The Wheeling daily register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1864-1878, 1867-01-18

President. The court proceeoca 10 eA'
anime the character of the oath IN
tion, saying, as it cannot be taken Dy
all Attorneys, it operates as perpetual
declaration of exclusion from one OF the
professions and avocations of life, and
therefore must be regarded as punish
ment for an offence which may not nave
been punishable at the time the offence
was committed, and is thus brought IN
to the character of an ex post facto law,
as in the Missouri case just decided.
The office of attorney or counsellor Is
not like an Office created by Congress,
and which may be burdened by condi-
tions. Attorneys are not officers OF the
United States; they are officers of the
court and are admitted as such by the
court on the ground of their legal learn
ing and good private character. The ad-
nilsson ito the bar is O sufficient en-
dorsement.
From the time of entering upon the
practice they become officers OF the
court and hold office during good be-
havior, and can be deprived OF IT only
by the court, their admission and eXclu-
sion is not q mere ministerial power.
The court is not the register OF rhe
edicts of any other power. A counsel
lor, however, does not hold his office as
q matter of grace or favor. To appear
for suitors is something more than Is
revokable by q court or Legislature.
He can only be deprived of his office
for misconduct or professional delin-
quency.
The question is, whether Congress can
fix qualifications as q means OF punish
ment. II cannot be indirectly done by
State, and the reason by which that
conclusion is reached applies similarly
to Congress. These views are further
strengthened by the pardon of the Pres
ident. The constitution provides that
he shall have power to grant reprieves
and pardons for offences against the
United States, except in cases OF I'M
peacHment. This extends to every other
offence known to the law.
This power of the President is not
subject to the negative control OF Con-
press, which cannot limit its effect.
The benign prerogative of mercy can
not be averted by legislative restriction.
A pardon reaches both the punishment
lprescribed and the offender. 1t blots
out the consequences of the offence, and
in the eye of the law the offender stands
as guiltiess as if he had not committed
the offence. If pardon is granted be-
fore conviction, it does away with q
trial; if granted after conviction, the
subject of it is made new man.
The pardon produced by the petition
er is full pardon, and subject to Ger,
tain conditions, which have been com
piled with. The effect of the pardon is
to relieve him from all disability and
from the consequences of his offences
during the rebellion. He is placed be,
yond the reach of punishment, and to
exclude him from his profession is not
embraced in the pardon.
1t follows from these views that the
prayer of the petitioner must be grant
ed. The prayer of r. II. Marr is also
granted, and the amendment of the
second rule adopted unadvisedly, Jan
uary 4th, 1865, which requires the oath
to be taken by attorneys and coun'
sellors, must be rescinded, aud it is sc
ordered. The majority of the court are
Associates Wayne, Nelson, Grier, Cliff
ford and Field.