Meanwhile Mr. Sumner’s colleague, Mr. Wilson, with a view to “a bill in which all could unite,” moved the reference of the pending bill to the Committee on the Judiciary, “for the purpose of having the whole question thoroughly examined,”--a motion which on the part of the Committee itself was strenuously opposed. Upon this posture of the case, January 19th, Mr. Morton, of Indiana, remarked, that “there seemed to be an obstinate determination that Virginia must come in according to the bill reported by the Committee or not come in at all,”--that “the Senator from Nevada [Mr. STEWART], with all his zeal and his good intentions, was standing as substantially in the way of the admission of Virginia as the Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. SUMNER]”; and turning to the latter, he said: “It seems that the distinguished Senator from Massachusetts is unwilling that Virginia shall come in now upon any terms; and the Senator has developed more clearly this morning than he has done before what his desire is. It is that there shall be a new election in Virginia. Am I right in regard to that?” MR. SUMNER. I have not said that. MR. MORTON. Then what does the Senator’s argument mean, that the last election was a monstrous fraud? What is the object in proving that the last election was a monstrous fraud, unless the Senator wants a new election? Let us have an understanding about that. MR. SUMNER. I wish to purge the Legislature of its Rebels. I understand that three-fourths of the Legislature, if not more, cannot take the test oath. That is what I first propose to do. After further remarks by Mr. Morton, Mr. Sumner spoke as follows:-- MR. PRESIDENT,--In what the Senator from Indiana has said in reply to the Senator from Nevada I entirely sympathize. I unite with the Senator from Indiana in his amendments. I unite with him in his aspirations for that security in the future which I say is the first great object now of our legislation in matters of Reconstruction. Without security in the future Reconstruction is a failure; and that now should be our first, prime object. But while I unite with the Senator on those points, he will pardon me, if I suggest to him that he has not done me justice in his reference to what I said. And now, Sir, before I comment on his remarks, I ask to have the pending motion read. THE PRESIDING OFFICER. (Mr. ANTHONY, of Rhode Island, in the chair.) The pending motion is the motion of the Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. WILSON] to refer the bill to the Committee on the Judiciary.