CONGRESS, UNITED STATES. 



177 





IJrucj, Cameron of Pennsylvania, Clay ton, Conovor, 

 s, Dennis, Dorm-y, Qoldtuwaite, Hamilton, 

 Jlumlin, .li'lmston, Jones of Florida, Jones of Neva- 

 .l.i. M l> mid, Murriinun. Morton, Robinson, Sauls- 

 bury, Sharon, Sherman, Thurman, Wallace, Wbyto, 

 Wiudom, Withers, and Wright . 



So the amendment was agreed to. 



The joint resolution was reported to the 

 Senate as amended, and the amendment made 

 as in Committee of the Whole was concurred in. 



The President pro tempore : " The ques- 

 tion is on ordering the amendment to be en- 

 grossed and the joint resolution to be read the 

 third time." 



The result was announced yeas 27, nays 15 ; 

 as follows : 



YEAS Messrs. Allison, Anthony, Booth, Bout- 

 well, Burnside, Cameron of Wisconsin, Christiancy, 

 Conkling, Craijin, Edmunds, Ferry, Frelinghuy- 

 8on, Harvey, Hitchcock, Howe, Ingalls, Logan, Mc- 

 Millan, Mitchell, Morrill. O^lpsby, Paddock, Pattur- 

 son, Sargent, Spencer, Wadleigh. and West 27. 



NAYS Messrs. Bogy, Cockreil, Cooper, Davis, 

 Eaton, Gordon, Kelly, Kernan, Key, McCreery, 

 Maxey, Norwood, Randolph, Ransom, and Steven- 

 son 15. 



ABSENT Messrs. Alcorn, Barnum, Bayard, Bruce, 

 Cameron of Pennsylvania, Clayton, Conover, Dawes, 

 Dennis, Dorsey, 'Goldthwaite, Hamilton, Hainlin, 

 Johnston. Jones of Florida, Jones of Nevada. Mc- 

 Donald, Merrimon, Morton, Robertson, Saulsbury, 

 Sharon, Sherman, Thurman, Wallace, Whyte, Win- 

 dom, Withers, and Wright 29. 



So the amendment was ordered to be en- 

 grossed and the joint resolution to be read a 

 third time. 



On August 14th the resolution was taken up 

 for the final passage. 



The President pro tempore : ' : The question 

 is on the passage of the resolution upon which 

 the yeas and nays have been ordered." 



M r. Kernan, of New York, said : " Mr. Presi- 

 dent, the Senate, by a majority vote, has sub- 

 stituted the article reported by the Judiciary 

 Committee for the article proposed and passed 

 in the House of Representatives and sent 

 here. 



" That was the proposed article which had 

 been brought to the attention of the public 

 many months ago by a gentleman of distinction 

 ( Mr. Blaine) in the party with which he acted, 

 and very well known to the country ; and I 

 believe that it met with no considerable oppo- 

 sition in any quarter. It declares that money 

 raised in a State by taxation for the support of 

 public schools or derived from any public fund 

 therefor, or any public lands devoted thereto, 

 shall not bo under the control of any religious 

 sect or denomination, nor shall any money so 

 raised be divided among the sects or religious 

 denominations. Were this before the Senate 

 I would support it. 



" I should be opposed, if the people of a State 

 were entirely of one denomination, and that 

 the one to which I belong, to placing money 

 raised for the support of public schools under 

 the control of that religious denomination. 



"But there has been another article pro* 

 posed here and adopted by a majority of the 



VOL. XVI. 12 A 



Senate ; and as I wish to call the attention of 

 t tic Senate to this proposed article, 1 cannot, 

 with my views of what is wise either for 

 the Federal Government or for the people 

 of the respective States, vote for this pro- 

 posed article. I ask the attention of Senators 

 to the leading principle or idea which the 

 wise men who framed the Constitution of the 

 United States followed in framing it. It was 

 that the Federal Government, which was to be 

 the Government, and to act for the people of 

 all the States, should have those powers which 

 were essential to action by that Government 

 on subjects as to which the people of all the 

 States had a common, general, national interest. 

 It was to be a Government with power to 

 make treaties with foreign countries, to pro- 

 vide for the general defense, to furnish a cur- 

 rency, to regulate commerce, and to have 

 jurisdiction over other matters of like charac- 

 ter, in which all the States had a common, 

 general interest, and upon which the people 

 of the several States could not properly act. 

 The framers of the Constitution believed also 

 that it was wiser and better that the people of 

 the several States should reserve to themselves 

 and exercise all those powers of government 

 which related to home rights, if I may use 

 that term, to the internal affairs of the State, 

 to the regulating of the domestic relations, to 

 the title to property, the modes in which it 

 could be transferred ; in a word, that the 

 people of each State should have the exclusive 

 power to manage their local and internal affairs 

 as they thought best for their own happiness 

 and prosperity. I think all experience shows 

 how wise this was and is. 



" It was and is wise in reference to the per- 

 petuity and strength of the Federal Govern- 

 ment, which extends over a very wide section 

 of country, over communities living in different 

 States and having different views as to their 

 local matters and State governments. The 

 Federal Government will be strong and the 

 people contented while the people of each 

 State manage their own local affairs, and the 

 Federal Government in its action is restricted 

 to general national affairs. But when in ref- 

 erence to these local affairs of a State, these 

 home matters, the representatives from Massa- 

 chusetts or New York have a voice as to what 

 shall be done in California as to local State 

 matters, the people of Ohio shall have a voice 

 in the local affairs of Missouri, we can readily 

 see that there will not be as much content- 

 ment, and I do not believe there would be 

 as much of good government and prosperity, as 

 if the people of each State managed these local 

 affairs for themselves. It makes the Federal 

 Government strong to leave local affairs to the 

 people of the State, because the people of 

 different States then do not come in conflict 

 in the Halls of Congress as to local government 

 and policy, in regard to which they may have 

 very different interests and views. The found- 

 ers of the Federal Government had the wi- 



