The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1870-01-14

not necessary for any hi~n orrrosA uh.,ou..
Sncy would ~. 90 endorsed by the people Ths
:. of April last was to the effect that Il
virginia would provide in her State constitution
for giving colored men the right to hold Office
she would be admitted. She had fulfilled that
condition, and now 1t was proposed TO admit her.
with fundamental condition that she would
not change or alter her Constitution In those
particulars. Did not gentlemen on the
Republican side of the House see
position, that they were surrendering their fort
ress to the enemy, when they admitted that Vir-
ginia could change her organic law by disfran-
chising her colored citlzens2 He appealed
to his own side of the House to be
logical II not magnanimous, wise II
not conlding. Why should they insult and
harass and worry and destroy that unhappy
Commonwealth What has she done to deserve
such treatment? She was a State that had
given four Presidents to the republic; that had
entered with hesitation into the conspiracy to
destroy the Government, and whose people had
been punished as never people had been pun
ished for their folly and their. crimes. shorn
OF raiment, despairng, she stood at
the door of the Capitol meekly asking
not to shape the policy of the country not to fill
the capital with her sons and retainers but for
the right to rule herself and to shape her own
local laws: For himself he would not "laugh at
her calamity, nor mock when her fear cometh,"
Republican though he was She was n part of
ms country, and he would not insult her sor-
TOW Ou bu6 contrary, nc cOulQ 1ln0 no words
for her but those of welcome, and confidence
and cheer.
Mr.. Upson, member of the Reconstruction
Committee, stated that he had concurred In re-
portlls the bill from the committee and that he
would vote for its passage because he believed
that all its provisions were necessary, reason
able, and just
Mr. Hawley supported the BILL and would
even exact further conditions from Virginia if
his vote could secure them.
Mr.. Asper said he had been originally in favor
of admitting Virginia without conditions but
he was now induced to believe that the interests
and liberties of the whole people of that State
were not safe If she were admitted without con-
ditions. He would support this bill, and if the
conditions were struck out he would vote against
the admission of Virginia.
Mr. Ward, from the Reconstruction Commit
tee referred to the singular position in which
the bill was placed by the action of the gentle
man from Illinois (Sir. Farnsworth) who had
been deputed by the committee as its organ to.
present the bill to the House. He was surprised
to hear the opposition made by that gentleman
to the provisions imposing an oath upon the
State officers. The committee had reported the
bill in good faith with the understanding that
the gentleman from Illinois should defend it in the
House. If that gentleman could not consistently
do so, he should have passed it over to some
other gentleman on the committee-tor instance
to Mr.. Beaman-who would defend it and press
it to vote.
Mr.. Farnsworth said that he had pursued in
the House the course which he had intimated in
the committee he should take advocate the bill
with the exception of the provision in regard to
the oath. 1t seemed to him that the members
of the committee who had thus far addressed
the House, except Mr.. Upson, had not advo-
Gated the bill as much as he had. When the
gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Paine) was ad-
dressing the House, he (Mr. Farnsworth) had
been inquired of as to which side that gentle
| man was ON, and upon careful examination of
| his speech since, he was at loss to determine
| whether the speech was in favor of the bill or
| ooanst n