Norfolk day book. [volume] (Norfolk and Portsmouth Va.) 1868-1880, 1869-07-09


section of article IA. The same
notification appear in General
Orders, No. ST. and beyond
this, no restriction was placed
upon members elect. The rule
which General Candy desires to
enforce in Virginia was ex-
plicitly discarded under the
highest authority in regard te
Georgia.
The same course was pllr-
sued in Louisiana. In the pro
ceedings of the State Senate
under date June 80, 1868, we
find recorded the following
telegraphic dispatch from Gene
raj Grant to General Bucha.
nan: 4ez
4 have no orders at present
to give; but repeat to you, as
heretofore, that the members Of
the Louisiana Legislature are
only required to take the oath
prescribed by their constitution
and are not required to take the
test-oath prescribed in the Re
construction acts. Generals
Meade and CANDY are acting
on this view of the case %.
(Signed) U. S. Grant
AS a result of this communi-
cation, the record of the Senate
proceedings adds: General
Buchanan directs that the oath
prescribed by the Constitution
and no other be required.
Were the instructions OF
General Grant with reference
to Georgia and Louisiana right
or wrong Was the interpre-
tation of law on which, accor-
ding to General Grant, even
General Candy acted in 1868 a
sound and just Interpretation /,
or is the present after-thought
of General Candy to be accept
ed as correct? The enquiry adj
mits we think, Of a positive and
satisfactory anwer.
The plea ofthe proscriptionists
is that the test-oath is srequir-
ed by the terms of the ninth
section of the second supple
mentary Reconstruction act,
which provides
THAT all members of said
Boards Of Registration, and all
persons hereafter elected or ap-
pointed to office in staid mill
tary districts, under any so
called State or municipal au-
thority, or by detail or appoint
ment of the district comman-
ders, shall be required to take
and to subscribe the oath OF
office prescribed by law for
officers of the United States.
All turns upon the applica-
bility Of this section. It will
be seen that it describes only
elections or appointments to Of
flee in said military districts
under any so-called State or mu-
nicipal authority plainly re-
ferring to the States or govern
ments described in the first re-
construction act being mot le-
gal State governments 'as pro-
visional only land in all respects
subject to the paramount autho-
rity of the United States. 1t
can have no bearing upon 60
yernments or constitutions de-
signed to be created under the
authority of the United States,
which, as in the Carolinas,
Georgia, Louisiana, Arkansas,
Florida and Alabama are not
so called governments, but 60
vernments de jure. In the pre-
liminary stages of reconstruc-
ton, where elections and APP
pointments are concerned, this
oath is to be exacted, but it has
no place in other stages of re-
construction. Members of the
convention, by whom the new
constitution OF Virginia was
framed, were not required to
take the oath. The reconstruc-
ton acts are silent as to tests or
other qualifications for holding
office under the constitutions to
be framed under them. These
are to be sought-as General
Grant told Meade and Buchan-
ann the local constitutions,
and in the third section of the
fourteenth amendment, which
is of general application.
Fl If any doubt formerly exist
ed upon the subject, it would
seem to have been removed by
recent action of Cnnrrass talk