The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1869-09-14
AN EXAMPLE IN TENNESSEE.

AN EAAMHDE In IENNEOOEE,
From the NJ Y. World.
From the less one learns the greater. 1t
seems that in Tennessee they have a state of
things somewhat resembling that which
afflicts the community at large, to vita set
of bogus Legislators who owe the right to hold
their Office not to any provision in the Con-
stituton, but to legislation 'outside of the
Constitution" Thus there are eight men,
bers of the Tennessee House who are men,
bers not by provision for their election in
the State Constitution, but by virtue of
a schedule tackled to said Constitution
at the time of its institution in 1866.
Now, as is well known, the schedule to
q constitution is not a part of the constitu-
ton, but merely ministerial like the act of
legislation ordering the assemblage of the
convention which frames the Constitution,
and so soon as the fundamental law is got in
working order the scbed1Ie becomes, .fUActuS
obiciO, null, imperative, and void. Not to go
into detail of cases where it has been en-
phstically decided that such is the sole force
of a constitution SchedltIe, we need but refer
to the latest instance on the subject-the
declaration to wit, of Mr.. Grant, in his pro-
clamation of 10th July, 1869, submitting the
reconstructed Constitution of Mississippi to
the vote, that which is known as the schedule
thereto, sections to 10 inclusive, is not to
be held or considered as any part of said con-
stitution
Such being the status of a schedule to a
State constitution, it follows that the Ten
nessee schedule of 1865 is now legally inope-
rative, and has been since the instrument to
which it was temporarily ancillary went into
operation. By consequence, the election
from 1866 to 1869 of the eight extra members
allowed in 1866 by this schedule has been
constantly illegal; and against a repetition of
this illegality in the future and to meet its
10 in
Tennessee to provide by simply following out
the law as hereinbefore indicated on the sub
iect of the validity and obligation of
schedules Of course, any such action will
lead to an immense amount of bowling and
roaring in the radical camp, it so happening
that the present eight extra members elect
are all from one locality-East Tennessee
and trooly loil. To this it is sufficient to
answer that all the members allowed by the
| constitution of Tennessee, irrespective of
| locality or politics, will be undisturbed, only
| those being denied seats who can trace their
| claim to no better authority than schedule
| exhausting its operation in 1865.
All this, no doubt, seems dry-perhaps is;
| and yet in it one finds clue to the safe solu-
ton of that greater difficulty which besets the
| country at large at the hands of bogus Repre-
| sentatives in the House and surreptitious
| Senators in the Senate. None of these wor-
| thies owe their seats to the Constitution, but
| to legislation outside of the Constitution
and directly terminable in its very terms.
| This legislation is reconstruction. Recon-
| struction is in one original act and many
| supplements. The ground of the original
| act-and, par consequence, of all based
| thereon-is that no legal State Governments
or adequate protection for life or property
| exist in certain States, and that it is ''neces-
sary that peace and good order be enforced
in said States until loyal and republican
| State Governments be established therein;
therefore, be it enacted, etc. Here the act
is expressly limited to a certain date, or, in
other words, is not, like a constitution, tc
remain unchanged except by the authority
creating, but to carry within itself the time
and date of its ceasing to be of any effect
| The moment that Congress admits the South
ern States, that moment the reconstruction
schedule accomplishes itself, and the members
from the Southern States have no right tt
seats under said schedule, but such right only
as they may deduce from the Federal Consti
tuition itself This, of course is simply ne
right at all, and the House may turn them ou
as legally as the eight provisional member,
may be excluded in the case of Tennessee
The right in the premises being thus clear, il
remains that there be the power sufficient tC
its exercise. This, as things go, will not b'
long lacking, and is matter that can b'
safely left to itself, our present object beinl
attained in showing how the indubitabl,
legality of the contemplated procedure il
Tennessee points the way to a like clearnes
Of law whereby the genuine constituencies o
this country may slough off the surreptitiou
delegations now equally potent with them.