The weekly clarion., 1867-02-07

Mosby, Of Mississippi; Robert Colq-
aonn, Of Mississippi and others.
Boutwezl's Bill.
The struggle in the United Statss
House Of Representatives over Bout
wells bill making rule for United
States Courts to exclude from practice
confederates and others, is over. The
conservatives made q good fight, dis
their duty nobly, though
finally defeated. It passed by q vote
Of one hundred and nine ayes to for
ty-two nays, all the republicans voting
in the afirmafive excapting Hole, Of
Nsu York, ana MGR, Of califqrnia.
Fhu voted withv1l,x. COZ Ez9tises I'M
the negative. 1ll4 bill Hectares mo-
person shall pc permitted to act as an
attorney or counsellor in any court OF
the United States who has been guilty
of treason bribery, murder, or other
felony: or who has been engaged IN
anv rebellion against the government
of the United States; or who has CIV
en- aid, comfort or encouragement to
the enemies of the United States in
armed hostility thereto. The third
section makes it the duty of judge or
Judges of any such court, when the
suggestion is made in open court, that
any person acting as an attorney or
counsellor ofsaid court, or offering or
proposing to so act, to bar him by the
provisions of this act, or whenever
said Judge or judges shall believe that
such person is barred to inquire and
ascertain whether such person has
been guilty of treason bribery, murder,
or other bribery, and upon being con-
vinced of his guilt, exclude such per-
SON from the office of attorney or coun-
sellor of said court. Boutwelrs object
was of course to destroy the effect OF
the decision of the Supreme Court in
the case of A. II. Garland of Arkansas.
But we think the opinion of this tribu-
nal covered the question so fully, and
laid down the law so clearly and en-
phatically that the efforts of this pigmy
Congressman certainly cannot pre-
vail. We extract from the official
version of the opinion the following
passage in point:
These views are further strengthened by
Reconsideration. of the effect OF the pardon
broSNgsea broSNsea the letitianelea END 11emature
of the pardoning power OF the Freslaent
The Constitution provides that the freslaena
"shalI have power to grant reprleYes ano
nordons for offences against the United
States. except in cases of impeachment
The mower thus conferred is unlimited, with
+ha exceution stated; it extends to every
offence known to the law, and may be exer
cised at any time after its commission
either before legal proceedings taken, OF du,
ring their pendency, or after convlclt!On anu =
Judgment This power OF the Preslaent IL
not subject to legislative control. Congress
can neither limit the of his pardon nor ex'
clude from its exercise any class OF offenders
The benign prerogative of mercy reposed In
him cannot be fettered by any legislative re-
atriction. Such being the case, the enquiry
arises as TO the effect and operation OF a
pardon. On this point all the authorizes
concur: a pardon reaches both the PUNISH
ment prescribed for the offence and the gun!
of the offender, and when the pardon Is 1uli
it releases the punishment ana oiots oet ,Oa oa
existence his guilt, so thattint the eye OF the
law the offender is as innocent as II he had
never committed the offence. If granted
before conviction, it prevents any OF the
Denalfies and disabilities consequent upon
conviction from attaching. If granted after
conviction. it removes the penalties and dis.
abilities, and restores him to all his civil
rights. 1t makes him as it were new
man, and gives him new credit anu capac'
ity. There is only this limitation to lts
operation it does not restore offices forfeited
or property or interests vested in others In
CONSEQUENCE of the conviction and Judgment
The pardon produced by the petitioner is
full pardon for all offences by him committed
arising from participation direct or lmphec
in the rebellion, and is subject to certain con
ditions which have been complied with. Int
effect of this pardon is to relieve the petltoh
er from all penalties and disabilities attach
ed the offence committed by his partlcipa
ton in the rebellion. So far as that ofIencs
is concerned he is thus placed beyond ths
reach of punishment of every kind: but .
exclude him by reason of that offence iron
continuing in the enjoyment OF prevIsousi.
acquired by right is TO enforce punishment
for that offence notwithstanding the paL
don. If such exclusion can be eifecteo 2,
the execution of an expurgatory oath coyei 3
ing the offence, the pardon may be av0loeo
and that accomplished Indirectly Whicn ca. |.
not be reached by direct legis alton. !. - -
not within the constitutional power o. 20. q.
Cress thus to infict punishment peyonu -
reach of Executive clemency
There is no difference IN letter =
spirit between the test oath bill whlc
Mr.. Garland took up TO the suprem
Court. and the malignant measure pr
sented by boutwell, II the sena' .s
passes the bill, the President VIII =
turn Il with his disapproval, and
nassed over his veto, the Suprem
Court must declare it . nnllity, or PEI
NIT the Judiciary to be dissolyet
when wewill have a repetition {
France in the days of Robeipierre an
Danton.
fo,xv x,aors fn.1 af most we ex