Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1869-07-13

Ridley could not claim the right
o register as a voter, unless he
Fought himself within theprovisions
# the act of May 3, 1866. We think
he act is binding and valid, and the
aw of the State" That is all that
,he court decides in the Ridley
Sherbrooke case touching the fran
ehisen law--that it is binding and
valid, as o law of the State; that
the Legislature "ehanged article a,
section 1, of the constitutions" by
the enactment of law determining
and limiting the elective franchise,
the constitutional validity" OF
which the court was called upon to
determine, and did determine to be
"binding and valid, and the law Of
the State No where does the
court treat the franchise law
as an amendment of the con-
stitution or a part of the eonsti!
tuition, but as an act Of the Legis7
lature, just as they would treat any
other act of the Legisture, the
constitutional validity of which
they were invoked to determine,
with this single exception, that the
Legislature was specially author
lied to pass a law determining "the
qualifications of voters and the
limitation of the elective fran
chise." The court in its recent de-
cision at Brownsville, treats the
franchise acts as acts of the Legis-
lature passed under special grant
of power, but not as an amend
ment of the constitution or a
part of that instrument. What
then makes the franchise law a
part of the constitution? The
authority delegated by the
convention and ratified by
such of the people as chose to
vote in the I'D of February, 1865,
was that "the qualifications ofvoters
and the limitation of the elective
franchise may be determined by
the General Assembly which shall
first assemble under the amended
constitution. What did the con-
yention by this delegation of power,
and what did they expect the Legis-
lature to do under it 2 Let us see.
On the third day of the session Of
the convention of January, 1868,
Judge Sam. Milligan, the chairman
of the committee on business, re-
ported an amendment to the consti.
tuition of the State, the fourth sec,
ton of which reads as follows:
Sec. 4. All free white male persons
81 years of ago, citizens of the United
States and of the State and of the county
where he offers to vote for six months
next preceding the day of election, and
all who have voluntarily borne arms in
the service Of the United States, the
same being citizens of Tennessee, shall
exercise the right of suffre Provided
That no person shall be dlss ualified from
voting in any election on account of color,
who shall be by the laws of this State
q competent witness in a court of justice
against a white man: Provided, further,
That all civil, judicial and other officers
Of the State Of Tennessee and of the so
called Confederate States, who know
ingly and willingly acted in HOSTILE
ty to the government OF the United
States and in concert with those
engaged in armed rebellion against
it, by giving them aid and comfort, OF by
passing or executing laws, or otherwise,
shall be forever DISTINGUISHED, and shall
never hold any Office Of honor, profit or
trust in this State; yet nothing herein
shall be so construed as to disfra3chise
or effect those judicial or other officers OF
the State who can establish their loyalty
beyond all doubt. Provided, further,
That all officers in the ProVls-
ional Army Of Tennessee or in
the armies of the so-called
Confederate States above the grade of
Lieutenant Colonel, shall be forever dis
franchised and debsrred the privilege of
holding any Office Of honor, trust or profit
in the State of Tennessee: Provided fur
Their, That the Legislature may have
power to re-enfraachise such persons,
well disposed toward the government OF
the United States, as in their judgment
may seem to them proper"
The committee here proposed to
fix the right Of suffrage definitely,
and to make it a part of the consti-
luton of the State. This PROPOSE
ton met with very serious opposi-
ton, and on the fifth day, Jan. 13,
1865, J the committee submitted a
revised report, eliminating the dis
franchising feature, which it was
originally proposed to insert in the
constitution Of the State, and make
a part of that instrument, and the
ninth section of the schedule as it
now stands was substituted. In
submitting this report, Judge Mil
ligGn said: ..
We have attempted to provide that
the elective franchise for present pur-
poses, shall be confined to loyal men.
Then we throw open to the Legislature
the power to fix the elective franchise in
future. The people can then open or
close the door, as circumstances may re-
quire. We don't want Rebels to vote
down changes of the constitution or elect
the Legislature"
After endeavoring to incorporate
the DISTINGUISHING feature into the
constitution, the committee ADAM
doned the project because Of the
very decided opposition it met
with, and empowered the Legisla-
ture "to fix the elective franchise"
and "the people can then open or
close the door as circumstances
may require" This is precisely
Stokes idea of having the Legis-
lature empowered to remove the
disabilities of the DISTINGUISHED,