According to these words, the three qualifications are (1) age, (2) citizenship, and (3) inhabitancy of the State he assumes to represent. These qualifications are not questioned, because they are grouped in a special clause of the Constitution; and every applicant, on presenting himself here, is subjected at once to these tests. But it is a mistake to suppose that these are the only qualifications imposed. There is another, mentioned in a later part of the Constitution, more important than either of the others; so that, though last in place, it is first in consequence. It is _loyalty_, which I affirm is made a qualification under the Constitution; and we have already seen, that, even if the organic law were silent, it is so essential to the fitness of a Senator for his trusts, that the Senate, in the exercise of its discretion, ought to require it. But the language of the Constitution leaves no room for doubt. The words establishing loyalty as a qualification are as follows:-- “_The Senators and Representatives before mentioned … shall be bound by oath or affirmation to support this Constitution._”[201] These words are explicit in requiring the oath to support the Constitution. And the first statute of the First Congress, approved June 1, 1789, and standing at the head of our statute-book, provides for the administration of the oath as follows:-- “The oath or affirmation required by the sixth article of the Constitution of the United States shall be administered in the form following, to wit: ‘I, A. B., do solemnly swear, or affirm, (as the case may be,) that I will support the Constitution of the United States.’ … “The President of the Senate for the time being shall also administer the said oath or affirmation to each Senator who shall hereafter be elected, _previous to his taking his seat_.”[202] Thus by the Constitution, explained by the earliest statutes, must the oath to support the Constitution be administered to a Senator _previous to his taking his seat_. But the oath is simply evidence and pledge of loyalty; and this evidence and pledge constitute a condition precedent to admission. As loyalty is more important than age or citizenship or inhabitancy, it has been put under the solemn safeguard of an oath. So far from agreeing with the Committee, or with the Senator from New York [Mr. HARRIS], that it is not named among “qualifications,” it seems to me that it stands first among them. Of course, it is vain to say that it is not expressly called a “qualification.” Let us ascend from words to things. It is made a qualification in fact, call it by what name you will. Men are familiarly said to “qualify” for an office, when they take the necessary oath of office; so that the language of common life becomes an interpreter of the Constitution. Sir, loyalty is among constitutional “qualifications” of a Senator.