Year: 1867

Z


i officers have recently occurred, and in both
the impeached officers were convicted and
Ousted from their offices.


Judge Thomas Frazier, Of Nashville,
Tennessee, issued a writ of hobcds cor
pas in behalf of two members Of the House
OF Representatives Of that State. who re-
fused to sttcssd its sessions, ard thereby
prevented quorum for the transaction OF
business, and were arrested on the warrant
of tie Speaker, by virture oflhat clause OF
the Constitution empowering less than a
quorum OF either House Of the General
Assembly TO compel the attendance of alb
sent members They were taken from the
custody ofthe Sergeant at Arms, an officer
OF the House of Representatives. and by
the Order,of Judge Frazier were discharged.
\ concerted plan had been agreed upon by
the conservative leaders and the conserva-
tive members of the Legislature TO prevent
a quorum from assembling. and the inter
ference of Judge TraZier was regarded as
an attempt, through the abuse of Judicial
authority, 10 abet the conspiracy TO destroy
the Legislative power of the State.


y quorum was eventually obtained, the
seats of the cOntdmacious members were
declared vacant, and the people elected
other representatives to fill their places
The House of Representatives preferred
articles OF Impeachment against the Judge.
and presented them to the Senate for its
action, in accordance with the provisions
OF the Constitution. After notice was scrv-
ell upon him 20 appear and answer the ac
cusitiOns of the House of Representatives.
Judge Frazier rendered his resignation. but
the Senate proceeded to try him. nOtwith-
standing, and, after a trial lasting four
weeks, found him guilty, sentenced him to
removal from Office, and declared him for
ever after incapable of holding any public
',.iice under the State of Tennessee.


The decision of the Senate is denounced
by the Democratic press in and out OF Ten
neSsce. as a Radical outrage. and as an at
tempt 90 destroy the independence of the
Judiciary; but the Independence of the leg
islative authority, within the scope of its
constitutional powers. is fully as important
as that Cf.aily other department of govern
mcnt, and the Jr' -e had no more right To
Interfere with the process issued by the
House of Representatives To- compel the
attendance of refractory members, than
that branch OF the Legislature would have
had To order the release OF a ccniumaciOus
witness sent TO Jail by Judge Frazier, for
contempt Of court. 1t seems to us n clear
case of usurpation on the part of the Judge.
and that the State of Tennessee could not
have rendered different decision, without
the surrender of an express power given
Ivy the constitution to- each branch of the
Legislature, and which is essential to the
existence Of all legislative bodies.


The other case was that of Judge King.
one of the circuit judges of the State Of
Missouri. The offense with which he was
charged was that of disrega riding that pOr-
ton Of the Constitution OF the State which
DISTINGUISHES men engaged in the rebellion,
and using his official position to encourage
its violation by others. From such state
ments of the case as appear in our Missou-
ri exchanges, we infer that Judge King,
in common with the Democrats of Missou
ri. held that under the Constitution of the
United States il was not competent for the
State of Missouri, even by her Constitution
TO disfranchise a nun for engaging in re-
bellion against the State and the United
States. But the Legislature held to the
opposite doctrine; and being impeachcd by
the House of Representatives. the Senate
dcposed him, and DISTINGUISHED him from
holding any other Office for the space of
two years.


Judge King is, Of course, a martyr in the
vi
their organs dcnounce in the most rancOr-
Gus terms the action of the Senate in his
case. But is il not fundamental article
of their party faith that To the State alone
belongs the determination of the right oil
suffrage? Did they ever admit forOne mo-
mcnt that any other power whatever could
/ interfere with, or prescribe the qualiiica-
/ tiOns of voters in State? and do they not
now protest that an attempt by Congress to
extend the right of suffrage to the negroes


of Maryland, in order TO neuiralize the
votes of rebels lately in Lees army, would
be fragrant violation of the rights of that


State and clear infraction Of the Consti-


tuition of the United States. 1t is impossi-


ble for them to defend the conduct of Judge


King in trampling on the Constitution ol
the State of Missouri, and advising its vio-


lation by the people of his circuit, without


abandoning the doctrine that the State i


the sole arbiter In the matter of suffrage
But the fact that the Democratic party ha:


taught one thing or another on this poin


could not be material in the determination


of the impeachment. The Judge was pun


ished for attempting to subvert an impor-


tant provision of the Constitution for parti


san purposes. This was what was charg-


ed against him, and proved TO the satisfac
tion of the court before which he was tried


and in that view of the case the judgment


is clearly defensible.-Ind. Jour.