The Wheeling daily register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1864-1878, 1866-03-21
aTbe Unau.werabIe Argument"

Inc IHI6tfytHCtI uds puphohSu, 'o"
the notes of its Reporter, speech on the
Test Oath, made in the House of Dele
gates in February, 1865, by Mr.. FERGU-
SON, of Cabell county, and heads it in
large type and in trne sensation style,
" AN UNANswERABLE ARGUMENT" THE
TEST OATH SUSTAINED &c Now, we
want our readers to- know the very best
argument that can be made in defeuce OF
this measure, and then they can Judge
for themselves
AS the Reporter has given it to us, a
part of the argument isunintelligible, aud
that which cannot be understood is GER
tainly unauswerable The true Radical
will, however accept tue assurance of
the MfelHgencer rs sufficient, and as it
proclaims the argument To be unanswer
able be will take il to be 49, without go
lug TO the unnecessary trouble of trying
to comprehend it But ne do not place
much faith in the assertions of that pa
per, either a. 10 Iacls OF arguments, aud
We have, therefore, taken some pains to
examine the speech itself, aud try 10
spell out It's meaning Aud here We may
remark that Mir Ferguson seems To
have thought that his own argument
was not entirely conclusive, for, as We
I.,ll l., 4 h.,t q
test oaths are nnjustifiable except in
time of war. and should not he enforced
now the war Is over
Ii may even be doubted whether Mr.
FERGUSON, when he made The speech
supposed bis own argument to he sound.
He Az making a speech for The occasion.
aud f"w men knew better than he, how
10 10 that thug He know the LeglaIu
ture would pass the bill, right or wrong.
They were bent upon it All that was
asked of him was To furnish some pre-
tence of argument for it, however himsN
aud unsubstantial the pretruce might
I've 1t he had snok,n To them in He
brew anu then told them in English
that he had proved the bill to he all
right it answered every purpose
Passing over the portions of the speech
which are intended merely for bHacombe
there would seem to be really four points
made, that are meant for argument
Iu the first place, Mr. fFFGUSuN
quotes an act passed February >, 1868
government of Virginia. prescribing no
should be citizens of that State. and
contends this act determines who are
citizens of Vest Virginia and as such
entitled to vote
But we adopted in the New State our
own rule in relation to citizenship, and
a very different rule from that prescribed
by the Virginia law. The sixth section
OF the first article of our Constitution
declares that The citizens of the State
are the citizens of the United States
residing therein and the eighth section
of the eleventh article continues IN force
such laws of Virginia only as are not re
pu nnant to the Constitution of this
State To ascertain whether auy per
sou is citizen of Vest Virginia, there
are two questions only tn be determined:
is he a citizen of the United States
Does he reside in this State :" The act
which Mr. FERGUSON quoted prescribed
different test of citizenship altogether
1t was repugnant TO our own Constitu-
ton, and was, therefore, never in force
as a law of the New State
There is nothing then in this argu-
meut Mr. FERGUSON was merely quo
ting law which had no application to
the question.
The second point made by Mr. F is,
that a public enemy cannot be q citizen,
and therefore, is not entitled to vote AID
init this, if Jon please But there are no
public enemies" in time of peace The
character of enemy ceases with the war
In the language of The Declaration OF
Independence, we must Lold these men,
as we hold the rest of mankind enemies
IN war, in peace, friends aud the Presi,
dent of the United States has long since
told us, that the rebellion waged by IA
portion of the. people against the prop
erly constituted authorities OF the gov
erument OF the United States has been
suppressed We cannot, therefore, eX.
ciude voters now on the ground that they
are public enemies aud Mr.. FERGUSON,
on bis own priuciple, is correct in main
raining that this class of legislation
shonld expire with the war
The next point make in the nnan
swerable argument is that, as the fifth
section of the third article OF the Con.
stitution provides that every citizen
NAV in time of war, insurrectiou or pub
lie danger, be required by law TO make
oath or affrmation that he viii support
the Constitution of the United States
and the constitution OF this State, under
pain of suspension of his right OF voting
therefore, every citizen may, i'll time OF