

dollars for unwarranted arrest and 

 ilt. It was very difficult to ob- 



iury, ami ' fifty-three challenges 



in all. Council lor tin- plaintiff offered in evi- 



tl..- C'.mmkvion of Mr. Dryd.-n as jndge. 



(ions wriv mado to its admissibility, on 



Hind that tho fundamental law of tho 



mt oil' tho duration of the commission 

 ! ^i'.."> ; mid, :n tho commission was dated 



.1 months previous, it was irrelevant. 

 Rebor (presiding) held tliat the commis- 



;' (lovernor (iamhlo to the plaintiff was 

 rent evidence. The court, after a 

 .Nir.M'ul review of the case, decided that the 

 onlinamv of the Constitutional Convention was 

 valid ; that Judge Dryden had no legal title to 

 the office of judge on the day when ho was re- 

 moved by force, and that he could not recover 

 in an action for ejectment. The decision sus- 

 tained the new constitution throughout. 



At tho election, held under the new consti- 

 tion, on November 7, 1865, Francis P. Blair, 

 Jr., tendered his vote, which was rejected by 

 the judges of the election, because he had rc- 

 ftmd to take the test oath. Mr. Blair, there- 

 fore, brought an action in the State Supreme 

 Court (nominally) to recover damages against 

 tho judges for refusing to receive his vote, but 

 really to have the provisions of the constitution 

 requiring the oath passed upon by the court. 

 In June, 1866, a majority of the court, Judges 

 Reber and Lord, sustained tho constitutionality 

 of the oath Justice Moody dissenting. 



, ious to this decision, tho test oath was 

 before tho United States Supremo Court for ad- 

 judication. The case was that of John A. Cum- 

 mings vs. the State of Missouri, on a writ of 

 error to the Supreme Court of that State. The 

 plaintiff in error was a priest of the Roman 

 Catholic Church, and was indicted and con- 

 victed in one of the circuit courts of Missouri 

 for the offence of teaching and preaching with- 

 out having first taken the oath, and was sen- 

 tenced to pay a tine of $500, and to be commit- 

 t>-d t<> jail until tho same was paid. On appeal 

 to tho Supreme Court of the State, the judg- 

 ment was confirmed. 



The United States Supreme Court decided tho 

 test oath to be unconstitutional, and ordered 

 the judgment of the State court to be reversed. 

 Tho substance of the decision was known as 

 early as May, 1866, but the decision was not 

 published until January, 1867. (See OATHS.) 



At Cape Girardeau, in tho month of June, 

 some excitement was caused by the arrest of 

 several sisters of charity or nuns, attached as 

 teachers to the convent of a Catholic academy 

 at that place, because they had not taken the 

 oath. The matter was finally compromised by 

 the offenders giving a bond for their appearance 

 at tho following circuit court of Cape Girardeau 

 County, to answer the charge. Rev. Father 

 < >'!:- ran, a Roman Catholic priest, of the same 

 county, was fined by the circuit court for solem- 

 nizing a marriage without having taken the 

 oath. Governor Fletcher, on learning the de- 



cision of the court, remitted the fine, and sent 

 to Father O'Regan the following letter: 



JnrxiMOir Crrr, October 19, 1366. 



RKV. FATHER 0'Rr.oAX Dear Sir: Herewith please 

 find a rcmittal of tho fine imposed on you by tho 

 Circuit Court of Cape Girardeau County for golem- 

 ni/.iirj; a marriage without taking the oath of loyalty. 

 On an examination of the record at Jackson, I found 

 tJmt there was no final action in the cases of Father 

 McGerry and Father Ryan. I also found that the 

 <>f the ladies of St. Vincent's convent wero 

 continued. 



The constitution of the State only permits me to 

 interfere "after conviction." I regret mat it is so, as 

 it would have been a real pleasure to me to relieve 

 from further annoyance from the indictments found 

 against them the venerable and worthy Father 

 McGerry, and the estimable and devoted sisters of 

 the convent, and whom you may assure I wilt do as 

 soon as can be done legally. 



Very respectfully, your obedient servant, 



THOMAS C. FLETCHER. 



This letter elicited a response, in which, 

 while the Governor is thanked for his kind in- 

 tervention, the right of the ministers of tho 

 Roman Catholic Church to solemnize marriages 

 without reference to civil restrictions, is de- 

 fended at length. 



At one of the terms of the circuit court at 

 Palmyra, fourteen ministers, who had not taken 

 the oath, were indicted for preaching. The 

 cases were laid over till the February term of 

 1867, and were of course abandoned, in conse- 

 quence of the decision of the United States 

 Supreme Court. A similar disposition was mado 

 of other cases then pending in other circuit 

 courts. 



"With reference to this subject of test oath?, 

 Governor Fletcher mado the following recom- 

 mendation in his annual message to the Legis- 

 lature, ill January, 1867 : 



I recommend the General Assembly to submit an 

 amendment to the constitution striking out the ninth 

 section of the second article. This section has not 

 prevented disloyal persons from pursuing the avoca- 

 tions of lawyers and school-teachers. Bishops, 

 priests, and ministers, teach and preach without 

 taking the required oath. Whenever a law is unne- 



productive of the most lamentable consequences. 

 The example offered by their disregard, especially by 

 so intelligent and influential a class of citizens, begets 

 a general disposition to exercise individual dis'i-iv- 

 tion in obeying or enforcing laws a disposition 

 which leads to anarchy and impunity in crime. 



The dangers to society from the too frequent use 

 of oaths, anu especially oaths for the taking of which 



frcat inducements are offered, and often demanded 

 y the very necessities of persons, cannot be over- 

 estimated ; and when there is, by common usage, no 

 penalty inflicted for the falsely taking of them, such 

 oaths are destructive of good conscience, and are 

 calculated to engender dangers to life and property 

 greater than was threatened by rebellion. This is 

 one of the many oaths required by our constitution 

 and laws that are unnecessary, and which only 

 familiarize the mind with the taking of oaths, there- 

 by lessening their solemnity and impressiveness, 

 and inducing perjury by creating a motive to swear 

 falsely. 



The oath of loyalty required of voters is also of 

 this class. The ballot is thereby offered as the pri: 



