Disunion and Restoration in Tennessee: Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Faculty of Political Science, Columbia University — John Shaqi
Disunion and Restoration in Tennessee: Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Faculty of Political Science, Columbia UniversityNeal, John Randolph
History
Disunion and Restoration in Tennessee: Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Faculty of Political Science, Columbia University
Neal, John Randolph
Reconstruction (U.S. history, 1865-1877) -- Tennessee; Tennessee -- Politics and government -- 1861-1865; Thesis (Ph. D.)
By the fall of 1863, the tide of battle had rolled so far southward
that the soil of Tennessee was at last free from contending armies.
The time had now arrived for the restoration of civil government. But
Governor Johnson felt secure in the exercise of his power only so long
as it rested upon a military basis. He therefore seemed in no hurry to
reorganize the State government. He contented himself with filling the
vacant offices, most of which under the laws were elective, by the
appointment of his political friends thereto.
The leaders of the Union men in the State, the majority of whom were
never in sympathy with Johnson, began to grow restive under his
military dictatorship.
In May, 1864, occurred Johnson’s nomination for the Vice-Presidency.
He naturally desired to obtain the electoral vote of his own State. A
Convention was therefore called to meet in Nashville for the purpose
of nominating an electoral ticket. The Union leaders seized the
opportunity which the Convention presented for perfecting an
organization of the Union party. A committee was appointed by the
Convention, and empowered to issue a call for a second Convention.
The second Convention was called to meet in Nashville, Dec. 19, 1864.
It failed to convene on the day appointed, as Nashville was at that
time threatened by Hood’s army. The defeat of the Confederate forces
in the battle of Nashville removed the danger, and the Convention came
together on the third day of January, 1865.
The work of the Convention was summed up in the passage of one
resolution.[9] The first section contained this statement of the
authority under which it claimed to act: “Whereas the first article
and the first section of the Declaration of Rights in the Constitution
of the State of Tennessee declares, ‘That all power is inherent in the
people, and all free governments are founded on their authority, and
instituted for their peace, safety, and happiness; and that for the
advancement of these ends they have at all times an inalienable and
indefeasable right to alter, reform, or amend the governments as they
may think proper,’ We, the people of Tennessee, in Convention
assembled, do propose the following alterations and amendments to the
Constitution, which, when ratified by the sovereign loyal people shall
be and constitute a permanent part of the Constitution of Tennessee.“
This assertion of constituent powers by the Convention was purely a
revolutionary act. The Constitution could be legally changed only in
the manner prescribed by the Constitution itself. In the third section
of the eleventh article, it provided that all amendments must
originate with the State Legislature. In no sense could the Convention
be held to represent the Legislature. It was therefore in the eyes of
the law a body of private citizens.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account