The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1869-07-07
A. II. STEPHENS.

VICe-TTGNTUCUT
Confederaoy-Status of the Expelled Negro
Mcmbcrs ,ofthe Georgia lsegisluture.
lnaietter written from Crawfordville Ga, June
~, 10 General w. A. Wright editor OF the Chronicle
and Seatinel, Augusta, Ca, Alexander IL. Stephens
bRxR sm;-Your letter of the 2ist inst was duly
received, but it found me in worse condition, ply
sically, than / have been for several weeks This,
with other pressing correspondence, has prevented
me from giving you my opinion upon the question
rsoat now he brief Indeed there is no necessity
for any extended views. The argument is already
exhausted by you, your neighbOr of the COnstitp-
tonakt the Constitution at Atlanta the letter of
judge Fleming, and the communication Of Tuly in
yEF paper, some days ago, 20 say nothing OF the
lN0rs and productions Of others. But in what
bN ieve the decision of the Supreme Court on the
question of negro eligibility to oice in this State TO
be in accordance with the law and constitution
which were their guide. Had been on the bench
should have come to the same conclusion under the
same law and constitution, that n majority of the
court did though not exactly by the same process OF
reasoning pursued by these learned judges The
result OF my Judgment, however, would have been
thought the two houses of our General Assembly
committed on error in deciding that those members
who had been elected and returned to theif respec
tive bodies with eighth or more of African blood
were thereby disqualified to hold seats In the Legs-
atufe under the laws and Constitution Of the State
as they now stand But it question which they
alone-each House for itself-had the right and
power under the Constitution to adjudfJate and de
teilnine. BY the Constitution of the State, each
house is made the sole Judge to decide upon cleo
ton re- aurns and qualifications of its members This
question OF eligibility qualification to hold office
on the part of this class of persons who elevated
to the stoias of citizenship by the present Consttu
ton of the State, knew was one not free from
doubt one on which able and true men might and
did drer Therefore while thought the decision
was erroneous [ also thought that all charges
against these legislative bodies upon the grounds
thatiheir Judgment had been from captious and
factious motives were altogether unjust.
This nov clearly appears from the able dlssentent
opinion OF Judge Warner an eminent jurlst of the
Republican party, who still maintains, after all the
discussions since had that the decision Of the House
vas right. Men on both Sides therefore, should
20, ,nu pIn ful1n " nfnn nPt tbn
motives of men in the discharge of public duties.
But your question to me now is, What effect this
decision Of the Supreme Court, now rendered, can
have upon the cases Of those members who were
decided by the respective houses OF the Legislature
not to be qualified TO hold seats therein viii it be
to reseat these excluded members, or are they
legally entitled to be reseated thereby TO this
there can be but one legal and judicial inH answer; M
the only tribunal having constitutional jurisdiction
over them, and having been decided, they cannot be
again opened even by the houses who decided them.
Their Judgment, after being finally rendered, cannot
be again taken up or reversed by themselves, any
more than the Supreme Court itself can go
back 10 the docket Of last session and reverse
any Of its own judgments then rendered to the
unsettng of the rights of the parties therein adudi-
Gated. Much less can this judgment OF the Supreme
Court legally affect in any way The action of the two
houses in tile premises. 1t can have no binding or
obligatory effect whatever upon the past or future
action of the houses Of the General Assembly upon
the question involved, for by the Constitution, as
stated above each house is the sole and exclusive
Judge of this question far as membership Of the
resnectiye bodes is concerned for all time co come
or SO long as the Constitution shall remain as it is
that point. No change 1t is presumed Will ever b'
made in it in this particular Tor 1t IS In strict con
forrnty with that universal law in all representative
governments whenever and wherever established
either civil or ecclesiastical, by which the sole powe
to decide absolutely upon the qualifications of thu
members OF the legislative bodies is and has been
without exception, believe, vested in those bodies
themselves. From their decision there Is no appea
to any other tribunal; and from the very nature
the subject there cannoG properly be-. This power
like all other delegated powers has often been very
grossly abused in this as well in other countries
It has been grossly abused repeatedly, perhaps by
one house the other Of the Legislature, In every
State of the Union, as it has unquestionaby Otter
been most grossly abused by Congress- It's gross
abuses in the British Parliament are well known by
students OF history. Still this arrangement in the
distribution of the powers OF government is the only
one or the best one, yet discovered for keeping
separate distinct and pereptly Independent OF eacl
other the three great departments, to Wlt:-tne EX
ecutye Judiciary ana eg.aMVe a. e doS as 70 t
stamped with the wisdom of our ancestors after th'
experience of centuries.
and qualifications OF the members of each house
which is vested in it by the Constitution Is however
by no means an unlimited power. Because tnere Il
no appeal from its exercise, it by no means justide
q caprlcious or illegal decision under it. 1t is
y judicial powers are. Each house is constituted
! Judge for the purpose; this court SO constituted
TO hear and decide both the law and the facts in eac
Il case as it comes before them. First to hear tn
facts and then apply the law to them; In formin
their Judgment upon the law and the facts, they ar
to be governed by the same general principles whic
govern all other courts in arriving at truth, rlgh
case stand as the decisions OF all other courts fror
which no appeal or writ Of error lies. This is tn
law of the case.
But how far members Of the Legislature Nigh
very properly be Influenced lin deciding doubtful
questions of law involved in the legal qualification
Of those elected and returned TO the respective house
by the Judgment Of the highest tribunal in the Stat
upon the questions In all other offices of tt
State, is very different question. My opinion
that In ali doubtful questions, or where their ow
convictions are not both clear and strong, the
should be influenced but not otherwise. The tw
houses of General Assembly, at the last session
/ have been informed, concurred in resol'
ton submitting this question, as one on whic
they had doubts, to the Supreme Court wit
q pledge to conform to the decision of th
Court in their action. How this is / do not know
but, my information is correct it certainly relieve
them OF all imputatlon OF improper or factious m
tves in their first action The effect OF the decisiC
now rendered under that resolution would be a r
quirement of them, in all future like cases whiC
may come before them, to decide in accordance wi
the principles established by the judgment of Il
81 Supreme Court. This is all the fulflment of u
pledge that they can legally and constitutional
render. This, think the same Judges who ma
this decision would, If Inquired Of pronounce to be
= right view of the subject
Yours, most respectfully
ALEXANDER II. STEPHENS