Such, Sir, have been my efforts to bring the Senate to a vote on this question. Never till this moment has it been in my power to have a vote on a question which I deem of vital importance. I have here on my table letters from different States,--from California, from Florida, from Virginia,--all showing a considerable number of colored persons--shall I say of African blood?--aliens under our laws, who cannot be naturalized on account of that word “white.” Now, Sir, here is a practical grievance which needs a remedy. This is the first time that I have been able to obtain a vote upon it; and I should be unworthy of my seat here, if, because Senators rise and say they will vote it down on the ground that it is out of place, I should hesitate to persevere. Senators will vote as they please; I shall vote for it. The Senator from Illinois [Mr. TRUMBULL] properly says it is in place. Never was there a bill to which it was more germane. You are now revising the naturalization system, and I propose to strike out from that system a requirement disgraceful to this country and to this age. I propose to bring our system into harmony with the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States. The word “white” cannot be found in either of these two great title-deeds of this Republic. How can you place it in your statutes? The motion was lost,--Yeas 22, Nays 23. Subsequently, on the same day, the pending bill was itself defeated, the original bill being preferred,--and the latter now coming up, Mr. Sumner renewed his amendment, remarking,-- Now I have to say that that is worth all the rest of the bill put together. That is a section that is pure gold. It will do more for the character and honor and good name of this Republic than all the rest of the bill. I am for the rest of the bill, but this is better than all the rest. Now I ask for the yeas and nays. After further debate the amendment prevailed,--Yeas 27, Nays 22; whereupon Mr. Williams, of Oregon, moved the following addition:-- “_Provided_, That nothing in this Act shall be construed to authorize the naturalization of persons born in the Chinese Empire.” July 4th, the debate on the House bill being resumed, Mr. Conkling, of New York, criticized sharply the course of Mr. Sumner in pressing his amendment, to the peril of the bill,--denominating it “an act of self-will in defeating the purpose of a great majority of this body to consummate a simple, practical, and urgent measure.” Mr. Sumner replied as follows:-- MR. PRESIDENT,--The Senator from New York has chosen to make an assault on me to-day, because, in the discharge of my duties, I do not see my duty as he sees his duty,--because on this Fourth day of July I choose to stand by the Declaration of our fathers. For that I am impeached by the Senator from New York.