Year: 1877

perhaps, the most Interesting ana pecu
liar in the history ofjurisprudence. W.
ars induced to refer to, and som ewhat ex
plain the origin and nature of the legis
lstion which gave birth to these contests
by reason Of the notice which has late
ly been taken of it by the .press outside o.
the State. The good name of the State
demands that the responsibility for it
be referred to the times to which II
belongs. They were desperate schemes
of dark and desperate epoch in the his.
tory OF West Virginia, when prejudice
and passion ran rampant, and legislative
enactments which defed all preceden,
and prudence were given the form and
force of law to crafty spirit of hate
and vengeance.


With returning reason and better
public sentiment-or, perhaps, more cor.
rectly, when these partisan desperados
were hurled from place and power by an
expression of sober judgment at the bal,
lot box, an effort was Immediately put on
foot to defeat the operations of these
statutes and repair the injury they had
already inflicted in individual cases. {.


The most violent and mischievous OF
these acts of legislation is ope which pro-
vided that if any party were in sym.
psthy with the rebellion, and had left
his usual place of abode, and was out OF
the reach of civil process for ninety
days, he was to be regarded as non.
resident.


The meaning and operation of this act
is easily perceived. 1t was intended to
supplement the act providing for the con-
tiscation by the State, of the property OF
persons engaged in the rebellion, by allow
ing private individuals to indulge in the
same luxury. 1t made it competent for an y
individual who had lost property by the
war, or whether he had or not, if he
could trump up claim of this character,
to select his man on the other side of the
llne, and dispensing with legal process
against him, proceed to take judgment.
1t was matter of no importance wheth-
er the individual thus proceeded against
was responsible for the loss or not. If 8
mans cow or horse strayed across the
line and got into possession of the Con-
federste forces, the owner had the privi.
lege of choosing from the ranks OF
the whole army the man whom
he would sue and make response
bic for the loss. The ground
taken by the authors of this scheme was
that the Confederates were co-conspirs.
tors against the property and rights OF
the subjects of the Federal government
and hence jointly and severslly liable for
any losses to the latter, whether occur
ring under the ususges of war or other
wise.


This liberal legislation was, of course
taken advantage of by many unprinci'
pied and spiteful persons in attempting
to Feather their nests by trumping uf
trlfing and vexatious claims which were
made the basis OF judgments in their
favor against innocent parties within the
rebel lines.


A large number of this character oI
judgments are now on record In some OF
the counties OF the State. A short time
ago, the Baltimore Sun and other Mary
land papers noticed that JOHN I
PIERCE, who, we believe, is resident o.
Mineral county, while passing through
Gsrret county Md, with lot of cattle
had his cattle attached under one OF these
very'same judgments, rendered against
PIERCE without process during the war


The authors of this legislation
further attempted to secure the
iruits of the scheme by suose-
ouently enacting a law to prevent
these judgments from being opened
or set aside. To do this they passed what
Is known rs the "Suitor's Test Oath
This required any defendant who sought
relief against any of these judgments tc
first make oath that he "never volun'
ta-ily gave aid or comfort to persons en-
gagged in armed hostility to she United
States, the reorganized government OF
Virgins, or the State of West Virginia
tSc" Unless he took this oath ne had nc
rights in court, no matter how many
wrongs were there on record against
him. Neither could he proceed
against these parties who mao
deprived him of his property by rev
action. The law made 1t conclusive
against him in any step he should take



either to recover right or redress
wrong, if the defendant simply hied
plea that the plaintiff was engaged In the
rebellion.


But, AS we have said, another and mo
suspicious era dawned on West Virgins
Amopg the first steps taken by the Leg
islsture OF West Virginis, under the ne"
regime, was to pass an act to preven:
the further iniquitous operation OF the
statutes referred to. This act provided
what is usually termed the "belligerent
plea" by which defendant in one o
these actions could defend on the grounc
that the property was taken according L
the usage of civilized warfare. I'M
plea was first tested, we believe IN
case in Preston county, where 1t VA