168 



COtfGKESS, UNITED STATES. 



Bundy, Burchard, Burleigh, Burroughs, Benjamin F. 

 Butler, Cain, Cannon, Carpenter, Cason, Cessna, 

 Ainos Clark, Jr., Freeman Clarke, Clayton, Clem- 

 ents, Stephen A. Cobb, Coburn, Conger, Corwin, 

 Cotton, Crooke, Crounse, Curtis, Darrall, Dawes, 

 Dobbins, Donnan, Duell, Dunnell, Eames, Field, 



ley, Hays, Gerry W. Hazelton, John W. Hazelton, 

 Hendee, E. Rockwood Hoar, Hodges, Hooper, Hos- 

 kins, Houghton, Howe, Hubbell, Hunter, Hurlbut, 

 Hyde, Hynes, Kasson, Kelley, Kellogg, Lamport, 

 Lansing, Lawrence, Lawson, Lewis, Loughridge, 



Negley, Niles, O'Neill, Orr, Orth, Packard, Packer, 

 Pao-e, Isaac 0. Parker, Parsons, Pelham, Pendleton, 

 Phillips, Pierce, Pike, James H. Platt, Jr., Poland, 

 Pratt, Rainey, Rapier, Richmond, Ellis H. Roberts, 

 James W. Robinson, Ross, Rusk, Sawyer, Henry 

 B. Sayler, Scofield, Henry J. Scudder, Isaac W. 

 Scudder, Sessions, Shanks, Sheats, Sheldon, Laz- 

 arus D. Shoemaker: Small, Smart, A. Herr Smith, 

 George L. Smith, H. Boardman Smith, John Q. 

 Smith, Snyder, Sprague, Starkweather, Charles 

 A. Stevens, Stowell, Strawbridge, Sypher, Taylor, 

 Charles R. Thomas, Thompson, Todd, Townsend, 



eorge 



Williams, John M. S. Williams, William Williams, 

 William B. Williams, James Wilson, Jeremiah M. 

 Wilson, and Woodworth 162. 



NAYS Messrs. Adams, Archer, Arthur, Ashe, At- 

 kins, Banning, Beck, Bell, Berry, Bland^ Blount, 

 Bow en .Bright, Bromberg, Brown, Buckner, Roder- 

 ick R. Butler, Caldwell, Caulfleld, Chittenden, John 

 B. Clark, Jr., Clymer, Comingo, Cook.Cox, Critten- 

 den, Crossland, Crutchfield, Davis, DeWitt, Dur- 

 ham, Eden, Eldredge, Finck, Giddings, Glover, 

 Gunter, Hamilton, Hancock, Henry R. Harris, John 

 T. Harris, Harrison, Hatcher, Hereford, Herndon, 

 Holman, Hunton, Knapp, Lamar, Lamison, Leach, 



} -.J-WM^** i.WA . j. ^/JlX J j JL. Ji^ajJOj A WW1 j 



1, Read, Robbins, William R. Roberts, James 

 inson, Milton Sayler, Schell, John G. Schu- 



Randall, 

 C. Robinson, 



maker, Sloan, Sloss, J. Ambler Smith, Speer, Stan- 

 ard, Standiford, Alexander H. Stephens, Stone, 

 Storm, Swann, Christopher Y. Thomas, Thorn- 

 burgh, Vance, Waddell, Wells, Whitehead, White- 

 house, Whitthorne, Willie, Ephraim K. Wilson, 

 Wolfe, Wood, John D. Young, and Pierce M. B. 

 Young 99. 



NOT VOTING Messrs. Barnura, Barry, Clinton L. 

 Cobb, Creamer, Danford, Farwell, Freeman, Frye, 

 Havens, George F. Hoar, Kendall, Killinger, Mar- 

 shall, Maynard, Mitchell, Nunn, Thomas C. Platt, 

 Purman, Ransier, Ray, Sener, Sherwood, William 

 A. Smith, Southard, St. John, Strait, Walls, and 

 Wheeler 28. 



So the bill was passed. 



In the Senate, on February 27th, the bill was 

 reported without amendment and read a third 

 time. 



Mr. Edmunds, of Vermont, said : " What 

 does this bill propose to do? This bill that 

 we have under consideration only proposes 

 that if there are any fundamental rights in this 

 Constitution they shall be secured by that 

 power which the Constitution says shall take 

 the measures to secure them, and that the 



Congress of the United States by legislation 

 appropriate shall secure to every citizen in this- 

 land the rights which the Constitution gives 

 him; and yet Senators say this is invading 

 State rights; this is tyrannical! Why, Mr. 

 President, State rights justly considered, the 

 real and the true rights of States can only be 

 secured under and by the Constitution of the 

 United States ; and therefore, in my opinion, 

 it is an invasion of State rights instead of an 

 attack upon them to say that you will turn 

 every State adrift and all its citizens be subject 

 to the turmoil and the disturbance and the 

 passion and the prejudice which may happen 

 from time to time to exist in any particular 

 State. There is no security for a State that is 

 not found under this bond of union which the 

 Constitution of the United States secures ; 

 there is no security to any citizen of a State, 

 either under the State or under any other pro- 

 vision, that is not found fundamentally and in 

 the first place in the fact that the whole family 

 of these States have a common interest in his 

 protection and in the protection of his State ; 

 and it was so in the first Constitution as it is 

 in this. 



" The Constitution of the United States, as 

 was stated in an opinion of the Supreme Court 

 once by an eminent Democratic judge, is a bill 

 of rights for the people of all the States, and 

 no State has a right to say you invade her 

 rights when under this Constitution and ac- 

 cording to it you have protected a right of her 

 citizens against class prejudice, against caste 

 prejudice, against sectarian prejudice, against 

 the ten thousand things which in special com- 

 munities may from time to time arise to disturb 

 the peace and good order of the community. 

 That is all this bill undertakes to do. Now let 

 us see what this bill is. 



"That first section of it simply provides that 

 all persons shall be entitled to certain common 

 rights in public places, in the streets, if they 

 were in they are not in, but that illustrates it 

 that no State shall have a right and no per- 

 son shall have a right to interrupt the common 

 use by citizens of the United States of the 

 streets of a town or city. Where is the au- 

 thority for that, Senators ask; where is the 

 authority for saying that a State shall not have 

 a right to pass a law which shall declare that 

 all citizens of the German race shall go upon the 

 right-hand side of the streets and all citizens 

 of French descent shall go upon the left, and 

 so on, and that all people of a particular reli- 

 gion shall only occupy a particular quarter of 

 the town, and all the people of another reli- 

 gion another side ? Is it possible, with a na- 

 tional Constitution which creates fundamentally 

 a national citizenship, that anybody can say a 

 State has a right to make laws of that kind? 

 I should be amazed to hear it stated. If that 

 can be stated, then I should be glad to know 

 what there is in being a citizen of the United 

 States that is worth a man's time to devote 

 himself to defend for a single instant. 



