Pomeroy weekly telegraph. [volume] (Pomeroy, Meigs County, Ohio) 1860-1866, 1866-02-01
Mr.. stevena They arc tribal and have

| their own separate governments.
| Mr. Brooks Why not embrace them nil
while you are making liberal Constitution?
Mr. Stevens We have not done so be.
cause the gentleman and his friend would
make objections
Mr. Sloan, of Wis, asked Mr.. Stevens to
withdraw his demand for the previous ques-
ton, as he desired to offer an amendment.
Mr. Stevens cannot do it.
Mr. Baker, of ILL., submit whether it is
entirely proper to put through an amendment
to the Constitution, and refuse word Of de-
bate or ono moment to raise an objection
AS for myself protest against this course.
Mr. Stevens / have only suggested what
I have thought it our duty to do if the amend
ment is to pass the House have only sub
mitted thc.question to the House.
After some further talk Mr. Stevens with
drew his demand.
Mr. Blaine, of Maine, said, that having
originally proposed the constitutional amend
mcnt, he wished to say few words, and also
reaffirm his assertion, in regard to the effect Of
the suffrage basis as between New York and
Pennsylvania. He stated, on the authority of
the eminent Chairman of the Committee of
Wuys and Means (Nlr Morrill,, that it would
The tables submitted by the gentleman from
New York himself admitted net gain Of
four That was enough Another objection
to the suffrage basis would he found in the
fact that the moment representative s are ap-
| portioned among the States liz that way. they
will necessarily be distributed within the
States on the same basis. A strife Of locality
is Mt once started in MI the States where the
male population of one section might be
greater than that of another He spoke
further in support of the amendment and
against the basis of suffrage. The loyal States
should not quarrel among themselves. nor
should one seek to get an Unfair advantage Of
the other.
Mr. Donnclly, of Minnesota, spoke in favor
Of the resolution |! would do away with the
rotten borough system of tie country. 1t
would reduce the representation in Congress
to basis of perfect equality II men had no
voice in the Government other men should
not sit in Congress pretending to represent
them. An oppressed race should not he rep
lrcscnted-by their oppressors, for it WAS merely
to say that mans enemy should be his agent
and selected by his enemies, as would be the
case if the white men in the South represented
the blacks in Congress, without the blacks
were allowed to vote. 1t was claimed that
this measure would induce the South to let
the negroes vote He did not believe this -
The hope of future political power was a very
remote and vague feeling. Antira'hy to the
to have the two subjects of taxes and repre-
scntation disconnected. Direct taxes should
be according to the assessed property, apart
from representation.
Mr. LeBond, of Ohio, msved that the
House go into Committee of the Whole on the
State OF the Union, and that the debate there.
in be restricted to each speaker twenty min
utcs
! Mr. Stevens objected.
Mr. Lawrence, of Ohio moved the resou.
ton be recommitted. with instructions to
amend first, to apportion direct taxation
among the States according to property in
each and second, to apportion representation
among the States on the basis of adult male
voters, who may be citizens of the United
States
Mr.. Washburnc, of ILL.,, objected and the
House then adjourned
WAsulScroN, Jan a.
HOUSE
| The House resumed the consideration of
the joint resolution proposing an amendment
to the Constitution.
Mr. Lawrence, of Ohio, moved to recon-
init the resolution 70 the Committee on recon
struction. with instructions to offer IN amend
mcnt to the Constitution of the United States
which, shall, first aprorton direct taxes among
the States according to the property in each,
and which shall, second, apportion n repre-
scntaton among the States on the basis of
the number of the adult male members who
shall he citizens Of the United States.
Mr.. Lawrence explained his proposition
The present mode of apportioning direct tan
cs and representation was unjust, and although
the result of II compromise, it was wrong in
principle and unequal in its practical results.
BY his amendment they would make the vo,-
crs in each state precisely equal 1t was not
proposed to withhold suffrage from any class
of people. The amendment did not design to
Interfere with the right Of any State to say
who shall or shall n"i be voters He wished
one voter in South Carolina to count as one
voter in Ohio for the purpose of representa-
ton. The original basis of representation on
three flths of the slaves of the south having
ceased, the mode itself should now pass away.
Place not tax on labor, bur on property,
which was the true basis of taxation.
Amendments and speeches in opposition
were respectively offered to the resolution of
amendment by Messrs Shallabaser, Banks,
Elliott and Schenck
Mr. Schenk advcrted to the views formerly
expressed by him in relation to slavery, and
thanked God that he, with others, was now
standing h. re in order to determine what pro.
vision should be made in the midst of the ru
in which the South by their efforts at seccs.
sion had produced He showed the magni
tule of the evil of Unequal representation.
and in reply to Mr. Marshall said if the Re-
publican party were revolutionary, it was in
the direction OF freedom and equality, nnd it
did not become gentleman improperly call
ing himself Democrat to object to this
They had no sympathy with those miserable
wretches of the South, who, making themselves
tyrants, deprived large portion of the people
ot their rights, now that an opportunity was
offered to remedy the evil. Those who op-
Ipose could do so.
Mr.. Schenck then explained at langth the
amendment which he had submitted
The House then without question adjourned
SENATE.
Mr. Wilson, of Mass, offered joint resolu-
ton, proposing as an amendment to the Con-
stitution of the United States /, provision that