Great Falls tribune. [volume] (Great Falls, Mont.) 1921-current, 1922-02-28

cause adopted in violation of legislative
procedure in those states, may have
been rendered ''immaterial," the court
declared. by the subsequent ratifica-
ton OF the amendment by Connecticut
and Vermont. The contention was dis
posed Of, however, on a broader ground,
| the court stated, adding that the Sec
| lamation of the ratification of the
amendment by the legislatures of 36
states. the amendment to all intents
and purposes had become a part of
the constitution.
AS Tennessee and West Virginia had
power to ratify, and had officially mott
fled the secretary of state that they
had done SO, their action would be
/ binding upon the secretary and upon
being certified by that official had be-
come conclusive upon the courts. The
| court announced in disposing of the
case. which had been brought on APP
peal on writ of error, that il. granted
the petition of the parties for a writ
of certiorari. but the decision today so
thoroughly disposed Of the objections
urged. there seemed in the opinion Of
court officials. on probability that any
argument could be presented which
would cause the court to change its
views.
Ends 72-Year Battle
Declaring the decision a final and
complete official recognition of the
victory of 72-year campaign b. the
women of the United States Alice
Paul, vice president of the national
woman's party, issued a statement in
which she said, Women are now free
to devote their energies to completing
the equal rights program" She as
serted that suffrage was only one plank
and that women asked IAN equal share
in all political offices, honors and emol-
uments; complete equity in marriage;
equality in regard to personal free
dom. property, wages and children.
and equal rights in the courts. schools,
trades and professions"
Lose in Lower Court
The federal courts in the District Of
Columbia and the state courts in Mary
land where the cases. respectively. |
were. originally brought, ruled against
the objections to the amendment. In
the oral arguments in the supreme |
court in the Fairchild case, the govern
ment contended that the secretary Of !
state having issued the ratification |
proclamation there was nothing to re-
strain, and that the case therefore be |
came moot, not presenting a contro
versy for judicial decision In the /
Lesser case the government acknowl-
edged that the proceedings had been
by voters who had sufficient /
interest TO warrant their presence in
court, but that the issue raised was
political, one for decision by congress
or for settlement in some other avenue
than by adjudication IN the courts.
While the state of Maryland had re
fused to ratify the amendment, it was
pointed out the state also refused to
question it's constitutionality.
The power of congress to propose
the amendment TO the state legislatures
for ratification was assailed by its op-
ponents on the ground that the people
reserved to themselves in their state
the right to regulate suf-
frage, and that the federal government
legally could not have anything what
ever to do with changing the sovereign
power embodied in suffrage quail
fications.
Argue Peoples Intentions
"The people were not setting I'D an
agency for their own de-
'tructlon. the opponents commended,
asserting, that in limiting federal juris
LECTION the sovereign people" did not
intend that their agents conducting
he federal government. should have
he power to betray them. Following
his line of argument it was argued that
he people alone by amendments to
heir state constitutions or by consti-
utional convention called for one plr-
'ose could extend or abridge their SOW
reignty.
The fifteenth or race suffrage
adopted after the war be-
Ween the states, was not a precedent,
tp1 h,-t Ia
ause it was an expression of the ire
ults Of revolution 'acquiesced in by
II the people. for the Reconstruction
t the nation. by extending. to the negro
ace freedom and equality. ''for which
he war was fought" Any other method
or permanently registering the mex
rable decree of the civil war would
ave been equally effective 1T was
rgued
Should it be held, notwithstanding
hese objections, that congress had con.
titutional power to submit the amend
lent for ratification by state legisla-
lres. the prescribed three fourths of
he legislatures. required for constitu-
pproval, the opponents of women's
lffrage insisted. naming Missouri
ennessee and West Virginia, counted
mong the thirty-six states necessary
y, RI ratification as. not having legally
Say Issues Political
Declaring the. issues presented were
POLITICAL" seeking to obtain from he
,urt an opinion" or CONSTRUCTION" =
J the contentious raised, the govern
emf asserted that the supreme court 4
had refused to deliver an
lnterrpretation' of the law because it
as beyond its power. It took this
'sition when requested for an "opin-
n by George Washington, and has
! repeated occasions adhered to it.
Whether the government Of state
as republican in it's nature; and
neither proposed constitutional :
nendment had received the approval q
the necessary number of state legis
lures. are not, the friends of the
nendment insisted, judicial questions
eplying, however, to the assertion
at the amendment had not been
gally ratified, the government assert
that Missouri, Tennessee and West