Perrysburg journal. (Perrysburg, Wood Co., O. [Ohio]) 186?-1965, 1873-06-27
Female SuiFrage-DCSSisioh IN the Case
Of Miss Anthony.
CANANDAIeuA, N. Y, June 49,
q HUNT. In his opinion in the case

CANANDAIeUA, N. Y, June IL.
JUDGE HUNT, In his opinion in the case
Of Susan b. Anthony, says
"The right of voting or the privilege OF
voting Is a right or privilege arising
under the Constitution of. the State, and
not of the United States If the right be
longs TO any particular person il is be
cause such person is entitled TO 1t as citi-
zen of the State where he offers TO exer-
else 1t. and not because of citizenship OF
the United States. If the State of New
York should provide that no person should
vote until he had reached the age OF
thirty.one years, or after he had reached
the age of fifty, or that no person having
gray hair, or who had not possession OF
all his limbs should be entitled to vote,
| do not see how it could be held to be a
violation of any right derived or held
under the Constitution of the United
States. If the Legislature of the State of
| New York should require higher quali1-
cations in voter for Representative in
| Congress than is required for voter for
a member of the Assembly this would,
conceive, be violation OF right belong
| ing TO one as citizen of the United States.
That right is in relation to Federal
subject or interest, and can be guaranteed
by the Federal Constitution. The inabil-
| ity of State 10 abridge the right OF vot-
| ing on account of race, color, or previous
| condition of servitude, is q Federal guar
antv. It's violation would be the denial
of d Federal right. That is, right be-
| longing TO claimant as citizen OF the
| United States. This right herein exists
by virtue of the Fifteenth Amend
mend only. If the Fifteenth Amend
ment had contained the word SEX
the argument of the defense would
have been potent. She would have said
an attempt by State to deny the right OF
vote because one is of Il particular sex IS
expressly prohibited by that amendment
The amendment, however, does not con-
tain that word 1t is limited to race,
color or previous condition OF servilude
The Legislature of the State of New York
has seen fit to say that the franchise OF
voting shall be limited to the male sex
In saying this, there is in my Judgment
no violation of the letter or of the spirit OK
the Fifteenth Amendment. This view. is
assumed in the second section of the
Fourteenth Amendment, which enacts
that if the right to vote for Federal Off
GERS is denied by any State to any OF the
male inhabitants of such State, except for
crime, the basis of representation OF such
, State shall be reduced in the proportion
specified. Not only does this section as
sume that the right OF male inhabitants TO
vote was the especial object of It's protec-
ton, but 1t assumes and admits the rlght
of a State, Notwithstanding the existence
of that clause under which the defendant
claims to the contrary, to deny TO any OF
! the male inhabitants the right 10 vote
, which is allowed TO other male inhabi-
tants. The regulation of the suffrage Is.
conceded to States as u States right. The
case of Mrs. Myra Bradwell, decided at
the recent term of the Supreme Court OF
the United States, sustains both these po-
, sitions. The Fifteenth Amendment gives
, no right To u woman To vote, ana voting Dy
. Miss Anthony was in violation OF law, III
she believed She had u right to vote does
: that release her from penaltyS 1t is
argued that the knowledge referred to in
the act referred to relates to her knowl-
edge of the illegality OF the act, and not
s to the act of voting, for it said that she
: must know that she voted. Two princi-
; pies apply here: First ignorance of law
excuses no one; second, every person is
n presumed to understand and to intend the
r necessary effects of his own acts. Miss
], Anthony knew that she was woman, and
: that the Constitution of the State pro
hbits her from voting. She intended TO
violate that provision, intended 10 test II
perhaps, but certainly intended to violate
+ it. The necessary effect OF her act was to
violate it, and then she is presumed to
have intended it. There was no ignorance
of any fact, but all facts being known she
| undertook to settle a principle In her own
n person. She takes the risk and she ought
s not to shrink from the consequences
/ The Court declined to submit the case TO
# the jury upon any question whatever, and
;, directed them to render verdict OF guilty
n against the defendant.
ir Judge Selden, counsel for Miss An
d thony, then requested the clerk to poll the
d jury, which request was denied by the
r Court and verdict of guilty was render
e ed.
d The defendants counsel excepted to the
f. decree and action of the Court, and insist
II ed that upon the construction given to the
s law by the decision there had been only 8
s. violation of State law, and that the
7. United States Court had no jurisdiction.
l. Sentence has not yet been pronounced