Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1869-06-03

livery. The coats OF une men SER
wants are to be Of lavender coler,
with white buttons, upon which is
the Michigan coat of arms, except
that the stays support the letter G,
which is of red enamel, with gold
edge. The female servants wear
large beltbuckles, bearing the same
design as that upon the buttons.
The hats of the men arc black, with
a wide purple band and large sill
YER eoekade, in the center OF which
is one of the buttons aforesaid" lsd
the DELIUAox OF JgDGEs or THE
80 sUPREME COURr Ggiz5i, 9
| There is some disposition to patlr
ate the delay of the Supreme
Court in deciding the case Of the
State against Staten, on the ground !
that it was o matter of delicaey
with the Judges, two of them being
candidates for election to the posi-
tions they held. We are quite will
ling to accord to the judges every
thing that they should properly
claim on the score of delieacy.
There is not a doubt that they felt
their motives might be impugned
if they had rendered an earlier de.
eision. But men placed in the Pc,
sition they were must necessarily
| lay aside such scruples when the
| rights of thousands of good and
tue citizens. are at stake. The
Judges knew before the assembling
| Of the court that this case would
be pressed for adjudication, with
special reference to the pending
judicial election. An effort had
been made to have the
case decided at the term held
II =
La year ago, and it was a
matter of discussion among the
| people and in the newspapers for
months before the meeting of the
| court at the present term, that
this should be among the first cases
taken up and decided by the court.
There were thousands of citizens
all over the State who had been
Illegally deprived of their rights
under the constitution, and they
appealed to this highest judicial
tribunal in the State for redress.
The decision of the court shows
that a great wrong had been perpe-
trated upon them, and this wrong
should have been righted at the
earliest possible moment. But it is
insisted that two of the Judges
were candidates for election
by the people, and they felt
a delicacy in rendering decision
which might be charged to their
account as having been done to ms
fluenee the result of the election
favorable to themselves. 1T that
be the reason which restrained their
| action, what must be the feeling OF
| the only one Of the Judges who was
elected, when he reflects that his
election was secured through the
failure of the court to act? There
is scarcely a doubt if the decision
of the court had been rendered on
the 22d ult., as it was originally
announced it would be, that Judge
Andrews would have been beaten
by considerable majority. That
is what this delicacy on the
part of the Judges has brought
about, whether intentional OF
not. But aside from this, the
decision shows that thousands Of
| citizens of the State had been
deprived of the highest right
of citizenship by the usurpa-
ton of the Governor, and
should the Supreme Court have
been deferred by any scruples of
delicaey from restoring to these
citizens their rights of franchise? Ut
is, to say the least, q strange doc
trine that wrong should be perpe-
trated simply because the Judges,
being candidates for election by the
people, had scruples of delicacJ
about acting before the election.