Daily Ohio statesman. [volume] (Columbus, Ohio) 1855-1870, 1867-01-18

uIeblOu cISco WAS dullOuUCtu,
reports from being made for publication,
but the rule has, been relaxed on condition
that the publishers state that the reports
are from reporters notes and not from the
official manuscript of the Judges. The
following report is from the shorthand
notes Of Mr.. ID. y. Murphy, one of the
conductors of the Reporter, and for many
years well-known reporter in the United
States Senate.
E'a The official Opinion. %.
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT,
a. Monday, Jan. IA, 1867.
Mr.. Justice Field having delivered the
opinion of the Court in the case of Cum
mingsp. Tue State of Missouri, proceeded
to say: am also instructed by the Court
to deliver its opinion in the matter OF the
! petition of A. Ill. Garland. On the ID of
July, 1862, Congress passed an act prescrib-
ing an oath to be taken by every person
elected or appointed to any office of honor
or profit under the Government of the
United States, either in the civil. military OF
naval departments of the public service,
except the President of the United States,
before entering upon the duties of his office,
and before being entitled to its salary OF
other emoluments. On the oath of January,
1865, Congress passed supplementary act,
extending its provisions so as to embrace
attorneys and cOunselOrs of the courts of
the United States, which provides that after
its passage no person shall be admitted as
an attorney or counselor to the bar of the
Supreme Court, and after the 4th of March,
1866, to the bar of any Circuit or District
Court of the United States or of the Court
of Claims, or be allowed to appear and be
heard by virtue of any previous admission
or any special power cf attorney, unless he
shall have first taken and subscribed the
oath prescribed in the act of July 2 1862.
The act also provides that the oath shall be
preserved among the files of the Court,
and IL any person take it falsely he shall be
guilty of perjury, and upon conviction
SHALL be subject to the pains and penalties
of that offense. At the December Term of
1850 the petitioner was admitted as an at
torney and counselor of this Court, and
took and subscribed the oath then required
by the second rule as it then existed. 1t
was only requisite to the admission of at
tOrneys and counselors of this Court that
they should have been such officers for the
three previous years in the highest courts
of the States to which they respectively
belonged; and that their private and pro-
fessional character should appear to be
fair. In March, 1865, this rule was chang
ed by the addition of clause requiring the
administration of the oath in conformity
with the act of Congress. In May, 1861, the
State of Arkansas, of which the petitioner
was a Citizen passed an ordinance of seces-
sion, which purported to withdraw the
State from the Union, and afterward, in
the same year, by another ordinance at
tached herself to the sO-called Confederate
States, and by act of the Congress of that
Confederacy she was received as one of its
members. The petitioner followed the
State and was one of her Representatives,
first in the lower House and afterward in
the Senate of the Congress of that Conted-
eracy, and was member of the Senate at
the time of the surrender of the Conieder-
ate forces to the armies of the United States.
In July, 1866, he received from the Presi-
dent of the United States full pardon for
all Offenses committed by him by partcipa-
tion, direct or implied, in the rebellion. lie
now produces this pardon and asks per-
mission to continue TO practice as an
attorney and counselor of the Court, with
out taking the oath required by act of
January "a, 1866, and the rule of this Court
which he is unable to take by reason of the
offices he held under the Confederate Gov
ernment. He rests his application princi-
pally upon two grounds: First, that the
act of Jan. "a, 1865, so far as it affects his
status in the Court, is unconstitutional and
void second, that if the act be constitu-
tional, he is released from compliance with
its provisions by the pardon of the Presi-
dent. The oath prescribed by the act is as
follows: First, that the deponent has never
voluntarily borne arms against the United
States since he has been q citizen thereof;
second, that he has not voluntarily given
aid, countenance, counsel or encourage
ment to persons engaged in armed hostility
theretO third, that he has never sought,
accepted or attempted to exercise the func-
tiOns of any Office whatsoever under any
authority or pretended authority in hostil-
ity to the United States; fourth, that he
has not yielded a voluntary support to any
pretended Government, authority, Power
or Constitution within the United States
hostile or inimical thereto; fifth, that he
will support and defend the Constitution of
the United States against all enemies,
foreign and domestic, and will bear true
faithand allegiance to the same. ugG sfBl-
This last clause is promissory only and
requires no consideration. The questions
presented for our determination arise from
the other clauses. These all relate to past
acts. Some of these acts constituted, when
they were committed, offenses against the
criminal laws of the country, and some Of
according to circumstances under which
they were committed and the motives of
the parties.0 The first clause covers one
form of the crime OF treason, and the afii-
ant must declare that he has not been gull
yOf this crime, not only during the war of
rebellion, but during any period OF his life
since he has been citizen. The second
clause goes beyond the limits Of treason
and embraces not only the giving of aid and
encouragemento of reasonable nature to
public enemy, but also the giving of assist
ance Of any kind to persons engaged in
armed hostility to the United States. The
third clause applies to the seeking, accept
ance or exercise, not only of Offices created
for the purpose of more eftecttally carry
ing on hostilities, but also OF any of those
offices which are required in every COM
munity, whether in peace or war, for the
administration of Justice and the preserya-
ton of order. The fourth clause not only
includes those who gave cordial and ac-
tive support to the hostile government, but
also those who yielded reluctant obedi-
ence to the existing order established with
out their corporation. The statute is, di-
rected against parties who have offended in /
any of the particulars embraced by these /
clauses, and its bject is to exclude them from
the profession OF the law, oratleast fromits
practice in the courts of the United States.
AS the oath prescribed cannot be taken
by these parties, the act as against them
operates as q Legislative decree of perpetual
exclusion. An exclusion from any of the
professions or any of the ordinary ayoca-
tionS Of life for past conduetoan beregard-,
ed ia, no other light than asl o punishment
for such conduct. The exactlOn of the oath