The Chattanooga news. [volume] (Chattanooga, Tenn.) 1891-1939, 1920-09-10

| TRAN we nave done IN numerous other
cases.
The most precious privilege OF free
men Is to unite with others Of their
kind in legislation, and there Ia no law
as important as the organic law--the
charter or constitution. When a prop
osition attracts to It the support Of
three-fourths Of the states It Is evil
IDENTIFY high time the objections Of q
small minority were disregarded. The
] highest Of states rights Is to unite in
bringing about such q change In our
| laws.
The constitution Of the United States
Ia one OF the most precious charters
that exist today. But the difficulty
met with in amending It has furnished
refuge for the reactionary elements
which have fought every great reform.
, II was contended that such an amend
ment as that forbldding the manufac-
| ture and sale OF intoxicants could not
| be imposed on another state. but tho
supreme court made short work Of that
! contention.
| We witnessed In Tennessee when the
Nineteenth amendment was before the
| legislature the desperate methods which
were resorted to by the remnants OF
| tho elements which continue to tight for
booze, and have Joined hand In hand
with those who fear liberal legislation,
| md prefer that women shall not vote,
states rights" negro domination"
and various other cries were raised. The
pleas are speclous and II was fortunate
for the country that Tennessee dis
nIsssed them one and ALL
States rights to those who UNDER
stand our form Of government include
tho retention by tho state OF the con-
troll OF Its internal affairs, so far ms
| these do not vitality effect the affairs
Of the nation. Tho right Of representa-
tive government In reserved to the state
and tho right OF the state to equal rep
rcsontation In the senate. John G.
Calhoun contended that the state re-
tNired a right TO nullify federal law.
but Andrew Jackson proved to the con-
| trnry. The right OF secession seemed to
| bo In, the constitution. but the Civil
| war ended that controversy and for
tunately so. A state may maintain as
ANTICIPATED local institutions as II
| chooses. II Ia only as In the case OF
who shall be permitted to exercise ct-
izenship, which affects not only that
state, but others who are legislated for
by congress elected by the voters OF
all the people and presided over by
president chosen by all tho people. Nor
| could the people OF the states which de-
sired to get rid Of the liquor traffic al
low II to continue TO exist in few. II
would have complicated the problem.
II states were denied the right TO
unite with others In amending the con-
stitution then indeed we would have an
abridgement OF states rights which
would be un-American and dangerous.
Not even Calhoun or Jefferson Davis
ever advanced the theory we 40 often
hear today that there Ia any invasion
or states rights when three -fourths OF
tho states adopt an amendment against
the vote of one-fourth. II is true the
thirteenth. fourteenth and fifteenth
amendments were opposed IN the south,
but on the ground Of eSpedlency more
than on any contention that such
amendments were contrary 10 the con-
stitutlon.
Having given the black man the vote
" was certain TO follow that the white
women would be put on an equality
with him In the franchise. BY the time
that was done the negro voter had
ceased to be menace, In fact, the
south would not now, n II could, re.
peal the war amendments, because they
contain democratic justice,
but the question OF whether or not
constitutional amendment affects the
rights OF the states must not be consid-
cred from the point OF view OF whatever
prejudice we may Justly or unjustlv
have az to the amendments brought
about by the new status Of the negro.
Since the Fifteenth amendment three
others have been ratified, all affecting
tho states to an extent. the prohibition
amendment even invading its police
power, The south, ms stated, was en-
thuslsstic for that amendment. although
Il curtailed states sovereignty. So the
extent OF our feeling over those mat
tiers depends much on whose OK is
gored,
Those who are opposed. to suffrage
should he frank. II Is not their con-
Germ over states rights that influences
them, Too often II II some unproFres-
siNo prNiudiCe or raactionarv interest