Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1870-03-20
OUR NEW CONSTITUTIONS.
Maynard's Objections TO it Fully
Rnswered---Ths Radical Chief
ShelVed Again.
Letters from Judge W. H. Stephens
and Judge A. 0 P. Nicholson.
The TOrbstt Issues Of Bank Of Ten
nessee Notes Considered.
The Action of the Convention upon
that Head Thoroughly Sus-
tainGd.

From the Nashville Union and American
We publish below private letter
| from the Hon. A. o. p. Nicholson to
one of the editors Of the Union and
| An7erican. Although private letter,
vet IS il covers the objections sug-
| gested by Mr.. Maynard in his letter
/ 10 the editor OF the Soldiers GGzstts
/ (Radical), we take the liberty, with
| out consultation with the writer, OF
publishing it:
COLUMBIA. TENN, March 10, 1870
! DeqT SSy. l confess myself surprised
! to learn that any one who claims to be
! a lawyer can seriously insist that the
abrogation of the schedule Of 1853 re-
! atfirms, re-enacts or leaves in force the
! ordinance of secession, the military
/ league, and repeals the prohibition
against the Legislature paying the
/ s.. .OO0, ,OOO of Confederate bonds, and
! the Torbett issue o. the Bank Of Ten
/ uesse. / write hastily.
You will observe that the first sec
I ton of article II reads as follows:
Gan laws and ordinances now in
( fyrce and use in this State, not i1cOn-
l sistant with this constitution, shall
continue in force and use, until they
/ shall exnire. or be altered or repealed
/ nv the Legislature. But ordinances
/ contained in any former constitution
or schedule thereto, are hereby abro-
/ gated"
The ordinance OF secession is not in
! force and use in this State for three
I conclusive reasons:
1. Because it was rendered null and
void bv the failure of the Confederate
! States to form a permanent independ-
/ eut government--the result Of the
civil war decided all secession Ordi-
! nances to be absolute nullities.
/ , Because the secession ordinance
/ Is inconsistent with the constitution
/ recommended by the late Convention.
| If that constitution is adopted by the
/ naopIe the secession ordinance Is
! thereby declared TO be null and void,
| because this constitution Is framed for
/ Tennessee as a State of the United
States ana not State OF the Confede-
/ rate States. The lth section Of Article
s / declares that an oath to support the
/ Constitution of the United States is
the only test TO be required as a quail
! fiication for Office. And Article y
/ section l, provides that every officer
/ under this constitution shall take an
/ oath to support the Constitution OF the
United States. LlhrOughOut the new
constitution the authority OF the
L 7ited States Is recognized as para
mo unit, and Tennessee Is declared TO
he State Of the United States-aiI
which b, by necessary implication, re-
Dudia ties and abrOgateS the secession
Ordina nee.
r The abrOgatiOn Of all ordinances
contained in any former Constitution
or schedule thereto, 50 far from reaf-
| firning or re-enacting the secession
ordinance. actually and expressly ab-
rogates that ordinance. The secession
| ordinance was adopted by the Legis-
/ lsture on the 9th of May, 1861. Be
| sides proposing TO take Tennessee out
/ of the Federal Union, that ordinance
/ also proposed to anRul and abr0gate
/ crrtain specified clauses Of the Consti-
/ tuition of Tennessee, as they then eX-
! isted, leaving the Constitution OF Ten
nessee thus altered ana amended 70
/ remain as the organic law OF the
! State. But the Legislature did not
/ assume to have power 20 ADOPT the
/ secession ordinance and to adopt an
/ amended Constitution without the
sanction and ratification OF the peo-
Die Of the State. Hence IL vas
I Uroposed by the Legislature that
! the people OF the State, should,
on the 9th of June, 1861,
/ either ratify o. reject the ConsLl-
! tuition as proposed to be amended,
containing as part thereof the ordl-
/ nance of secession. The people dld
! ratilv the constitution so amended, to-
oether with the secession ordinance
/ contained therein. When, therefore,
/ the late Convention declared that ali
/ ordinances contained in any former
/ constitution. or schedule thereto,
! should be abrogsted, they declared
! expressly, and intended TO declare,
that the secession ordinance, as Well
as the schedule to the constitution OF
| 1865. should be annulled. 1t was the
opinion of the Judiciary Committee
(aud l think they were unanimous
that the necessary legal effect OF adopt
: inc the new constitution would be the
abrOgation Of all ordinances and sched-
ules of former constitutions, without
any such express declaration, but, TO
avoid any misconstructiOn or doubt on
this subject, il was deemed best 10 pro-
! ]
contained in any former constitution
or schedule should be abrogated.
You will bear in mind that the
official proclamation OF the adoption
; of tine amendments and schedule OF
the constitution ia 1868, took place on
the 25th OF February, 1850, While the
war was being waged, and While the
secession ordinance was claimed a.
> being in force and use. But when the
{ / war ceased and it was being authOri'
! tatfyelv decided that Tennessee had
3 | never been out Of the Union, il was al
: / the same time and by the same adludi
= cation determined, that the secession
ordinance was null and void, Gb tait0
It was therefore unnecessary for tht
/ new constitution to have contained
any express abrOgation of an ordI
4 nance not in force or use-but out o
/ abundant caltiOn, and to avoid jus
4 such objections as seem to be made
the express abrOgatiOn was inserted
AS to the military league it is only
necessary to say that it died out Ions
. before the war closed. 1t was upon il
7 face only a temporary meaSure-tC
; Lost until the State of Tennessee should
Z he admitted into the Southern Con
: federacv. This took place in August
j 1861. mona which time the military
Iae0ue ceased to be in force or use
= The idea that q mere tempOrar,
u measure. that expired by its owl
: terms nearly nine years ago, was IN
y tended to be- or could be reatirmed o
: re-enacted by a provision for the abro
= cation of the schedule Of 1863, seem
: Scarcely TO require argument to dis5pel
AS to the prohibition in the sched
: ME of 1865 against the payment OF Cd
u Cohfederate bonds or the payment G
u the Toybett issue, it is only necessar
u fo say that the Judiciary CommItte
I. recognized The obligatory force OF Tn
y Fourteenth Amendment Of the Con
stitution of the United States, W1lc
: prohibits any State from assuming O
- isvipg any debt or obligation incul
al in aid of insurrectiOn or rebellion
agsinst the United States. The pay
6ent Of orr Confederate bonds and
he Torbett issue $50 far as IL was l.
, s,;4d in All of the rebelli0nl BEN
- inns Ddsidyely and empnatIally pr,'
hibjted bv the supreme law ol y
land the Judiciary Committee eoui
see no sense in repeating that promo
Il -. IN the Constitution OF the olat,
Z iion Teno paab.e to conceive how, py q
: rorating @ the schedule OF ;,aS3,,, isS?, =
= l0d coI,jd Te-aflrm or give vitality vitality; !
- q bonds or debts which the ConstllTlllq @ ~
9 ~ 'tb tbe United States declares to be
, % IeoaI and neverto be assumed or pa
. by any Of ahe States.
y have STltten at much more lengi
. than / should bave done II did n
NOW how industriously and unseru
uIousIy the opponents OF ths new CO..
stitntion are seeking for pTeteXtss
- - -, = ;nauence the public min