Bristol news. [volume] (Bristol, Va. & Tenn.) 1867-189?, 1872-03-08

here as existed
NOWHERE ELSE UPON THE AMERICAN
CONTINENT.
1t was because / did find that state of
things so existing that / made the re-
mark did, Ifthose facts did not ex
ist,' then was guilty of slapder. If
they did exist, and if told the truth
to the House, that Tennessee had been
by misrule a, PandemOniums for four
years after the war closed, then was
not guilty of any slander. / stand
either as willful and malicious libel
er, or stand confirmed by the facts as
they may be shown.
x. -
said that Tennessee had been in
that deplorable condition, and L say
so now. / turn to The history of that
State, and will refer to and ask leave
TO print a carefully pared article Civ
ing its political status from the time of
the Inauguration of its government up
to 1868, wherein it is shown that the
men who took control of its Legisla-
ture i'm the spring of 1865 passed Sc
ries of acts unparalleled in American
history. Constituting themselves and
Governor BrownlOw masters of the sit
uation, although as body "
THEY DID NOT REPRESENT ONE
TENTH OF THE PEOPLE,
and were neither elected nor appointed
under any of the forms of law. they
passed the old sedition law almost in
the very words of the act of 1898, ma
king it highly penal offense to speak
disrespectfully of the powers then con-
trolling the Government. Emerson
EIdridgc was tried before a military
commission because he had dared to
do So Outlawry of the person, out
IawTy of speech, OF the press, Outlawry
OF the franchise, outlawTy yOfeverything
hat did not bow to the orders and
succumb to the mandates of the men
then in power was the order of the
day. -. -..-....
The first thing, as / have said, was
the sedItiOn law, which | hold in my
hand and will have incorporated with
my remarks in the Globe in order to
prove the facts. That sedition law,
passed on the Sd day of June. 1865,
provided that whoever should be gull
ty of uttering seditious words or
speeches, spreading false news, writing
or dispensing malicious libels against
the State or Government, &c. shall be
guilty of nisdemeanOr, and, If con-
victed, shall be forever held unworthy
of holding any officer ofprofit or trust.
Then followed in few days the law
limiting the franchise. l wish gem
tlemen to know that l am now refer
ring to official documents, among 9TH
ers to the statutes of Tennessee and
the records in the case of Thomas vs..
Arnoll, Miscellaneous Documents,
Thirty-ninth Congress, No. ~, and
TO the case of Sheat1e VS.. .Tillman Mis-
celldneous Documents, No. So, Sec
ond Session of the Forty-hrst Con-
gress), to sustain all | say.
After the seditiOn law was passed
the act limiting the franchise followed,
wherein every man who had been III
any shape or form connected with the
rebellion, or rather all they said has
been, was
DISFRANCHISED BY THE SELF-CON
sTITUTED GOVERNOR AND LEGISLA>
TURE.
Section three ofthe act provides that
ali other persons except those mention
ed in section one of this act are hereby
aud henceforth excluded and denied
the exercise of the privilege of the
elective franchise under this act for
the term of five years from and after
its passage. The first section having
limited the right to a very limited
number, and the second having made
a sweeping exclusion of participants
in the rebellion. That act.
DIsFRANCHIsED SEVENTY THOUSAND
MEN.
The County Clerks were appointed
registrars, and they registered men
who were opposed TO the then ruling
dynasty which soon became extreme
lv odious. The result was that, when
they saw that power was departing
from them, the Legislature, by an act
passed MAY 3, 1866. set aside the whole
registration that had been made, and
put the power of appointing registrars
into the hands of the Governor.
This law annulled and declared void
all the certificates issued under the
firstlaw and thus disfranchised every
man in the State, Notwithstanding
they had abquired a right under the
law of The Legislature TO vote-a right
that is regarded in England as sacred
as the right TO property. Under this
law the Governor appointed the COM
missioners of regestration, and eXper-
ience has shown that he selected for
this position men who generally had
MORE REGARD FOR MAKING RADICAL
VOTERS,
than to fairly execute the law. 1t
soon became evident, however, that
even under this law, administered as
il was in the Interest of the Radical
party and not of the people, the Rad
icals could not retain the power they
had so outrageously abused, and a
new and more stringent and sweeping
disfranchisement became party ne
cessitv. This resulted in the passage
of the franchise law of February %
1867, which again disfranchised every
man in the State, and under WElch
large numbers of men who had certifi-
! Gates could not be again registered
But Radicalism did not stop here
| Fe9riug that even under this law they
could not geta majority Of the white
voters of the State TO sanction their
| outrageous unsurpations, the Radicals
1 enfranchised the negroes and, lest
| this should not serve the purposes OF
| the Brownlow dynasty, they passed a
! Law authorizing the Governor TO set
aside the registration of any county,
and then appoint a more plant tool to
! do -.--5f. -.s.f-
THE DIRTY WORK MARKED OUT FOR
las sfl u gifass HIN. ~ Ee
1t was apparent that the first laws
would not accomplish the purposes IN
tended that the Governor. ofhis own
motion, ,disfranchised twenty-eight 81