office lie holds. The Chief Magistrate should devote his whole time to the duty of administering the laws of the country and to seeing that they are faithfully executed. He should not be diverted, by any hope of future position, from the single purpose of promoting the good of the country over which he presides.

I suppose every Senator in this Chamber must have witnessed at some period of his life the evils resulting from the executive office being used for the purpose of securing the reelection of its incumbent. Such efforts always result in evil, and tire never promotive of good. We find now on the lips of almost every person who is not in favor of the reelection of the present incumbent the assertion that he is using his office for the purpose of securing a reelection. It is said that he hawks offices about, and bestows patronage here and patronage there on unworthy and sometimes corrupt individuals in order to secure their aid to promote his desire for a renewal of his term of service. The same charge has been made against every man who has filled that office and who has sought a reelection, since I have had any knowledge of public affairs. I believe we can have no man in the presidential office who, if he desires a reelection, will not use the office to a greater or less extent to secure that result. Our fandamen tal law should be so formed as to prevent such a prostitution of power by forbidding it absolutely. The amendment that I propose cannot affect the one reported by the committee. It cannot affect the reelection of the present incumbent of the office, for we all know that before the amendment can be approved by the Senate and the House of Representatives, and be ratified by the States by the constitutional majority, the next presidential election will have transpired.

I am opposed to any amendment of theConstitution at this time; butif we are to enterupon that work, let us exhibit to the world that our ideas are not restricted to one. The speeches and arguments which have been made and the amendment which has been proposed by the Judiciary Committee, have reference to but one single object, and that is the subject of African slavery, although there are others admittedly demanding a corrective. Let us while we are engaged in this work do something that will be of permanent advantage, something that will secure, or tend to secure, at least an honest administration of our public affairs in the executive office. When we clothe a citizen with the functions of that office, let him understand distinctly that he has been highly exalted, that he has high duties to discharge, that virtue should distinguish the possession of power, that the administration of justice and of law involves the well being of the millions of his fellow citizens who have intrusted their dearest interests to his care, and hence that he is expected to concentrate every faculty of his mind, and the best sentiments and affections of his heart, on his great responsibilities; that if he barters office and prostitutes justice to gratify ambition he is edged about by the Constitution which forbids his reelection, and will overwhelm him with shame and disappointment; thatif he desires to transmit his name to posterity as a wise, virtuous, great, and good man, he can only do it by fidelity and patriotism.

One part of the platform announced a few days since by the Senator from Kansas, [Mr. Pomeroy,] I heartily approved, while others I thought were very bad indeed. He approved the one term principle. I never knew a state of political affairs in this country when the 44 outs" did not. The "ins," who want reelection, are only for it in theory.

The one term principle was a favorite one with General Jackson; and if I am not mistaken he recommended that the Constitution be so changed in one of his messages or inaugural addresses; but even that stern old Roman chief, a man of high, noble, Roman virtue, after his installation into that office not only received, but, it may be supposed, sought a reelection. I have no idea that the old hero of the Hermitage used that office in such a manner as to prevent his reflection; on the contrary, I suppose he used it to promote it. All have done so, all will do it; and as wise men, as patriotic men, as men devoted to the perpetuity of their country, if we commence amending the instrument we should correct some of the many evils that we know do flow from such an exercise of the executive office as promotes the reelection of the incumbent. Let the man that we hereafter put there know that there is no possible hope of a reelection, and that he must depend on an honest And faithful and patriotic discharge of the duties of his office for his reputation in all future time. Put this provision in the Constitution, and when a partisan President all of them are partisans to a greater or less extent clothed with the office he can afford to lay down the partisan robes and execute the office faithfully, justly, and honestly, and like a judge on the bench decide according to right and justice. He will know that he cannot, by catering to this or that wing or faction of party followers, ask or receive future promotion. Consequently, he will dismiss all such from him, and he will enter upon the discharge of the duties of the office with a single purpose to promote the public good. At least, I hope that will be the result.

Senators cannot say that it will interfere with the proposition before the Senate as reported by the Committee on the Judiciary. It is a separate, and distinct article; but if it be adopted by the -Senate we can remove all doubt about it by providing that the States may ratify one or all of the propositions presented by the constitutional majority, and ths portion ratified shall become part of the Constitution. But without that provision I hold thatif we were to pass one, two, three, four, or ten separate and distinct articles, the States could ratify one article without ratifying the rest.

Mr. FOSTER. If the honorable Senator from Kentucky will extend the period of service for. these several officers—President and Vice Pi esi dent—to six years, I will vote with him for the amendment.

Mr. POWELL. I have no objection to that. I first drew the amendment so as to fix the term at six years, but at the suggestion of a friend I. struck out" six" and put it at "four." I will accept the amendment of the Senator from Connecticut. If the Senate prefer "six," I have no objection.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator so modify his proposed amendment to the amendment?

Mr. POWELL. I do.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is the form of the amendment proposed to the amendment.

Mr. TRUMBULL. The proposition introduced by the Senator from Kentucky, I am satisfied, meets the approbation of many members of the Senate. I am inclined to think it would bean improvement of our present Constitution not to allow the Executive to be reelected. But we have now got before us one distinct proposition to so amend the Constitution as to prohibit slavery. That question has been discussed. This proposition now offered by the Senator from Kentucky is a new one. I do not know but that it would command a majority of the Senate or two thirds of the votes of the Senate; but there are differences of opinion in regard to it. It will open a new discussion. I think we had better not adopt it in connection with this great, grand idea of making thisRepubiiefreeand ourConstitutionaConstitution to protect free men alone. I want that proposition to go solitary and alone to the American people, and let them pass upon it.

I hope, therefore, that the Senator from Kentucky, if he thinks proper to offer this amendment, will, after we shall have disposed of the present question which has been discussed, offer it as a separate proposition. It may be done to-morrow or any day after we shall have voted upon this and it shall have passed out of the way, and I am not aware but that I shall vote with him. I think there is much force in the suggestions which he has made, but 1 do not like to have the proposition which we have been discussing for several days, and upon which the Senate is now about ready to act, mixed up with another one which will open a new discussion, and perhaps extend this debate for weeks.

For this reason alone I shall feel compelled, in the present condition of things, in the present condition of the debate, if the proposition is persisted in, to vote against it.

Mr. POWELL. Mr. President, the reasons suggested by the Senator from Illinois do not strike nie as being very sound. He desires this amendment presented as an independent, distinct proposition. It is so presented. It is a separate and distinct article in no way connected with the amendment proposed by the Judiciary Committee of which the honorable Senator is chairman. It is perfectly competent for the Senate to pass, by a two thirds vote? the proposition of the Senator from Illinois from the Judiciary Committee, and also by a two thirds vote to pass the amendment that I propose. It is then also equally competent, if these two amendments go out together and are submitted to the States, for three fourths of the States to adopt the amendment that I propose and to reject the one proposed by the Judiciary Committee, or to adopt both, or to adopt the one Proposed propose. by When the committee the Constitution and reject was the first one amended, I think there were ten amendments or more proposed, most of which were adopted, but some were rejected.

Mr. TRUMBULL. I am aware of that. That was not the point which I made. 1 am aware that where several articles are submitted to the States, the States may adopt one and decline to adopt another; but the point which I made, if there was any force in it, was this: that we had had one of these subjects under consideration for some time, that the Senate was about ready to come toavote upon it, and now that there is proposed another amendment of a different character, notgermarie fo theotte which has been under consideration, which will open a new discussion and prolong- the debate; and the other objection which I had wasthat I wanted this one great proposition of 'freedom to go out by itself is large enough to occupy the attention of the whole nation—without hmxingit up with the other propositionof making the President ineligible to a reelcc tion Mydesire is to keep this one thing before the public arid ntft mix it up with another at this time. I am aware that the States could adopt one and reject tlfe other. The Senator is quite right about that.

Mr. POWELL. The Senator admits all that I contended for upon that point; but we have new under consideration the question of amending the Constitution. I am opposed to the amendment proposed by the Judiciary Committee and shall not cast my vote for it. I do not think this il the proper time for us to enter upon the work of amending the Constitution; but as we have the question before us, as amendments are proposed, as Congress seems determined to submit amendments to the people for their rejection or ratifies tion, let us send out the amendment which I propose if Senators think it a good amendment. My opinion is that the amendment which I propose will be ratified by every State in the Union, if it shall be submitted to the States; but if it be unpopular, it will not in the least jeopardize the adoption of the amendment proposed by the Judiciary Committee, if the two Houses send them both out together.

Mr. HOWE. I wish to ask the Senator a question, the answer to which will guide my vote on his proposition. I am utterly opposed to maki ing the specific amendment to the Constitution which the Senator proposes; but I have not the slightest objection to submitting such an amendment to the people; and I am inclined to vote to do so unless there is some objection to it on this side of the House that I have not heard yet if in return the Senator from Kentucky and his friends in the two Houses will vote to submit to the people the proposition which we make. I suppose, however, that if the proposition which we have been debating should go to the people he would probably oppose its adoption by the people

Mr. DAVIS. Mr. President

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Wisconsin yield the floor?

Mr. DAVIS. I call the Senator to order, I do not think it is in order to make a proposition of bargain and sale between Senators.

Mr. HOWE. Things of no value, like Senators and Representatives, 1 suppose can be bargained and sold. I was simply saying to the Senator from Kentucky (Mr. Powell] that I supposed he would oppose the adoption of the amendment which we have been debating here for several days, as I should certainly vote against adopting the amendment proposed by him. But I have no objection to submitting his amendment to the people, and will vote to do so if the main proposition will thereby go to the people with more force. If we can in that way get his vote and the votes of his friends to submit the main proposition, I shall be very willing to do it, and I hope the Senator from Illinois who has charge of thi* measure will consent to it.

Mr. POWELL. I cannot accept the proposition of the honorable Senator from Wisconsin. I am no political trader; I never have trafficked in that way. Throughout my life I have acted politically independent, I have advocated or opposed measures as I thought they were meritorious, wise, and constitutional, or the opposite. I have never yet so tarnished my political reputation as to vote for or against a measure merely on partisan grounds. 1 stated distinctly to the honorable Senator that I was opposed to the amendment proposed by the Committee on the Judiciary. I shall vote against it here, and if I shall have any influence in other places I will exert it there against it. I have presented my proposition, and i hope it will prevail on its own merits. If the Senate do not think it a wise provision to putin the Constitution, if they do not think it will result in practical good, it is the duty of Senators to vote it down. If they think it is wise, and will promote the public interests, then, as honest men, and not as political traders, I demand their votes for it. It can in no way injure or mar the amendment proposed by the Judiciary Committee. I present it as an independent article, and for the very reason that I do not wish to have around, its neck .the millstone that I think the amendment of the •Judiciary Committee would prove to' be to it. s While 1 mast decline all political trading, I hope th u no Senator who believes the amendment I propose is wise and proper will vote against it because! decline to enter into a political traffic.

Mr. ANTHONY. I risetoaskaparliamentary question. I understand that the proposition of the Senator from Kentucky is offered by way of amendment to the amendment reported by the committee. Therefore, if his motion prevails, the question will then be upon the amendment as amended. Is itnot so, sir?

Mr. POWELL. It is presented as a separate And .distinct article, numbered differently.

Mt. ANTHONY. But it is an amendmentto the amendment of the committee.

Mr. POWELL. It is an amendment to the proposition, but not an amendment of the article proposed by 'he committee.

Mr. ANTHONY. The Senator from Kentucky cannot vote for his own amendment ultimately, as I understand, unless he votes for the proposition that comes from the Committee on the Judiciary, because his amendment, if adopted, is ingrafted on that. The Senator from Kentucky has several other amendments to propose, as I understand, and if we adopt them tile result may be that we shall have several constitutional amendments combined, each of which would command separately the vote of two thirds of the Senate, but the whole would be rejected.

Mr. POWELL. As I understand it, each article will be voted upon separately, as if it were a separate and distinct bill. The Senate certainly have the power to do that. I offer this as a separate and distinct proposition.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator offers it as an amendment to the pending amendment. On the question of order the Chair lias no doubt.

Mr. COLLAMER. But is it germane to the pending amendment? Is itnot independent matter.'

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Thatdoes not raise a question of order for the Chair to rule it out on the ground of a want of congruity. That only furnishes a reason to the Senate to vote against itfor want of congruity, hut does not raise a question of order for the Chair.

Mr. SHERMAN. The Senator from Kentucky says he offers it as an independent proposition. if ho, I submit that it should go through the regular foun, and receive its various distinct readings.

Mr. POWELL. I offer it as an independent article.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. It is offered as an amendment, by way of additional article, to a pending amendment. There is but one mode of treating it. I There is no difficulty about the question. There is one plain mode of treating it: it js an amendment to an amendment, mid must be bo treated; if adopted, the question will then recur on agreeing to the amendment hh amended.

Mr. HOWE. I understood the Senator from Kentucky to offer it as an amendment to the pending proposition, and I supposed he knew, Mtd I suppose still he knows what he meant by it. As I saw him apparently desirous of amending this proposition, I wanted to know what lie was disposed to do with it after he should have got it amended; whether he was disposed then to vote for the proposition as amended. It was therefor that[ put the in qtury I am answered Satisfactorily; I understand that he will not vote for the proposition. 1 cannot see the force of the reason which he assigns, which is that he is not a political trader. Really, I did not assume that the Senator was of that character when I put the question to him; I simply wanted to know whether when he got the pending proposition amended to suit him, he would then vote for the pioposition as amended, vote to submit these two constitutional amendments to the people of the United States. The Senator seems to think that is opening up a bargain. It may he so

Mr. SAULSBURY. Will the honorable Senator from Wisconsin allow mc to make a suggestion?

Mr. HOWE. Certainly.

Mr. SAULSBURY. I think these questions are divisible; and for one, while I will not vote to amend the Constitution according to the first amendment proposed, I will vote for the amendment proposed by my honorable friend from Kentucky, if I can vote upon it as a distinct proposition. I presume that when the vote is taken, it will be in order to call for a division of the question, and we may vote for the first proposition or against it, and then for oragainst the second. If that be true, I shall vote in favor of the last proposition and against the first.

Mr. HOWE. We can have that vote on this as an independent proposition to-morrow or the next day, whenever it shall be brought forward by itself.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. It is competent for the Senator from Kentucky, or any other Senator, to move it as an additional amendment; the proposition is separate and independent from the one contained in the pending amendment reported by the Judiciary Committee; butinasmuch as it is offered as an amendment to an amendment, it will, if adopted, combine both propositions in the question upon agreeing to the amendment as amended. It would come in more appropriately if offered asa separateamendmentaftertheSenate should have acted on the pending one reported by the committee.

Mr. HOWE. I am very anxious that the amendment which we have been considering shall be submitted to the people. If I can get any additional votes for submitting it to the people by voting to submit another proposition to them I will do it; but if I cannot, as I understand I cannot, of course I will not vote to submit to the people a proposition to amend the Constitution in a particular in which I do not wish to have it amended.

Mr. WADE. I wish to inquire whether this amendment will require a two thirds vote or a majority vote for its adoption?

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Asanamendment to an amendment, in the judgment of the Chair, a majority will carry it.

Mr. POWELL called for the yeas and nays, and they were ordered.

Mr. HENDRICKS. The Senator from Pennsylvania [Mr. Buckalf w desired me to say that lie was so sick as to be compelled to leave the Senate.

The question being taken by yeas and nays, resulted—yeas 12, nays 39; as follows:

YKAH—Messrs. Brown, Davis, Foster, Grimes, Hendricks, NoMnlth, romeroy, t owell Itiddle, Saulsbury, Wade, awl VVilkin«on—13.

NAYH—Messr*. Anthonv, Chandler, Clark, Collamer, Comicss, Cowan, Dixon, Doolittle, IV eutfon Foot, Hale, Harding', Harlan, Harris, Henderson, Howard. Howe, Johnson, Lane of Indiana, Lane ot Kansas McDougall, Morgan, MoihII, Kam ey Sherman, Spias ue Sumner, Ten Kyelc, Trumbull, Van Winkle, Willey, and Wilson— 32 So the amendment to the amendment was reJr The' PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair will have the 44th rule of the Senate read in reference to the vote required in order to carry an amendment, or any proposition short of the final question. It does not require a two thirds vote.

The Sccictary read the 44th rule, as follows: "4?. When an amendmentto be proposed to the Constitution is und«M consideration the concuircnceof two thirds ol tin- membei s present shall not be i requisite to decide any qne tiou lot amendment'!., or extending to the nicnts, being f-lioit of the final question."

Mr. POWKLL. I have another amendment to be added to the amendment of the committee as an additional at tide:

Art. M. The principal officer in each of the Executive Depart rn M ts ami all persons connected Willi the diplomatic service, may he removed from ofliec at the pleasure of the President, All other officers of the; Executive Departments may he removed at an) time by the Tie tdent or other appointing powt rwhen their services are mineer f ruy or tor dishonesty, incapacity, inefficiency, misconduct, or neglect of duty, and when so removed, the removal shall be reported to the Senate, together with (he reasons therefor. Since I have had any knowledge of public affairs here it has struck me that the manner in which the sub officials in the Executive Departments are removed with every incoming Administration is very detrimental to the public service. If this amendment shall be adopted, the President will have the power to remove without cause the heads of Departments and all the diplomatic corps; but no other civil officers can he removed except for cause; and then when the Senate shall meet, the power that removes must report the names of those removed and the causes for which they were removed.

We know what a most lamentable thing it is to see the emasculated forms of the office holders •here when an incoming Administration makes its appearance. They hardly have any politics; the poor creatures look as if there was very little manhood about them. To be sure, there are exceptions to that rule. We know since the time of General Jackson, whenever an Administration comes into power almost every Department is swept of the officers; faithful, honest, capable men arfcturned out to give place to political supporters of the successful party.

Mr. SAULSBURY. I know my honorable friend from Kentucky will pardon me for interposing a suggestion. The most distinguished, the ablest man my State overproduced, was John M. Clayton. He made a speech in this body against removals from office, and the gi avamen of his charge was that five hundred men, including postmasters -and all the subordinates, had been removed under General Jackson s administration. I therefore ask my friend to except from his general animadversion the administration of General Jackson, because according to the statement of Senator Clayton on this floor in the master speech of his life—the speech on Foot s resolution estimated those removals throughout the United States to amount to five hundred. Do not compare the present Administration to General Jackson s

Mr. POWELL. I am not comparing it with General Jackson s and God forbid that 1 should; I merely meant to indicate that about that period of our history this system of turning men out of office commenced, as I understand. The evil that I propose to correct is a great one, an alarming one, as every Senator here must know. What does the country want in the way of a public official? It wants a man who is honest, who is capable, who is vigilant in the discharge of the duties of his office. When you get that you have promoted the public service as much as you can do so through the agency of an official. But we do know—and I do not charge it al Fne upon the Republican Administration— that under Democratic Administrations and under Whig Administrations, in many instances, honest ami faithful men have been turned out merely because they differed from those then in power in politics; men who were honest, who were vigilant, and who were educated to the discharge of the functions of their office. I wish to prevent that. I know that the proposition that 1 propose, if it shall prevail, will not inure to the benefit oT my political friends, for the offices are now held by those opposed to me politically; but 1 never would propose an amendment to the Constitution to effect any party interest. If it shall be amended, the amendment will stand perhaps as long as the Government. But we know that the" spoils" system is a very great evil; we know that honest, faithful, capable, educated men in their business have been turned out of office, and men utterly untried and inefficient, and very often dishonest, put in their places.

The public interest does not demand that. The public interest demands the very contrary. All the country has a right to ask is that the public offices be filled by men of integrity, capacity, and industry, and when you get that you promote the public interest; and if you turn such men out to give place to politicians, cross roads politicians often, who have no capacity to discharge the functions of the office, you absolutely do great harm to the country. It should not be done. I hope the amendment I have offered will be passed. I ask for the yeas and nays.

The voas and nays were ordered.

Mr. TRUMBULL. I rise merely to say that I shall vote against this proposed amendment without particular regard to its merits, for the reason already indicated by me in stating why I voted against the other amendment.

Mr. WILLEY. I simply desire to say that in casting the vote which I shall give I wish to be understood as not condemning the principle incorporated in the proposed amendment. If it were a distinct proposition put in proper form, I should like to see it made a part of the Constitution; but I do not desire to embarrass this other greatand leading question by any such mattersatthistime. While I am up I will take the occasion to saythat In voting against the other proposition of the Senator from Kentucky, I did so not because I was not in favor of the one term principle, butbecause in that instance, as in this, I did not wish to embarrass the main question by any other matter. I am a little surprised, however, that a Senator who is so hostile to proposing amendments to the Constitution in this particular condition of the country, seems so anxious to introduce so many of them.

Mr. McDOUGALL. I cannot agree with the amendment proposed by the Senator from Kentucky, and my reason is this: we want an Executive, and he must have authority in his own department, or we shall have no Government. I would rather go, as the gentleman suggested by his previous amendment for extending the term and increasing the power of the Executive than diminishing ii at this day. The Executive ought to have authority over his sub executives it is u necessary authority; otherwise there is 110 Government.

Mr. POWELL. The honorable Senator from West Virginia thinks it strange that if 1 were opposed to bringing in propositions to amend the Constitution at this time 1 should offer so many amendments myself. I will state to the Senator that so far as the Senate is concerned I see it is determined to propose amendments to the Constitution, and while it is engaged in that work, I deem it a patriotic duty to offer any and every amendment that I think will promote the public interest; and it is for that reason that I have offered this amendment; it is perfectly satisfactory to myself.

The question being taken by yeas And nays, resulted—yeas 6, nays 38; ps follows:

yeas Me rt Davis, UcMidiick s Powell, Riddle, SauNbnrv, and Wade

NAY —jVIesMh Anthony, I5io vn Chandler, Olaik, Colin mer, Cowan, Conness, Dixon. Dool title. Fessendcn, Foot, Foster, (Jiimrs. Utile, Uiudinsj, Harlan, llains Henderson, Howard, JI owe', Johnson. Lane of Indiana, Lam; of Kan as lUcDongall, Morgan, Morrill, Nr taiih Pomeroy, Ramsey, Sherman, Sprague, Sumner, Ten Eyck, Trumbull, Van Winkle, Wilkinson, \Y Willey, and Wilson—38.

So the amendment to the amendment was rejected.

Mr. POWELL. I have made several efforts to get in some w se and salutary amendments, and I propose now to offer one other. I have no idea that i shall be able to get it through; but I will make the cfToit. 1 offer this to come in as a separate article at the end of the amendment of the committee:

Art. 14. Every law, or resolution having tin*, force of law, shall relate to but one subject, and that shall he expressed in the title*.

I think I have heard almost every Senator on this floor complain of a species of legislation that is very common here at the close of every session. For instance, or appropriation bills an amendment will be stuck in by one House or the other that is m no way germane to the subjectmatter; and by that means a great deal of legislation finds its way on- the statute book which would not otherwise ha e been passed by either House. The constitution of the State in which i live was once in that respect as the Constitution of the United States now is, and we encountered these difficulties as we do here. In 1849 we had a convention which made a new constitution, and put in it a provision similar to that which I now offer, and we all saw at once the wise woikingof it. I do not think there is a Senator in this Chamber who, if he were asked the question pi vat el y, would not say that bethinks such a provision as this would promote the purity of legislation. It would prevent a great deal of legislation which could not be passed on its own merits, but which yet finds its way upon the statute book

A few days ago I was told by a Senator that an amendment was put upon an appropriation bill some years since giving somebody a pension; and upon some money bills, and other bills of importance, may be found clauses giving land grants to railways. All these things should be forbidden by a wise people. Every proposition that is enacted into a law should go through upon its own merits, and not be carried because of the peculiar su noun ding cu eu distances in which, owing to the condition of the public service, a vital measure must be lost or extraneous matter carried through by it. To prevent this state of things hcieafter, 1 have seen fit to present this amendment; and I ask for the yeas and nays upon it.

The yeas and nays were ordered; and being taken, resulted—yeas 6, nays 37; as follows:

YEAS—Messrs. Cowan, Davis, Hendricks, Powell, Riddle, and i Saulsbury—

NAYS—Messrs. Anthony, Bi own, Chandler, Clark, Conness, Dixon, Doolittle, Fe senden Foot, Foster, Grimes, Hale, Harding, Harlan, Harris, Henderson, Howard, Howe, Johnson, Lane of Indiana, Lane of Kansas, McDougall, Moignn, Morrill, Ne«mith, Pomeroy, Ramsey, Sherman, Sprague, Sumner, Ten Eyck. Trumbull, Van Winkle, Wade, Wilkinson, Willey, and Wilson—37.

So the amendment to the amendment was rejected.

Mr. DAVIS. I offer as an amendment to the amendment an additional article, which I send to the Chair.

The Secretary read the words proposed to bo added, as follows:

The President and the Vice Pi evident of the United States shall be elected in the followingmanucr: each .State may, within thirty days next before the tune appointed for the election of President, in any mode adopted by the State, nominate to Congress one candidate; and on the first Monday of February nc t before the expiration of each presidential term, thc two Houses of Congress shall meet together as a convention, m the Hall of the House of Kepresentatives, and nil the candidates nominated by the States within the piceedmg Unity days, not exceeding one from each State, whose nomination shall have been authenticated to Congress, shall be before «.anl convention as. candidate? for the Presidency; and thereupon said convention shall proceed, under the Hipci vc ion ol the {'residing Other rs of the two Houses, to vote by open ballot nom among all said candidates for President, and when any one fhaU have received a number of votes equal to the number of member?, elected and appointed, ot both Houses of Congress, he shall bcdrclaied In the President of the Senate to be elected President of the United States. In all eases where the balloting shall have continued in this mode through fivrda s and no election shall have been effected, on the sixth d ij 11 shall be tCMimcd, and after each ballot the officers pi riding shall drop the candidate who has received the smallest number of \oic*, or two 01 more candidates who have received an equal number of votes, and less than all the oihei s and the balloting shall he ro eon turned among ill1* lennumrg candidate* until one shall receive the majority if\ af u and thereupon the Pj evident of the Senate shall announce him to hr elected ir ideiu of the United States, l he convention shall then proceed in the <amc manner from the remaining candidates to elect a Vice President of the Kmted States. Whenever it inaj occur in the voting for President or Vice President that all the candidate-, but two have been dropped, the balloting between them may if necessary to make an election, continue two d n s longer; and it then no candidate shall have received the required number of votes, the offlceis presiding over the convention shall report the str le of fact to the Supreme (Mint of the United States, and it shall thereupon pronounce which of the two candidates shall fill tne office. Ami noSonatoroi Representative u ho shall have voted foi the candidate that may be elected 1 ies ldent, or for the candidate for the Vice Presidency who may have been clot ted to that offu e. and upon whom the Pie jiJenr may have devolved, l ill be nominated 01 appointed to am office by the incumbent of the Pie idency for whom he may have voted.

Mr. DAVIS. My own reflection has convinced me that the two great infirmities of our system of Government ai c the power of icmovai, which has produced the spoils system, and the mode of electing the President and Vice President. It is the selection of our king, and it is regarded of such paramount importance that it absorbs-? every J other election, general and local, m the United I States. It in truth divides the whole community not only upon the subject of a presidential election or of politics ireneral and local, but it divides the entire community in all its interests, social, religious, political, and business. It absorbs the mind of the people of the nation, and it excites that mind to such an extent that the billows which it raises in one presidential contest are not allowed time to subside until they aic taken up in the enkuh)£ one.

I think if gentlemen would read the amendment carefully for themselves, it would commend itself |j to their own reason and judgment, those especially who have experience, as most of them have, in relation to presidential elections.

Anything that would prevent the wholecountry from taking up a presidential controversy, and continuing it until the election, and immediately after the PiesiJcrU clet elected has been installed into office, or within a very short time afterwards, precipitating the country into another canvass, in my judgment would he productive of an immense amount of good to the country, and to the proper wot king of the Govt rnm ni i will state that tins amendment would cut off entirely what ix called the presidential campaign, winch is emincntlyexciting. eminently corrupting; and mischievous in its results. Within a very short time before the presidential term begins, it permits every State that may choose to do so to present a candidate it does not compel any State to present a candidate; but enough States would be willing to present their candidates to have plenty in the field.-

The amendment prescribes that on a day in February the two Houses of Congress shall get together in convention, and that the two Houses in that convention shall proceed to make the selection in the mode provided in the amendment, which I will not attempt to explain. I feel assured at any rate that if this mode be adopted it will result in relieving the country entirely from the excitement and the corruptions of presidential canvasses; it will present the very best men of each State before the joint convention for the two offices of President and Vice President; each State will have the privilege of presenting but one name arid when the Piesidentshall have been selected, the Vice President will be selected from the residue of the persons named by the various States. Jt provides for a mode of election that would secure the ehoiceofboth officers within a few days, and in my judgment would secure the election of better men, and much better men, for both offices thanweaiom the habit of getting, because it would secure a choice from among the very best and most competent and most virtuous men among the whole people of the United States. The amendment to the amendment was rejected. The question recurred on the amendment reported by the Committee on the Judiciary, which was to strike outall of the original resolution after the resolving clause, and insert the following:

(Two thirds of both Ilou e concurring,) That the following article be piuposeti to the "Legislatures of the several States as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which, when ratified by three, lourthsof said JjCgwlatutes, shall be valid to all intents and purposes as apart of the said Constitution, namely:

Article Xlli.

Sro. 1. Neither fdaveiy nor involuntary servitude, except as punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been dnl\ convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to then jinn diction v2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate Jegi lation

The amendment was agreed to.

The joint resolution was reported to the Senate as amended.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on concurring in the amendment made as in Committee of the Whole.

Mr. SUMNER. 1 made no objection to the amendment in committee, but I wish to call the attention of the Senate to the language of the amendment before it is finally acted upon and gets beyond our reach.

The PUF SIDiiNTG OFFICER. It is properlyopen to amendment now, and will not be after it shall have been concurred in,

Mr. SUMNER. I «o understood, and reserved what I have to say to this moment. Of course, in placing a new text m the Constitution we cannot be too onieful, and especially when that text is of such transcendent importance. Now, if 1 can have the attention of the Senate

Several Senators. L n us adjourn.

Mr. WILSON. It is evident that we are not to have a vote on this question to night and t should like to make a 1 epoi t fiom a committee of conlV iene and to have it disposed of at once.

Mr. SUMNER. 1 give way.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. If there be no objection, the conference report will he received.