Year: 1867

Iudt scCtiOH, lCaSiuS ~ nv paiG VI III


bill when very great objection wa


made to it by one or two members. Blu


after that was done the gentleman from


Illinois Mr. Baker] went on to make /


fierce onslaught upon the sixth section


of the bill, simply upon the ground tina


it proposed to pla,e these southern peo


pie in the position of foreigners, anc
requiring them to go through the proc


ess of naturalization before they coulC
again exercise the ri eht of citizenship


That was the ground the gentleman
took. Will he for moment deny that
we have the right to exclude traitors
and rebels from the exercise of the elec
tive franchise? And if we have the
power to keep them from the ballot box
may we not dictate the method by which
they may return to it ? Is there any
reason why we may not, if we see fit,
tell them that after five years, if they
go through the process Of naturalization
they may again vote? To my mind
there can be no possible objection to
that if We have the power to exclude
them from the ballot-box at all.


Sir, will vote for the bill as it is, if
need be. although l would like to see
it more thoroughly matured. l will
vote for some other bill, if [ have the
chance, which comes up more nearly to
what 1 desire. will vote for some
bill or other in order that there may be
one step taken in The process of recon
struction


The loyal people ef the South cry out
in ca; nest for US to do something for
their relief And they have cause to
do SO. The governments which have
been given to the rebellious States by
the President are all in the hands of
men who are full of cruelty. They love
cruelty, and indulge in it today as they
have been indulging in it for months.
And it is the voice of distress and suf-
fering that comes up here to US asking
for protection and relief; and it is the
duty of the Thirty-Ninth Congress to
do something in the process of recon-
struction. .


In regard to the amendment to the
Constitution proposed by Congress at
last session, l looked upon it simply as
barrier over which no State could
step after it should once have become a
part of the Constitution. No one de-
MED the power of Congress to prescribe
just such terms as are to be found in
that amendment; and the object of
proposing it for ratification was that
there might be imbedded in the Con-
stitution the principles therein contain
ed, so that no State legislation and no
legislation of Congress should be able
to override them 1t was not to decide
the question of our right to say to a
State, ''Thus far shalt thou go, and no
farther; )" that was uot it. But it was
to have imbedded in the Constitution
certain great principles which could not
be overridden by any State or by Con-
gress.


One Of the principles involved in
that amendment was equality of repre-
sentation. The southern people had
formerly held four million slaves, each
five of whom we're counted as three
white people iu their representation,
though the slaves had DO voice in the
choice of Representatives based upon
their numbers. When those four mil
lion slaves came to be emancipated then
representation became based upon the
whole number instead of upon three
ffths only as before. That provision of
the amendment to the Constitution was
for the purpose of preventing the Gov
ernment of the United States from be-
ing overslaughed by the representatives
of class who we're to have no voice
whatever ia the election of those Rep
resentatives.


Now, what demands have any one of
those ten States to make of this Gov
ernmeDt? What demand has even Ne
braska to make; and she can make as
many demands as North Carolina, South
Caro- ina or Georgia !? What demands
have either of them a right to make
upon the Government? They have no
legal State constitutions they are not
acknowledged by US as States they
have had no Representatives in this
Hall since the session of 1860 aud 1861;
they are not held by Congress to occu-
py the position of States. If one of
them desires to come into this Union
as State. is it not perfectly consistent
for this Congress to do with South Car
olina or Georgia what it has done in
regard to Nebraska and Colorado? We
have the right to say to them: the col
ored citizen born upon the soil must be
allowed the right of suffrage; that this
is one of the prerequisites to the admis-
sion of their Representatives upon this
floor. Is there anything inconsistent in
that? If SO, then We have already been
inconsistent in regard to Nebraska and
Colorado. Then, if am right in that,
the amendment to the Constitution pro-
posed to the States for ratification is
not the hnal measure of reconstruction.


And, sir, we should not wait the ac-
tion of the State Legislatures on the
amendment proposed to them before We
adopt legislation here to secure and pro-
tect, if possible, the loyal men in those
States and if there is to be reorgan-
ization, one to be acknowledged by
Congress, it should be reorganization
under the control of loyal men and none
others. ..-4o a.ta


Mr.. Speaker, the opposition of the
minority of this House has been consist
ent, steady and unceasing to every prop