Mr. WADE. I have reflected somewhat upon this subject, and I cannot exactly agree with the Senfrom Illinois upon it. We have a law that we deliberately made, and which nothing less than both branches of congress, together with the President, can annul. That law provides that no man who has been engaged in the rebellion or held any office under the confederacy and sworn allegiance to it I do not repeat the exact words of it shall be a member of Congress. There that law stands like a lion in the path. This man, as I understand the committee found, was ajudge who took an oath to an port the confederate government that was in hostility to that of the U.S., and the duties of that office would inevitably compel him to do acts in furtherance of those rebel laws. Our committee pronounce a high eulogy upon him because he did take an oath that he would act as a judge and execute the laws of the confederac, because they say his motives were good. ir, it is all idle to give that construction to it. He violated the laws of the U.S.; he violated his duty as a citizen; be abandoned his allegiance to the Government of the U.S.; and whatever his motives may have been he was guilty of hostility to this Government. Sir, what would his duty as a judge compel him to do? One of the 1st laws passed in the confederacy was that the property of all northern men' in that country should be confiscated and passed over to the confederacy, and all debts that were owing from their people to northern men were to be confiscated and collected for the use of the confederacy; and that was about the 1st duty that this judge had to perform. Instead of enforcinga contract in favor of the man to whom the obligation was due, he sat there with an iron and rebel hand to compel the execution of it to a confederacy warring against his own Government. He, with his eyes open, took this upon himself. If this Judiciary responsibility commmittee had gone down there with a lawful calling, acting in subordination to the laws of the government under which they lived, they would have made themselves liable to this confederate government; it might be that in defending the [lag of their country they would have committed treason to this confederncy and thereby forfeited their lives; and this judge upon the bench, if he were true to his rebel oath, would have been compelled to enforce those laws against them, even to the taking of their lives, because they were true to their own Government. This man voluntarily placed himself in a position where to be true to his own Government he must be false to that confederacy which he had sworn allegiance to. He voluntarily placed himself in a condition where no honest man could act. I do not care what you say of his motives. If he acted up to the laws of that confederate government, at war‘with ours, he was at war with Our Government and compelled to disregard all its laws and to enforce those rebel laws whose object was to put.down the loyal Government. If he was true to our laws he was false to that oath that he had taken. He could not serve God and Mammon, and he knew it when he took the confederate oath. No man can act as a judge under a rebel government and swear allegiance to it without committing an act of hostility and treason against his own Government. If he acted in subordination to their laws he was false to ours. If he was true to ours he was false to that to which he had sworn allegiance. Sir, to pronounce a high eulogy upon a man who is ajudge, a man of good capacity, a eu tleman of character and learning, who vo untarily places himself in this position, and to say that he did so for the good of somebody, is a strange idea of a man’s duty, I think. He places himself where he has to betray one side or the other. If he is true to the confederacy he is a traitor to our Government. If he is true to our Government he is false to that to which he has voluntarily swqn. You pronounce a eulogy over him for putting himself in this predicament, and say he did so because his object was to do good to the loyal men down there! In Heaven’s name, what good could he do that would be for their benet as a judge? For every loyal act that the performed there was a penalty that he'wouid be bound to enforce in his court. How could he protect them? lfhe did protect them, he was a false judge; and when he took an oath to support their government, he was a false judge to 0 so to shield anybody. Sir, I do not wish to judge him harshly, but he placed himself in that predicament; and when a man places himself in hostility to his Government and deliberately takes an oath to a government hostile to his allegiance, I think he is very well dealt by if you leave him in a private station. Let him be honored there, if you please; but for Heaven’s sake do not ro nounce any ofyourjndicial eulogics upon imbecause he has got into that predicament, and say that he is entitled to a seat in the Senate of the U.S., and that right over the law that you yourselves have passed, and that stands like a lion in your path. Sir, law makers should not be law breakers. Can you permit him, with that law standing in full force, to come in and swear? You cannot repeal that law. The Senate cannot repeal it. There it stands. How can a man of moral rectitude say that he will permit anybody to come and trample that law under foot before his e es? How are you going to get him in here? on will endeavor to repeal that law of course. Everybody saw that it was necessary in order to clear his path into this Senate that you should overcome that law. It could not be done in any other way. Failing in that, on now propose to let him in, law or no law. The law stands in full force, and yet the resolution is that he is entitled to take a seat here, not withstanding the law to the contrary that you cannot repeal. Sir, there never was a proposition on earth more plain and palpable than that this man cannot come in here and take the oath without trampling the law under foot, with the up robation and corisent of the senate of the IgU.S. I do not see how an body can so ose that it ca be done.Mr. SPRAGHE. Did he ta e the pay?