Mr. ROGERS. Very well, then; if that Oath is now required to be taken under an act already in force, then it is unnecessaryto insert here an provision for the taking of that oath. But that is not the ground on which I propose to strike at this portion of the bill. My reason for making this motion is that I regard the requirement of this test oath as odious, unjust, and despotic. I object to the provision It of the bill, because it is intended to prevent any person in the South who has been in any way engaged in the rebellion from occupyinv a position under this bill. It will exclude all persons in the South who have given an aid or comfort to the rebellion, or who have conin any manner engaged in it, or who have held any position under the confederate govermnent, no matter how unwillingly such persons may have participated in the rebellion. tmay prove difficult or impossible to find in the southern States persons, who are able to take this test oath. Some Depts of the GOvernment have already found it necessary to dispense with that oath in order to carry on the machinery of the Government in the southern States. I oppose this upon another ground: that a test oath of this kind is unconstitution al, that there is no authority in the constitution of the U.S. to the Congress to inflict upon the conscience! of any men any oath in regard to the support of the Federal Government except the oath laid down in the constitution of the U.S. itself. It is an oath to support that constitution; and any obligation attempted to be. inflicted upon people by virtue ofan act of Congress, difigrent from that contemplated in the constitution, is not binding upon the conscience, is in violation of law, is an infringement on liberty, an effort of despotism to strike down a people because they have disagreed with us on great political questions, and haw seen fit to take up arms in defense of the position they occupied. I am opposed to this, sir, for the reason that I want to restore harmony and good feeling to every section of the country. I do not want to see any more laws passed. after peace has been proclaimed and war has been declared to have ceased, making a discrimination against any person, whether that person was engaged in the rebellion or not. I hold that under the general amnesty and the manner in which they have been treated by the POTUS that immaculate man who has attempted to defend the integrity of the whole country and to restore it to its former rand eur, it is an infringement on the part o congress to prevent persons, merel and simply because trey have been enga in rebellion, from holding office under thisihnkrupt law.