FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   1119   1120   1121   1122   1123   1124   1125   1126   1127   1128   1129   1130   1131   1132   1133   1134   1135   1136   1137   1138   1139   1140   1141   1142   1143  
1144   1145   1146   1147   1148   1149   1150   1151   1152   1153   1154   1155   1156   1157   1158   1159   1160   1161   1162   1163   1164   1165   1166   1167   1168   >>   >|  
; and it is only through its aid that the ultimate truth of any question can be reached and its principles be correctly established. Nor can courts of justice take exception to such criticism, since the reports abound with evidences of the fact that there is no judicial immunity from error; and we believe that if the glamour of supposed legal impeccability, that shrouds the judiciary in the eyes of many, could be removed, a public service would be accomplished. In the case under consideration an important question of constitutional law was involved, the construction of which affected not only the plaintiff therein, but the entire class of persons to which she belonged, while the decision extends it still further, and makes it applicable to every citizen of the United States. Thus, while the particular case may be ended, the entire community has an interest in the conclusion announced. It is not our purpose to consider the subject of suffrage as an abstract right; with this aspect of it we have nothing to do in this article. We shall treat it solely as a legal right. Under a government of law, indeed, there are, properly speaking, no abstract rights. All rights, of person or of property, are legal rights, and it shall be our purpose to show that the right of Federal suffrage is recognized in the Constitution of the United States, and certainly no one will deny its practical exercise during nearly ninety years. An inspection of the Opinion will show that the whole matter was summed up in the question, whether suffrage is a right or privilege appertaining to citizenship of the United States, for if it be, then the plaintiff's suit was rightly brought. The opinion, which was delivered by the Chief Justice, states the matter as follows: It is contended that the provisions of the Constitution and laws of the State of Missouri, which confine the right of suffrage and registration therefor to men, are in violation of the Constitution of the United States, and therefore void. The argument is, that as a woman, born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, is a citizen of the United States and of the State in which she resides, she has the right of suffrage, as one of
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   1119   1120   1121   1122   1123   1124   1125   1126   1127   1128   1129   1130   1131   1132   1133   1134   1135   1136   1137   1138   1139   1140   1141   1142   1143  
1144   1145   1146   1147   1148   1149   1150   1151   1152   1153   1154   1155   1156   1157   1158   1159   1160   1161   1162   1163   1164   1165   1166   1167   1168   >>   >|  



Top keywords:
States
 

United

 

suffrage

 

rights

 
Constitution
 

question

 
citizen
 

matter

 
entire
 
plaintiff

subject

 

purpose

 

abstract

 

speaking

 

exercise

 
solely
 
property
 

properly

 

person

 
Federal

recognized

 

government

 

practical

 

Missouri

 

confine

 

registration

 

therefor

 

provisions

 
states
 
contended

violation

 
naturalized
 

jurisdiction

 

thereof

 

resides

 

argument

 

Justice

 
summed
 

privilege

 
Opinion

inspection

 

appertaining

 

citizenship

 
brought
 
opinion
 

delivered

 

rightly

 

ninety

 

immunity

 

judicial