The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1895-04-16
A FEW PALACES Exploded.

! state, under the provisions of the con-
stitution as 1t now stands, we here in
sert the first two sections of the ar
ticle on Elections and Qualifications
of Voters:
Section 1.-The rights of citizens of
the State Of Utah to vote and hold
office shall not be denied or abridged
on account of sex. Both male and
equally enjoy all civil, political and
religious rights and privileges.
Sec. Livery citizen of the United
States of the age of q years, and up
wards. who shall have been a citizen
for ninety days. who has resided in
the state or territory for one year, in
the county four months, and in the
precinct sixty days next preceding any
election, shall be entitled to vote at
such election except as herein other
wise provided.
1t will be seen that there is no spec
ial obligation upon either sex as a
qualification for the suffrage, nor any
special exemption. THAI is a suf1-
Gent answer to the objections fire.
quently heard like thass:
well, if women are to vote they
ought to be made to pay pon sax"
eff you give women he ballot they
ought to bear arms and serve IN the
militia"
eff women may so 20 the polls they
ought to pay taxes"
Women ought not - have the priv
ilege of the elective franchise equally
with men unless they have the same
duties as men,
Now, it will be seen that paying
poll tax, bearing arms, paying taxes
and all the rest of 1t are not quail
fications for male suffrage. Men NAV
vote without doing either of these
things that thought1ess people would
impose on women as qualification
for voting. The article simply places
men and women on political equal
fty. 1t takes away political disabili-
ties on account of sex. It admits
women to political liberty. It takes
away their political inferiorty and
serfdom. That Is all.
Here are a few further objections,
if they may be dignified by such
term.
81 don't want my wife to be
policeman"
81 don't want my wife to serve on
a jury"
Il don't want my wife to engage
in rows at political conventions"
Well, the constitutional provision
does not require either of these things
Of women or men. 1t does not require
a man to be a policeman, or to serve
on a jury, or to engage in political
squabbles as qualification for vot-
ing. He may vote on all questions
without doing either.
''But this provision makes women
eligible for office"
1t does, but It does not require
them to hold Office. Very few mem
are fit for public office Very few
men" out Of the masses of voters
even aspire to Office. It is supposed
that the good sense Of the voters will
be exercised in electing men" to
public positions. They would not
choose a weakly or crippled man"
for sheriff, an ignorant man" for
q judge, an incompetent man" for a
governor, or a witless man" for a
legislator. They ordinarily elect men
to positions for which they are sup
posed to be fitted. Very few women
you'd want oifice. The voters would
not ordinarily put a woman in an
Office for which she was not adapted.
The rule would work both ways.
There are clerical and similar places
in the state for which some women
would be entirely suitable. and the
provision simply takes away any bar
rier to their occupation of such places.
Here are some remarks made by wo-
men:
Il don't want the suffrage and I shall
oppose it,
st don't want to have to go to the
polls"
ct don't want to be compelled to be
a juror"
81 don't want to have to attend po-
litical meetings.
II don't want to be constable, or
a tax collector or public officer of any
kind"
The article in the constitution does not /
require any woman to vote. to serve on !
iuries. to attend political meetings or /
to hold any Office. 1t does not require /
1 man to do any of these things. Mill I
ions of men who may vote. stay away
from the polls and from political gath I
srings. More of them do not hold or
want to hold office They have their
liberty. Under this provision women /
will also have their liberty. But they /
will be under no compulsion. And if |
some women desire to remain in politi-
al bondage. that is no reason why I
hey should stand in the way OF other
women who want their freedom. The
dog in the manger' policy is not
rood pattern for either men or wo-
men to initiate
We do no! attempt now to argue in
avor Of woman suffrage. but simply
o reply to objections that have no
weight in them. and yet, are advanced
s arguments by people who would
aturally be expected to know better
md we wish to add. that if these are
eal1v ohiactions 70 kear,fnc the SEQ