Abbeville press. [volume] (Abbeville, S.C.) 1860-1869, 1867-06-07
Friday, June Z, 1867.
THE ATTORNEY GENERALS OPINION.

lhs recent OPINION OF Attorney Ueherai Stan-
berry, upon the Reconstruction laws. has
been the subject Of very general comment
upon the part Of the rrblic journals North aud
South and the moro Radical express some dis
appointment al tho very Restricted di-f!an-
Enlistment, which results from the Attorney
Generals construction Of the law. There is
no doubt but that the Acts were designed 10
have n much wider operation than the strict
rule. Of construction will warrant Both the
Military aud Supplemental al Acts profess to ex
clude from The suffrage, ali "who may have
been ,iisGranch;scI for participation in the re-
bellion, yc: the Attorney General has only
recognized n settled legal principle, in holding
that par;ici patton without conviction works no
disfranchisemont. His duty hos been to con-
etrue, and not to lncislatc and he had no power
to supply the deficiencies or correct the lin
Perfections of the original act. If Congress
had designed to exclude from the polls all who
participated in the called rebellion, it should
have plainly sail so. So in like manner if il
int, nled to require other evidence than the
oath Of the voter. on the question of his COM
potency. or if it had desired to exclude all from
the suffrage who were not properly sceredited
by the District Commanders or their subordn-
atcs. These laws must be subjected to the or
dinary rules Of Interpretation, and if they do
not support the views which its Radical au-
thors hope TO sustan the fault rests with them
selves With regard to the conclusiveness an d
OF the opinion. we suppose there can be no qucs.
ton. 1t is indeed The opinion Of but one man.
according to tho Washington Chronicle, but
fhat "a,
Government. to whom the whole matter has
been referred and who after consultation with
the President and bis cabiuet, has given an au-
thorilativc exposition Of the law. 1t will like
ly be promulgated by q General osder from
Secretary Stanton. as n binding rule for the
guidance of the District Commanders.
With regard to the extent of the dsfranchiee
nent there is still much difference of opn
ion, and the opinion Of the Attorney Gen
eral leaves the matter very much in the
dark. Tho New York Herald estimates
that the whole number disfranchi.ed at
the South will not exceed 100000 persona
The Charleston Mercury controverts the view
of the Tribune tha, the dsfrnnch,ement in this
State, at least, will be reduced to narrow lim-
lite. 1t says.
"Mr Grerleys organ may consider ihnt Mr.
Stanb+rry reduces the scope OF disfranch ise-
mcnt under tue Military acts to very narrow
limits. but, in this State at least, such will not
be the effect. That tho executive aud Judi.
eiar officers of the State would be disfranchis
ed was known; and this clause alone, and in its
mos liberal sense excludes, as It was expected
to do, large numbers Of our most able and
prominent citizens. But, if magistrates and
Justices OF the peace are, as they possibly may
be, considered to come under the head Of "e1-
ntlve or judicial ohicrrs OF the State" disfran-
chlscment will reach nearly every u,an in
South Carolra Of position. influence and abrl-
hy. There were many reasons. which need not
be specified. why il was desirable to become a
magistrate; and rs tie time nj which the office
wash-ld is not revelant if the holder did at an Y
subsequent period participate in the rebellion.
IL Will be found that there are bnt few gentle
'nen OF social Influence, legal ability, or high
standing, particularly in the country districts
who have not during the last fifty yeais (ii
not members of the Leg slature) been magis-
'rhtes or Justices Of the pea e. and who are n OF
on that account dsfrenchised. 1t was unou
This point, in order to relieve all doubt, that a
oec'ded opinion was desired and, while il
may not be 60 important in other States it il
highly important in this to know at once and
authorita,ively, whether the classes referred
TO are, or are not, disfranchiscd.
The Charleston Ne'cs point. out some omis
SONS and Inconsistencies into which the At,or.
ney General has fallen. 1t shows clearly his
Inconsistency ip holding that the members OF
Sscession Conventions are dsfrsnchised. after
establishing that by tho clear " ords of the Act
Convention and Legislature are expressly
distinguished from each other and that the
u's4o"'hcat'"ns as to members of Legislature
10 not attach to members of a Convention.
IL also makes clear point which the Attorney
General leaves very much in the dark-lhe eli.
gloll'ty OF members of the Legislature during
the war to a seat in the Convention. Bv The
original Military Bill, according to the Neps
meD'oer oi the State Legislature, who had
tecome member since the establishment o.
The Confederacy, would not be DISQUALIFIED be.
cause, never mind how far he had partic;nste,
IN the rebellion. he had not previously taken
tne oath to support the Constitution of IN,
o"i'eu SKATES. Before the Supplemental Bill
"aS passed., however. this fact attracted the At
'en"oH '' Congress. aud they attempted to rem
Guy H. owl owing 10 the haste with which th.
act was passed. they only half effected thei
Purpose. The SUI Elemental Act in provid;n,
lot repatriation. specified a registry oath which
required the applicant to swear among 9th.
thiDgs' that he has never been a member q
any State Legislature. nor held any sxecutiv
or judicial office in any State, and afterv.rd
eppaped in insurrection eo.:,.. a., IT..