nderstand it takes the ground that, as the
law is a living or profession, the oath cannot be insisted
upon to take that living away, and that the President's pardon
restores all such rights. The country has been repeatedly
admonished that such a decision would be made about this time;
nevertheless, a very considerable sensation was created when
it was officially enunciated. All these movements are but
preparations for a counter-revolution in the interest of
slavery and treason." ---- "I learn that the opinion of Justice
Field against the test-oath, like that against military trials
in time of war, goes outside of the immediate case in issue,
and indulges in a fierce onslaught upon test-oaths
in general. If so, it will only add another reason for such a
re-organization as will prevent the judges in the last resort
from becoming the mere agents of party, or the mere defenders
of rebellion. The adage constantly quoted, yet never out of
fashion, that 'Whom the Gods wish to destroy they first make
mad,' is having a pointed illustration in these successive
judicial assaults upon the rights of the people. Although
the Supreme Judges hold for life, there is at once precedent,
necessity, and law for such a change in the present system
as will in a short time make it a fearless interpreter of
republican institutions, instead of the defender and apologist
of treason."

The decisions were announced on the 14th of January, 1867. On the 22d
of the month, Mr. Boutwell, from Massachusetts, introduced a bill
into the House far more stringent in its provisions than the act of
Congress just declared invalid. It was a pitiable exhibition of hate
and vengeance against all persons who had been engaged, directly or
indirectly, in the rebellion. It declared that no person who had been
thus engaged should be permitted to act as an attorney and counsellor
in any courts of the United States; and made it the duty of the
judges, when it was suggested in open court, or when they had reason
to believe that any person was thus debarred, to enquire and ascertain
whether he had been so engaged, and if the court was of opinion that
such was the fact, he was to be excluded. The court was thus, upon the
suggestion of any one, to be turned into a tribunal for the summary
trial of the accused without the ordinary safeguards for the
protection of his rights. In intro