State of West Virginia more than a year before this act was passed.

The object of the resolution is to correct this unjust discrimination and official misconstruction of the law as it really did exist. Congress has just given its assent to the annexation of these two counties to West Virginia. Therefore I trust, not merely for the sake of allowing the loyal men in these two counties to have their claims adjusted, but for the sake of a sense of pride on the part of the State of West Virginia, these two counties may be placed on an equal footing with all the other counties in the State.

Mr. CLARK. I have always been in favor of paying the claims of loyal men in the country wherever found; but I hardly see the necessity of the haste which the Senator from West Virginia manifests by desiring to have this resolution considered at the present time. I do not make objection to its consideration, but I think it should go to some committee who should make an examination of it. If it is all right, there will undoubtedly be a favorable report; and it would be more satisfactory to the Senate to know precisely where we are going. I do not desire to have it go to the Committee on Claims, but I think it had better go to the Committee on the Judiciary who had this whole matter under consideration. I have no doubt they will report at an early day, and perhaps that will be more satisfactory to the Senate.

Mr. WILLEY. There being objection on the part of Senators, of course I do not feel like urging it.

Mr. CLARK. I do not make an objection to its present consideration. I only point out the course which I think the resolution had better take; and I move its reference to the Committee on the Judiciary, if the Senator from Illinois will withdraw his motion, because that committee had the whole matter under consideration and they can report at a very early day, should the other bill not pass, which I think will be satisfactory.

Mr. TRUMBULL. I am not particular about the committee it goes to; but I do not wish to be understood by the Senator from West Virginia as at all opposed to the object he has in view. I presume I am for it; I agreed to the bill which has already been reported from the Committee on the Judiciary. I withdraw the motion to refer the resolution to the Committee on Claims. It is immaterial to me to what committee it goes.

Mr. CLARK. I move that it be referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. So far as informed at the present time, I will say to the Senator from West Virginia that I think I am entirely in favor of it, but I desire simply to examine it and know where we are going.

The joint resolution was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.

HOUSE BILL REFERRED.

The joint resolution (H. R. No. 116) to prevent the introduction of the cholera into the ports of the United States, was read twice by its title, and referred to the Committee on Commerce.

NAVAL OFFICERS VISITING WASHINGTON. Mr. GUTHRIE submitted the following resolution; which was considered by unanimous consent, and agreed to:

Resolved, That the Secretary of the Navy be requested to communicate to the Senate copies of any orders of the Departments which deprive officers of the Navy who are not on duty of the privileges of citizens of the United States with respect to their privileges of passing from one State to another or to the eity of Washington; also, whether the Department has refused to permit officers to visit Washington for the purpose of personal appeal to the President of the United States or to Congress in their own cases, and if so by what authority this right is withdrawn from them as citizens of the United States.

CAPTURE OF JEFFERSON DAVIS.

Mr. HOWE. I offer the following resolution, and ask for its present consideration: Resolved, That the Secretary of War be requested to communicate to the Senate all evidence upon which the award of the commission appointed to

examine the different claims to the reward offered for the apprehension of Jefferson Davis was based, and especially copies of the reports of Lieutenant Colonel D. B. Pritchard, of the fourth Michigan cavalry, and of Lieutenant Colonel Henry Harnden, of the first Wisconsin cavalry, together with copies of the orders under which the above-named officers respectively acted.

Mr. COWAN. I should like to know if the purpose of the resolution is to assail the validity of the award.

Mr. HOWE. I want to get the evidence on which the award was made. I do not know whether I shall assail it or not until I see on what evidence it was made. I have some reasons to think, however, that the award is not justified by the evidence.

Mr. JOHNSON. Has the amount been distributed?

Mr. HOWE. No, sir, and cannot be, I take it, until there is an appropriation. Mr. JOHNSON. I thought there was an appropriation in advance.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Chair will ask whether the present consideration of the resolution is objected to.

Mr. CHANDLER. I presume the Senator can get the information he desires by applying to the Provost Marshal General or to the Secretary of War. I do not know that there is any particular national importance in the question whether the lieutenant colonel of a Wisconsin regiment or the lieutenant colonel of a Michigan regiment receives the money. It has been carefully adjudicated and decided. I understand that there is a little conflict of opinion between these two officers as to which is entitled to the reward. The fact is that the Michigan colonel caught him and has been decided to be entitled to the money. I do not care who sees the evidence, but I do not see what importance it is to this body.

Mr. COWAN. If this information was communicated, and it may be very voluminous, it will have to be printed; and if printed, for what purpose? There is no right of appeal that I know of to this body unless it should arise when a question of appropriation comes up. I should suppose that then it would more properly come up than now. I have no disposition to enter into the controversy which exists between Michigan and Wisconsin on this subject. I hope the services of both in this behalf will be paid. and well paid, but I do not want to throw good money away after bad.

Mr. HOWE. I do not understand exactly the philosophy which controls this discussion. This resolution simply proposes to ask the Secretary of War to communicate to the Senate of the United States the evidence upon which that award was made. I take it that evidence will not hurt the Senate, and it will not hurt the country. The Senator from Pennsylvania suggests that there can be no possible good derived from communicating here the evidence, because there can be no appeal taken from the award of these commissioners. I think the Senator is mistaken about it. An appeal can be taken. I do not think the award of these commissioners binds the Congress of the United States to appropriate a dollar unless the Congress of the United States are satisfied that the award is correct and ought to be paid. There was a bounty offered to those persons who should capture Jefferson Davis in his flight. It has been decided by the officers who were detailed to examine the question that certain individuals are entitled to the award. I do not know that the decision is not just. I have an impression that it is not just. I think the publie is in no sort of danger if the Senate is allowed an opportunity of looking at the evidence and determining for themselves whether it is correct or not.

I do not know that I shall dissent from the

award. I do not know that the fourth Michigan cavalry did not earn it. I am advised officially that the fourth Michigan cavalry did not get it; only a small portion of the regiment. If it was earned by that part, my impression is it was earned by more of the corps than are allowed to participate in the reward. I do not

undertake to say that the first Wisconsin cavalry is entitled to any portion of it. I have a decided impression that a portion of the first Wisconsin cavalry is. But let us see the evidence. My friend from Michigan does not object to that.

Mr. CHANDLER. Not at all.

Mr. HOWE. Then let us have it.

Mr. CHANDLER. It is very voluminous. I suppose it is a large volume, and it wil cost several thousand dollars to publish it. If the Senator will change his resolution, and ask that the evidence be furnished to him in manuscript for his examination, I shall certainly vote for it. I am in favor of his having it all. I am satisfied with the award.

Mr. HOWE. The evidence, I think, will compose about as small a volume as you are in the habit of seeing, and whether we shall print it when we get it or not will be a matter for the Senate to determine when they have seen it. I think the evidence will consist mainly of a brief report from Lieutenant Colonel Pritchard, commanding the fourth Michigan cavalry, and quite as brief a one from Lieutenant Colonel Harnden, commanding the first Wisconsin cavalry. That is about all the evidence, I guess, there is on the point. If there is more, I shall be glad to see it.

Mr. CONNESS. There is much more.
The resolution was agreed to.

PAY OF ARMY OFFICERS.

Mr. WILSON. I move to take up House joint resolution No. 101, for the relief of certain officers of the Army.

The motion was agreed to; and the joint resolution (H. R. No. 101) for the relief of certain officers of the Army, was considered as in Committee of the Whole.

In every case in which a commissioned officer actually entered on duty as such, and was entitled by law to be so mustered in, but by reason of being killed in battle, captured by the enemy, or other cause beyond his control, and without fault or neglect of his own, was not mustered according to the regulations within a period of not less than thirty days, the pay department is to allow to such officer full pay and emoluments from the date on which such officer actually entered on such duty, deducting from the amount paid in accordance with this resolution all pay actually received by him for such period.

Mr. RAMSEY. I propose to amend the resolution by striking out in the fourth and fifth lines the words "and was entitled by law to be mustered in as such ;" and by striking out in the eighth line the words "according to the regulations," and then after the word "days," in the ninth line, by inserting "from acceptance of any appointment or actual entry upon duty, and who was afterward regularly mustered into the service of the United States. This amendment has been brought to the attention of the Committee on Military Affairs, and I believe I may say that the chairman is satisfied with it and thinks it meets a case which ought to be provided for. The resolution, if amended as I propose, would read thus:

mustered into our Army. The purpose may be good enough, but the language is liable to this criticism.

Mr. WILSON. I prefer that the resolution be passed over, in order that we may look at the exact bearing of the amendment which has been adopted. I did not see all of the amendment before it was offered.

Mr. GRIMES. I suggest that it be printed. Mr. WILSON. I move that the further consideration of the resolution be postponed until to-morrow, and that it be printed as amended. The motion was agreed to.

PROTECTION TO UNITED STATES OFFICERS.

A message from the House of Representatives, by Mr. LLOYD, Chief Clerk, announced that the House had non-concurred in the amendments of the Senate to the bill (H. R. No. 238) to amend an act entitled "An act relating to habeas corpus and regulating judicial proceedings in certain cases," approved March 3, 1863, and requested a conference with the Senate on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses thereon, and had appointed Mr. JAMES F. WILSON of Iowa, Mr. SAMUEL MCKEE of Kentucky, and Mr. B. M. BoYER of Pennsylvania, managers of the conference on the part of the House of Representatives.

Mr. CLARK. I move that the Senate insist on its amendments to the bill just received from the House of Representatives and agree to the conference, and that the committee of conference on the part of the Senate be appointed by the Chair.

Mr. HENDRICKS. I wish to ask the Senator from New Hampshire if he is advised upon what amendments there is a disagree

ment.

Mr. CLARK. There was but one amendment that was of importance, and I suppose it must be upon that. That was in regard to the time at which the bill should cease to operate, with the amendment proposed to it by the Senator from Indiana. I suppose that is the amendment upon which the House must have disagreed with us, because the others were merely verbal. I will say to the Senator from Indiana that there is but one course to be taken, and that is to insist upon our amendments and agree to the conference, or else to recede from our amendments, and I do not suppose the Senator would be willing to recede.

Mr. HENDRICKS. No, sir; I think the Senate ought to insist; but then the chances are that when the committee of conference is appointed we shall not see the amendments again. I wanted to know what questions were to be submitted to the committee.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The question is on the motion of the Senator from New Hampshire.

The motion was agreed to. CONTRACTORS FOR VESSELS AND MACHINERY

Mr. NYE. I move to take up the bill for the relief of contractors for double-enders and iron-clads.

The motion was agreed to; and the Senate, as in Committee of the Whole, resumed the consideration of the bill (S. No. 220) for the relief of certain contractors for the construction of vessels-of-war and steam machinery, the pending question being on the motion of Mr. NYE to amend the amendment of Mr. GRIMES by striking out "twelve" and inserting "fifteen."

Mr. HENDRICKS. I had thought of submitting a very few remarks to the Senate with regard to this measure, but have concluded that it is better that we shall vote upon it, as the Senate very generally understand it. I suggest to the Senator from Nevada, in order that we may come to a vote upon it at once, that he withdraw his amendment to the amendment of the Senator from Iowa, and allow the Senate to vote upon that proposition.

Mr. NYE. I am ready to do so. I withdraw my amendment to the amendment. The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The amend ment to the amendment being withdrawn, the

question now is on the amendment of the Senator from Iowa, which will be read.

The Secretary read the amendment, which was to strike out all of the bill after the first clause, and in lieu of the words struck out to insert the following:

That the Secretary of the Treasury be directed to pay, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, to the several parties the awards made in their favor by the naval board organized under the resolution of the Senate, adopted March 9, 1865, the awards being made under date of December 23, 1865, and reported to the Secretary of the Navy: Provided, That the payment shall not in any case exceed twelve per cent. upon the contract price, except in the case of the Comanche, in which case the award shall be paid in full.

The amendment was agreed to.

Mr. SUMNER. I now offer this amendment to come in as a new section:

SEC.. And be it further enacted, That in the cases of Donald McKay, of Boston, Massachusetts, who built the Ashuelot and machinery, and Miles Greenwood, of Cincinnati, Ohio, who built the Tippecanoc, whose contracts have been completed to the satisfaction of the Department, and who were vented from appearing before the naval board, shall be entitled to the same rate of compensation as is authorized to be paid to other parties building the same class of vessels and machinery; and such payment to be made to them out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, under the supervision and direction of the Secretary of the Navy, provided the evidence submitted for his examination fully establishes the right of the said parties to compensation.

I believe there is no question on this amendment. I have conferred with Senators who are interested in this subject, and I believe I have their concurrence in moving the amendment. The Senator from Nevada who has the bill in charge is familiar with it, so is the Senator from lowa, and I understand that the

Navy Department also is familiar with it, and

that it has the cordial concurrence of that Department. I think there is no question in regard to it.

The amendment was agreed to. The bill was reported to the amended.

Senate as

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The tion is on concurring in the amendments made as in Committee of the Whole.

resolution of the Senate, passed without any notice whatever on the 9th of March, 1865, after the adjournment of Congress and dur ing the executive session. The report of that board shows that they took no evidence what ever in order to ascertain the truth of the matter now before this body, and appealing to our generosity rather than to our justice, because, if I understand the report of that board, it was their generosity that gave us such a report, and not their sense of justice. I have heard no answer to the point made by the Senator from New Hampshire the other day. What is the proposition now made? It is a change simply from the award of the commission to twelve per cent.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The morning hour having expired, it becomes the duty of the Chair to call up the unfinished business of yesterday, which is the bill making appropriations for the benefit of the Post Office Department.

Mr. NYE. I hope we may be allowed to get a vote on this question. I trust the Senator from Ohio will permit us to come to a vote upon it.

Mr. POMEROY. There is a special order for to-day, which I should like to have the Senate proceed with.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. There is a special order, but the unfinished business of yesterday takes precedence of the special order.

Mr. POMEROY. I know that the unfinished business takes precedence, but it is within the province of the Senate to proceed with the consideration of the special order if they so determine.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The unfinished business of yesterday is before the Senate, of course subject to the order of the Senate to be postponed or delayed at their pleasure.

Mr. HENDRICKS. I wish, almost as a personal favor, that this bill for the relief of these contractors could be disposed of this ques-morning, as I desire to leave the city in a day or two, to be gone for a few days, and I should like to have it disposed of before I leave. I feel some little responsibility about it, as it was referred to myself and other gentlemen as a sub-committee. I believe the friends of the bill do not propose to discuss it at any length.

Mr. HENDERSON. I now move to postpone the consideration of the bill and amendments until the first Monday of December next, and upon this motion I call for the yeas and nays.

The yeas and nays were ordered.

Mr. McDOUGALL. I desire to inquire of the Senator from Missouri the reason why he asks this postponement. I should like to hear the reason.

Mr. HENDERSON. This subject was thoroughly discussed a few days ago. I had not examined the subject as thoroughly as I might have done, but I thought the Senator from New Hampshire [Mr. CLARK] clearly disclosed to the Senate reasons suflicient to postpone the consideration of this bill, not only until the first Monday of December next, but forever. I do not pretend to say that there are not meritorious claims in this bill, individuals named who are entitled to something at the hands of Congress. I would be perfectly willing to grant something to some of these parties, but even in the original bill those parties are mixed up with others, as was clearly shown by the Senator from New Hampshire, who are not entitled to one cent and ought not to be paid one cent; at least if they ought to be, I have seen no reasons for it; no reasons have been given. Why, sir, if I am not mistaken, it has been shown clearly to the Senate that the only consideration for their claiming anything at the hands of Congress arises from their own willful neglect to perform the work within the time that they stipulated to do it in.

If we are inclined to do anything for these men, I think we ought to open the Court of Claims to them and prescribe some rules by which these parties can enforce this just claim which it is said they have against the Governinent. I am totally opposed to voting any thing to these contractors upon the report of this board-a board organized under a simple

Mr. WILSON. How long will it take? Mr. HENDRICKS. But a few minutes, I think. We do not wish to discuss it.

Mr. CLARK. I suggest to the Senator from Indiana that perhaps the bill had better go over until his return. I do not think it is likely to suffer from delay. I will say to him that I have never been so much embarrassed by any measure before the Senate since I have been a member of it, and that by reason of these cases being lumped together. I have no doubt there are some meritorious cases in the bill from the examination that I have been able to make, but they are loaded down by others that ought not to pass; and I think we should endeavor to see if we cannot contrive some way to relieve the Senate of this difficulty, so that we may have some discrimination in regard to these cases. I make this suggestion to the Senator in a friendly spirit, because I feel that some of these men should be relieved-I cannot say how many; but it seems to me to be the better way to legislate for individual cases, if we can contrive some way to do it. I have no personal wish about it. I make the suggestion to him as to the best course to be taken with it.

Mr. HENDRICKS. I know that is the feeling of the Senator from New Hampshire, but it is doubtful if we can really get to understand this case any more thoroughly than we now understand it, and if it is postponed until late in the session, the difficulty would be to secure a consideration of it in the House of Representatives. These parties are much pressed, and ought to have some relief; and as this is not quite half as much as the board allowed them, I thought it certainly would be adopted by the Senate. If we could agree upon any

plan safer to the Government and more just to the parties, I would be willing to do it. I have considered the subject in every light possible. I thought myself that the safer way was to adopt the report of the board, but as Senators for whose judgment I have a great deal of respect thought that was giving too much, and the chairman of the Committee on Naval Affairs proposes twelve per cent. on the contract prices, a reduction, I believe, of more than one half, I thought we might agree upon that.

Mr. CLARK. I will state to the Senator the difficulty which is likely to occur, and which will embarrass us, perhaps, to some extent. Here are some forty-two or forty-three of these claimants put into one bill. They do not include all this class of cases; and we are continually in the receipt of letters from other parties, who say, "We do not claim anything upon our contracts; we took a contract, we have fulfilled it, and though we have lost by it, we are bound by it; we do not ask anything; but if these parties are to be relieved by a general bill, we ought to be relieved also." How can the Senate resist such an application?

Mr. HENDRICKS. So far as my knowledge goes on that subject, I think this bill, with the amendment proposed by the Senator from Massachusetts, really covers about all the cases that have any equity. There is one case, I will state to the Senator, which is not here, but which I think will address itself forcibly to the Senate, and that is the case of Mr. Webb, who constructed the Dunderberg, a grand vessel, perhaps the greatest vessel-of-war in the world. I shall be in favor, so far as I know anything about his case, of giving him some relief. I think he has produced the greatest vessel, perhaps, in the world; but he could not present his case to the board, and he will have to appeal upon the merits of his separate case. I do not know of any other than that one.

Mr. POMEROY. I move that the Senate postpone the consideration of the present and all other orders, and proceed to the consideration of the special order, which is the bill for the admission of Colorado into the Union.

Mr. NYE. I hope the Senator from Kansas will withdraw that motion long enough to enable us to get a vote on this bill.

Mr. POMEROY. If the Senate is ready to vote on this question I am willing to allow the special order to be laid aside temporarily for that purpose; but if we are to have no vote upon it I think we had better proceed to the consideration of the specal order.

Mr. CLARK. It is pretty evident, if the Senator will allow me, that we cannot come to a vote at once. There is pending the motion of the Senator from Missouri to postpone the bill until the first Monday of December next, and, then, if that is defeated, and the bill is to pass, I desire to propose an amendment to it before it does pass, and that will necessarily take some little time.

Mr. POMEROY. It could not be passed to-day, probably.

Mr. CLARK. I do not know, but I think we had better go on with the subject that is regularly before the Senate.

Mr. HENDRICKS. If that is the view of the Senator, I will move that this bill be made the order of the day for to-morrow at half past

twelve o'clock.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The motion now before the Senate is to postpone the present and all prior orders and proceed to the consideration of the bill for the admission of Colorado into the Union.

Mr. HENDRICKS. I move that this subject be made the special order for to-morrow at half past twelve o'clock.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. There is another motion before the Senate. Mr. NYE. I hope the Senator from Kansas will withdraw his motion long enough to allow the motion to be put on postponing this subject

until to-morrow.

Mr. CONNESS. I hope it will not be made a special order in the morning hour. Mr. POMEROY. I have no objection to

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The motion before the Senate is to postpone the present and all prior orders and proceed to the consideration of the special order, and that motion must be put unless it be withdrawn.

Mr. POMEROY. I will withdraw that in order to allow the motion of the Senator from Indiana to be made.

Mr. HENDRICKS. Then I move that this subject be made the special order for to-morrow at half past twelve o'clock.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The question really before the Senate is the bill making appropriations for the Post Office Department, but that bill will be considered as laid aside, if there be no objection, in order to entertain the motion of the Senator from Indiana, which is, that the bill recently before the Senate for the relief of certain naval contractors be postponed to and made the special order for tomorrow at half past twelve o'clock.

Mr. CONNESS. I hope it will not be intruded into the morning hour.

Several SENATORS. Say one o'clock. Mr. HENDRICKS. Very well; I will say one o'clock.

The motion was agreed to.

ADMISSION OF COLORADO.

Mr. POMEROY. I now renew the motion to postpone all prior orders and proceed to the consideration of the bill for the admission of Colorado.

Mr. SHERMAN. As the Post Office appropriation bill is the unfinished business, and I hope will take but little time, I think we may as well proceed with it. There will be time enough to pass both bills to-day. I hope, therefore, that the Post Office bill may be proceeded with for awhile, and if we find that it is going to take up much time we can then postpone it. It is now in order and is before us.

Mr. TRUMBULL. I should like to inquire if the Colorado bill was not the order of the day at one o'clock.

The PRESIDENT protempore. It was made the special order for to-day at one o'clock, by a vote of the Senate, but the unfinished business of yesterday, by the rule of the Senate, takes precedence of the special order, and the unfinished business is the Post Office appropriation bill.

Mr. McDOUGALL. It is my opinion that the ruling of the Chair in this particular case is not according to the law, and I will state my reason as a point of order. The special order supersedes the order of business, and if the Chair determine upon reflection to rule otherwise I shall be compelled to take an appeal; || because these are laws that should be understood, and have to be studied to be learned. A special order overcomes the regular order of business, both in the House of Representatives and in this body, as I have understood it. I think if the President of the Senate will consider for a moment he will agree with me that a special order made by the Senate, for action upon a particular subject at a given hour, governs the regular order of business. In rising to question the judgment of the President I do not propose to reason; I rather rose to suggest that Senators may consider the subject, for it is a matter which, as a precedent, may be of great importance. When the Senate make a special order it is to be relied upon as the voice. of the Senate, giving the right to the subjectmatter at the hour appointed, independent of the ordinary course of business. So it has been understood always, as far as my knowledge ruus, in regard to parliamentary law. I do not

profess to be very highly versed in these things, but it seems to me that logically it must be true; and I think if the President will consider carefully he will agree with me. If the President insists upon the ruling which he has made I shall be compelled to take an appeal from the decision, for the purpose of ascertaining what is the law of the Senate.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Chair will call for the reading of the fifteenth rule of the Senate.

The Secretary read it, as follows:

"15. The unfinished business in which the Senate was engaged at the last preceding adjournment shall have the preference in the special orders of the day."

Mr. SHERMAN. There is no doubt at all about the rule. It is not only clear by the rule, but it has been the daily practice of the Senate ever since I have been a member of the body; probably fifty times in the session the unfinished business takes precedence of all other special orders. But I rose to say that I find it is the desire of the Senate, as this day was set apart for the consideration of the Colorado bill, to proceed with it, and I therefore have no objection to postponing the Post Office appropriation bill. I give notice that I shall call it up at an early day, in order to get it passed.

Mr. McDOUGALL. "When ignorance is bliss, it is folly to be wise." My wisdom I withdraw.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The question is on postponing the present and all prior orders to proceed to the consideration of the Colorado bill.

The motion was agreed to; and the Senate proceeded to consider the motion submitted by Mr. WILSON to reconsider the vote by which the Senate rejected the bili (S. No. 74) for the admission of the State of Colorado into the Union, upon which the yeas and nays had

been ordered.

Mr. SUMNER. Mr. President, on the 13th of March last, after a debate of two days, the Senate rejected a bill for the admission of Colorado as a State into the Union. This was by a vote of 21 nays to 14 yeas, being a majority of 7. And now, after an interval of more than a month, a motion is made to reconsider that vote. An attempt is made to revive a question which at that time seemed to have been buried. Of course those who press this motion have a right to do so, if they are satisfied in their minds that the motion ought to be pressed. I do not complain of them. But I meet the proposition on the threshold. I do not content myself by waiting to another stage and entering into the discussion after we have allowed the reconsideration. I oppose the reconsideration. I insist that this subject, once closed by such a majority, and on such good grounds, as I shall proceed to show, shall not again be opened in this Chamber.

Sir, the proposition concerns the admission of a State into this Union. I need not remind you that in other days no such proposition could be made in this Chamber without exciting great interest. Some of the most remarkable debates that have occurred in the Senate have been on such propositions. The proposition has two aspects: first, as it concerns the people in the Territory itself, who, I submit, are not prepared to assume the responsibilities of a State government; and secondly, as it concerns the other States in the Union, who, I submit also, ought not to be obliged at this moment to receive this community into full equality as a State.

On another occasion I felt it my duty to remind you of the position, the responsibilities, the powers, and the prerogatives of a State in this Union. I held up before you what you would undertake to convey to this small community if you invested it with the character of a State. I showed you that you would impart to it a full equality in this Chamber with the largest States in the Union; with New York, with Pennsylvania, with Ohio, with Massachusetts; and that in the exercise of this equality the Senators from this small community on all

questions of legislation, of diplomacy, and of appointments, might counterbalance the Senators of these large States. Assuming that this small community was already a State in the Union, I had no criticism to make on that equality of power; but I did present it to you as an unanswerable argument why you should not admit a community so small in the proper attributes of a State to the enjoyment of that high equality.

Permit me to say, sir, that you cannot adequately consider this question without giving your attention for one moment to the condition of the country at the moment when the question arises. We are happily at the close of a long, a bloody, and a most expensive war. Throughout that war, there was one question that entered into it, predominating over all others. It was the question of justice to the colored race. And now, sir, that the war is closed, that our soldiers are no longer in the tented field, that same question enters into your debates, and challenges your decision. You have before you at every stage of your legislation the question of justice to the colored race, And now, with this question staring you in the face, what do we see at this moment? A small community in a distant part of the country, small in population, even according to the statements of its friends not amounting in numbers to more than twenty-five or thirty thousand people; according to the statements of others, even as few in numbers as ten or fifteen thousand people; with agricultural resources that already begin to fail; with mining resources that during the last two or three years have been constantly failing; with accounts at the Post Office which during the past year have been failing; we have this small community coming forward and asking admission to equality as a State in the Union with a constitution that tramples on human rights. This new candidate, pressing for recognition, holds up a constitution which excludes all persons from the electoral franchise who are not white. It presents to you a constitution with a discrimination of the word "white;" and the question that you now have before you is, whether this small community, so slender in every respect, of such inferior condition, and coming forward with a principle of human inequality in its constitution, shall be admitted by you to the equality of States in this Union. You are not obliged to admit it. Your discretion is ample. The language of the Constitution is plain. "New States may be admitted into the Union," not must be, but "may be." You may exercise your discretion in the exercise of this prerogative. You may admit, or you may reject. Therefore when called to act, you must exercise your discretion. You cannot decline to exercise it. You must bring your judgment to bear upon the case; you must consider well all the facts and all the elements which enter into the civilization of this candidate community; you must consider of course its population, its resources, and also the character of its constitution. In doing so, you can have no feeling except of kindness and sympathy for the people there. God knows that I wish them well from the bottom of my heart. There is no aspiration which I do not offer for their welfare; but, on this occasion, we must consider the requirements of duty. And here the way is clear.

Now, sir, allow me to say, with these few words of introduction, that I present to you this proposition, that such a community as now exists in Colorado, deficient in population, failing already in agriculture, failing already in mineral resources, and with a constitution which sets at defiance the first principle of human rights, should not at this moment be recognized as a State of the Union. Mark me, if you please; I say at this moment and under these circumstances. The proposition that I present is com pound or complex. I do not found my conclusion on any one of these elements or details, but I found it on the whole compounded together; and I say, sir, that at this moment, at the close of this war, when by every obligation we are

solemnly bound to maintain the rights of the colored race, you will err if you give your hand to such a community as I have described, which, so inferior in population and resources, comes forward with a constitution denying those rights. Thus much, sir, I have to say by way of introduction; all this is simply that I may open to you in one word the magnitude of the question and the general principles which underlie it; but before I sit down it will be my duty to consider with some minuteness the actual condition and the resources of this Territory. And here, at this stage of the discussion, I hope to be pardoned if I call the attention of the Senate to a document which I find on our tables and which has been read I dare say by Senators. It is a pamphlet entitled

Colorado," and is addressed "to the honorable the members of the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States," and is signed "J. B. Chaffee and John Evans, Senators-elect." As I proceed it will be my duty to allude to statements in this pamphlet, which is the repertory of facts and arguments for the admission of Colorado. I am reluctant to criticise it; but I believe if any Senator will canvass it from beginning to the end, he will find that there are very few of its statements which are entirely candid, very few which in point of fact can be relied upon in all respects. I said that it was signed by J. B. Chaffee and John Evans. Now, sir, I do not intend to introduce any personal question into this discussion so far as it can be avoided; but as this document is on our tables, and as it is here with a certain authority, in order to enlighten us as to our duty on this occasion, I think I shall not err if I call the attention of the Senate to the solemn judgment of one of the most honored committees of this body on the conduct of one of the signers of that document. I have in my hand the third volume of the Report of the Committee on the Conduct of the War, and I turn to the head of "the massacres of the Cheyenne Indians." That report, which is signed by B. F. WADE, chairman, after alluding to the testimony of Governor John Evans, one of the signers of the document now on your tables, proceeds as follows:

His testimony before your committee was characterized by such prevarication and shuffling as has been shown by no witness they have examined during the four years they have been engaged in their investigations; and for the evident purpose of avoiding the admission that he was fully aware that the Indians massacred so brutally at Sand creek, were then, and had been, actuated by the most friendly feelings toward the whites, and had done all in their power to restrain those less friendly disposed."

Such, sir, is the language of your committee characterizing the testimony of the Governor of Colorado who now comes here to plead for the admission of that Territory as a State into this Union. His testimony is held up as "characterized by such prevarication and shuffling as has been shown by no witness they have examined during the four years they have been engaged in their investigations." It is that gentleman who now signs the paper I hold in my hand which is addressed to you in the expectation of influencing your votes on this occasion.

I shall not consider minutely the character of this pamphlet; but I will at this stage call attention to the very first proposition as an illustration of what seems to me the uncandid way in which the facts are presented. I may err; but this is the way it seems to me. For instance, here is a statement of the area of this Territory, which amounts, as it is said, to one hundred and five thousand eight hundred and eighteen square miles. Of this the pamphlet says that two fifths is east of the Rocky mountains, and that its agricultural and pastoral lands comprise forty-two thousand square miles, or over twenty-five million acres. That is the statement with which the pamphlet begins. Against this statement, which is not authenticated in any way, not supported by any authority, I oppose authority. I have in my hands a transcript from the report of the surveyor general of Colorado, dated August 15, 1865, addressed to the Commissioner of the General

Land Office, in whose annual report it appears. This authority is as follows:

"The extreme limit of the amount of land capable of cultivation in Colorado will not vary much from twenty-five hundred thousand acres.'

Thus is the first statement in this pamphlet sweated down, if I may so express it, from twenty-five million to twenty-five hundred thousand acres.

Mr. KIRKWOOD. The Senator will allow me a moment. Will not the Senator find the statement he has just read from the surveyor general's report, word for word and letter for letter, in the paper submitted by Mr. Evans and Mr. Chaffee? Then wherein is the misrepresentation, I should be glad to know, when the very words read by the Senator from Massachusetts are in the report signed by those gentlemen?

Mr. RAMSEY. Does not the Senator recognize a difference between agricultural and pastoral lands?

Mr. NYE. The two and a half millions are agricultural, the other are pastoral lands. Mr. SUMNER. But they are the same.

Mr. NYE. Not at all. They do not mean the same in the western States. One means sage brush, the other a place where things will grow.

Mr. SUMNER. They mean substantially the same; and it did seem to me that in the form of the statement there was a disposition to exaggerate uncandidly the actual condition of the Territory. And if I am mistaken, then I am happy to be corrected, and proceed at once to consider the important question of population. It will be remembered that when this enabling act was under discussion my excellent friend, the Senator from Ohio, [Mr. WADE,] who had the bill in charge, stated as follows. I quote from the Globe:

"I understand there must be now about sixty thousand inhabitants in Colorado. Some think a great deal more than that. That is the smallest number I find intimated by those who profess to know anything about it. It is a Territory which is filling up very rapidly. Judge Edmunds tells me that he has not the least doubt in the world that before they finish their arrangements and become a State, there will be sufficient population there for a Representative in Congress according to the ratio of representation fixed by the last census."

That was more than one hundred thousand. So that when the enabling act was passed the Senator from Ohio announced to us, on authority which he regarded, of course, as satisfactory, that there was a population there actually of sixty thousand. Now, the popula tion, instead of increasing to one hundred thousand and more as the Senator triumphantly promised, has been constantly diminishing, growing smaller year by year according to all the evidence that comes to us, especially as shown in the annual elections. Thus, for instance, at the election for members of a Territorial Legislature in the autumn of 1861, the aggregate vote was 10,580; in December, 1851, a few months later, the aggregate vote for Delegate to Congress was 9,354, diminishing, you will observe. In October, 1862, the aggregate vote for a Delegate to Congress was 8,224, still again diminishing. In September, 1864, the aggregate vote was 5,769. In September, 1864, again there was a vote under the congressional enabling act to determine whether a State government should be adopted or rejected, and the aggregate vote was 6,192. Then, again, in September, 1865, only this last September, there was another vote on the adoption of the constitution now before us, when we have, all told, only 5,905. So that you will see that from 1861 down to the last evidence before us, the population of this Ter ritory instead of increasing has been diminishing. Instead of rising to the proportions and the stature of a State, it has been gradually dwarfing into proportions, I might almost say, hardly fit for a Territory. It has shrunk inconceivably and beyond all precedent. I believe there is no other instance in our history where a Territory has gone backwards. Always before population has increased. It is the rule of this country; it is the tendency of

our people. But here the reverse has occurred. If you ask the reason why, it is plain. The Territory of Colorado is vast in extent, situated on the two opposite sides of a chain of mountains, like Italy "parted by the Apennines," sparsely settled, with few centers, with scanty resources, so that emigrants arriving there from foreigu lands or from the East, instead of being tempted to stay are seduced to go still further West.

"Westward the star of empire takes its way," and they finally plant themselves in Montana, or Idaho, or Oregon, leaving behind them Colorado, so that in point of fact this Territory can hardly be said at this moment to have what may be called a permanent population. It is a floating population not yet attached to the soil, but still subject to change, and still subject to the temptation of emigration to other Territories.

Thus, for instance, Hon. SAMUEL MCLEAN, Delegate in Congress from the Territory of Montana, says in reply to inquiries addressed to him, that he was a resident of Colorado from 1859 to March, 1862; he then went to Montana, and in the fall of 1864 was elected Delegate. He estimates the population of Montana at nearly forty thousand, "one fourth of whom went there from Colorado and are still going."

Mr. POMEROY. I ask the Senator if there is any other way of getting to Montana from the East except by going through Colorado. Do not they all have to go through Colorado?

Mr. SUMNER. When he says they went there from Colorado I interpret that he meant that they made Colorado a temporary home. Mr. POMEROY. They may have staid there over night.

Mr. SUMNER. He could not mean any such thing. That would be playing with words. He says he estimates the population of Montana at nearly forty thousand, "one fourth of whom went there from Colorado and are still going." What is the natural meaning of these words? Obviously that they are emigrating from Colorado to Montana.

Mr. POMEROY. They come to my own State in the same way from the East and from Europe. They go to Massachusetts in the same way, and then go on; but we do not argue from that that Massachusetts is not a State, or that Kansas is not a State. This star of empire goes westward. These emigrants stop for a time in all the States. That is what that means, that they staid for a time in Colorado and then they went on to Montana.

except by the supposition that the population is tempted to other lands westward?

I have said that the Territory had been failing in population. I now remind you that it has also been failing in agriculture. On that head I quote the authority of the surveyor general of Colorado in his report dated August 15, 1865, as follows:

"No land can be cultivated without irrigation. "The great drawback to the settlement of Colorado is the want of system in the method of irrigation. "An emigrant generally leaves the Missouri river early in the spring, and arrives here in time to make a crop, provided he could find a farm already prepared for working; this he cannot do, and to dig the ditch necessary to irrigate a farm will consume the whole summer, and take more money than most emigrants have. The consequence is, that thousands come here, spend a few days trying to get a farm, and go on further west."

There, again, is an answer to the inquiry of my friend from Kansas, [Mr. POMEROY.] It seems that the surveyor general of Colorado says that these emigrants, after spending a few days at Colorado vainly trying to get a farm there, go on further west.

Mr. POMEROY. They do precisely that when they are in Illinois, and when they are in Missouri, and when they are in Kansas. Those men who are moving west only stop a little while. If they are not suited in one place they go on to another. That is precisely what this statement proves.

Mr. SUMNER. But the figures here show something more. We have also a statement in the same report of the surveyor general to the effect that grasshoppers have interfered with the products of the soil. Its agriculture has been essentially impaired by that insect. Here are his words:

"The only drawback to the cultivation of land is the grasshopper."

Again, speaking of the crop of 1865 he says: The grasshoppers have destroyed all of two thirds of the grain crop."

As no crops can be raised without great expense at ditching, and appealing to that irrigation which was essential to the agriculture of ancient Egypt, while there is no Nile in Colorado to contribute from its abundant waters, and as the grasshoppers destroy two thirds of the crop before it is raised, we see easily why the farming population of Colorado has diminished.

Then, sir, we come to the mineral resources. Colorado is a mining Territory; its population is mining. But here there has been the same retrogression. Instead of going forward the Territory has been going backward. Thus, for instance, the same official report which I have already quoted, speaking of the mining, says, "the gold crop of the present year, 1864, has been almost a failure." Then, again, this same authority, in the report of 1865, says:

Mr. SUMNER. But the figures I have read it seems to me are sufficient. They explain themselves and answer the Senator from Kansas. They show this constant decrease; and thus, for instance, at the last election there were only 5,905 voters. The Senator from Nevada Mr. NYE] refers me to a vote of 7,000 which occurred, as I understand, at the Governor's election. I have been told that there are some circumstances of a peculiar stoppage of all the old mills. character, some persons call them frauds, which affected that vote, so that I have not undertaken to discuss it. It was not cited in our debates the other day, and I have not chosen to introduce it into the discussion now. Mr. NYE. I have it here.

"Gold mining is almost at a standstill. Only fifteen hundred ounces per week is being produced in the whole mining region of Colorado, and the product for the year will not exceed one million dollars. "The speculations of last year caused an entire

Mr. SUMNER. The statement that I have before me from a citizen of Colorado, I will read, then:

"The last vote in Colorado is not given for the reason that the canvassers threw out a great many of the ballots because illegally cast, or rather because of monstrous frauds. Over a thousand, it is currently reported, were thrown out from one district. The number returned from the several voting precincts was over 7,000."

A few of the new mills are now in motion, but at the present cost of labor, and everything else, they cannot more than pay expenses. Many companies are doing nothing. some waiting for better times, some waiting for machinery, some experimenting on new processes, and some fooling away their money by trusting their affairs to ignorant men, and some who never intend to mine outside of Wall street."

Such is the official testimony with regard to the mines, and yet we are told in the pamphlet which is on our tables and to which I have already referred, that "Colorado, as a gold-producing country, is second only to California." In point of fact there was a time when it was second only to California, but that time has passed. If you look at the statistics you will find that the figures give an unerring answer. Take, for instance, the finance report for the year ending June 30, 1863. There it appears that California produced $13,501,000 of gold in that year; Oregon, $3,016,000; Colorado, $2,893,000; so that in 1863 Colorado instead of being the second was the third. Then take the same report for the year ending June 30, 1864, we find that California that year produced $15,071,000 of gold; Idaho,

Assuming that over 7,000 were returned and that 1,000 were thrown out in one district for fraud, you have that cut down at once to 6,000; but assuming that it is 7,000, what is all this compared to the original 10,000 votes with which the Territory began, and compared also to the splendid promises which the Senator from Ohio made with regard to the Territory when he first called the attention of the Senate to it? And how do you account for this falling off,|| $2,306,000——

year.

Mr. SUMNER. Very well; it is the report, so far as it goes, of the Superintendent of the Mint, founded on the receipts of that institution.

Mr. KIRKWOOD. I desire to inquire if the Senator is giving us the figures officially communicated by the Director of the Mint?

Mr. SUMNER. These figures are taken from the finance report of the Secretary of the Treasury.

Mr. STEWART. That gives a very small fraction of the actual production.

Mr. SUMNER. It goes on the basis of what is received at the Mint.

Mr. STEWART. But a very small portion of the product of the country goes to the Mint. We are producing annually in the United States, according to the best estimate we are able to get, $100,000,000 of gold and silver, while, according to the report on which the Senator relies, only about twenty millions go to the

Mint.

Mr. SUMNER. I was commenting on the statement in the pamphlet, as follows:

"The report of the Superintendent of the Mint shows that Colorado, as a gold-producing country, is second only to California."

I answered this statement by the finance report, showing the contrary; so that, according to this highest authority, whatever may have been the position of Colorado five or six years ago, during the last three years it has not been the second gold-producing region of our country.

When the Senator interrupted me, I was giving the figures from the finance report for the year ending June 30, 1864, showing from California $15,710,000 of gold, from Idaho $2,306,000, from Oregon $2,162,000, and from Colorado $2,136,000; so that in 1864 Colorado stood fourth on the list, instead of standing second. Then comes the finance report for the year ending June 30, 1865, where it appears that California produced $13,332,000 of gold, Idaho $4,971,000, Montana $1,767,000, and Colorado $1,622,000; so that during this last year Colorado was again fourth on the list, instead of being the second. For the years 1861, 1862, 1863, and 1864, Colorado, according to this testimony, produced over two millions annually, but in 1865 it produced considerably less than two millions; less in 1864 than in 1863; less in 1862 than 1861. Therefore, sir, according to this unanswerable evidence, you find that her mineral wealth has been failing, and that this Territory has been less productive than it was at the beginning.

Sir, there is another illustration which goes to show how this Territory has been falling off. I refer to the Post Office. I need not remind you that there is no part of our system which quickens, increases, and expands with time more than the Post Office. There is no person who does not write more letters this year than he wrote the year before. So with all families. The interchanges of affection and of business grows naturally rather than diminishes. If you find, therefore, that there is a falling off in the Post Office, it is because the population there has essentially failed, showing there is not the same need of a Post Office that there was before. In this respect the fall has not been great, but it has been enough to indicate a retrogression. It shows what I have been aiming to exhibit from the beginning, that this Territory has been going backward. According to the report of the Postmaster General for the year ending June 30, 1863, there was received from letters in this Territory $1,440, from papers $993, from the sale of stamps $14,263, making a sum total of $16,697 received by the Post Office from this Territory. For the year ending June 30, 1864, you had from letters $1,185, a fewer number of letters than the year before; you had