The tri-weekly standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1866-1868, 1867-09-26

|
on man. or as such persons were often callt
tories or traitors to the Confederacy, any a
4 which such person may have rendered, {
impartial man would at once say was n
done of his own voluntary choice. Viii
on the other hand, a man who was know
among his neighbors, by his conduct,
have been heart and soul for the war, an
rendered aid to the rebellion, it is equally {
fair an inference that such aid was volunt'
rily rendered, and he cannot consistently tax
the " test oath"
Therefore, any aid which may been give
the rebellion by one whose aoeI kn0oon Stata
was that of a Union man, is presumed not t
have been UoIunturily done, and he has
presumptive right to take the "test oath ;
while any all rendered by one whose we
known status was that of an enemy to tn
| Union is presumed to have been C0tuntdrat
done, and he is excluded from the right t.
take the test OATH"
Such is the true construction OF the ties
OATH" and it has been so held by the highes
authority in the United States. refer tt
the United States Senate, in the admission
| in July, 1866, of Judge Patterson, of Ten
nessee, (son-in-laW of the Presidency to hi
seat as Senator. He had held the office o
Circuit Judge in that State during the Con
federacy, and had taken the Confederate
oath; but he was well known among his
neighbors to be Union man, and he held
the office not with the intent to aid the re-
bellion, but for the purpose, as he alleged
that he might be of service to the cause Of
the Union and to Union men. He took the
test oath" and was admitted to his seat in
the Senate, majority of whom were mem
bers of that body in July, 1862, when said
test oath was enacted, and are presumed
to know its intent and meaning
l have given this subject thorough con-
sideration, and in looking to the intent and
purposes of Congress in the adoption of this
oath, which is conceded by all lawyers to be
the true key to the Interpretation OF the law,
I am clearly of the opinion that holding the
office of Public Register during the war does
not exclude one from the right to take said
oath.
l am further of the opinion that the Courts
should take no cognizance of case against
any party whose status for loyalty, during
the war; does not come in conflict with the
intent and spirit of Congress in the adoption
of the law.
am further of the opinion that where
the intent and spirit of Congress in the
adoption of this oath is carried out, although
there may be an apparent inconsistency in
the party taking the oath, yet it is the die
tate of public policy that the Courts should
take no cognizance of the matter. In truth,
no prosecution could be sustained, unless
there is evidence that the oath taken was
"ciJuNy false and corrupt"
There have been many offences committed
by parties during the war, who had prior
thereto taken an oath to bear true faith
and allegiance to the United States" then
violated that oath by making war on the
Government, yet these were revolutionary
times, and have. as District Attorney OF
the United States, deemed it the part of
public policy not to hold parties to the strict
responsibility of the law for offences then
committed.
1 took charge of the duties of this office in
November, 1865, when there were large
amounts of property, held by those who had
rebelled against the Government, liable to
seizure and confscation, yet there has not
been instituted the first proceeding to con-
iscate the first dollars worth of this proper
ty. There are now large amounts of proper
ty liable to cOnfscation under the act of
August 6, 1861, which is not relieved by the
Presidents Proclamations; and notwith-
standing inyormGtions have been filed with
me against some valuaDe portions of this
property, yet I have forborne taking any
proceedings to confiscate the same, because
such was not the governments policy, and
the interests OF the country would not there
by be subserved The same reasons will
most certainly apply with equal force against
the prosecution of the loyal officers Of the
Government of the United States, who, in
their desire to aid the Government in the
enforcement of the laws, have taken said
oath but In no 0iolati0aa of the spirit and
of the same.
There are many influences brought to
bear to Macart the laws of the United States.
The Internal Revenue Laws bear heavily on
the tobacco and liquor interests. While the
revenue Officers are endeavoring to enforce
these laws and bring to Justice Uransgressors.
parties in these interests and disappointed
office seekers, together with many disaffected
persons, who hate the government and
Union men, make common cause. to bring
into contempt the Laws of the United States.
and prevent the execution of the same by
threats OF prosecution against loyal govern
ment officials, for having taken said oath.
While l am District Attorney am deter
mined, so far as in my power lies, to see that
the laws of the United States are enforced.
and that those lawless persons shall not be
permitted to evade the laws of the national
Union by subterfuges of this kind.
by no means intend to include in this
class large number of high-minded and
honorable persons, who did what they could
tor the Confederacy, but who accepted the
result of arms and the establishment of
the national authority in good faith, and
who now desire to see the laws faithfully ex-
,cuted. -.
I am, very respectfully, &C..
D. II. STARBUCK,
.. u s. Dist Att0rne,,