Evening public ledger. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1914-1942, 1920-09-13
ANT[SUFFRAG|STS
CONTINUE FIGHT
Delegation From Tennessee to
Explain Situation to Sec
retary Colby
RATIFICATION HELD INVALID


Washington. Sept, f3. - Anti suf
fragists still hope 10 be able to convince
the State Department the proclamation
Of suffrage ratification should be with
drawn. Officials OF the National Asso
citation Opposed to Woman Suffrage an
nounced last night that delegation
from the Tennessee Legislature, headed
by Seth NJ. Walker, speaker OF tn,
House, had left Nashville for Washing
ton in order to place before Secretar,
Colby on Tuesday the status OF suffrage
ratification in the Tennessee Assembly
According to the "antis" here the
Tcnnesseans will seek to convince Mr..
Colby that suffrage was not legally rati-
fed, and that unless the proclamation
is withdrawn endless confusion and a
number OF contests over the November
election will result.
After an interview with the secretary
Of state the Tennessee party expects
to visit Maryland and Connecticut in
an effort to block the passage Of en-
nblirg legislation in those tw) statcs.
The antis declared last night the pub
liSh+"l statement that the scCi :lary OF
state would "stard pat" on tt" rr"cln =
nation would make no difference In
their plans. They denied that Tennes-
see attempted to 'rescinG" or with =
draw ratification and maintain that
ratification was never accomplished ia
Tennessee.
Speake. Walker Explains
A statement from Speaker Walker
explaining the legislative "tangle' in
Tennessee. which was made public here
tonigt, follows: ..
"On Wednesday, August 1S, mo-
ton was made In the House that Senate
joint resolution No. I, ratifying the
nineteenth amendment. lay upon the
table. This motion failed, the vote be-
ing a tie, 4S. to AZ. The question then
REQUIRED in the House concurring in the
said Joint resolution by vote of At
to A.. but before the clerk announced
the vote and before the speaker de-
clared the result. changed my vote
from no to aye and entered upon the
journal motion to reconsider. Under
all rules of parliamentary law this was
privileged motion.
The House met on August 10 and Au-
gust 20 without any action being taken
on the motion to reconsider. On Sat.
urday. August 21, in the absence OF a
quorum, as the journal affirmatively
shows. an effort was made to call the
said joint resolution No. from the
journal. and in the absence of quorum
the House refused to reconsider.
THE motion to reconsider was en- =
tered on the Journal on August Is,
Until this motion was lawfully disposed
of the clerk could not transmit to the
Senate said joint resolution No. /. II
no motion had been entered on the
Journal for reconsideration within
two days next succeeding August IS
then under Rule 81 it would have been
out Of order for any member to make a
motion to reconsider. Said Rule No. 81
does not provide that motion to recon
slider shall be disposed of within two
days, but it does provide that it shal
be in order for any member voting witt
the prevailing side to move for re
consideration at any time the same day
or the next two succeeding days of nc
tual session. This rule has alwayi
been recognized and followed as l hav,
interpreted the same herein.
THE motion to reconsider was en-
tered on the Journal the minute the
vote was cast and the rule was com
piled with when the first day quorum
was present on September l the House
did reconsider its action and noncon
Cured in said joint resolution No. l
Tennessee, under Section 80 of Article
NJ of her constitution, could moi
ratify the amendment at this session
Furthermore. Tennessee has not done
so, AS an examination OF HARE VS.
Rice. 204 U. s.. 291; State VS.. AL
good, 81 Tennessee, 1853: Y. s. VS.
Balliu, 144 U. S. l, 5 Lansing IN. r.
II. and the Hawke vs.. Smith (Ohlc
referendum) decisions will prove.