The Wheeling daily register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1864-1878, 1865-09-19
Eek Post Facto Laws.
OUlm eahdrhQ Gle IatelHgencer has con

are glad to observe that his friends seem
to have become convinced of that fact;
but, If our readers will excuse little
Latin, We will quote, as applicable 10 Tue
case, "non tall aarilio nee defenso,'ibus ist's
eoet-Attorney General. For the beneht OF
that gentlemen we will state that by
very liberal translation this may be con-
strned 30 mean that the editors defcnce
of the Attorneys position only makes
the matter worse, or by a still more lib
eral construction, may represent the AT
torney General exclaiming 'save me from
nv friendsp We would by no means de-
preciate the legal ability of our sleigh
Dor of the Intelligeneer. We estimate 1T
so highly that We feel free to say he
knows more law than at least one gentle
man who occupies judicial position in
West Virginia, and probably as much as
the Attorney General himself. Unlike
those gentlemen he does not bid the
people rest upon his opinion alone, but
makes show of authority and calls upon
STORY for aid. We must beg leave to
think, however that in the citations made
yesterday morning the editor was peculi-
arly unlucky and materially damaged hi'
case. s.sr
He gives the following definition OF an
er post facto law: " An er post .tacto law IS
one which renders an act punishable IN
manner in which it was not punishable
when committed" This is Chief Justice
MARsHALLs definition, and since it has
received the sanction OF the law editor of
the InteHigencer we must accept 1t as un-
questionably correct, although we are
inclined to doubt whether our distin
guished Attorney General will concur in
that opinion. f.
Is it a punishment, then, to deprive a
man of the right of sufragea If it is, the
test oath law is IN er post tacto law, for
it punishes offences in n manner III
which they were not punishable when
committed. We are much obliged to our
neighbo. for presenting the question i'll
such form that plain man. can easily
understand it. No one can doubt that TO
deprive a voter of the right of suffrage,
directly or indirectly, is punishmeat-
We have good reason for believing that
no more gricvous penalty could be III
hicted upon our neighbor OF upon the AT
t0rnex General than t" dchr!ve them OF
their right to hold Office, aid ii this lie.
privatiOn he a punishmcut how much
more in.olerable would it become ii
coupled with complete loss of the right
to vote. Dsfranchisemcnt wasnnt obeot
the legal penalties Of rebellion before tue
test oath law was passed Therefore, he
cause that act attempts to impose a new
punishment for deeds done long prior 20
its passage, it is al &c post tdCto law with
III the definition furnished by Chief JUS
tice MARSHALL and endorsed BY the IN
tgtkgencer. 1t is therefore not only III.
consistent with our own State Constitu-
ton, bnt direct and palpable violation
Of the Constitution of the United States
No State says the latter Instrument,
shall pass any &c post factO law
But there are also other grounds upon
which it may be shown that tue test oath
law is CT post tdcto in its character; aud
here again we quote from the authority
cited by the latelligeHcer. In th, g. :a Of
CALDER IS BULL, (sec LII Dallas 595)
Judge CHASE (not SALMON P) loi,yered
Tie following opieiOn i'll relation 80 e.
,ost jacto laws:
Il Ill state what laws CONSIDER. &c
e.osi jact0 laws within the words aud the
iutent of the prohibition, LIST EVERY law
that makes an action done hciorr the
iiassing of the law and which Nls innn-
cent when done, criminal; aud Furnishes
such action. Cd Every law that aggra-
Yates crime OF makes it greater than it
was when committed. Sd. Every law
that changes the punishment and in
hicts a greater punishment than the law
annexed to the crime when committed
4th Every law that alters the legal
rules of evidence and requires Tess, or
different, testimony, than the law re-
quired at the time of the commission of
the offence, in order TO convict the of
fender.p = ,r1r
We have seen that the test oath law
passed by the West Virginia Legisla-
tnre, is plainly incladed in the Sd spcci-
fcation,above, Itmay he deemed er post
facto becauseit falls also under the 18th
clause of Judge CHAsE's definition. 1t
indirectly places the man whose vote is
challenged, upon trial fortreason against
the United States or this State, and col.l-
pels him to testify in his OWL case under
oath, either eliminating or cxculpating
himself; and then, after having violated
all the legal rules of evidence III order to
procure the conviction of the offender,
it imposes upon him acknowledgements as
the penalty of his crime. If this test
oath law be not &c post tacto within both
the third and the fourth clauses of the
definition quoted aboye,awc cannot no
agiue a law to which th;,' drtiniiion
would apnlv .sg-