Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1873-06-26
STATES RIGHTS REAssERTED.


Judge Ward Hunt, of the Supreme Court
o: ne United Safes, the successor of Judge
Nelson, appears to bea very decitedState's
rights man. In laying down the law in The
case of Miss Susan B. Anthony, tried at
Canard, igua, n. Y, few days ago,
for having violated the law in casting a vote
in the election in New York last fall, Judge
Hunt held, among other proposition, the
following:
Sd. The right Of privilege of voting Is a
right or pririIege arising 1nlder the CORSti-
tuition Of the State, and not Of the Unitod
States If the right belongs to any particu-
lar person, it is because such person is enti-
tied 10 it as citizen # the State where he
offers TO exercise it, and not because of citi-
zen hip Of the United States. 1.-THE State
of New York should provide that no per-
son should vote until he had re aChed the
age of 81 years, or after re had reached the
age of so or that no person having gray
hair, or who had ct the possession of all
bis limbs, should be entitled to vote, do
not see how it could be held 20 be a viola
ton of any right derived or held under the
Constitution of TIE United States. He
might say that sucb regulations were I'M
just, tyrannical, unfit for the regulation Of
an intelligent State, but If rights of a citizen
are thereby violated, they are Of that
fundamental class derived from
bis position as citizen of the
State, and not those limited rights belong
ing to him IS citizen Of the United States,
and such was the decision in Cornteld vs..
Carryell. If the Legislature of New York
should require higher qualification in a
voter for Representative IN Congress than
is required for a voter for q member OF the
Assembly, this would, l conceive, be a vio-
lation of right belonging TO one as citizen
Of the United SAFES. That right is in re-
lation to a Federal subject or interest, and
can be guaranteed by the Federal -Consti-
tuition. The inability of State TO abEidge
the right of voting on account of race,
color, or previous condition Of servitude IS
q Federal guaranty. Its violation would be
the denial of a Federal rigLt-lhat is, 4
ght belonging TO the claimant as citizen
of the United States This ight herein
exists by virtue of T. e Fifteenth Amend
ment only. IL the Fifteenth Amendment
had contained the word ''sex" the argument
of the defence would have been potent.
State TO deny the right TO vote because one
is Of particular sex is expressly prohibited
by that amendment. The amendment
does not contain that word. II is limited
to race, color, or previous condition of
scryitudc.
4th. The New York Legislature has
seen tit 10 say that the franchise OF voting
sl.1ll I g limited TO the male sex. No. only
dies this section assume thas the right OF
male inhabitants to vote was the especial
object of its protection, but it assumes and
admits the right Of State, notwithstand-
iDs the existence of that clsuse under which
the defendant claims to the contrary, to
deny to any of the male inhabitants the
right TO vote which is allowed to other male
Inhabitants. The regulation Of the suffrage
IS conceded TO the States as States right.
The New York Express regards this IS
something positively refreshing and dds:
" he Judge, who succeeds Judg Nelson,
sa2ms to be imbued not only with some Of
the old-fash,oued ideas Of bis predecessor,
Ens to state them with 8 force and logic
that proves their correctness. States then
have rights of their own, and one of them
is The right 10 say who shall vote, and New
York having SAID who shall Eote, il is not
in the Province of the Federal Constitution
to change the use of this right? Such
decision, in the face of what we have seen
.nd read for many years past, comes to rs
like good news from far country, or cold
water to thirsty SOUL"