Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1870-07-17

"a -
Even Radicals are becoming alarmed at
the usurpations of Congress. Several
Radical journals have denounced the
course pursued in the imprisonment of
Pat. Woods for an assault upon q. mem
Der of Congress in Richmond, Va. They
confess that if the House of Representa-
tiyes may arrest, go through the farce of
trying and then imprison man for an
assault on a member of their body, when
he was many miles away from the CAPT
tai and not there on official business, that
body, may with equal propriety order the
arrest of an editor or a correspondent for
criticising the course of member or the
action of the House. 1t was announced
in the early stages of the ''trial" of
Woods that he was TO be convicted and
punished as warning to those editors in
the South who were very free in their
criticisms upon carpet-bag congressman.
Radical journals now see and appreciate
the danger to the liberty of the citizen in
this assumption of power by the House
of Representatives, and they are denounc-
ing ip quite freely But Congress has
taken even a more bold and dangerous
step than this. The New York Times,
which has been extra Radical since tie
death of Mr.. Raymond, its former editor,
denounces this latest step in the direction
of Capitalization as follows: -
ssThe bill recently introduced by Mr..
Bingham, entitled ga bill to regulate the
mode of determining the ratification of
amendments to the Constitution of the
United States proposed by Congress, and
for other purposes" seems to us to be
Objectionable, in several particulars.
Like all special measures of an excep-
tionable character, and suggested by par
tisan experience, it goes too far. The
first section, which provides that it shall
be the duty of Governors of States to
to forward to the United States
Secretary of State an official certificate
of the ratification by his State of any
Constitutional Amendment proposed by
Congress, is unobjectionable, and was ev-
identity suggested by the failure of Gov.
Hoffman to notify the authorities at
Washington of the ratification of the
| Fifteenth Amendment An act compel
ing such notification would be proper,
| if it could have any binding force upon
the Governors of States, which is, per-
haps, questionable. The other provisions
of the bill are. less excusable.
Thus, the second section provides
that after a certificate of ratifca-
ton of an amendment has once been
given, it shall be unlawful for any State
officer to certify the repeal of such rati
fication, unless the repeal has first been
proposed by Congress; and moreover,
| that any such notice of repeal shall be
null and void. The third section is still
worse. 1t provides that after three
| fourths of the States shall have ratified an.
amendment, any person who shall attempt
| to repeal the ratification of any State,
| either by State law or ordinance, shall be
deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and on
conviction shall be punished by fine and
Imprisonment. These provisions seem to
Us III tueIn5tlHe6 rOUJeCIlOHdDlt, anu III
their tendency mischievous. They involve
an implied assertion of Federal right
to legislate penalty as to State officers
acting in official capacities; and fur
ther, they are an invasion by Con-
gress of a strictly judicial function. The
proposed act in effect decides plain con-
stitutional question as to the right of a.
State to withdra v its ratification of an,
amendment to the Constitution ques-
ton hitherto supposed to belong, and
properly belonging, exclusively TO the
Supreme Court. The points embraced in
the question are purely judicial, and Mr..
Bingham's proposition to dispose of all
by an act of Congress is startling and IN
wise. Equally bad is the proposal to fine
and imprison members of State Legisla-
lures and State officers for attempting to
abrogate the action of State after three
fourths of the States have Joined in the
ratification. We confess ourselves sur
prised that Mr.. Bingham should have
made himself party to measure so ex+
traordinary in its character" !