The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1896-02-23

the said jefferson Davis. having previous
~ to the offence charged I'm said indict-
ment taken an oath as member OF Con-
gress 10 support the Constitution of the
United States, question arises whether by
the operation Of the third clause OF the
fourteenth amendment OF the COnstitu-
ton of the United States the defendant
is exempted from liability to indictment
or prosecution for treason In leFying war,
participating or engaging In the late re-
bellion. and upon that question the opin-
ION Of the Judges are opposed And there
upon the said parties. upon the request OF
the defendant. stated under instruction OF
the said judges. were certified under the
seal Of the court, 10 the Supreme Court OF
the United States ar its next term.
Judge Chase voted for dsmission and
Judge Underwood against 10. This order
was certified at once 20 the Supreme
Court Of the United States for its deter
minatiOn, and there IL has rested, uncon-
sidered and undecided until the present
time so that, I'm point Of fact, Jefferson
Davis has never been tried by the civil
tribunals OF the Government.
OF the Hon. John c. Underwood, who
figured most prominently In all these pro-
ceedings, a distinguished citizen Of Rich
m0nd has spoken as follows. adopt MS
language as far better than any have az
command 10 portray his character: lie
was a political bigot, as blind and fanau-
cal as ever sat upon the bench. III
case had any political complexion II hai
for him but one side. Perhaps mere
never was a judge or man so iittie III
danger Of being lbcllcd as he TOT DIS
neral and judicial photograph Is I'M
pressed indelibly upCn the record or TWO
Rel nNf
Wall. 2I9. and Underwood W. McNeigh,
p Graft. 48. 10 clearly appears from
these cases that, in The year lN2, while
sitting IN Alexandria as Judge OF the
United states District Court. be tried
libel FOR the forfeiture OK the real estate
OF one McNeigh. who appeared by coun-
sci. answered. ana claimed his property.
Underwood ordered that the appearance,
answer, and claim be stricken from the
files. for the reason that the defendant
is "A resident OF the city OF Richmond,
within the Confederate lines. ana "a rebel.
The same day he entered decree OF
sale, and al the sale himself bought the
house In the name Of his wife and moved
into It. Upon AIcVeigh's appeal the SUI
pTeme Court said. In our judgment the
District Court committed a serious error
in ordering he claim and answer OF the
defendant % bee stricken from the files.
A. We are unanimous in this conclusion.
our opinion viii be combined 20 that SUBJ
ject. The order In effect. denied the re-
sp0ndent hearing. IL Is alleged that he
was IN Gee position of an allen enemy.
and hence De could have no locus standi
in that forlm. II asgailed there he
could defend them. The liability and the
right are inseparabe a different re-
suit would be Il blot upon our iurlspru-
dence and civilization. We cannot hesl-
tate or doubt on the subject. IL would be
contrary 10 the first principles OF the So
cial compacts ana OF the right admins
tIation OF justice"
Incidentally and I'm conclusion. Iot me
say that I once heard the opposing coun-
sci to Mr.. MceVigh remark that he had
been the most successful litgant that
ever appeared I'm court OF Justice for
he had not only recovered an his real
estate which had been cOnfscated. but
also the sum Of $4,000 IN addition. IL
TINS be so. he was indebted for his suc-
cess TO the legal ability and arduous la
bors OF my friend. ohn Howard. ESQ. Of
the city OF Richmond. who was his coun-
gel il all his litigations since The war
ana who, since Mr. McgeiQh's death. I'm
the SUIT or McNeigh VS. Howard. In our
court or Appeals obtained a Judgment
Tor the sum OF $1,000. v.th interest. IA bls
zee "hich was no. a large compensa.
uon when his long. successful legal SER
WIS are considered. Il. ID. w.