The Nashville daily union. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1862-1866, 1866-02-06

has divided this people lElo ptgllc--LL
J., prescribed and these who think Pro5c-iPlI
wrong. aud the proscrihers and those w
Uphold hem. We see daily evidence OF u
- iact, and tnat the difference is widenl-
end the dislike deepening. This, alon
o should condemn it g policy, 10Y the tn
line Of action 10 fratsrnize, and by co p
. ration attempt to repair The ihisehiets
&. the struggle But, sir, the propositicn b'
3 ! forsus goes far bsvond the measure OF la
>, session, and in the face, too, OF Inul1 yln
!. evidences thst al ground upon which
e could be urged is UnJeuable, for challenG
: | gentlemen 10 8 single fact Of iupQrtgng
| which has occurred since lsSt June, VIII.
, need give any one fear Of the relnstal4ati3
- OF rebel power in this State, OF incite drea
/ that popular sentiment, disloyGl snd dan
5 gerous 10 TIE authority Of the general Cos
; erRnent, IS SECURING infu nee II any or
has en- L, I must say that Wllh e!oss 20
/, | servatior, have uct been sble 10 dlscoNe
It. Discontent at what many regard as IN
lIrise and ruinous legis alton Kay be sesu
, and the subiecE now under Consideration !
one Of the instances, but submit, sir, ths
cannot be ci ed S. prof Of disloyalty or con
strued as dangerous 20 the peace OF tn
country. unless It should itself provoke tn
/ trouble. If gentlemen persIst n this ms,
1 ATTEMPT to dislranchiss and politically de
grade Crest masses Of the people, they vii
increase this discomfort; but again sU6mi
that It is not fair to adduce this staie o
things as q justihcsti0n for further incentive
10 il.
| The bill reported from the Committee re
psals the present law and proposes 20 inded.
nitely 10 exclude from the franchise privi-
lege every man in Tennessee, who sympa.
thissd with, or encouraged in any manner
the late insurrection against the Govern
ment; and this includes, perhaps hye-slzthl
oI the voting population By the constitu-
tional standard; it fgrthe more provides Q
cumbrous and expensive system BY which
suffrage certificates ere 20 b5 obtained
marked with cd Gus and tyrsnicsl fss ures;
! it exact an election oath, as stringent anu
/ sea ching, as il is senseless and onrscss-
/ ssry. Now, sir hold thatth re IS nc war
rant from sLy poVer under which We at,
| 10 pass any such bill 1 an not lawyer,
CT vsrsed II constitutional questions, but
have read aud STUDIED the laws and consti-
tuiion Of the Government, end an con
WINGED thas there IS no power given 70 dis
! franchise hy le sisiative act, whole masses Of
| the people, for any cause, OF under any cir
cumstoness.
Section lst, art 4, Of the State CoRstitu-
| ton prescribes who shall be electors, VIZ;
white ciu-ens, twenty-one years Of age, aud
SIX months residents or the county IN which
they may offer 70 vote. Sec. ? oi tue same
| article declares that claws may be passed
excluding from the right Of suffrage persons
1 who nav be convicted o infamous crimes" !"
| If there be smother line or letter IN the con-
stitution proper, giving tho law-mskiHg
power control over this subject, It has not
| yet been pointed out. Il is true that the
/ convention Of year ago, under whose au-
authority and action We assembled,
| ADOPTED a schedule, which was an
nexed to the constitution, the 9TH sec
ton OF which declares that "quslidcations
Of voters, and limitions Of the elective
franchise may be determined by the next
! General Assembly" and this is claimed 20
authorize the present measure, But, sir, o
question, il seems 70 me, may we'll arse
whether this schedule repesled, or over
rides in force, the lst Section Of Article 4th.
It certainly did not DO the fFss, Tor the sec
ton named is still part Of the instrument
Il is questionable whether power was con-
ferred 10 interfere with ve-ted rights al
ready acquired under that section, and de-
Clared deiessible only upon conviction of
crime; ana if intended 10 be conferred,
whether it did not apply TO q condition OF
sffsirs since altered by the action Of the Gen
eral Government. A yearGso upon the ex-
pected cessation Of the war, Il was thought
that there would be returning from the rebel
armies large mass Of unrepentant and uR-
pardoned rebels, who, by warning upon
Inc Government had, as was oouteGded, Tor
fe.tsd their citiEsnship and It's attaching
rights. But sincs then, the character @!
the relation held by this class Of men has
been changed by the amnesty offered
by and accepted from the President It
may be asserted that, this has really
worked no change ia their feelings, but
we have nothing TO do with the supposed
aniras Of men We can only Judge Of con
duct. and We are bound to hold them as oc-
cupying the relationship which the elem
eucy OF The superior power has given them.
l think this position conuot be denied, ana
under it, the merely promissory and sugges-
tive phrEseology Of the scbeduie is shorn Of
It's fcrce, when C0ntTRsted with the positive
Language Of the lst section Of art. 4ths fixing
the qualifications Of voters. twill not be
asserted that these men, whose suffrage
rights are there defined, we're not citizens
ard as such lawful voters, before their re-
bellious acts were eommittedj and If 60, the
amnesty or act Of obllyion relieved them OF
al forleitures Of political rights on account
of those acts, and restored them TO their
condition before the war. And this brings
Us to consider the character Of the lag
of The sehedule. II the positions I have
stated be correct, this measure Is either in
tended to deprive them Of political rights
restored to them by TIE Presidential eznnes-
t., both that Of M Lirccin, ana the later
one Of Mr.. johnson, upon the ground that
they are unsafe depositsries Of political
power, and that the Offer Of amnesty was
blunder; or else it is regarded and intended
as a punitive measure for the crime Of re-
bellion sgainstthe State and general govern
meut. N the FIRST be the ground on which
it is placed, it is a grSye impeachment OF
the wisdom Of the two great men, who have
hsd better opportunities than any others, 20
observe a wide range Of fscls on which TO
predicate their olicial sets, and who took
the steps after long dehberauo1i and /
think is IS lste in the stage Of these matters,
flr this or sny siniiar body, y sssune such
ground az that
Bu: if it be, and !: certainly is punitive,
whether il be techniczlly 50 Intended or rot,
Il is iaet vi provisions Of the constitusI.n
whioh positively p hibit Isgs PISSED in
that spirit or tent. The Dsclarstioo OF
Righ ., which Is declared part Of the con
sltution, forbids the passage Of lavs for the
1 punishment CT oasuses, which are sr post
JGeio, OF rstg spectivs in their operation.
Aud 80 70 this view, the right 70 psss this
bill Is clearly excluded. Il is also further
| provided, that no free man sha ] be put 10
suswsr sny criminal charge but by present
uent, inaleiment, or impeschment." But
disiEanehislng aud dives ing him politi-
cal rlghtai as . puuishment fer the ime OF
rebe hoo, Is condemnaii aud execution
without tEis, or conviction. snd sec ion "a,
| OF article 9TH, already quoted, shows hat
the constitution regards exclusion from the
| right Of suffrage, As one mode Of PUG sh-
ment for crime. Again, sir, tue sth smend-
Sd srticle Of the cosstitution of The Uriie6
states declares that "no person shall be
held % answer ior a capital, or otherwise
Infamous crime, unless on a presentuient or
| indictment py 3 Grand jury" But th 8
mode OF punishing, bv legislative exclu-
sion fro2 tie highest and dearess right Of
citizen, is the inaictiou az a penslty fer
crime without the Intervention OF this iudi-
cisl process, and Is therefore il violation Of
this clause. This measure is also in con
fict With TIE IN Section Of article llth Of
the State Constitution which declsres that
81 laws must be equal and Fsneral-that
they must apply TO all, snd net 10 a elsss
and is in Asgrant conIrsdiction 70 the nfth
section OF the ls. article, which declares.
"tbat al elections shsll be free ana equal .
for it infringes tie freedom Ct elections and
denies e. uai.,y among eillzens a. the ballot
box.
Vow. sir. I think that this summary
glance at positive provisions sud prohibi-
/ uous u the coastitutioa win safisfv anv
I fair mind. that they ca1uot be outwsirhed,
! when estimating ous power ou this cues
6en, By the Language Of the schedule. I
do rot think that the latter endues US with
/ the suthority 10 msze thls sweeping ehsnFe
/ in the Fundamental larr even In its most
liberal consiruction; snd 7 sn of opiriaa,
that wha;over power it does grant, refers
mere spscisca1y % the creation Of new
slectors than ne disiurbzzce of tie riehts
/ Of those nov snGued q it- and ia this
1 connection, while would not seem 70 raise
. douhl in regard to The power of the con
vsution which framed it, or the node and
I eirsuInsianees undsr which it was ratified.
/ tor ] iuttifed them a. TIE tine sad DO 50
I vst. s seems 20 ne, that every isir znd in
/ teihfert mind, anxious torliscsrn The iust
r-essure Of authority snd sancslon We pos
| tess. Should let the veil known facts in re-
I rsrc e it- have ace ws.Fht OF cogrse
I refer q tss fact. thsf g VS. estshiished &C .
tnie whel -1efs ain5s rera szcites, io-