The Louisiana Democrat. [volume] (Alexandria, La.) 1845-1918, 1872-04-03
came part of ne Constitution of the

The position of Congressman then
be that Oh the 2lst of July, 1868, GER
tain classes of citizens of the United
States became ineligible to State or
Federal Office by reason of their partic-
ipation in rebellion, though previously
eligible despite such participation. In
other words legal and political disibiii-
ties not Heretofore existing were then
imposed" That the imposition of
these disabilities is punishment can
not be doubted. Punishment and
crime go together, and this very four
teenth amendment speaks in section 9
of participation in rebellion OF, other
crime" The disabilities imposed by
the third section of the fourteenth
amendment are therefore punishment
for crime-the crime of participation
in rebellion. 81
We now come to the recent decision
of the Supreme Court of the United
States in the case of the United States
Us. Klein, administrator of WILSON,
Wilson had cotton which was sold as
captured or abandoned property and
the proceeds paid into the Treasury.
Klein, as administrator, sued for the
money in the Court of Claims, which
gave Judgment in his favor. Counsel
for the United States appealed to the
Supreme Court, and argued that under
the terms of what is known as the
Drake proviso in the General ApprO-
priations act of March IL, 1870, Klein
had no rights. This proviso was in
effect that Presidential pardon, when
pleaded in either the Court of Claims
or the Supreme Court, should prove
only that the person pleading had been
engaged in rebellion, but not that he
| had been pardoned therefor. AS the
Supreme Court put it, the pardon
should "be conclusive evidence of the
acts pardoned, bnt null and void as ev-
idence of the rights conferred by it,
The object of the proviso was to evade
the fulfillment of the promise made in
the earlier amnesty proclamation of
Lincoln and johnson of full pardon
with restoration of all rights of proper
ty, save as to slaves, on the taking and
, keeping of certain oath. On plead
ing his pardon the sutton was to be
told that he had thereby admitted par.
ticipation in the rebellion, and on this
!, the courts were to dismiss the case al
being one brought by q disloyal per
son. 1t will be seen, therefore, thai
{ the Drake proviso repudiated the Elk.
, ecutive promise of restoration of rights
: of property, and the Supreme Cour
held that itswas not within the power
, of Congress to thus nullify the Execu.
tive pardon. In support of this view
, the court laid stress on the nature ani
extent of the pardoning power. L
t said, through Chief-Justice Chase, whe
r delivered the opinion, the court being
unanimous: cit is the intention of tn,
Q Constitution that each of the great co
4 Ordinats departments of the govern
ment, the Legislative, the executive
q and the judicial, shall be, in its sphere
. independent of the others. To the Elk
1 ecutive alone is intrusted the power @
e pardon; and it is granted withou
! limit. Pardon includes amnesty
h 1t blots out the offence pardoned
e and removes all it's penal conse
: quences."
S The Executive pardon blotting on
}, the offence pardoned and removing al
: its penal consequences, it follows tina
It the amnesty proclamation of July 4
IS 1868, bletted out the participation i
d the rebellion of all persons save thos
If under actual presentment or indict
: ment therefor, and removed all Tia
" penal consequences of such participa
|, ton. That proclamation reads:
% Be it known that I, Andrew Johnso,
5, President of the Uuited States, do, by vi
e tue of the Constitution and in the name
> the people Of the United States, hereb
% proclaim and declare, Internationally an
= without reservation. to all and every pc
!. son who directly or indirectly partieip
- ted in the late insurrection or rebellion
, excepting such person or persons as ma
l. be under presentmeut indictment
any court of the United States havin
20 competent jurisdiction upon a charge
ID ttreason or other felony, II full pardo
IT and amnesty for the offence of treaso
~ against the United States, or of adheriE
S; to their enemies during the late civil wa
"a with restoration of all rights of propert
e except as to slaves, and except also as
y, any property Of which any person nls
Ill have been legally Invested under the Law
Mt of the United States -
il Beyond Mr. Jefferson Davis an
r some obscure person indicated in Ea
" Tennessee, it is not known that al
j. one was, at the date of this proclam
e. ton; Under Indictment or presentmel
es in the Federal courts for participate
he in rebellion, and the full pardon AZ
ar amnesty bestowed by the proclamatit
he extend therefore, with these exec
he ticns, to every participant in the r
ce bellion. On the ith of July, 1868, the
at it may be said that every person wi
or participated. directly or indirectly,
nd the rebellion had that participate
ay blotted out and all its penal cons
il. quences removed. In contemplate