Brownlow's Knoxville Whig, and rebel ventilator. [volume] (Knoxville, Tenn.) 1863-1866, 1864-02-13
The Virtue Of The Amnesty Oath.

The Virtue OF The Amnesty 0alh.
Much contrariety Of opinion has existed
and still exists in regard to the change ci-
icctod in the status Of the rebel citizen up
on taking the oath prescribed by the Presi-
dent NJ n condition precedent 10 his pardon,
II has been thought by many that the oath
possessed both present and retroactive
virtue by which the jUror secured not only
reinstatement in his citizenship, and con-
scquontly, full protection in .ftUo, but also
guaranty Of indemnity for all losses he
may have sustained ut the hands Of the Gov
cmmcnt during the period Of his alicn0go
from, on rebellion against it, This doctrine
so popular with rcpcntant rebels, and too
readily asscntcd to by numbers Of loyal
men, we have never concuTcd m To nc
ccpt il, is to agree that the United States
Government shall make good the losses in
cured by the rebels in consequence Of their
own rcbclious conduct and offer Il prrmiim,
under the scmbancc Of Il parton, for past
disIoyalty,
But we are spared the labor Of II further
discussion Of this question. We have an
official, if not an authoritative settlement
Of it in the very pointed and positive letter
addressed by Col. KEITH, Acting Provost
Marshal General of East Tennessee to Il
citizen Of this place, The letter will be
found in anothcrcolumn and the careful peru
sal Of itmay save many persons the trouble
of preparing, and the officials the tcdium OF
listening to their demands against the GOV,
crmcnt for compensation, Our readers
will no doubt think Col. Keith "a plain,
blunt man in very truth,-auch as the
times demand-and they can but admire
the "incXorablc logic that forces his con-
illusions, To all sorowiugrebcls who may
not like his decision we have only to SAY
make the most ofitl We would meanwhile,
commend to all such the predetermined task
Of restoring rights that have had no lreri-
oHS existence; and, in the meantime would
tcndelly suggest TO others that neither the
President nor Congress has yet abrogatcd
that incstimabc right-"He right to Jchmg
for hc0SoH.'
p $. Since being furnished with the let
ter above referred to, we have received from
COL Keith the two following documents
since received at hi, ottcc-thc one from
the office Of the War Department, the other
from the Quarter Master General office at
Washington. They are conclusive upon the
question discussed by Col. Keith and fully
corroboratc his position:
QUARTERMASTER GENERALS OFFICE,
Washington, d. c. January -, 1854.
CAPTAIN +. B WHITNhN-Isst. Qunrferm0Ster
hp0rrHe TgaeSssc-Captan: In reply to so much
Of your letter Of the 4th ultmo as relates to pay
ing account, for purchases made from parties in re-
beiou. or disloyal to the Government, you are in
formed that no payments should be made to such
persons.
As to what would be considered SUFFICIENT evidence
of loyalty, no specific instructions can be siven.-
There are so many cases Of simulated loyalty pre-
,cutod in connection with claims, that the mere taxi
inc the oath Of allegiance Is not Of Itself sufficient
proof OF loyalty. Unl,ss your knowledge Of the
party corrohoac' the letter and spirit Of the oath
Won should have the evidence Of well known and
undoUhtcd loyal men to support it, before paying
money to person: whose loyalty has been question:
cd Very respectfully,
Your obcdcnt servant,
By order CHAs THOMAS,
Asst q. NJ. Gen.