Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1867-06-06

the preparation Of the opinion. Il was
stated, during the delay, that the Attor.
ney-Generaf had been compelled to ex.
anime the statutes of ali the Southern
states, to ascertain what disfranchise.
ments existed under them, for participa-
tion In the rebellion but as that could
easily De ascertained by the Brigadier
who plays CESAR In each district. we
could not see the alleged necessity nor
can we now discover, upon a microscopic
examination, any traces Of such an in
y~esugation in the opinion itself.
The reconstruction acts do not seem 10
US to present any very novel or grave
difficulties Of construction, sufficient to
require long thought, profound examine
ton Of authorities or extraordinary legal
ability to solve them, or any great
length Of time in which to prepare a
satisfactory opinion. If as much time is
required In every case of equal or greater
difficulty, submitted to the Attorney
General, the business of his office will
fall sadly in arrear, and his opinions will
49,"
not ELL many volumes. We venture to
say that Attorney General WIR-, LIE
CARE CUSHING or BLACK would have
been ready with an opinion on all the
points discussed by STANBERY, in
forty-eight hours from the time it was
asked for.
And we may add, that neither of them
would have found it necessary to write
half as much on the subject and that
either would have arrived at the same
inevitable conclusions by a more salts
factory process of logic. Nevertheless,
the opinion does reach the conclusions,
and state them distinctly enough to ena-
bic I'D .esident to cause orders to Issue
upon them as propositions not to be
gainsaid. Why this very necessary duty
is not performed, we do not know. The
opinion will not, Ike 8 judgment of a
Court, execute itself.
We are permitted to hope that atsome
remote period in the future, the Attor-
ney- General viii reach some eonclu-
sions, Of some kind, in regard to the
poWers of Brigsdier- CEsARs. The judi
oial education Of SICKLEs and SHERIDAN
has been sadly neglected and if haste is
ever required in any thing, it is required,
We should think, in enlighteniDg them
as to the nature and extent of their i'm
perial powers and prerogatives.
We cannot publish the opinion al
ready given in full. 1t is not worth it.
We give, instead, the following very cor
rect statement Of its purport, from the
New York Tribune:
The Interpretation given to the recon-
stIuetiOR act by Attorney General Stan
berry is practically as important and au-
thofitative as if ii were pronounced by
the supreme court, since no appeal can
possibly be taken from the action of the
military commanders, which will be
guided by the opinion Just published. IL
therefore merits a very careful consider
alton, for upon this basis the entire work
of reorganization will proceed. The
opinion of Mr.. Stanbery on all matters
other than those relating to disfranchise-
ment is not likely to be the subject of
dispute, and need not be reviewed at
length. He holds that the decisions Of
the boards Of registration are final that
every applicant for registration must be
tweMy-one years old lOheR registered, |
but need not have been One year in the
state until the election, and that one but
citizens of the United States can vote.
DISTINGUISHING clause Of the act, |
added to the original Sherman amend
ment by Mr.. S~hellabarger, were doubtless
intended to have a broader operation
thar the rules of legal Interpretation will
allow. These clauses were drawn up in
great haste, and adopted as a cOmpro-
mise, without the benefit of debate,
which might have drawn attention to
their loose expression. Why the error
should not have been corrected in the
supplemental act, which was framed with
more deiibeFstian, it is not easy to ak
plain, unless by supposing that congress
vas SO anxious to show good faith in Rd-
herring to the act Of the previous session
as a inality that it preferred to leave a
defect uncured, rather than expose itself
to the charge of yacillatiOn. However
this may be, it is certain that both acts
to exclude from the right Of SUI
all "whO may have been disfran-
chised for participation in the rebellion"
and vet that no one is so disfranchised in
any o fthe states affected by thisaet other
wise than by other clauses of the act
itself. This is very clearly stated by
Mr.. Stanbery; and the exception
he suggests may exist in Viz
ginis was, we are very confident, abro-
gated in 1865. This clause is, therefore,
Substantially q nullity. The remaining
text of the two statutes themselves is the
only authority for excluding from the
polls any one who formerly had q right
TO vote. The oath prescribed by the
act declares in effect that
the applicant for registration has never
engaged in rebellion against the United
nor given aid or comfort to the
sneHiies thereof, after hRying been q
member of a state legislature, or an eX-
OF Judicial officer OF 8 state, or
4fter having taken an oath as such, or
rs a member OF congress, or as an officer
IF the United States, TO support the con-
stitatiOn Of the United States. The at.
-orney general holds that this oath dos%
not exclude members OF q state conYep-
lion as such, that body being entirely
iiStinguishable from a legislature. In
his he is perfectly right, and We on6g
'egret thst he could not have 80 in
SIR. johnson IN 1865, and thus
rave saved the latter from the error Of
assuming, as he did, that electors Of a
convention must necessarily have the
anne qualifications as electors of q legis-
ature. I
The state officers who, in Mr.. Stan
Judgment, are disfranchised, are
,ply those who, in a proper sense, are
officers Of The state, and not mere officers
If a municipality. He does not cite any
authority for this proposition, but there
5 q very respectable decision directly in
point, in the third Of HarringtOn's Del
sware) reporta. in which il was held that
J provision in the constitution forhidding
from holding Office did not !
to municipal offices. Mr.. Stan
lery may find it desirable to refer to this
'ase the state agent, Wilmington in
preparing his opinions upon the questions
le has reserved. Militia officers, and
)ersons who have held offices of 3
purely nOn-political character, such as )
stsbe directors of public insti- !
etc., are held not to be disfFan- !
by the act. But officers of the
United States, Of every species and {
,rade, civil or military, executive, legis- :
alive or judicial, are held to be within {
he statute, though whether mere COM .
nissioners to take acknowledgements, or
imilar officials, are within this class, :
Stanbery does not say. They are so
ew, however, that the question is unim- I
!
Participation in the rebellion, it is
leld, must have been voluptary, in order 1
o d~isfranohise and must have consisted 4
( something more than mere oo-opera- q
ion in preserving the usual forms oflocal :
government. Judges, sherifs, county \
Jerks, mayors, etc, etc, are not to be I.
onsidered as engaging in rebellion, or 4
ven IS giving aid and comfort TO rebels,
y performing the ordinary duties of @
uch offices during the rebellion. The t
esult Of the attorney generals interpret I
alton of the law is to reduce the scope /
( the DISTINGUISHING clauses to very mar
DIV limits. Unless those who hold the v
olicy Of exclusion and DISTINGUISHING to '
e necessary can persuade congress to a
mend the law in July, which is very I
Improbable, they will have to accept q
nearly the programme of Impair c
ial suffrage which the Tribune has con- .
family Advocatee2
SCHOOL OF THE HOLY CROSS. :
A musical and dramatic soiree by the A
upils Of this excellent Academy is an .
Ounced for Friday evening, the 18th
Instant, at the Greenlsw Opera House. h
nd the proceeds will be sppIied IN tbo a