Virginia free press. (Charlestown, Va. [W. Va.]) 1832-1916, 1866-04-12

1 Circuit Court Of Jefferson County,
The Circuit Court for JeffersOn County, w
Virginia. commenced its session N Shepherds.
town on Monday last, Judge E. 3. HAIz, pre-
siding. His charge to the Grand Jury, Nc
learp-for we were not present at the time
was appropriate and conciliatory. and be seern-
ed to give satisfaction to those present.
After the charge to the Jury, and little
preliminary business, Gov. STANTON, who had
been previously appointed to contest the right
Of ANDREW HUNTER, Esq TO practice law with
out taking the test oath prescribed by the last
Legislature of West Virginia, addressed the
Court for about an hour. he stated that he
felt embarrassed, inasmuch as he having the
privilege of practising to contest the right Of
any lawyer. He handled the subject with in
genuity, but having quoted old worn out and
stale authorities of the dark ages, we think he
failed to sustain his cause. Ab
Mr.. HUNTER then replied in an argument
of more than an hour, which was listened to
with marked attention.
The points maintained by Nr. Hunter in the
argument, which he had commenced at the
recent term of Court in Berkeley and contin-
ued in Jefferson were:
That under tie ruling of the Court Of APP
peals of West Virginia, in the Quarter case,
the license of a lawyer in Virginia, resident
within the limits of West Virginia was neither
taken away, nor even suspended, blythe divi-
sion of the State and that thus license was a
franchise which the Legislature has no right to
take away.
That the act of February last imposing upon
LAWYERS, as a condition of their being permitted
to practice their profession, a test oath, which
it is impossible for them to take without per-
Jury is clearly an "ex post fscto law; forbid
den both by the Federal and State constitutions,
and therefore void. p
That this act further violates another clause
of the West Virginia Constitution, which forbids
the passage ofany bill ofattainder. The proper
definition of bill Of attainder, being, &c the
infection of punishment by Legislative act,
without judicial trial" And he further
showed most conclusively by reference to his,
own case, how gr.evous punishment was thus
inflicted without trial. or even any alleged Of
fence against the laws of West Virginia.
He showed further that the act in question
violated both the Federal and State Constitu-
tons; which in express terms forbid the pas
sage of any act "impairing the obligation of
contracts" That the grant by the Common
wealth, of licence to practice law, upon con-
ditions which had been fully complied with,
raised contract between the State and the
practitioner; which the former is expressly for
hidden to violate and that it can no more do
it by indirect than direct means.
He relied further upon the clause in the West
Virginia Constitution which forbids every one
being compelled to become witness against
himself" which was clearly the effect of this
act; and that the act not only Furnishes for a
past offence but an offence, if any there was; a.
gainst the United States, and that notwithstand-
ing the party had been fully pardoned for any
such supposed offence against the Federal Co.
vernment.
The decision of Judge Hall is looked for with
much interest by thosclwho have suits, as well
as the legal profession. We presume he will
Give his oDinion in few DAYS