The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1918-01-24
THE TOPEKA STATE JOURNAL
GNFORMATION BUREAU
BY FREDERIC }. HAsKIN. Director.
Washington, ID. O.
WOMAN SUFFRAGE.
H.-Why by Federal Amendment

Mrs. Carrie Chapman Gait, president
of the National Woman Suffrage AS
ISOLATION. told the house committee on
woman suffrage recently. Because 1t
is the most direct method"
Many persons do not understand
why suffrage should be granted to
women by federal amendment. They
believe it is a matter to be decided
wholly by the states. Since this view
is held by many people who do not
oppose the principle of woman suf-
frage. it is interesting to know why
the women consider the stateby-state
method impracticable.
To amend the constitution of the
United States requires heroic effort,
but to amend the constitutions of many
states is practically impossible. In
the first place, a number of states
require a majority of all the votes
cast at an election to insure the pas
sage of an amendment. That is, if
100000 votes are cast for governor.
then majority of that number must
be cast in favor of the amendment
a most unfair provision, since the
mum Der of people voting on an amend
ment is always smaller than the num-
Der voting on the head of a ticket. In
other words a state that cast 10000
votes for governor might cast only
$4,000 on an amendment.
Now suppose that the amendment is
the suffrage amendment, and that out
of the 10000 votes cast, $4,000 were in
favor of and $4,000 against woman
suffrage. In a state like New York.
which requires only majority of the
votes cast on an amendment, suffrage
would have been carried by 10000
majority. But in a state such as the
above, which requires the majority of
the total votes cast in the election. the
amendment would be defeated by a
10000 majority. In short, the men
who thru ignorance, indifference or
careleSsneSs had failed to vote on the
question of amendment would be con-
sidered against it.
The state of New Mexico has a con-
stitution of this sort, requiring a
three-fourths majority of the votes cast
at an election. including two-thirds
from each county, I'd pass an amend
ment In Indiana, majority of all
voters is required, including registered
voters who do not go to the polls.
Under these circumstances, Indiana
constitution cannot be amended and
the courts have held that suffrage
cannot be granted under it the way
i. is.
In other states an amendment de-
feated in one elect on cannot be voted
upon for definite period of time I'M
der the state constitution. Pennsyl-
vania and New Jersey. for example
which voted against woman suffrage
in 1915, cannot, under their state con-
situations, vote upon the question
again until 1920. In the state of New
Hampshire the state legislature has no
power to submit an amendment. A
s ecial constitutional COW. ton must
be called to do this and the law pro-
vides that UGH a convention may be
called only once in seven years.
All these peculiarities in state con-
situations make the state by state
method impossible. The women could
campaign Indiana for years and never
achieve suffrage. In Vermont they
would have to wait until 1929 before
they even began, for in Vermont the
constitution may be amended only
once every ten years, and it was last
amended in 1913.
Another reason why the women OBJ
ject to the state-bystate method is
the difficulty OF obtaining fair re-
erendum. In regular elections there
are means by which one party can
keep a vigilant check on any irregu-
larfties OF the other. Political senti-
nels are stationed at the polls, and
bipartisan election boards count the
votes. In the case of a suffrage ref
erendum, women would not be per
polls, and they would have no means
of insuring fair count. In the re-
cent New York elections women were
permitted to serve as watchers at the
polls, and it is their opinion that this
had a great deal to do with the ia
vorabl result.
That corrupt influences have ex-
erted their full power against woman
suffrage says Mrs. Gait, I'VE know
well. l have myself seen blocks of
men marched to the polling booth and
paid money in plain sight, both men
and bribers Haunting poldly that they
were Deatlng the - women. 1
have myself seen men who could not
speak word of English, nor write
their names in any language driven
to the polls like sheep to vote against
woman suffrage, and no law at the
time could punish them for the mis-.
use of the vote so cheaply extended
to them, nor change the result
1t is very discouraging. the women
contend, to devote their money. their
time and their strength to a state cam
paign for suffrage; have reason to be-
lieve their efforts are successful and
then hear from male vote-counters
that the amendment has been de-
feated.
For these reasons the women want
the federal amendment. They want
its protection. Even if they do win a
state for woman suffrage, without a
federal amendment, they point out,
they can never be sure that they can
keep it. The state will still have the
right to rescind the privilege
These are the technical difficulties
that lie il. the path of woman suf-
frage by the state method AS to the
rights of the states themselves, the
women dismiss this
quated. The passage of the prohibit
ton amendment recently has proved
that, they contend. and in answer to
your argument that it is a matter for
the states to settle they will refer you
somewhat maliciously to the speech of
Mr.. Webb of North Carolina an OPP
ponent to woman suffrage but a pro-
hihition advocate In urging the ma &C.