The Nashville daily union. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1862-1866, 1865-11-14

The Northern Democracy, in trying 10
smooth abe path Of It's Southern allies back
into Congress, finds few obstacles in the
shane of laws-am0ng others the famous
test oath act Of july 2, 1864. That act re-
ouiras every person elected TO any Office 10
swear that nc has never voluntarily borne
arms against the United States, nor c0un-
seized nor encouraged resistance 10 the laws,
nor held any office under the rebellion, nor
Welded any voluntary support TO the rebel
Government; and, further, that he will
support and defend the Constitution. IN
doubiedlv. she Retrospective clauses Of the
oath viii exclude, as they were intended to
exclude. an active aud eli consentiug rebels
from Congress, until the act is repealed
which ID will not be Just yet. The Demo
cratic Journals, therefore, resort 10 their old
tactics Of arguing against the validity Of the
law. exactly as they have argued against
the validity of every law meant 10 preserve
the integrity OF the Union during the last
four years. There appears no other meth d
Of ringing m tile Southern representatives,,
since even ii Mr.. Mcpherson could be bullied
into putting them on the roll-which be
can't bc-they c7uld scarcely swallow an
oath quite 50 heavily iron-clad as this.
> sstcrisy's World, rejecting the election
as an unplea ant topic, fires away at the
="
suppose, Tor legal argument. Il objects
fret thut the oath may be meant IS pen
altyi which Is too absurd for serious discus
aion. Z be only other point in the article il
thft The Constitution prescribes an oath "a
be taken by Senators and Representatives
therefore Congress can require no other
The constitutional uaih relates 30 support
ofthc Union in the future, thinks the World,
sud queries "wnere then, 81 the oath o.
1862. porn of revolution, be not In the ma
ture of penalty ior acis OF rebellion, does
Congress get power % compel member
elect to take the fret two-thirds, which re-
hates 30 the past snd does not concern the
future. The TACT Of never having been con
rsrrsd IN q rebellion against the United
staies 8 ceFiauly n0i mentioned among the
constitutional qualifications for members Of
Congress, aud an oath "to support the Con
sIiiutiau" BE- clearly a very difiercnt thing
irem ihe oath rovidcd by the act Of July :
lsd2.
TINS sort Of logic chopping comes To-
laie. The Mor.d opinion IS extreme y
valuable, he doubt, on aquestion Of law. but
possibly that of John Marshall may not be
less veiehty. ln Mlullough agt State o.
MARYLAND. the Chief Justice of the Suprems
Dauri of the United States considers and
dispases Of the very objection which the
World nov seeks 60 raise. lie says;
"rbe powers vested In Congress may
certainly hc carried into execution without
Tueacubur au oaih Of Office. The power &
sraai this security Tor the faithful perform
aure ui duty is mot given, nor Is % indispen-
SADLY necessary. The different departments
may be- established taxes may be imposed
ana co .ccted armies and nayies may be
raised aud maintained and money may be-
borrowed without requiring an oath of Office
ID might be argued, with as much p!ausi-
hiliiy as other Incidental powers have been
assalcd, that the Convention was not un-
mindful oi this subject. The oath which
Iuictt be- oXactod-3hat Of fidelity to the
NaHstiuuuu--is prescribed, aud no other
c-n b. required let Ac io0Hid Be charged
sr5th lHsaHs'u Jei0 should contend iaat "a,
Legislator H.igAt H0t sHpcradd 70 he oatA
directed De- Mc Consultations sach Other oaA
~ afo5 as as lrisfom night sEggCsf. -
Wheaton. alt.
The test oath of 1862 is exactly "such
other oath as the wisdom Of Congress sug-
gesled Ia time OF peril ought TO be taken
lu addition Go the oath prescribed in the
Constitution. Chief Justice Marshall saws
whoever doubts the power Of Congress 10
pre- cfibei such ca oath, Is insane II that
cplhct happens 10 hit the case Of the
Void, thc fault isnotours.-N. I. Iii5HHe.