New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1865-12-16
A PRESIDENTIAL PARDON
Does II Restore All Civil Rights
Argument Before the United States
Supreme Court
WASHINGTON, Friday, Dec. Is, 1865.

The United States Supreme Courtroom was
crowded to-day with lawyers. including some Of ma.
tona distinction rom various parts Of the country to
hear the argument the question TO whether par
don by the President restores the recipient to all tho
rights Of citizenship which he enjoyed previously to the
Rebellion.
NJ. H. Carpenter, esq, Of Wisconsin. said he had
been applied to by A. II. Garland Of Arkansas to sub
IRENE Northwestern State and had favored
all the measures 10 suppress the Rebellion,
but was now prepared 10 extend the right hand OF el
owshp 10 his reconstructed brother; and as our flag
floats from the Atlantic to the Pacific after four years
OF stern civil this is the time to fix deep and strong
the landmarks Of constitutional law The peculiar case
u the petitioner Mr. Garland. well Mr.. Mari of
Louisiana grows out Of the late rebellion in which he
took part He has submitted himself 10 the Govern
ments authority and for held by the President
be entirely sufficient he has been granted full pardon.
He asks to be readmitted counsellor at this bar but
met in this endeavor by the act OF Congress- passed in
1863 This law requires attorneys TO take oath that
they have not participated wfully In the Rebellion.
and W render allegiance and obedience TO the Govern
ment- This act is complete bar to the petitioners
rights. II it violates the spirit Of the Constitution. IL
void. This Court has held that any legislation is void
which imposes burdens and renders rights secured
by the Constitution useless The members Of this
Court for instance hold Office for life during good
behavior and therefore would be mpetent for
Congress 10 provide that they should not preside beyond
certain age Take the case OF assault and battery.
IT is punished by fine, but Is not followed by civil
disqualification Suppose an attorney commits
assault and battery and il fined, and suppose that
Congress had passed law requiring him to swear that
be unconstitutional What is the result OF the
law Of which complaint is msdei First,
considering the petitioner as guilty of treason.
President has fully pardoned him. aud the effect is to
restore him 10 his rights civil and political and the
holding Of Office as fully as il he had never committed
the ofense. Engaging in the Rebellion subjected him
to forfeiture, but the pardon restored him to his rights
Yet the act of Congress fTes perpetual bar 10 his
holding Of office and is in direct opposition to the par
shall not he precluded from practic!ng In the
Supreme Court, hut by the act Of Congress he
is disqualified. Tho President ia trying to pardon
and the Congress TO punish the former 10 wiped out by
the latter. The President may pardon for all ofenses,
and this construction Is sustained By the Federast
and other authorities including former Justices Of the
Supreme Court. The language in the Constitution
giving the President the power TO grant reprieves and
pardOrs must be construed according to the sense.
The power was understood In England at the
time OF the adoption Of that instrument. The
Constitution Ia the same today as II was al the period
il was ratified Those who stood by the President In
the Constitution be not ah0rn Of its power In peace
The gentleman referred 10 the annals Of England TO
not only the punishment, but also the guilt Of the
ofense ITSELF In the eye OF the law the person 10
as innocent as II be had never committed the
The pardon will enable him TO prosecute for libel any
one " no may call him traitor or fclon. II regen
crates and renews him. and To call him traitor is to
power Of the king to make him new man. This the
Supreme Court has similarly decided The President
has exercised the power In behalf OF the petitioner as
70 make il impossible 10 inaict any punishment upon
him for the crime Of treason but the act OF Congress
does infct punishment II excludes him from office.
This the effect OF the law because having committed
the ofense specified he cannot swear hcinever has
which absolutely disqualifes him from holding any civil
Office. This is punishment. An American citizen
who thinks he can obtain an once. beieyee tnat al
other things will be given unto him. When tho War
ceased the Constitution resumed its sway over taose
parts Of the country where its operations had been sus
pended. The learned gentleman cited various au
thorites 10 show that disqua6catons punishmen.s
and could be visited only upon persons who have been
found guty'of offeDses on due process OF law The
you shall not be disqualified in consequence of
anv treason you have committed" but Con
grcss says to him lyon shah not practice In the
courts unless you take an oath that you never commit
punished. When pardon Is granted tho recipient
cannot be deprived Of the restoration Of his rights be
1t is in effect forbidden by tbe Consultation OF the
regard the act pardon as 1t Is understood in England
II Compress in opposition TO the power OF pardon
should be permitted to prescribe oaths for those who
limit They might. II ever we should
have corrupt body require an oath as qualification
for Office thai the recipient, had neye, voted for or
their power The right OF the petitioner to exercise his
Office is species Of property and to be considered as
other gst No man can oae h tIe
The forms of law. The authorities sustain the
petitioner pet oa' that he has right in this Court
Of which he rs can be d vested. only BY
excuse in the truth that it war war act. When II
was passed our were falling on many batto-ields.
Mothers and friends were weeping at open graves. and
the pubic heart stung 10 madness and revenge but
Low that peace las returned let the small still voice
go from this temple to quiet whatever excitement
sa a Of dG 10 Sa pSS
prosperity may shed their blessings over once more
united people. II get from this court such procla-
nation then those who believe N special Providence
and that not even sparrow falls 10 the ground without
lis special notice. Will fns their faith strengthened by
the accession to the Enthusiastically OF one who en-
Joys the reputation OF always having been the generous
friend Of popular liberty IN ilS most comprehensive
Attorney General Speed said he reioced as much as
Mr. Carpenter who had just addressed the Court TINT
peace has again returned Az lie understood the argu
me nj that gentleman had maintained that Willie IN re-
bellion against the United States, Mr. Garland wGs
still an officer OF this court with as much right 10
az he had TO locomOt0n and property. On this
MIR Speed took issue. There never was time when
Congress did not prescribe qualifications for once
The petitioner arrayed himself with those wAo not
only endeavored destroy tls Court Dut the uoSefh
ment itself and thereby ceased to be an officer Gould
not the power that made the office destroy III the
position OF the gentleman was correc, Judge ma
erath who never resigned his place a. Jadge Oh inc
district Court Of South Carolina bu. who took part IN
the Rebellion will be restored TO his position when ne
10 pardonel by the President But the pardon would
not certainly restore him Take also the case Oh post
masers and officers Of the army and navy who pariic
pated in the Rebellion. IL certainly would not De con
that a pardon would restore TO them their ofhces
snS reesls The proposition is that by his treason
Mr. Garland did not forfeit his Office; and IT Is Insisted
that an attorney in this court holds an once
now there are public and private officers a.
there are public and private corporations and
there are offices established in the Constitution
and also BY law. Is tho position Of an attorney
private or public oficef Ii 1t his private property
attorney Ia not admitted the bar for the purpose
Of giving him Office Congress has said that the Court
NAV nsthhsh rnlea and In l7a9 the qualification Tor the