Newspaper Page Text
nation of the persons Intended to be reached.
It is to be regretted in a matter of so much im
portant e, that the rule of designation adopted
as to members of Congress and of a State
Legislature bad not been followed up, or if that
was found impracticable, that some more defi
nite general rules had not been declared.
The uncertainty becomes manifest in the ap
plication of the law, and this uncertainty ne
oesfitntes construction. The necessity for con
struction, which arises from the generality of
the law, cannot be better stated than in the lan
guage of Plowden : “ Though the words be
.general they arc to be reduced to a particulari
ty by exposition made according to the intent
of the act.” These statutes which comprehend
all things in the letter, the sages of the law
have expounded to extend but to some things
Those, which generally prohibit all people
from doing such an act, they hare interpreted
to permit some persons to do it, and those
which nclude every person in the letter, they
have adjudged to reach some persons only ail
founded upon the intent oollected by consider
ing the cause and the necessity of the act and
comparing one part with another, and some
times by foreign circumstances. I deem it
proper here to fix some dear ideas of the gen
eral intent of these acts and by what rule of
construction strict or liberal, that intent may
best be arrived at. The intent that is express
cd, is to enable the people of each of tln-se
States, to frame a constitution for the State, bv
ihe exercise of the right of suffrage. There are
clauses of the act giving the right, by general
terms of description, to the people generally,
and especially to those who have never en
joyed the right before. There are other clauses
of the act which by general terms take away this
right of suffrage from those who have always
enjoyed it.
'1 he rule of construction as to the clauses
which give the right, must be liberal, and as to
them, the general terms are not to be restrict
ed *, .but as to those clauses which derogate
from the existing right, the rule of construc
tion must be strict, that none should be-ex
cluded who are not clearly within the letter or
intent.
I begin then with the inquiry, whether offi
cers of military or of State are embraced with
in these, terms of description ; and I have no
doubt licit they are not. Certainly Congress,
as to the officers of a State, was not content to
use the term at large, and without qualification ;
hut as wc sec, it intended to qualify. The usual
words to manifest thnt intent woiild have been
adopted, and the terms would have been the
•Judicial and Executive, the civil or military of
ficers of the Slate. Accordingly, we find when
that was the purpose, m wc see it was, in the
third section of the Constitutional Amend
ment, known as article 14, Congress expressed
that purpose very clearly. That section pro
vides that no person shall be a-Senator or a
Representative in Congress, or elector of Presi
dent and Vice-President, or hold any office,
civil or military, in the United States, or as
executive or judicial officer of State, to support
tiie Constitution of the United States, who
shall have engaged in rebellion or insurrection
against the same, or given aid ana comfort to
the enemies thereof. This third section - is ex
pressly referred to more than once in these
acts ; it is made in part of these acts, its lan
guage is followed, word by word, in these dis
qualifying clauses, ns far ns it was possible, ex
cept In the particular in which one is made to
apply to the eligibility and the other to the
right to .vote.
When, therefore, we find that Congress, in de
claring what persons shall be disfranchised
from holding an office, expressly includes mil
itary, as well as civil officers in third sectiou
of amendment, aud |iu providing What persona
shall be disfranchised from voting who held
any office, omits to mention the military offi
cers, we cannot escape the conclusion that
military officers were not here within their
contemplation.
It is impossible to imagine a case in which
the construction from laws in pare mature
has a more cogent application, for it is evident
here that the law maker in framing disqualifi
cations of voters, took special cognizance of
the third sectiou of amendment, and weighed it
word by word, following it literally for the
most part, and rejecting deliberately the very
word intended to embrace a military officer.
It must be borne in mind that we are here
considering the class of military officers who
were such prior to the rebelliou, when the of
fice was lawful, and who were known as offi
cers of the militia. Not the class who became
military officers during the rebelliou. As to
this last class, they all come under that other
clause of disqualification which applies to par
ticipation in the rebellion.
Having the inquiry thus circumscribed to
civil officers, the question recurs, what civil
officers are to be brought within the terms of"
executive or judicial officers of a State. Thfcy
clearly include, so far as executive officers are
concerned, all such officers as are generally
known by the proper description of State
officers or officers of State. In one sense, and
in a popular sense, the description of executive
officers of a State is applicable to a well known
class : the Governor, Lieutenant Governor,
State Auditor, Treasurer, Secretary, and State
officials proper, who exercise executive func
tions at the seat of government.
I am not prepared to say that only these
proper State officials come within this term ot
description ; nor am I prepared as to the
judicialoffieors of a State, to limit the descrip
tion to judges of courts whose jurisdiction ex
tends over the entire State. I, must content
myself in saying of these officers, executive or
judicial, that they are clearly within the mean
ing of the law.
Now, changing the inquiry from an affirma
tive to a negative process, such officers do
not usually pass under the description of mu
nicipal, nor do.thoy come in the purview of the
act, such as officers of cities, towns, villages
and subordinate municipal divisions ; whether
tiieir functions are executive or judicial, as is
sometimes the case when the same officer acts
in both capacities. Outside of these two repre
sentative classc , the first of which is clearly
within and the last of which is clearly without
the purview of these clauses, we find in each of
these States a list of officers whose status is in
some way to be determined. It is impossible
here to proceed by way of enumeration, and to
distinguish by name all those who are included
and all those who are excluded—all that can be
done is to establish.some fixed rules. I feel the
necessity of circumspection herein saying who
are included within the disfranchisement, rather
than in saying who are not included ; for where
there is>,doubt, according to the rule of con
struction, which has been referred to, that
doubt must be solved in favor of, rather thau
against the right ot the voter.
The exclusion- is all comprehensive as to
time, and applies not only to those who were
iu office when the rebellion commenced, but to
those who held the prohibited offices at auy
previous time, although they may have ceased
to hold such office-in any indefinite number of
years prior to the rebellion. It is founded on
the idea of a breach of official trust due to the
State, as the author or donor of the trust. It
is founded on the Idea of a breach of trust, not
arising merely from allegiance as a citizen, but
duty to the State in a direct official relation to
the State, and through that to the Federal Gov
ernment, so far as this act designates by person
the person who violated such a trust. It is
that class to whose keeping the trust is espc;
daily confided, that is to sav, the persons who
were clothed with tfce legislative power.
Where, as in this iustance, there is a purpose
of exclusion on a common ground, and one
class is designated as coming within the pur
pose, and other classes arc left indefinite and
only to be ascertained by construction, it is
allowable to fiud ilie indefinite class byWbe rule
of assimilation.
We see thus iu this law a purpose of exclu
sion as to the three great departments ©f a
State,legislative, judicial and executive; we see,
further, that as to the legislative department,
made up of a legislative body, composed ot
members aud various officers appertaining to
such a body as a Legislature. The exclusion
is only of the higher functionaries of that body
—the members —and is uot carried to its subor
dinate officers. The terms of exclusion are not
the members and officers of a State Legislature,
but simply the members of a State Legislature;
as, therefore, the exclusion iu the legislative de
partment has effect only upon the highest'class
in that department, It is safe to say the same
policy of exclusion attaches rather to such offi
cers as exercised functions of important trust
in the executive and judicial departments, than
to those whose functions and duties are mere
ly limited and subordinate. I have already call
ed attention to the comprehensiveness of these
exclusions as to time. Now to declare them
comprehensive as to persons, and to sav
that they embrace all officers, large and small*,
coming in any sense frkbin the description of
executive or judicial officers who have at anv
tune during their lives beid any of these
'•faces, would have this inevitable result:
that in the formation of the constitution for a
State by the agency of its own people, a large
proportion, perhaps a majority of the most in
telligent and capable of the pebple, would be
excluded. There is no part of my duty, in
attempting to give construction to these laws,
in which I find myself iuvolved in such painful
uncertainty as in determining what officers
outside of the classes already designated come
within the just rauge of exclusion. I have
said, that iu addition to the class of officers
who clearly come within the terms of the act,
as judicial and executive officers of the State,
and to those classes which comprehend militia
officer* and municipal officers who clearly are
not within the terms of the act, there remain a
vast number of officers whose status is in some
way defined. These are known in popular
language by such terms of description as coun
ty, township or precinct officers. Their name
is legion. Their functions and duties are for
most part strictly local. Some of them, such
as sheriffs and justices of the county courts,
have jurisdiction over th’e entire Qounty;
others arc restricted to the smallest civil sub
divisions.
I have directed abstracts to be prepared for
each of these States, which will exhibit all
these offices, and the duties which appertain to
them, and the form of oath required.
I must reserve for further consideration, af
ter the abstracts are made, the question wheth
er all of them, or if not all, what classes of
these officers come within the disqualification.
As to all other executive or judicial officers
who are not in popular language characterized
as county officers, I incline to consider them
is coming under the description of executive
or judicial officers of a State, within the mean
ing of these laws.
I deem it proper here, in reference to that
class of officers, judicial or executive, who are,
by the rule I have laid down, brought within
the operation ot disfranchisement, to distin
guish a class whose duties are not localized—
who stand in direct relation to the State, and
who, in my opinion, cannot properly be designa
ted as .to the execution of judicial affairs of a
State. I mean that a class of persons who exer
cise special duties, rather in the nature of oc
casional employment than a general and con
tinuing official duty, this distinction between
the offices and employment, and between an
officer of a State and an agent of a State, is
well established.
Chief Justice Tilghman, in 8 Serg. and Rawle
14.), recognizes it in the case of commissioners
appointed to lay out roads and canals, and
other works of public improvement. The
question arose on a section iu the constitution
of Pennsylvania, which provided “that the
Governor 6hall appoint all officers whose offices
are established by this constitution, or shall be
established by law, and whose appointments
are not herein otherwise provided for.” The
Chief Justice says : “It has never been ascer
tained, por is it easy to ascertain to what offi
cers this power ot appointment extends. I
speak of officers created by law since the mak
ing of the constitution ; the word office is of
very vague and indefinite of import; everything
concerning the administration ol justice, or
the general interests of society may be sup
posed to be within the meaning of the consti
tution, especially if fees or emoluments are an
nexed to the office, but there are matters of tem
porary and local concern which, although com
prehended in the term office, have not been
thought to be embraced by the constitution,
and wheu officers of that kind have been cre
ated, the Legislature has some times made ap
pointment in the law which created them
—sometimes given the appointment to others
than the Governor, and sometimes given the
power of removal to others, although the ap
pointment was left to the Governor. The officers
of whom I am spealyng are often described iu
acts of assembly by the name of commissioners;
such, for instance, as are employed ”in‘|he lay
iug out of roads and canals and other, wbfrks of
public nature. Yet, all these perform a duty;
or, iu other words, exercises an office. I can
not enumerate all of the employments under
the Stale authority which, in my opinion, work
no disfranchisement. I will name some by way
of illustration, viz : Boards of Commissioners
of public works, Directors of State Asylums,
Visitors ot State Universities, Directors of
State Penitentiaries, State directors of banks-or
other corporations, special commissioners or
agents appointed by the Governor. Os other
State authority to perform special duties, as
examiners of banks, notaries public, and com
missioners to take acknowledgment of deeds.
The rule laid down, and these illustrations will
perhaps be sufficient to determine who come
within its operations.
The next disqualifying clause is founded on
the oath of office. The oath as incidental to
the office is not mentioned in the first disquali
fying clause, but the office alone—but in the
second clause the oath is made to enter as a
uccessary element in order to work disfran
chisement, aud it is applied to the same classes
of officers named iu the first clause.
And also to others not named in the first
clause ; that is, to officers of the United States,
it is an oath to support the Constitution of the
United States, and is clearly provided by this
1 clause that if this oath has been taken by a
I member of a State Legislature, or by au execu
: tive or judicial officer of any Slate, then such
; person who has taken that oath and engages iu
I insurrection shall be disfranchised.
There is some obscurity in these clauses, and
room for doubt whether disqualification under
the first clause would arise in the case c fa mem
ber of any State Legislature, or any executive
ot* judicial officer of auy State who had not
taken an oath to support %e Constitution of
tho United States. I iueline to the opinion that
this oath is put as au essential thiug,'thc breach
of which, by insurrection against the United
States, violates the trust imposed by it upon the
officer. But this clause, so far as the executive
or judicial offic‘is ot a State are concerned,
does not enlarge the class subject to disfran
chisement. The officer breaking the oath, which
works disfranchisement, must, also, be a judi
cial or executive officer of a State, according to
the rule hereinbefore established.
I do not apprehend auy practical question
will arise here, for by the Constitution of the
l nited States this oath is required to be taken
by the members of the several State Legisla
tures. and all executive and judicial offices of
the United States aud of the several States; and
in these ten States the same oath was required
as to members of the Legislature and the exec
utive and judicial officers of the State.
This brings me to the question who is to be
eons dered an officer of the United States.—
ithin the meaning of the clause under con
sideration here, the term officer is used iu its
most general sense and without any Qualifica
tion as legislative or executive or judicial; and
l think, as here used, it was intended to com
prehend military as well as civil officers of the
United States, who had taken the prescribed
oath, inasmuch as the violation of the official
trust has relation to fealty to the United States,
which is brokeu by rebellion against the Uni
ted States. The reason is apparent for includ
ing all officers of the United Stares, and for
ruakiug the disfranchisement more general and
comprehensive, as. to them standing as they do
in more direct relation and trust to the United
States than the officers of a State.
1 now come to consider what is the meaning
and scope of the disqualification arising upon
that part of the oath which requires the person
to state that he lias not engaged in insurrection
or rebellion against the United States, or given
aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. I most
here repeat what has been said before, that to
work disqualification two elements must con
cur : first, holding the designated office, State
or Federal, accompanied by an official oath to
support the Constitution of the United States;
and, second, engaging id rebellion against the
United States, or giving aid or comfort to its
enemies. Both these must not only concur,
but they must aoncur in the order of time
mentioned—first the office and the oath, and,
afterwards, engaging iu rebellion or giving aid
or comfort. A person who has at office within
the meaniug of this law, aud has taken the
official oath, aud who has not afterwards par
ticipated in a rebellion, may very safely take
this oath, aud so, too, the* person who has
folly p irticipated In the rebellion, but has not,
prior thereto, held an office and taken the
official oath, may with equal safety take this
oath.
My duty here is simply one of con ct'en
! I do not deem it proper to enter upou any
question of the constitutionality ot this part of
the act. Taking it as .granted, fpr the purpose
: of construction, that Congress has the right to
impose such an oath, it is not only allowable,
| but imperative, that I keep in view its essential
characteristics, it is something more than a
legislative act in derogation of an "existing
r’gbt. It is, in effect, a law which takes away
l a P existing right,, id consequence of acts done
i at a P” or 4ime, and which, at the time tbev
were done, entailed no such consequences. In
the late cases before the Supreme Court of the
, L nited States, upon the test oath prescribed by
Longress, to be taken by lawyers, by
which the exclusion from the right to prac
j .profession wa3 made to arise upou
prior participation in the rebellion, the court
says: “As the oath prescribed cannot be
taken by these parties, the act as against
i them operates as a legislative decree of
| P a rtial exclusion, and exclusion from any
of the professions, or any of the ordinary avo
j cations of life for their past conduct, can be re
garded in no other light than as punishment for
| such conduct ; the exaction of the oath is the
mode provided for ascertaining tjie parties upon
whom the act is intended to operate, and in
‘ stead of lessening, increases its objectionable
character. All enactments of this kind partake
i of the nature of liilisof pams-and penalties.
| The Court further says: The deprivation of any
rights, civil or practical, previously enjoyed,
! may be punishable, the circumstances attending
; the causes of the deprivation determining this
fact. The characteristics of this clause of (he
acts, are therefore retrospective, penal and pu
ritive. Os course there can be no question as
I to the rule of construction avhich is here to be
applied. Those who are expressly brought
j within its operation cannot be sav and from its
operation, wherefrom the generality of terms
of description, or for any other reasonable
doubt that arises, that doubt is to be resolved
against the operation of the law, and in fator of
the voters.
What acts, then, within the meaning of the
law, make a party guilty of engaging in insur
rection or rebellion against the United States,
or giving aid and comfort to the enemies there
of ; the language here comprehends not only
the late rebellion, but every past rebellion or
insurrection which has happened in the United
States; so, too, it comprehends every foreign
war in which the United States has at any time
been engaged. First part of sentence covers
cases of domestic war, existing iu form of re
bellion or insurrection, whilst'the last applies
to foreign war, the words giving aid and com
fort to the enemies of the United States, are the
same used in the constitutional definition of
treason, and the eneures there meant must be
taken to be toreign enemies. These words,
originally found in the early statutes ot Eng
land against treason, have received that settled
interpretation in .English and American courts.
They are used in this act without any qualifica
tion, and we give them full force and applica
tion when they are made to apply to'adherence
or giving aid and comfort to foreign enemies.
Such an act as the breach of the oath or duty of
allegiance stands upou the same policy of dis
qualification as engaging in rebellion or civil
war. A person, therefore, who gave aid and
comfort to our enemies in the war with Great
Britain of 1812, and in the war with Mexico in
1847, would, in that particular, come within this
clause.
m laying down this rule, I do not forget that
for certain purposes, and in a certain sense,
every citizen in the rebel States during the late
rebellion is to be considered a public enemy.—
As in respect to the liability of his property to
capture as prize of war ; and in respect to va
rious acts of Congress passed during the re
bellion which, as to property, declare its liabili
ty to capture, forfeiture or confiscation when
used in aid of the late rebellion ; but whenever,
in any ot these acts of Congress, these terms,
“ aid and comfort, ” are used in any otbei than
the commonly received acceptation, the same
qualification or description is added to make
them apply to the rebellion.
Nevertheless, although I strongly incline to
think that the aid and comfort mentioned
should strictly be confined to its acknowledged
legal interpretation, I am not quite prepared to
say that Congress may not have used it as an
plicable to the rebellion. I shall, therefore, al
low it due weight in the next inquiry, in giv
ing construction to the clause now to be con
sidered.
We are now to inquire what is meant by en
gaging in insurrection or rebellion against the
United States. The force of the term “to en
gage,” carries the idea of action, rather than
passive conduct, and of a rebel soldier, com
pelled to service by force of conscription.—
Take as another instance, the case, who, by the
command of bis master, or by military order,
has served in the lanks or aided in the con
struction of military works. It would be an
abuse of language to hold that in these in
stances the parties have engaged in rebellion
within the meaning of that word as used iu this
law.
But, whilst in my opinion a conscript or
slave, forced into the ranks, or other military
service, is not included, it does not follow that
other classes than those who actually levied
war, and voluntarily joined the ranks of the
rebels are to be excluded, taking it to be clear
that in sense of law persons may have been en
gaged in the rebellion without having actually
levied war or taken arms. *AII those who, in
legislative or other official capacity, were en
gaged in the furtherance ot common unlawful
purpose, 'or persons who, in their individual
capacity; hrirc done any overt act for the pur
pose ot promoting the rebellion, may well be
said in meaning of this law to have engaged in
rebellion. All persons who, during rebellion,
acted in an official capacity, where "the duties
of office necessarily bid relation to support of
rebellion, such as members of rebel Legisla
tures, rebel Congress and rebel conventions,
diplomatic agents of the rebel Confederacy, or
such other officials appertaining to the support
of the rebel cause must be held to cofne within
the terms of the exclusion of officers in those
rebel Suites, who, during the rebellion, dis
charged official duties not incident to the war,
but in the preservation of order and adminis
tration of law, are not to be considered as
thereby engaged iu the rebellion. The interests
of humanity require such offices for the per
formance of such official conduct, in time of
war or insurrection, as well as in lime of peace;
and the performance of such duties can never
be considered as criminal.
I cannot bring myself to the conclusion that
Congress could have meant that such purely
civil and necessary officers involved tbe incum
bent iu guilt of insurrection. Nothing but the
most urgent language, such as was used in (he
test oath for lawyers, could manifest such a
purpose. The Supreme Court, iu construing
that test oath, aud iu reference to the clause to
which I have alluded, uses this language: “The
third clause applies to the seeking acceptance
or exercise, not only of offices created for the
purpose of more effectually carrying on houtilr-
Sties ; "but also of any of these offices which are
required in every eommuuity, whether iu peace
or war, tor the administration of justice, and
the preservation of order.” 1 find no such
purpose in the use of any of the terms of the
act now under consideration. lam accordingly
of opinion that holding a simple judicial office
in other executive offices or public employment
as are of a purely civil character, -such as
county offices, municipal offices, and all others
ol like nature, which were not created for the
purpose of more effectuilly carrying on hostili
ties, and which did not involve the performance
of duties expressly iu furtherance of the re
bellion, do not, within the meaning of this
part of the oath, fix on the incumbent the
gudt of engaging in the rebellion.
So much for official participation. I now re
cur to what amounts to individual participation
in the rebellion, in the attempt to arrive at
classes of persons or of acts intended to be
comprehended. In the matter of engaoio o- in
rebellion, we must have due regard to the sub
ject.matter. L ndoubtedly, although every re
bellion against the l nited States is compre
hended, it is the late rebellion, which almost, if
not altogether, can be the proper subject mat
ter. A rebellion which extended over eleven
Mates of the L nited States, involving more or
less millions of their people, and continuing
for more than four years, and maintained by a
vast military authority, which, as to all these
people for a and as to most of them du
ring its continnanee, excluded them from all
protection under the lawful Government. The
obligations of allegiance when thus separated
from the corresponding right of protection,
and the breach of that allegiance, are necessari
ly modified.
Under such oircumstances the obligation is
stringent, and a breach of that obligation is
less reprehensible than in cases of temporary
or local insurrection. Nor mast we form
that throughout these rebel States there were
large classes of their population more or less
opposed to the rebellion movement, and who
were yet more or less necessarily involved in
supporl.
I have already said that the language used in
this act a§ to participation, carries the idea of
voluntary participation ; and I am satisfied that
these considerations, growing out of the hature
of the rebellion, induced Congress to use the
word “ engage” iu the sense of voluntary par
ticipation. When an insurrection, by its con
tinuance and power, takes the form of a de facto
Gpvernment, and prescribes and enforces laws
over people within its territory, individual
rights and obligations undergo an inevitable
modification, and the rightful and displaced au
thority, when it again comes into place must,
in a measure, accommodate its action to circum
stances, and consider many things as rightfully
done, which is a mere insurrection, would have
no color of legality. This principle is recog
nized by all civilized nations, and has been
especially enforced in England by statute, and
by the decisions ot courts, as early as the reign
of Henry \ if., obedient to the dc facto govern
ment, established under a usurping monarch,
has been held not to involve a subject in the
guilt of treason to the lawful king.
Giving due weight to these well established
principles, I proceed with the inquiry: I am ot
opinion that some direct overt act done with
the intent to further the rebellion, is necessary
to bring the party within the purvjew and mean
ing of this law. * Merely disloyal sentiments or
expressions are not sufficient.
The person applying for registration is not
required to clean himself from the taint of dis
loyalty. The meaning of Congress Sere be
tween get more evident when we look at the
’ast clause of the presumable oath. He is required
to swear that he “will faithfully support the
Constitution and obey the laws of the United
States, aud will, to the best of his ability, en
courage others to do so.”
This part of the oath is not exculpatory but
promissory. It looks to the future and not to
the past; and the purpose is here manifest to
omit as to the right to vote, the disqualification
from the right to exercise office. Mere acts of
common humanity and charity cannot be con
sidered as involving the party in participation
in the rebellion. So, too, are forced contribu
tions by the rebel authorities, or the compulsory
payment of taxes in aid of the rebellious State
would involve the persons, aud it must not
work disqualification under this law.
Voluntary contributions, in furtherance of
the rebellion, or subscriptions to the rebel
loans, and their organized contributions of
food and clothing, or necessary supplies, ex
cept Os a strictly sanitary character, are to-be
classed with acts which disqualify the Board of
Registration. The original act contains no
provisions as to the manner and time for hold
ing the election of delegates to Convention, or
the ratification of the Constitution framed by
that Convention, or for other purposes.
First section of supplemental act provides
that a registration of votes shall be made be
fore the first day of September, 1867. Fourth
and subsequent sections provide for the means
by which this registration is to be effected. .
The commanding general is directed to ap
point a3 many Boards of Registration as may
be necessary, consisting ot three loyal officers
or persons, to make and complete the registra
tion, superintend the election and make return
to him of polls, list of voters, and of persons
elected, as delegates, by a plurality of the votes
cast at said election; aqd, upon the reception of
said returns, he shall, open the same and ascer
tain the persons elected as delegates, according
to the returns of the officers who conducted
said election, and make proclamation thereof ;
and if a majority of the votes given on that
question shall be for a convention, the com
manding general, within sixty days from the
date, shall notify the delegates to assemble in
convention, at a time and place to be mention
ed in the notification, and said convention,
when organized, shall proceed to frame a
constitution and civil government, accord
ing to Ihe provisions of this act, and the
act to which it is supplemental; and when
the same shall have been so framed said con
stitution shall be submitted by the 'convention,
for ratification, to the persons registered under
the provisions of this act, at an election to be
conducted by officer or persons appointed, or
to be appointed by the commanding general as
herein before provided, and to be held after the
expiration of thirty days from the date of no
tice thereof, to be given by the same conven
tion, and returns thereof shall be made to the
commanding general of the district. Sixth
section provides that all elections in the States
mentioned in said act, to provide for the more
efficient government of the rebel States, shall,
during the operations of said act, be by ballot,
and all officers making said registration of
voters, and conducting said elections shall, be
fore entering upon the discharge of their du
ties, take and subscribe to the oath prescribed
by the act, approved July 2d, 1862, entitled “an
act to prescribe an oath of office;” provided,
Chat if any person shall knowingly and falsely
take and subscribe to any oath, in this act pre
scribed, such person so offending, and being
thereof duly convicted* shall be subject to the
pains, penalties and disabilities which, by law,
are provided for the punishment of wilful and
corrupt perjury.
The only oaths presented by this act, are the
oath to be taken by the person applying for
registration and the oath to be taken by the
persons composing the board of registration.
The duties of the board are, first, to make and
complete the registration and to superintend
the elections.
The first question is, as to the duties and pow
ers of the board in making and completing the
registration. The first section provides, that
the commanding general shall cause a registra
tion to be made of the male citizens of the
United States, twenty-one years of age and up
wards, resident in each county or parish in the
State or States, included in the district, which
registration shall include only those persons
who are qualified to vote for delegates, bv the
act made aforesaid, and who shall have taken
and subscribed to the following oath or affirma
tion : By this oath, the person applying for
registration must swear, or affirm, to every
qualification provided for by the original act.
The first question which arises here is, whether
any other oath can b’e required of th3 person
applying for registration, or any oath can be ad
ministered to any other person or persons,
touching the qualifications of the applicants by
the board of registration. The last clauae of
this first section provides as follows : “ Which
oath or affirmation may be administered by any
registering officer.” the oath here referred to
is the oath to be taken by the person applying
for registration.
1 have very carefully examined all the pro
visions of this act, and I can find no authori
ty for any other oath to be taken by any one
touching the qualifications of the applicant for
regsitratiou, but only this oath. I am clearly
of the opinion that another oath touching the
qualifications of the applicant would be extra
judicial, and without authority, and that false
swearing could not be assigned as perjury
upon such an unauthorized oatb, especially as
the proviso to the sixth section, above quoted,
which declares that false swearing shall
amount'to perjury, as expressly limited. Any
oafti in this act prescribed, in arriving at this
conclusion I have giveu due weight to that
part of the first section of the act which de
clares that the registration shall include only
those who are qualified to vote for delegates by
the act aforesaid, and who shall have taken
and subscribed the following oath or affirma
tion. If we read these words by themselves,
without regard to the other provisions of the
Act,the impression is made that two things must
coneur to authorize the registration of Ihe ap
pliant:
First. That he actually possesses the qualifi
cations required by the original act, aqd I fiud
that he is required by this oath to swear
to every one of these qualifications, and
that no authority Is anywhere given to enter
upon any other inquiry as to his qualifications, 1
or to administer any other oath to him, and
that his oath, aud his oath alone, is punished :
with perjury.
It is impossible to resist the conclusion that;
the oath itself is the sole and only test of the
applicant. When, therefore, a person applies
to the board for registration, the power of the ‘
board is confined to the administration of the
proscribed oath, and if the applicant takes that
his name must go upon the register, and the
board cannot enter upon the inquiry whether I
he has sworn truly or falsely. That inquiry!
must be reserved to the court, which may after
wards have jurisdiction to try him on an in
dictment lor peijnry.
Next, t<s the duties of the’board,after the reg
istration is completed : They are to superin
tend the election and make a return of the
votes, list ot voters, and ot the person elected,
to commanding general.
It is very cleaf from these provisions that in
superintending these elections the duty of the
board is to receive the votes of the persons
whose names are upon the registration, and to
reject all others. There is no provision any
where to surcharge or falsify, or to erase a
single name which appears upon it.
Appointments of Registers.
15. The following appointments of Registers
are hereby announced :
State of Georgia.
Ist District.— Chatham, Bryan, Effingham
—S. D. Dickson, W. P, Yonng, Savannah.
2» District.— Liberly, Tatnall, Mclntosh
James Rahn, Liberty county, (Graytown P. 0.,
Effingham county;) T. P. P,ease, Darien, Mclu
tosh county.
3d District.— Wayne, Pierce, Appling—Geo.
G. Dodge, No. 6, A. »fe G. R. R., Wayne county ;
G. H. Mitchell, (Savannah P. 0.,) ADpling
county.
4th District.— Glynn, Camden, Charlton
James M. Coleman, Brunswick, Glynn county;
G. V. Demare6t, Jefferson, Camden county.
sth District.— Coffee, Ware, Clinch—C. P.
Jones, Tebeauville, Ware county.
6th District.— Echols, Lowndes, Berrien—
Alvin B. Clarke, Valdosta, Lowndes county; A.
Marocbettl, Valdosta, Lowndes county.
7th District— Brooks, Thomas, Colquitt—
J. R. Alexander, Thomasville, Thomas county ;
Lyons, (care Capt. White, Thomasville)
Colquitt county.
Bth District.— Decatur, Mitchell, Miller—
Andrew Clarke, Camilla, Mitchell county; S.
P. Allison, Bainbridge, Decatur county.
9th District.— Early, Calhoun, Baker—B.
F. Brimberry, Newton, Baker county; H. C.
Fryer, Blakely, Early county.
10th District.— Dougherty, Lee, Worth—
D. C. Bancroft, Starkesville, Lee county; F. O.
Welch, Albany, Dougherty county.
11th District.— Clay, Randolph, Terrell—
David Jones, Fort Gaines, Clay county ; S. A.
Hurd, Cuthbert, Randolph county.*
12th District.— Stewart, Webster, Quitman
—Samuel T. Bedingfield, Lumpkin, Stewart
counlj; Tftivis Usher, Lumpkin, Stewart coun
ty-
13th District.— Sumter, Schley, Macon—W.
A. Wilson, Americus, Sumter count}'; James
C. Floyd, Marshallville, Macon countv.
14th District.— Dooly, Wilcox, Pulaski—
Michael O’Bryen, Hawkiusville, Pulaski coun
ty; Simon P. Odin, Drayton, Dooly county..
15th District. —Montgomery, Telfair, Irwvn
—no appointments.
16th District. —Laurens, Johnson, Eman
uel—Dr. Nathan Tucker, Sr., Dublin, Laurens
county; John Overstreet, Cannoochee, Emanuel
county.
17th District —Bullock, Scriven, Burke—
James L. Hilton, No. 6 Central Railroad, Scriven
county ; E. M. Hill, No. 10, Central Railroad,
Burke county.
18th District.— Richmond, Glasscock, Jef
ferson—E. J. Pannell, Louisville, Jefferson
county; Thomas 8. Skinner, Augusta, Rich
mond county.
19th District.— Taliaferro, Warren, Greene
—W. H. McWhorter, Greensboro, Green coun
ty ; John A. I. McDonough, Warrenton, War
ren county.
20th District. —Baldwin, Hancock, Wash
ington—W. E. Quillan, Milledgeville,’ Baldwin
county; E. M. Chapin, Sparta, Hancock county.
21st District. —Twiggs, Wilkinson, Jones—
Thomas Gibson, Gordon, Twiggs county; A.
E. Hill, Irwinton, Wilkinson county.
22d District.— Bibb, Monroe, Pike—W. J.
Howe, Milner’s Station, Pike county ; A. E.
Marshall, Forsyth, Monroe county.
23d District.— Houston, Crawford, Taylor
—Posey. Maddox, Fort Valley, Houston countv:
a. >l. jWnieny, Knoxville, Crawford county.
24th District. —Marion,Chattaboochee, Mus
cogee—John W. Duer, Columbus, Muscogee
county ; Slayton Henley, Columbus, Muscogee
county.
25th District.— Harris, Upson, Talbot-r-
John H. McCoy, Pleasant, Talbot county ; H:
D. Williams, (P. O. West Point,) Harris
county.
26th District.— Spalding, Butts, Fayette—
Rev. James R. R. Willis, Indian Springs, Butts
county ; George Ware, Fayetteville, Fayette
county. a
27th District.— NeWton, Walton, Clarke—
Rev. W. J. Spear, Covington, Newton county.
28th District. —Jasper, Putnam, Morgan—
Dr. Franklin George, Shadky Dale, Jasper coun
ty ; Lucius P. Campbell, Morgan county.
29th District.— Wilkes, Lincoln, Columbia
—Henry Leitner, Berzelia, Columbia county;
D. G. Cotting, Washington, Wilkes county.
30th District.— Oglethorpe, MadisoD, El
bert—Joseph McWhorter, Bairdstown, Ogle
thorpe county ; Amos T. Ackerman, Eiberton,
Elbert county.
31st District.— Hart, Franklin, Habersham
—Nathan Gunnells, Bold Spring, Franklin
county; John O. Church, Clarkesville, Haber
sham county.
32d District.— White, Lumpkin, Dawson —
James L. Baird, Dawsonville, Dawson county ;
Dr. Harvey, Dahlonega, Lumpkin county.
33d District.— Hall, Banks, Jackson —j. B.
S. Davis, Jefferson, Jackson county ; Ben Dun
nagau, Gainesville, Hall county.
34th District.— Gwinnett,' DeKalb, Henry
— R. M. Clarke, Fiat Rock, Henry county ;
James Walker, Decatur, DeKalb eouutv.
35th District.— Clayton, Fulton,' Cobb—
Henry G. Cole, Marietta, Cobb county ; C. W.
Lee, -Jonesbore, Clayton county.
36th District. — Merriwether, Coweta,
Campbell —Davis C. Gresham, Greenville, Mer
riwether county ; Jeff. R. Smith, Newnan,
Coweta county.
37th District.— Troup, Heard, Carroll—
■ Henry W. McDaniel, Bowdon, Carroll county ;
R. Richards, LaGrange, Troupe county.
| 38th District.— Haralson, Polk, Paulding—
, Walker Brock, Buchanan, Haralson county ; S.
A. Tidwell, Dallas, Paulding count}'.
I 39th District. —Cherokee, Milton, Forsyth
! —R. F. Daniel, Canton, Cherokee county ; Rey.
} W. A. Finley, Cumming, Forsyth county.
] 40th District.— Union, Towns, Rabun—
! Horace W. Cannon, Clayton, Rabun county;
! John Butt, Blairsville, Union county.
41st District.—Fannin, Gilmer. Pickens —
D. E. Slagle, Eilijay, Gilmer county; Wtu.
j Franklin, Morganton, Fannin county.
42d District.—Bartow, Floyd, Chattooga—
j Wesley Shropshire, Dirtown, Chattooga coun
! ty; VV. L. Goodwin, Cartersville, Bartow
; county.
43n District. —Murray, Whitfield, Gordon
! —W. P. Farnsworth, Spring Place, Murray
i county; Dr. f!. P. Gudger, Dalton, Whitfield
j county.
44th District.—Walker, Dade, Catoosa—
W. J. Henry, Ringgold, Catoosa county; Thos.
M. Phipps, Lafayette, Walker county.'
special boards for cities.
Savannah Citt Board.—Henry 8. Wet
more, Dr. J. W. Clift, Savannah.
Augusta Citt Board.—Samuel Levy, B. F.
Hall, Augusta.
Macon City Board.—C. T. Ward, Elijah
Bond, Macon.
Columbus City Board.—Thomas S. Tuggle,
C. W. Chapman, Columbus. »
Atlanta City Board.—Dr. Joseph Thomp
son, T. M. Robinson.
******
By command of Brevet Major General Pope.
G. K. Sanderson,
Capt. 33d Inl’y, and A. A. A. G.
Murdered Soldier in Atlanta.—The re
mains of a soldier belonging to thia garrison
were found in the vicinity of the cemetery on
Sunday. We learn that it was identified as the
body of private Sink, of Company K, 33d
United States Infantry, who had been missing
for several days. By what means, or by whom
deceased came to his death is not known. The
condition of the body when it was found indi
cated that it had lain there for three or four
days, aud that it had been carried from the
common high vay and deposited in an isolated
spot not far from the cemetery. The presump
tion is that the deed was perpetrated lor pur
poses of robbery while deceased was passing
from the city to the barracks, which are located
just beyond the cemetery. —lntelligencer, 3S th.
[From the Vicksburg Times.
Death of the Hon. Geo. R. Clayton.
We learn, with deep regret, of the death of
the Hon. George R. Clayton, of Columbus, Mis
sissippi. Among the elder citizens of our State,
Judge Clayton was well known, though there
arc thousands of our people who consider them
selves well informed in all things pertaining to
Mississippi, who, perhaps, never heard his
name. A native ot Georgia, he came to our
State when a young man,' and his ability and
knowledge of his profession, the law, coupled
with the highest honor and the most genial
traits of character, won for him a wide and lu
crative practice. Judicial honors soon fol
lowed, and he was chosen judge of the circuit
in which be had made his home, a district which
had Columbus for its centre, and embraced
within its compass an amount of legal ability
apd learning uot often equalled.
A Whig iu principle. Judge Clayton was
chosen with great unanimity as the candidate
of that party for Governor in 1848, And his com
petitor, the standard bearer of the Democratic
party, was the Hon. Albert G. Brown. The
Democratic party being iu th 4 ascendant by
thousands, Gov. Brown was elected, as a mat
ter ot course ; but he, aud all others who mot
Clayton in the arena of debate* acknowl
edged in him a foeman worthy of their bright
est steel.
For some years past, Judge Clayton has been
in delicate health ; .but his high and manly
character, his generous aud genial nature, his
just and gentle instincts, won for him friends
wherever he was known.
By one of those strange and beautiful coinci
dences of nature, which the Greek poets were
wont to characterize as one of the “Unities,”
Judge Clayton died in the place where he was
born. After all his wanderings, he returned
with drooping pinions to the parent nest from
whence, with unfledged wings, his young and
ardent mind had essayed its earliest sorings.
A native of the loveliest and most picturesque
town of Georgia, beautiful Athens, he had made
a pilgrimage, in search of health, to the home
of his young and sinless years. While there,
on the night of the 24th of April, in his owu
chamber, with none but the cherished wife of
his bosom present, he suddenly fell dead, and
nis gallant and noble spirit returned to the
great God who gave it.
We dare not intrude upon the privacy of his
stricken family. Their grief is sacred—but, as
an old friend—one whoTcnew and honored his
sterling qualities of head and heart—he who
pens these lines, may be permitted to offer this
brief tribute to liis memory, and hang upon his
tomb this humble offering to unsullied worth.
Peace, -then, and a sweet repose, to the noble,
generous gentleman, George R. Clayton, and,
life’s fitful fever o’er, may he awake to life
eternal in the chambers of the blest.
[ From the Norfolk Journal, lltb.
The Fidelity of Mr. 'Davis’ Servants.
Married, on Tuesday night, May 7th, at Fort
ress Monroe, Carroll Hail, by the Rev. 0. 8.
Barten, Rector of Christ Church, Norfolk,
Frederick McGinnis to Ellen Barnes.
The above deserves more than a passing no
tice. It is not often, in these days, that we
witness such faithfulness and devotion on the
part of servants. Both parties belonged to
Mr. Davis’ household, and have shared with
him and his family their long protracted im
prisonment. They were his servants in Rich
mond, and have remained true and devoted to
him through good and evil report. When, af
ter the evacuation of Richmond, the family
were compelled to move southward, Ellen
could not be persuaded to leave them, but
faithfully shared with them the toil and suffer
ing of those fearful days.
When, after Mr. Davis’ capture and hia re
moval to the Fortress, his anxious, almost dis
tracted wife was waiting for tidings from him
who, by the chances of war, had been thus
cruelly torn from her side, Frederick, ever
faithful and true, sought her, offering his ser
vices to go to him and help in ministering to
hi& Wailtß. Whim iKo alondov mefltno
bf the fallen family would never permit such
an expenditure, his services were offered freely
and gladly, without reward or remuneration.
When, at last, arrangements were made ami
means provided for him, and he found himself
within the Fortress, a part of his wages were
carefully laid aside, and have been regularly
sent home to South Carolina to his old mis
tress (like many others, impoverished by
war), who, in his own words, had been as good
to him, and whom he loved as a mother. A
like faithfulness and liberality must be record
ed of Ellen.
Surely such an instance speaks for itself!
Who does not feel that the unobtrusive faith
fulness and devotion of,those good people are
a noble tribute to one wno will ever be regard
ed, by all who know him, with peculiar affec
tion, whom his friends admire and cherish for
his high integrity and noble bearing in public,
and quiet gentleness and refined sympathy iu
private.
God bless the happy pair! May heaven
smile upon them, and give them all the good
things of life w’hieh they so richly deserve.
Melancholy- Accident.— On Saturday morn
ing, about 9 o’clock, while Mr. Robert Jordan,
the Superintendent of West Point Mills, was
overlooking the manufacture of some staves
for rief barrels, his foot caught on a piece of
wood, aud he fell backward upon a circular *
saw of ten inches diameter. The saw was ele
vated about three feet from the ground, being
one of a pair used to cut the staves the proper
length, aud was in rapid motion at the time of
the accdent. Mr. Jordan received a terrible
wound, the saw striking him just below and
back of the right shoulder, and cutting entirely
through the muscles and ribs into the cavity of
the chest. Strange to say, he walked from the
building where the accident occurred to his
house, a distance of about four hundred yards.
He bled profusely, and if it had not been for
the presence of mind ol his daughter, who
made a bandage of a sheet and stopped the
bleeding until a surgeon could come, he would
doubtless have bled to death. Dr. Anthony
Pelzer and Dr. Win. Horlbeck were called in,
and were at first of opinion that the wound was
fatal, but in the afternoon the patient was
evidently better, and he continued to improve
through yesterday, although, of course, he still
remains in a Y-ery critical condition.
Mr. Jordan was slightly wounded by the
same machine about a week ago, which led to
an alteration being made in It that probably
prevented Jaira from being killed immediately
ou Saturday. —Charleston Mercury.
Mail Robbery in Georgia.—The mail
pouch made up at Savannah, Ga., on the even
ing of the 17th instaot, for the Washington and
New York postal car, was lost after it left the
office, and between the post office and the rail
road depot.
Upon being informed of the fact the post
master immediately notified special agent A. L.
Harris, and made a requisition on the whole
police force of the city toward its recovery, but
without success. There is every reason to be
lieve that it was a case of premeditated robbery-
It is known in Sayannah that there is an or
ganized band of robbers and desperadoes-in
Georgia and South Carolina, having their head
quarters in Savannah. Several eases of mail
robbery have been recently reported to the
special agent. Every effort is contiued to trace
the missing pouch, but with little hope of suc
cess.
They were no registered letters or money
order business in the missing pouch.
The agents and postmasters have all been
notified. — If as king ton Chronicle .
Inquest.—Coroner Whiting held an inquest
at the-corner of Charlotte and Alexander streets
on la»t evening, on the body of an unknown in
tant, found in a mahojpany coffin, with a rope
tied around the coffin and two bricks tied at
the other end of the rope, which was discovered
by the city employees engaged in cleaning the
fire weil at said locality.
\ erdict, that said unknown child came to its
death from some unknown cause to the jury.
[Charleston Mercury , 2S th.
Death of Mr. Robert Jordon.—We regret
to state that Mr. Robert Jordon, an old and es
timable citizen, for many years connected with
the West Point Mills, died yesterday at one
o’clock, from the effects of the injuries which
he received on Saturday last by an accident, an
account of which has been already published,
[Mercury, «oth.