The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1866-12-20


not t TO adopt his policy for the readmission
of the rebel States then II is perfectly obvious that
no Legislation can be got through Congress unless
we can carry il over his veto by a vote Of two
thirds of each of the two bodies.
Mr.. JOHNSON, of Maryland took the floor at
the conclusion OF MIR. Howard's speech in OPPOSE
! ton to the bill, and to Mr.. Browns amendment
There was great danger, he said, to be apprehended
from the admission Of too many new States. There
| was reason to fear: IL had been feared, when the
| Constitution was formed, that in this way the
| whole legislature Of the country would be inau-
! enced by those new States He argued against
| giving to Nebraska the same power in the Senate
over question of tariff that belonged to the east
| ern STATES. The question of reconstruction had
nothlng TO do with 1t. IL should be decided in its
merits, without reference to other political issues
| lie was opposed to the amendment of Mr.. Brown,
| because IL involved conditions that Congress had
Mr.. WILSON, of Massachusetts, moved to
| amend Mr.. Browns amendment by providing for
| the ratification OF the fundamental conditions of
no exclusion from political rights account of
color by the Legislature of Nebraska, instead of,
| as IN Mr.. Browns amendment, by the people of
| the territory.
Mr. Wilson explained his position in offering
| the above At the last session of Congress he was
| in favor of the admission of Colorado and was
| willing to see it done without any Conditions but
the necessity that controlled his vote in that ques-
| tion had passed away. The Senate was assured of
atwo-thirds Republican vote, and after the fourth
| OF March II would be still stronger. He hoped
| Mr.. Brown would accept his amendment, and
that Mr.. Wade would let the bill be amended and
| passed.
| Mr. DOOLITTLE, of Wisconsin, desired to in
| qnire OF Mr.. Wilson whether it his under
standing that the faith of Congress pledged,
| In case the constitutional amendment was adopted
by the States Of the south that they would be enti-
tled to representation. He understood the Senator
| from Ohio TO say that he (Alr. Wade) regarded
Congress pledged to admit the States on the rati-
hcauon Of the amendment.
| Mr. WADE said he was misunderstood on what
| ne bad said. He did not state intend to be
derstood, that when these States adopted the con-
! sututional amendment tney were entitled to come
in here at all hazards. The proposition to which
| he Mr.. Wade) adhered was that when the consti-
| tuuonal amendment was adopted by three. fourths
of the States, and adopted by the seeded States,
! their relations TO the general government
| such that II they applied for admission in a
| loyal form, all other things being equal, they
ought TO be admitted, il represented by loyal men.
Mr. WILSON, OF Massachusetts, denied Mr.
| Doolitte's right to ask the question propounded
| by Mr.. Doolittle He (Mr WILSON, had voted for
| the admission Of Tennessee because she had
| adopted the amendment, and might have felt
! bound to admit other States if they had come at
| that time in the same way. But since then the
| people had expressed themselves. There was no
law pedging Congress to admit the rebel States on
| the adoption of the amendment, and he did not
intend vote for the admission of the rebel States
now until they had secured fun civil and political
rights 10 cClored persons. He intended to go to the
u1thest limit Of constitutional power.
Nr. DOOLITTLE replied to Mr. Wilson, argu-
ing against the theory that the southern States
were States for the purpose of acting upon con-
situuonal amendment, but were not States for the
right of represen tation in Congress.
q Mr.. FESSENDEN, of Maine, said the men pre-
tehdlng to act upon constitutional amendments
were not the legislature, unless Congress saw fit
10 recognize them as such. This view was set forth
IN the report of the Reconstruction Committee.
For himself he did not know what he should do in
n specific case. His understanding was that he
had right to inquire whether the amendment
was adopted by loyal legislature which he was
bound to recognize. This was question he had n
rlght 10 examine, He was free to say if from the
government of State he saw 1t had a constitution
under which it would be safe to admit 1t, he would
be willing 10 admit it. with regard to the new for
nation of these States, he held that he had right
TO inquire what kind of constitution they had.
after these States had adopted the amendment,
whether they had government which gave them
the right to adoptit. He would not yield one iota
OF the guarantees insisted upon, and such further
guarantees as might be needed, He did not know
that any other would be necessary.
Mr.. DOOLlTILE resumed the toor contend
ing that the Committee on Reconstruction, by re-
porting a bill TO admit any of the rebel States that
might raufy the amendment, had committed itself
on this subject to the doctrine that the State go
ments of the south were valid.
Mr.. BROWN, at As, moved that the Senate ad-
Journ. Lost Yeas IA, nays 25
Mr.. DAVIS, of Kentucky, would like to know
of Mr. Fessenden whether, If the State of Tenpes-
see had not ratified the amendment, but had
adopted the constitution she now has he (Ir.
Fessenden) would have voted for the readmisslon
Mr. HENDRICKS of Indiana, addressed the
Senate in opposition to Mr.. Browns amendment.
Mr.. SUMNER again urged an adjournment,
Mr. HENDRICKS asked that there be an agree
ment 10 vote on the pending bill tomorrow at four
mr. WADE said he would be willing to agree to
that if it were certain that there would be quo
rum here 10 vote TO Omorrow.
The Senate then, at p NJ again refused to ad-
journ.
The question was then taken on the amendment
offered by Mr.. Cowan yesterday, that the people of
Nebraska shall owe paramount allegiance to the
United States, &c. Disagreed to.
The next question upon Mr.. Wilson's
amendment to MI. Browns amendment.
At 5 25 Mr.. HENDERSON moved to adjourn.
Mr.. WADE, OF Ohio, called for the yeas and
nays.
Disagreed to--yeas l5, nays 20.
Mr.. SUMNER, OF Massachusetts, moved that
the pending amendment be printed, for the use of
| the Senate. Disagreed to.
Mr.. SUMNER said there was time when Mr..
| Wade could see importance in a question invol-
wing human rights. Mr.. Wade was now trying to
! pass through the Senate a bill in direct violation
| of human rights.
At the conclusion of his remarks ne again moved
| an adjournment which was again deteated-yeas
| 10, nays 10.
MI WADE took the floor in reply to Mr. SUM-
ner,
| Mr. HENDRICKS moved TO postpone the tur-
ther consideration OF the bill until the 7tn of Janu
| airy next
hear Mr.. Sumner characterize the constitution of
Nebraska as odious without entering his protest
against it, The constitution of Nebraska was in
this respect precisely the same as the constitution
| of Iowa.
| Mr.. SUMNER asked if ne (Mr Kirkwood)
thought that that provision OF the constitution Of
Mr. KIRKWOOD-I'n say to the Senator that it
is none OF his business. 1t is the business of the
/ people CT Iowa
Mr. SUMNER resumed the floor. The constitu-
tion OF Iowa not before the Senate. If it was
he should express his opinion on it,
Mr. SUMNER at SIX o'clock, moved an adjourn
ment Yeas H. nays Is.
| Mr. POMEROY, of Kansas, took the floor in
opposition TO Mr.. Browns amendment
| Mr. EDMUNDS rose 10 address the Senate, but
yielded at siX.JWenty to motion to adjourn, which
| prevailed.
| House of Representatives.
On motion of Mr.. WENTWORTH, of Illinois,
the President was requested to furnish copies of
al papers in his possession touching the case OF