into regiments or companies as 'United States Colored Volunteers.'

The general tone of the debates in Congress indicated a growing conviction on the part of the people of the whole country, without regard to party distinctions, that the destruction of slavery was inseparable from the victorious prosecution of the war. Men of all parties acquiesced in the position that the days of slavery were numbered--that the rebellion, organized for the purpose of strengthening it, had placed it at the mercy of the National force, and compelled the Government to assail its existence as the only means of subduing the rebellion and preserving the Union. The certainty that the prosecution of the war must result in the emancipation of the slaves, led to the proposal of measures suited to this emergency. On the 6th of February, a bill was reported in the House for the establishment of a Bureau of Freedmen's Affairs, which should determine all questions relating to persons of African descent, and make regulations for their employment and proper treatment on abandoned plantations; and, after a sharp and discursive debate, it was passed by a vote of sixty-nine to sixty-seven.

The bill, however, did not pass the Senate, and nothing final was done in this direction until the next session.

The most noticeable of the measures in reference to slavery which were before Congress at this session was the resolution to submit to the action of the several States an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, prohibiting the existence of slavery within the States and Territories of the Union forever.

The opposition which this proposition met was wonderfully little considering the radical nature of the change proposed, and showed that the experience of the last three years had left but little inclination in any quarter to prolong the existence of slavery, and that the political necessities which formerly gave it strength and protection had ceased to be felt. At the commencement of the session, resolutions were offered by several members in both Houses, aiming at its prohibition by such an amend

ment of the Constitution. This mode of accomplishing the object sought was held to be free from the objections to which every other was exposed, as it is unquestionably competent for the people to amend the Constitution, in accordance with the forms prescribed by its own provisions. One or two Southern Senators, Mr. Saulsbury, of Delaware, and Mr. Powell, of Kentucky, being prominent, urged that it was a palpable violation of State rights for the people thus to interfere with any thing which State laws declare to be property; but they were answered by Reverdy Johnson, of Maryland, who urged that when the Constitution was originally framed this prohibition of slavery might unquestionably have been embodied in it, and that it was competent for the people to do now whatever they might have done then.

A prominent feature of the debate on the resolution in the Senate was a strong speech in its favor by Senator Henderson, of Missouri, whose advocacy of the measure surprised even its friends, and was a striking proof of the progress of anti-slavery sentiment in the Border States. The resolution passed the Senate on the 8th of April, 1864, by the strong vote of thirty-eight to six. It then went to the House, where it was taken up on the 31st of May. Mr. Holman, of Indiana, objected to the second reading of it, and this brought the House at once to a vote on the rejection of the resolution, which was negatived by a vote of seventy-six to fifty-five. It was debated at a good deal of length, but without a tithe of the excitement which the mere mention of such a change would have aroused but a few years before. The vote on the passage of the resolution was taken on the 15th of June, and resulted in its rejection by a vote of ninety-four in its favor to sixty-five against it, twothirds being necessary. Mr. Ashley, of Ohio, changed his vote to the negative, for the purpose of moving a reconsideration; and the motion to reconsider having been made, the matter went over in this position to the next session.

A more successful effort was made to repeal the notorious Fugitive Slave Law. The bill for the repeal was introduced in the House, where it was passed on the 13th

of June, by a vote of eighty-two to fifty-eight. On the 15th it was received in the Senate, when, on motion of Mr. Sumner, it was referred to the Committee on Slavery and Freedmen, who immediately reported it favorably, without amendment; but a vote on it was not reached till the 23d, when it passed by a vote of twenty-seven to twelve.

The action of Congress during the session, relating to questions connected with taxation and the currency, does not call for detailed mention in this connection.

Some incidental matters which arose excited full as much controversy as more important matters of legislation. One heated controversy was had over a resolution introduced on Saturday, the 9th of April, by the Speaker, Mr. Colfax, for the expulsion from the House of Alexander Long, a member from Ohio, for language used by him in a speech before the House. Mr. Colfax's resolution was as follows:

Whereas, on the 8th day of April, 1864, when the House of Representatives was in Committee of the Whole on the State of the Union, Alexander Long, a Representative in Congress from the Second District of Ohio, declared himself in favor of recognizing the independent nationality of the so-called Confederacy, now in arms against the Union.

And whereas, the said so-called Confederacy, thus sought to be recognized and established on the ruins of a dissolved or destroyed Union, has, as its chief officers, civil and military, those who have added perjury to their treason, and who seek to obtain success for their parricidal efforts by the killing of the loyal soldiers of the nation who are seeking to save it from destruction.

And whereas, the oath required of all members, and taken by the said Alexander Long on the first day of the present Congress, declares that "I have voluntarily given no aid, countenance, counsel, or encouragement to persons engaged in armed hostility to the United States," thereby declaring that such conduct is regarded as inconsistent with membership in the Congress of the United States:

Therefore resolved, That Alexander Long, Representative from the Second District of Ohio, having, on the 8th day of April, 1864, declared himself in favor of recognizing the independence and nationality of the so-called Confederacy, now in arms against the Union, and thereby given aid, countenance, and encouragement to persons engaged in armed hostility to the United States, is hereby expelled.

The resolution was followed by a sharp debate, in the

course of which Mr. Benjamin G. Harris, of Maryland, during a furious speech against the resolution, used the following words :

"The South ask you to leave them in peace, but now you say you will bring them into subjection. That is not done yet, and God Almighty grant it never may be!"

These words added fuel to the fire which was already raging. On motion of Mr. Washburne, of Illinois, the language of Mr. Harris was taken down by the Clerk of the House. The resolution for the expulsion of Mr. Long was postponed till the following Monday, and a resolution was immediately introduced for the expulsion of Mr. Harris, which, under the operation of the previous question, was brought to an immediate vote. The vote resulted in yeas eighty-one, nays fifty-eight; and the resolution was lost, a two-thirds vote being requisite for the expulsion of a member. A resolution was then introduced that Mr. Harris, "having spoken words this day in debate manifestly tending and designed to encourage the existing rebellion and the public enemies of this nation, is declared to be an unworthy member of this House, and is hereby severely censured ;" and this resolution was adopted by a vote of ninety-two yeas to eighteen nays.

The resolution for the expulsion of Mr. Long was debated for four days, when the mover, being satisfied that a sufficient vote could not be obtained for the expulsion, adopted as his own a substitute of two resolutions, introduced by Mr. Broomall, of Pennsylvania. The first resolution, declaring Mr. Long an unworthy member of the House, was adopted by a vote of eighty yeas to seventy nays. The second, directing the Speaker to read the first resolution to Mr. Long during the session of the House, was also adopted.

Considerable time was also consumed, and a good deal of ill-feeling created, by a controversy between General F. P. Blair, Jr., of Missouri, whose seat in Congress was contested, and other members of the Missouri delegation. General Blair was accused by one of his col

leagues of very discreditable transactions in granting permits to trade within the limits of his department, from which he was, however, completely exonerated by the investigations of a committee of the House. After this

matter was closed, General Blair resigned his seat in the House and returned to his post in the army. The House, by resolution, called upon the President for information as to the circumstances of his restoration to command, and received on the 28th of April the following in reply:

To the House of Representatives:

In obedience to the resolution of your honorable body, a copy of which is herewith returned, I have the honor to make the following brief statement, which is believed to contain the information sought.

Prior to and at the meeting of the present Congress, Robert C. Schenck, of Ohio, and Frank P. Blair, Jr., of Missouri, meinbers elect thereto, by and with the consent of the Senate held commissions from the Executive as major-generals in the volunteer army. General Schenck tendered the resignation of his said commission, and took his seat in the House of Representatives, at the assembling thereof, upon the distinct verbal understanding with the Secretary of War and the Executive that he might at any time during the session, at his own pleasure, withdraw said resignation and return to the field.

General Blair was, by temporary agreement of General Sherman, in command of a corps through the battles in front of Chattanooga, and in marching to the relief of Knoxville, which occurred in the latter days of December last, and of course was not present at the assembling of Congress. When he subsequently arrived here, he sought and was allowed by the Secretary of War and the Executive the same conditions and promise as was allowed and made to General Schenck.

General Schenck has not applied to withdraw his resignation; but when General Grant was made Lieutenant-General, producing some changes of commanders, General Blair sought to be assigned to the command of a corps. This was made known to General Grant and General Sherman, and assented to by them, and the particular corps for him was designated. This was all arranged and understood, as now remembered, so much as a month ago; but the formal withdrawal of General Blair's resignation, and the reissuing of the order assigning him to the command of a corps, were not consummated at the War Department until last week, perhaps on the 23d of April instant. As a summary of the whole, it may be stated that General Blair holds no military commission or appointment other than as herein stated, and that it is believed he is now acting as major-general upon the assumed validity of the commission herein stated, and not otherwise.