The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1868-12-04

in Washington day or two before. The
demand. however, for o brief statement of
the point made was not unreasonable, and
the paper had better be prepared at once.
After short recess, MIR. O'Conor pre-
scented the following:
/" Circuit Court of the United States for
the District of Virqinia.-The United
- States rs. Jefferson Dauis.
''The indictments in these cases were
framed on the alleged fact that the defend
ant did engage in the instruction ana re-
bellion against the United States known to
the court and to the several departments OF
the Government as having existed at the
several times mentioned in the said indict-
ment in the State Of Virginia and else
where, and thereby gave aid and comfort
to the enemies of the United States engaged
in said insurrection and rebellion.
ID "And the defendant alleges that prior to
such insurrection and rebellion, and IN the
year 1916, he, the said defendant, was .
member of the Congress OF the Un1tea
States. and as such member took, in said
veer. an oath to support the Constitution OF
The United States in the usual manner and
IA REQUIRED by law in each case.
Sand the defendant alleges in bar of any
proceedings upon said indictments, or either
of them, the penalties and disabilities de-
nounced against and inflicted on him for
his said alleged offence by the third section
of the fourteenth article of the Constitution
of the United States, forming an amend
ment to such Constitution.
Sand he insists that any Judicial pro-
ceeding to inflict any other or further pain,
penalty, or punishment upon him for such
alleged offence is not admissible 6y the
Constitution and the laws of the United
States.
Wherefore he, the said defendant,
moves the court now here to quash and SET
aside the said indictment, or to dismiss the
same and the prosecution thereon, or to
render such other relief in that nature as
the aforesaid facts and circumstances shall
require, and as may seem proper.
..,...r &C. 0'CoNoR,
a.. .4,--. "WILLIAM READ,
.~y .9.0 Gro. GUILD,
Ia. - s. - "JAMEs LYONS"
Mr.. Beach then submitted the following
in behalf of the Government: .
:" United States Us. Jefferson Davis:
I" To enable the Court at once to consider
and pass upon the question of dismisslng
this case under the motion above made,
with the benefit of facts necessary to such
consideration, and which do not appear on
the record, inasmuch as the counsel for the
United States believe these facts to exist
and to be provable, they waive the regular
process of plea, and agree that the Court
may assume as facts, for the purpose of
this motion, that Jefferson Davis, in the
year lS45, aud previous to the alleged COM
mission of the offences set forth in the in
dictment, did take an oath as member of
Congress of the United States to support
the Constitution Of the United States, and
that this agreement shall also be of effect
in case the above motion shall be con-
sidered by the Supreme Court Of the United
States. 3. T. BEACH,
"United States District Attorney.
"December 3, 1863"
The Chief Justice Both the papers may
be filed.
Judge Guild then commenced the argu-
ment for the defendant on the motion to
ouash. He said it was now concession in
the cause brought properly to the notice of
the court that Jefferson Davis was in le45
a member of the United States Congress,
and in that capacity took an oath to sup
port the Constitution of the United States.
As had been supposed by the learned coun-
sci on the other side, the affidavit filed by
the defendant bears an intimate relation to
the third section of the fourteenth constl-
tutional amendment, which provides that
every person who, having taken an oath
to support the Constitution of the United
States, afterwards engaged in rebellion
shall be disqualified from holding certain
State and Federal Offices. Whether this
section be of the nature of bill of pains
and penalties, or in the form of beneh-
cent action of amnesty, it will be generally
agreed that it executes itself, acting pro-
r1rio uiqore. 1t needs no legislation on the
part of Congress to give it effect. From the
very date of its ratification by sufficient
number of States it begins to have all the
effect that it's tenor gives it. If it's proVl-
sions inflict punishment, the punishment
begins at once. If it pardons, the par
don dates from the day of its Official
promulgation. It does not say that Con-
press Shall, in its discretion, prescribe
the punishment for persons who swore
thew would support the authority of
the United States and then engaged in re-
bellion against that authority, but itself
pronounces the penalty and intiicts the
punishment. For this declaration there is
the authority of the Supreme Court as laid
down nre &c parte Garland, Cummins Us.
The State of Missouri a Wallace), in which
q majority of the court held that deprlya-
ton from office, in one form or another,
couched in civil law or criminal proceed
ing, is punishment for on offence a
Wallace, 32l). The theory of political
security rests upon the fact that man
kind are endowed with certain ina
lienable rights,-life, liberty, and the
pursuit of happiness-and any depriva-
ton or suspension Of those rights is pun
ishment, and can be no otherwise defined.
This same doctrine is laid down in &c parte
Garland, a Wallace, page 344,) and in the
argument of that case counsel referred
to numerous authorities to prove the
fact that disqualification from office.
holding is punishment. Judge Golthwate
q Porter, 1881 held this ground,
and questioned whether any ingenuity.
could devise punishment more cal
eulated to operate on the public mind.
Spencer, C. j., had remarked that the dis
reimbursement of citizen is no unusual
puniehment for treason. So the very law
under which the Indictment against Mr..
Davis is framed expressly excludes from
Federal Offices those who engaged in the