CONGRESS, UNITED STATES. 



195 



States that can be legally cast and counted, will be 

 those cast in pursuance of the laws in force in the 

 several States prior to the legislation by Congress 

 upon the subject of reconstruction. 



I cannot refrain from directing your special atten- 

 tion, to the declaration contained m the joint resolu- 

 tion, that " none of the States whose inhabitants were 

 lately in rebellion shall be entitled to representation 

 in the Electoral College," etc. 



If it is meant by this declaration that no State is to 

 be allowed to vote for President and Vice-President, 

 all of whose inhabitants were engaged in the late re- 

 bellion, it is apparent that no one of the States will 

 be excluded from voting, since it is well known that 

 in every Southern State there were many inhabitants 

 who not only did not participate in the rebellion, but 

 who actually took part in its suppression, or refrained 

 from giving it any aid or countenance. I therefore 

 conclude that the true meaning of the joint resolution 

 is, that no State, a portion of whose inhabitants were 

 engaged in the rebellion, shall be permitted to parti- 

 cipate in the presidential election, except upon the 

 terms and conditions therein prescribed. 



Assuming this to be the true construction of the 

 resolution, the inquiry becomes pertinent, may those 

 Northern States, a portion of whose inhabitants were 

 actually in the rebellion, be prevented at the discre- 

 tion of Congress from having their electoral votes 

 counted ? It is well known that a portion of the in- 

 habitants of New York and a portion of the inhab- 

 itants of Virginia were alike engaged in the rebellion, 

 yet it is equally well known that Virginia, as well as 

 New York, was at all times during the war recognized 

 by the Federal Government as a State in the Union 

 so clearly, that upon the termination of hostilities it 

 was not even deemed necessary for her restoration 

 that a provisional Governor should be appointed. 

 Yet, according to this joint resolution, the people of 

 Virginia, unless they comply with the terms it pre- 

 scribes, are denied the right of voting for President, 

 while the people of New York, a portion of the in- 

 habitants of which State were also in rebellion, are 

 permitted to have their electoral votes counted with- 

 out undergoing the process of reconstruction pre- 

 scribed for Virginia. New York is no more a State 

 than Virginia ; the one is as much entitled to be rep- 

 presented in the Electoral College as the other. If 

 Congress has the power to deprive Virginia of this 

 right, it can exercise the same authority with respect 

 to New York or any other of the States. Thus the 

 result of the presidential election may be controlled 

 and determined by Congress, and the people be de- 

 prived of their right under the Constitution to choose 

 a President and Vice-President of the United States. 



If Congress were to provide by law that the votes 

 of none of the States should be received and counted 

 if cast for a candidate who differed in political senti- 

 ment with a majority of the two Houses, such legis- 

 lation would at once be condemned by the country 

 as an unconstitutional and revolutionary usurpation 

 of power. It would, however, be exceedingly diffi- 

 cult to find in the Constitution any more authority 

 for the passage of the joint resolution under consider- 

 ation than for an enactment looking directly to the 

 rejection of all votes not in accordance with the polit- 

 ical preferences of a majority of Congress. No power 

 exists in the Constitution authorizing the joint reso- 

 lution or the supposed law, the only difference being 

 that one would be more palpably unconstitutional 

 and revolutionary than the other. Both would rest 

 upon the_ radical error that Congress has the power 

 to prescribe terms and conditions to the right of the 

 people of the States to cast their votes for President 

 and Vice-President. 



For the reasons thus indicated, I am constrained 

 to return the joint resolution to the Senate for such 

 further action thereon as Congress may deem neces- 

 sary. 



ANDEEW JOHNSON. 

 WASHINGTON-, July 20, 1868. 



In the Senate, the bill was passed by the fol- 

 lowing vote : 



YEAS Messrs. Abbott, Anthony, Cameron, Cat- 

 tell, Chandler, Cole, Conklin, Conness, Corbett, Cra- 

 gin, Drake, Edmunds, Ferry, Fessenden, Freling- 

 huysen, Harlan, Harris, Henderson, Howard, Howe, 

 Kellogg, McDonald, Morgan, Morrill of Maine, Mor- 

 rill of Vermont, Morton, Nye, Osborne, Patterson 

 of New Hampshire, Pomeroy, Eice, Eoss, Sherman, 

 Sprague, Stewart-Sumner, Tipton, Trumbull, Van 

 Winkle, Wade, Welch, Willey, Williams, Wilson, 

 and Yates 45. 



NAYS Messrs. Buckalew, Davis, Doolittle. Hen- 

 dricks. McCreery, Patterson of Tennessee, Vickers, 

 andWhyte 8. 



ABSENT Messrs. Bayard, Dixon, Fowler, Grimes, 

 Norton, Pool, Eamsey, Saulsbury, and Thayer 9. 



In the House, the resolution was passed by 

 the following vote : 



YEAS Messrs. Allison, Ames, Anderson, Arnell, 

 Delos E. Ashley, James M. Ashley, Bailey, Baldwin, 

 Banks, Beatty, Benjamin, Benton, Bingham, Black- 

 burn, Blair, Boles, Boutwell, Bowen, Bromwell, 

 Broomall, Buckland, Eoderick E. Butler, Cake, 

 Churchill, Eeader W. Clarke, Sidney Clarke, Cobb, 

 Co-burn, Cook, Covode, Cullom, Dawes, Delano, 

 Dixon, Donnelly, Driggs, Eckley, Eggleston, Ela, 



1111, ninas, nooper, iopKins, unester _L. nuDDara, 

 Hulburd, Hunter, Ingersoll, Jenckes, Alexander H. 

 Jones, Judd, Kelley, Kelsey, Ketcham, Koontz, 

 Laflin, Lash, William Lawrence, Lincoln, Loan, 

 Logan, Loughridge, Lynch, Mallory, Maynard, 

 McCarthy, McClurg, Mclee, Mercur, Miller, Moore, 

 Moorhead, Morrell, Mullins, Myers, Nunn, O'Neill, 

 Orth, Paine, Perham, Peters, Pike, Pile, Plants, Po- 

 land, Polsley, Pomeroy, Eaum, Eobertson, Sawyer, 

 Schenck, Scofield, Shanks, Smith, Spalding, Stark- 

 weather, Thaddeus Stevens, Stewart, Stokes, Sypher, 

 Taffe, Taylor, Thomas, Trowbridge, TwichelK Up- 

 son, Van Aernam, Burt Van Horn, Van Wyck, Vidal, 

 Ward, Elihu B. Washburne, Henry D. Washburn, 

 William B. Washburn, Welker, Whittemore, Thomas 

 Williams,William Williams, James F. Wilson-John 

 T. Wilson, Stephen F. Wilson, Windom, and Wood- 

 bridge 134. 



NAYS Messrs. Adams, Archer, Axtell, Barnes, 

 Beck, Boyden, Boyer, Brooks, Gary, Eldridge, Fox, ' 

 Getz, Glossbrenner, Golladay. Grover, Haight, Hoi- 

 man, Hotohkiss, Johnson, Thomas L. Jones, Kerr, 

 Knott, Marshall, McCullough, Niblack, Nicholson, 

 Phelps, Bandall, Eoss, Sitgreaves, Stone, Taber,Law- 

 rence S. Trimble, Van Auken, Wood, and Wood- 

 ward 36. 



NOT VOTING Messrs. Baker, Barnum, Beaman, 

 Elaine, Burr, Benjamin F. Butler, Chanler, Cornell, 

 Deweese, Dockery, Dodge, Finney, Gravely, Halsey, 

 Harding. Hawkins, Asahel W. Hubbard, Eichard D. 

 Hubbard, Humphrey, Julian, Kitchen, George V. 

 Lawrence, Mann, Marvin, McCormick, Momssey, 

 Mungjin, Newcomb, Newsham, Price, Pruyn, Eobin- 

 son, Koots, Selye, Shellabarger, Aaron F. Stevens, 

 John Trimble, Eobert T. Van Horn, Van Trump, 

 and Cadwalader C. Washburn 40. 



The Speaker: "On the question, * Will the 

 House, on reconsideration, agree to the pas- 

 sage of the joint resolution ? ' the yeas are 1 34, 

 and the nays 36. Two-thirds having voted in 

 the affirmative, and it having been certified 

 from the Senate of the United States that upon 

 a similar vote upon reconsideration two-thirds 

 of that body have agreed to the passage of the 

 joint resolution, I do, by the authority of the 

 Constitution of the United States, declare that 



