The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1810-11-30

policy. incompatible with such practice
Out If the incompatible Office be abandoned
professional rights are itso .facto restored.
III, tor example, judge of this court were
toresign his station, surely he might resume
his practice in his former courts, without
/. qualifying anew.
1t must be agreed. that if the profession of
the law be an Office or place under the com
monwealth at all, it is a lucrative one
Now. the constitution of Virginia expressly
=. !.o!i!:;..::s,- Z:
five o0;ces. shall be incapable of being elect
ed members Of either house of assembly or the
pi1vy Council art. II. If then the con-
struction am controverting, be right, law:
yers are excluded from the assembly 6 the
council the trainers ofthe constitution,
most OF whom sat in the first assembly under
IL, ana their successors ever since, never
(as we know) had any such idea The
wnote practice of the Constitution from it's
origin 70 TINS day-the contemporanenus, the
present, the constant exposition of it. re-
flutes this inference and by consequence
exptodes that construction, of which il is the
direct inducton-,hat attofuies are of
hcers under government. never heard of
out one doubt on this point, which was start
ca ny one member of the last assembly.
Nay, some OF our aolest men have much
doubted, whether the appointment of states
attorney IN the county courts is an office
xnder government. In the senate. the neg
alive was resolved in Mr. Dotidridge's case
In Mr Campbell's. the affirmative in the
other house, remember no precedent,
Iho tne case TO my knowledge has often &C
Cured.
Some may attempt to obviate this last ar
gument. by taking distinction between of.
noes under the constitution and under the
commonwealth and though it be too subtle
Tor the vision and grasp of my mind, vet
should 1t occar, it will be pat to rest BY con
sidering. that this principle of the constituti-
on is not restrained to Offices of its' own pro
viding-that the clause itself recognizes oil
lucrative offices---and that, tho the profes
sion OF the law is not mentioned by the con
seltution' yet 1T depends OH courts of consti
tutional organization
Again by the constitution of the U. 6. art
/ sec. 6 cl. 3, No person holding anv of
nee under the U. S. shall be a member of
e.ther mouse during his continuance in of .
lJ1ce' lsit, or has it ever been, thought that
hereby, the bar of the federal courts are ex
Guided from congress!
one instance Inore-By the act of 1888,
new Kew. Code, p. 40 THE members of
the congress OF the u. S.-Sc all persons who
snail hold any legislative, executive, or in
t.
soever, under the authority of the u. s.
shall be ineligible to. and incapable of hold
ing any seat in either house of the general
assembly, or any legislative, executive, or
)uoic'al once, or 9th Lucrative Office what
soeVer' under the government of this com
monwealth" And by the act of 1899 Id d
oSS No person holding or occupying am
cD1ee or mace, or any commission or APP
PoiNTMENT whatsoever civil! or military
unoer the authority of the u S. whether
any pay OF euloiument be attached to such of
p,aee' commission or appointment, or
o'herwise, or accepting or receiving anv e.
molument whatsoever from the u. s. shall
De capable of being elected to or holding any
ONCE ! gsiatlve. executive, or judicial, or
any other once, place. or appointment OF
trust or profit, under the government of this
commonwealth"
=, now II lawyers in the STATE courts are
ofhcers or placemen under the common
wealth lawyers IN the federal courts are so
under the y. ). and are. by the statutes lust
rec''ed. excluded, not only from all political
anu military s,ate Offices. but from he state
bar also. fl am % be excluded from ,bis
bar tor refusing this test, the gentlemen OF
the federal bar. must be disbarted in the
state courts. Yet 1T was never imagined
even tle Keen sighted Jealousy which pro
uuCeo these laws, never imagined
such conclusion could grow out of them
Inc objection has eluded the sagaci,y of all
our statesmen. lawyers, judges-of all con-
Ceraeo IN devIs'ng, making, executing those
laws. In hse, it never occurred as a posi-
bic opinion, that lawyers of the state or fed.
erai par, are officers under the state or fed
erai government; otherwise. doub,iess. The
exception made by those laws. in favor of
county JUSTICES and militia officers. would
nave oeen extended TO them.
we must suppose the legislature acouain,
eu win the terms, principles. and spirit of
our laws----with the English legal language
and doctrine, the basis OF our own-m,,ch
more with our particular institutions. and
/ win the universal practical Construction ot
.hsm that whenit uses particular language,
uses II IN the sense affixed to il, bv The
Eoglish JurIsts by tho state and national
cons buttons, by former laws, bv constant
Pracuce under them ALI, and by the uniyer-
sal understanding Of the public in previous
cases, all coucurrine.
Mr.. l.. knew OF only two objections IN HE
argument, WINCH had been dedlced from our
own laws and usages. One was, that under
general provision, that all oficers Of ron.
ernmeW snail take the oath OF alleS;ance
tne members of the bar, state and federal
nave been always held bound TO take that
oath that is, they have been held to Be
oB1cerS under government. Bat thjs obiec
ton, Mr.. l.. showed, was founded ON n main
mistake IN point of fact il was no, from
any such reasoning or inference ,ut from.