Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1868-06-10
dEM2BES APPEAL.
THE JUDICIARY AND THE RIGHT OF
FRANCHTSE.

| Inc questions OF the cOnSutuLlOuhllty }
OF the disfranchisement of white men
and OF the investiturs Of negroes with
citizenship in Tennessee, are now before
the Supreme Court, sitting at Browns
Vile, in a case which contests the valid
ity OF the elections Of last March in
Shelby county. The case also involves
we understand, the legality OF the action
of Governor BrOwnlow in annulliUg the
registration Of voters here, In removing
the Registrar, Davis, and in annulling
his acts done during several days prior
to his removal from Office.
No grsver questions than these will
ever be presented to the Supreme Court
of Tennessee. They are so from their
own intrinsic Importance, as demanding
that the Court shall either sanction or
condemn the disinheritance Of thousands
Of citizens Of the State, by their depriVa-
ton without conviction or trial, but by
a mere legislative sentence, OF their
English birthright,n as Lord Holt
termed the right TO vote, if they refuse
to swear that they have not done partic-
ular acts or felt particular sympathies,
or entertained particular opinions. They
are so because they call on the Court to
decide whether, when part Of the citi-
zens constituting a State established by
white men, have succeeded in disfran-
chising the rest, they can, without
authority to that effect in the Constitu-
ton, confer the prerogatives Of citizen
ship on horde Of ignorant descendants
of black bsrbarians, and put the political
power Of the State In their hands. They
are so, because they require the Court to
decide whether the Governor of the
State is really invested with the power
to cancel certificates Of registration in
the hands Of those who have obtained
them by q full compliance with the laws
under which they were issued; and
whether the other officers of the State
have no other tenure of Office than his
will.
But these questions are grsver still,
because they have become in q great
measure Of a political nature, and the
Jacobinieal doctrine is now boldly an
nouneed in high places, that in such
cases, the opinions Of the Court should
be so moulded and fashioned as to ae-
cOmmodate themselves to what the popu-
lace or the party in power demand.
The deluge of IicentiOus and anarchi-
cal Jacobinism has swept away all the
safeguards Of constitutional liberty save
one, or they are rapidly crumbling before
it ; and that one, the independence and
integrity of the Judiciary, is angrily
mensced by it, and begins to yield.
The time was when no man distrusted
the judiciary. Unfortunately that time
is past. 1t is no longer an unknown
thing for a Judge to decide q case in his
own mind, in accordance with his party
and afterwards to seek for
to justify his decision. It is not
so difficult now, as it once was, for
Court to evade the conclusions of an in
exorsble logic; because men are no longer
disgusted with sOphistry, or amazed at
or startled at the pIiancy Of
his judicial conscience.
II the Judiciary would vindicate itself
from aspersion, it must walk in the
straight path of the law, turning neither
to the right hand or the left, and deaf
alike to the clamours of faction or the
mob, the seductions of prejudice, and
the thousand other influences that beset
them and seek to lead them astray.
II the Father Of all can hate any hu-
man creature, He must hate the unjust
or corrupt Judge; and the magistrate is
both unjust and corrupt who allows any
improper influences to Iesd him to
wrongful judgment. The country and
the people, or at least all sober and
thinking men look this day with the ex-
tremest concern and anxiety to the Tri-
bunals Of Justice SIS alone capable Of
opposing the eneroaehments Of power
aud the usurpations of faction, and of
the Constitution and the
great principles of English liberty. If
they prove untrue to their trust, they
become Iost to honour and were better
have died in the faithful performance
Of duty than have lived to receive the
wages and eat the bread OF the slavery
Of dishoRour.
The Constitution of the State of New
York, in force in ls43, provided that
- No member of this State shall be dis
or deprived OF any rights or
privileges secured to any citizen thereof,
unless by the law of the land, or the |
Of his peers"
The language of the original provision
N the Great Charter of King John, |
which this provision initiated, was, as
translated from the original latin: "No |
reeman shall be seized or imprisoned, OF |
or Outlswed, or in any lgGy /
destroyed laut Giiquo HlodO destru-
ltur); nor will we condemn him, nor
will we commit him to prison, excepting
BY the legal Judgment Of his peers or by
he law OF the land" In the Second |
Great Charter Of King Henry III, the
language was, "No freeman shall be
-aken or imprisoned, or dispossessed, of
bis free tenement or liberties or free Gus
.OBls, or be outlswed or exiled, or in any |
way destroyed :" and it is the same in
The Third Great Charter of King Henry /
III, and the First Of King Edward 1.
In the Constitution Of Tennessee the
orovision is: "That no freeman shall be
taken or imprisoned, or disseized of his
freehold, liberties or priUiJegeS, or out
awed or exiled, or in any manner de-
,troyed, or deprived Of his life, liberty or
property, but by the judgment Of his
peers or the law Of the land"
Commenting on the provision quoted
from Magma Charta, Lord COKE says.
Cd Instit. 46): mo man shall be dis
,eized, that is, put out of seison, or dis
possessed Of his freehold THAT Isl lands
,r livelihood, or of his liberties, or free
that is, of such franchises, and
reedomss, and free custOmes, as belong
- -, ~, l,ls fraa hirfhr{Vht unIass if !