The Wheeling daily register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1864-1878, 1865-12-05
From the Parkersburg Gazette
Sudyc Loomis and the Test o nih I'M
portant Opinion

From the Parkersburg Gazette
gudyc Loomis and the Test o nih-Im-
portant Opinion.
ED1roEs GAZETTE You will remem-
her that the late election in our State
gave rise to conflicting opinions IN re,
gard to the constitutionality of the law
known as the test oath law" How any
sane man could have honestly enterl ain
ed the opinion that this act of the Legis.
lature, so palpably in iconfiictswith the
Constitution of the State, was Constitu-
tional, passes all comprehension. Judge
LOOMS, a gentleman of fair legal &C
quirements, whose loyalty is beyond all
question, at tho last session o. his Court,
in Roane county, Nov, 18th, was called
upon by the Grand Jury to instruct them
upon the provisions and requirements of
this law. In compliance with their wish
es, he gave judicial Interpretation of
tie Statute, which will not only chal-
lenge the assent of every honest and in
telligcnt legal mind of the State, but
will put a quietus upon such ofiicious
opinions as that of Mr.. Hall, the Attor-
ney General, "et id omhe genus" which
are merely the vagaries of partizans
whose researches and conclusions are un-
sustained by the light of honest and in
telligent legal investigation.
1t appears that after the Grand jury
had retired to their chamber to consider
of their presentments, they returned into
the Court and asked for instructions,
touching a matter then under considera-
ton by them, and the Foreman pro-
pounded to the Court the following
question: Whether the Supervisors and
Inspectors of the late election i'll Roane
county. who refused to require the aft.
davit of persons, whose votes were chal-
lenCed as prescribed by the Act of Febru.
ary %, 1865, were liable TO indictment
for such refusal The oath prescribed by
the Legislature Feb. IS, 1865, is rs fol
lows:
Il, A B., (name Of ahiant,) do solemnly
swear that l have never voluntarily
borne arms against the United States,
the reOrganized government OF virginia,
or the State of West Virginia that l
have never voluntarily given aid, COM
fort or assistance to persons engaged III
armed hostility against the United States
the reorganized government OF Virginia,
or the State ct West Virginia; that
have not at any time sought, accepted
exercised, OF attempted TO exercise, any
office OF appointment whatever, under
any authority or pretended authority,
hostile or inimical TO the United States,
the reurgauized government of Virginia,
or the State of West Virginia; that
have not at any time yielded voluntary
support 10 any government or pretended
government, power OF constitution WITH
in the United States, hostile or lnlmlcal
thereto or hostile or lnlmlcaI 10 the ro-
organized government OF Virginia or the
State of West Virginia, that ! will sup
port the constitution Of the United
States, and the constitution of the State
OF West Virginia aud that l take this
oath freely, without any mental reserva-
ton or purpose OF evasion
In answer 10 which the Court said,
that the Constitution of the State OF
West Virginia declares who may vote i'll
this State The first section of article
III of the constitution is as follows:
The white male citizens Of the State
shall be entitled 10 vote at all elections
held within the election districts in
which they respectively reside; but no
person who is minor, or of unsound
mind, or 4 pauper, or who is under con-
victiou OF treason, felony, or bribery III
any election, or who has not been resi-
dent of the State for one year, and of
the county in which he offers to vote for
thirty days, next preceding such offer,
shall be permitted to vote while such
disability continues" and the 9th Sec
ton of Article who are citizens OF this
State, thus:
The citizens ofthe State are the citi-
zens of the United States residing there
in; but 10 person i'll the military, ma
val or marine service ofthe United States
shall be deemed resident of this State
by reason of being stationed therein"
Now it is not competent for the Legis-
lature to pass any law which modifies,
restricts, or enlarges any of the provi-
sions of tho Constitution of the State ;
and any act of the Legislature in con-
flict with the Constitution, is of no
binding obligation upon any citizen of
the State, but is absolutely null aud
void.
In order to determine the validity of
the Act of February %, 1865, let us see
whether its provisions, if carried out,
would in any wise conflict with the two
articles of the Constitution referred to.
1t will be seen, by the LIST Sec. of Art.
Sd, that all white male citizens of the
State may vote, unless they fall within
the class of exceptions therein mention
ea' which exceptions are as follows:
Minors. persons of unsound mind, pau
pers' persons convicted of treason, felony,
or Drlping IN an election, or who have
not resided Ter one year in the State and
for thirty days in the county wherein he
offers to vote. The said Act of Februa.
ry, 1866, would tend to exclude any and
all persons Offering to vote, whether
they were of the classes excepted in the
Constitution or not. unless they produc-