Newspaper Page Text
" 11 - T ii- ii i ii -i ii i ii "I " ' - ii - - - 1 i l- i mi mm i mm r i r "
UcFiLaiur : ;:. TRUT AND RIQHt-qod and our country.- : : .: ; ;; : tw doiu p a ' v ."'
Y OlXtf S B UKG. COL UINIB I A C b., :r A AVEDNE S D AY, JULY 25, 1 SGG .
irS YOL. 1. NOi 22, :
i i, a 9 ' .x - m - " . i t j in z
J?TJBTJ5TTrT ITERY WEDNESDAY,
,.,;,1N BLO 0 ZISIU UG, PA,ii BYi
j ac o By; &zj k e c e n . ,
TEHMS, 00 in fYrinci?i- imol frf titVthe
h& of lh irr. 5fl -eot mJi'itiorml will be cliff (J.
tyotHipfr Sieontinued olitir.all Trergr
fcft pt ticrpt t ii8 opi'.joit of thc cdliorN ,, ,
'i""" RATES OF ABTIRTOtSO.''
;iifc.i- - i - , p wt it(
KTr7-intbi(u9t lusartion let ti,an 13 so
itict. 1m. 2j. .3u.i, Ca.L-r ,Jr. ..-l
i Muart. I 2J-- 5 3TO J 100' I fi.OO 10
g rum, a.oo'f 5.0.) J".io I o.ou,H
r - -3,00 1 7,00 8.80 ' I T M 0 t-H.
IP ) I 30 ()
13 oO 'f
nooo - 50 00
kx1' mfiA 'AUininJrtrator'ii Nolicu 3.0')
AadHor's Noitce.. t- 2.50
Ctber adTeniaemcnts inicrtnt according to apecial
ntra-t. " J n f- .- --
ffuvine atice, without aJyeriMement.'twentx;,
ru pr line. - " ' " . " . '''''".'
TranaJent a.lerti"m',nfi paynhleln 'aJtanee, all
jra 6ur altr thr firt tnfertion. -
CT OKFiCE-Ia Shiva'a Btoc; ComerofMain
lit fra etr-fi- a - ' ' " " "
Addre. JACORYfc IKELKR. ,z
liiooniabnrj, Columbia County, Fa. -
v .-Courting Iiow-A.-Days-
.!() -VJJI . . . x.-j . .
1 Ve a!wjr h4 (frat dislike - i
For: all the toniU wry. -' .-'-!
'TbaHf ralea which folkahar got '
Kr-court in now-a-daya
Tbry'vv cat aile Iba good old alrtf -
of f,ut; m if vvflu cnn," " "
And imitate. lik el-i''pea.
mlit'' 8om hateful fureign plan., , , .,y
w ' ip hour it nikea sor (In iidrr raice .J j
To ' iliew counting noy dy.
tim'ea ar'ni at lliry used tin was, '
. , " A one can eaay tIl." ' .
Fur when a frjie sees a rat
That amis bint pretty al . ' . ., I..
Il'a gut to M firat--itroduc)l.M .
And Uiea lift pnia her Rota a. , , .
And pretty toon he roinea around. " -
-v tTu 'ttir Kiad old folk -1 ,t
By Jtarke. we do at beliere itpays, - t -iJ'i
iTkt way the boy coart now-a.-days. .,
ai PiradIrvaaBn then hegoeato pay,- -.
- ( rby-doat apatk any BMre-.)' .
i Anal aa-ervntsl't yon aea him pull t ,
The white k to at the door ...,. . J
. YiHi. sfKiav 'servant" uahrra him
Into the parlor glMot; "i ..
1 hear eontes Ms duck and lakes a asat
Osi t'etttef side ihcyiotii f r, tj ;l
A1thre they sit and sigh and faze I
.11 ''Thy call that coarting uow-a-dajal
Ma . - . '
'""'metimes tlley talk ,bot't'ry books ; '
fonietrines tbelaify' sinrs ' :
t"'rlOirt,tiioes he plava the Organ,-' too.' ' '
,,,iJ"-T atrow hei flnKet'rlngaT , "f
Vometiinea they take a pleasure walk. '
aiowieliuiea thry tike a ride. 1
And by-anJ by tkc f-llnw aran ' "t
-h t oa tyuw be-say bride f"1
fi , Te bow and acrape a thousand, ways.,,
. liiiuk that's eoarUng now a days J
Tl)y tel a'dat and hire a priest, .
'..'s Ad rent a rbur h or tw,
w c.cr uvaf soul wir n 5 '
Caaj hare a separate pew ' " . . '
... . And when the hour at last arriref ' .
In gone. array, v , i ...
They t.orii up lo the "witillnt priest,
V'h -tje tb knot" Straightway , .
... .. Congratulations, words of prai.v .
VViXid up the courting aow-a days,' , , . .
tk' ll ,1 : . .
O gi re us back the good old aiyle
Of merry days goue by.
- When wecould go" with any gal
Thai ebwnced to lafca a s eye .
flilltodk her home frm spelling school,
."" -tlott nine rMocfc ae nrglH", --
- Tea) by the o'd stone- hearth's warm aide.
-War aparked rii broad ilaylisht 1 ' ' -' f- . t
' We hufg'd and kle.'.tit brraif of day, :
- Nor hears' the old clock toll the hours away (
We tell you. chum. m h courting py--
' It weel ahead. of now M-days I. .
Abolitionists and Abolitionism.
Messes." Xd'itoss .--Some time ago I no
ticed, in the" Philadelphia Jnquirer, jkj ac
count of a Lecture delivered in that city by
J. rLtJiixaore; Esq!, inrivhich ha .ppoka of
the white people of the fcfouthdividing thein
into' three clas-e and says : : "The poor
white ,cla3 are lowerhan,' the negro.'. ,
Poof people I Thay must be very low in-deedl-JJut
this' ij jut what Mr. Gil more
and all hi3 radical friends arc working for.
2 aery:, Is this Fj-q. Oiimore any relation to
at Gch." Gniuoro1 wh'. TEfofc ! IhVJ liioil-V
harness, carriaffei &n'Jtare? &c, from the
citizen? of, Charleston," 8crath' Jaroiina,"o,'
Whicli the Itev. Dt. Baa'climan. cave,. xu, 'a
history a. few-months ? aso , hi the public
prints? ' I should Mike to knovr.-iire pnb
fic would like to know. ? But. to. re turn:
Defiradcd and low as is the nejrro. Ai r. ( il-
more and Lis Abolition co-wbrkerS ai-creCriv
inr in every possible waythey ean, topiaea
U9 wmce people, ayu (espeeuui wunt-a
. c. .l t-.it t i u: ii. u:..
Ol tile OVUUl, BUli KVIUW J1I1IJ. lACIlw ' 11119
Romp Conrre3!, (which the President and
the people ought not to have recognized as
the Congress of the United States for it is
not a Constitutional Congress) has been Jg
isljiiri thLi whole session to heap taxes and
rjther hardens on the whites to depress them
in order to provide fOTj and feed the blacks
in filth ana idleness at the expense cf our
hational trea.Tiiry.In confirmation of thi'j
I need but cite tne reader .to the 'Negr'Bu;
reao Bill, which, thanfc" lod, President
Johnson has yetocdy,thus paving millions of
taxes annually to thtrwhite producers. -
I win riti rotrir fact to "prove that the
Wsktion of the Rump is. ftll for the negro,;
rtn. LvOss,ot i.iJvnoi. utejy intxouuceu a res
olution ill the "House WspC ppartonediy
in each week. to be 'calkd, the C white., man's
day,'! for th purpose of eonsiderine the in
terests of ..white peppIe.'But, the Abolition
bero-worshipping, majority true to their in-tinct-atnrl
the nigger's out.tinct?; voted thi.
down! - Tliu.-i poleianly declaring by a delib
erate vote of the Knmp, that not onesixth
part of the time shall be given to the delib
eration of white' men's interest.?, tut all
must be devoted to the exclusive advantage
tf the blacks! - -And yet those blind fanatics
do not really fcenctit' the negro, because every
Act they pass neglecting the interests of the
white racevalio 'icjnrer the rrgrp, who is
dependent oa the white man JW guidance
tud grtecor.1 always looking tip to him for
inotruction. and-tupport. "; '. ' ' ' 'J"
. Con?rec3 ought, therefore, to legislate after,,
Ihe manner of .our illustrious ancestors', viz:
for the intereatsof the wh?t3'iaan,'who under
the Constitution and ".wholesome", laws can
Manage the Lxl interests of both white and
thek flt to a 8Tece.ful issue,' trv the pros
per'!, tl e pr-.nee and comfort af alL ;
But Mr. Gilmore is reportel as frying
Ihat "th.13 cla.a of poor white folks is so un
intelligent that, many of thcra "yet "vote "fur
Thomas Jefferson for President.' ' This is
an asisertion, Ilki? most others made' by llad?
al Ab;litionist that nepfUmtich proof be-'
iom r'am peorla can believe it Butvthe
the ' enlightened, ; pious'.' Abolition
thi PLilvlelLhia liwvirer, will, no
a r ?
lo gati.f:ed with mere assertion,' nn-
-. . t
rA f t1 thr.n-n it. i. a-iTTsf
cm rsce in the South. - or they and
tir ilk- will rctiva anything but the
, ,c :.z-;i:z2 . tha .white . pcojIadown
kt tLi, tai fhda cfl tne f-nrarrect.
' - - - rr
in th3 South yet, vote for 31 f. Jefferson for
President. In so doiug, they how ayener
ation for One who was a Man afoong rnier',
a real white man, the true friend of aU men;
and the, greatest KUtesman; that ever, lived.
IiV-ithuii voting, for. Jefferson,", those. m en
show a love for the principles he enunciated
in, the glorious Pecfaratioa "that white men
are-created, equaJ,'A- they prove theniclves
patriots in striving to maintain the Constitu
tion and the rich nerifage of Union 'fend free
Government which." Jefferson and his oeni
batriots bequeathed to' their descendants.
Be it rcmemberedj'Thomas Jefferson was a
consistent friend of the : Union,' 'sovereignty
and rights of the States.'' ' And those voters
adhered to .the fame 'sound doctrintfjthey
loved Jefferson and those principles "estab
lished by the revolutionary fatherland under
which, our Union prospered for nearly" four
score years." t ' '- "'I'-
' Those poor men doubtless thonglit it" bet
ter to have a dead lion than' a Union-splitting
nose of wax in the Presidential chair !
Therefore, they' were much more consistent
in their regard for Jefferson than are any of
the Disunion Abolitionists in ' howling for
Lincoln, who was a mere echo, and a tool for
demagogues, utterly incapable ' of enuncia
ting anything but, ."that a smalldebtis easier
paid than a larger one." He had not the
first qualification for the Chair of State, and
yet is virtually voted for by all the fanatical
negro-worshipping disuniouistjof the North.
Democrats never vote for dead men; we
have good living men in our party who hold
Jefferson's undying principles to 'vote for,
and with fair elections these would invariably
trinmpliJ ir "y -: !" ' V";'' ' ' ':
But dead men vote for Abolitionist?, and
hence they sometimes get into ' olnce, as in
the Cae of Curtin against Woodward for
Governor, Lincoln against McClellan ' for
President, and in the case of Given against
Weaver for Commissioner in Philadelphia.
Will the Jnquirer and E.-q. Gilinore stick a
Ein there ? and say if they don't smell a rat ?
ut if the rat should smell them, he would
certainly have the worst of the bargain.
, , :' "; '.',,' .Jeffersox '
Gnbernatorial. No. 10. "
Editors Democrat and Star': With all
the migrations ; and changes of .sublunary
things, even, in these daysof apostatedegen
eracy, the undying principles of Democracy
stand as firm as "Truth Kternju.'''.; It , was
upon this corner-stone that the glorious struc
ture of our government was erected, which
has how'existed over eighty years, and will
continue to nuv, co-equal with time, and must
become the' conservator, in all future time,
of free Goverrtmeirt and Constitutional lib
ertythe inheritance bequeathed to, us by
our Revolutionary Fathers. And may God
forbidthat this Imperishable' legacy won
by patriots and scaled in. blood should ever
agin .be marred or stained, either in our State
or Nation,. by. the cowardly handsof any dis
union abolition crew. .. . . ,
..I tarn.. with iively interest from the con
templation of the past daik history , cf our
much loved and greatly, oppressed country,
and view with feelings of deep emotion and
fond anticipation the tar of our coutry '& fu
ture hope. IIiester Clymer is the coming
man. His election to the Gubernatorial
chair, in next October of which- no doubt
exi-t will shatter the ranks of thedisunion
Geary paTty, and inaugurate the establishing
of a white man's Government again in Penn
sylvania. " ' - -
Pellow Freemen ! Lay firm hold, with
strong hands and ; out-strtftched arms of the
sawed Axk of our politicalcovenant. Guard
it with watchful vigilance and -unfalterine:
fidelity. It is our only boon of liberty. ' It
is the Fait of .the earth, the light of the
world, and the hope of mankind.- And
whilst the Democratic party lives, and where
ever its holy principles are developed, equal
laws, common justice, and Constitutional
Freedom, will be. perpetuated.' ; . . . f , '
3Iy Countrymen, this has ever been my
advice to you, and never in all my life were
such teachings , more important than in the
present crisis. ;: Yea, ii it were to be -my
fast exposition, T nm ' willing that it should
be received aa my dying admonition. ' Guard
W-ell the sacred' ballot-box and preserve the
purity .of. the elective franchise. " ' -
Democrats make . your enemies tremble
before the all-powerful inliuenceof the silent.
Ballot. ,-JLearn them everywhere ta tear
ita cogent power. jid in it they willfind
i "A weapon that t snr-r set
And firmer ihar they bayonet
A weep.! that rome tlown a still ' ! :;r
' v As snow-flakes fall upon the scd, - - i
But elfrntrs a- frcentae will '.
As ighlniig iloes the wil. of lrl " . . -
' " .' "' A jAacsoy Democrat. -
The Vice Presidents of the Uni
ted States. ,'.
John Adams, Ma.??.. 17S9-1797.
Thomas Jefferson, Vx, 1797 IbOl.. t
Aaron Burr, N. Y., T801 1805. :
"4v George Clinton, N..Y., 1S05 113.
5. Elbridge Gerry, Mass., 1813. Died in
G. Daniel D. Trtrhpkius; X.- Y.," 1S1 25.
' 7. John C: Calhoun S. V.slS 1833
JS.; Martin Van Burcn, N.1 Y.1833 37."
0. Richard M. JohnsnT Ky., 1837 '41.
10.' John Tyler, Ya., 18-11; Became Pres
ident by the death of President Hajri.-jon.", '
11. GeortreM. Dallas, Pa., 1S4.WS40.
12 Milliard; Fillmore," N Y,i 1 Re
came Preiidcnt by the death oi President
13. William E. Kmg,,Aa., lS53. Died in
office. ' ...'.'.':. .. : '
14. -John C. Breckinridge, Kentucky, 1857
lSfK "'.; ' '
15. Hannibal Hamlin, Me., 1SG1 1SG.V
16. Andrew Johnson, Tenn., 1864. 'Be
came President by the :dcath of President
Lincoln. " ' .
It thus appeara from; the organization of
the Government we have had sixteen Vice
Presidents.' Of these "three became Presi
dent bv the death of the Chief Magistrate.
Two Vice: President have died in office
Mr. Gerrvand Mr. Kinr. Four of the Vice
Presidents were, afterward ' President,,viz :
Adams, Jefferson, Van Buren and Johnson.
Tliree.ofhe 'Vice Prcsidentsffigned the IV.C
laratioa of. Independence, viz : Adams, J ef
ferson and Getty;. New York lias had the.
Vice Presidency more than any other State,
viz : Four tpaTs Under jJurrr eigh I years un
der , Clint6n. eight; years, under 'Torapkins
four years under- VaajBuren, ' and Qne.year
under Fillmore.4 ''Total; twenty-five years. or
about ane-thjrd of , the lime, e
' Of the seventy-five years the office has.
been in existeriretB !?Qfth'fca.5 hatd,it ix- !
ty years to the Month's seventeen.
, " Ay old man rvrmmitted suicide in - Pater
son, N.' J; on his first wife'sgrave, hecane
he hrid married a Becond., "-. "Widowers take
RAttxrii Eay3"Jhat rrinfers ink X3 the best
friend he ever hadi ije Invested in it large
ly by mdiciouaadrertisin,' and prospered
THE DESERTER CASE !
brrxrotf and - judgment-' of
THE SUPHEME CO UR T ON THE
' - DISFRANCHISEMENT ACT.
HUBFR V& RE1LY. :' Error to the Court
of Common Pleas of Franklin County.
' Stomr, Justice.' " ' , .
The act of Congress under which the de-fendant-bclow
justifies his' refusal to receive
the vote of the plaintiff is the one approved
on the 3d day ofMarch, 1865.' The twenty
first section is the only one applicable to this
case, and it is as folliws : "And leit furllwr
enacted, That in addition to the other law
ful penalties of the crime of desertion' fi-om
tlie military or naval service, all persons who
have d 3 -erted the military or naval service of
the United States, who shall not return to
said service, or report themselves to a pro
vost marshal within sixty- days after the proc
lamation hereafter mentioned, shall be deem
ed an 1 taken to have voluntarily relinquish
ed and forfeited their rights of citizenship
and their rights to become citizens " 'and
such deserters shall be . forever incapable of
holdinrr a nV office of trust or profit under
the United States, or of .exercising any
ritfhts of citizens thereof; and all persons
who shall hereafter desert the military or na
val service, and all persons who, being duly
enrolled shall depart the jurisdiction of the
district in which lid is enrolled, Or golxyond
the limits of the United States, with. intent
to avoid any draft into the military or naval
service, duly ordered,, shall be liable to the
penalties of this section." This is followed
by a clause authorizing and requiring the
President to issue 'tis proclamation setting
forth the provisions of the section, and we
know judiciously that this was done on " the
11th of March. 1865. , ' . .
; The act of Congresses highly penal. It
imposes forfeiture of citizenship and ; depri
vation of the rights of citizenship as penal
ties for the commission -of a crime. Its
avowed purpose is to r.dd to the penalties
which the law had previously affixed to the
offense of . desertion from the military or na
val sen-ice of the United States,' and it de
nominates the additronal sanctions provided
as penalties. Such being its character, it is,
under the well known rule of law, to receive
a strict construction in favor of the citizen.
The constitutionality of the act hat been
assailed on three grennds. The firt of these
is thnt it is an ex pott tctoaw, imposing an
additional punishment for an offense com
mitted before its passage, and altering the
nils of evidence so as to require different
and less proof of puilt than was renuired at
' the time of the perpetration of thec-rinle.:
The second objection is that the act is an at
tempt by Congress ti regulate thfl right of
, suffrnce in theSkates, or to impair it; and
the third objection is that the act proposes to
i inflict pains and penalties upon offenders
before, and without a trial and conviction by
1 due process of law. and that it is therefore
prohibited by theBill f)f Rights.
In the view which we take of this co?e,r,nd
giving to the enactment the construction
which we think properly belongs to if, it is
unnecessary to consider at length cither of
' these objections to its constitutionality. It
' maybe insisted with stron rr reason that the
peraltyof forfeiture of citizenship imposed
upon those who had deserted the military or
naval service, prior to the passage of the act,
is not a penalty for tne original desertion, but
for persistence in the crime, for failure (in
the language of the statute) toreturn to said
service, or to report to a provost marshal
within sixty days after the issue of the Itps
ident's proclamation. ' If this is po, the act
of Congress is in no sense cx pnat fnrto, and
it is not fir that reason "in conflict with the
Constitution. Its operation is entirely pro
spective. I? a drafted man owe3 service to
the Federal Government, every new refusal
to render - the service may be regarded as a
violation of public dr ty, a public offense for
which Congress may impose a penalty. And
as it is the duty of every court to construe a
statute, if possible, so uvt rex marp ralectt,
qitnmprreat". that construction of this act
luut be adopted which is in harmony with
the acknowledged powers of. Congress, and
which applies the forfeiture of citizenship to
the new offence described as failure to return
to service, or to report to the provost mar
slial. - " . '
The fcond objection also assumes more
than can be conceded. " It is not to be doubt
ed that the power to regulate suffrage in a
Stat, and to determine who shall
or who shall rot be a voter belongs ex
clusively to the State itself. The constitu
tion of the United States confers no author
ity upon Congress to prescribe the qualifica
tions of electors -within .the several States
that compose the Federal Union. Congress
is indeed empowered to make regulations for
the time, place and manner of holding elec
tions for Senators and Representatives, or to
alter those made by; the Legislature of a
State, except those in relation to the places
of choosing Senators, but here its power
stops. The right of s afi'rage at a State elec
tion is a State "right, a franchise conferable
only by the State, which Congressman neither
give nor take away. If,- therefore, the act
now under consideration is in truth an at
tempt to regulate the right of MitTnige in the
States, or to prescribe the conditions upon
which that right may 1 exercised, it must
le held unwarranted by the Constitution.
In the exercise of its admitted powcr, Con
gress may doubtless deprive an individual
of the opportunity to enjoy a right that be
longs to him as a citizen of a State, even
theright of suffrage. But this is a different
thing from taking away, or impairing, the
richt it-elf. . Under tht- laws of the Federal
Government, a voter may be sent abroad in
the military service of the country, and thus
deprived of the privilege, of exercising his
right; or a totcr mav te - imprisoned for a
crime against the United StateSj but It is a
perversion of language o call this impairing
hLs right of suffrage. - Congress may provide
laws for the naturalization of aliens, or it
may refuse to provide such laws; Its jfction
or non-action may thus - determine whether
individuals shall or Ehall'fiot become citizens
of the United States. And I cannot doubt J
that as a penalty for crime against the Gen
eral Government Congress may impoe upon
the criminal forfeiture of his eitizent-hip of
the United State, ) Disfranchisement of a
citizen as a punishment ibr crime is no unn
uat punishment BarkiT vs. the People 20;
Johns 458." If by the organic law of a State
citizens of the United States only are allow
ed to rote', the action or' non-action of Con-
?ress may thus indirectlj' affect the iramber
of those entitled to the right of suffrage. r
i'et,. after all, the rightis one whichits fo
sessor holds as a citizen of a State, cured
to him by the State Constitution, and t be
held on the terms prescribed by that Con
stitution alone." i It is an integral part of the
Stite Government, T:' ; ''' .
But It is not a correct riew of the 'act of
Congress now before us to regard it as an at
tempt to override Stats Constitutions, orw
rrrerir the rruaHfiestioM of vetr. Tb
a jt makes no chanere in the' organic law of
the State. . Ifc leaves thatas beibre, to confer
the right of suffrage as it pleases. t The en
actment operates upon an individual offend
er, punishes him for violation of the Federal
law, by deprivation of his citizenship of the
United States, but it leaves each State to de
termine for itself whether such an individual
may be a voter. It does no more than in
crease the penalties of the . law upon the
commission of crime. . . Each State defines
fir itself what shall be the consequences of
the infliction of such penalties. And with
us it is still our own Constitution which re
stricts the right of suffrage and confers it
upon those only who are inhabitants of the
State and citizens of the United Sates.
The third objection againit the validity of
the act of Congress would be a very grave
one, if the act does in reality impose pains
and penalties before and without a convic
tion by due process of law. The fifth article
of the amendments to the Constitution or
dains "that no person shall be held to an
swer for a capital or other infamous crime,
unless on a presentment, or indictment of a
grand jurv, except incases arising in the land
or naval forces, or in the militia, when in ac
tual service, in time of war or public danger;
nor shall any person be subject for the same
offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or
limb ; nor shall be compelled in any criminal
case to be a witness against himsetf ; nor lc
deprived of life, liberty or property without
due process of law." The sixth article se
cures to the accused in all criminal prosecu
tions certain rights,among which are a speedy
and public trial, by a jury of the vicinage,
information of the nature and cause of tlffc
accusation, face to face presence with the
witnesses against him, compulsory process
for his own witnesses, and the assistance of
counsel. The spirit of these constitutional
provisions is briefly tint no person can be
made to suffer for a. criminal offence unlc-s
the penalty be iullicted by due process of law.
What that is has been often defined, but
never better than it wasboth historically and
critically by Judge Curti-4 of the Supreme
Court of the United States in Den v Mur
ray et ai, 18 Howard 272. It ordinarily im
plies and includes a complainant, a defend
ant nnd a judge, regular allegations, oppor
tunity to answer, and a trial according to
some settled course of judicial proceeding.
It must be admitted there arc a few excep
tional cases, Prominent among these are
summary proceedings to recover debts due to
the Government, especially taxes and sums
due by defaulting public officers. Rut I can
call tq mind no instunceJn which it has been
heldt that the ascertainment of guilt of a
public offence, and the imposition of legal
penalties, can be in any other mode than by
trial according to the law of the land, or due
process of law, that is the law of the par
ticular cae, administered by a judicial tri
bunal authorized to adjudicate upon it.. And
I cannot jiersuaJe . 'myself that, a judge of
elections or a board of election officers, con
stituted under State laws, is such a tribunal.
I cannot think they have .ower to try crim
inal offenders, still less to adjudge the puilt
or innocence of an alleged violator of the
laws of the United States. A trial before
such officers is not due process of law for the
punishment of offence-, according to the
meaning of that phrase in the Constitution.
There are, it is true, many things which they
may determine,such as the age and residence
of a person offering to vote, whether he has
raid taxes, and whether, if born an alien, he
Iras a certificate of naturalization. These
things pertainto the ascertainment of a polit
ical right. But whether he has boen guilty
of a criminal offence, -and has, as a conse
quence, forfeited his right, is an inquiry of a
different character. "Neither our Constitu
tion nor our lav has conferred upon the
judges of elections any such judicial func
tions. They are not hworn-to try issues in
criminal cases. They have no power to com
pel the attendance of witnesses, and their
judgment if rendered would be binding upon
no other tribunal.. Even if they were to as
sume jurisdiction of the offence described
in" the act of Congress, and proceed to try
whether the applicant for a vote had boon
duly enrolled and drafted, whether he had
received notice of the draft, whether he bad
deserted, and failed to return to service, or
failed to report to a provost marshal, and
whether he. had justifying reasons for such
failure, and if after such trial they were to
decide that he had not forfeited his citizen
ship, all this Would not amount to an acquit
tal. It would not protect him against a sub
sequent similar accusation and trial, it would
not protect him against trial and punishment
by court martial. Surely that is no trial In
due process of law, the judgment in which
is not final, decides nothing, but leaves the
accused exposed to another trial in a differ
ent tribunal, and to the imposition by that
other tribunal of the full punishment lire
scribed by law.
Moreover, it is not in the power of Con
cress to confer upon such a tribunal, which
is exclusively of State creation, jurisdiction
to try offences . against the United States.
Notwithstanding the decision in Buckwalter
vp. The United States, 11 S. and R., 193.
which was an action for penalties, declared
to be recoverable as other debts, the doc
trine seems a plain one that Congress cannot
vest any of the judicial power of the United
States in the courts "of any other government
or sovereignty. Martin vs. Hunter's lessee,
Wheaton 3()4j ?,Z0 ; Fly vs. Peck, 7 Conn.,
142, and Scoville vs. Canfield, 14 Johns,
23S. And clearly, if this is so, Congress
cannot make a bo.tr d of State elect ion oliicers
competent to try whether a person has been
guilty of an offence asraim.t the United
States, and if they find him guilty to enforce
a part of the prescribed penalty. '.
If therefore the act of March 3, 1S65,
really contemplates the infliction of its pre
scrilied penalty or any part of it without due
process of law, or if it attempts to confer
upon the election officers of a State the pow
er to determine whether there has been a vi
olation of the act incurring the penalty, and
to enforce the penalty or any part of it, it
may well be doubted whether it is not trans
gressive of the authority vested in Congre&s
Ly the Constitution. . '
But such is not the fair construction of the
enactment. It is not to be presumed that
Congress intended to transgress its powers,
and especially is this true when the act ad
mits of another construction entirely conso
nant with all the provisions of the Constitu
tion. - v
"What then is its true meaning ? ' As al
ready observed," ' forfeiture of citizenship is
prescribed as a penalty for dejertion, an ad-
Lditional penalty "; not for an offence commit
ted belore the passage ot tbe acty minor
continued desertion and failure to return or
report. It is not a new consequence of a
penalty, but itisan integral part of the thing
itself. Nor is it the whole. ' 5 It is added to
what the law had previously enacted to be the
penalty of desertion, "as imprisonment is
sometimes added to punishment by fine. It
must have been intended therefore that it
fhould be incurred mthe pstne way, and im
posed by the same tribunal that was author
ized to impose the ' other penalties for the
offence. It would be very absurd to suppose
that two trials and two condemnations for one
crime were intended, or that it was designed
that a criminal might bo sentenced in one
court to underero part of the punishment de
nounced by tile , law, and be punished in
another court bv the imposition of the re
mainder. The law as it stood when the act
of 1 805 was passed had provided a tribunal
in which alone the crime of desertion could
be tried, and by which alone the penalties
for desertion could be inflicted. The conse
quences of conviction may be noticed in oth
e crourts, but the tribunal appointed by the
law for that purpose is the only one that can
determine whether the crime has been com
mitted, and to adjudge the punishment.
The act of March 3d, 1865, is not to be
considered apart from the other legislation
respecting the crime of desertion." It is one
of a series of acts pertaining to the same sub
ject matter. It must therefore be interpret
ed with them all in view. This is an admit
ted rule of statutory construction. So long
ago as Rex vs. Jaxdale, I Burrows, 147,
Lord Mansfield wild, when speaking of acts
of Parliament, "that all which relate to the
same subject, notwithstanding some of them
may be expired or not, notice must be taken
to be one system and construed consistent
ly." So Chancellor Kent, in the first vol
ume of his commentaries, page 4G3-4, said;
"it is to be inferred that a code of statutes
relating to one subject, was governed by one
spirit and policy, and was intended to be con
sistent and harmonious in its several parts
and provisions.'-' In looking through the
numerous acts of Coneress relating to the
desertion from the military or naval service,
it is plainly to be seen that they all contem
plate a regular trial aud conviction prior to
the infliction of any penalty, and conrts mar
tial are constituted and regulated for such
trials. The 20th article of war, enacted on
the 10th of April, lhOO, (Brightly's Dig. 75)
is inthese words : "All officers and soldiers
who have received pay, or have been duly
eniisti'd in the service of the United States,
and st'ill le convicted of having derserted
the same, shall suffer death or such other
punishment as hy-xtitcuce of court martial,
shall be inllieted." Other enactments have
been made at different times respecting the
f'inishinent to be inflicted lor the offence.
he punishment of death in time of jKacc
was abolished in 1830. Corporeal punish
ment by stripes was abolished by the act of
May 16, 1S12, and by the act of March 2d,
1833, that section of the repealing act was it
self repealed, "so far as it applies to any en
listed soldier vim shall becomvictrdby a gen
eral courtmarti.il of the crime of desertion."
By the act of Jan. 11, 1812, an additional
penalty was prescribed for desertion, and itl
was declared that such soldier shall and may
be tried by a court martial and punished."
Brightly's Di- 89. The 1 3th section of the
act of March 3, 1863,, which declared that
any person failing to report after due service
of notice that he had been drafred, shall be
deemed a deserter, enacted that such a per
son "shall be arrested by the provost mar
shal and sent to th-; neatest pot for trint Ly
court martid, unless, upon proper showing
that hois not liable to military duty, the
board of enrollment t-haH relievo him from
the draft. ' ' All these acts of Congress man
ifestly contemplate trial fordescrtionincourts
martial, and the infliction of no punishment
or forfeiture except upon conviction and sen
tence in such courts. The act of 1806 pro
vided for geueral courts martial, and made
minute and careful regulations for their or
ganization, for the conduct of their proceed
ings, and for the approval -or disapproval of
their sentences. Subsequent acts made some
chamres,- but they have not restrained the
jurisdiction or diminished the powers of such
courts. It is to such a code of law?, forming
a system devised for the punishment of ds
sertiou, that the 21st section of the act of
March 3d, 1864, was added. It reibrs plain
ly to pre-existing laws. It has the single ob
ject of increasing the penalties, but it does
not undertake to change or dispense wi'Ji the
machinery provided for punishing the crime.
The common niK-s of construction demand
that it bs read as if it had been incorporated
into former acts. And if it had been, if the
act of Ij-06 and its supplements had pre
scribed that the penalty for desertion or I'ail
ure to report within a designated time after
notice of draft, (which the act of 1863 declare.-!
desertion) should be punished on con
viction of the same, with forfeiture of citi
zenship and death, or in lieu of the latter,
such other punishment as by the sentence of
a court martial may be inflicted, would any
one contend that anj' portion of this punish
ment could be inflicted without conviction
and sentence ? Assuredly not And if not,
so must the act of 1865 be construed now.
It means that the forfeiture which it pre
scribes, like all other penalties for desertion,
must be adjudged to the convicted person
after trial by acourt martial and sentence ap
proved. For the conviction and sentence of
such a court there can be no substitute. They
alone establish the guilt of the accused and
fasten upon him the legal consequences.
Such, we think, is the true meaning of the
act, a construction that cannot be denied to
it without losing sight of all the previous
legislation respecting the same subject mat
ter, no part of which does this act profe.-s
Jt maybe added that this construction is
not only required by the universally admitted
rules of statutory interpretation, but it is in
harmony with the personal rights secured by
the Constitution, and which Congress must
be ps-esumcd to have kept iu view. It gives
to 1 he accused a trial before sworn judges, a
i ight to challenge, an opportunity of defence,
the privilege of hearing the witnesses
against him, and of calling the witnesses in
las behalf. I t preserves to him the common
law presumption of innocence until he has
been adjudged guilty, according to forms of
law. It gives finality to a single trial. If
tried by a court martial and acquitted, his
innocence can never be again called in ques
tion, aud he can be made to suffer no part of
the penalties prescribed for guilt. On the
other hand, if a record of conviction by a
lawful court be not a pre-requisite to suffer
ing the penalty of the law, the act of Con
gress may work intolerable hardships. The
accused will then be obliged to prove his in
nocence whenever the registry of theprovost
marshal is adduced against him. No deci
sion of a board of election officers will pro
tect him against the necessity of renewing
his defence at every subsequent election, and
each time with increased difficulty arising
from the possible death or absence of wit
nesses. In many cases this may prove a
gross wrong. It cannot be doubted that in
some instances there were causes that pre
vented a return to service, or a report by per
sons registered as deserters by provost mar
shals, that would have been held justifying
reasons by a court martial, or at least would
have prevented an approval of the court' b
sentence.-: It is well known, also;' that some
who were registered deserters were, at' the.
time, actually in the military Bervice as vol
unteers, and honorahly discharging their du
ties to the Government To hold that the
act of Congress imposes upon such the ne
cessity of proving their innocence, without
any conviction of guilt, would be an unrea
sonable construction of the act, and would
be attributing to the national legislature an
intention not warranted by the language and
connection of the enactment. .
It follows that the judgment of the court
below, upon the case stated, was right. The
plaintiff not having been convicted of deser
tion and failure to return to the service, or
to report to a provost marshal, and not hav
ing been sentenced to the xenalties and for
feitures of the law was entitled to vote.
The iudement is affirmed.
.Woodwarp, C J.
1 concur in the conclusion stated in the
above opinion, and in most of the reasonings
by which that conclusion is reached.
But I do not concur in treating the act of
Congress as a valid enactment, for I believe
it to be an expoxt ftctohvr, in respect to all
soldiers, except such as commit the crime of
desertion after the date of the law. This is
not a case of desertion subsequent to the en
actment, but prior to it, and the penalties of
the offence are such as were fixed, by Jaw,
when the offence was committed, and it is
not competent for the legislature to increase
them, except for future cases.
A Reverend Seducer..
HE DRUGS TWO YOUNQ GIRLS AND THEN
OUTRAGES Til EM.
A correspondent at Salem sends us the
following startling revelation of a shocking
crime perpetrated in Yamhill County, which
did we not positively know the veritable
character of tne writer, we should le inclin
ed to doubt its truth ; but we are compelled
to lielieve the statement notwithstanding its
diabolical atrocity :
"Salkm, April 20, 1866.
"Rev. W. F. Boyakin has finally capped
the climax of his infamous and amorous ca
reer, by drugging two girls and debauching
their person. The outrage, for cool, delib
erate, lialolical atrocity, is unsurpassed.
Boyakin, who has been residing in Salem
during the winter and officiating as pastor of
the Bapti.-t Church, recently went to Yam
hill County to deliver a series of lectures on
the Revelation. Here he became the guest
of a worthy minister in the same church.
and for some weeks partook of the hospital
ities of that gooj man and his very estima
ble family. The family consisted of the
minister's wife and three daughters, the
eldest of whom is married, and was at her
father's home, sick of confinement. The
parents had changed their sleeping room to
one adjacent to that of their sick daughter
in order to administer to her wants, and
Boyakin was permitted to occupy the vacant
room, which was of convenient access to the
chamber of the two young girls, who are
about 13 and 15 years of age, respectively.
Into this chamber Boyakin introduced him
self in the night, and with the aid of drues,
overcame their iunoccnee and outraged their
persons, as stated. Night after night did
this lecherous old ruffian satiate his infernal
lu.-t.s upon his powerless victims, until the
crime speedily manifested itself in the ap
pearance of the daughters. It was with
difficulty that the lives of the unfortunate
sufferers were saved, never, however, to re
cover from the sufferings that Boyakin's
crime has brought themselves nd their
stricken parents. ' ' -
Boyakin escaped the just retribution pre
pared for him by the neighborhood, by flee
ing from it. He 5 supposed to have effected
his escape on the Sierra Nevada, on her last
outward tri p. lie is about fiftr years of age,
with hair and beard gray. He was guilty of
some impropriety in t'alem last winter, while
at the theatre, and public indicnation .was
quite strong aeainst him, but the church of
which he was pastor nestled him in her lap
and screened his unworthy cartas.
The faiuiby in which ho ha wrought this
ruin is one of the most estimable in the
State, and it is a pity that they gave such
implicit confidence to a man about whom the
world had rumored bad things even if he
was gray-haired and a minister. But what
i most to be regretted is that the Baptist
church in Salem did not, when his notorious
conduct in the Salem theatre had excited
such universal comment, put its foot upon
the monster and crush him, instead of giv
ing him a passport into homes to blight and
Boyakin was for some time editor of the
Coryaliis (iazctte. He has perambulated
the valley divers and sundry times, lecturing
on loyal tv and Sambo. La;t winter he was
esteemed and worthy correspondent
of the Oreronian, over the cognomen
of 'One of the Smiths.' He was a great
favorite with the editor of the Statrsnum,
who was eager to champion him. He was
a 'burnin' and 'shinin' light in the 'Union
as well as in the church. He was very pious,
loyal, and lustful, incessantly haranguing on
f)olitics and belaloring copperheads through
lis favorite medium, the Oregon iin.
His services had been procured to stump
Yamhill county for the 'Lnion ticket' in the
present canvass, and his untimely flight
will be a severe loss to the ticket in that
The old devil was seen in this citv about
the time of the sailing of the Sierra Nevada,
and we hear it stated that some one had him
arrested for debt just a3 he was going on
board, but the matter was settled, and we
suppose he has made his escape. We hope,
however, that steps will be immediately ta
ken to secure his arrest, if possible,' in San
Francisco, or any other place where he can
le overtaken. Portland, 0&on, Herald.
The Rev. W. F. Boyakin.'whose exploits
arc related above, was a chaplain in the 3oth
regiment Illinois volunteers, when that regi
ment first went out, and was loyal and pious
to a degree. His home is in Bellville, Illi
nois, where he has or had a family living.
He has probably had to leave the Pacific
coat, and is douhtless in Illinois at present
Ed. Chicago Times.
Not a Christian, but a Baogage Mas
ter. An accident happened to a train on
the Atlantic and Great Western Railroad
awhile ago out in Ohio. The baggage-master
sat in his car reading at the time, but
perceiving by the motion of the car that an
accident had taken place, he attempted to
jump out, but was canehtbetween two boxes
and badly jammed. He was taken outin an
insensible condition, and being laid upon the
ground an attempt was made to revive him,
which proved successful. As he opened his
eyes to a con.sciousnessof things, a clergyman
stepped otvt from the circle who surrounded
him, to offer prayer for his complete restora
tion. He kneeled down by the side of the
victim, but before proceeding with his work
ot mercy, he asked the youtn, Are you a
Christian ?" "No, sir," as emphatically as
his weak condition would allow, "I'm a
baggage-master on the Atlantic and Great
A Clergyman Whips hlr Child
. . I . to Death. V-;i
We learn from the railroad men who came
from Medina this morning that there- was -great
excitement in that village arising from
a report that a Presbyterian, clergyman,
named Lindsley, residing a mile Eouth of tha
village, yesterday whipped his eon three. ,
years old, so wvcrely that he died two hours
subsequently, because he would not pay ' his ;
prayers. Report adds that the child's fin-'
gers were broken by the blows administered.
The report seems so monstrous and unnat- '
tiral that we telegraphed to Medina to learrl '
if it was true, and received an answer that it '
was. The telegraph states that the minister
was two hours whipping the child with a
heavy rod, and it died from its injuries with-4
in the time stated above. Lindsley had not;
been arrested at the time the dispatch was :
sent, but we learn that an officer from Albi- '
on has gne Medina to take him into cus
tody. For the sake of common humanity we
hope the htory is exaggerated, and it may b
possible that it is. ."';.'
Since writing the above we have receivod
by special telegraph the statement of Mr.
Lindsley, the father of the child, made to
jury summoned by Coroner Chamberlain
"On the eighteenth of June the child dis
obeyed his step mother, and I commenced
correcting him, using a shingle f r the pur-
pose, and continued to chastise him for more ;
than two hours, when the child began to show
signs of debility, and I cea-ed to punish him
and laid him on a couch and called, my wife.
When she saw the child she said he was dy
ing, and before twelve o'clock he wmsdead." .;
The coroner's jury returned a verdict yes
terday "that death resulted from chastise
ment by the father." It will be wen that
the whipping, was given on the eighteenth
instant, instead of yesterday, and that com- -mon
report did not in this instance overstate)
the facts in the case. A child three yean
old whipjred to death by its father because'
it could not or would not pay ita prayers ? Is j
it possible, and of all other persons, that . a
clergyman should be guilty of such a piece
of inhumanity ? The condemnation or the '
public is not enough. ' The law should take) -firm
hold of him and deal out justice to hird .
with an unsparing hand. . .A cold Mooded
murder it can be called nothing less
should not go unpunished. No wonder ths '
people of Medina are indignant and -excited;
Territii.e Affair Near Marios, Ala- '
bama. On the night of the 21st ult, about
nine o'clock, some persons unknown entered
the residence of Mrs. Kcnningtoo, and with ;
some bluntpicce of iron probably a hatchet
crushed her skull all to pieces. The mur- -derer
then attacked the children, a little boy
and a little girl, aged respectively eight and K
ten years. The skull of the boy he crushed;
in two places, but failed, as the surgeon V
thinks, to inflict fatal injuries upon the girL
In tne house, at the same time, was a very :
old lady, the. grandmother, we believe, of
Mrs. Kennington, and her daughter, Becky '
N'arramore, an aunt of Mrs. Kennington..
The skull of the latter wa? crushed to piecea .
above the eyebrows, but the presence of the
old lady in the house not being suspected
When the bodies of the dead and wounded
were found next morning, Mrs. Kennington
was lying across her bed, her head swinging
offj as though she had been in the act of -rising
when struck down. The blood from
her crushed skull had run through the mat
trass upon which she was Iving, and formed
a puddle upon the floor. Persons who wit- ,
nessed the scene say it was shocking beyond
The negro has since been arrested, and is .'
now in thej'erry County jail. Marion Com '
vionicenJth. ' .
A Horse Thief Shot. Early last Spring ,
a man calling himself William Greely, and a
woman who passed for his wife, hailing from '
Manistee, Michigan, arrived at Richmond, '
Bay County, Mknuri. Shortly after Greely '
opened a school in the vicinity, which ho
ker.t until it was broken up, in consequence '
of his unmercifully beating one of hispupili,
whose father beat Greely in return. Shortly
af r. it appears, he took to horee-stealing,
which he carried on without suspicion for
some time. Finally, he left under dubious cir-
cum stances was followed and overtaken near
Chillicothe, livingston County, having three
stolen horse and a stolen revolver in his pos
session. This occurred on the 2Sth of June.
On his way back to Richmond he undertook
to make his escape, and threw snuff in the
face of. one of his guards to tmable him to.
do so. Unfortunately for him the snuff af
fected only one eye of his guard (a Mr.
Brown, of Bay County,) who pursued Greely
as he ran off, and ou his refusing to stop
when ordered to do so, Mr. Brown shot and
instantly killed him. Next day Mr. Brown
surrendered himself, and was discharged
after a hearing of the case. Greely was sup-
fosed to have accomplices in the neighbor
hood. Missouri Republican.
Costume at Pan Asia. A n ewspa per cor
respondent at Panama says: "The chariest
maid of Panama is prodigal enough only
when she unmasks her beauty, not merely '
to the moon, but to the blazing sun and en
tire populace. The whiteness of her dra
pery is in sharp contrast with her tawny
skin. Some boys of 12 years, and under,
wear shirts, but most are entirely naked,
while girls appear 'in elegant costume of the -Greek
Slave. They form striking couples'
for promenade young arrayed only in straw
hats, and juvenile gentleman in the same
attire with hats omitted. ' If there be any
Calvinism in dress, thev arc hopeless exam
ples of total depravity.''
A Man in England imagined that he liad"
the rinderpest His physician, unable to
convince him to the contrary, gave himi a
sealed prescription with which he hurried to
the drucgist. His bad symptoms immedi
ately left him when the clerk opened it and
read, 'This man has the cattle plague ; take
him into the back yard and shoot him ac
cording to law."
In Chatham churchyard is a stone iriseri-
bed: A man had buried two wives; after
stating the name and age of the first are the
words, "The Lord gave and the Lord hatfcu
taken away, blessed be the name of the!
Lord." In a few years his second wife died '
and after her name and age are these words, '
"I called upon the name of the Lord and he:
heard me, and delivered me out of all my
troubles." , .
Mrs. Partington says the only way to pre
vent steamboat jexplosions ig to make engin.;
eers bile the water on shore. Inher opinion,
all the bustin' is done by cooking the steam
on board. ' ' -
A Florida planter estimates his cotton
yield as high as eight bales to a hand. - This
s considered Yprygood., -J