Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1869-02-04
PARDON AND AMNESTY.
The Presidents Proclamation SUs-
isined by the COurt-JudFe TriEg's
DeefsIOu.

tanned by the COurt-Jua<e zrixE's
Decision.
His Honor, Judge Trigg, delivered an
oral opinion yesterday in the Fsdorsi
Court upon the motion to dismiss the
prosecution in the case Of the United
States, VS.. John H. Crozier, for treason.
As stated in our previous report, the
defendant, along with about a thousand
others gilmore or less prominence in the
rebellion, was indicted in the United
States Circuit Court at this place, some
four or five years ago, for treason. He
was arrested and admitted to bail, though
up to the present term Of the court he had
filed no plea Of any sort to the indict-
ment, and, without pleading, moved the
court, through his counsel, to dismiss the
proceedings against hin, under the gen
eral provisions Of the proclamation of the
President, issued the 18th Of December
last. To this the District Attorney OBJ
jected, and lengthy argument
ensued, Of which we have already
made mention. His honor held /:
THAT the President has the right
to grant pardOnS either to individual of
tenders, Except in cases Of impeachment
by special exercise of the power, or to
classes of offenders by general exercise
Of it, and this right is derived from, or
conferred by, the constitution.
THAT he Aas the right, likewise,
to make such pardon or general amnesty
known by solemn proclamation.
3.-That the courts of the United
States should take cognizance Of such
prOclamations for the pardon Of specified
Offense and stay proceedings for the pun>
Ishment Of such offense, whether such
proclamation be specially pleaded in bar
of the prosecution or not, and, therefore,
5.-Thst the President had the con-
stitutiOnal right to issue his Proclama>
ton Of the 18th of December last, and
that the defendant can not be held further
to answer an Indictment for an offense for
which the Court must know, from the
indictment ITSELF he has been fully par
doned.
The motion was sustained, the indict-
ment dismissed, and the defendant dis
charged.
This, we believe, is the first Judicial
decision upon question involving Presi-
dent JOhnsOn's constitutional right to
issue his proclamation of general amnes-
ty. 1t so happened, and it will be so
remembered by the bar especially, that
Judge Trigg was the first Judge in the
United States who declared the unconsti-
nationality of the act OF Congress prescrib-
ing test oath for attorneys in the courts.
This he did in the case Of &c parte John
Baxter, and the very reasoning OF
that opinion was adopted by the Supreme
Court Of the United States, in their de-
cision Of the same question in another
case, a year or more afterward.
The question decided by Judge Trigg,
in the case Of Col. Crozier, is now being
considered, we believe, by the Judiciary
Committee Of the United States Senate,
and a partisan majority may deny the
right of the President to issue his procla-
nation of amnesty, but we doubt not,
that when the Presidents action shall
come to be tested by the judicial minds
of the Supreme Court, Judge Trigg will
again be found to have been the pioneer
in the true pathway of constitutional
lsw.-hnOrUilie Press and Herald,
Fe6. ..