Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1869-05-30
TELEGRAPHIC.
WAS GTO N.
MEMORIAL SERVICES.
Execution at Richmond.
ExtensEe Indian DepredatiOns.
Fire at the Sc. Louis Type
Foundry.
The Races at Cincinnati.
Execution at Richmond.
ExtensGe Indian DepredatiOns'
The Races at Cincinnati.
THE FRANCHISE DECISION.
The Court Unanimous.

Special to the Union and American.
BROWNSVILLE, Tenn, May % jim
The opinion pronouncing the decision OF
the Supreme Court 10 the case OF the State
us. Staten, was delivered by Judge Smith
this morning, Judges SbaCkelford and
Andrews coDcurfiBg. @ 1-s'.
The case involved the question whether
the Governor Of Tennessee has the power
10 set aside registrations duly made under
the various registration acts, and whether
the Legislature had the power, under the
constitution, to confer such authority upon
the Cove nor, which ia assumed to have
been done by act Of February &c, 1865.
Staten was indicted in Gibson county
for voting auder the certificate from q
registration declared void by Brownlow,
in February, 1868 His counsel demurred
TO the Indictment, aud alleged,
First, That he was qualified voter
Secondly, That the Governor had no
power 10 snnul 5 registration duly made,
and divest citizen Of the franchise
II WAS argued for the State that by sec
tion OF an act March 8, 1867, the
:. Legislature had empowered the Governor,
for fraud and irregulsrity, 10 SET aside a
registration; and that by special act of
February 26, 1868, his annuImeutS Of
registrations had been legalized and rati-
fed
Judge Rogers Of the Gibson Court sus-
tanned the demurrer, aud from this rul
the Attorney General appealed TO the
Supreme Court
The opinion sustains the Circuit Judge,
aud holds.
First.
That Commissioners of Registration
are judges under the Franchise law Of The
rlght of the citizen applying for certifi-
cate; that the issuance ef certificate WAS
a final adjudication and vested HIM with |
the right; that the Legislature did not it,
self possess, and could not confer on the
Governor the power 10 annul this sdjudi-
cation by voiding the whole or sny part Of
the registration; and that all laws assuming |
60 confer it were unconstitutional and of no |
force. Consequently, that the registrations |
under the various franchise acts of june |
5, 1865, of May g. 1866, and Of February |
Is, 1867, are unimpsired by subsequent
Legislation and proclamstions, and certif-
Gates under them are in full effect.
Secondly,
That the right of suffrage once deter
mined under The 9th schedule of the
amended constitution and the laws in pur-
suabce, and vested in the citizen by the
proper officer Of the registration law, could
not be diverted except by court of com.
petent jurisdiction GU charge of crime as
a disqualification, against which he could
enter defense.
Argument was made by counsel for |
Staten, to show that all franchise laws
subsequent to June 1865, we're uncoustitu-
tional. The court, however, announced
that their decision should be strictly con-
lined TO the points 10 Staten's case, and the
principles governing it, and that as no
question of the constitutiouality of the I
acts Of 1866 apd 1867 properly came
before It, no opinion would be announced.