Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1867-09-14

to amercement for contempt, that
80 although the pardon comes before the
Judgment, yet, the original cause Of
the amercement being p%ardOned, the
amercements itself by consequence is
pardoned.D The cause being /" dis
charged" the consequences end.
So in Biggin's Case, 6 Co., 50 D., the
statute having provided that, after
clergy allowed and burning in the hand,
the prisoner should be presently dis
charged and delivered out Of prison, and
the Queen having p~ardOned the burning
in the hand, it was held that, "for
this cause the burning of the
hand being discharged, the party
also shall be discharged Of his
imprisonment by good construction
Of the same act; otherwise the party
would be lawfully discharged Of his pun
jshmeHt and yet remain p~erpetually in
prison." So, il by a test oath one can be
prohibited, and disqualified and disabled
to work at his profession, notwithstand-
ing his pardon, he would be lawfully
discharged Of his punishment, and yet re-
main perpetualy punished by a disabil-
itv, and virtually an exile under his W
skies. q Pariah with no civil rights, one
of a new caste created by legislation in
violation Of the Constitution and Of the
mowers Of the President, and equally
against public policy and injurious to the
public interest
And We may incidentally note, that
even in the Stsr-Chamber, All the par
don had been obtained before the SEN
tence, then the pardon had discharged
the whole for then the Court could not
have proceeded to any sentence OF the
principal, and by consequence not Of the
costs, which are but sccesssry HALLS
| Case, q %. 81 b..
In John TroHop's Case, 8 %. IS, the
question arose whether a general pardon
discharged 3 man communicated, Of
the excommunication bat the certih-
cate OF recommendation was held in
sufficient, and the question as to the
effect Of pardon was not reached.
But, in a case st Michselmas Term, 8
JAMES l., entitled Prohibition, y Co.
! 70 b, it was determined that a man could
/ not be communicated after a general
pardon and that il he was, he might
have either Of the three remedies
suit out Of Chsncery, commanding the
Bishops 10 sssoil him, an action on the
case against the Ordinary, or 3 plea in
the Kings Bench.
To require an oath that a party has
not been guilty of treason or Of favOring
rebellion, as a qualification, after N
nesty OF pardon, indispensable to the <
ercise of a profession of any kind, is to
! create q disability and is either er post
f1cto, as q new disability, imposed after
commission Of the offence, or the cOntin-
uance Of one created by the offence and a
consequence Of the offence. In the
former case it is unconstitutional, and
also contrary to common right and to
Justice, because it is q penalty that retro
acts. In the latter it is an open violation
Of the undenisble principle Of the Com
mon Law stated by BACON Abr. Par
don, H. that although 1t was FORM
erIy doubted whether pardon could
do more than take away the pun
ishment, leaving the crime and It's dis
ebliug consequences unremOved, 1t is
now settled that q pardon, whether by
the King or by vote Of Parliament, re-
moves not only the punishment, but all
the legal disabilities consequent on the
crime. For this are quoted, CID. EU.
rs; , Ba1s. l54; Palmer 4I2; l Sid. 50,
in which the principle was stated to be
p9na potest toHL cwpa perennis erH
Hob. 81, 81; Hale, p c., 27s; SAX. $50
Id. RGyU. 80 4 State Trials, 6SI Cns.
Temp. Holt, 6S5;5 State Trials, III; ?
SAX. go; Fttzg. l05.
A pardon discharges suits in the Spirit
usl Courts, IS well as In the temporal,
unless where there is an interest or prop
erty in the plaintiff, as in cases for
tithes, legacies, or matrimonial contracts
and the Ike. BAG. AJr. Pqrdoa, B., 5
Co. 81. Latch 1870.
In HesdOH a. Mastersoa, HOB. 292, It
is said in F5Ileys Gaze, 5 Co. 10 D., il
was resolved that If a man obtained 8
pardon before conviction, be shall not
forfeit his goods nor the profits Of his
lands. And, it is Afterwards said in Cnbe
~. lii:
In the same book (RJliUe0 it is said
that II q man has y charter Of pardon, Of
elder date han the exigent, his goods
are saved, for the cause Of salvation ap-
pears Of record"
Infamous crimes, like forgery and per
jury, are quite different things from Do
litical Offences, in which it Is failure that
constitutes the crime. In the former
cases, it is with some reason held that
though the pardon restores the compe-
tency to testify, it does not restore the
credit and wa formerly held that the
party could not be a juror.
But DO such infamy attaches to politl-
cal offences, and especially to attempts
by whole States at revolution and 10
attain independence, when the rebellion,
If it be one, becomes civil war. II the
Revolution Of I776 had been unsuecess.
ful, it would have been pronounced by
historya rebellion, and WASHINGTON and
his Generals would have been liable to
the pains and penalties Of treason.
IT is with reason, therefore, that In
respect to such offences as these, the
pardon is held to obliterste the offt
and make it as II it had never been.
There is not, in such q case, even the
desPots fear Of assassination to induce
cruelty. Republics should be impasslye
TO fear, q incapable OF cruelty or re-
venge; and when they pardon there
should be no mental reservations OF lin
gerings Of an ignoble anger.
The French Courts have upitormIv
held hat although an amnesty Is not
defined in the constitutional law NJ
France, it is admitted in the public law
and in the custom and practice In france
as sn act Of the Prince necessary Ia ths
common veal, after political comma
tions, and that its effect is to throw the
veil Of Oblivion over acts termed crimes
or deficits by the penal law, and to liber-
ate from all prosecutions or eondemna-
lions those who have committed such
offences; in such manner that, for the
future, the condemnation Is as If It had
been" The offence amnestled is
as II had never been committed, saving
as to rights vested in third persons.
Every trace Of the offence is eff4ced by
it. The law attaches q fiction to the very
nature Of the amnesty, by which the
party, even when by condemnation
civil death had s~upervened, is con
sidered never to have lost the ex-
ercise Of his civil rights. II
retro-acts to the day Of the condemns
ton. 1t effaees and annuls the legal
effects of the civil death. at annuls the
condemnation, abOlishes tbs past, and
restores the smnestied party to the plen-
titude Of civil life, saving only the rights
acquired by third persons, "-De o.