New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1920-08-25
BY William Howard Taft

He' '1''s w fhoHc Ledger COMPANY
PHILADELPHIA, Aug 24.--The Nine
'eehsh Amendment to the Federal Con
s1'tueion, which has now been adopted
ny the affirmative vote of the Leris
iature of Tennessee as the thirty
sixeh state to ratify IT, reads as fol
Inc right of citizens of the United
o.Ates 10 vote shall not be denied o,
abridged by the United States or an,
STATE on account of SEX"
rms is called the "Anthony" amend.
ment. because first framed ana intro.
oueed into Congress more than fort,
years ago at the instance of Susan r
Anthony, one of the leading advocates
OF woman suffrage. The suffrage
aamendment was drawn in the exac,
.orm, mutatis mutandis, of the Fiji
l Iesnth Amendment, which read as fol
The right of citizens of the United
states to vote shall not be denied O,
abridged by the United States or BY
any state on account of race, color OF
previous condition of servitude."
both amendments contain as a sec.
ono section the following:
Inc Congress shall have power t.
enforce this article by appropriate
legislation"
IL was very wise in the trainers of
1he Anthony amendment to follow in
exact words the Fifteenth Amendment
because the latter amendment has
oeen construed by the Supreme Court
IN several cases, and it's effect upon
state legislation as to elections and
electors has been made clear beyond
dispute.
The Supreme Court has affirmed
.nat women have always been citizens
fo1 the United States if born or natural
1zed IN the United States and that the
fourteenth Amendment merely con-
nrmed this; but the court denied that
citlzenship of the United States car
rleo with 1t the right to vote. The
court expressed the unanimous opinion
that the Constitution did net confer
me right of suffrage upon any one and
mat the constitutions and laws of the
several states which committed that
important trust to men alone were not
void. 1t held that the Fifteenth Amend
ment did not confer the richt of suf
frage on any one, that it merely pre-
vented the states or the United States
from giving preference, in this par
ocular, to one citizen of the United
States over another on account of race
tude
In subsequent cases, however, where
II was commended in view Of this princi-
PIE that Congress could not protect the
rlght to vote of negroes by penal legis-
!atlon, the court amplitied and explained
us previous ruling, in the language of
Mr. justice Miller, as follows:
Supreme Court Runnr
hile 1t is quite true, as was said by
thls court IN U. S. vs.. Reese, 80 L. S. 21S.
that this article (the Fifteenth Amend
mentl gives TO affirmative right to vote.
ana is designed primarily to prevent
ulscrlmlnatlon against him whenever
ehe rlght to vote may be granted to
others, 1T is easy to see that under
some circumstances it NAV operate as
the immediate source of a right to vote.
IN an cases when the former slave
noldlng states had not removed from
their constitution the words white
man as qualification for voting, this
provision did, in effect, confer on him
ehe right to vote, because, being para
mount to the state law and part Of
the state law, it annulled the discrim-
mating word white. and thus left him
IN the enjoyment of the same right as
white persons, and such would be the
effect of any future constitutional nro1
VISION of state which should give the
right of voting exclusively to white peo-
pie, whether they be men or women
IN such cases this Fifteenth Amendnen+
does, proprio vigare, substantially con-
Ter on the negro the right to vote and
congress has the power to protect and
enforce that right"
1t follows from this authoritative
construction of the Fifteenth Amend
mcnt that the Nineteenth Amerdman+
as passed does not need any affilmative
action by the states to give women the
right to vote at once. 1t is se}f-exo-
cutting. 1t by its own force amends
every election law of every state so as
to include in the state electorate
women as we'll as men, where onlv
men were given the right to vote be-
tore. OF course, woman cannot vote
who, if she had been a man, could not
have voted under the laws of the state
where she lives. She must in all re-
spects have the qualifications which
men voters must have under the cleo
ton laws, but if she fulfills these re-
quirements she can vote and the state
cannot prevent her so doing, and no de-
lay of the state in recognizing or act
ing on the new amendment can preju-
dice her right to vote.
States Must Grant Rights
Election officers of the state who
impede or deny her right to vote ex-
pose themselves to prosecution under
statutes, whether Federal or state
enacted, to protect citizens in their
lawful right to vote. 1t may we'll be
that the doubling of the number Of
voters in every state by this amend
ment will require for the convenience
of voters amendments to the election
laws of the states, but such inconveni-
ence cannot be made any excuse for
preventing women from exercising the
franchise.
The anti-suffragist forces expect,
however, to ccctest the validity of the
ratification by the Tennessee Legis-
lature under the following clause in
the constitution of Tennessee:
"a convention or general assembly
of this state shall not act upon any
amendment of the Constitution of the
Irr;taI Statar -