Arizona republican., 1903-03-21

AS9H created lt.lfltOiial SoNS 4i-i furnished the rules of conduct by which the government is to exist, and pfoNld- ed limitation to each branch thereof. Legislation, of course, must not De Tn conflict with the laws of congress un- der and by which it is organized, and the power to legislate is granted and the rules enacted by congress Hilllt, the power of the legislature to make laws
 Paragraph 25 (section 1S59) of the or Sanic law Of Arizona reads as fol- lows:
 Every male citizen above the age O. tWenty-one < % who are actual resi- dents of such territory at the time Of the organization, shall be entitled to vote at the first election in such terri tory St etc. subject to the limita- ton in section 1S60."
 Paragraph 26 (section 1S6O) provides that at all subsequent elections the qualification of the voters shall be such as are prescribed by the legislative as sembly of the territory, subject to cer- tain restrictions on the power of the legislative assembly mentioned in said section. the first Of which is
 "The right of suffrage shall
  United States above the age of twenty one years": second. "There snail be ma denial of the elective franchise to q cit iZen on account of race. color or prevl- ous condition of servitude.''
 The territorial legislature is therefore restricted to confer the elective fran chise only upon citizens of those who have declared their intention to be- come citizens. The privilege of voting is not natural right, bur privilege conferred by law.
 Who are "citizens" within the lr- tention and contemplation Of the or ganic act?
 It evidently was in the mind of cong ress at the enactment of sections 1S39 and 1860 that it was dealing with the subject of male citizens exclusively. Females were and would be residents of the territories at the time of the contemplated elections and, according to certain accGptations of the word l citizen. also citizens of the territory. If congress intended to give the cleo tive franchise to citizens regardless oi sex it would not have placed the express limitation to the male citizen.
 However. courts in passing upon the question of the subject matter of this bill, have given construction to the term citizen" in it's relation to the elective franchise. They make dis tinction between political and civil rights. The latter constitutes the cit izen while the former are not necessary ingredients.
 The territory may deny all her politi- cal rights to an individual and yet ha may be a citizen. The rights of office and suffrage are political purely an1 are denied by some or all of the states to part of their population who are still citizens.
 Van Vallzerburg Y. Brown, Calif., g.
 RiOomer V: Todd. ct al, 19 Pac. Rep, 135
 That congress intended to restrict the elective franchise to male citizens is further evident because of its own lir- itation in legislating upon the subject.
 Section ?, of article 14. of the Con- sitution of the United States, reads as follows:
 Representative shall be apportioned among the several states according to their respective numbers. But when the right to vote is de- nied to any made inhabitants of such state, being twenty-one years of age and citizens of the United States, A $ the basis of representation therein shall be reduced " etc
 It will be seen that by extending the vote to females the basis and fabric oi federal representation to which such state is entitled cannot be adjusted without a change in the above stated article of the Constitution of the United States.
 To my mind then it is clear that it was the intention of congress to limit the elective franchise to male citizes: that the territorial legislature receives it's powers to legislate from congress, and that the legislature in enacting house bill No. S1 into a law legisla ted upon a subject not consistent with the Constitution of the United States and the acts of congress.
 l therefore return the bill to your honorable body without approval.
 Very respectfully,
 (Signcd) ALEXANDER O. ERODE.
 Governor of Arizona.
 --O-