Staunton spectator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1849-1896, 1865-09-26
The Congressional Oath.

The Lynchburg Republican says that
''some of those who insist that no one should
be elected to Congress who cannot take the
test oath of 1862, are driven to the necessity
of putting construction upon that oath
which it does not bear and was never inten-
ded to bear. Among these are the Hon.
John NJ. Bolts and our respected cotempo-
rary of the Richmond Whig. Before stating
the arguments of these parties, it will faciH-
itate proper understanding of the subject to
give the reader the language of the oath it
self. 1t is as follows 81 have never given
"aid, countenance, counsel or encouragement
Ito persons engaged in armed hostility to the
"United Ssates.'
1t will be observed that this oath does not
require man to swear that he has lever
given any "aid," &C., to the Confederate gov
ernment or to the authorities of that govern
ment; nor does it swear him that he has
never given any sympathy to the cause of the
rebellion. But it swears him in plain Ian
guage that he has never given any laid,
countenaace, counsel or encouragement to
persons engaged in armed hostility to the
United States" So that it is as clear as lap
guage can make it, that any one who has Civ
en- "aid'' or "countenance'' to any 'spersons"
engaged in the rebellion is excluded. from
seat in Congress. What are "aid and coun-
tenance 2" They are to "help, succor, favor
OF support Any one, therefore, who has
helped, succored, favored or supported (not
the rebellion) but any 'tpersons" engaged in
the rebellion, is excluded from Congress by
this oath. What man or woman in Virginia
has not done one of these thingss Who is
it that has never given any "aid or counten-
ance" to the gallant soldiers of the late war
Who refused to feed, or clothe, or look with
favor and kindness upon any of them? Who
did not throw open their doors to them as
they passed along, naked, and hungry and
thirsty? Who did not have fellow feeling
with them and sympathize with them in their
heroic struggle? Who did not vote for
President Davis? Who did not sell proyi-
sions to the government and sustain and sue
cor it in various ways? Who did not rejoice
over Lees great victories, and the victories of
our other heroes? 1t lis folly for men to say
they never did these, or some of these things.
Both Mr.. Bolts and the Whig admit that
il this be the effect of the oath, that they
know of none who can subscribe to it. Mr.
Bolts admits that he cannot. But they deny
this construction, and contend that the
rssguestion Of nsotive is to decide the matter"
Sg says nothing about smotive," but
4 that the parties shall not have been
the act. IF the question be merely
motive" then any Union man who
held Office during the rebellion, as many did,
without any purpose whatever of beneftting
the Confederacy, but merely to discharge a
3 public duty to their people, or to keep from
conscription-such, for instance, as magis-
trate, or clerk, or post quartermaster ANY
person. indeed whose heart was not with us,
might very well take the oath in question.
But it is perfectly certain that no man who
held office at all, let his motives" have been
what they may, can take his seatin Congress
under this law; and if no one who held Office
can take it, how can any one who gave "aid
and countenance" to those engaged in rebel
lion take it? The one prohibition is as alb
solute as the other.
The truth is, this test oath was framed for
the express purpose of excluding from Office
every man who had ever had, directly or in
directly, openly or tacitly, any connection or
sympathy with the rebellion, or any "per-
sons" connected with it, or who had ever
"yielded voluntary support to any "au
thority' under the rebellion. The "nsotiue'
of the man is nothing, nor is it any part of
the OATH"