The Daily state journal. [volume] (Alexandria, Va.) 1868-1874, 1871-02-02
REPEAL OF THE TEsT-oATH.

"Solitary aud alone, the STATE Jour-
NAL set the ball in motion" for the
repeal Of the test-oath, or iron-clad. More
than year ago we asked that this should
be done as an acceptable measure Of
amnesty to a large and deserving class of
people in the South Those who bore arms
in the ranks, the young men, and the
original Union men, who, while they were
not the cause of the war and had no hand
in bringing it on, nevertheless, could not
subscribe to an oath which required them
to swear they had never voluntarily borne
arms, given aid and comfort to the enemy
or sympathized with the South in the re-
bellion.
The number of native Southerners who
could conscientously take this oath was
very small indeed, and every man or wo-
man who could not do so was disqualified
from holding any position under the gov
eminent. We were DESTROYS that this one
cause of complaint on the part of the
people of the South should be removed,
that at least that excuse for continued dis
disloyalty or indifference might no
longer be pleaded. Aad then, too,
we could not see any good reason
why men who were allowed to con-
troll their own State affairs, ell the offices,
vote for President, Senators and Repre-
sentatives in Congress, should be excluded
from the privilege of holding small
clerkship in the postoffice, aspiring to the
important position Of letter-carrier, taking
the place of janitor at the custom-house,
or entering West Point or Annapolis as
cadets.
In our advocacy Of this measure we are
happy to knew that we have had the sup
port of the best Republicans in Virginia.
There were few here who opposed it on
the highly patriotic principle that it
would increase the number Of aspirants to
Office, aud lesson their own chances; but
then, you see, they will have to become
good and true Republicans before they can
possibly hold Office under Republican
administration, and as all are now quail
fed we may look for good many who had
no. hope of preferment before, but were
completely shut out, to enter the lists and
compete for Federal prizes.
The bill repeating this oath, which
passed the House yesterday, and had al
ready passed the Senate, relieves all who
are not disqualified by the fourteenth
amendment, -that is, all who never held an
Office before the war, which required them
to take au oath to support the constitution
OF the United States and afterwards went
into rebellion.
There was quite spirited discussion
over it in the House when General Butler,
from the Committee on Reconstruction, re-
ported it back from that committee, with
recommendation that it should be
adopted. Mr.. Porter, representing this
district, it seems was opposed to it in the
committee, and made speech against it in
the House, while Mr.. Plat, from the Peters.
burg district, spoke in favor of it, and
voted as he spoke.
The correspondent of the New York
Tribune gives the proceedings had n MOI
day upon this important measure, as fol.
lows
The committee on reconstruction sgreed
this morning, to report for passage the Senat,
bill providing that all persons not disqualified
by the fourteenth amendment from holding
Office, may take the modified oath, instead Of
the iron-clad st-oath, and the report was
made by General Butler. Pending debate on
it the House adjourned. Mr.. Porter, of Vir
ginia, chairman of the subcommittee to whom
the subject had been referred, opposed the bill
in committee, on the ground that it is danger
GUS to go any further in the direction of remov.
ing disabilities unless provisions can be made
at the same time by law for the protection oil
loyal citizens, white and black, at the South
Until this is done, Mr.. Porter thinks that legis
lation removing disabilities encourages acts o.
prescription and violence on the part Of the
late rebels. Mr.. Porter, from the same sub
committee, made minority report in the form
of the following rough draft of bill, which
be thinks will give the needed protection in
the courts to loyal people in the South:
Whereas, The following named statss-to wit
Alabama Arkansas, Delaware. Florida, Georgia, Ken
lucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi, North Caro-
lima Soutn Carolina, Tennessee Texas, and Virginia
have denied persons within their respective jurs
dctions the equal protection of the laws, and have
in other respects violated the Constitution of the
United States and the laws made in pursuancs
thereof in relation 10 persons within their respec
tive Jurisdictions ia consequence Of their color
prejudice against them; therefore
he it enacted, &c. That in all cases. civil ard Grim
inal which now pending in any court Of any o.
the above named States either party in civil case
and, in criminal case, the defendant or accused
party, or the injured party or in of his hel
Death one er of the relatives of the de
ceased living within the jurisdiction of sad State
Court or nearest thereto, If living in sale
Jurisdiction may have said civil rimina
moved to The u s Circuit Court for the District In
which said State Court ia held, upon making anc
filing an affidavit that he, she, they believe thai
Justice cannot be obtained in said State Court il
consequence of the color Of prejudice against the
aiiant or the deceased injured party Suits may BIZ
commenced in the U. s. Courts by either party upon
a similar affidavit.
A further provision of the bill prohibits
under severe penalties, the exclusion of citi
zens from being summoned or put upon th'
lists to be drawn as jurors, or from serving Al
such in any Federal, State, or Territorial
court, on account of their color. The consid
Grafton of this bill was postponed by the com
mittee until Tuesday next. Mr.. Epson o
Ohio, Republican, and Mr.. Morgan of Ohio
Democrat, the other members OF Mr.. Por
ter's subcommittee, disagreed to the report
Mr.. Epson takes the ground that the legisla
ton proposed would revolutionize the entire