The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1895-04-02

fed voters of the proposed state shall
posed constitution" Who are the quail
flied voters of the proposed state?
Undoubtedly those who possess the
qualifications required by the constitu-
ton. This is plain, if the constitutional
convention has the power to formulate
IN IT the qualifications Of voters under
the state government, it is self-evident
that the convention has that pow
er, and may prescribe those quail
ifications according to its judg-
ment, unless the provisions of section
which have been mentioned pre-
clude 1t. It is not probable that Con-
gress. in an act looking to the adnlis-
sion of new state on an equal foot
ing with the other states would as
sumo to prescribe the qualifications of
voters under the government of the
new state, in such peremptory form
that the convention must ignore its
own judgment and strictly follow the
dlctation of Congress- body in which
Utah had no voting representative.
No construction can be given to
those clauses of section 2 that will
necessitate the adoption of the quail
fications there given of voters for dele
gates as those to be inserted in the
constitution to govern for all time, to
distinguish those who may have a
voice in the state government.
The constitution will prescribe the
qualifications which the majority Of
the convention deem just and wise. It
may not insist on a voter being Il
years of age: nor that the voter be a
male citizen: it may require more
than a years previous residence.
The conclusion is inevitable that IL
the convention has power to follow its
own judgment in determining what
shall be the qualifications of voters in
state elections it must provide that
the person having those qualifications
may vote for or against the constitu-
ton. because the enabling act requires
the constitution to be submitted to
them.
At that election every voter will ex-
ercise the right of suffrage before his
permanent right to be a voter will be
decided. The persons will thus vote
who will have the right of suffrage
under, the constitution if it is adopted.
If exercising the right before the
constitution which gives and defines
the right. is funny or absurd in the
case of women. the laugh is equally
due in the case of men, If both may be
voters under the constitution when
adopted
Schedules to constitutions generally
regulate the elections to adopt them,
If the right of suffrage is given by
the constitution to women. they should
be allowed to vote on its adoption and
for state officers.
Should the provision giving them
this right be submitted separately.
that circumstance will not impair their
right to vote at the first election, but
their votes should be taken in a separ-
ate box, so that they can be suppressed
if the provision is rejected.
]. G. SUTHERLAND.
We regard Judge Sutherland as good
sound legal authority. Because of our
respect for his judgment on questions
of law. we give prominence to his
opinion on the qualifications of voters
for or against the constitution. But
no man is infallible. We yet have
his position on this question. Careful
reading of all the provisions OF the
enabling act, with comparison of their
several parts, conveys to US the i'm
preston that the intention of Congress
was to permit the voters who voted
they only, to vote for the ratification
of the constitution.
How could the voters, male or fe-
male, who are to be qualified voters
of the state and who have not the
qualifications of voters under the
enabling act, be considered as such
voters before the constitution is rati-
fed? Judge Sutherland says: If this
IS absurd 1.-The laugh is equally due IN
the case of men If both may be voters
under the Constitution when adopted"
But we do not see 1t in that light
The enabling act takes care of them.
All male citizens, ETC., who have re-
sided one year next preceding the
election, may vote for the ratification
of the constitution. That is secured to
them irrespective of the provisions of
the state constitution. Why should
Congress say anything as to the quail
fications of voters on the ratification, if
it was not intended TO define what
they should be? If Congress meant to
leave that to the convention, why in
sert the provision in the last clause of
Section Two?
We nope some learned lawyer on the
other side Of this proposition will take
the matter up and give the public his
strong reasons. We believe Judge
Sutherland has given this expression of
his views that he may hear from "the
other side.'
1t should be observed that if his po-
sition is correct the effect will be just
the same whether the woman suffrage
plank is put in the body Of the consti-
tuition or submitted as a separate
proposition. The former. in our opinion,
is the proper way. But in either case
the result would probably be the same
as to its adoption. And the separate
boxes which he suggests for the
woman vote. would be needed just the
same in the one case as in the other if
his position is right. or if there is any
likelihood of a difficulty concerning
it. Let the question be fully con-
sidered before the convention provides
for the manner of conducting the rati-
flying election.
Coray. of Chicken Creek. seems to