The semi-weekly messenger. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1897-1908, 1904-12-20
y POS
TIES
POssrBILT-

Under the above heading The wash
ington Post publishes an editorial.
which we give below. AS our readers
viii find IL is on h construction by
the federal supreme court OF certain
clauses OF the constitution Of the United
States wherein the court undertakes
tn declare what was,or is supposed 10 be
the intent Of the men who drafted hat
instrument and what meaning their
language was intended to convey. We
believe The Post editors words win
bring some new ideas to those of our
readers who have never made a study
Of the federal constitution, as well as
to those who have paid some attention
to the aDstruse subject of the relation
ship between the federal government
n that of the individual state. The
Post says:
The Philadelphia Evening Telegram
asserts as a fundamental fact that
the trainers of the constitution never
contemplated the possibility of women
becoming voting citizens" Whether
they did or did not contemplate that
possibility n be positively deter
mined, nor is it a matter OF moment.
It is certain, however, that they left
each Of the states in, or to be in, the
union free to extend the franchise to
women 1t is equally certain that this
freedom cannot be abridged by act of
congress, whether it be an act admit
ting a naw state or anV other Lind of
legislation. Aside from the fifteenth
amendment, the demise of which is con-
ceded to be an accomplished fact, the
states nave unlimited authority over
the suffrage. The right of a state to
give the ballot to persons who are not
even citizens of the United States is
not questioned, although it's exercise
might we'll be abandoned.
But there are a number of important
! possibilities which, in all probability,
the trainers never contemplated. The
supreme court has found some of these
in the constitution. And when hat
tribunal says that a right, or power.
or authority is in the constitution, it is
there, however invisible it may be to
any or all of the people. Indeed, the
finding of five justices Of the supreme
court that the constitution warrants
this, that, or the other thing stands
firmly against the opinion of four JUS
tees of that great tribunal, backed by
the concurrent opinion of nearly all the
! jurists in the country. 1t seems to us
incredible that any intelligent citizen,
familiar with the text of the constitu-
| ton, believes that the trainers thereof
ever contemplated such a thing as the
issue of irredeemable legal tender paper.
But the supreme our has found that
they did provide for just that, and left
| the amount of such issues to the dis
erection of congress-. That finding has
the effect of putting that provision into
the fundamental law. Rejection of .
| supreme court decision would be insur-
rection or anarchy. Probably not one
in a thousand of ~well-informed citizens
{ imagines that the fathers ever contem-
| plated the possibility that became a
fact through our acquisition of sover-
| eighty in the Orient and the insular de-
cision of our court of last resort. But
what of that? All the other opinions
in the United States, including those
of four justices of that court, go for
naught when weighed against that ma
jority finding. This is an imperative
necessity, and the recognition of it by
the American people is one of the
strongest proofs of their fitness for self
government. But it is not wise for the
legislative department to create need
less work for the judiciary by enacting
laws that have no constitutional basis
such laws, for instance, as infringe on
the equal rights of the states in all
things, including the suffrage.