CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION OF 1870
While the Radical leaders were engaged in their futile efforts at
Washington to obtain Federal intervention, the Legislature convened at
Nashville, and Governor Senter was inaugurated with the usual
ceremony. Both the Governor and the Legislature manifested a desire to
fulfill their election pledges, by restoring the franchise to the
ex-Confederates, but the manner in which this should be accomplished
was not at first very apparent.
In the Constitution, as it was prior to the war, the suffrage
qualifications had been clearly stated and no power had been vested in
the Legislature to alter them. It was in virtue of the amendments
adopted by the Radical Convention of 1865, that the Legislature had
passed the disfranchising acts of 1866 and 1867.
The simple repeal of these acts would have re-enfranchised the
ex-Confederates, but it would have left unsettled a number of
perplexing problems resulting from the war. It was felt that the
solution of these questions should not be left to the Legislature, as
its members were all Union men, and therefore did not represent the
whole political body. It was also recognized that the questions to be
settled were of a constitutional character, and could be properly
dealt with only by a constitutional Convention.
These considerations led to the passage of an act which authorized the
Governor to put to a vote of the people the question of holding a
constitutional Convention. At the same election delegates were to be
chosen. Every male person not convicted of infamous crime, of the age
of twenty-one, and a citizen of the United States, and a citizen of
the State of Tennessee was allowed to vote. The election was held on
the 3d of December and resulted in a large majority in favor of the
Convention.
The first constitutional Convention in the history of the State was
the one which had met in Knoxville, and framed the Constitution under
which Tennessee had been admitted into the Union.[19] Conspicuous
among the members of the first Convention were John Sevier and Andrew
Jackson. The constitution they adopted was modelled after that of the
mother State, North Carolina. In 1834, a second Convention met at
Nashville, and modified the old Constitution, so as to bring it into
harmony with the industrial changes of the first quarter of a century.
The next assertion of constituent powers was in 1861, when the
Legislature passed the Declaration of Independence, and the Ordinance
of Union with the Confederacy. In 1865, the Radical Convention, as we
have seen, framed a number of constitutional amendments.
The newly elected convention assembled at Nashville on the 10th day of
January. The character of its members was a guaranty that its action
would be Conservative. It has been pronounced the most intelligent
body ever elected in Tennessee for any purpose. John C. Brown, an
ex-major-general of the Confederate army, was elected to preside over
its deliberations. As the Authorization Act did not limit the power of
the Convention, it was at liberty to enter into a thorough-going
provision of the constitution, but it manifested from the start the
intention to confine itself to the task of settling the question
growing out of the war. Chief among these was negro suffrage.
The Fifteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States had
not yet been adopted, so it was still in the power of the State to
withhold the franchise from the negro. In the discussion of this
suffrage question, the Convention was divided into three factions. The
Union delegates, who were greatly in the minority, favored universal
suffrage. The extreme opposite opinion was expressed in the minority
report of the Suffrage Committee: “We hold that the negro race is the
lowest order of human beings, incapable in themselves of a virtuous
intelligence, or free government; and for the truth, we appeal to
history, and challenge the world to show a single exception. We hold
that the inferiority of the negro to the white man, in race, color,
and capacity for permanent, well-ordered government has been fixed by
Him who ‘doeth all things well,’ and whose natural or revealed law has
never been violated by any human government without disaster and
confusion.”
In the abstract, the above statement undoubtedly represented the view
of a majority of the delegates. But the conservative men of the
Convention recognized that the rejection of negro suffrage would
strengthen the Radicals in their efforts to obtain Federal
intervention. Considerations of political expediency led, therefore,
to the adoption of the following provision in regard to suffrage:
“Every male person of the age of twenty-one years, being a citizen of
the United States, and a resident of this State for twelve months, and
of the county wherein he may offer his vote, for six months next
preceding the day of election, shall be entitled to vote for members
of the General Assembly, and all civil officers of the county or
district in which he resides, and there shall be no qualification
attached to the right of suffrage, except that each voter shall give
to the judge of the election, where he offers to vote, satisfactory
evidence that he has paid the poll taxes assessed against him for such
preceding period as the Legislature shall prescribe, and at such time
as may be prescribed by law, without which his vote cannot be
received.”[20]
After fixing the suffrage qualifications, all the important changes in
the constitution proposed by the Convention, were directed, with
possibly two exceptions, towards the prevention of the recurrence of
the political abuses, from which the State had suffered under the
Radical administration. Fresh in the minds of all were the arbitrary
acts of Governor Brownlow in suspending the writ of habeas corpus, and
proclaiming martial law. A number of limitations were, therefore,
placed upon the military power of the Governor. It was provided that
“the militia shall not be called into service except in case of
rebellion or invasion, and then only when the General Assembly shall
declare by law that the public safety requires it.” The Bill of Rights
was so amended that “the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended,
unless when, in case of rebellion or invasion, the General Assembly
shall declare the public safety requires it.”
Another flagrant abuse under Radical rules had been the too frequent
meeting of the Legislature. During the four years of Governor
Brownlow’s administration, it had been in almost continuous session.
To remedy this, regular sessions were made biennial, and it was
provided that no member “shall be paid for more than seventy days of
the regular session, or for more than twenty days of an extra or
called session.”
The two important changes in the constitution, which had no relation
to the disturbed political conditions resulting from the war, were the
creation of a homestead exemption, and the delegation to the
Legislature of the power to pass general laws for the organization of
private corporations.
Having completed its labors, the Convention proceeded to the Capitol,
and, in the presence of both Houses of the Legislature, it placed the
revised constitution in the hands of the Governor. By him it was
submitted to a vote of the people, and ratified by a vote of 98,128
for, to 33,872 against.
At the first State election that occurred under the provisions of the
new Constitution, the Democrats regained political control of the
State. This ended the Reconstruction Period in Tennessee.
[19] Caldwell’s “Studies in the Constitutional History of
Tennessee.”
[20] _Journal of the Constitutional Convention of 1870._
AUTHORITIES.
Acts of Tennessee: Extra Session, 1861; 2d Extra Session, 1861;
1861-62; 1865; 1865-66; Extra Session, 1866; 1868; 1869; 1869-70;
1870; 1870-71; 1871; 1872; 1873; 1875; 1877; 1879; 1881. Extra
Session, 1881; 1882; 1883.
BARNES, W. H. “History of the Thirty-ninth Congress.”
BATE, W. B. Messages to the General Assembly.
BLAINE, JAMES G. “Twenty Years of Congress.”
BROWN, JOHN C. Messages to the General Assembly.
BROWNLOW, W. G. “Sketches of the Rise, Progress, and Decline of
Secession, with a Narrative of Personal Experiences among the Rebels.”
Philadelphia, 1862.
CALDWELL, JOSHUA W. “Studies in the Constitutional History of
Tennessee.” Cincinnati, 1895.
COX, S. S. “Three Decades of Federal Legislation.”
DUNNING, W. A. “Essays on the Civil War and Reconstruction.” New York,
1898.
EVERETT, EDWARD. “Account of the Fund for the Relief of East
Tennessee.” Boston, 1864.
HARRIS, ISHAM G. Messages to the General Assembly.
HAWKINS, ALVIN. Messages to the General Assembly.
_House Journals_ for 1865, 1865-66, 1866. Extra Session, 1866,
1867-68. Extra Session, 1868, 1868-69, 1869-70.
HUMES, THOMAS WILLIAM. “The Loyal Mountaineers of Tennessee.”
Knoxville, 1888.
_Journal of the Constitutional Convention of 1870._
_Knoxville Whig_, Knoxville, Tennessee.
MARK, ALBERT. Messages to the General Assembly.
MACPHERSON, EDWARD. “History of the Rebellion.”
MACPHERSON, EDWARD. “History of the Reconstruction.”
MILLER, CHAS. A. “The Official and Political Manual of the State of
Tennessee.” Nashville, 1890.
Report of the Committee Appointed to Investigate the State Debt.
Appendix to the _Senate Journal_ for 1879.
SCOTT, W. A. “The Repudiation of State Debts.” New York, 1893.
_Senate Journal_ for 1865, 1866, 1867-68, 1868-69. Extra Session,
1868.
SENTER, DE WITT. Message to the General Assembly.
TOWNSEND’S Records of the Great Rebellion.
_The Union and American_, Nashville.
“Why the Solid South?” Hilary Herbert, Baltimore, 1890.
WILSON, HENRY. “History of the Rise and Fall of the Slave Power.”
VITA
The author of this dissertation, John Randolph Neal, was born
September, 16, 1874, at Rhea Springs, Tennessee. His early education
was received at the public schools in Tennessee and Washington, D. C.
In 1890, he entered the University of Tennessee and was graduated in
1893 with the degree of A.B. During the years 1893-96, he pursued
graduate work in Vanderbilt University, taking courses in History,
Economics, Literature, and Philosophy. In 1894, he received the degree
of A.M.; and in 1896, the degree of LL.B.
Since 1896, Mr. Neal has been a graduate student at Columbia
University. He has had Constitutional and Administrative Law as a
major subject, and Roman Law, and Political Economy and Finance as
minor subjects. He has attended courses given by Professors Burgess,
Goodnow, Munroe Smith, Mayo-Smith, Moore, and Seligman.
While at Vanderbilt, Mr. Neal held university scholarships in
Economics and History. At Columbia, he has been University Scholar in
Political Science and Public Law.
* * * * * *
Transcriber’s note:
Footnotes were renumbered sequentially and were moved to the end
of the chapter in which related anchors occur.
Inconsistent hyphenation and misspelled words were not corrected.
Space was removed after apostrophe in “coup d’état.”