Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1867-01-23

TEST OAIus.-tiyQ Judges of the supreme Count
of the United States have condemned two test oaths
as unconstitutional to wit, an oath required Of
ccrNmen and attorneys 10y Missouri statute. that
they have OF been JIM hostility to the United States.
nor adhered TO lis enemies, nor desired their tri-
umph, nor sympathizcd with them, nor aided them.
nor lct tine state to avoid military service against
the rebels nor expressed dissatisfaction with the
governments and another oath, required of lawyers
at the bar of The L. S. Courts, and imposed by
Congress, that they have not been guilt, OF treason
II any person cannot take these ouhs hc is barred
from his profession The majority of the court
hold that the requiring these oths are retroac-
tive, bills of pains and penalties nhicting punish
ment which were not in existence when the crime
was committed, and therefore are unconstitutional
In the arising under the act of Congress. the
majority of the court also held that the pardon of
the President exempted from all penalties for trea-
son, this included -Four of the Judges dissented
from these decisions, holding hat these acts are not
to be regarded as penal and innicting new uunish-
ments for treason, but simply civil regulations
prescribing loyalty one qualification for the dis
charge Of official duucs-hc fact being that the test
applies not only to cergymen and lawyers, but to
an civil and military officers These judges hold
in the Missouri that the whole legislative pow
er as to religion belongs to the States, and there
fore to the State Of Missouri in respect to its own
citizens; and TO the case of the lawyer, that
Congress has tine right to prescribe the qualifca,
tions of attorneys 10 United States Courts as well
as of all L. $. officers, civil and military and that
the President cannot avoid these regulations by
pardons for treason.
1t strikes us that there is very broad line be-
tween penal statute and civil prescription of
qualifications and dsquaiifcations in that the penal
statute comes into force only after trial and con-
victioni while the civil operates at once without
trial and without reference to the penal conse-
quences of q trial For instance jeff Davis is
known to be guilty Of treason, yet he cannot be
hung because he has not been formally tried and
convicted The penalty of death is imperative
Now Missouri, Congress, interfere by a civil
regulation and declare that no man who cannot
purge himself of treason or of disloyal sentiments
shall hold any civil military Office or practice in
It's courts. ID is operative at once. and upon all
citizens, whether traitors or not; they must all
purge themselves, guilty or not guilty; and amy
man cannot do so he is not held legally guilty of
the crime of treason nor held to the legal penalty
without trial ard conviction precisely as if he had
I heNei uceh cHltu 10 purge hiiuseU before a civil
officer or tribunal II Is the distinction between lc-
gally ascertaned crime and no crime at all because
in criminal law even JeA Davis is held guiltoss
until he shall have been convicted, But, in the
case of the Missouri test oath it is distinction also
between acts that would be criminal on conviction,
and things not criminal in law such as dsloyal SEN
timents entertained but not expressed and dlssatis-
faction with the government
But more nobody can doubt that church may
righuully refuse to employ clergyman hecauso OF
reasonable acts, or sloya sentiments, or ssas-
faction with the government under which thatchurc
is protected or that President johnson may right
fully say, will appoint no such m1n to u mill
tary or civil office, or to chuplaney in the army
or navy why may not the State Of Missouri say,
all men shall purge themselves Of these offences be-
fore being eligible to religious or civil or military
offices under the Statei and why may not Congress
say in respect to the very offices which It creates
The fact is that President johnson excludes men
from office for infinitely smaller offences for less
wcigh,y rcasonsi and so does every appointing
power, national or state, We do not believe that