The Chattanooga news. [volume] (Chattanooga, Tenn.) 1891-1939, 1920-03-18
Extra Session MayLeUy
Poll Taxon Women for 1919
I which impaIrs The OBLIGATIONS OF a con.
constitutional Provisions

Constitutional Provisions.
ARTICLE |, section O. of the fedora
Constitution provides that no bill Of
attainder. or eX post facto law shall
be passed
"Artice I, section 10, Of the same
Constitution provides that mo stat,
shall enter into any treaty, alliance oil
| confederation; grant letters Of marQu,
| or reprisal; or coin money; emit bills
Of credit; make anything but gold ant
| silver coin a tender in payment Of
| debts, pass any bill OF attalnder %
post facto law or law impairing the OBJ.
| legations Of contracts, or grant any
| title OF nobility
Article !. section II, OF the Tonnes
see Constitution provides that the laws
made for the punishment OF acts COM
| mitted previous to the existence OF
| such laws and by them only declared
| criminal are contrary to the principles
of a free government; wherefore no ex
post facto law shall he made
Elk Post Faeto Question.
Section 20, OF the same article Of
the Tennessee Constitution provides
that no retrospective law or laws Inn
pairing the obligation Of contract shall
be made
1T is well settled that these con-
stitutional provisions forbiding ex post
facto laws apply only to laws respect
ing crimes and criminal punlshments,
and that they have no application what
ever to other retrospective legislation,
Gray, on Limitation OF Taxing Pow
er, p. 923.
THE supreme court OF this state In
speaking OF eX post facto laws says:
blackstone and other law writer's de-
line an ex post facto law to relate TO
punishment; and this certainly was the
sense in which tho trainers of the
Constitution received II, else why make
use OF the expression Retrospective"
also2'--Jones VS.. Jones, Second Tonnes
see, p. 4.
80 the levy of poll tax by legis-
lation in 1920 for the year. 1919 would
not be an ex post facto law. To pass
an act requiring the woman voter TO
furnish evidence Of the payment OF this
tax as condition precedent to her
right TO vote and fixing a penalty for
the violation thereof. would not be an
ex post facto law, because the crime
would not consist of the failure TO pay
the tax. but would consist OF the fact
OF voting after the passage Of the law,
and coupled with IT, the failure TO fur
nish evidence of paying the tax. The
payment of the tax. the procurement
OF the evidence OF the payment, the
furnishing OF this evidence 10 the otfi-
Ger of election, and the act Of voting
are all done and committed after the
passage of the law and not before
Therefore the failure to furnish this
evidence OF payment and voting with
out such failure which constitutes the
crime or penalty, are acts committed
after and not before the law was
passed. | am. therefore, of the opin-
ion that such acts can be passed with
out violating the ex post facto clauses
of the federal and state Constitutions
Retrospective Contracts.
I'm discussing Article 20 above
quoted as TO retrospective law, the SUI
preme court has said:
I'VE have viewed with earnest at
tention the bin of rights. section co.
and have considered the Inconvenience
duce, and have finally settled down In
this opinion that the word ''retrospec-
tive" as In tho North Carolina and
Maryland constitutions, It is followed
by explanatory words. so here Il Is
explained by the words which immedi-
ately follow, ''or law impairing the OBJ
legation of contract" and that the whole
gether mean that no retrospective law
which impRirs their obligation shall
he made. the latter words relating
TO both tho preceding substan-
lives; and, therefore, that the terms re-
Prospective alone, without the explana-
tory words, can have no influence IN
this discussion. Townsend vs.. Town
send and others, Tennessee, iB.
1T Is then only such Retrospective
laws ms impair the obligations OF con-
tracts that are prohibited by both the
federal and Tennessee Constitutions,
tween the state OF Tennessee and the
women OF Tennessee growing out of
the Constitution OF the state which
would he impaired by the passage OF
such a law,
THE holding OF the supreme court In
the Nertrees case that the taxing clause |
Of tho Constitution did not exempt
women from taxation or preclude the |
legislature from oNenpting them act |
Hes the question. They mad. therefore. |
no constitutional right or contract right |
TO be exempt from the payment OF n |
poll tax, They were exempt In 1919, !
simply because the legislature failed !
pr declined TO levy and ASSESS the poll |
AK against them.
THE question as to whether or not |
he levy OF n poll tnx against women |
N one year for the preceding or pre- !
fious year constitutes an ex post facto |
aw or q retrospective law which Inn |
'alrs the obligations OF contract has |
never been decided so far as / have
been able TO ind, by any court, state
,r federal, IN this Union, Such n law
With the added requirement OF the FUR
lishinE evidence ~ the payment OF tho
Doll tnx ms condition precedent 10
ne IlEUl ~ Npit una UNlng n penalty !
herefor, clearly would not he an oN
'ost facto law. I do not think. either.
hat II would he retrospective law
mpairing the obligations of contract
or tho reason that the federal govern
nent has frequently levied taxes IN
no year 10 BIO paid a. OF the previous
ear
I'm 1919. congress through tho fed
raj Income tax law. created "A sur tax
r profit tax on business transacted and
Incomes derived during tho year 1918. L
has rot ben thought by anyone that
his was either mn ex post facto law
r n retrospective law which violates
he obligations OF n contract I there
ore think that the legislature could
v levyinE ana assessing u poll tax
pom nl women for the year 1913. ana
squirting same 10 be paid at n date
rior to any election In Tennessee for
he year 1920 ana also nm net requir-
* each woman voter 10 furnish owl
ence OF such payment to tho election
/