On the presentation of the credentials of Hon. David T. Patterson as a Senator from Tennessee, Mr. Sumner moved their reference to the Committee on the Judiciary, with a view to inquiry whether he could take the oaths required by Act of Congress and the rule of the Senate.[44] In remarks on this motion, Mr. Sumner referred to the case of Mr. Stark, of Oregon.[45] Afterwards, in reply to Mr. Grimes, of Iowa, he said:—
…
But, Sir, there was something that fell from the Senator from Iowa to which I would make a moment’s reply. He imagines, that, if we make this reference, we shall establish a dangerous precedent; and he even goes so far as to imagine the possibility that he or his colleague, arriving from the patriotic State of Iowa, may find their credentials called in question. Sir, the Senator forgets for a moment the history of the country: he forgets that we have just emerged from a great civil war,—that the State of Tennessee took part in that war,—and that the very question now under consideration is, whether the gentleman presenting himself as a Senator was compromised by that war.
If in the State of Iowa there should unhappily be a rebellion, and if public report should announce that our patriot friend had taken part in it to such an extent as to sit on the bench as a judge, enjoying its commission and swearing allegiance to it, then should he present himself with credentials as a Senator, I think we should be justified in asking an inquiry; and that is the extent of what I ask now. I take the case the Senator from Iowa supposes, but remind you of well-known facts which he omits; and there, permit me to say, is the whole question. If the case of Tennessee were an ordinary case, like that of Iowa, there would be no occasion and no justification for inquiry. But it is not an ordinary case; it is a case incident to the anomalous condition of public affairs at this moment. It cannot be treated according to the ordinary rule; it is a new case, and to meet it we must make a new precedent.
The Senator is much afraid of precedents. Sir, I am not afraid of any precedent having for its object the protection of right; and just in proportion as new circumstances arise must they be met by a new precedent. New circumstances have arisen, and you are called on to meet them frankly, simply.
The motion prevailed,—Yeas 20, Nays 14.
July 27th, the Committee reported that Mr. Patterson, “upon taking the oaths required by the Constitution and laws, be admitted to a seat in the Senate of the United States”; and this report was adopted,—Yeas 21, Nays 11,—Mr. Sumner voting in the negative.