Nashville union and dispatch. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1866-1868, 1866-12-07
ARNELLAND THE FRANCHISE LAW

Inc Aeulpuis DHttcttt vi the fJl lnSl.
contains the following:
AT the Congressional election in Ten
nessee, in August, 1865, ID. B. Thomas
received an overwhelming majority of the
votes cast in the Columbia Congressional
District, over S. NJ. Arnell, the selfconsti-
tuted leader Of the Radicals in the Tennes-
see Legislature. BY wanton exercise of
power in the Executive office, Thomas
vote was thrown out, and the certificate of
election awarded 10 Arnell. This was so
msnifestly unjust that il is reported that
Arnel positively refused TO assert any
claim TO the seat, and told Thomas that he
would make no opposition to his occupying
1t. This was a year ago, when the Ten
nessee Congressman we're about starting to
Washington TO claim their seats In the
meantime Arnell kept his seat in the
Legislature, while Thomas, conscious Of
his election, resigned and went to Wash
ingtOn. Just before adjournment, Congress
admitted the Tennessee delegation but,
instead of Thomas, Arnell was admitted.
Arnell was then in the Tennessee House of
Representatives, engineering the second
bill Of abomination-the franchise act
through its final passage; thus receiving
the pay of Congressman in Washington,
and Of member of the Tennessee Legis-
lature in Nashville, at the same time!"
We do not know what foundation there
is for the reported refusal Of Mr.. Arnell
ITO assert any claim to the seat he
now occupies, but there is question Of
law as to his right to occupy seat in the
Legislature after he accepted the eertifo
cate of election to Congress. The Con-
stitution of Tennessee provides that no
person holding any Office under the au-
thority of the United States shall have a
seat in the General Assembly; nor shall
any person in this State hold more than
one lucrative Office at the same time
Here was Nr. Arnell holding an Office uu-
der the authority Of the United States,
for he did not resign bis membership in
the Legislature until after the passage of
the franchise law; and he held two lucra-
tive offices, for we are informed he ac-
cepted pay as a member Of Congress from
the 4th of March, 1865, while he had re-
ceived pay during portion Of the same
period as member Of the Legislature
The present franchise law was passed on
its third and last reading in the House of
Representatives when there were only
ffty-six. members present, that number
being barely a quorum. We have shown
that according to the constitution, Mr.
Arnell was not legally a member Of the
House of Representatives, yet his vote
was required to pass the franchise law.
If all the other members were legal Re-
the bill failed to become a
law because quorum Of legal members
did not vote. But there is good reason to |
doubt whether there were not other ille>
gal members present and voting when this
bill is declared to have passed its third
reading. The eighth section of the sche-
dule to the amendment of the constitu-
ton adopted on the 22d Of February.
1865, provides for the representation in
the present Legislature upon the basis
prescribed in the act Of the 18th Of Feb
ruary, 1852, with this proviso
provided, that said apportionment be so
modified as to give to the counties of John
son, Carter, Campbell, Anderson, Union,
Sewer, Macon, and Hancock, each one
member, and the district composed Of the
counties of Fentress Morgan, Scott, and
Cumberland, one additional member in the
House of Representatives" -..E
Under the apportionment of 1852 the
counties of Carter and johnson elected
one Representative, Anderson and Camp
bell one, and Knox and Sewer two
making total of four for the six coun-
ties. 1t was evidently the intention Of
he modification of this apportionment to
give these counties one Representative
each, and fair Interpretation Of the
clause we have quoted can give it no other
construction; that is to say, six Repre-
sentatives, Instead of this, we find them
represented in the House of Representa-
tives by nine members. Carter and
johnson have each one Representative
and Jointly one Anderson and Campbell
have each one Representative and Jointly
one; Knox and SEWER have each one Rep
resentative and jointly one. ,There must,
then, be three illegal Representatives
from these counties. Thus it will be seen,
if these members were present when the
franchise bill was passed, that the House
lacked four Of having quorum Of legal
members fl
We make no point on the power o. the
convention to increase the number Of