June 5th, at the next stage of the bill, Mr. Sumner moved his amendment in the following form:-- “_And be it further enacted_, That every person claiming the service or labor of any other person as a slave shall pay a tax of two dollars on account of every person so claimed: but in no case shall any person so claimed be sold for the purpose of collecting the tax.” The yeas and nays were ordered, and, being taken, resulted, Yeas 19, Nays 16. So the amendment was agreed to. * * * * * June 6th, Mr. Anthony, of Rhode Island, who had voted for the tax on slaves, moved a reconsideration, not because he had changed his opinion, but, as he said, at the request of Senators. This was to give an opportunity for another vote. In the debate which ensued the amendment was assailed by Mr. Doolittle, Mr. Browning, Mr. Cowan, and Mr. Hale. The latter quoted the words,-- “And if we cannot alter things, Egad, we’ll change their names, Sir,”[70]-- and insisted, that, however it might be called, it was a tax on slaves; on which Mr. Wade remarked from his seat, “So much the better.” Mr. Sumner said in reply:-- MR. PRESIDENT,--I presume there is no difference among Senators in desire to follow the Constitution. The Senator from New Hampshire [Mr. HALE], on my right, cannot be more desirous to follow it than the Senator from Pennsylvania [Mr. WILMOT], on my left. In that respect they are equal. Nor do I believe that the Senator from Illinois [Mr. BROWNING], over the way, can claim any particular monopoly of such devotion. In that respect, Sir, we are all equal. Our difference is as to the meaning of the Constitution. But it is a poor argument which finds its chief force in asseverations of devotion to the Constitution. Conscious of my obligation to support it, and of my loyalty, I make no such asseverations.