Public ledger. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1865-1893, 1869-06-30
PUBLIC LEDGER.
MI E Nj r H i 81
Wednesday Evening. june 80, 1853.
FRANCHISE AND CONVENTION.


The new Stokes organ, published at the
Banner Office in Nashville, defines the
position of the Bald Eagle party on the
question of convention and suffrage. To
have distinct idea in few words of
what Gen. Stokes and his adherents hold
on these great issues of the canvass, we
take short extract from the State Jour
nal, OF June rs, which says:
Gen. Stokes does not understand that
his plan of gradual, in contradistinctlon
to general and immediate enfrancbise-
ment, cannot be accomplished by the &C.
ton of the Legislature until the constitu-
ton is changed and the Legislature en-
dowed with the necessary power; but ne
is certainly in favor of beginning the
work on his plan at once and in earnest.
1t cannot be believed that he would favor
the plan of Gov. Brownlow indeed, he
took ground ia effect against ii in the dis
cussion at Knoxville.
Col. Stokes then is not in favor Of imme'
date enfranchisement, as he would make
some believe. But his plain is to enfran-
chise by gradual and slow measures, so
that anti-Stokes rebels may not have the
opportunity of voting until Stokes is dead
and his bald head has ceased to glisten for
gubernatorial honors. This official organ
saws the Convention should be called
after the heat and passion OF
the hour has passed. And, of course,
Colonel Stokes must be the Judge
in the future, when the turbulence
of contending human passion shall have
subsidized. The whole Stokes plan Of
enfranchisement is q humbug, and could
have only originated in the shallow brain
of such man. This Radical headlight
organ sees, as in the immediate future,
that the next Legislature will be neces-
sarily empowered TO do and undo all that
is required without convention, for it
is we'll known by those who have read
the late decision of the Supreme Court
that the franchise acts of the Leg
islature are no pert of the con-
stitution, as recognized by this sd.
perior tribunal OF the State but as we
have stated in previous article on this
subject, they are nothing more than legis-
lstive dictum, which may be repealed at
the pleasure of any other legislative body
that shall meet hereafter. We reach this
conclusion very naturally, for when this
high court has declared that the franchise
law passed and supposed to be part of
the Constitution, is not such, then we
must conclude that the entire series of
acts, for three sessions of the Legislature,
are equally unconstitutional. As to
whether part of the organic law is or
should be constitutional, we hold the
Supreme Court cannot decide upon.
Where part of the constitution or the
whole has been adopted by the people,
who alone can undo the work Of consti'
tutional law, the highest court in the State
has no jurisdiction in case which would
involve the correctness of that constitu-
ton. But the court has ample authority
to sdjudge whether or not such and such
enactments by the Legislature constitute
part of our organic law, or whether they
ore only legislative enactments, subject
to be set aside for want Of validity. AT
the meeting of the next Legislature, if
that body is composed of the proper men,
it will be seen whether they regard
these impositions as constitutional,
by which they, as the peoples representa-
tives, shall be governed. But, it might
be asked, why then favor convention
We say for the reason that not only the
question of enfranchsement needs over
hauling but the entire Constitution Of
the State.
The Radical party should not make a
noise as to what measure the people may
adopt, so as to have their constitution
altered or amended, for if these men will
but remember they can view their own
hasty action in 1865, in making the last
amendments to that instrument. What
is fair for the goose is sauce for the
gander.