tion to argue it--I am in
favor of granting it to them. But in the absence of this respectful form
of application which, since May 22d, 1872, has become a sort of common
law as preliminary to amnesty, I simply wish to put in that they shall
go before a United States Court, and in open court, with uplifted hand,
swear that they mean to conduct themselves as good citizens of the
United States. That is all.

"Now, gentlemen may say that this is a foolish exaction. Possibly it is.
But somehow or other I have a prejudice in favor of it. And there are
some petty points in it that appeal as well to prejudice as to
conviction. For one, I do not want to impose citizenship on any
gentlemen. If I am correctly informed, and I state it only on rumor,
there are some gentlemen in this list who have spoken contemptuously of
the idea of their taking citizenship, and have spoken still more
contemptuously of the idea of their applying for citizenship. I may
state it wrongly, and if I do, I am willing to be corrected, but I
understand that Mr. Robert Toombs has, on several occasions, at
watering-places, both in this country and in Europe, stated that he
would not ask the United States for citizenship.

"Very well; we can stand it about as well as Mr. Robert Toombs can. And
if Mr. Robert Toombs is not prepared to go into a court of the United
States and swear that he means to be a good citizen, let him stay out. I
do not think that the two Houses of Congress should convert themselves
into a joint convention for the purpose of embracing Mr. Robert Toombs,
and gushingly request him to favor us by coming back to accept of all
the honors of citizenship. That is the whole. All I ask is that each of
these gentlemen shall show his good faith by coming forward and taking
the oath which you on that side of the House, and we on this side of the
House, and all of us take, and gladly take. It is a very small exaction
to make as a preliminary to full restoration to all the rights of
citizenship.

"In my amendment, Mr. Speaker, I have excepted Jefferson Davis from its
operation. Now, I do not place it on the ground that Mr. Davis was, as
he has been commonly called, the head and front of the rebellion,
because, on that ground, I do not think the exception would be tenable.
Mr. Davis was just as guilty, no more so, no less so, than thousands of
others who have already received the benefit and grace of amnesty.
Probably he was far less efficient as an e