Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1879-05-01
Legality of the Test Oath.

DncIDING THAT JuRoRs ARE NOT OBLIGEp
TO CRIMINATE THEMSELVES.
WAsniNGToN, April 2s.-Among the cases
in which decisions were rendered by the
United States Supreme Court to-day, was
that of George Burt, plaintiff in error
against Maria NJ. Ponjoud in error to the
Circuit Court of the United States for the
Northern District of Florida. This was an
action of election brought to recover posses
sion of two lots of land in st. Johns County
Fla, which defendant in error claims under
certain deeds Of conveyance and by virtue of
alleged prior possession Among the errors
assigned was a ruling of the lower court to
the effect that certain Henry Holmes, called
to be a Juror in this case, was not obliged to
answer any questions touching his qualfica-
tions As juror, under section 500 of the Re
vised Statutes. Under this ruling Holmes
declined to say whether he did or did not par
ticipate in the rebellion. He was challenged
on the ground that he was disqualified under
the aforesaid section of the Revised Statutes
and the court overruled the challenge Upon
this point this court holds that Juror is no
more obliged than a witness to disclose on
oath his guilt of any crime, or of any act
which would render him infamous, in order
To test his qualifications as a Juror. The
question asked him, if answered in the affirm
alive. would have convicted him of the crime
of treason Whether pardoned by a general
amnesty or not, the crime was one which, in
the opinion of this court, he could not be re-
quircd to disclose in this manner. If he
were guilty. the challenger had the right to
IL hV a. her
A. he did not offer to do this and as the iu-
ror's incompetcncy was not proved. the court
was not bound to exclude him As To the
ownership of the lots, this court holds that
there Is sufficient evidence of defendant in
errors prior possession, and that she is emit
tied to them both Mr.. Justice Miller dCliv-
cred the opinion.
Mr.. Justice Field delivered n separate CON
curing opinion with regard to the test oath
demanded of the juror Holmes. a. follows :
81 agree with the court that the Juror Holmes
in this case cannot be required to answer the
questions put to him. but 90 further. do
not think that the act of Congress. which by
requiring test oath as to past conduct. eX-
cludcs a great majority of the citizens of half
the country from the jury box is valid In
my Judgment the act is not only oppressive
and odiOus. and rcpugnant to the spirit of our
Institutions but Is clearly unconstitutional
and void. As war measure, to be enforced
/ in the insurgcnt States when dominated by
the national forces. the act could be sustained.
bat after the war was over and the insurgent
States were restored to their normal and con-
( stituiiona relations to the Union il was as
much out of place and as imperative as
would be law quartering soldier in every
Southern mans house"
Mr.. Justice Strong disscnted from the
opinion of the court.
! The Gar lives very simply and monoto.
nonsly at l-ivadia. He walks out in the
morning after biscuit and a cup of coffee,
which he drinks for the sake of his nerves,
shattered by the hard work of the past few
] years.