MISCELLANEOUS. The President on Colonization, in Au- | and hence you may come to the conclusion that you have gust, 1862. 1862, August 14-The President received a deputation of colored persons relative to emigration. The interview is thus reported: WASHINGTON, THURSDAY, August 14, 1862. This afternoon the President of the United States gave an audience to a committee of colored men at the White House. They were introduced by Rev. J. Mitchell, Commissioner of Emigration. E. M. Thomas, the chairman, remarked that they were there by invitation to hear what the Executive had to say to them. Having all been seated, the President, after a few preliminary observations, informed them that a sum of money had been appropriated by Congress, and placed at his disposition, for the purpose of aiding the colonization in some country of the people, or a portion of them, of African descent, thereby making it his duty, as it had for a long time been his inclination, to favor that cause; and why, he asked, should the people of your race be colonized, and where? Why should they leave this country? This is, perhaps, the first question for proper consideration. You and we are different races. We have between us a broader difference than exists between almost any other two races. Whether it is right or wrong I need not discuss; but this physical difference is a great disadvantage to us both, as I think. Your race suffer very greatly, many of them by living among us, while ours suffer from your presence. In a word we suffer on each side. If this is admitted, it affords a reason, at least, why we should be separated. You here are freemen, I suppose. A VOICE-Yes, sir. The PRESIDENT-Perhaps you have long been free, or all your lives. Your race are suffering, in my judgment, the greatest wrong inflicted on any people. But even when you cease to be slaves, you are yet far removed from being placed on an equality with the white race. You are cut off from many of the advantages which the other race enjoys. The aspiration of men is to enjoy equality with the best when free, but on this broad continent not a single man of your race is made the equal of a single man of ours. Go where you are treated the best, and the ban is still upon you. I do not propose to discuss this, but to present it as a fact, with which we have to deal. I cannot alter it if I would. It is a fact about which we all think and feel alike, I and you. We look to our condition. Owing to the existence of the two races on this continent, I need not recount to you the effects upon white men, growing out of the institution of slavery. I believe in its general evil effects on the white race. See our present condition-the country engaged in war! our white men cutting one another's throats -none knowing how far it will extend-and then consider what we know to be the truth. But for your race among us there could not be war, although many men engaged on either side do not care for you one way or the other. Nevertheless, I repeat, without the institution of slavery, and the colored race as a basis, the war could not have an existence. It is better for us both, therefore, to be separated. I know that there are free men among you who, even if they could better their condition, are not as much inclined to go out of the country as those who, being slaves, could obtain their freedom on this condition. I suppose one of the principal difficulties in the way of colonization is that the free colored man cannot see that his comfort would be advanced by it. You may believe that you can live in Washington, or elsewhere in the United States, the remainder of your life; perhaps more so than you can in any foreign country, nothing to do with the idea of going to a foreign country. This is (I speak in no unkind sense) an extremely selfish view of the case. But you ought to do something to help those who are not so fortunate as yourselves. There is an unwillingness on the part of our people, harsh as it may be, for you free colored people to remain with us. Now if you could give a start to the white people you would open a wide door for many to be made free. If we deal with those who are not free at the beginning, and whose intellects are clouded by slavery, we have very poor material to start with. If intelligent colored men, such as are before me, would move in this matter, much might be accomplished. It is exceedingly important that we have men at the beginning capable of thinking as white men, and not those who have been systematically oppressed. There is much to en courage you. For the sake of your race you should sacrifice something of your present comfort for the purpose of being as grand in that respect as the white people. It is a cheering thought throughout life, that something can be done to ameliorate the condition of those who have been subject to the hard usages of the world. It is difficult to make a man miserable while he feels he is worthy of himself and claims kindred to the great God who made him. In the American Revolutionary war sacrifices were made by meu engaged in it, but they were cheered by the future. General Washington himself endured greater physical hardships than if he had remained a British subject, yet he was a happy man, because he was engaged in benefiting his race, in doing something for the children of his neighbors, having none of his own. The colony of Liberia has been in existence a long time In a certain sense it is a success. The old President of Liberia, Roberts, has just been with me the first time I ever saw him. He says they have within the bounds of that colony between three and four hundred thousand people, or more than in some of our old States, such as Rhode Island or Delaware, or in some of our newer States, and less than in some of our larger ones. They are not all American colonists or their descendants. Something less than 12,000 have been sent thither from this country. Many of the original settlers have died, yet, like people elsewhere, their offspring outnumber those deceased. The question is, if the colored people are persuaded to go anywhere, why not there? One reason for unwillingness to do so is, that some of you would rather remain within reach of the coun try of your nativity. I do not know how much attachment you may have toward our race. It does not strike me that you have the greatest reason to love them. But still you are attached to them at all events. The place I am thinking about having for a colony is in Central America. It is nearer to us than Liberia-not much more than one fourth as far as Liberia, and within seven days' run by steamers. Unlike Liberia, it is a great line of travel-it is a highway. The country is a very excellent one for any people, and with great natural resources and advantages, and especially be cause of the similarity of climate with your native soil, thus being suited to your physical condition. The particu lar place I have in view is to be a great highway from the Atlantic or Caribbean Sea to the Pacific Ocean, and this particular place has all the advantages for a colony. On both sides there are harbors among the finest in the world. Again, there is evidence of very rich coal mines. A certain amount of coal is valuable in any country. Why I attach so much importance to coal is, it will afford an opportunity to the inhabitants for immediate employment till they get ready to settle permanently in their homes. If you take colonists where there is no good landing, there is a bad show; and so where there is nothing to cultivate, and of which to make a farm. But if something is started so that you can get your daily bread as soon as you reach there, it is a great advantage. Coal land is the best thing I know of with which to commence an enterprise. To return-you have been talked to upon this subject, and told that a speculation is intended by gentlemen who have an interest in the country, including the coal mines. We have been mistaken all our lives if we do not know whites, as well as blacks, look to their self-interest. Unless among those deficient of intellect, everybody you trade with makes something. You meet with these things here and everywhere. If such persons have what will be an advantage to them, the question is, whether it cannot be made of advantage to you? You are intelligent and know that success does not as much depend on external help as on self-reliance. Much, therefore, depends upon yourselves. As to the coal mines, I think I see the means available for your self-reliance. I shall, if I get a sufficient number of you engaged, have provision made that you shall not be wronged. If you will engage in the enterprise, I will spend some of the money intrusted to me. I am not sure you will succeed. The Government may lose the money, but we cannot succeed unless we try; but we think with care we can succeed. The polit ical affairs in Central America are not in quite as satisfactory condition as I wish. There are contending factions in that quarter; but it is true, all the factions are agreed alike on the subject of colonization, and want it, and are more generous than we are here. To your colored race they have no objection. Besides, I would endeavor to have you made equals, and have the best assurance that you should be the equals of the best. The practical thing I want to ascertain is, whether I can get a number of able-bodied men, with their wives and children, who are willing to go, when I present evidence of encouragement and protection. Could I get a hundred tolerably intelligent men, with their wives and children, and able to "cut their own fodder," so to speak? Can I have fifty? If I could find twenty-five able bodied men, with a mixture of women and children-good things in the family relation, I think-I could make a successful commencement. I want you to let me know whether this can be done or not. This is the practical part of my wish to see you. These are subjects of very great importance-worthy of a month's study, of a speech delivered in an hour. I ask you, then, to consider seriously, not pertaining to yourselves merely, nor for your race and ours for the present time, but as one of the things, if successfully managed, for the good of mankind-not confined to the present generation, but as "From age to age descends the lay To millions yet to be, Till far its echoes roll away Into eternity." The above is merely given as the substance of the President's remarks. The chairman of the delegation briefly replied, that "they would hold a consultation, and in a short time give an answer." The President said, "Take your full time-no hurry at all." The delegation then withdrew. It was proposed to settle these persons on a tract of country in New Grenada, but that Government objected, and no further attempt has been made in that direction. (For further particulars see page 212.) Incompatibility of Civil and Military The assigned him to the command of the Seventeenth Army Corps. IN SENATE. June 15-The Judiciary Committee reported this resolution: Resolved, That an ficer of the United States whose resignation has been duly accepted and taken effect, or who, having been elected a member of either House of Congress, qualifies and enters on the discharge of the duties of a member, is thereby, in either case, out of the office previously held, and cannot be restored to it without a new appointment, in the manner prescribed by the Constitution. June 30-This resolution passed withor division. IN HOUSE. June 13-The Committee on Elections mad report, and submitted these resolutions: Resolved, That ROBERT C. SCHENCK, having resigned the office of Major General of Volunteers which he then held on the 13th day of November, 1863, which resignation was accepted November 21, 1863, to take effect December 5, 1863, was not, by reason of having held such office, disquali fied from holding a seat as a Representative in the ThirtyEighth Congress, whose first session commenced on the 7th day of December, 1863. Resolved, That FRANCIS P. BLAIR, Jr., by continuing to hold the office of Major General of Volunteers to which he was appointed November 29, 1862, and to discharge the duties thereof till January 1, 1864, the date of his resignation, did thereby decline and disqualify himself to hold the office of Representative in the Thirty-Eighth Congress, the first session of which commenced on the first Monday in December, 1863. June 29-They were adopted without a division. Repeal of the Fishing Bounties. First Session, Thirty-Seventh Congress. Pending the consideration of a tax bill in the Senate, July 29, 1861, Mr. SAULSBURY moved to add this section: That from and after the 6th day of October, 1861, all acts and parts of acts granting allowances or bounties on the tonnage of vessels employed in the bank or other cod fisheries, De, and the same are hereby, repealed. Which was rejected-yeas 15, nays 19, as follows: YEAS-Messrs. Browning, Carlile, Chandler, Doolittle, Grimes, Harlan, Johnson of Missouri, Polk, Powell, Rice, Saulsbury, Sherman, Trumbull, Wilkinson, Willey-15. NAYS-Messrs. Anthony, Clark, Collamer, Dixon, Fessenden, Foot, Foster, Harris, King, Lane of Indiana, Lane of Kansas, McDougall, Morrill, Pomeroy, Simmons, Sumner, Ten Eyck, Wade, Wilson-19. Third Session, Thirty-Seventh Congress. IN SENATE. 1863, Feb. 2-Pending the legislative bill, Mr. POWELL offered this new section: That all laws or parts of laws allowing or giving bounties on the tonnage of vessels engaged in the cod or other bank fisheries, be, and the same are hereby, repealed. Which was rejected-yeas 8, nays 35, as follows: YEAS-Messrs. Carlile, Kennedy, Powell, Richardson, Sherman, Turpie, Wall, Wilson of Missouri-8. ROBERT C. SCHENCK and FRANCIS P. BLAIR, Jr., were elected in the fall of 1862 members of the Thirty-Eighth Congress, the first named then being a Major General. The latter was commissioned a Brigadier, and then a Major General, subsequently to the election. former resigned his commission November 13, 1863, to take his seat in Congress, the resignation to have effect December 5, 1863; the President accepted it November 21. The latter resigned January 1, 1864, which the President accepted January 12, giving it effect that day. He took the oath of office as Representative in Congress, January 12. April 23, he requested First Session, Thirty-Eighth Congress. to withdraw his resignation as Major General 1864, April 12-The Naval appropriation of volunteers; and, same day, the President bill being under consideration in the Senate, NAYS-Messrs. Anthony, Arnold, Chandler, Clark, Colla Mr. POWELL offered the following as a new section: That from and after the first day of July, 1864, all acts and parts of acts granting allowances or bounties on the tonnage of vessels engaged in the Bank or other cod fisheries be, and the same are hereby, repealed. Which was rejected-yeas 18, nays 20, as follows: YEAS-Messrs. Buckalew, Cowan, Davis, Harding, Harlan, Henderson, Hendricks, Lane of Indiana, Lane of KanBus, McDougall, Nesmith, Pomeroy, Powell, Saulsbury, Trumbull, Wilkinson, Willey, Wright-18. NAYS-Messrs. Anthony, Chandler, Conness, Doolittle, Fessenden, Foot, Foster, Grimes, Hale, Harris, Howe, Johnson, Morgan, Ramsey, Sherman, Sprague, Sumner, Ten Eyck, Wade, Wilson-20. May 31-Pending the Internal Revenue bill, Mr. POWELL offered the same section, which was rejected-yeas 11, nays 24, as follows: YEAS-Messrs. Buckalew, Conness, Davis, Grimes, Hendricks, Nesmith, Powell, Richardson, Saulsbury, Sherman, Trumbull-11. that he had neither voluntarily renounced his allegiance to ernment of the United States. Yeas 78, nays 47. The NAYS were: Messrs. William J. Allen, Ancona, Jacob B. Blair, George H. Browne, Calvert, Casey, Cobb, Corning, Coz, Dunlap, Eng lish, Grider, Haight, Harding, Holman, Johnson, Kerrigan, Knapp, Law, May, Menzies, Noble, Noell, Norton, Nugen Pendleton, John S. Phelps, Richardson, Roinnson, James S. Rollins, Segar, Shiel, Smith, John B. Sele, William G. NAYS-Messrs. Anthony, Chandler, Clark, Dixon, Doo-Stele, Stiles, Benjamin F. Thomas, Francis Thomas, Vallanlittle, Fessenden, Foot, Foster, Hale, Howard, Howe, John-digham, Vibbard, Voorhees, Wadsworth, Ward, Chilton A. son, Lane of Kansas, Morgan, Morrill, Pomeroy, Ramsey, White, Wickliffe, Woodruff, Wright—47. Sumner, Ten Eyck, Van Winkle, Wade, Wilkinson, Willey, Wilson-24. To prohibit Polygamy in Utah. Second Session, Thirty-Seventh Congress. IN HOUSE. 1862, April 28--The House passed, without a division, a bill to punish and prevent the practice of polygamy in the Territories of the United States and other places, and disapproving and annulling certain acts of the territorial legislature of Utah. (It is the identical bill passed at the first session of the Thirty-Sixth Congress, with the difference that this bill strikes out the exception of the District of Columbia from its provisions, which was contained in the other.) June 3-The bill, amended, passed the Senate-yeas 37, nays 2, (Messrs. Latham and McDougall.) June 23-The bill was amended and passed in the Senate-yeas 23,nays 5, (Messrs. Bayard, Carlile, Kennedy, Powell, Saulsbury.) June 24-The House non-concurred in the amendments of the Senate. A Committee of Conference arranged the differences, and their report, being the existing law, was adopted in the House without a division, and in the Senate-yeas 27, nays 8, (Messrs. Bayard, Carlile, Davis, Henderson, Nesmith, Powell, Saulsbury, Stark.) Bill to Punish Conspiracies. The bill to define and punish conspiracies provides that if two or more persons within any State or Territory of the United States shall conspire together to overthrow, or to put down, or to destroy by force, the Government of the United States, or to levy war against the United States, or to oppose by force the authority of the Government of the United States; or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States; or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States Declaring Certain Persons Ineligible against the will, or contrary to the authority of the United to Office. Second Session, Thirty-Seventh Congress. IN HOUSE. States; or by force, or intimidation, or threat, to prevent any person from accepting or holding any office, or trust, or place of confidence, under the United States: each and every person so offending shall be guilty of a high crime, and upon conviction in any district or circuit court of the United States having jurisdiction, or district or supreme 1861, December 23-Mr. MOORHEAD offered court of any Territory of the United States having jurisdic this resolution, which was adopted: Resolved, That the Judiciary Committee be instructed to Inquire into the expediency of reporting a bill providing that any person or persons engaged or implicated in the present rebellion against the Constitution of the United States be forever hereafter rendered ineligible to hold any office under the Constitution and laws of the United States, 1862, March 13—Mr. WILSON gave notice of a bill declaring certain persons ineligible to office. June 4-The House passed a bill declaring certain persons ineligible to office. It provides that any person elected or appointed to any office of honor or profit under the Government of the United Bates, either in the civil, military, or naval department, shall, before entering on the duties of such office, and before being entitled to any of the salary or other emoluments thereof, take and subscribe an oath that he had never voluntarily borne arms against the Government of the United States since he had been a citizen thereof; had voluntarily given no aid, countenance, counsel, or encouragement to persons engaged in armed hostility thereto; had never Bought or accepted or attempted to exercise the functions of any office whatever under any authority or pretended authority in hostility to the Government of the United States; tion, shall be punished by a fine not less than $500 and not more than $5,000, or by imprisonment, solitary or social, and with or without hard labor, as the court shall determ ine, for a period not less than six months nor greater than six years; or by both such fine and imprisonment. 1861, July 15-It passed the House-yeas 123, nays 7, (Messrs. Ashley, Burnett, Diven, Edgerton, Goodwin, Pomeroy, Wood.) July 26-The bill passed the Senate without a division. Same day-Mr. POWELL presented this protest against its passage: Protest of the minority of the Senate of the United States The government of the United States is a Government of specially delegated powers; and though treason is one of the highest crimes known to the law, it is a political offence. To guard against the abuses which in times of high ex citement had, in the history of England previous to the rev olution of 1688, too often sacrificed able, virtuous, and innocent men on charges of treason and kindred offences, unaccompanied by acts, the Constitution of the United States expressly defines the crime of treason in the following terms: ART. 3, SEC. 3. "Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort." It further provides that "no person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court." The intent to restrict Congress in the creation of crimes of the nature created by this bill seems obvious; for in treason all are principals, and in any conspiracy of the kind stated in the bill, an overt act in pursuance of it, proved by two witnesses, would be treason against the United States. Thus the creation of an offence, resting in intention alone, without overt act, would render nugatory the provision last quoted, and the door would be opened for those similar oppressions and cruelties which, under the excitement of political struggles, have so often disgraced the past history of the world. The undersigned can conceive no possible object in defining the crime of treason by our ancestors, and requiring proof by two witnesses to the same overt act to justify the conviction of the accused, unless it be to restrict the power of Congress in the creation of a political crime kindred to treason, and charged as resting in intent alone, which would, if accompanied by an overt act, be treason. It matters not that the punishment prescribed in the law is not death, but imprisonment; for the passage of the bill, though it might not affect the life of an innocent man, would give, from the uncertainty of the offence charged, and the proof requisite to sustain it, the utmost latitude to prosecutions founded on personal enmity and political animosity and the suspicions as to intention which they inevitably engender. JAMES A. BAYARD, L. W. POWELL, J. D. BRIGHT, W. SAULSBURY, JOHN C. BRECKINRIDGE, Letters of Marque. Second Session, Thirty-Seventh Congress. Be it enacted, &c., That in all domestic and foreign wars the President of the United States is authorized to issue to private armed vessels of the United States commissions, or letters of marque and general reprisal, in such form as he shall think proper, and under the seal of the United States, and make all needful rules and regulations for the government and conduct thereof, and for the adjudication and disposal of the prizes and salvages made by such vessels: Provided, That the authority conferred by this act shall cease and terminate at the end of three years from the passage of this act. IN SENATE. February 17, 1863-Mr. SUMNER offered the following amendment: That, to aid in putting down the present rebellion, the President of the United States is authorized to issue to private armed vessels of the United States, &c. Which was rejected-yeas 13, nays 22. The bill passed the Senate-yeas 27, nays 9, as follows: YEAS-Messrs. Anthony, Arnold, Chandler, Clark, Collamer, Cowan, Doolittle, Fessenden, Foot, Foster, Grimes, Harding, Harlan, Harris, Hicks, Howe, King, Lane of KanBas, Latham, McDougall, Morrill, Nesmith, Rice, Sherman, Turpie, Wade, Wilson of Massachusetts-27. NAYS-Messrs. Davis, Dixon, Henderson, Howard, Lane of Indiana, Pomeroy, Sumner, Trumbull,' Wilson of Mis souri-9. March 2-The bill passed the House without division. Enabling Act for Nebraska. 1864, March 17-The House considered the bill to enable the people of Nebraska to form a constitution and State government, when Mr. Cox moved to add a proviso: That the said Territory shall not be admitted as a State until Congress shall be satisfied, by a census taken under authority of law, that its population shall be equal to that required as a ratio for one member of Congress under the apportionment. Which was disagreed to-yeas 43, nays 72. The YEAS were: Messrs. James C Allen, Ancona, Augustus C. Baldwin, James S. Brown. Chanler, Cox. Dawson, Denison, Eldridge, Hall. Harding. Harrington, Herrick, Holman. Kalbfleisch, Kernin, Law, Long, Mallory. Marcy, McAllister Mc Dowell, Middleton, James R Morris, Noble, Odell. John O'Neill, Pendletom. Perry, Pruyn, Rogers, James S. Rollins, Ross, John B. Steele, William G. Steele, Stiles, Strouse, Sweat, Voorhees, Wadsworth, Webster, Wheeler, Yeaman-43. April 14-The Senate passed the bill without a division. State of West Virginia. Second Session, Thirty-Seventh Congress. IN SENATE. 1862, July 14-The bill providing for the admission of the State of West Virginia into the Union, passed-yeas 23, nays 17, as follows: YEAS-Messrs. Anthony, Clark, Collamer, Fessenden, Foot, Foster, Grimes, Hale, Harlan, Harris, Howe, Lane of Indiana, Lane of Kansas, Morrill, Pomeroy, Rice, Sherman, Simmons, Ten Eyck, Wade, Wilkinson, Willey, Wilson of Massachusetts-23. NAYS-Messrs. Bayard, Browning, Carlile, Chandler, Cowan, Davis, Howard, Kennedy, King, McDougall, Pow ell, Saulsbury, Stark, Sumner, Trumbull, Wilson of Missouri, Wright-17. During the pendency of this bill, July 14, 1862, Mr. SUMNER moved to strike from the first section of the second article the words: "the children of all slaves born within the limits of said State shall be free," and insert: Within the limits of the said State there shall be neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, otherwise than in punishment of crimes whereof the party shall be duly convicted. Which was rejected-yeas 11, nays 24, as follows: YEAS-Messrs. Chandler, Clark, Grimes, King, Lane of Kansas, Pomeroy, Sumner, Trumbull, Wilkinson, Wilmot, Wilson of Massachusetts-11. NAYS-Messrs. Anthony, Bayard, Browning, Carlile, Col lamer, Doolittle, Foot, Foster, Harris, Henderson, Howe, Kennedy, Lane of Indiana, Powell, Rice, Saulsbury, Sherman, Simmons, Stark, Ten Eyck, Wade, Willey, Wilson of Missouri, Wright-24. Mr. WILLEY proposed to strike out all after the word "That" in the first section, and insert: That the State of West Virginia be, and is hereby, declared to be one of the United States of America, and admitted into the Union on an equal footing with the original States in all respects whatever, and until the next general census shall be entitled to three members in the House of That this act shall not take effect until after the proclama Representatives of the United States: Provided always, tion of the President of the United States hereinafter provided for. SEC. 2. It being represented to Congress that since the convention of the 26th of November, 1861, that framed and proposed the constitution for the said State of West Vir ginia, the people thereof have expressed a wish to change the seventh section of the eleventh article of said constitution by striking out the same, and inserting the following in its place, namely, "The children of slaves born within the limits of this State after the 4th day of July, 1863, shall be free and no slave shall be permitted to come into the State for permanent residence therein: " Therefore, Be it further enacted, That whenever the people of West Virginia shali, through their said convention, and by a vote to be taken at an election to be held within the limits of the State at such time as the convention may provide, make and ratify the change aforesaid and properly certify the same under the hand of the president of the convention, it shall be lawful for the President of the United States to issue his proclamation stating the fact, and thereupon this act shall take effect and be in force from and after sixty days from the date of said proclamation. Mr. LANE, of Kansas, moved to amend the amendment by inserting after the word "there- | in" and before the word "Therefore" the words And that all slaves within the said State who shall at the time aforesaid be under the age of ten years shall be free when they arrive at the age of twenty-one years; and all slaves over ten and under twenty-one years shall be free when they arrive at the age of twenty-five years. Which was agreed to-yeas 25, nays 12, as follows: YEAS-Messrs. Anthony, Clark, Collamer, Doolittle, Foot, Foster, Grimes, Harlan, Harris, Howard, Howe, King, Lane of Indiana, Lane of Kansas, Morrill, Pomeroy, Sherman, Simmons, Sumner, Ten Eyck, Trumbull, Wade, Wilkinson, Wilmot, Wilson of Massachusetts-25. portance of the question itself, have caused me to delay the answer until now. Your letter states that "the schooner Elizabeth and Margaret, of New Brunswick, is detained by the revenue cutter Tiger, at South Amboy, New Jersey, because commanded by a 'colored man,' and so by a person not a citizen of the United States. As colored masters are numerous in our coasting trade, I submit, for your opinion, the question sug gested by Captain Martin, of the Tiger: Are colored men citizens of the United States, and therefore competent to command American vessels?" The question would have been more clearly stated if, incan colored men be citizens of the United States; for within stead of saying are colored men citizens, it had been said, our borders and upon our ships, both of war and commerce, there may be colored men, and white men, also, who are not citizens of the United States. In treating the subject, I shall endeavor to answer your question as if it imported NAYS-Messrs. Browning, Carlile, Davis, Henderson, Ken-only this: Is a man legally incapacitated to be a citizen of nedy, McDougall, Powell, Saulsbury, Stark, Willey, Wilson the United States by the sole fact that he is a colored, and of Missouri, Wright-12. to. The amendment as amended was then agreed A motion to postpone the bill to the first Monday of the next December was lost-yeas 17, nays 23. IN HOUSE. July 16-The bill was postponed until the second Tuesday of the next December-yeas 63, nays 33. Third Session, Thirty-Seventh Congress. 1862, Dec. 10-The House passed the bill*yeas 96, nays 57, as follows: not a white man? Who is a citizen? What constitutes a citizen of the United States? I have been often pained by the fruitless search in our law books and the records of our courts, for a clear and satisfactory definition of the phrase citizen of the Uni ted States. I find no such definition, no authoritative establishment of the meaning of the phrase, neither by a course of judicial decisions in our courts, nor by the con tinued and consentaneous action of the different branches of our political government. For aught I see to the contrary, the subject is now as little understood in its details and elements. and the question as open to argument and to speculative criticism, as it was at the beginning of the gov ernment. Eighty years of practical enjoyment of citizenship, under the Constitution, have not sufficed to teach us either the exact meaning of the word, or the constituent elements of the thing we prize so highly. In most instances, within my knowledge, in which the matter of citizenship has been discussed, the argument has YEAS-Messrs. Aldrich, Arnold, Babbitt, Baker, Baxter, not turned upon the existence and the intrinsic qualities of Beaman, Bingham, Jacob B. Blair, Samuel S. Blair, Blake, citizenship itself, but upon the claim of some right or privWilliam G. Brown, Buffinton, Burnham, Campbell, Casey, ilege as belonging to and inhering in the character of citiChamberlain, Clark, Clements, Colfax, Frederick A. Conk- zen. In this way we are easily led into errors both of fact ling, Covode, Cutler, Davis, Duell, Dunn, Edgerton, Ed- and principle. We see individuals, who are known to be wards, Eliot, Ely, Fenton, Samuel C. Fessenden, Thomas A. citizens, in the actual enjoyment of certain rights and D. Fessenden, Franchot, Frank, Goodwin, Gurley, Haight, privileges, and in the actual exercise of certain powers, soHale, Harrison, Hickman, Hooper, Horton, Hutchins, Ju- cial and political, and we, inconsiderately, and without any lian, Kelley, Francis W. Kellogg, William Kellogg, Killin-regard to legal and logical consequences, attribute to those ger, Lansing, Lehman, Loomis, Lovejoy, Low, McKnight, individuals, and to all of their class, the enjoyment of those McPherson, Maynard, Mitchell, Moorhead, Anson P. Mor-rights and privileges and the exercise of those powers as rill, Justin S. Morrill, Nixon, Noll, Olin, Patton, Timothy incidents to their citizenship, and belonging to them only G. Phelps, Pike, Pomeroy, Porter, Potter, John H. Rice, in their quality of citizens. Riddle, Edward H. Rollins, Sargent, Sedgwick, Shanks, Sheffield, Shellabarger, Sherman, Sloan, Spaulding, Stevens, Stratton, Trimble, Trowbridge, Van Horn, Van Valkenburgh, Van Wyck, Verree, Walker, Wall, Washburne, Whaley, Albert S. White, Wilson, Windom, Worcester-96. NAYS-Messrs. William J. Allen, Alley, Ancona, Ashley, Baily, Biddle, Cobb, Roscoe Conkling, Conway, Cox, Cravens, Crisfield, Crittenden, Delano, Delaplaine, Diven, Dunlap, English, Gooch, Granger, Grider, Hall, Harding, Holman, Johnsom, Kerrigan, Knapp, Law, Mallory, Menzies, Morris, Noble, Norton, Odell, Pendleton, Price, Alexander H. Rice, Richardson, Robinson, James S. Rollins, Segar, Shiel, Smith, John B. Steele, William G. Steele, Stiles, Benjamin F. Thomas, Francis Thomas, Train, Vallandigham, Voorhees, Wadsworth, Ward, Chilton A. White, Wickliffe, Wright, Yeaman-57. 1863, April 20-The President issued a proclamation announcing the compliance, by West Virginia, of the conditions of admission. Colored Men as Citizens. OPINION OF ATTORNEY GENERAL BATES. Hon. 8. P. CHASE, Secretary of the Treasury: colored men can be citizens of the United States. The ur It includes these counties: Hancock, Brooke, Ohio, Marshall, Wetzel, Marion, Monongalia, Preston, Taylor, Tyler, Pleasants, Ritchie, Doddridge, Harrison, Wood, Jackson, Wirt, Roane, Calhoun, Gilmer, Barbour, Tucker, Lewis, Braxton, Upshur, Randolph, Mason, Putnam, Kanawha, Clay, Nicholas, Cabell, Wayne, Boone, Logan, Wyoming, Mercer, McDowell, Webster, Pocahontas, Fayette, Raleigh, Greenbrier, Monroe, Pendleton, Hardy, Hampshire, and Morgan. In such cases it often happens that the rights enjoyed and the powers exercised have no relation whatever to the quality of citizen, and might be as perfectly enjoyed and exercised by known aliens. For instance, General Bernard, a distinguished soldier and devoted citizen of France, for a long time filled the office of general of engineers in the service of the United States, all the time avowing his French allegiance, and, in fact, closing his relations with the United States by resigning his commission and returning to the service of his own native country. This, and all such in stances, (and they are many,) go to prove that in this coun try the legal capacity to hold office is not confined to citizens, and therefore that the fact of holding any office for which citizenship is not specially prescribed by law as a qualification, is no proof that the incumbent is an American citizen. Again, with regard to the right of suffrage, that is, the right to choose officers of government, there is a very com mon error to the effect that the right to vote for public officers is one of the constituent elements of American citizenship, the leading faculty indeed of the citizen, the test at once of his legal right, and the sufficient proof of his membership of the body politic. No error can be greater than this, and few more injurious to the right understan ing of our constitutions and the actual working of our po litical governments. It is not only not true in law or in fact, in principle or in practice, but the reverse is conspicn ously true; for I make bold to affirm that, viewing the na tion as a whole, or viewing the States separately, there is no district in the nation in which a majority of the known and recognized citizens are not excluded by law from the right of suffrage. Besides those who are excluded specially on account of some personal defect, such as panpers, idiots, lunatics, and men convicted of infamous crimes, and, in some States, soldiers, all females and all minor males are also excluded. And these, in every community, make the majority; and yet, I think, no one will venture to deny that women and children, and lunatics, and even convict felons, may be citizens of the United States. Our code (unlike the codes of France, and perhaps some other nations) makes no provision for loss or legal depriva tion of citizenship. Once a citizen (whother natus or datus, |