Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1885-05-24
LgTTERS 10 THE EDITOR.


Az you have devoted good deal Of
space to the discussion Of the question
sf the disabilities Of General l.awton
and Others similarly situated, II Is 10 be
hoped you viii lind il convenient to IN
ssrt the following extract from the dis
eussion n Congress on the general am
nesty bill Of 1879 and the communies-
ton which recently appeared IN The
Nation:
Mr.. Butler. Of Massachusetts, Chair
man Of the judiciary Committce), IN
reporting House bill No. 27Gl on the
18th Of May, 1874, tsce Congressional
Globe, second session, forty-second
Congress, part A, page 1881 SAID
There Is no more necessary business
TO be transacted by Congress than this.
The Committee on the Judiciary, IN
obedience 10 the instructions OF the
House, have reported bill which
covers some sixteen or seventeen thou
sand names. That bill has been
amended with twenty-five additional
pages Of names. So far as the com
mittcc are aware, none of these names
come within the classes which have
been objected 10 upon the floor OF
this House. Under these circumstances
the committee have instructed me
to report a general bill removing disa-
bilities from oil persons, with the ex-
ception Of four classes, which will en-
brace between two and three hundred
men only in the whole land. These
classes arc members OF the Thirty-sixth
and Thirty-seventh Congresses, judicial
and diplomatic officers Of the United
States, and those in the army and navy
who resigned and went into the rebel
lion. Let me say 10 gentlemen that this
is done with desire TO pass a bill
which will remove disabilities from as
many as can be done in the present
juncture Of affairs"
Mr. Mcintyre "Does this bill ex-
cept the State judiciary"
Mr.. Butler: "No, sir. II excludes
from amnesty none but members Of the
Thirty-sixth and Thirty-scventh Con-
crosses, judicial and diplomatic officers
of the United States, and officers of the
army and navy Of the United States
who left TO 60 into the rebellion. 1t
excludes nobody else"
Mr.. Hoar Z" Is there not an ambiguity
In the language Of this bill 4? II does
not appear from its terms whether it is
intended to include in the exemption
those who merely held the offices
named or those who held them at the
time the rebellion broke ont"
Mr.. Butler: THAT question came
up in committee, and we thought that
the meaning of the bill, considered in
connection with the constitutional
amendment, was clear
Mr.. Dawes: :" ask my colleague
whether he will not admit modifica-
tom | think the bill should show
specifically that amnesty is withheld
from those who committed acts Of re-
bellion while members of Congress-
Mr.. Bingham "Some of them re-
signed
The foregoing discussion shows that
il was the intention of the trainers OF
the bill TO exclude from its benefit only
those who held the specified offices at
the time or after the sO-called "rebel-
lion +" broke out, and not such officers
as, having previously taken an oath TO
support the Constitution. had resigned
or vacated their offices by expiration of
their terms or for other cause before the
so-called rebellion occurred. Ii may
have been that some officers Of the army
or navy may have entered the Coincide
rate service after the oath prescribed
by the act Of July, 1862, had been sken
by them, and these Of course would come
under the exception. As for those
officers WHO had not taken an oath to
support the Constitution, the exception
does not apply TO them, for they had
not come under the disabilities of the
fourteenth amendment nor were their
disabilities removed by the said act,
for they had none to be removed.
The question, however, is Of impor-
tsncc to such officers as were in the iu-
dicial and diplomatic service of the
United States but had left il before Sc
cession was contemplated; and subsc-
quently sustained the Confederacy.
That officers Of the army did not take
an oath to support the Constitution be-
fore the war is clearly shown by the
following communication to The Ma
lion.
The westPoini Oath.
10 the Editor Of The Nation:
SRA letter recently appeared In the
Fayetteville (TcRn.) Ubscrrer. written by
Mr.. j. W. Newman, a lawyer OF that town
from which the following extract Is to Ken
"ln 1870 Colonel J. II. Holman. who had
been nm officer In the old army and had re-
signed. and In 1861 went into the rebellion
ss Lieutenant Colonel Of the First Ten,
nessee (Confedcrate) regiment, was elected
Attorney General OF the sixth Judicial cir
cult Of Tennessee. Soon thereafter and
amer entering upon his dutiesas Attorney
Genera he was indicted In the Fedora
court at Nashville for holding Office ~
VIOLATION Oh TIE louIttthNu Hhtthh
lnent. lie plead In abatement OF th'
writ Ex-Governor Marks. OF Tennessee
being his attorney the fact that h'
had never taken go oath as officer IN th'
United States army To support the Consil
tuition OF the United states that the only
oath he had taken was the oath COpiet
above from Dunlop. The War Department
at Washington furnished him an exempt
fed copy OF IN oath. and TIE went Ia trla
upon IL. The Court sustained Colonel Hol
mans plea and quashed the Indictment
The District Attorney-GeneralM r. Mcl'hai
Smith, appealed 10 the supreme touri q
the United states. from which court ~ wa
dismissed by the Auofncy-CenerM ot th
limited states WithO,d a hearlpg So 10 WI
he seen the question n res 0,ibUdiedfd, an
Mr. Garland need not have pleaded the eli
xibility Of Mr.. LAwton on the ground q
spaf,ion. hut might have put 10 with equn
force upon the ground of his not helm
Amenabie To the penalties OF The foufteent
amendment
The oath referred To ls the following. an
10 In the one which was prescribed for oil
Gers and soldiers before the late war;
IL Il. H.. do solemniy swear, or affirm "a
the ease may bel that VIII bear true fait
America, aud that will serve them hou
essiy and faithfully against their enemie
or op,sxefx whomsoever: aud that ! Wi
xoisserve and obey the orders OF the Pres
xient Of the United States, and the orders {
Jhe officers appointed over me- according {
fhe Rnies and Articles OF War"
AZ the time General lAwtOn entered ia
Military Academy. In 1895. cadets were ne
required 10 take an oath, but they +" la IN
Is~ence u the superintendent or some on
x1es,uted by him, subscribed To an engage
800 tf.ll .sftatT for