The tri-weekly standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1866-1868, 1867-05-28
No. go.

or taking an official oath by certain officers
afterwards participating IN the rebellion and
against the United States.
The consideration of these two clauses
leads to two distinct subjects matter of en-
quiry First, what officer or officers are
comprehended. Second, what acts amount
to engaging in instruction or rebellion
against the United States or giving aid or
comfort to the enemies thereof
I will first consider what offices or officers
are comprehended. AS to some officers, there is
no room for doubt. Member of the State Leg
islature, and members of Congress are clearly
enough designated. The question might,
however, arise whether a convention held in
State for framing an amendment of its con-
stltution, would answer to description of q
State Legislature within the meaning of the
act. Such convention, although it is cloth
ed with Legislative powers, cannot properly
be denominated State Legislature, and in
the acts now under consideration, a conven-
ton and Legislature areexprossly distinguish
ed from each other, for they require the con-
stitution to be framed by convention, and
they require the legislature of the same State
to adopt the constitutional amendment.
When then in the same acts they again use
the phrase Legislature of the State" they
must be understood to use it in the same
sense and rs distinguished from constitu-
tional convention, but as to those legislative
bodies which passed what are called ordi-
nances of secession, or by whatever name
they may have been called, I am of the opin-
ion that their members are properly compre-
hended within this disqualifying clause, for
I can imagine no official legislative position
in which the duty OF allegiance was more
distinctly violated.
The next and more difficult inquiry is who
is to be considered an officer of the United
States or a judicial or executive officer of
any State within the meaning of these clauses.
The various classes of officers are here in
tended as State, Federal, executive or judi
cial officers. No legislative officer is nell
toned, except member of the State Legis-
lature or member of Congress. The des-
cription used as to other officers are as to
State officers, that they must be judicial or
executive, and as to a Federal officer, the
terms executive or judicial are not expressed.
He is described simply as an officer of the
United States.
1t has been shown that the Federal officers
and State officers are classified separately in
the clauses of the act under consideration.
I deem it profitable and conducive to clear
order to follow this classification. shall
accordingly first consider what State officers
are included in the terms Executive or
judicial" This phrase is twice used in these
clauses, with the superadded description, "in
any State " in the first clause, and of "any
State" in the second clause. / think the
controlling term of description, if there is
any repugnancy in the terms, must be taken
to be the last, for that is used in the first
clause and to Others Besides, it is the same
term of description used in the act of Con-
gress of 1889, declaring what State officers
are required to take the oath to support the
constitution of the United States, and in the
third section of the constitutional amendment
both use the same terms of description, Ex-
ecutive and judicial officers of State" The
terms are SO general and indefinite that they
fail to express with sufficient certainty o
designation of the persons intended to be
reached.
1t is t. be regretted in matter of so much
importance, that the rule of designation
adopted as to members of Congress and of a
State Legislature had not been followed up,
or if that were found impracticabe, that
some more definite general rules had not been
declared. The uncertainty becomes manifest
in the application of the law, and this un-
certainty necessitates construction. The ne
cessity for construction, which arises from
the generality of the law, cannot be better
stated than in the language of Plowden
Though the words be general, they are to be
reduced to a particularly by an exposition
tAlof the mode according to the intent of the
iENEkAof those statutes which comprehend all
, No NO., ~ the letter which the sages of the
he Information Of all cdnt &c hgxtend but to the
nand:
SECOND MILITARY DISTRICT,
NORTH Carolina and South CdTOzina.\
CHARLESTON, 8. c., April LIST, 1867.
GENERAL ORDERS, .
When an election for District, County, NUM-.
ipal or Town Officers is required to take place,
n accordance with the provisions of the local
aw, within the limits of any post in this COM
nand, Commanding. Officers will promptly re-
ort to these Headquarters the time and place of
UGH election and the designation of the Offices
o be filled.
If the present incumbents be ineligible to hold
fice, or any objection exist arising out of theii
Misconduct in Office, to the continuance of their
unctions, the facts will be reported by the Post
with his suggestions, having in view
he interests of the service and the welfare Of the
ocality Immediately concerned.
BY Command of
MAJOR GENERAL D. E. SICKLEs:
wv. CLOUS,
Japt. 3sth U. s. Inf, A. D. c., and A. A. A. g.
BY Command of
COLONEL ]. V. BoMFoRp:
D. T. WELLS,
LIST Lieut.. Sth U. 8. Inf,
15-tf. and Bvt. Major U. s. A., A. A. A. g.