The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1882-09-23
RULING OF JUDGE TWISS
On the Validity Of the Woman S
Suffrage Law.

Tn the matter Of application Of AM
/ II. Thompson on application 10.
zOTit Of m0nd1HlBS IS. John b
! Gehr, Deputy Registrar Of cleo
i tjonS.
! The applicant. in her application
for writ OF mandamus, on oatl
lsays, that she was on the 18th day
of May, 1872, and ever since has
been and is now married woman
the wife OF William Thompson, who
was that day liz due torn of law
admitted as g citizen of the
United States; that ever since
they both have been such citizens
that she is over 81 years Of age.
that She has lived in the precinct
and county Of Beaver and Territory
OF Utah, continuously, more than
five years last past. She also alleges
that on the 18th day of September
1882, she applied TO the respondent
as deputy registrar Of voters IN
Beaver Precinct aforesaid, tobe reg
iStered as one of the voters of the
Territory Of Utah, upon the registry
list of said. precinct, and at that
time rendered to the respondent as
said registrar her affidavit, which is
fully SGT out in the application, con-
tanning all the allegations and
statement Of facts required in the
affidavit required by rules OF
the Territorial Commissioners
appointed under and in compliance
with the last act of Congress, ap.
proved March y, 1882, commonly
known as the EdmundS bill. But
neither in her affidavit presented tC
the respondent, nor in her application
TO this court for writ Of mandamus
does she say that she in person, OIL
by her husband as her authorized
agent, or otherwise, has ever paid
any tax, or that she is, or ever was,
Taxpayer in this Territory, OF
make any statement tending tC
show that she is a taxpayer.
That upon the presentation by
her to the respondent, of her aft
davit, she requested him to receive
and take said affidavit and place
her name as voter upon said regis
try list, then and there being pre-
pared by him, but that the respon.
dent as said registrar refused to take
said affidavit, and refused to SO reg
lister the applicant.
Wherefore she prays that a writ
of mandamus be issued requiring
the respondent to take and receive
said affidavit and register the said
applicant on said registry list.
Upon the filing of the application
it was ordered that the respondent
show cause on a day named why he
should not register the applicant as
demanded by her Upon the ap
pearance OF the respondent he ad,
mitted the truth Of the allegations
contained in the application, but
commended that upon them she die
not show that she was a voter ell
Stitled to be registered, or to the wit
of mandate prayed for.
The case has been thoroughly
presented by counsel on either side
On the part of the applicant it is
claimed that the territorial act Of
Feb, y, 1870, known as the female
suffrage act, is valid, in full force
and effect according to the terms
thereof, and that she is entitled tt
register and to vote.
The respondent claims that thu
act conflicts with and is inconsistent
with the act Of Congress, and there
fore she has no right either to regis
ter or to vote. The question sub
mitted to me by counsel is whethe
the applicant on her statement 0,
application has a right to vote; i
she has, she has an undoubte I RICH
to be registered; if she has no RICH
to vote it is not claimed thatShe ha
a right to be registered as a voter.
In considering this question thus
iraiSed. ! have not undertaken to de
| teTmine whether any other married
woman is or is not q citizen by viz
tue OF her marriage to a citizen no
whether any woman except the up
plicant is entitled to vote, Dor TO de
termine the validity of the act 0
1870. l assume, for the purpose o
| this case, (but for 10 otherl, that j
lis consistent with all acts OF Con
IgTess and therefore valid, and shall
decide this case upon what l con
slider a just construction OF the ter
rit0rial statutes found i'll Chapte
II, Title III, of the Compiled Law
under titles as follows: "An Ac
prescribing certain qualification
necessary 10 enable a person to bt
eligible to hold Office, vote, or serve
as a juror" approved Jan. q, 1853
and IAN Act, comforting upon WO
linen the elective franchise" ap
proved February y, 1870. Although
| there is a difference of eleven year,
in the dates of these statutes, the!
are in the Compiled Laws, placed
lin the same chapter, under the gen
eral head or title Of Elections anC
qualifications Of officers" Section
| 40 Of the Compiled Laws (sec. 3 O.
the act Of 1850 provides tina
! "neither shall any person be en-
Titled to vote at any cleo
| ton unless he is a male citizen O.
the United States, over q years O.
iage. and has been q constant resi-
\ dent IN the Territory during the
six months next preceding said cleo
ton"
| This section alone, disconnected