144 



CONGRESS, UNITED STATES. 



not have remained upon the statute-book. 

 Mr. Speaker, as has been remarked, a new- 

 official oath was prescribed by the Congress of 

 the United States, in 1868, as to persons whose 

 disabilities under the fourteenth article of 

 amendments had been removed. While the 

 4 iron-clad oath ' remains as to all persons not 

 under disabilities, it does not remain as to that 

 class of persons from whom, by the action of 

 Congress, disabilities have been removed. 

 Gentlemen stand here and ask, ' Why should 

 you require a loyal man to take the iron-clad 

 oath ? ' I answer back, why should you excuse 

 a man who broke his oath to enter upon the 

 work of the rebellion from taking the iron- 

 clad oath, and deny that privilege to the man 

 who never committed that offence at all ? This 

 act of the Senate merely puts those who never 

 did violate an oath to enter upon rebellion 

 upon a footing with those who did, and whose 

 disabilities have been removed. It ought to 

 occur to the House that this is simply equal- 

 handed justice, and there is much in favor of 

 the proposition to commend it as it now stands 

 which never did exist to commend it in the 

 other case at all never. It became a neces- 

 sity in 1862 to require of United States officers 

 the iron-clad oath, and that was the reason of 

 its enactment. And because, after disabilities 

 were removed, while the oath remained un- 

 changed the officer-elect could not enter upon 

 the discharge of his duties, Congress passed the 

 act of 1868. 



" Now, we are told that wo must deny to 

 the people of the United States everywhere the 

 privilege that rightly belongs to them under 

 the Constitution of this country, to elect to 

 Federal offices those who are not under disabil- 

 ities imposed by the Constitution itself. It is 

 not competent for the Congress of the United 

 States to impose such disabilities ; not at all. 



" By the passage of the fourteenth article of 

 amendments to the Constitution of the United 

 States, the will of the people was incorporated 

 in the Constitution to the effect that all per- 

 sons having the qualifications of age, citizen- 

 ship, and residence, required by the Constitu- 

 tion for Federal offices, and not under the dis- 

 abilities named in the fourteenth amendment, 

 shall be elective to the offices designated in 

 the Constitution and laws, and if elected by the 

 people should enter upon the office. 



" I therefore make this appeal to-day, not so 

 much in behalf of the persons directly affected 

 by this bill as in behalf of the rights of the 

 American people. So long as your statute 

 remains unchanged, you say to the voters of 

 every congressional district in America, that, 

 although they should vote unanimously for a 

 citizen of the United States, resident in the 

 State, qualified as required by the Constitution 

 to represent them in the Congress of the Uni- 

 ted States, we will interpose this iron-clad 

 oath and nullify their action. Sir, I deny the 

 right of the Congress of the United States, un- 

 der the circumstances, to do any such thing, 



and for the simple reason that, since the pas- 

 sage of the act of 1862 prescribing the test-oath, 

 the people have declared their will and purpose 

 in this behalf, and the extent to which partici- 

 pation in rebellion shall disqualify for office, 

 by an express provision in the fourteenth arti- 

 cle of amendments, and also the mode by which 

 such disabilities might be removed." 



The question was then taken on the passage 

 of the bill, and it was decided as follows: 



YEAS Messrs. Adams, Archer, Asper, Axtell, 

 Ayer, Bailey, Banks, Barnum, Beck, Bethune, Biggs, 

 Bingham, Bird, Blair, Booker, Buck, Buckley, Bur- 

 chard, Burr, Calkin, Churchill, Sidney Clarke, Cleve- 

 land, Conner, Cook, Cox, Crebs, Darrall, Degener, 

 Dickinson, Joseph Dixon, Dockery, Dox, Duke, 

 Dyer, Eldridge, Farnsworth, Fiukelnburg, Garfleld, 

 Getz, Gibson, Griswold, Haight, Haldeman, Hale, 

 Hambleton, Hamill, Harris, Hay, Heflin, Hill, Hoi- 

 man, Hotchkiss, Jenckes, Johnson, Thomas L. Jc 



j-Bvutj jj.aiut/i b ja, JL aiiiB, n imam vv . .rame, jrerce, 

 Peters, Platt. Poland, Potter, Price. Eandall, Beeves, 

 Eice, Sanford, Sargent, Lionel A. Sheldon, Sherrod, 

 Shober, Slocum, John A. Smith, Joseph S. Smith, 

 Stiles, Stone, Strader, Strickland, Strong, Swann, 

 Sweeney, Sypher, Taylor, Tillman, Trimble, Upson, 

 Van Auken, Van Trump, Voorhees, Wallace, Cad- 

 walader C. Washburn. Wells, Eugene M. Wilson, 

 Winans, Winchester, Witcher, Wood, Woodward, and 

 Young 118. 



NAYS Messrs. Allison, Ambler, Arnell, Atwood, 

 Beaman, Beatty, Benjamin, Bennett. Benton, George 

 M. Brooks, Butfinton, Burdett, Benjamin Sf. Butler, 

 Eoderick K. Butler, Cessna, William T. Clark, Amasa 

 Cobb, Clinton L. Cobb, Coburn, Conger, Coles, Cul- 

 lom, Dawes, Dickev, Nathan F. Dixon, Donley, Du- 

 val, Ela, Ferriss, Ferry, Fisher, Gilflllan, Hawley, 

 Hoar, Hoge, Holmes, Julian, Kelley, Kelsey, Knapp, 

 Lawrence, Logan, Long, Loughridge, Maynard, Mc- 

 Craiy, McGrew, Mercur, Eliakim H. Moore, Jesse II. 

 Moore, William Moore, Daniel J. Morrell, Myers, 

 Newsham, O'Neill, Orth, Packard, Packer, Palmer, 

 Peck, Phelps, Pomeroy, Porter, Prosser, Eainey, 

 Eoots, Sawyer, Scofield, Shanks, William J. Smith, 

 Starkweather, Stevens, Stokes, Stoughton, Taife, 

 Tanner, Townsend, Twichell, Tyner, Van Horn, Van 

 Wyck, Ward, William B. Washburn, Welker, Wheel- 

 er, Wilkinson, Willard, Williams, John T. Wilson, 

 and Wolf 90. 



NOT VOTING Messrs. Ames, Armstrong, Barry, 

 Boles, Bowen, Boyd, James Brooks, Cake, Corke 

 Fitch, Fox, Hamilton, Hawkins, Hays, Hooper, lu- 

 gersoll, Alexander H. Jones, Knptt, Lash, McCarthy, 

 Milnes, Samuel P. Morrill, Morrissey, Mungen, Neg- 

 ley, Eogers, Schumaker, Porter Sheldon, Worthing- 

 ton C. Smith, Stephenson, and Whitmore 31. 



So the bill was passed. 



In the House, on February 15th, the bill re- 

 ported by the Judiciary Committee to enforce 

 the fifteenth amendment was considered. 



Mr. Eldridge, of Wisconsin, said: "Mr. 

 Speaker, of all the legislation proposed by this 

 or any other Congress, there is none, in my 

 judgment, more unwarrantable and unjusti- 

 fiable than that proposed by this bill. It is 

 absolutely atrocious. It has no warrant in the 

 Constitution, and no precedent, unless it be in 

 the act to which this is amendatory, in any 

 previous practice of the Government. Aside 

 from that, it stands alone, original as it is 



