Sir, I trust Congress will find that it has the power. One thing I know: if it has the power to amnesty Rebels, it has the power to enfranchise colored fellow-citizens. The latter is much clearer than the former. I do not question the former; but I say to my excellent friend from Maine that the power to remove the disabilities of colored fellow-citizens is, if possible, stronger, clearer, and more assured than the other. Unquestionably it is a power of higher necessity and dignity. The power to do justice leaps forth from every clause of the Constitution; it springs from every word of its text; it is the inspiration of its whole chartered being. Mr. President, I did not intend to say so much. I rose to-day merely to enable the absent to speak,--that colored fellow-citizens, whose own Senators had failed them, might be heard through their written word. I did not intend to add anything of my own; but the subject is to me of such incalculable interest, and its right settlement is so essential to the peace of this country, to its good name, to the reconciliation we all seek, that I could not resist the temptation of making this further appeal. February 1st, Mr. Carpenter, of Wisconsin, in an elaborate speech, replied to Mr. Sumner, and criticized his bill, especially so far as it secured equal rights in churches and juries. February 5th, in pursuance of the opposition announced in his speech, Mr. Carpenter moved another bill as a substitute for Mr. Sumner’s. Mr. Norwood, of Georgia, sustained the substitute; Mr. Wilson of Massachusetts, Mr. Frelinghuysen of New Jersey, and Mr. Morton of Indiana predicated the earlier proposition. Mr. Sumner then replied to Mr. Carpenter. Before the vote is taken, I hope the Senate will pardon me, if I explain briefly the difference between the two amendments. First let me say a word in regard to the way in which the amendment moved by me comes before the Senate. Even this circumstance has been dwelt on in this debate, and I have been criticized--I think not always justly--on that account. Here is a memorandum made for me at the desk from the Journal of the Senate, which shows the history of this amendment. I will read it.[225] … At last, during this session, before the holidays, when the present measure of Amnesty was under consideration, I found for the first time a chance. Twice had I introduced the bill, and on my motion it was referred to the Judiciary Committee, who had twice reported against it. Sir, was I to be discouraged on that account? No committee enjoys higher authority on this floor than the Judiciary Committee; but I have been here long enough to know that its reports do not always find favor. Have we not during this very session, within a very few days, seen that committee overruled on the Apportionment question? REPLY TO MR. CARPENTER.