Keowee courier. [volume] (Pickens Court House, S.C.) 1849-current, 1867-06-08

OF Suffrage Dy lOrcc oil the act itself nor u0cS
such consequence follow from conviction for
treason, or conspiracy to commit treason, or
for any other act participation in rebellion.
The provision in the Constitution Of tile Uni
ted States as to treason against the United
States docs not declare hat shall be the pun
ishment OH conviction Of treason That is
left for Congress, with the in.itation that cor
1nptiep Of haay opAla tfRpI(pE tfRpI(GE ss, as ooaso-
life of the party. Congress, in the exercise u tGss
its power, has limitcl such punishment, as
the consequence of conviction, to the penalty
| of death or imprisonment, and tic manumis
sion Of slaves owned by the party, and to the
disqualification from h0ling auy Office under
the United States
am not advised Of any statute now in force
in eithcl.of these ten States; except, perhaps
Virginia, which declares disf,anchiscp,cnt as
to right Of suffrage by force Of the act itself
The fourth and fltE sections may be consid
cred together. Parties applying for registra
ton must swear tllnt sc have never been n
member of any State Legislature, nor held any
| executive or judicial Office in any State, and
afterwards engaged in insurrcction or rebel
| lion ng&inst the United States, or given aid
| and comfort to the cucmics thereof; that
| have never taken any oath us a member Of the
Congress of the United States, or as an officer
OF the United States, or as Il member of any
| State Legislature, or rs an executive or Judi
cal officer OF any State, and afterwards en-
! gagcd in insurrcction or rebellion against the
! Fnitcd States, or given aid and comfort to
the cueues thereof" These clauses of the
oath in effect extend disfranchiscmcnts be-
yond the provisions Of the original act and the
| prior clauses of the oath itself in the important
particular, that neither conviction, nor the
Judgment OF u court, nor express legislative
enactment is required to establish the fact of
disfranchiscment. In legal p:rlancc, disfran-
cliscmcnt under these clauses of the oath, re
suits from matters en- pnis but in one respect
these clauses limit the generality Of the orig
inal act as to the disfranchiscmcnt. The orig
| inal act contemplatts disfranchiscmcnt under
these clauses that does not arise from partc-
patton in rebellion alone, but other elements
must concur-that is to say, holding certain
Offices, or taking o(licinl oaths by certain Of,
fccrs, and afterwards participating in rebellion
against the United States. The consideration
of these two clauses leads to two distinct sub.
jcct matters of inquiry: FiYst. What offices
or officers are conprchcndcd! Second. What
acts amount to engagement in insurrcction or
rebellion against the United States, or giving
aid and comfort to the enemies thereof? /
will first consider what Office or Offices are
comprchendcd. As to some Offices there is
no room for doubt. Members of State Lcgis-
laturcs and members of Congress are clearly
enough designated. The question, however
might arise, whether convention held in IL
State for the framing or amendment Of it's con.
siitution, would answer the description of II
State Legislature within the meaning Of the
act Such II convention, although it is clothed
| ~ s,tV kv,
dcnom:nated State legislature; and in the
acts now nndcr consideration, convention
and Legislature arc expressly distinguished,
for they require a constitution to be framed
by convention, and they require the Lcgis-
lnture of the same State to adopt the consti-
I tutionnl amendment When, then, in the
same acts they again use the phrase, " lcgis.
laturc of the State" they must he understood
to use it in the same sense and as distinguished
from constitutional convention; but as to
those legislative bodies which passed what are
called ordinances of secession, hy whatever
name they may have been called, ] am Of
opinion that their members are properly com
pretended within this disqualifying clause,
for j can imagine TO official legislative posi-,
tion in which the duty Of allegiance was more
distinctly violated
The next, the more dtHM ult inquiry is,
who is to be considered an officer Of the Uni,
ted States, or an executive or judicial officer
Of any State, within the meaning Of these
clauses ? Various classes Of officers arc here
intended State officers and Federal officers,
and executive or judicial officers. No eeis-
lative officer is mentioned cxcopt member Of
O. State Legislature or member Of Congress.
Descriptions used as 70 other officers arc as to
State officers, that they must be judicial or
executive, and as to Federal officer, the
terms "iiudicia or " executive " arc not OK
press. Ilo is described simply as an officer
of tho United States. 1t has been shown that
Federal officers and State officers are classified
separately in the clauses Of the Act under
consideration. | deem it profitable and con
ducivc to a clear order to follow this cassifica-
tion. ] shall accordingly first consider what
State officers are included in the terms cxccn-
tive or judicial. This phrase is twice used in
these clauses, with the supcr-added lescrip.
tion, " in any State" ''In any State" in
the first clause, and ot any State in the second
clause. think the controlling term of de-
scription, if there is any rcpugnancy in tho
terms, must be taken to be the last. for that
rs used in the first clause and others besides.
1t is the same torn of description used in the
Act Of Congress of 1880, declaring what State
officers are required to take the oath to sup
port the Constitution of the United States,
II in tl,o tl ;rl II, -