Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1874-11-22

1t is said that when serpent is
killed it does not cease to move its tail
until the sun goes down, though its
vitals may be literally ground to pow
der. One Of our. contemporaries finds
parallel to this in the dying struggles
Of the Arkansas Radical party. Though
beaten and anihilated it still wiggles its
tail and now wants to start another re-
billion. A curious pamhlet has recent
ly come to light in Washington city,
entitled, Y. V. Smith, Lieute-
nant- Governor of Arkansas, Us.
A. II. Garland" printed In Chicago,
and containing over one hundred
pages. 1t is a letter and argument
combined, written by Smith to one T.
D. W. YOnley, attOrney-at.law, asking
for legal opinion, which opinion is
also part Of the pamphlet. The
opinion covers list of eleven PROPOSE
tions relative to the Arkansas elections,
the last of which is, whether, if Bax-
ter should voluntarily surrender the
Office to some person claiming to be
elected under the new constitution,
ETC., would Smith be authorized to dis
charge the duties Of the unexpired
term, and whether Baxter would have
right to resume the Office of Govern.
or if the President, or some proper au-
thority, should dispense the government
established under the new constitution.
But the remarkable feature OF this
document is Its date, which is Oct. /,
twelve days before the new constitution
was voted on at all. It was written in
anticipation of the adoption of then new
constitution, and the election of the
Conservative Governor under it, in
which event there could be no doubt
that Baxter would surrender the Office
to the new government. So it appears
that the case Of Smith VS.. Garland was
made up while the latter was still only
a candidate.
The only point raised by Spith-the
validity of the new constitutions one
which has been settled by large line
of precedents. A constitution is the
act of a living body, not the viii
of dead man. Its adoptiou
by majority of 10000, as was the
case IN Arkansas, atones for all iITegu-
larities, if there were any, and expresses
the supreme sovereignty of the people
in it's freest and most perfect exercise.
An executor or heir may be bound by
the dead letter of a dead mans will,
but the living man can change his Will
in what manner he pleases. So of any
living community or State. Pennsyl-
vania, in 1870, adopted a new constitu-
ton, framed by convention acting in
fragrant disregard Of the prohibition
of the constitution Of 1776, which de-
NAaANA -L1S duACIOllcllJ5 5lOutu Only De
made through the instrumentality of
the council Of censors. Delaware adopt
ed constitution in 1892, by a similar
disregard of the organic Law; and Ma
ryland did the same thing in 1851. No
one would dream Of attempting to set
these constitutions aside. The conven-
tons of New York in 1916, Louisiana
In 1852, Massachusetts in 1853, and
Missouri in 1916 and 1861, are conspic-
uous examples of the disregard of
methods Of revision indicated by the
constitutions in force at the time of
their assembling. In view of these
historic facts, the NeD York Tribune
concludes that Gen. Grant can do no
wrong by refusing TO interfere in any
way with this fresh dispute in Arkan-
sas, while on the other hand he can do
great mischief by meddling.