The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1895-08-30


GERS. on the same footing as men.
There is also the subsidiary question,
| that admitting that women have not
under such statutes and institutions
the right to vote for the adoption or
rejection of the constitution, whether,
they still have not the right to vote
for state officers at such election.
1t is respectfully insisted on the part
of the plaintiff that she has such right
because it is vouchsafed her without
limitation or infringement in the con-
stitution of the proposed state.
She insists:
First-That under our system of gov
eminent, the power to confer or eX-
tend the elective franchise is SOW
ereign power, which in this case, has
been conferred on her by the people
of Utah, acting in their sovereign ca
pacity.
Second-That by the enabling act of
Utah, Congress has by express provis-
ion recognized the sovereign right OF
the people of Utah to confer the cleo
tive franchise on whomsoever they
may deem fit.
Third-That her right to vote is by
the terms of the enabling act and the
constitution. which is in pari materia
with il, in express terms conferred on
women, on the same footing as men,
without any abridgement or limita-
ton.
The difference between this country
and England was that there the peo-
pie went on the theory that they de-
| rived their rights and benefits from
! the all wise and gracious benignity Of
my lord the king, while here the peo-
pie were the sovereigns and derived
nothing from either kings or Congress.
He said the point at issue was one
the decision on which should not be
affected by public discussions or street
arguments. He said Congress had no
power to fix the qualifications of vot-
ers in any state; but that that power
rested in the people. This was express
ly set out in the national constitution.
He cited Instances where the qualifi-
cations Of voters had been locally
fixed.
Judge King, of the court, named
Minnesota as one of these, and Judge
Merritt replied that Minnesotas action
was not under an enabling act, ana
had to be ratified by Congress.
Several questions were asked by the
court, and answered by Mr.. Hiles, who
proceeded with his argument, claim
ing that Congress had expressly au-
thorized the constitutional convention
to qualify voters on the constitution
and for state officers The constitu-
tive today in provisions affecting the
division into legislative districts, the
number and style of officers, etc Mr..
Hiles then took up the provisions of
the enabling act, and insisted that
! these authorized those persons to vote
who should be qualified electors in the
new state, by virtue of its constitu-
tional provisions. Replying to ques-
ton as to whether section IL of the
1 ssnlln rlIaln
constitution, which says that male cit
liens over the age of q years may vote
at the first election, Mr.. Hiles argued
that that did not expressly exclude fe-
males, and that even if it was con-
strued that way it was negatived by
section II following, because that in
cluded the qualified voters of the pro-
posed state.
Mr.. Hiles continuing said that if the
newly elected state legislature should
! elect senator's, their certificates should
be signed by the newly elected govr-
nor of the proposed state, and not
by the governor of the territory of
Utah. In making the illustration he
named Governor Thatcher" and
Senator Rawlins." He re-asserted his
conviction that the qualified voters of
the proposed state meant the voters
who would be qualified under the state
constitution.
Charles s. Varian.
c. S. Farian was the next speaker for
the respondent. He said in part that
Congress is not the legislative author
ity for the territory of Utah; he did not
contend that it was That Congress
however, had power to withhold or
grant permission to this or any other
/ territory the privilege of becoming
state was illustrated in the case of this
territory, the people of which had many
times formed constitutions which were
approved by the people, but Congress
refused to ratify them. 1t was, there
fore. idle for Mr.. Hiles to argue that
the people of this territory had power
to form themselves into state and
pass upon the qualifications of its vot-
ers independently of the provisions of
the enabling act. The law once in force
permitting women to vote in Utah was
nullified by special act of Congress and
that special act was never repealed
and remains in force as long IS it re-
mains a territory. 1t has no sovereign
powers until il has been admitted as
a state and the constitution only be-
comes operative after it has been ap-
proved by the president. The language
of the enabling act was plain; it said
qualified electors. that is, male citizens
=
sided at least one year III the territory
Counsel argued that the line of rea-
Sonlng pursued by the attorneys of the
other side lead to the inevitable conclu-
sion that the constitutional convention
had power to disfranchise all male cit
liens or to enfranchise aliens. Chinese,
idiots Indians or criminals, in fact to
disfranchise and enfranchise whom it
would. The constitutional con-
vention derived its power to
form a constitution from Con-
gress and on the terms set down in the
enabling act, and Congress alone has
authority to pass on the validity of the
acts Of the convention.
AS to the right of women to vote for
state officers the appellant claims there
/ is no distinction in the law between
that. case and voting for or against the
constitution.
BY authority of Congress the Whole
scheme of state government is made
part OF the proposed constitution That
creates the offices. provides for officers
their qualifications, terms and duties
and fixes their compensation. The en-
aiding act provides for a representa-
tive in congress, fixes the day for the
constitutional election, and, if the OPP
ton to elect conditionally in 1895, is
accepted, orders the election at the
same time. There is to be but one
election for all the purposes relating
to the admission of the state and or
ganizing the state government. This
also appears from the omission to
qualify or authorize the qualification