Washington standard. [volume] (Olympia, Wash. Territory) 1860-1921, 1888-06-08
WOman's Right to the Ballot.

ED. STANDARD: Again has liberty
been stricken down by the decision OF
another newly appointed judge, and
from the ilimsy pretense upon which
it Was based, have no hesitation in
CHASING as a fourth-rate judge at that.
Our former judges, Dennison, Greene,
Lewis, Wingard and Hoyt, familiar
with the working of the woman suf-
fragc experiment, and, at the same
time, recognizing the rights and privi-
leges of citizens under the Constitti-
ton, found no occasion to disturb it.
But it seems that our new jurist has
come on to enlighten the peo-
pie of Washington Territory on
matters pertaining to the elective fran
chise. And on what ground does he
deny the ballot to women? Why, that
Congress, by 1.-The organic act, does not
confer power upon the Legislature to
confer suffrage on women. 1t was not
So intended by the lawmakers who
framed the act" But l deny that
Congress or any Legislature has the
right to confer the elective franchise
upon any native-born American citi-
zen. The right to confer implies the
right to withhold-to take away. No,
the tenure of our liberties rests not on
the consent or dictum of any legisla-
tive body. They are our servants to
protect us, not our masters to enslavc
US. Yes, if they can deny the ballot
to women citizens they can deny it to
men citizens, and our Government in
stead of being free is despotism! The
decisions of Judges Langford, Turner
and Nash, and others OF the Judge
fancy school, would soon, if not dis
carded, destroy the last vestige of
freedom in our republic! The elective
franchise has in no manner been con-
ferred by the Constitution. When
slavery was abolished by our civil war,
no provision whatever was made to
confer suffrage upon the freed men.
The 18th amendment simply con-
firmed and made more explicit the
guarantees in favor OF liberty already
in the constitution. Prior to our Rev
olution suffrage was conferred d by the
old colonial charters. But when our
fathers and mothers rebelled, they as
sumed that all rights and privileges
pertaining to government existed in
themselves, and they took special
care 10 secure them by all :,eedful
guarantees in the constitution. Under
the King suffrage WAS privilege. I'm
del freedom 1t is used as n right, in
herent in the people, before the Gov
ernment was established, and has never
been surrendered. 1t was exercised by
the people in forming the Government,
prior to the enactment of any election
laws, thus demonstrating that the right
exists prior to all legislation in all free
republics. Consequently it is clear
that neither Congress, nor any legis-
lative body has power to confer on ma
tive born citizens the elective franchise,
any more than they have power to con-
fer the right of acquiring and holding
property. Both are natural rights, to
be protected and regulated, but not
created by legislation. The error has
originated with half-flsdged jurists like
Judge Nash, in supposing that regu-
lating the elective franchise was ranta-
mount to comforting the right itself.
To sum up the matter in short, to be
an American citizen, male or female, is
to be entitled to vote because the right
is inborn. And this right is fully pro-
tected by the fourteenth amendment:
;" No State shall make or enforce any
law that shall abridge the privileges or
immunities of citizens of the United
States" Judge Nash admits that
women are citizens. How, then, can
he violate a plain command of the
Constitution by abridging the privi-
leges of the women citizens of Wash
ington Territory? Judge Bushrod
Washington, Chief Justice of the Su-
preme Court of the United States, long
ago held that the word privileges, as it
occurred in the Constitution, included
among other rights the elective fran
chise. Is it not Judge Nash's duty to
be governed by the Supreme Court?
A decision that clearly violates the
dearest privileges of thousands surely
calls for impeachment. And let me
assure the women of the Territory that
such decisions will not be tolerated
long. The Judge is disposed to shelter
himself behind the decision of the
Supreme Court in the case OF Dred
Scott, which "held that he was not a
man within the meaning of the Con-
stitution." That is, he was only a
chattle personal not entitled to any
protection as citizen from the laws.
The Judge needs to be reminded that
Judge Tany's decisions no longer pass
current. When the right of women to
vote is in question, it will hardly do to
class them with minors, idiots, crimi-
mails and slaves, the only ones besides
women deprived OF the ballot.
/ hope the women will not be dis
couraged by these seeming set-backs.
Every outrage only hastens the day OF
your enfranchisement. You are citi-
zens and the supreme law OF the land
declares that your privileges and i'm
munities shall not be abridged by any
legislative enactment whatever. Your
rights are co-equal with men, not only
to vote, but TO hold Office and serve on
juries. Ere long decision of the Su
preme Court will affirm that women
are fully entitled to exercise all politi
cal rights with men wherever floats the
star spangled banner. 1t was the guar
antees in favor of freedom in our plo