The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1865-12-18
al THE SUPREME COURT TEST OATH

Presidential PRrdOnN---Do they Re
store CItiHenshIP--VIcySs OF AttOr-
ney General Speetl---DOea the Presi-
dents Pardon Restore all the Rights
OF Citizenship?
WASHINGTON, D. C., December 49,
The United States Supreme Court room
was crowded to-day with lawyers, in
Guiding some of national distinction
~ from various parts of the country, to
hear the argument on the question us
glHl to whether pardon by tho President
restores the recipient to all the rights OF
citizenship which he enjoyed previous
to the rebellion. Matt. II. Carpenter,
ESD, Of Wisconsin, said he had been
--- applied to by A. II. Garland, of Arkan-
sas, to submit motion TO the court and
, 10 ask for its consideration. Ho stated
that no resided in tin extreme North
western State, aud had favored all the
measures to suppress the rebellion, but
now was prepared to extend the right
hand of fellowship to his reconstructed
brother; and as our flag floats from the
a Atlantic 70 tile Pacific, RIter four years
OF stern, civil war, this is the timo to
fix deep aud strong the land marks of
constitutional law. The peculiar case,
OF the petitioner, Mr.. Garland, ns well
rs Mr.. Mari, Of Louisiana, grows out of
the late rebellion i'll which he took a
part. He has submitted himself TO tho
authority OF the Government, and, for
reasons held by the President to be en-
full pardon. He asks to he reuLmitteti
rs counsellor Mt this bar; but is met
80 In this endeaNor by the act of Congress
passed in 1865. This law requires at
toFneys to take the oath that thew have,
not participated wilfully in the rebel
lion, and 70 render allegiance and Obe-
t. - dienCe TO the Government This act is,
complete bar to tho petitioners rights
IL it violates the spirit of the Constitu-
ton, 1t is void. This court has held
that any legislation is void which inn
pedes business and renders the rights
secured by the Constitution useless
Tho members of this court, for instance,
hold Office for life, or during good be-
haViOr, and aver that it would not be
competent for Congress to provide that
they should not preside beyond a GER
tain age. Take tho ctlse of assault and
battery: It is prohibited by n fine but
It's not followed by civil Disqualified
ton. Suppose an attorney commits an
VI assault and battery and Is fined, and
auppose Congress had passed Law re-
quiring him TO swear that he had never
committed the offence, would not that
bc Unconstitutional? What Is tho re-
NADER, .l-.T.l H
First, considering. the petitioner is
guilty of treason. He might have been
punished with death, but the President
has fully pardoned him. and the effect
Is TO restore him to his rights, civil and
political, and the holding OF office, ms
fully as If he had never committed the
offence. He engaged in the rebellion.
and has been subjected 70 forfeiture
but the President restored him 10 his
rights, yet the net of Congress fixes n
perpetual bar to his holding of ofiice
and is in direct opposition to the par
don. =.
The President said by his paryiops.-
You shall not be precluded from prnc.
Using in the Supreme Court, but by the
act OF Congress he Is disqualified. The
49, President Is trying to pardon, and the
Congress to punish. The former is
wiped out by the latter. The President
may pardon tor all offences, aud this
construction Is sustained by the Feder-
alist aud other authorities, including
~ former Justices of the Supreme Court.
,,55sF The language in the Constitution Civ