Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1871-12-10

The Washington correspondents Of the
Cincinnati Gazette states that the Commit
tee on Elections viii report on Monday in
favor Of Clark and Glddings, Radicals in
the Texas contested elestion cases. The
people of Texas, at the late election, chose
four Democrats to Congress. The Cover
nor, who is q Radical carpet Dagger, DELHI
erately threw out number OF counties and
and gave the certificates of election to one
Democrat and three Radicals. One of the
latter had the honor and the decency to de-
cline to receive it, on the ground that his
opponent, and not himself, was
elected. 1t seems that the
high-handed and rascally conduct of the
Governor is to be sustained by the Commit
tee ON Elections,and win also most likely be
by the Radical majority in the House of
Representatives. When such unblushing
rascality as this is not only winlzed at but
approved by the Radical majority in the
House of Representatives, what is the use
of putting the people of Texas to the
trouble of holding an election. But is there
no remedy for the outrage which the Gov
ernor of Texas has committed upon the
freedom of ELECTIONS and the rights of
yoters2 1t is very certain that if the throw
ing out and refusing to count the votes of
whole counties in order to
elect political . favorite had
been done by Democratic Governor, the
members he would thus s'elect' would not
only not be admitted, but he would be
punished for the outrage upon the legally
qualified voters. of such counties. The en-
forcement act would be made 10 do this
work in the event Democratic Governor
should be guilty as the carpet-bag Governor
of Texas has been. 1t may not have been
the intention of the authors of that act to
compel Radicals to perform their official
duties honestly and impartially, but never
theless it will cut both ways. The fourth
section OF that act provides
THAT if any person by force, q
or other unlawful means, shall hinder, de-
lay, prevent, or obstruct, or shall combine
and confederate with others to hinder, de-
lay, prevent or obstruct, any citizen from
doing any act required to be done to qualify
him to vote, or from UOtiag at dry election
aforesaid, such person shall for every such
offepse forfeit and pay the sum of five hun
dred dollars to the person aggrieved thereby,
| to be recovered by an action on the case,
with full costs and such allowance for coun-
sci fees as the Court shall deem Just, and
shall also for every such offense be guilty
| Of misdemeanor, and shall, on conviction
| thereof, be fined not less than five hundred
| dollars, or be imprisoned not less than one
month and not more than one year, or
| both, at the discretion of the Court"
This section seems to fit the case. 1t
would certainly do so if Gov. Davis were a
Democrat. He has by ''force" and ''other
unlawful means"-for there is no law OF
Texas which authorizes him to revise the
returns Of an election-deprived thousands
of legally qualified citizens from voting by
! throwing out their votes. This enforce
ment act applied TO the election held fol-
Congressman in Texas, and if fair elee-
/ ton could not be held in any county OF
counties, if threats were made by any per-
| sons and voters were kept away from the
| polls by intimidation, this act makes ample
provision for their arrest and
punishment. Nothing of this kind was at.
tempted by the authorities of Texas, and
when the Radical candidates were defeated
the Governor steps in and by 'force" and
''Other unlawful means" DISTINGUISHES the
citizens Of whole counties in order t
change the result of the election. Somt
citizen thus deprived of his right to vote
the right to have his vote counted-ough
to test this matter. The people of TIN
South have too long submitted to thest
usupations. If the law is made for any
| thing, it is to punish such outrages as tina
by which qualified voters are not allowed t,
have their votes counted.