The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1866-01-15
s,,,. INV nebcIs.


There is an evident and growing dis
position in favor OF the repeal or
amendment of the net passed February
%. 1865, entitled "An act to prevent the
prosecution of suits and the suing out
az process by persons engaged in rebel-
Ion" Such measure is urged not
exclusively by rebels and their advo-
Gates, but by men of undoubted loyalty
and 10y the public opinion of the State,
so far. as it has been expressed. A
measure advocated by pardoned rebels
is generally to be viewed with susPi-
zion, but in the present instance, tho
logic of events, demonstrated by tho
conuuering Union army, admits the
propriety of the proposition. The law
3u Question was passed when the down
fall of the rebellion, though near,
seemed neither sure nor speedy. us
intention and elect then were 10 ue-
Drive treason of every weapon wnlch IL
might otherwise receive from the hands
of its sympathizers. This WINS the
whole purpose appearing from the
words of the statute, and its title, If 1t
he evidence, goes to show that the law
was intended to cease with the
war, 1t was directed ut persons
ut tie time of the prosecution of
their suits, or who hnd aided or abetted
IL Heretofore. The objection to this
provision is, that it applies TO every
suit, whether brOughtin the past, pres
cnt, or future, while such aid to rebel
lion, as was prevented by its PasshSe, is
no longer possible. The law remains,
but its reasons fell with Richmond.
The propriety of removing the objec-
tionnbte features of this law is bes,
shown by It's effect at the present time
As il loOksat thechnrncter of the plaint-
iHonly, the law may be made to shelter
the VIIest traitor in our borders from the
responsibility of his contract. In
cnse reported to have recently occurred
in Kannwha county, n notorious rebe
took advantage of this just reconstruction
of tho law, to require of the plaintiff,
much less offensive "nider and nbet
tor" the affidavit specified in the law
and escaped just clnim, because the
latter could not take the oAth. II was
hardly the intention of the Legislature
to interfere for the protection OF ont
rebel sued by another.
But to take wider view OF the sub
ieCt. Whatever may be the wishes of the
loyal people of the State, as to the flu
ture Of those who fought against theiI
country, this law, in the redintegratton
of society, must be positively harmful.
Whether the late rebel Is TO stay with
us or emigrnte, such Legislation Is uh'
fortunate. He cannot stay and be use
ful in society without the nbilityt to en-
force his contract. He cannot, at least
will not, leave tho State unless he car
sell his real property here and be Ger
tain OF payment. If theintention be to
conliscato his property, lett be done fol
tho benefit of the State or of UnioT
mon who have suffered by his acts, anG
not for the benefit OF his individual
debtor r
We have not referred to any part o.
this question, save its expediency, fol
what has been said seems sufficient tc
SHOW the necessity for the repeal pro
iation for the protection of the loyal
portion OF the community, which shall
be free from the objections stated to the
present law.