Wilmington journal. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1844-1895, 1868-11-27


repeated EFFORTS 10 prevent this Senator
from taking his seat on this floor, when
there was no apparent reason for it.
There is no one here who can say that he
is banned by the Howard Amendment
Those who oppose him here, do SO only on
presumpti7e evidence He did not take
any oath. The opposition say the presump,
ton is that he did, as the law required it !;
and, from the eagerness manifested here
to deprive him OF his seat, it is clear that
If their object is not gained or the matter
settled to-day, by political trickery, it will
come up again very soon. He was tired of
this wire-working and trickery, and he had
submitted to it silently as long as he in
tended to. be was as good Repn blican
as any man on the floor, but he would not
do wrong, knowingly, to promote party
interest or to satisfy personal Spleen
Some Senator was anxious for the yeas and
nays on this question. He was in favor of
1t he desired TO. enter his protest, and
above all, he desired the people to know
who, In this body, are controlled by
narrow. nliudedness or selhshneSs. 1t was
clear TO his mind that the Senator was not
banned, and that lie did not take an oath
About the time that the Senator was elected
Solicitor OF his county the State seeded,
aud there was no oath required. In Beau
iort- county he knew instances where
magistrates were appointed and not re-
qulred to take the oath, unless they did it
from preference. Tie opposition hold
that ii he did not take an oath, he was
not an officer. What then, can be his
offence, to ban him ? He hoped the
proposition to reconsider would not pre-
vail.
ILr. Blythe said the law required n
County Solicitor to take al oath to support
the Constitution of the United States, and
the officer or Court who failed to admins
ter that oath violated the oath of Office and
perjured themselves. We, as Senators,
are the Judges Of the qualifications of our
members, aud we have sworn TO observe
the Constitution Of the United States,
thereby pledging ourselves not to admit
any one whom we believe to be banned by
the Howard Amendment; and he, for
one, Vas Lot willing to periure himself.
Therefore he was in favor of reconsidera-
ton at once.
Il. II. Galloway (colored) said he did not
intend 10 say much, but it was evident to
lis mind that if the Senator held the Office
Of County Solicitor, and did not take the
oath, that those who were prosecuted by
him, while he was acting in that capacity,
would como back on him. He had heard
OF speeches The Senator had made during
the campaign, that had reflected on his
race &c was pledged TO pursue the same
course oS legislation as in Georgia. He
was a dangerous man and ought not to be
turned loose.
III. Rich, Republican, said ho thought
it very singular that Mr.. Avery shonld be
singled out as q mark, when another Soma
tor, whose case had been postponed to the
same time, should be left aloDc. He did
not know what influence was working
against Lin, and he did not think it right
to make fish Of one and flesh Of the other.
The Senate, on yesterday, by very hand
some majority, lad agreed to postpone
this case until the 10th of December, and
he hoped that the matter would remain as
il was.
Mr. Robbins said that certain Senators
had viewed this matter in strange light,
and thought Mr.. Avery ought to be ex-
Guided, because, as they assert, he is a
dangerous man. The question is not what
kind Of a man Mr. Avery is, but it is a
question Of law: Is he banned by the
Howard Amendment ? He recognized the
Howard Amendment as a part of the Con-
stitntion, and if it could be shown to him
that any member on this floor was banned
by that Instrument, let him be q Democrat
Wing, Republican or Radical, he would
vote to Vacate his seat. He assured Sena-
tors that he did not defend Mr.. Avery on
partisan grounds, and he was glad to say
that he had generally found the Senate
disposed to act fairly II cases Of this char
acter. He did not use this language to
fatter, but was sincere in what he said,
aud he felt proud that he could speak thus
of a body Of which he was member. He
appealed to Senators to cast aside all
questions irrelevant to the case in point
to forget that Mr.. Avery was ever seces- !
sionist and come up fo'Ely and squarely to
the point: Is he a banned man ?
Some gentleman hero advanced the idea
that ho is banned by the reconstruction
acts. II that was the test he would admit
it, and, under that test, the Governor OF
the State aud q majority Of the Legislature
are also banned. The Governor cannot
take the iron-clad oath, neither could a
large majority of the Senate, and yet the
9'h section OF the supplemental act of re-
construction requires it, But, Senators,
the test in the reconstruction acts does not
Provisional Government; they have ac-
complished the purpose for which they
were intended, and that was to get US back
in the Union. When he took his seat, as
Senator, he simply qualified. How did
the Senate know that he was not banned ? |
Simply from his own declaration. Simply |
on the virtue of his own veracity, and in |
that manner all of them were admitted
Maj Avery says he will swear he did not
take an oath to support the Constitution
Of the United States. The Senate believed |
him (Mr. Robbins) Why not believe Maj
Avery? You say lie did take the OATH
Proce ii. Why say you DO not believe
him why insult his constituents by saying
you doubt the yeracity Of their fayorite
Why insult North Carolinians by impeach-
ing the veracity of her honored son ?
Again Mr.. Avery was elected to the office
Of Solicitor just two weeks before the State
seeded. 1t was out of fashion at that
time here to take such oath. When he
says he did not take it, it is presuming
great deal to say he did, and, if he did not
AXE the oath according to law he was never
Solicitor He may have acted as such. but
was never legally qualified.
Again, Mr.. avery was elected just two
weeks before the State seceded-as least
Month after the war had actually begun,-i
What does the Howard amendment say
e says those who held an Office prior to