Rock Island Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1893-1920, 1914-02-14
DELAYS DECISION
ON SUFFRAGE ACT
Tribunal Hears Arguments on
Statute Granting Vote to
Illinois Women,
LOCAL OPTION MAIN POINT
Opponents Contend Law Does Not
Give Right to Vote on Wet"
or Dry Issue.

D Springfield. Ill, Feb. 1.-THE fate
/ of the Illinois woman suffrage law to-
day is in the keeping OF the Illinois
supreme court Oral arguments. sup
ported by written briefs, were made be-
fore the court yesterday.
The constitutionality of the act. es-
pecially as TO the right OF women TO
vote on the "wet'--;TIioi Try -ITr056st=
tion. which is to be submitted in 300
Illinois towns at the April elections,
was assailed vigorously by Attorneys
Alfred :. Austrian and Levy Mayer OF
Chicago. representing William ].
Scown in the case brought by him
against the Chicago election board.
Just as vigorous were the arguments
made by Attorneys Charles S. Cutting,
John J. Herrick, Charles II. Mitchell
and Willard u. McEwen in the laws
defense.
When briefs in the case were filed
the court was requested to render an
early decision. This the court refused
10 do and in the oral arguments today
the request was not repeated. although
the printed briefs ask that this be done.
Time for Decision in Doubt.
No intimation was forthcoming at
the conclusion of the hearing regard
ing the time when the decision would
be handed down. In the regular course
OF events the decision would come at
the April term, too late 20 have any
effect upon the April elections.
In the event the act we're found un-
constitutional IL f. probable the court
would announce The decision at this
term. which viii end the latter part
both sides OF the case expressed them |
selves as having little hope that de- |
cision VIII be had before the close OF
the April term OF court.
There was trouble over the two sets |
OF briefs fled on behalf OF the women. I
The rules provide that only one brief .
may be presented. Former Judge Nc 1
Even. who appeared as the legal rep /
Of County Judge Owens.
had fled the first brief and argument
under. the rules OF the court. The
subsequent brief was filed on behalf
1f the Illinois Woman's Suffrage as
sociation. Mr.. McEwen filed a motion
which permitted the entrance OF rec
Jrd OF much Of his own brief. In con-
lection with the second, which had
Jeea filed, thereby covering a technical
lttack which had been made by Mr..
Mayer.
Main Fight on Local Option
As matters now stand, according TO
,piniOn last night. there Is a posi-
,ility that the supreme court may hold
hat the women have no right to vote
m the wet" and dry" issue under
he suffrage act II may hold that |
ne constitutionality OF the suffrage act !
5 good" but there may be diyi-
ION as to the propositions upon which
,omen might vote
This would mean. according 70 cur
ent report, that the court might hold
be local option act to be a specific
lection act which had not been set spe
ihcaIIy in the repeating section OF the
uffrage act. This sort OF opinion
.ould mean, probably. that the suf-
age act IS good" as applying TO the ]
mces enumerated in the law. but that
would not apply to the popular vote j
n "aII propositions" as stipulated In !
le suffrage act.
Attorneys Mayer and Austrian con- G
.uded in their oral arguments that the c
lhrage act should not be construed
, the limit suggested and offered the
digestion that while the grant OF yot-
.g power 20 the women for statutory a
noes might be constitutional. there
as strong ground for the point hat