To the President and Members of the Constitutional Convention:

The undersigned, members of the legal profession, having a common interest with other citizens of Utah, not only in the formation of a good Constitution, but in a regular submission of it for adoption by the people, and observing that there is considerable diversity of opinion on the question whether the persons who may exercise the elective franchise under this Constitution, if adopted, may vote at the election next November for its ratification or rejection, we offer the following suggestions on that subject: Section 4 of the Enabling Act fixes the time for that election and contains this language, as to voters: “The qualified voters of said proposed State shall vote directly for or against the proposed Constitution and for or against any provision separately submitted.” Section 2 also contains a provision on the same subject in these words: “Persons possessing the qualifications entitling them to vote for delegates under this act, shall be entitled to vote on the ratification or rejection of the Constitution.” They are “all male citizens of the United States over the age of 21 years who have resided in this Territory for one year next prior to such election.” It is supposed by some that the persons thus mentioned in section 2 are the only persons entitled to vote for or against the Constitution, on the maxim that the mention of one person or class is an exclusion of others. The maxim is sound and applicable, for the right to vote at this election must be granted and the right can be exercised only by those to whom it is granted. The mention of those who may vote need not be in one section exclusively. Particular persons may be mentioned in one section and others in another, section and the maxim will cover the accumulative enumeration, and only those not mentioned in either section will be excluded. Does section 4 profess to confer the right to vote, and by a different and possibly more comprehensive description than that contained in section 2? We think it does. The qualified voters of the proposed State are manifestly those who will be qualified voters when the proposed State becomes a State, those who possess the qualifications that the Constitution of the proposed State requires. The persons declared entitled to vote in section 2 are not declared in that section to be qualified voters of the proposed State, and in our judgment the Constitution might be so framed that no male citizen only 21 years of age could vote, so that no citizen who has not resided in Utah longer than one year could vote.

On the other hand, the Constitution may so define the qualification of voters that they may exercise the right at and over eighteen years of age, and after six months' residence. If so, it may define the right in a manner to make no distinction between the sexes. The qualified voters of the proposed State, according to the requirements of the Constitution, including the persons mentioned in section 2, whether they possess all the constitutional qualifications or not, would seem plainly to be the persons to whom the Constitution must be submitted. In other words, if women are guaranteed in the Constitution the right to vote, they have the right to vote on the ratification or rejection of the Constitution. It has been suggested that the expression “qualified voters of the proposed State,” means the voters within the boundaries of Utah, and has no force to require anything, but being voters within that area. Doubtless it requires residence within that area, for it requires them to be qualified voters. To be such, they must have all the qualifications enumerated in the Constitution_It should be borne in mind that constitutions generally prescribe the qualification of the persons to whom the question of their adoption is submitted; those who will be qualified to vote after the adoption of a constitution may fitly be trusted to decide whether it shall be adopted. The submission of the Constitution to the qualified voters of the proposed State follows the American practice, is strikingly consistent with the other features of the Enabling Act, with providing for the election of the first State officers at the very election at which the adoption of the Constitution is to be decided.

Signed,

J. G. SUTHERLAND,

CHARLES C. DRY,

JOHN A. MARSHALL,

GEORGE SUTHERLAND,

H. P. HENDERSON.

• Communication from J. G. Sutherland and Others [1895-04-30] (introduced on 1895-04-30 09:00:00 - CREATE - e695826) [This document]

• Communication from J. G. Sutherland and Others [1895-04-30] (introduced on 1895-04-30 09:00:00 - CREATE - e695826) [This document] [view current proposal at this moment]
  • Read: Communication from J. G. Sutherland and Others (introduced on 1895-04-30 09:00:00 - PROCEDURE - e695827) [view current proposal at this moment]
    • None (introduced on 1895-04-30 09:00:00 - ADOPT_PROPOSAL - e695828) [view current proposal at this moment]
    • Drop: Communication from J. G. Sutherland and Others (introduced on 1895-04-30 09:00:00 - PROCEDURE - e695829) [view current proposal at this moment]
      • None (introduced on 1895-04-30 09:00:00 - DEBATE_MOTION - e695830) [view current proposal at this moment]
      • None (introduced on 1895-04-30 09:00:00 - ADOPT_PROPOSAL - e695831) [view current proposal at this moment]