The Wheeling daily register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1864-1878, 1866-06-20

| England the attorney derlVeu hIS
to practice by letters patent under tne
great seal, upon his taking the pre-
seribed oath. The statutes thap aeIno s5
| lied the grant Of license also conIerreu
upon him the right to practlce ns pli
fession unless his name should De stfucA
from the roll upon his CONVICTION Vi senno
of the offences therein prescribed. ~.
In looking to the organic law OF tnls
government and of the several otales
and the legislation in pursuance tneerol,
if manifestly appears, that the existea eoD
| of the legal profession was necessary ioi
the nroper administration OF the natlo 2I,sa
and several State governments. in0
services of gentlemen learned IN t the t Su.
we're essential to the Judges OF Inc 90
nreme Cont of the United osaIos,
fndges of the Supreme ana . lnLeiioa
| conTis of the several States III uis e1i
IF their respective duties 10 Ill tne
the nosition of Attorney General OF the
f 9hT led States who is the legal adviser OF
the President, and the position OF -Attor-
nev General of each State who Is the le-
n ni adviser of the Governor and
69ficers of State, learned counsel
mnst be selected. 1t is also among
other things, provided by the
9Th article Of the constitution of the
United States, that in all criminal prose
cutions. the accused shall "have the
assistance Of counsel for his defence"
! In this State any three Judges OF the
Superior courts Of this State may grant
a license in writing to practice law
chan, 1874. sec. ], Code of 1849. The Sd
section of same chapter provides that
every such person (attorney) snail
nroduce to the court before which he
wishes TO practice, satisfactory evidence
If being so licensed and take an oath
that he will honestly demean hlmseh Ill
the practice of the law.
This oath in addition to the oath TO
support the constitution OF the United
States and the constitution of this State
are all the oaths that were required TO
be taken by an attorney (who has been
So liceBsed) up to the
QUARTER CASE.
In this case the applicant derived us
ripbt to practice before the passage OF Inc
act recurring the test OATH We are not
loft in doubt as to how he derived that
rioht, The language Of the law has fixed
iii is bv grant. The Attorney Cen
oral claims it to be q mere privilege;
admit that to be true, is it not the grant
If q privilege of value ? He qualified
himself for the practice of his profession
TO meet the requirements of the law as
| il stood. The duly appointed officer OF
the law three Judges) being satisfied
that he was qualified, upon the produc
ton to them Of the certificate required
| in such cases, granted to him for and on
behalf of the State the right to prac
| tice.
But the 9Th and 9th sections of Oh.
| l64 of the Code of lS49 reserves to the
States, through the courts, the right to
supercede or suspend or annul those IL
censes and the right to practice. But
neither can be done without cause
those causes are conviction of felony or
malpractice, and if charged with either,
the attorney is entitled to trial by
Jury. In addition to the right of the
court to rescind, suspend or annul his
license, the court has right TO Emo him
for contempt Of court.-See 9TH section,
same chap and II. j. Fishers case.
The right to practice law upon prop
erly issued license, raises at least an Inn,
piled contract between the attorney and
the State. Upon his doing that which
the law requires him to do to quality
himself for the profession, the State
grants him the right to pursue and ENJOY
that profession. Is it, after the implied
contract has been consummated, cempe-
tent for the State by legislative condem-
nation TO deprive the other contracting
marty of that light, or to impair the obi
cation Of thai contract / think not
The court MAY do so for the causes In
the statute stated, and in the manner
f prescribed, bui for no other cause and IN
no other way.
In this view Of the case does not the
act in question cOntrayene the 10th Sec
tiop Of the 9th article OF the Constitu-
ton of the United States, and the 9TH
section of the ID article of the COnstltu-
ton of this State, forbidding the passage
Of any bill of attainder, &c post fdcto lar
or Ia v impairiug the obligation OF con-
tracts.
The act in question, in the opinion Of
the court. is In violation of the constitu-
tional provision forbidding the passage
of an err post fcto lnW The effect of such
law is not TO prevent the commission of
crime in the future and to provide Tor
its punishment but is to declare acts
done or committed, before, the passage
of the law, offences which were not Of
fences when done or committed, and to
provide for their observation-disclosures its
repugnancc to our social compact.
The effect OF the test oath is retroac-
tive and penal. hence the law requiring
il is unconstitutional. 1t requires him
to testify against himself touching the
commission OF the highest crime known
TO the law-treason. In this it violates
the ID section of article I'd of the cOnsti-
tuition of this State, which provides that
no person shall be compelled to be wit
ness against himself 1t also, for the
same reason. violates or conflicts with
the 9th article OF the amendment to the
Constitution Of the United States.
1t is true it GOes not impose upon him
the punishment prescribed by the con-
stitutiOn for those guiltyof treason, but
it Furnishes by Corfeiting his right to prac-
tlCe his profession. 1t virtually repeats
the license granted him by the State.
Suppose the act in question compelled
the party to testify whether or not he
had committed the offences recited in the
oath would it not be clear violation of
the constitutional provision which says
'no party shall be compelled to testify
against himself" and if it be conceded
that the legislature cannot pass it in
this form, can it then pass an act which
| --o,,ll ;,l;rao.lI- bava tho effapt of i'm