CONGRESS, UNITED STATES. 



159 



wer to let it l>e known. Tli:it i> all. We do 



not undertake to *:iy that either this, that, or 



t hi- other State is in a condition to act 80 88 that 



i.in on t!u- suhjcet i-hall IK- binding. 



.\\. with reference to myself individually, 

 I ( |n not know, anl 1 do not undertake to say, 

 what 1 may or may not do in a given specific 

 I'.ut when we vote for a constitutional 

 <d iiu-iit to be submitted and it is submitted 

 I iy tin- .S-civtary of State to the Legislatures 

 now in existence, do we admit that those States 

 we regularly constituted and that we have got 

 to n-co^nize them after they have acted? Not 

 at all. My own understanding is that I have a 

 right to inquire, and it is my duty to inquire, 

 whether t lug 1 constitutional amendment has been 

 legally adopted by a Legislature of a State 

 whieh I am bound to recognize. Have I not a 

 right to make inquiry? If an organization, no 

 matter how got up, with or without the con- 

 sent of the people or a majority of the people 

 of a State, sets itself up as the Legislature, am 

 1 precluded from inquiring into the fact whether 

 that is the Legislature of the State whose 

 action is binding on the question submitted? 

 That is a question which I have a right to $x- 

 ainine. I am not prepared to say in the very 

 teeth of the report of the reconstruction com- 

 mittee, so called, that these States are so con- 

 stituted and so organized that their action, so 

 far as the . United States Government is con- 

 c-erned, is legal and binding upon any one sub- 

 ject. I have not admitted that ; I do not ad- 

 mit it now. 



" And yet, sir, I am free to say that if from 

 the conduct of a government assuming to be 

 the government of a State, from the constitu- 

 tion that they submitted and here let me say 

 that no constitution has yet been submitted to 

 Congress from any of these States I saw that 

 the principles of that constitution were such 

 as would render it safe and proper in my judg- 

 ment to say that it was the constitution of a 

 State, and that the State should come into Con- 

 gress, 1 might then come into that compact and 

 >ay that such a State was to be admitted into 

 the Union or to be recognized as one of the 

 States of the Union, if gentlemen like that lan- 

 guage better, on the constitution thus submitted 

 to Congress and the provisions they had made. 

 But is it to be held that before any such thing 

 has been done, when the old constitutions ha\ e 

 been' overthrown, with every thing, to use the 

 language of the President, prostrate in the dust, 

 nothing new done under the authority of Con- 

 gress, or even by the assent of any one of these 

 States, I am to take it for granted that that is 

 the constitution of a State, and that they are 

 States in the Union with all proper connections 

 with the Government of the United States be- 

 fore I know what it is ? I take it for granted 

 that that is not obligatory on me in any sense; 

 and I want to say here now with regard to 

 the formation of these States, the new forma- 

 tion of these States if you please to call it so, 

 because wo all understand what their con- 



dition is I conceive that I have aright to in- 

 quire what the terms of ti itionu are, 

 to see whether those terms are Bai 

 whether they have placed themsclvc-H in a con- 

 dition to bo admitted, whether they were in a 

 condition to adopt the constitutional amend- 

 ment which we have .submitted, and whether 

 they have done it; not that any convocation 

 of people called .together by a satrap, forming 

 new arrangements to suit themselves, which 

 they have never chosen to submit to Congress 

 or the people of their State, of which we know 

 nothing officially, are necessarily a Legislature 

 and a government, all of whose acts we are 

 pledged to take as the acts of the proper, well- 

 organized, constitutional government of States 

 in the Union and having repaired all their broken 

 connections with the Union. 



" I admit no such doctrine, sir, and therefore 

 1 say, after a vote has been taken, if any should 

 be by any one of these so-called States, adopt- 

 ing the constitutional amendment, it may be a 

 question preliminary with me : has the consti- 

 tutional amendment been adopted by a legally 

 organized constitutional government of a State, 

 which I am bound to recognize ? And, sir, I 

 do not preclude myself from a right to look in- 

 to the terms of the constitutions they submit to 

 Congress. I rose simply to enter this caveat, 

 and I think if gentlemen will read the report of 

 the reconstruction committee they will find 

 nothing particularly inconsistent with what I 

 have said in relation to that matter. Upon all 

 these questions, separate or otherwise, as they 

 come up, I am ready to act when they come ; 

 but no general rule can be established which 

 will be binding upon me with reference to ques- 

 tions of this description : each one is to stand 

 upon its own particular merits or demerits, as 

 the case may be." 



Mr. llendricks, of Indiana, said: "But what 

 is proposed here ? It is proposed by the Sen- 

 ator from Missouri to change the constitution 

 of Nebraska. Now, does Nebraska come here 

 as a State with a constitution ? If a constitu- 

 tion, then how was that constitution adopted ? 

 No Senator has claimed that the constitution of 

 Nebraska was adopted merely by the act of the 

 Legislature. It has greater force altogether 

 than a mere legislative act. It is claimed to be 

 a fundamental law deriving its validity and its 

 force and power from the will and act of the 

 people. A constitutional convention, it is un- 

 derstood, may adopt a constitution without, 

 submitting it to the people, because the dele- 

 gates are elected for that purpose. The act of 

 the delegates in constitutional conventions is 

 the act of the people, and they may make a 

 law above an enactment by a Legislature, a 

 law that shall govern a Legislature. 



" Then it was the act of the people in voting 

 upon this constitution that gave it the fftrce 01 

 a constitution. Now, how can that constitution 

 that is adopted be changed? Can Congress 

 do it ? The Senator from Ohio, who has charge 

 of this bill, has argued mo>t emphatically that 



