The weekly register. [volume] (Point Pleasant, Va. [W. Va.]) 1862-1909, 1869-09-02

| INJUSTICE RkLlGlOUbLYI hOhALLli avn
| POLITICALLY, FOR ANY GOyERHNENT 10
wITH,HoLD FROM ANY PORTION oFITs CIT
fzgYs OF THE SANE COLOR. LINEAGE,
| LANGUAGE AND REELECTION, AND INBUED
WITH TnE SANE POLITICAL EDUCATION,
THEIR EQUAL RIGHTS, UPON THE BARE
sUpPoslTtoE THAT THEY WILL no WRONG
IN THE AB'ENCg OF ANY DEMoNsrRA-
TIoN OR THREAT EyIEcISG sUcH AN M
CLrEATloN
Mr.. Register:
In my last communication | gave q
very general istory and summary Of the
test oalhs Of this STATE, and in this one
neon 10 examine the test oath usually
osIed the lawyers test oath with some
dcgee of care. If ! have been inform
cd correctly, the history Of that oath is
curious one and one that deserves 10
bo pcrpeluated. have heard it stated
By those who said they knew it, that in
the month of May, 1865, meeting of
the bar or portion thereof was held,
or at least. II not formal meeting, they
in some way got together and came TO
the conclusion that there were enough
young lawyers 10 do the business OF the
Couh without The aid Of the returning
Secession lawyers, and that this really
was the true reason Of the public officers
oath being tenderei TO Mr. Quarter and
others and be declining to take itend Mr.
Faulkner subsequently OF Wheeling de-
Ginning to lake it,gavc rise to tho discus.
sion and decision in the lsl vol. Of Ho.
gan's ReporrSpage 2G9,and inasmuch as
Nj Qparder's appeal was met by the
lest oath on appeals. The Supreme
Court at Wheeling not seeing it in the
same light that the bar and the court Of
The county from which a copy of the rec
ord came, decided adversely to the de
cisioo Of the Court cxcludiog Mr.. Quar-
ficr and the lawyers there, qualified in
The Supreme Court, and then came into
existence this law passed on the 18th of
February, 1866;
Be tc0ac'ca Jy tie Legislature Of Yyt
Trginia:
No attorney Of law shall be allowed to
practice in any court or before any JUS
liCo or board of supervisors Of this state,
after the passage of this oct, until he shall
take, in the court in which he proposes
to practice, in addition 10 tho oaths now
required by law, the following cath:
81, "a, B DO solemnly swear lhat |
have not, since the twentieth day ofJune,
eighteen hundred aud sixty three, borne
arms against the United States. nor
against the state Of West Yrgjniai rhot
| have voluntarily given no aid or CON
foit to persons engaged 10 armed hoStiIi,
ty thereto, BY countcnuocing, counseling
or encouraging them in the same; that !
haye not sought accepted nor attempted
10 oxercise the functions Of any Office
whatever uOder any authority in hoslih
ty to the United States or to the state Of
West Virginia, that l have not yielded
support to any pretended government,
authority, power or constitution within
the United States, hostile OF inimical
thereto; and that | take this obligation
freely, without any mental reservation Of
purpose Of evasion"
This you will notice my anti proscrip
two friends is a tcar measure ado pied a
year alter every resistance had ceased
and is pretty strict and broad oath md
WAS no doul purposely made SO, as
Uar meesurc!!
True some men of pretty elastic con-
sciences might take the oath, while men
OF different moral temperament
would not, This oath requires a lawyer
to swear that he had not borne arms
against the United States nor against the
State of West Virginia, since the goth
Of June, 1868, that he had not given aid,
or comfor 10 persons engaged in armed
hostility thereto, by countenuncing, coun-
selling or encouraging them in the same;
thirdly, that he had not sought or ac-
cspted any Office from the so"caIled
Ccnfedsracy OF any part of it; fou'thIy
that he had not. yielded voluntary
support to any pretended government,
authority, power or constitution within
the United States, hostile or inimicable
thereto. That "he had not borne arms
is somewhat definite. That he had not
piyen aid and comfort 10 persons enga>
ged IN armed hostility, &C., that is very
indefinite. What is aia9 WHAT'S com
for? What is meant by the word per
sous? Does il mean tlieNOid that fAth-
er gave to son, brother or nephew,
who was in the Southern armyl For
shame to thus punish a man for such
conduct. The alder perhaps had no
control over the person aided, and yet
because he did not sever every tie OF
blood, relationship or friendship, he is
| thns nrnscrihe1 II he did sack an oflice