Mr. Patterson should refuse to take this oath; suppose he should say, “I cannot take this oath; you have voted that I am qualified, but havin accepted this office, having exercised the uties of iIt, cannot subscribe the oath;” what is your position 7 You are in the position of having voted that he could do that which he himself decides that he cannot. I do not say that he will so decide. He is of opinion that he can take this oath. Let that be left to him. I cannot say that he can take it. I confess that I do not see, under my view of the law and of the reading of it, heiv, ifI had done what it is admitted was done in this case there is no doubt about the facts I could take the oath. This is a very important question, let me say to Senators; this is the precedent you are set ting. If you say today that a person who has admittedly accepted an office and exercised the duties of it under a government in hostility to the U.S. may notwithstanding, swear that he has not done that and be admitted because his motive and object in doing it was not to injure the U.S., but really to benefit them, how would you keep Alexander H. Stephens or anybody else from being admitted? Ste hens just before the rebellion broke out may 0 a speech in which he deprecated it? He may come hereand say “Inns vice resident in the rebel confederacy; I acted for iiiur years as VEEP; I did all I could to uphold it; I made speeches in favor of it, ” as we know that he did, In which heurged upon the southern people to unite together and fight the Union and establish their independence, that that was their only safety. Suppose he comes here and says, " l was really opposed to this thing, andI really did this for the purpose of protecting the Union.” A queerway of doing it, it is true! In hiacase itwould. be veryqueer; but in the case under consideration testimony was submitted to the committee; we had the testimony of a witness before us, a colonel from Tennessee; and from the testimony which was submitted to us and it was undisputed I was satisfied that Mr. Patterson was a Union man at that time; that he wanted to preserve the Union; and that it was urged upon him to take the of fice for the purpose 0 protecting the Union men of that country, it being known that the majority of the people in that part of the State of Tennessee were nion people. It is an embarrassing question; it is cmbar rassing to me, exceedingly so, I confess; and I have not seen very clearly how to dispose of the question. I confess that when a gentleman comes here who in fact in his heart has been a Union man all the time and has done what he could to protect Union men when he was in the midst of the secession country, when he exercised the duties of his office as far as he could for their protection, although he did exercise the duties of an office under the confed cracy, although he himself administered the oath to support the confederac to other persons, I feel strongly for him. but it seems to me if we receive such a person here in this way we do awa with the oath and we bring into disrepute the very law which we have placed upon the statute book; and I authority to do that? I submit the question Mr. President, so far as I am concerned. I do not know that I shall say an thing further in the case; and perhaps I should not have said this much ifI had been able to agree to the majority report; and had it not been that we are in the very last of the session, when we are so overburdened with labors that I found it impracticable to do so, I should have written out my views and here presented them as the views of the minority of the committee in reference to this matter. As it is, not having been able to do that, I have endeavored briefly to present the view of it which occurs to me If other Senators can see the case differently, if Mr. Patterson can be admitted to his seat, and they are satisfied and can see their way clear to vote that he is qualified under the circumstances, the fact of his being here will gratify me as much as any rson, though I cannot myself see it in that ght.