The Chattanooga news. [volume] (Chattanooga, Tenn.) 1891-1939, 1920-03-18
Gen. Thompson Renders 0pin-
ion That Such Statute
Would Not Be Ex-
Post Facto.

Atty Gen. Frank Nj. Thompson
opinion on the right of the legisla
ture to levy poll tax for the yea
1919 at this late date is now in IA
vor of the proposition. IL will b
remembered that when the question
of levying a poll tax on women 70
1919 as a prerequisite for their vot
ing in the 1920 elections was dis
cussed in the fall of last year the at
torney-general said that the poll ia,
was levied as of Jan. 10 every yea
and when that date had passed M
law could be enacted which would b,
retroactive. The encouragement
has looked into the question further
however, and his exhaustive opinion
just rendered sustaining the conten,
ton that II will not be necessary K
amend the state constitution, on &C.
count of the federal suffrage amend.
ment, or enact any other legislation
so as to qualify women as voters, al
the same time indicates that the way
is open to levy poll tax on women
and put them In the same category
as men as respects the poll tax, and
| he advises that this be done as a
|
| ton might be asked for from the
federal court, which might leave the
question undecided at the time of the
election.
Gen. Thompson's analysis OF the
federal and state suffrage laws is one
of the most complete and exhaustive
that has ever been prepared, He
traces the history of federal amend
10
tive in his opinion that the enact
ment of the Susan b. Anthony
amendment strikes the words male"
from our constitution as affecting the
vote.
AS Gen. Thompson puts It: The
proposed amendment says that the
right of citizens of the United States
TO vote shall not be denied or
abridged by the United States or by
any state on account Of sex
Under the foregoing rules and
holdings of the supreme court of the
United States, this woman suffrage
amendment, then, will, ex propria
vigore, eliminate the words male
citizen in the constitution of every
state in the Union, including that of
Tennessee, and permit every citi-
zen, whether male or female. to vote.
subject alone to such conditions as to
qualifications as the states may pre-
scribe which do not pertain to sex"
On the poll tax provision. and the
subject alone to such conditions as to
Tennessee situation peculiar, no other
like it having been discovered. The
text Of his opinion In this respect is
the gist of the whole matter as II af-
fects Tennessee and makes an extra
session OF the legislature desirable,
and is therefore given in full as fol-
lows:
Gen. Thompson's Opinion.
1.-THE foregoing, however. leaves open
this question: As to whether or not
the failure OF the legislature to meet
and levy and assess a poll tax upon
women as a condition precedent TO their
right to vote, whereas such levy. as
sessment and furnishing evidence OF
payment thereof is now required by the
laws of Tennessee ms n condition prece-
dent TO mans right 70 vote, Is not
in and OF itself an abrdgement OF the
rights of men under the amendment
itself when it Is ratified, which pre-.
vents the United States or any state
from denying or abrdging the right of
suffrage on account of sex?
by the Constitution and statutes of
Tennessee a poll tax is levied and as
sessed against all males under the tax
ing clause, which has no relation to
suffrage; but under the suffrage clause
and statutes he Is required to furnish
evidence that he has paid his poll tax
for the year preceding the one In which
he votes, The women are exempt from
these conditions. The question can and
probably will be made that this In an
abrdgement. under the amendment it.
self. OF the rights Of men This ques-
ton, OF course. is Federal question,
which cannot be decided until tine
amendment is ratified and the question
actually arises.
my opinion is It is not an abrdge-
ment for the following reasons:
~. Under the taxing clause, the
state has a right to levy poll tax
aga inst men. and not women. without
10 Under the suffrage clause, wom-
mn IL rendered amendahle 20 poll
tax when and only when. or rather,
sessed against her. /
course. to furnish evidence of tho pay |
men, OF it until II is levied and as
seseed.
q. At tho time when the last poll |
tax was levied and assessed by tho |
and the law, she was not |
amenahle to tho poll tax by law, nor |
was she granted the privilege OF SUI
fraRe. that is. in 1919
cutting down OF the right This con-
struction OF these acts does not cut
down the rights Of man, and he is not
entitled to protection, either under the
state Constitution or the Federnl Con-
stitution, upon the ground that suffrage
Is an immunity or privilege covered
by either constitutions.
"Still, the question can and probably
will be made, and an Injunction bin
iled In the federal court seeking 10 en-
oin women from voting until the logis-
allure has met md assessed against
hem a poll tax and required them 10
furnish evidence Of the payment OF
tame This litigation. In my opinion,
would fail I'm the end, but II might hold
he injunction sufficiently long enough
o permit the election 10 pass. and thus
leprive the women OF Tennessee OF the
light of suffrage.
''Can the Legislature now levy poll |
AK 80 as 10 qualify women to vote In
$40? .,
"The poll tax mentioned in Article
T. Section 2s Is 10 he levied and as I ,
essed annually. That Is, the poll tax
,eriod is an annual period The pre-
eding period mentioned in Article ~.
lection ]. for which the poll tax must
a paid and evidence thereof furnished ,
3 a condition precedent 10 the right
4 which the vote IL cast and, Therefore.
,ould he tho poll tax n 1919. the
allot being conferred on the women in
900
"Two questions then arise, that IL.
neither or not tho levy ana assrsa- q
ient Of n poll tax IN 1920 for the year I
re and the requirement that evidence I
tho payment OF the same be fur- (
iehed 10 the officers ~ the election hy 4
le women az condition precedent 70 {
leir right 20 vote would constitute an !
y-post facto law or retrospective law :