Evening public ledger. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1914-1942, 1920-07-14
RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE
TO HAVE THEIR SAY
The Issue Raised by Governor Glenn
ent In His Refusal to Help
the Suffrasists

ent In His Refusal to Help
the suffrasists
THE disappointment Of the women
l. suffragists with the action Of Gov
ernor Clement. Of Vermont, is natural.
The members Of the Legislature, elected
in 1918. are said to be in favor of the
ratification of the suffrage amendment
to the federal constitution. IL is gen
orally understood that IL they were al
lowed to meet they would ratify the
amendment.
They were elected. however. several
months before Congress decided to sub
nit the amendment to the states. 1t
was on June IL of last year that the
acting secretary of state sent a certified
copy of it to the governors of the forty
eight states with request that 1t be
submitted to the Legislatures.
Governor Clement, in spite of the
fact that he has been urged, "as a
matter of party expediency.' to sum
mon the Legislature in extra session,
sets forth his reasons for refusing to
yield in what lie regards as n matter OF
principle. lie suggests, however. that
the candidates for the Legislature to
be elected this year be required to de-
clare their position on the subject in
order that the Legislature may have
mandate from the people. His course
has merely delayed ratification. il 1t
shall appear that the voters OF the state
favor equal suffrage.
While the women would like to have
the amendment ratified in time for them
to vote in the presidential election this
, wear, and while this result may be Sc
e cured by the action OF the Legislature
e of Tennessee or North Carolina, the
more thoughtful of them would doubt
r less prefer to wait year rather than
n have the ratification brought about in
St any state by a trick or by snap judg-
ID mcnt. Such radical change as is con
l. templated should not be made hastily
10 nor without first assuring ourselves that
N il is the deliberate will Of the people
is The suffragists themselves must admit
= this.
: Governor Clements reasons for hi'
course deserve the serious consideration
'e of all those interested in the preScrva
n ton Of American institutions TIL
IL decision of the Supreme Court in thu
: prohibitory amendment case has set mer
n to thinking about the dangers that Ii,
o in the customary method of amendin!
c the constitution. 1t is now established
;e that two thirds Of majority of tn,
VI members of both houses of Congress
may submit amendments to the states
Conditions can arise under which thi'
two thirds would be much less than {
majority Of all the members elected
Then II the. Legislatures of three
n fourths of the states ratify the amend
n ments thus submitted they become {
Is part of the constitution itself.
s The Legislatures have not always re
o garded the expressed will of the people
In Ohio, after prohibitory amend
II ment to the state constitution had beer
s rejected by popular vote, the l.cgisla
x ture ratified the prohibtory amendment
It to the federal constitution. In this
e state, after the voters had rejected al
a equal suffrage amendment TO the stat,
II constitution, the Legislature ratified thu
= equal suffrage amendment submitted by
10 Congress. And it ratified the prohibi
IS tory amendment also in spite of tn,
n failure to put prohibition in the stat,
N constitution.
'r The constitution Of Tennessee has
et provision forbidding vote on an!
amendment to the federal constitution
l. by Legislature the members of whicl
nt had not been elected after the amend
nent had been submitted to the state
The governor. in spite of this expires
Z sion Of the will of the people, is to cal
is special session of Legislature elected
% In 1918 to vote on an amendment no
submitted until June of 1919. TIL
o, fact that the Supreme Court has decide
q that ratification under such circum
stances would be valid in spite of III
state laws places upon the state au
. thoritics a responsibility which Cover
nor Clement, of Vermont, apparent
n does not intend to Shirk.
:, The constitution Of Vermont restrict
= the privilege of suffrage to males. Tn
ratification of the federal amendmcn
would change the provisions of the stat
, constitution. The governor will no
-. consent that it be changed in this wa
II until the voters have been allowed L
- express their wishes. He is not alon
" in this position, for Governor llOlcOmb
= of Connecticut, refused in March t
" call "a special session of the Legislator
g." at the request of the Republican stat
convention to ratify the federal amend
. ment. He said that he had taken a
= oath to support the state consttutio
, and that the responsibility for actio
=. rested on him and not on the stat
= convention.
V 1t is not necessary to take seriousl
y the plea that the proposed federS
amendment would change the state con
D stitutions, because If carried to its logi
3 cal conclusion it would lead to objec
I tion to every federal amendment whic
e in any way conHicted with state law,
d The real point of the objection of the'
y two governors is to amendments O
s. which the people in their sovereig
capacity have not given their verde
II is an objection to detail in Il
method of ratification by the sta
u Legislatures.
- The constitution provides for tv
o methods of ratification. One is by sui
d missiop to the Legislatures of the re,
n eral states and the other is by submil
sion. to conventions called in the sever
}. states. The convention method HI
ly never been used. II is costly and Gun
y All II.