“One is, that I discover, that, if we should remain here, as we certainly shall do, for a very considerable period, petitions will come in to such a degree, requiring so much paper, that really the price will be vastly enhanced, and it will thereby become a considerable tax to the Government of the United States; for the Senator is receiving, I might almost say, volumes--I know not what the quantity is; it is immense, however--from all parts of the nation.” And then again:-- “Again I am reminded that it is best to try to get rid of the imposing Senator [Mr. SUMNER] on that subject, just as the lady answered her admirer. The suitor had been importuning her time and again, and she had invariably declined to accept the proposition. At length, however, being very much annoyed, she concluded to say ‘yes,’ just to get rid of his importunity. I want to go with the Senator to get rid of this matter, [_laughter_,] because, really, Mr. President, we find his bill here as a breakwater. A concurrent resolution was introduced here for the adjournment of Congress at a particular day. Well, you saw that bill thrust right on it. ‘Stop!’ says he, ‘you must not adjourn until my bill is passed.’ There it was again; here it is now; and we shall continue to have it; and I am for making peace with it by a general surrender at once. [_Laughter._] I stop not there, Mr. President; I go further, and I indorse the Senator to the utmost degree in his proposition.”[221] Mr. Morrill, in an elaborate argument, denied point-blank the constitutionality of the bill,--insisting, and repeating with different forms of expression, that “the exercise of this power on the part of Congress would be a palpable invasion of the rights of the people of the States in their purely domestic relations.… This Constitution has given us no such authority and no such power.”[222] January 31st, Mr. Sumner replied to Mr. Morrill. REPLY TO MR. MORRILL. MR. PRESIDENT, before this debate closes, it seems to me I shall be justified in a brief reply to the most extraordinary, almost eccentric, argument by my excellent friend, the Senator from Maine [Mr. MORRILL]. He argued against the constitutionality of the pending amendment,--you all remember with how much ingenuity and earnestness. I shall not follow him in the details of that speech. I shall deal with it somewhat in the general, and part of the time I shall allow others to speak for me.