The History of Woman Suffrage, Volume IV — John Shaqi
The History of Woman Suffrage, Volume IV
History
The History of Woman Suffrage, Volume IV
Women -- Suffrage -- History; Women -- Suffrage -- United States -- History; Women's rights -- History; Women's rights -- United States -- History
Thus, wherever woman turns in this boasted republic, from ocean to
ocean, from lakes to gulf, seeking the citizen's right of
self-representation, she is met by a dead wall of constitutional
prohibition. It has been held in some of the States that this applies
only to State and county suffrage and that the Legislature has power
to grant the Municipal Franchise to women. Kansas is the only one,
however, which has given such a vote. A bill for this purpose passed
the Legislature of Michigan, after years of effort on the part of
women, and was at once declared unconstitutional by its Supreme Court.
Similar bills have been defeated in many Legislatures on the ground of
unconstitutionality. It is claimed generally that they may bestow
School Suffrage and this has been granted in over half the States, but
frequently it is vetoed by the Governor as unconstitutional, as has
been done several times in California. In New York, after four Acts of
the Legislature attempting to give School Suffrage to all women, three
decisions of the highest courts confined it simply to those of
villages and country districts where questions are decided at "school
meetings." Eminent lawyers hold that even this is "unconstitutional."
(See chapter on New York.) The Legislature and courts of Wisconsin
have been trying since 1885 to give complete School Suffrage to women
and yet they are enabled to exercise it this year (1902) for the first
time. (See chapter on Wisconsin.) Some State constitutions provide, as
in Rhode Island, that no form even of School Suffrage can be
conferred on women until it has been submitted as an amendment and
sanctioned by a majority of the voters.
The constitutions of a number of States declare that it shall not be
sufficient to carry an amendment for it to receive a majority of the
votes cast upon it, but it must have a majority of the largest vote
cast at the election. Not one State where this in the case ever has
been able to secure an amendment for any purpose whatever. Minnesota
submitted this question itself to the electors in 1898 in the form of
an amendment and it was carried, receiving a total of 102,641, yet the
largest number of votes cast at that election was 251,250, so if its
own provisions had been required it would have been lost. Nebraska is
about to make an effort to get rid of such a provision, but, as this
can be done only by another amendment to the constitution, the dilemma
is presented of the improbability of securing a vote for it which
shall be equal to the majority of the highest number cast at the
general election. Since it is impossible to get such a vote even on
questions to which there is no special objection, it is clearly
evident that an amendment enfranchising women, to which there is a
large and strong opposition, would have no chance whatever in States
making the above requirement.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account