The daily Gate City. [volume] (Keokuk, Iowa) 1855-1916, 1866-01-25
BY TELEGRAPH.
@FOR AFTERNOON DISPATCHES Es
SEE SECOND PAGE.
MIDNIGHT REPORT.
WASHINGTON, Jan. "A.

WASHINGTON, Jan. "A.
HOUSE.
The House resumed the consideration O
the proposed amendments to the Constitution
Mr.. Lawrence, of Ohio, moved to recon
INIT the resolutions, with instructions to retor
that direct taxes shall be apportioned accord
ing to property, and representation fixed OF
the basis of adult male voters. who shall b,
citizens OF the United States. He advocated
his proposition in q speech.
Mr.. Lawrence explained his proposition
! The present mode ofapportioning direct ia xe,
and representation was unjust, and althohgl
the result OF compromise, it was wrong il
prlnciple, and unequal in its practical results
! by his amendment they would make the voter.
IN each State precisely equal. 1t was not bro
posed to withhold suffrage from any class o.
/ people. The amendment did not design &c
! interfere with the right of any State to sa,
/ who shall or who shall not be voters. He
wished one vote in South Carolina to count a,
one vote In Ohio, for the purpose of repre-
sentation. The original basis of representa-
tion ON three iifths of the slaves of the Sonth
having ceased, the mode itself should now
pass away. Place not tax on labor but on
property, which was the true basis of taxa.
ton.
Mr.. Shellaberger, of Ohio, opposed tn
resolution: because It contemplates, provides,
and in effect authorizes the States TO wholly
disiranchise an entire race ofpeople, and that
whether that race be white or black. Saxpn.
Celtic or Caucasian, and without regard "a
number or proportion, to the entire popu.
lation of the States.
Mr.. Banks said that the basis of renre Sen
tation having been in effect stricken out by
the anti-siavery Constitutional Amendment.
the question was whether the House should
re- establish it,
Mr.. Shellaberger further opposed the reso-
luton and advocated the amendment of Mr..
Lawrence.
Mr.. Elliot, of Mass. offered an amendment
to Mr.. Lawrence s instructions, viz:
That representatives and direct taxes shall
be apportioned among the several States.
which may be included within the Union. ae
cordlng to the representative number. count.
ing the whole number Of ofpersons in each State
excluding citizens not taxed and the elective
franchise shall not be denied or abridged in
any State on account of race or color He
SAID ne could not give 10 the resolution re-
ported from the Committee on Reconstruction
his support, because it asserted by implica.
ton that State had right to disfranchise a
large mass OF It's citizens. Another objection
to the resolution was that it enabled State.
by making the right to vote depend upon a
property qualification, to excludes large mass
OF both races, and State might lecislate in
such way as TO convert itself from a reuublic
to an oligarchy
Mr. Sehenek moved the following amends
ment to Mr.. Lawrences S Instructions
Representatives shall be apportioned among
the several States which NAV be included
within the Union according to the number of
male citizens over q years of age, having the
qualification for electors for the numerbus
branches OF the State legislature, the don-
gress at their lst session after the ratification
OF tins amendment by the required number of
State, shall provide by law for the actual
enumeration OF such voters. and such actual
enumeration shall be separately made in a
general census of the population of all the
the States within every subsequent term Of 10
years, In such manner as Congress NAV by
law direct. The number of REPRESENTATIVE
shall not exceed one for every 100 600 of the
population, but each State shall have at least
one representative.
Mr.. flke, OF Ne, opposed the resolution.
Mr. Nelly, of Penn, said that on the 10th
OF January he took occasion to point out "A
slight error in Constitutional law into which
the President seemed to have fallen. The
principle which he had asserted at that time
having been controverted by the gentleman
from Iowa, (kasson.) he fkelly) now bro.
ceeded to establish it. He read from the de-
bates on the adoption of the Constitution
Mr.. Madison saying the necessity of Gene.
raj Government supposes that The State Leg.
islatures will sometimes fail or refuse to con
suit the common interest at the expense of
their social convenience or preJudces Mr..
Nelly, continuing, said the view of the cues.
ton was TO decide that the Legislatures Of. tho
States ought not to have the uncomfortable
right of regulating the time, place and man
ner of holding elections. These were words
of great latitude. Should all voters for all
Representatives, or all in the district. vote
for member allotted to the strict. these
and many other points would depend on the
Legislature, and might materially affect the
appointments. Mr.. Kelly further quoted
from the debates on the adoption of the Con
stitution to sustain his views
Mr.. Bromwell, of Illinois, said that the res.
olution reported by the Committee allowed
its object to be defeated by leaving door
open to property or other qualification. so
that the man whom the amendment was de.
signed to protect may be disfranchised He
wanted to apportion the representation among
the different States III the same proportion Of
the inhabitants of each State, excluding In.
dians not taxed, as the number of male voters
qualified to vote for representatives of the
most numerous branch of the Legislature
will allow. He preferred that all the amend
ments should be reported, in order that thew
might all come up together for discussion.
Mr.. Cook, of llls, was satisfied that the
resolution reported from the Committee on
Reconstruction was the only one which should
be engrafted in the Constitution.
Mr.. Marshall, of Illinois, in the course of
a few remarks, said that he saw such indica-
tons after the election of Mr. Lincoln as to
satisfy his mind that the dominant power de.
sired civil war for the purpose of bringing on
a revolution In our system. If any amend
ments to the Constitution of the United
States were necessary, this was not the time
to make them.
Mr.. Schenck, of Ohio, adverted to the
views formerly expressed by him in relation
to slavery, and he thanked God that he, with
others, was now standing here in order to de-
termine which opinion should be made in the
midst of the ruin which the South, by their
efforts at secession, had produced He showed
the magnitude Of the evil of unequal repre-
sentation, and, in reply to Mr.. Marshall, said
1t the Republican party were revolutionary, il
was IN the dlctation OF freedom and equality,
and it did not become gentleman, i'm
properly calling himself Democrat, to object
TO this object. They had no sympathy with
those miserable wretches Of the South, who.
making themselves tyrants, deprived a large
portion of the people Of their rights. Now
that an opportunity Was offered to remedy the
evil, those who oppose could do so only on
the ground that it would solve the difficulty
and remove the negro from the arena of poll
ties, and SO their occupation would be gone.