Nashville union and dispatch. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1866-1868, 1866-11-24


would they not have been more explicit in
comforting the power? By thus constituting
the power delegated TO the Legislature we
j are able make each and every part Of the
CaJustitatiOn stand. ANY other construction
ihe one has 10 give way 10 the Osher. Tag
Court Is therefore content to hold. thai the
power delegated 10 the Legislature by tie
;inended Constitution does not vest then
/ with the power 10 determine the quaiiiCa-
tlons of voters in all cases, but only so FAR as
the freedmen are concerned. If the Court is
correct in the determination of the foregoing
| proposition, then ii necessarily follows that
the Legislature have transcribed their pow
ers in the passage Of the act underconsidera-
tiOn. so far as they have attempted to alter
the qualification 70 vote Of those who were
already voters under the old Constitution
and TO that extent the act is void, and would
not excuse the respondent from giving the
ne,, ssary certificate TO the relator.
But there is another question in the case.
which feel bound TO examine Il is one
which might have arisen under the consti-
tutiOnal government OK some of oUr sister
States, but it is no great compliment o. them
to say that it has never yet occurred in any
of them. The Generalization of civil war
and the disorganization incident to that most
dangerous period Immediately followiug,
when the strong arm Of the military power
has been Withdrawn, and the more reliable,
if not stronger arm of the law has not yet
resumed its sway, we're required to produce
the state Of facts upon which suCh question
can alone be raised. The old landmarks are.
at such a period, swept away or lost sight Of
and new ones have not yet been created.
Now, for the first time in the constitutional
history of this country, the legislative de-
partment of the General Government and Of
our own State, have not been content to fol
low in the safe line Of precedent, bat have
been induced from 4 conviction Of duty, this
Court is bound to presume, to resort to the
CrOmwelIian plan Of purging their own
bodies of members obnoxious to the majori-
ty. If a sense Of duty has compelled the
two Houses of the General Assembly Jf the
State to exclude some Of the members of
each, duly returned by the electors, a sense
of duty equally cons,rains this Court to ex-
anime into the constitutionality of the act,
and to ascertain whether, if uncJnstitgti0u-
al, the fact can be noticed in this case
The facts which raise this question are as
follows: k..s"
The General Assembly Of the State hay
ing certain measures before il in relation to
the elective franchise, portion of the House
Of Representative, sufficient in number to
reduce that body below 4 quorum, thought
it was their duty to resign theirseats iE order
to prevent the haSty passage Of 90 important
a measure, and 10 ascertain by a vote the
wishes of their constituents. To fill tie va
cancies thus created, his Exeellency the
Governor of the State, as in duty bound
issued his proclamation 10 the proper ofi-
GERS directing elections to be held il the
several districts according 20 law. These
elections were accordingly held, anG new
members elected, among whom, however,
we're number-f.teen, We bolieve-who
had resigned their seats aS Gforesaid When
these members, with taei- certificates il due
form, went to Nashville - take their seats,
the House of Representatives, or, rather,
those membere Of the House who had noi
resigned, and one or tEo members whom
they selected from the new comers, refused
to allow them to take their seats but iU-Cl-
ally elected them 10 the number of fifteen
in the House and two N the Senate. This
was confesSedly done, not because there was
any informality in the elections, nor il the
certificates Of the proper officers, nor be-
cause the applicants we're not possessed Of
all the constitutional qualifications, free
from all the constitutional disqualiica;ions,
and able and willing TO comply with
all the cons,.i iItional requirements, but
simply because they had directly
or impliedly assented TO the movement which
had left the House without a quorum, and
thereby, in the opinion Of those who ref1sed
to join in this action, had disqualified them
selves from eligibility TO seats in the House.
This was the sole ground upon which their
forcible exclusion from the body to which
they had been sent by the people, was put
by the dominant majority. In the Senate,
about the same time, the Hon. Cave Johnson
recently elected member to that body, was
excluded upon another ground. 1t was not
pretended that he had not been elected, duly
and legally 10 dll the vacancy; nor was it
denied that he bad al the necessary qualii-
cations, but the Senate chose to refuse him
admittance because lis sympathies had been
with the South in the late rebellion. In
both cases, that Is 10 say, In the case OF the
excluded members rom the House, and in
the case Of the excluded member from the
Senate, each Of those bodies chose to add to
the qualifications or disgGalihcations made
by the Constitution, others OF It's own framing. I
Was this right? If not, was the body from
which they were thus wrongiully excluded |
any longer Constitutional General Assem- !
bly,? Such are the grave points which this
Court is called upon 20 decide.
The requirements necessary to eligibility |
to the General Assembly, as prescribed By !
the Constitution, are found in Art II, Sec |
tions and 10 of that instrument, and the |
Constitutional disqualifcations in Sections /
25 and 26, Of the same article. 1t is not
necessary to quote those sections, nor to detail
their provisions, for it is not pretended that
they have anything to do with the aesion |
taken by the two Houses in the cases before
US. Nor is it pretended that there is any
thing in the amendment TO the Constitution, !
nor in the law of the land, directly justifying /
the exclusion. But it IS scontended that each
House of the General Assembly has the ex-
elusive right TO judge Of the qualification Of
its members, and is decision cannot be re-
vised.
The Constitution Article II Section II |
provides that: "The Senate and |
House Of Representatives, when assembled,
shall each = be judges Of the quail