The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1869-05-14

Zens, who, at the time of the rattt1ca'
ton, were actively engaged III the per-
| Torrance of their several duties. Very
many, if not majority OF these officers,
| had; in one or another Of the capacities
described in the third section, taken an
oath to support the Constitution, and
had afterwards engaged in the late rebel
| lion; and most, if not all of them con-
tinued in the discharge of their tunc-
tions after the PRONUNCIATION of the
amendment, not surprising that by its
operation their Offices could be vacated
without some action OF Congress. II
| the construction now contended tor be
given TO the prohiOitive section, the Ell
| feet must be 10 annul all official acts
performed by these officers. No sent
euce, no judgment, no decree, no nc
knowled Sment OF a deed, no record of
IA deed, no sheriff's or commissioners
sale-in short, no official act-is of the
least validity. 1t is impossible to
measure the evils which such a construc.
ton would add TO the calamities which
have already fallen upon the people of
these States. The argument from in
convenience, great IA these, against
the construction commended for, Is GER
| tainly one of no light weight.
Bat there is another principle, which =,
| in determining the construction of this
amendment, is entitled to equal con-
sideratiOu with that which has just
| OSSu StulSu anu ltluSlIdlSuG ~ u1h9 NC
sta ed thus: OF two constructions,
either of which is warranted by the
words of an amendment OF public
act, that is to be preferred which best
harmOnizas the amendment with the
general tenor and spirit OF the act
amended. This principle lOrbids
| construction of the amend ment, not
clearly required by its terms, which
will bring it into conflict or disaccord
with the other provisions of the Consti-
tuition.
And here it becomes proper to ex-
anime somewEa; more particularly the
character of the third section of the
amendment. The amendment itself
was the first of the series of measures
pr, posed or adopted by Congress with
a view to the reorganization OF State
Governments acknowledging the con-
stituliOnal supremacy of the National
Government, in those States which had
attempted to break up their cOnstitu-
| tiOnal relations with the Union, and to
establish an independent Confederacy.
All citizen who had, during its earlier
| stngas, engaged in or aid the war against
| the United States, which resulted in
evitAbiy from this attempt, had incur
red The penalties of treason under the
statute OF 1890. But, by the act of July
II, 1862, while the civil war was IA
grant, the death penalty for treason,
cOmmitted by engaging in rebellion,
was practically abolished. Afterwards.
in Decein Der. 1868 full amnesty, on con-
dl!ionY which now certainly seem to be-
moderate, was offered by President
Lincoln in accordance with the same
act Of Congress and after organized
| resistance TO the United States had
ceased, amnesty WIS again offered, in
accordance with the same nct, by Pres
| ident Johnson, In May, 1865. In both
| these offers OF amnesty extensive ex-
M var audi In
| more than IL year later, the fourteenth
amendment was proposed and was
| ratified in July, 1868. The only punt
tive section contained in It Is the third,
| now under consideration. It Is not i'm
pr0ba bic that one OF the objects of this
section was to provide for the security
OF the nation and of individuals by the
exclusion OF class of citizens from
Office; but it can hardly be doubted that
its main purpose was to intliCt upon
the leading and most influential char
acters who had been engaged in the re-
| belliOn, exclusion from Office as pun
ishmeut for the offence. IL is true that,
i'll the judgment OF some enlightened
jnrisIs, its legal effect was to remit all
ether punishment, And such certainly
| was lis practical effect, for IL led to the
general am nestylot December 25, of the
same year, and to the order discOntiu-
| uinS NIL prosecutions for crime. and
proceedings for cOntiScaLion originating
in the rebellion, But this very effect
shows distinctly its punitive character.
Now it is undoubted that those provi-
sions of the Constitution which deny TO
the Legislature power to deprive any
person of life, liberty or property with
out due process of law, or to pass a bill
OF attainuer, or an CT post JdctO. are in
consistent in their spirit and general
purpose with provision which, at
once, without trial, deprives a whole
class of persons of offices held by them,
for cause, however grave. It is true
that no limit can be imposed on the
people when exercising their sovereign
power in amending their own constitu-
ton of government. But 1t is neces-
sary presumption that the people, III
the exercise OF that power, seek TO con-
Ii RIM aud improve rather than to weak
en- and impair the general spirit of the
Constitution.
If there were no other grounds than
these for seeking another Interpretation
of the amendment than that which We
are asked to put upon 1t, we should feel
ourselves bound to hold them sufficient.
But there IS another and sufficient
ground, and it Is this, that the con-
petitioner is nugatory except for mis-
chief. In the language of one of the
counsel, "the object had in view by us
is not to unsaaL Hugh w. Shefey, and
no Judgment OF the Court can effect
that" Now the object of the amend
mCnt is To unsent every officer, whether
judicial or executive, who holds civil or
military Office in contraventiOn of the
terms of the amendment. Surely,
construction which fails to accomplish
the main purpose OF the amendment
and yet necessarily works the 1nischlafS
and Inconvenience which have been
described, and is repuguant to the first
principles of justice and right EN- bodied
III other provisions of the Constitution,
Is not to be favored, IL any other rea
sonable construction can be found.
Is there, then, any other reasonable
construction? In tho Judgment OF the
court there is another, not only reason
able, but very clearly warranted by the
terms OF the amendment, and recoF-
uIzsd by the legislation of Congress.
Tue object of the amendment is to ex-
clude FROM certain offices certain class
OF parsous. Now, 1t is obviously i'm
possible to do this by II simple declaru-
lion, whether in the Constitution or in
an act of Congress, that all persons in
Cluded within particular description
shall not hold office. For, in the very
nature of things, it must be ascertatned
what particular individuals are en-
brnced by the definition before any
sentence of exclusion can be made 10
operate. To accomplish this ascertain
ment and ensure effective results, pro-
ceedings, evidence, decisions, and en-
forcement of decisions, more or less
formal, are Indispensable; and these
can only be provided for by Congress:
Now, the necessity OF this Is recognized
by the amendment itself, in its fifth
and final section, which declares that
Congress shall have power to enforce