Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1869-01-06
WHAT eovERsmENr HAVE WE
Sudieial Contradictions - Tsbera ~.
Farris An the Supreme Count.

Suoaeial Contradictions Tshara 90.
Farris An the Supreme Count.
To the Editors of the Union and Am,riean.
| The decision of the Court. az
pronounced by Judge Smith, in this
case, seems not to have attracted
the attention to which it is entitled
From the report of it, as published
IN the UNION AND AMERICAN of De.
cember Is, is taken the following
extract:
| For the purpose Of this opinion and
the judgment of the court upon the case
IN hand, it may be conceded that the
election in March, 1864, was actually
held, and that Isbell was then elected,
and by virtue of such election under the
proclamation, went into and held the Of
fee, and was rightfully entitled so to do.
It may also be conceded, that in the civil
war. the sovereign government Of the
nation, having by military force made
conquest aud holding firm occupation By
such force. Of the country within the
scope and boundary in which the war ex-
listed, possessed the belligerent power to
organize and enforce the government Of
the people within the country so occu-
| pied, and as a means Of so organizing and
enforcing government, may rightfully ap-
point suitable functionaries directly by
the military commanders Of the forces
occupying the country, or through the
agency of elections held by the people
themselves pursuant to the orders Of the
military officers in command. 1t must
nevertheless be held, that the Junction.
aries 50 created, hold their offices by the
military power, and no longer than the
war comes to an end and peace is re-
stored, and the regular movement Of the
municipal government Of peace, Is re>es-
tablished."
Here we have the Jaw of the cas-
truly stated and if the Judge had
adhered to it in his conclusion, all
would be right. But he next pro-
ceeds to assume that "such regular
movement of the municipal govern
ment Of the State must be held to
have been established in respect
of the Office in question here, st and
by the regular election in March,
1866, in the county of Obion."
He then refers to the government
of the State organized by Military
Governor johnson in 1861, in re
gard to which he affirms that " the
government so established, endures
for the time such occupation (by
the Federal army continues and
ends with the restoration of peace
and the resumption of the regular
municipal government of peace"
Here we have it distinctly stated
that the government established by
Gov. johnson ceased to exist upon
the restoration of peace; and, in
the former quotation, that restOra-
ton is held to have occurred at least
as early as March 1866. Then what
government have we left, under the
operation of which Farris could
claim the Office in question p? I'm
der what government are Judge
Smith and his associates authorized
to receive fat salaries for talking
nonsense and standardization on
the judicial bench ?
Whatever scurvy politician "
may deem it expedient to maintain,
the judicial mind can reach but one
conclusion from the premises laid
down by Judge Smith himself The
judgment of the court should have
been that nobody was authorized to
decide between the parties, neither
of whom, nor any one else, could
hold the disputed office.
LEGALIs.