Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1872-03-26


sand majority. This was the honest an'
well considered conviction on the par
Of every member be believed, In Dotl
Houses from West Tennessee, and he pro
fessed to be somewhat posted in regard (
the political status of the counties consul
tuting the district proposed, nearly, u no
quite as well as the Senator from Shelby
/ himself. If be (AIr. POrter) considered /
the least doubtful. he would cheerfully VOTE
! for a change. But this was most certainly
! not the case, This statement is borne out
/ by the leading editorials in both the leading
| papers of that district, the politics Of which
papers were in full accord with his own.
| He was willing to take them as Democratic
authority, and to be governed By them in
this matter. True, the Senator from Shell
by Thought otherwise, and had read them
out of the party. But still this
was not suficient to govern bis action,
and with proper regard, begged leave to
differ most materially from the honorable
gentleman. There was another reason
Wbv he could not vote for The amendment,
and that was, he was credibly informed the
people of Men airy county were almost unan-
imously opposed to remaining in the Mem
phis district, but wish to constitute apart OF
the river district. Everything being equal, he
would let the wishes of this people govern
his action in this matter. He would there
fore be compelled to vote against this
amendment without in any way commit
ting himself to the support of the other
provisions of the bill.
Mr.. Brandon submitted figures to show
thatthe amendment he had offered would
make the three districts in the West more
equal. He commended that the opposition
came from West Tennessee members be-
cause they wished to deprive Middle Ten
nessee of a representative. In fact they had
openly admitted it since the bill had come
before the Assembly.
Mr.. Tharpe said the bill did not originate
in West Tennessee. 1t had come from
Middle Tennessee member. 1t was en-
phaticaIly Middle Tennessee bill,
but Western representatives with but
one exception had come forward
and sacrificed their personal
interests. Rising superior to their own indi-
vidual wishes they had agreed to accept this
bill. To make change in one district now
would necessitate change throughout the
State. To detach McNairy from the river
district would reduce it below the Congress
sional ratio, and to attach it to the ninth
district would swell it above that ratio.
BE therefore hoped the bill would be pass
ed without amendment.
Mr.. Ridley said if he were framing the bill
he could draw up one to suit certain districts
better than the one now before the House.
He did not regard it as perfect and he was
far from thinking that il could not be i'm
proved. He was not committed to any one
apportionment of counties into districts,
and he was disposed to favor any amend
ment which would improve the bill. He
would vote for the amendment.
The amendment was rejected on the fol-
lowing division: Ayes, Messrs. Brandon,
Cooper, DuBose, Halves, Merritt, Ridley,
and Young.
Noes; Messrs. Bugg, Clarke, Coulter,
Earnest, Patterson, Pope, Porter, Tharpe,
Tolley, Warren, Windle, and Speaker
Vaughn-l2.
Mr.. Merritt moved to amend by transfer
ring DeKalb county from Davidson to the
fourth district. The change, be said,would
still leave the Davidson district 100000.
Mr.. Clarke opposed the amendment.
The amendment was rejected on the
following division:
Ayes-Messrs. Brandon, Cooper, DuBose,
Merritt, Porter, Ridley, Tolley, and Windle,
9.
Noes-Messrs. Bugg, Clarke, Coulter,
Earnest, Greene, Hughes, Patterson, Pope,
Tharpe, Warren, Young and Speaker
Vaughn-12.
Mr.. Mcconnell offered the following:
Amend by detaching Jefferson county from
the second and adding the same to the first
Al Iyvt nlyinV TTviOn aNnptH from
che first and attaching the same to the Sc
cond district. LOst-ayes s; noes u.
Mr.. Gibson said be cared nothing individu-
ally about the amendment which had Just
been voted down. But the question was, what
had they assembled to do? Was it not to
carry out a law Of Congress requiring the
States to. be redistricted in a certain way.
When Congress said thing it meant it,
and with an army and navy at its back
would see that its will was executed. He
ridiculed the idea of the puny Legislature
of Tennessee crushing the Republican
party-that party which was the nation
and owned the President, the Senate, the
House of Representatives, thTee-fOurths Of
the States and the army and navy. There
would be free election in this State. With
the Ku-Klux Klans driven to their dens or
bayOneted in their tracks, and the ballots
counted by honest men there would be
free election and there would be a Republi-
can victory in spite of the gerrymandering
of this Legislature.
They would appeal from this re-district-
ing to the people Of Tennessee at tie bal
lot, and to the Congress of the United
States, and see whether the Legislature
could laugh to scorn the Legislature Of the
nation.
Mr.. Ridley asked what appeal the people
of Mississippi would have, whose State had
been gerrymandered by the Radicals.
Mr.. Gibson said he knew nothing about
the State of Mississippi, nor did the Sena-
tor from Rutherford, (Mr. Ridley except
what he cleaned from Democratic papers.
But two wrongs did not make right. If the
Democratic party could see nothing in the
Republican party to initiate but its rascality,
God help them!
Mr.. Ridley Amen.
Mr.. Gibson continuing
East Tennessee had been OYerslaughed and
downtrodden by this bill. But whether
Democrat or Radical oppressed her, the
people of the Eastern Division would unite
as one man, regardless of parties, in pun
ishing their oppressor. He recognized
the fact of three divisions in the
State, and when he saw an attempt to wed
two inimical divisions in political wedlOck,
he protested against the forced union. He
warned the Senate that Congress would not
permit such an outrage 10 be perpetrated
upon the voters of Tennessee, and would
redistrict the State to suit themselves. All
this labor to gerrymander Maynard out OF
Congress was a work Of supererOgation,
for he had been elected for
the last time to Congress.
Ifa popular Democratic candidate had been
put in the field last election, Maynard would
have been defeated. The result of this bill
would be to strengthen Radicalism in East
Tennessee, and at the next election the
first three districts would send Republicans
to Congress. As partisan he would be
pleased to see the bill pass. He would eX-
ercise all the influence he could outside this
chamber to effect its passage. But in the
Senate, under his cath he could not endorse
any such system of reconstruction as was
attempted by the Democracy of Middle and
West Tennessee. 1t seemed to him that
this was a deliberate attempt to make
East Tennessee remember where she
stood in the dark days of 1861.
GerrymanderiDg had always resulted in the
r IL 49, a. .