The Newberry herald. [volume] (Newberry, S.C.) 1865-1884, 1866-04-18
The Repeal of all Fest 0athS Require
ment Of Peace.

Mtut Ol ItdCcs
The experience of mankind is against either
the policy or wisdom Of test oathS. They are
inconsistent with tie existence Of Republican
institutions. They are utterly opposed to the
spirit or legislation of free people. They
are the emblcns of vengeance. They can
scarcely be regarded as among the symbols OF
liberty.
It is, therefore, with pleasure that we record
the efforts of the Hon. W. +. Finck, one Of
the representatives from the State of Ohio, IN
favor of their repeal All honor to those
statesmen, of every section, who, amid the
clamor and fanatclsm Of the present, remain
firm in their adherence to the Constitution
and to the great cause ofpublic right. Rising
superior to the madness of the hour, they
would still preserve the freedom of the coun-
try, in deed as we'll as in name. They have
not yielded to the domination of q partiZan-
ship, which would, in the blindness ofits fury,
sweep away every landmark of Justice and &C
customed law. Fetered as the South now is,
her people ca: do but little more than render
to the President and all true lovers of their
country the honest tribute of their patriotic
judgment.
Having few days since briefly alluded to
the unconstitutionality of these oathS, We
would now say few words in reference to
their inexpediency.
Their effect certainly is neither to harmo-
uize the, country or to promote kind and fra
ternal relations between the different States.
Their result is to shut ont nearly the whole
of the people Of eleven Of the CONFERENCE.-The
from any practical participation in the affairs
of the Government.
Mr.. Finck thus,clcarly illustrates their log
&c {: "Now what is our duty to the people OF
9he South? Is it to crush them, and while
we impose upon them the burdens Of Govern
znent exclude them from its bencfitsl 1t is
TO seek by our legislation to degrade tfcm
and make them outlaws? We have deterln-
iaed that they shall remain with Us, citizens
Of the same common government. Shall they
remain with US as our equals or not?
II want them to return to their full and
complete allegiance to the Constitution, not
as an inferior or degraded people, bit an Their
true manhood, as the equals Of the people oT
>erery otter .State We must have confidence
in them, They and their children are des-
tined to live with US and Our children for gen
'erations to come. 1t is best that we should
live together on terms Of friendship and equal
ity,"
The continuance of these oaths upon the
:statute books is contrary to the amnesty
which has been granted by the Executive.
The power for this prerogative is beyond
the authority or control of Congress- 1t is
derived from the Constitution Itself The sec
ond Section of the second Article vests in the
President the power to grant pardons and re-
prieyes for offences against the United States.
The grant is without limit or qualification,
with the single exception Of cases of lmpeach-
'lnent Not only so, but Congress Itself has
recognized the wisdom of this provision OF the
organic law, and committed itselfin favor of
the policy pursued by the President in refer
ence to this matter.
K By its enactment of the 18th July, 1862, it
declared that the President was thereby au-
thorized, at any time thereafter, by proclama-
tion to extend to all persons who may have
participated in the existing rebellion, in any
State or part thereof, pardon and amnesty,
with such exceptions ard at such time and on
such conditions as he may deem expedlent tor
the public welfare.
In pursuance, therefore, of the Constitution
itself, and with the sanction Of Congress eX-
plicitly upon the record, the President on the
29th Of May last, did by proclamation an
.nounce his terms Of complete amnesty, which
have been accepted and complied with by the
people Of the South.
The necessary result is that they are there
by restored to as complete and entire an e2NaI-
-ity Nth tile people Qf'eeeTy other St"te as y
The tcar had necsr 0ccurrcG, or any c1r1I StrNg-
gle taken place. The amnesty sweeps away
every statute of disability. 1t destroys not
,enly every pretext, but every weapon Of war,
whether on the field in legislation,
The amnesty has been acceded to. It IS e!-
fcacious and operative. Congress has, there
4ore, no more legal authority to keep up the
Sembance ola war BY hostile statutes than 1t
would by embattled hosts. The strife is over.
= 1t should be so recognized by every depart
enent Of the Government. And that this view
Ss correct is apparent if we consider the effect
of the amnesty proclaimed by the President.
Lilly in his abridgment, thus states the law
"a pardon" says he, "discharges not only the
sounishment which was to have been inflicted
upon the person that did commit the offence
pardoned, but also the guilt Of the offence IT.
self It pardons the tauJtS0 clearly Mat IN
the cue Of the IuoO the offender IS as lnn0cent as
ifhe had necer c0nnaitted the ctence.
So, too, Bacon, in his abridgement, in dis
,cussing this question, says; 1T was formerly
doubted whether pardon could domore tnan
take away the punishment, leaving the crime
and it's disabling consequences removed. But
1t is now settled that a pardon, whether oy
the King or by Act of Parliament, TemoreS
not only the Punishment, 5utaU tie Ifg15 d'S-
abilities consequent on the crimc."
A test oath which excludes from Office, on
account of voluntary participation in the re-
cent civil contest, certainly is a "disabEDg
consequence" of that participation. 10 al
lcge, therefore, that the amnesty of the Presi-
} hIyi md
disability, is 70 maintain that, although it