CONGRESS, UNITED STATES. 



191 



States " did moan not owing allegiance to any- 

 body else. The Indians are not Biibjoct to oar 

 jurinliction. 



Mr. Johnson, of Maryland, paid that who 

 is a citizen of the United States is, at present, 

 an open <[iie>tiun. There is no definition as to 

 how citizenship can exist in the United States 

 except through the medium of citizenship in a 

 State. The amendment proposes to define what 

 oiti/i'iiship is in the best way that can be devised. 

 rther thought that in one sense the In- 

 dians were a part of the people of the United 

 States, being within the Territorial limits. 

 The United States may exercise jurisdiction 

 over all the tribes. The courts would sustain 

 this jurisdiction. The amendment proposed 

 ehould, therefore, be accepted. 



Mr. Hendricks, of Indiana, asked if it were 

 not a matter to be decided by Congress alone, 

 whether to treat with the Indians by treaty, or 

 govern them by direct law. He said : " I 

 asked the question whether, under the Con- 

 stitution, under the powers of this Govern- 

 ment, we may extend our laws over the In- 

 dians and compel obedience, as a matter of 

 legal right, from the Indians. If the Indian is 

 bound to obey the law, he is subject to the 

 jurisdiction of the country ; and that is the 

 question. 



u Now, sir, this question has once or twice 

 been decided by the Attorney-General so far as 

 he could decide it. In 1855 he was inquired 

 of whether the laws of the United States regu- 

 lating the intercourse with the Indian tribes, 

 by the general legislation in regard to Oregon, 

 had been extended to Oregon ; and he gave 

 it as his opinion that the laws had been ex- 

 tended to Oregon, and regulated the inter- 

 course between the white people and the In- 

 dians there. Subsequently, the Attorney-General 

 was asked whether Indians were citizens of the 

 United States in such sense as that they could 

 become the owners of the public lands where 

 the right to acquire them was limited to citi- 

 zens ; and in the course of that opinion he says 

 that the Indian is not a citizen of the United 

 States by virtue of his birth, but that he is a 

 subject." 



Mr. iloward, of Michigan, said in reply : " Ac- 

 cording to the ideas of the honorable Senator 

 from Wisconsin, as I understand them, this con- 

 sequence would follow the adoption of his amend- 

 ment: all that would remain to be done on the 

 part of any State would bo to impose a tax upon 

 the Indians, whether in their tribal condition or 

 otherwise, in order to make them citizens of the 

 United States. The great objection, therefore, 

 to the amendment is that it is an actual natu- 

 ralization, whenever the State sees fit to enact 

 ft naturalization law in reference to the In- 

 dians in the shape of the imposition of a 

 tax, of the whole Indian population within 

 their limits. There is no evading this con- 

 ecquence." 



Mr. Saulsbury, of Delaware, said: "I do 

 not presume thut any one will pretend to dis- 



guise the fact that the object of this first sec- 

 tion is simply to declare that negroes shall bo 

 riti/ein of tin- I'niK'l States. There can be no 

 other object in it, I presume, than a further 

 extension of the legislative kindness and benefi- 

 cence of Congress toward that class of people. 



4 The poor Indian, whose untutored mind 

 Sees God in clouds, or hears Him in the wind,' 



was not thought of. I say this, not meaning it 

 to be any reflection upon the honorable com- 

 mittee who reported the amendment, because 

 for all the gentlemen composing it I have a high 

 respect personally ; but that is evidently the ob- 

 ject. I have no doubt myself of the correctness 

 of the position, as a question of law, taken by 

 the honorable Senator from Wisconsin ; but, sir, 

 I feel disposed to vote against his amendment, 

 because if these negroes are to be made c-iti- 

 zens of the United States, I can see no reason, 

 in justice or in right, why the Indians should 

 not bo made citizens. If our citizens are to 

 be increased in this wholesale manner, I cannot 

 turn my back upon that persecuted race, among 

 whom are many intelligent, educated men, and 

 embrace as fellow-citizens the negro race. I 

 therefore, as at present advised, for the reasons 

 I have given, shall vote against the proposition 

 of my friend from Wisconsin, although I believe, 

 as a matter of law, that his statements are cor- 

 rect." 



The question was taken, and resulted as fol- 

 lows: 



YEAS Messrs. Buckalew, Cowan, Davis, Doolittle, 

 Guthrie, Hendricks, Johnson, McDougall, Norton, 

 and Riddle 10. 



NATS Messrs. Anthony, Clark, Conness, Cragin, 

 Creswell, Edmunds, Fessenden, Foster, Grimes, Har- 

 ris, Henderson, Iloward, Howe, Kirkwood, Lane of 

 Kansas, Morgan, Merrill, Nye, Poland, Pomeroy, 

 Ramsey, Sherman, Stewart, Sumner, Trumbull, Van 

 Winkle, Wade, Willey, Williams, and Wilson 30. 



ABSENT Messrs. Brown, Chandler, Dixon, Lane 

 of Indiana, Nesmith, Saulsbury, Sprague, Wright, 

 and Yates 9. 



The first and second amendments proposed 

 by Mr. Howard were then agreed to. To the 

 amendment offered as section three, Mr. Hen- 

 dricks, of Indiana, moved to amend by inserting 

 the words "during his term of office," before 

 the words "have engaged.'' The motion was 

 lost, and the amendment of Mr. Howard agreed 

 to, by the following vote : 



YEAS Messrs. Anthony, Chandler, Clark, Con- 

 ness, Cragin, Creswell, Ed'munds, Fessenden, Foster, 

 Grimes, Harris, Henderson, Iloward, Howe, Kirk- 

 wood, Lane of Indiana, Lane of Kansas, Morgan, 

 Mori-ill, Nye, Poland, Pomeroy, Ramsey, Sprague, 

 Stewart, Sumner, Trumbull, Van Winkle, Wade, 

 Willey, Williams, and Wilson 32. 



NAVS Messrs. Buckalew, Cowan, Davis, Doolittle. 

 Guthrie, Hendricks, Johnson, Norton, Riddle, and 

 Saulsbury 10. 



ABSENT Messrs. Brown, Dixon, McDougall, Xes- 

 mith, Sherman, Wright, and Yates 7. 



The section four cf the amendment then came 

 up for consideration, which declares that the 

 obligations incurred by the United States shall 

 remain inviolate. Mr. Hendricks, of Indiana, 

 said: 



