The Nashville daily union. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1862-1866, 1865-11-26
Message from the GOvernOr-The

Z
August Electiop.
The foilowisg ulessage frousGov. Brown
low was transmitted to and reea IN The House
yesterday:
NAsHvILLE. IEss., Aev- =, 1855.
G 1T emen ofthe 6eHeiai Assembly
In compliance with your joint resolution,
! adopfsa Nov. .. 1868, ! hsye The honor
Ia iaske the folioEiug report ltlla
On the 10th July last, seeing q general
DISPOSITION 10 disregard The s'act 70 limit the
elective franchise issued my proclana-
ton recurring G strict execution ofthe aw-
I and announcing shat ali the votes Of al
/ OF persons and COUNTIES contrary 20 the strict
I provisions OF this law viii be thrown out
( and not taken into Eecount
After tie election, being assured thst the
7 la1 lad "besn IN come counties esroneously
construed, snd in others wilfully eyGded,
and in some instances totally disrsgarded,' =
! issued my proclamation, CO ling upon the
. Clerks and sherifs ana loyal citizens for
iHformation Is 10 the manner in which
voters had been registered and the election
he d. Copies Of these proelsmations are
herewith pferentsd.
Most Of the Clerks aud sheriifs Of the
various counties Of the State have e,pO. d
e1 to the inquiries made in the proclama-
ton OF August the llIh, and ! roget 70 ind
was not mistaken in my epprehensisns
that the law had been extensively mis-
construed and disregarde@.
Certificates of registration seem 70 have
been obtained generally in ave different
modes.
/. Where tbs applicant was known to the
clerk 70 be Of publicly Known Union senti-
ments.
2. Upon proof BY witnesses that the ap
plicant came within the provisions Of the
"act 70 limit the elective franchise"
9. Upon the oath Of the applicant alone,
that be came within some provision Of the
law.
4. TIE production Of an oath Of ailegi-
ance Or amnesty, taken a. some time b. the
applicant.
>. Where The app ieant was certified OF
vouehed for BY some ofiiciai, either civil or
n litary.
with some doubts as to the legality Of
issuing certifcatel 70 persons Of public
known Union sentiments without proof, I
the Clerk being the Judge, have neverthe- /
less, admitted chat method Of regis iration 1
where there was Do evidence Of abuse Of
the discretion assumed by the Clerk.
The second method enumerated is clearly I
legal, bat the last three are as clearly /
Illegal.
Believing that an applicant for registra-
ton must either be known 10 have beensa /
man Of publicly known Union sentiments, |
at ali times, or must produce proof un-
der oath that be comes within the pro- /
visions Of the law, have in the applica-
ton Of this construction, "thrown out and 1
not taken into account the votes cast in
The following counties, as Illegally regis
tered, viz: Hawkins, McMinn, Monroe, /
Meigs, Grundy, Van Buren,, White, smith, /
Putuam, Jackson, Macon, Coffee, Franklin,
Benton, Williamson, Davidson,
sumner, Robertson, Chsatham, Maury,
Montgomery, Stewart, Law
renee, Gibson, Weakly, Madison and Lau-
ierdale.
The vote Of the following counties having
been registered in the one or the other Of
he two modes first enumerated, have been
aiken into account, viz:
johnson, Carter, Greene, Cooke, Jefferson,
SEWER, Grsnger, Union, Knox, Campbell,
Anderson, Morgan, Blount, Badly, Hamil-
on, Polk, Marion, Bleisoe, Meigs, Wsrren,
smith, Putnam, DeKalb, Rutherford, Lin
'oln, Giles, Cannon, Coffee, franklin, Viii
on, Hickman, Wayne, Dickson, Hardin,
henry, Obion, Dyer, Carroll, MeNairy, Hsr-
leman, Shelby and Haywood.
From the following counties have ne
atisiact ~ reports, the presumption being
n favor Of the legality Of The registration,
'iz. Sullivan, Washington, Hancock, Scott,
Polk, Roane, Sequatchie, Cumberland. Fen
ress. Rhea, Overton, Bedford, Perry, Lewis,
Decatur, Henderson, Faye,te and Upton.
The following table shows the vote Of
sch District az shown by the original re-
urns, and also as modified By emitting I
ounties improperly registered s