[Previous Day][Next Day][Back to Menu of Days]

NOTE: You may notice textual errors throughout this document, many of which have been left intact from the original text. Should you want to investigate the integrity of the original report, please refer to the original two printed volumes containing the official report of the proceedings and debates.

President Smith in the chair.

Roll call showed a quorum present.

Prayer offered by Rev. Francis Herman, of the Scandinavian M. E. Church.

Journal of the twenty-seventh day's proceedings read by the secretary and approved.

Petitions and memorials.

A supplement to file No. 166, asking for prohibition, was received and referred to committee on schedule, future amendments and miscellaneous.

The committee on revenue, taxation and public debt reported, and the report was ordered printed and placed on the calendar of the committee of the whole.

The privilege of the floor was granted to Messrs. Sudberry and Judd.

The Convention then resolved itself into committee of the whole to consider the article on elections and right of suffrage, with Mr. Goodwin in the chair.

COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE.

Mr. EICHNOR. Mr. Chairman, I ask for information; how many amendments are before the house?

The CHAIRMAN. One, I believe_one substitute.

Mr. EICHNOR. Mr. Chairman, I submit the following amendment, and move that everything be struck out and this be inserted in lieu thereof:

The following article shall be submitted as a separate article to the qualified electors for adoption or rejection at the election for the adoption of the Constitution:

Section 1. The rights of citizens of the State of Utah to vote and hold office shall not be denied or abridged on account of sex. Both male and female citizens of this State shall equally enjoy {536} all civil, political, and religious rights and privileges.

Mr. THURMAN. Mr. Chairman, I wish to make a point of order on the substitute, that it is not in order; it is not germane to the question before this committee to propose something to be submitted to the people hereafter as an amendment to a paragraph proposed to be placed in the Constitution; it is an independent question entirely. It has little or no relevancy. It may be all right for the gentleman to offer that as something he proposes to offer in case the proposed amendment is voted down, and in case the paragraph proposed by the committee is rejected. But to propose it now is a matter of argument; I do not think it ought to be considered; I do not think it is germane.

Mr. EICHNOR. Mr. Chairman, it is in the form of an amendment; I hold that it is strictly proper. It removes the whole subject and inserts something in lieu thereof. The move may be a little different by which it is reached, but certainly it bears on the subject.

The CHAIRMAN. The amendment has a direct bearing on this subject. It simply proposes to change the manner of reaching it. I think it is in order. The question will be on the amendment of Mr. Eichnor.

Mr. JOLLEY. Mr. Chairman, the condition we are in this morning reminds me of a couple of travelers who were traveling from one town to another in our county, and there came up a snow storm and they missed their way and were lost for a while. Finally the storm cleared away, they saw they were verging into a town, and meeting a boy on the street, one said to him, “Young man, where are we?” And I would like to ask the question this morning, where are we? If I understand it properly, all the gentlemen that are here upon this floor upon both sides, have come fully to an understanding, that they will vote for suffrage providing that would be true to the wishes of their constituents. It is true one or two have taken an opposite view and have spoken very fluently in their way of vindicating their side, and it is also true that we have some petitions, that have been recently, and quite recently too, hastily gotten up to sideswitch the suffrage question, and let the people vote on it. But in no instance that I am aware of up unto the present time, have we had a petition anywhere in Utah to lay the suffrage question aside entirely_that they were opposed to it. I did not expect to speak upon this question in the beginning of our Convention labors. There were a few that seemed to be desirous of occupying the floor, and I was willing to let them do so; but it appears to me that this question has been the chief topic that we are to take in hand. From the county where I have come, I take it that women want what we care to give them. Had they not wished it, they would have handed in a petition or said something to me or my co-laborers before we came here. It is true that the young man who has been referred to from our county (Mr. Lund) that said the women from Sanpete County did not want suffrage, has gleaned his information from some source that I am unacquainted with, and I think it is an assumption on his part to make such an assertion. And I imagine, he being a single man, that he would have been associated with the younger class, that possibly they whispered in his ear, and told him they would trust their suffrage in this {537} life to him, but as for the married ladies, as for the mothers, I think if they did not want suffrage they would have said something about it,

and gave us a different position to stand upon than we are in at the present time. It as been said here by some of the former speakers that they are better than men. Yes, we will concede that, but I have never known many men that will go into the washtub. Their wives will go there. They are not too good to go there, or at least, Mr. Chairman, the ladies of our county are not too good to go into the washtub. They are not too good to stay in the kitchen all day, and my position that I occupy here to-day, is not exactly one of my own choice, for the simple reason that I have been elected upon the platform that grants or promises to grant equal suffrage to women with men. I can see no harm in them having that right. We have by those who have opposed the principle, the language that woman was made to be by the side of man, not following after him, not to be his lead. I will agree with that speaker. I do not expect that any of the ladies would want to be elected as justice of the peace. I trust they would not, for I believe it would go against the wishes of any American citizen for his wife to say, “take this husband of mine off to the lock-up.” I would not like for my wife to say that to me. But the granting of this boon that we have promised them is one question, and going back on our word is another, and that is a serious one.

I am very much surprised at some of the leading men in Salt Lake County. I have wondered in my mind if some of us were not acting more like school boys than the intelligent men that have been selected to represent the Territory all over, to come here to make laws. I cannot see how it is that the chairman of the republican party of Salt Lake City can construe the meaning of that plank which is inserted in the republican platform as he does. I was out of the Territory at the time that the parties divided on party lines; when I came back, in the place of finding my family as I had left them, quiet and not thinking of politics, I found my wife and daughter aroused to politics, their thoughts were upon politics, not only that, but not knowing anything about my views, for I had never expressed them before I left them, had taken up party issues. They had declared themselves in the family circle to be republicans. On going to the first political meeting I did not behold simply the faces of men, but as I see here before me this morning, a mixed congregation. They were gentlemen, they were ladies, and it appeared to me from all I could see that one sex enjoyed what was said as much as the other, and took as great an interest in it. Mr. Chairman, suppose that we succeed in getting a State government, and send our senators east to represent fair Utah, we send them on the basis of silver sixteen to one, they go down there, they meet with men that are able to speak eloquently, as brilliant minds as there is in the great nation whom we represent a part of, and they would say to our senators from Utah, “Well, how do you stand out in the west on the silver question?” “Oh, we are solid, we have come down here to represent our people, and they want the double standard, sixteen to one.” “Ah, that will hardly do, you must not be so selfish as that to represent your little district of the country, but when you come here, you come here to legislate for the whole nation. Why we people down here in New York, if we go to the bank and they go to shifting us out the silver we tell them we don't want to be loaded with the bullion. We want the gold.”

Mr. RICKS. Mr. Chairman, I arise to a point of order. My point is this. Rule 20 says that no member shall speak more than twice on the same subject, {538} nor more than five minutes at any one time. I have allowed the gentleman to speak ten minutes, for fear that the rule may not be applicable to that idea, but I believe, sir, that the rule strictly forbids any member speaking longer than five minutes at one time, but allows them to speak twice occupying five minutes each. I would like to have a ruling of the chair on that subject.

Mr. THURMAN. Mr. Chairman, I insist that there is a classified presumption in this Convention, that the gentleman has got a long list of names in his pocket that he can produce, but he ought not to be required to produce them.

The CHAIRMAN. I do not think any gentleman ought to be compelled to show what he has in his pocket. [Laughter.]

Mr. JOLLEY. Mr. Chairman, I seconded the motion on Saturday. Mr. Roberts had all the time that he wished in the closing of this debate. This is my first speech, gentlemen, upon this floor since the Convention met. I ask your indulgence a few moments. I will be brief.

The CHAIRMAN. Go on.

Mr. JOLLEY. Those senators in the east would say to ours, “You do not view those things right, be a little patient, agree with us for the single standard, and in a short time we will have shipped loads of gold from old Europe and it will be sent west and you people down there will not have your pockets full of bullion, but it will be full of twenty dollar gold pieces.” Our senators would look at each other and say: “Well, things have changed materially since we left our homes.” As was stated upon this floor in relation to suffrage, since last November_“Things have changed and if it is really so that our people by being a little patient can carry twenty dollar gold pieces in their pockets, in the place of silver at sixty-two and a half cents on the dollar, I think we had better change our issue, and when we go back and tell them what ground we had to change it, it will be all right, if not, they will have the privilege of voting upon it next time.” I appeal, gentlemen, to you, the republican delegates of this Convention, I appeal to your honor, I appeal to your position, I appeal to your future desires, and the ambitions you should have as men and not as boys_not exactly as the Dutch justice was, when the lawyer in pleading his case got through, the judge says, “To be sure you have got and won the case,” and the other one on the side of the defense, rose and made such an eloquent plea, as only some of our delegates here are able to do, and the judge says, “Sure he has won the case.” So it left the judge to pay the debt and the costs. And I want to tell you republicans, being the majority in this Convention, that if you allow this issue to pass, if you do not stand upon the foundation of men of judgment, carrying out the wishes of your constituents who sent you here, and not allow your own feelings to come in and change the matter, you or the republican party will have to pay the costs in the future, for it will be laid to you, you being able to carry this measure through, or able to defeat it, or to switch it, and make it a rider_you are more responsible than our democratic friends because they realize that they are in the minority. From what I can see here (and I am sorry to say it), it appears to me that if the democratic side had been in the majority where the republicans are to-day they would have had this thing put through [applause], and it would have been settled. But I can see weakening knees in the republican ranks in this house that I am ashamed of, gentlemen. Those are my feelings in the matter. I am no boy, I came here as a man to represent men. I came here not to place my own feelings upon the standard, and vote as Mr. {539} Jolley would have a desire, but I came here to vote, to advocate and to fill the obligations that I have made with my constituents, and when I return I will look them in the face, and I can tell them, although I have

not had a monopoly of this Convention, as some of my most intelligent friends have, that seem to be quite silent at the present time, and have not had a great deal to say_but I can look my people in the face, and say that I have done my duty. I want to tell you here, gentlemen, that Sanpete County wants suffrage for women, and I believe every other county wants it, and if Salt Lake County does not want it, why in the name of goodness have not they sent in a petition here telling us they do not want suffrage, that you make a mistake when you put it in the platform? I think that you men that are beginning to switch about here, had better consider where you are, who sent you here, and what you were sent here for.

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. Chairman, I wish merely to say that before the house shall come to a vote upon this substitute, as I neither favor submitting a proposition to be voted upon by the people separately nor in inserting it in the Constitution itself_I wish it distinctly understood, that I reserve my opportunity to reply to this discussion before that matter shall come to a vote lest it should displace the substitute that has been under discussion for the last few days.

Mr. IVINS. Mr. Chairman, the very wide scope which this discussion has taken, and the introduction this morning of the amendment offered by my friend Mr. Eichnor of Salt Lake City, have prompted me to do that which I had not intended to do, for it was my intention to have let this matter go to a final vote without having taken part in this discussion. When I moved, Mr. Chairman, last Thursday morning, that this question be passed to its third reading without further debate, it was with the very best feeling on my part, and not by any means with an intention of preventing a full discussion of it, because the very nature of the motion indicates that when it should come up for its final reading it would still be open to amendment and discussion. That question has already been discussed during one whole day very ably and I thought profitably, but I fancy, Mr. Chairman, that I saw in that discussion, that which would lead up if it were continued, to criminations and recriminations, to heart burnings, to the introduction of matters upon the floor of this house, the revival of old issues and questions, which would be discussed here not only without profit but to the absolute disadvantage of the members of this Convention. Mr. Chairman, I did not understand when I came here that I came as a Mormon or anti-Mormon, as a Catholic or a Protestant, as a Christian or an infidel_no, not even as a republican or a democrat. Because on the very day that the majority of the votes in the county, which my colleague and I represent, indicated that we were to be their representatives I regarded it as my duty just as much to represent my republican constituents as I do feel that these questions which have been drawn into this debate were unnecessary, that they have been unprofitable.
So far as my personal convictions upon this matter are concerned, (and I must express them while I am on the floor,) I wish simply to say that at the convention where we were nominated, that ourselves being present and accepting that nomination, a resolution was introduced instructing us directly to use our best efforts to the end that a clause should be incorporated in this Constitution, which we are about to frame, granting equal suffrage. Under these conditions we came here pledged. We could not, if we desired, in honor to ourselves, swerve from that duty which was there placed upon us. Otherwise {540} than this, my own convictions are very strong upon this question. I do not wish to enter into an argument because it would only be a reiteration of that which has already been said. But the question of woman suffrage is not a new one in Utah. It has been discussed long and earnestly. Long ago I procured every book that I could find in a book store in this city that treated in any manner upon the rights of woman, and the position

she should occupy in the professional, business and political world. I studied them carefully, and I read the debates. I read the arguments pro and con upon this question, and I must admit that in all the time we have devoted here to debate, there has not been a single new idea advanced. The very same arguments in opposition to woman suffrage that have been advanced here were advanced in Wyoming, they were advanced in Kansas, they were advanced in Colorado, and the same arguments in reply were made there. Why, the question, Mr, Chairman, has been discussed as though it was one that was peculiar to the people of this Territory, as being a special hobby of theirs. This is not the case. Woman suffrage is being discussed in every state in this Union, and the fact that a bill introduced granting equal suffrage has just been defeated in the legislature of Arizona by a majority of only two or three votes; the fact that the same result comes from California, the same result comes from New York, is an indication to us that this question is being favorably considered in other states of the Union, just as it is being considered in Utah.

Gentlemen say, “Why, for thousands of years, women have been asking for equal political rights with men, and if they are entitled to it, why have not they got it?” This may be true and that discussion will go on and go on, and in all of the thousands of years that it has been discussed it has never been so near favorable consideration as it is to-day. It is coming. There is no question about it in my mind. It is very true that traditions of long standing are not easily changed; reforms are not quickly accepted, or adopted, and this question of the rights of women will be no exception to the rule, and it will come. It is in the line of progression. The civilization of the world demands it, and the civilization of the age will have it. Who of us does not remember that only a few generations ago, the divine rights of kings were recognized in almost the entire earth, but as civilization advances, the minds of men, illuminated by the light of truth, lay hold upon the thought that the son of a king or emperor was endowed with no inherent right that was not also possessed by the son of the humblest peasant, and at the birth of this idea that all men were created free and equal, kingcraft received a blow from which it has never recovered, and since the day which has been referred to here upon the floor, when the barons of England upon the field of Runnymede demanded of King John a code, guaranteeing them protection in life, liberty and the possession of property, the idea that one class of citizens were endowed with rights above another, became less and less popular, until to-day the few kings that are left tremble upon their thrones, because of the voice of the people which is constantly thundering in their ears the great truth that all just governments derive their powers from the consent of the governed. Why, it is only a few years ago that here in our own land one class of men were deprived of the rights of citizenship. Yes, almost of the rights of human beings, for they were no better protected under the law, and in many instances no better treated, than the cattle in the field. They were chattels and were treated as such. But the time came when the aspirations which prompted the framers of the Declaration of Independence to say that all men were created free and equal, {541} took hold upon the minds of the Amercan people, and they said that in this land of liberty there should be no more slavery nor involuntary servitude. It was in the line of progress, and the civilization of the age demanded it, and the slave was made free. Gentlemen, just as this question of greater civil and religious liberty for men and the emancipation of the slaves has come on, is this question of the rights of woman coming on for consideration and final judgment. And though the people may pooh pooh it, and attempt to brush it aside as a thing of little import, though invective may be hurled against it, and volumes of oratory uttered in opposition to it, it will go on and continue to be discussed until the civilization of this age will place woman where she

belongs, not only the social but the professional and political equal of man.

There is one argument only that I have in mind to which I wish to refer before concluding that has not been made here upon the floor in opposition to woman's suffrage, and it is one, Mr. Chairman, that to my mind comes nearer to the pith of this matter, in very many instances, than any argument that has been produced, because it is a well known fact that men, should equal suffrage be granted, must of necessity come into competition with able, intelligent and capable women. A very prominent politician of this Territory, one, of course, who has no political aspirations, (politicians as a rule have none,) in discussing this question recently in private, after having made a very elaborate argument in opposition to woman's suffrage, after having recounted nearly all of the objections that have been recounted here upon the floor of this house, finally concluded his argument by saying (if I may be allowed to use such language here in the presence of these ladies), “that he'd be damned if he wanted any woman crowing over him.”

Mr. MILLER. Mr. Chairman, I will not occupy over five minutes. I anticipated the measure that has been sprung this morning to sidetrack this question. I want to say that I am opposed to the substitute offered. It has occurred to me since this discussion began that the strongest opposition to this measure comes from opulent Salt Lake City. I don't know why Salt Lake City and Ogden should oppose it. It is true that the ablest champion they have had so far on the floor is not of their city, but in concurrence with the delegates from the outlying counties, this same feeling has been manifested in them, that Salt Lake City and Ogden were arrayed against this measure for the purpose of either killing it or sidetracking it. I appeal to the delegates of the outlying counties and to all those who desire to keep their pledges, both democrats and republicans, to vote down this substitute, let's continue the fight, win or lose upon the main question.

Mr. PAGE. Mr. Chairman, I happen to be one from one of the outlying counties of the Territory, and I must say for myself and also for my constituents that I have not found that unanimity of sentiment in regard to this question that a good many on the floor of this house would have us believe. I was with some of my constituents at home, no longer ago than yesterday, and discussing the proposition with those of all classes and as far as I was able to meet them, they are almost unanimously opposed to this proposition. I want to say right here and now, that I do not hold myself bound by any platforms that have been garbled and jingled together for a sounding phrase to catch votes. [Applause.] I consider that we are here engaged in a nobler duty than drafting political platforms. I understand that we are here to draft a Constitution for the new State of Utah, and I insist that such a state of jingled, garbled garbage as is incorporated in the political platforms of both parties should have no weight {542} here. I am opposed on other grounds to this principle of suffrage. I believe, too, that the people should have the right to vote upon it if they choose to do so. It is not unanimous by any means. The sidetracking of this question is only putting it where it properly belongs. Let it go to the people. Let there be a fair discussion and a fair consideration of the question. If they want it they will have it, but otherwise_

Mr. JOLLEY. I would ask of the delegate from Sanpete what those articles were put in there for?

Mr. PAGE. To catch votes. [Laughter.]

Mr. EVANS (Weber.) Mr. Page, you say that those planks in the platform were inserted for the purpose of catching votes. I will ask you if the women had the right to vote_women did not vote at the political election, did they?

Mr. PAGE. I believe not.

Mr. EVANS (Weber). Then whose votes would it catch?

Mr. PAGE. It was supposed to catch a certain party supposed to be in favor of that proposition.

Mr. EVANS (Weber). That is to catch the votes of those who were opposed to woman's suffrage?

Mr. PAGE. Who favored the proposition_yes, sir. I do not think it was unanimous by any means.

Mr. ROBERTS. Would Mr. Page allow me to answer Mr. Evans?

Mr. EVANS (Weber.) I certainly will.

Mr. ROBERTS. I will tell you what class of votes it was intended to catch. There was a prevailing idea that the Mormon population of this Territory were favorable to that doctrine, and the party that took the lead in it made a bid for that vote, and to appeal to that people on that ground, and the other party undertook to outbid them in order to keep solid with the same class of voters. [Applause.]

Mr. EVANS (Weber). I desire to offer Mr. Roberts just a moment.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Page has the floor.

Mr. PAGE. I wish to say in reply to that proposition in regard to the catching of votes, it is a condition that as I understand it in this country (and I believe it to be only a supposition) that the people of Utah are favorable to woman's suffrage. They have had something of an experiment in that line, as stated by my eloquent friend on the other side of the house; it is more in the nature of a Relief Society measure, at which the gentlemen went to the polls and the women followed declaring their testimony. I understand that really to be more in the nature of that than a

conclusion arrived at by which the people could not act or vote intelligently on the measure. I am inclined to believe to-day, that if this thing is thoroughly agitated and thoroughly discussed through the Territory of Utah that the opposition will be in the majority against a measure of that kind; as far as the rights of the ladies are concerned, I believe there is no one who will be more glad to allow them the {543} privileges to which they are entitled than I would be.

Mr. THURMAN. May I ask the gentleman a question?

Inasmuch as the gentleman from Davis County undertook to answer for you, I want to ask you if his answer in which he said that that was put in for to catch Mormon votes by your party, is entirely satisfactory to you? Is that true?

Mr. PAGE. On the proposition of Mormon votes or Gentile votes, I hardly think the question is a proper one here in this Convention.

Mr. THURMAN. I understand that you do not wish to answer as to whether he has stated your position correctly?

Mr. PAGE. The conditions that exist we are all familiar with, but it is as well in my opinion, to avoid the discussion of that question here upon the floor of this house. I believe that both parties are sincere and honest in what they are attempting to do, and that is to reach a higher plane than that upon which they have been operating in the years that have passed.

Mr. THURMAN. It, I understand then, it is all right in a political convention, to put in those things to catch a certain class of votes, but it does not do after you get elected, is that the idea?

Mr. PAGE. Not always.

Mr. CANNON. I would like to ask Mr. Roberts a question, as he is answering them for Mr. Page. I would like to ask who drew the plank in the republican platform at Provo, providing for equal suffrage?

Mr. ROBERTS. I was not at the convention. I do not usually attend republican conventions.

Mr. CANNON. I suppose, however, that you read the newspapers.

Mr. ROBERTS. I do not know who drafted it.

Mr. CANNON. The chairman of that committee was ex-governor Arthur L. Thomas. It was prepared by him and presented, and if it was with the idea that the gentleman has answered, I never before heard it so explained.

Mr. JAMES. I would like to ask Mr. Cannon, if Mr. Thomas asked any advice from any other source, before writing that article, than his own individual self? [Laughter.]

The CHAIRMAN. That is not germane.

Mr. CANNON. I arise to a question of personal privilege. I have been asked a question, and if the chair permits a question to be asked, I demand the right to answer it.

The CHAIRMAN. If it is a germane question. The question asked by Mr. James is, what influence was had upon Mr. Arthur L. Thomas, or where did he get his advice?

Mr. JAMES. I arise to a point of order. I did not ask such a question. I asked if he consulted with others or did he write this article through his own personal volition, without consultation with other people?

Mr. MACKINTOSH. He did not.

The CHAIRMAN. I do not believe that is germane at all.

Mr. CANNON. I will say I do not know with whom Mr. Thomas consulted. I simply know that he, as chairman of the committee, brought it upon the platform and that he presented it as the report of the committee, and that if it did not voice his view, he should certainly have presented a minority report.

Mr. IVINS. I arise to a point of order. This whole discussion is not germane to the question before the house.

The CHAIRMAN. I think it is well taken.

Mr. KIMBALL (Salt Lake). Mr. Chairman, I have not offered to take {544} any of your valuable time during this Convention, but I feel duty bound this morning in justice to myself and to my moral convictions and upon this subject to state my position, and in justice to my constituents to say a few words. I am in the position of some who feel that they are bound by party pledges. I feel that I am bound by something stronger than this. I am bound with honor to my own convictions in justice to the gentler sex of our community. This principle cannot be changed in my mind by any amount of argument. It is true, I have listened here to the gentleman from Davis County, and other gentlemen who have spoken on this floor, but my opinion has not been changed. I am not my own servant, gentlemen, in this position. Were it so, I would consider that we were in a dangerous position indeed. I came here to represent the people, and in addition this is an inherent principle with me. I have understood it this way all my life. All my teachings have been to this end, and to-day I am satisfied, and I am sure there is no one on this floor that would question the fact that I have always been open to conviction and ready to receive truths from whatever source they may come. When I attended the democratic meeting in the theater and there listened to that declaration of liberty to the women, my heart rejoiced, though I will acknowledge here, that previous to that time, I had but very little confidence in the two political parties that

were started out in this Territory. The position they took upon this question, whether it was to catch votes or not, gave me confidence in these two parties, that for once, if not before, they were doing justice to all concerned. I cannot understand it (and you will pardon me for speaking of the two political parties), how the democratic members on this floor can speak against woman suffrage. The very principle that got me on political lines was equal rights to
all and special privileges to none. [Applause.]

I do not place my wisdom as against that of the learned gentleman from Davis County, for,

I am no orator, as Brutus is;

But as you know me all, a plain, blunt man,

That love my friend.

Now, I am not extravagant in this proposition. It is an evident fact that the rising generation are dilatory, that they are careless, that they are not as industrious as they should be; while on the contrary the young ladies are using all their time to development to that extent, that they are rising away above the young men. Now, I ask this intelligent body of men, shall we say to the women, “You shall not vote, you shall have no say in these matters, but this element who is inferior to you shall come to the front, and exercise the franchise, and say who shall govern matters for you?” So I appeal to the honor of this body of men. I appeal to their wisdom and judgment on this proposition. And when I make this assertion, I do it in this way, that the people of Utah through their circumstances are different to any other people in the United States. Take our mothers, for instance. In early days here our fathers were frontier men, off in the canyons, out on the farm, out fighting the Indians, out on missionary work and in a hundred other pursuits which took them away from home and the mother was placed in the responsibility of being a father and a mother too. The experience that has come out of this kind of a life has placed our mothers on a different footing to that of the women in larger cities in the United States. Consequently our mothers, our daughters and our sisters, and all, stand not only abreast with

men, but I dare venture on this floor that they are a long ways ahead in intelligence and in all the good qualities that go to make up men and women.

Now, I want to say, while I am open to conviction, I have heard nothing on this floor that has wavered me in the least. There is no man in this community that I respect higher than the honorable gentleman from Davis County, and on all other subjects would accept of his advice, but when it comes to this matter I must reject it, and stand on my own footing right here, and stand for woman to have equal rights with man and not to defer it to come in at the tail end, like another proposition that we expected to submit to the people. Now, gentlemen and ladies, I expect to vote for woman's suffrage right here. With it, as Mr. Evans said yesterday, I live or die, I sink or swim. I expect to stay with it until it is consummated, and I have sufficient confidence in this body of men that it will be consummated right here, and that very soon.

Mr. HILL. Mr. Chairman, I have not yet raised my voice on this floor in the advocacy or defense of any proposition that has been presented. My early education in this respect is deficient; I am not a public speaker, it is not my sphere. It is something that I am unaccustomed to. I believe I am entitled to five minutes, and if the Convention will bear with me, I will make the statement that I shall not detain them for more than thirty days. I do not take this floor with the expectation of making a single convert, but I am certainly surprised this morning at the acrimony and the feeling that has been manifested by the intelligent portion of the gentlemen I see before me. It appears more to me that we are on the eve of a great revolution than on the eve of establishing or forming a Constitution upon which this great commonwealth may enter into the community of the numerous stars that now bedeck our banners and flag. I say that this is apparently our position, and if there is anything that has annoyed me in this. Convention, it is for any non- Mormon, any ex-democrat or any ex that you wish to prefix to his name, to say that they have come here to work for the interests of his particular party. I was not elected for that purpose. It is my disposition and my nature to be conservative. {546} Bnt I certainly have been aroused here this morning, and not only this morning but on other occasions; and when listening to the eloquence that has been displayed by some of my associates in this Convention, I have been surprised to hear them this morning, after having said that this great Convention would produce such results that the morning stars would sing together_it appears to me that they are trying to bring the morning stars and the evening stars together to create a clash.

I believe, Mr. Chairman, that I to-day stand on this floor, occupying the position, and truthfully say I am one of the first, and oldest republicans in this Territory. I can recollect years and years ago when our esteemed President Wells and I used to converse together in reference to the political conditions throughout the nation. I was a believer in him. I believed in his principles. I believed that when we had placed at the head of this great American nation Abraham Lincoln, that we had one of the greatest republicans that was ever born, and to hear my friends get up here and take the positions that they do, and narrow this down until they have not a plank to stand on, I am surprised. We have heard a great deal about this particular plank in our different platforms that has cost so much strife. For the benefit of the republican party I will read_republicans agreed to it in Provo, and I am certainly surprised_it certainly astounds me to think that any man having any sense would take the position that some of us do here. Plank eighteen verbatim ad literatim [laughter] reads as follows: “We favor the granting of of equal suffrage to women.”

Mr. HILL. Yes, sir.

Mr. PAGE. Does that say that we must necessarily incorporate that in this Constitution?

Mr. HILL. I will answer your question if you will only give me time. I told you that I should not detain you over thirty days. You must excuse my abruptness, Mr. Page, I told you to commence with to bear with me, and I would like it understood, gentlemen, that you must excuse me for being in this position. I am certainly embarrassed, I am not accustomed to this kind of business, my knees will hardly carry me, but let me take thirty days and I will show you whether they will carry me. [Laughter.]

I will read this again so that there may not be any individual present mistaken.

“Section 18. We favor the granting of equal suffrage to women.”

I have another one here, I will refer to this later. The republicans not only in Utah, but in this great nation, favor liberty. Some of our friends from the democratic side of the house will say, “Do the democrats not favor liberty? Do they not favor equal rights? Do they not favor representation?” What do the republicans do? They do the same. I attended that convention where that plank was adopted. The question may be asked of me, “Did you vote for it? Do you wish to support it?” I will tell you right here in my argument that I am a female suffragist, I want you to understand that. No matter what I might say or any other man in controversy thereof may say, I believe in female suffrage in this way.

We had an illustration at the Grand theatre the other afternoon, when probably the mothers of some of those young men who are making some eloquent speeches upon this floor were voting against female suffrage. You say this is not the case. There was a matinee held in the Grand theatre, there were ballots printed, they were passed among the ladies, and for some reason I do not know, I was not there, I was here listening to some of your stories, they only distributed those ballots in {547} the parquette, they collected the votes, the vote as I have it here in my hand; there were 282 in the parquette voted against female suffrage, and 180 in favor of it. What does this mean? What does this mean? I respect every lady who is upon the floor of this house to-day. I wish I had them all within the sound of my voice, and I would say unto them, “If the majority of you ladies in this Territory, if the majority of you ladies within the confines of the United States, wish female suffrage, I will get it for you if I have to take the bayonet and fight for it. [Applause.] But if my mother, my sister, or my daughter objects to me getting suffrage for her, I will take the bayonet and fight against it. A little anecdote occurs to me just now, and it is a good place to tell it. I have a little daughter, she will be five years old on the 23rd day of next July; she says I have become a very bad man lately, and I believe I have. “Why, says she, “I never can get you home now nights, unless I come to the store and meet you, and then you send me home and tell me you are going to those old meetings,” says she, “everyday you are going to meetings_every day, and papa, do you know what they tell me, they tell me that those men down there at that meeting that you are going to, are trying to make a little boy of me.” “Why” says, I, “what is the matter my

dear, that is a mistake.” “Yes,” says she, “You are, and I am afraid you are going to do, it and if you do I will never like you, because I do not want to be a little boy.”

Mr. RICHARDS. I desire to ask the gentleman whether he believes that the result of the vote at the Grand theatre on last Saturday represents the view of the majority of the women of Utah Territory?

Mr. HILL. I will answer you as I did the gentleman on my right who just spoke, I will answer it by going on and referring to another vote that was taken, then I will reply to you. At the
Grand Pacific hotel, when there were quite a number of our lady friends present, they took a vote and it was similar to the vote taken at the Grand theatre. Now, I think I have answered your question, Mr. Richards. I do not think it is necessary to say anything further. I am unequivocally in favor of woman's suffrage if they want it, and it appears to me in those two particular places to which I referred a majority voted against it, and I am confident of this_I had my speech all arranged, Mr. Richards, as you did the other day, but you fellows knocked me out of it. I am not as composed as you are. I am not accustomed to it.

Mr. RICHARDS. I hope the gentleman will excuse me if I have embarrassed him, I certainly did not intend to. I think it would be impossible to embarrass him.

Mr. HILL. It certainly is. [Laughter].

Now, we have had petitions from females throughout this Territory presented here to this Convention for us to legislate to enfranchise them. I know not how those petitions were presented, I do not know under what conditions, but I do know that I as an individual have had some experience in having petitions presented to me, and my presenting petitions to others. For example, Mr. Richards comes to me, or Mr. Roberts, or Mr. Ivins, or any other gentleman; he has a certain scheme he wishes to accomplish, he probably states to me what he wishes to accomplish. He ask me for my support and signature, I give it to him, and in one particular instance, I cannot think of just now_

Mr. FRANCIS. I wish to ask the gentleman if that scheming operation applies to the Grand opera house election last Saturday?

Mr. HILL. If you will kindly not anticipate my answer you will get it without asking. [Laughter.] During the last campaign there was a petition brought to me to sign in favor of a proposition {548} that I certainly favored; it was a proposition to make silver 16 to 1, which is an awful difficult thing to do, we have experienced that. The parties bringing me that petition read it, it was brought up with a great many signatures to it; there were a great many sheets of paper; I signed it. The next time it was presented to me, it presented a very different appearance from what it did before, it was in support of a party measure of which I am not a member, but was being presented by the populists instead of the republicans I therefore, had to ignore it. I do not think for one moment_that answers your question_I do not think for one moment that the majority of the ladies of this Territory would vote against being enfranchised, if they thought they could enjoy all the rights and privileges that the gentlemen do without having the trouble to

acquire or pass though the difficulties the gentlemen have to, though I want to state right here, and have you understand that my mother in her tuition of me, in her bearing me and making a man of me endured more than I ever have done in justice. I speak of her in that way, and the only ability that I possess to-day was given to me through her teaching, and I honor her, and I honor every one of those ladies who are present here today, in the interest they are taking in this matter. Probably gentlemen will go to asking me now, if I am a married man; I presume that question will be asked. Why there is not a lady in the house at present but what admires me. [Laughter.] They know I am pretty, and they admire the position that I take in their behalf and our behalf.

Mr. CREER. Mr. Chairman, I now emphatically insist upon the rule.

The CHAIRMAN. I think the Convention suspended the rules by its action on Saturday.

Mr. CREER. I do not understand it so.

The CHAIRMAN. I think it worked a suspension.

Mr. CREER. Some of the gentlemen have been confined to the five minute rule.

Mr. HILL. There are some who have not spoken yet that will give me an hour.

Mr. CREER. I object to their giving a history of their life, and the life of their mother, and the Grand opera house, and the Pacific hotel and all that sort of thing.

Mr. JAMES. Mr. Chairman, I arise to a point of order.

Mr. CREER. I insist upon the rule. The rule was that each member should speak five minutes.

The CHAIRMAN. I do not think the objection is well taken.

Mr. HILL. May I proceed, or am I ruled out?

The CHAIRMAN. Go on, Mr. Hill.

Mr. HILL. It was stated here on Saturday, by some party, that during our entire campaign it was presented before the different primaries, and the stumpers throughout the Territory had stumped in favor of female suffrage. I, unfortunately for me, as I stated sometime ago, was among the oldest, if not the oldest, republican in Utah_I fail to recollect, at any of our primaries, at any of our meetings, to have heard the question of female suffrage discussed from the platform or the rostrum, and I wish to say that I consider, as my remarks indicate, that the proper thing for the Convention to do is to introduce a plank in our Constitution giving the ladies the privilege at our coming election of voting yes or no on this proposition, and in that article specify that it may be the duty of our next Legislature, if the ladies so desire from that expression, to give them the elective franchise.

Mr. RICHARDS. Before the gentleman {549} yields the floor, I desire to remind him that he kindly promised to answer my question and undoubtedly has overlooked it. The question I asked the gentleman is this: Whether or not, in his opinion, the majority of the women of Utah favor or oppose woman's suffrage?

Mr. HILL. My opinion would be of very little value to this Convention, for the reason that I am not sufficiently among the ladies to know their desires and wishes, and it would be inexpedient for me to answer that question.

Mr. RICHARDS. Then I take it you decline to answer?

Mr. HILL. No, sir; I say it would be inexpedient as I do not know. I do not know, sir.

Mr. RICHARDS. I ask your opinion, that is all.

Mr. LAMBERT. Mr. Chairman_

Mr. WELLS. Mr. Chairman_

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Wells.

Mr. WELLS. I am a little out of place but I desire to be considered in the ring.

Mr. LAMBERT. Mr. Chairman, was I not recognized before Mr. Wells spoke? I want the privilege of asking a question.

The CHAIRMAN. I did not recognize you.

Mr. WELLS. I desire to say to the gentleman that I have a speech in my pocket and I feel very much like a hen that wanted to lay.

Mr. LAMBERT. Read it.

Mr. WELLS. When gentlemen who are opposed to prolonging this debate voted on Saturday to adjourn until to-day without bringing this question to a focus, they did a most injudicious thing. For they unwittingly afforded members like myself who are unaccustomed to public speaking an opportunity to prepare written remarks and thus subject the committee to a deluge of manuscript speeches it might otherwise have escaped.

But inasmuch as the discussion has taken so wide a range, I take it there is not the same disposition to cut off debate that existed a few days ago. In view of some of the sensational remarks of gentlemen I am willing that every man in the Convention should have an opportunity

to speak, as I believe if there is distrust or suspicion or sentiments of fear lurking in the hearts of members as to the effect of the adoption of this section, that like the measles it is better out than in. Let us partake of the hot saffron tea of conviction, then wrap ourselves in the warm woolens of debate until we are red with the rash of wrath, and then see if we cannot agree upon some medicine that will dissipate our rage and put us on the road to convalescence, and finally to a healthy and permanent understanding.

There seem to be phases to this question which have been enlarged upon by gentlemen: first, as to the rightfulness of woman suffrage as a principle; and, second, as to the expediency of adopting it and putting it into the Constitution of the State of Utah.

I know a clever little woman who owns and runs a boarding house in this city. She pays annually in taxes something near a hundred dollars. But she has an average of about ten men who board there. The aggregate of their taxes, I do not suppose, would reach $50, because the most of them pay only poll tax. The other day there was an election in this county to determine whether the county debt should be funded by the issue of bonds.

It was a question vitally affecting the property interest of that little woman. All her boarders went to the polls and voted. She could not vote. Was that right? But gentlemen have said in such cases a woman may get her brother or her husband, or if she has not any, get her neighbor to vote for her. Let me ask the gentleman who made this argument, if he would be willing to let his neighbor vote for him on a question that affected his pocket? Now, if the {550} woman who owns property ought to have the right to vote upon that financial question, what reason is there for denying her the right to vote for the men who are to assess the taxes upon her property? The right of representation to all persons who are taxed is in my opinion an inherent right and a right which in this country was declared over a hundred years ago to be formidable to tyrants only. I have heard no plea that in the slightest degree swerves me from the belief that property owners, male or female, ought to have a voice in the government. Such rights are accorded to women in many of the states and in the old country in many of the nations. To deny this right to woman is to deny her a right recognized and accorded her even in monarchial governments.

Great Britain is governed by a woman. We will suppose that she should tire of the vexations of politics and public life and should seek an asylum such as the gentleman from Davis has alluded to, where she might remove her crown, comb out her bangs, put on her mother-hubbard and enjoy herself free from the restraints of royalty. Our government offers an asylum to the oppressed of every nation. Supposing she came to the United States, threw off her coronet and all allegiance to the mother country, became naturalized, as she has the right to do under our laws, settled down in Utah, and bought that magnificent residence in this city belonging to Mr. Mackintosh, would the gentleman from Davis or the gentleman from Salt Lake, both of whom I am informed were former subjects of her's, deny Victoria the queen, who erstwhile ruled over them in England, the scanty right to vote as a freeholder in this great land of liberty and equal rights? I think perhaps Mr. Roberts would not deny the right, but I am inclined to believe Mr. Mackintosh would want to know whether or not she belonged to the church. As for me, sink or swim, I am ready to vote first and last and always in favor of the franchise for any woman citizen holding in her hand that invincible credential, a property tax receipt. Now as to the rightfulness

of extending the franchise to all women citizens regardless to their property rights. While not an ardent advocate of woman suffrage in this extended sense, I cannot see the justice of withholding the right to vote to an intelligent woman and giving it to an ignorant man. I am an admirer of modesty in women, and I confess there is a charm for me about the woman who says she does not desire to vote. I do not wish to be understood as intimating that there are not many modest women who desire the franchise, but I say that all women, whether they be modest or brazen, if they have the requisite qualifications of age, and citizenship, should have all the political rights, if they desire them, of modest or brazen men. Governments derive just powers from the consent of the governed. If women are governed they must give their consent or there is no just government. How can they give their consent? Through the ballot-box, as that is the authoritative expression of the will of the people. Women are certainly a portion of the people, and the people are the source of all political power.

It has been argued here that the ballot belongs exclusively to the men because there ought to be a bullet or a bayonet or a dirk, or some dread instrument of war behind it, the inference being that men have in some way earned the distinction by fighting, and as woman cannot fight she ought not to vote. To me this is the merest nonsense; if liberty was won by bullets and if men were behind the bullets, behind the men was the heroic devotion and the uncomplaining endurance and suffering of women. It was a mutual sacrifice and one in which the women of our country exhibited as high {551} courage and as constant a patriotism as men. The result of these mutual sacrifices was liberty in its national sense to all its people, yet only half of the people are really free, if perfect freedom is obtained through the ballot box. But if only those who have borne the shock of battle are entitled to vote, the executive head of this nation, the great Grover himself, would be disfranchised, as it is given out he hired a substitute. And how many of the gentlemen upon this floor have ever stood the brunt of battle. It has not come to my knowledge that many of us have “smelt blood, sah,” in defense of our country's flag and thus earned in the sacred name of liberty the inestimable right to vote and pay poll tax. By such logic the franchise would belong exclusively to the military, and male civilians as well as women would be disfranchised. There has come to this Convention at various times among other estimable women, one whom I have especially in mind because she has all the grace and charms of her sex. She is a cultivated and intellectual woman, descended from revolutionary forefathers and related to one of the greatest statesmen that America has produced. She would consider it an inestimable privilege to be allowed to vote. Will gentlemen argue that it is right or just or decent to refuse her the franchise and bestow it upon Eph Kelly and Galleazzi? Other women who have come here who in point of ability are the peers of many of the gentlemen upon this floor. One of them is my aunt, and she is capable of making an argument upon this floor if she were permitted that would make the opponents of suffrage retire from this committee of the whole and pull the hole in after them. Some gentlemen have said they never fell in love with women on the platform, and that they would not like to hear their wives speak in public. More than likely their wives would not care to hear them either, unless they made better speeches than the majority of those against woman suffrage. Now, my position thus far is this: Firstly, women who own property ought to have the right pre-eminently to the franchise for the reason that taxation without representation is a species of tyranny that an American ought never to be guilty of. Secondly, women who want the franchise and the political rights that go with it, ought to be accorded the privilege because there is no justice in an aristocracy of sex. If women want to go further and part their hair on the side

and sing bass, I have no objection. Give her all the rights she wants, and let her be responsible for their abuse. The women who do not want such rights need not exercise them. There would be no compulsion about ft [*note*]. There is no law that compels me to go the polls if I prefer to go fishing. so women could stay at home if they chose. Now as to the expediency of conferring the franchise upon women in this Constitution. The great over-shadowing objection to it urged by its opponents is that it will be a menace to statehood because it will create forty thousand new voters whose politics are unknown, unsettled and uncomfortable, and a terrible unrest exists in the minds of many that these new voters will not vote the way they want to but the way some one else wants them to. I had thought it had become to be accepted as aphorism that:

When a woman will she will, you may depend on't,

And when she won't she won't, and there's an end on't.

I remember a friend of his, at the time of the division on party lines, said he would stick to the old liberal party to the last, and when all the rest of the party had deserted it, he and his friend would be seen walking up the street carrying the old liberal banner. Yet, when he saw the new voters by the thousands going to the polls and voting his way, he said, “Let her go. Galigher, its all right.”

I have not much patience with these continued assaults on the integrity of one class of people of this Territory. I think they have demonstrated their perfect sincerity in politics and I have understood that Mr. Mackintosh and his friends thought so too. But I am wondering now how long, O Lord, how long this period of probation must last. I doubt if the Millennium will be long enough. When the angel Gabriel blows his trumpet, on that great final judgment day, summoning us all to arise and report progress, I shall be surprised if my friend Mackintosh does not peep out of his mounted sarcophagus and say, “Hold on, boys, till we see whether that old fellow with the horn isn't Moroni instead of old Gabe.” Now is it possible to satisfy those who share this distrust? Can we do so by submitting this proposition in a separate article? No; because they know that it would carry anyway. Can we satisfy them by leaving it to the Legislature to regulate it hereafter? No; because they know the sentiment in favor of it is so strong that the Legislature

will pass a bill conferring it at the very first session. What are we then to do? Vote against our convictions and the pledges our parties have made? My reason and sense of justice revolt at the idea. For seven months it has been known of all men and published far and wide that the republican party in Utah had pledged itself to woman suffrage; in all that time no voice has been raised against it. Neither from the press or pulpit or platform has one word been uttered opposing the measure. Why, if all this fear existed, has it not been expressed before? Why have not myself and others been taken into the confidence to discuss the matter with them? Why do they wait until the question is brought up for discussion on the floor of this house, and then cast unwarranted suspicion on the sincerity of a movement that has been agitated so long? As for myself, while as I have said I never was and am not now an ardent woman suffragist, I am convinced that duty to my party and to my own self-respect demands that we, republicans I mean, meet this issue squarely and be true to ourselves in spite of the groundless fears in the hearts of men who can live side by side with their neighbors a lifetime and then in a supreme moment, without warning or notice, cast suspicion and distrust upon them. If we do not meet this issue now, it must be met in the near future. No gentleman that has spoken but admits that it is coming.
{553}

To thine own self be true

And it must follow as the night the day,

Thou canst not then be false to any man.

Will stalwart oak take root and grow,

Will last year's roses bud and blow,

Will rivers turn and backward flow?

After recess.

Mr. Cannon offered a resolution that at 3:30 p. m. Mr. Roberts be given the floor for the purpose of closing the debate.

Mr. CANNON. Mr. Chairman, I realize that this can only be done by unanimous consent under our rules. A little over 18 hours have already been consumed in the discussion, but this gives an hour and thirty minutes to close the debate, and at that time Mr. Roberts will be granted the floor. I think it would be better to fix a time for one thing, in order that Mr. Roberts may know when he is expected to speak. As it is he has been waiting for nearly two days expecting to be called upon at any time, not knowing when his speech would be expected. I offer the resolution and move its adoption.

Mr. MURDOCK (Beaver). I second the motion.

Mr. THURMAN. I think a single objection kills the resolution.

Mr. LAMBERT. Mr. Chairman, I have sat here patiently and listened to these long discussions, and this is the first time I have attempted to trespass upon your attention, but this is a question of vital importance to the people of Utah and of the United States. It is a question that all eyes of this nation and other nations are looking for, the advancement being made by the people of this country tending towards the enfranchisement of woman. The progress of the age is marked in that direction, but gentlemen, when I look at this question as it has come before us by the report of the committee, I am led to think that in those propositions are too much legislation. We are here to formulate fundamental principles, and the balance should be left for the Legislature to arrange in the future. We are not here to enact all the laws that are necessary, but simply to formulate that fundamental principle upon which laws shall be founded. I am in favor of suffrage, but I am not in favor of granting to women all the rights that men enjoy. I don't think that the ladies of this Territory ask for all those rights and privileges. One gentleman said this morning, that he was acquainted with the people of this Territory. I claim that I know more people in Utah than any other man upon the floors. For years I have visited their homes. I have mingled among them. I have talked with the mothers of Utah, with those of intelligence, and conversed with them on this principle that is before us to-day. I have not yet met one intelligent mother who has asked for the position of sheriff; I have not met one yet who has asked for the position of constable. I have never met one who has asked for the position of justice of the peace. But they asked for the right of franchise, for the privilege to vote upon those questions that materially affect them. They ask it in reason. They ask that they may be privileged to vote upon school questions, upon questions where taxes are {554} to be levied, upon questions that create indebtedness, but they do not ask to hold all these positions that are incompatible with their sex.

Saturday, after the discussion was through, I walked down the street with some ladies of experience and intelligence. A gentleman was along who was opposed to this movement, and pointing to a person down the street on a bicycle, he said, “There is the coming woman on the street in her bathing suit. By and by she will have a star upon her breast and will arrest wrong- doers upon our streets.” I think it was far-fetched, and I reiterate that I am in favor of granting the right of franchise, but when we come to claim for her all the rights and privileges that are accorded to male voters to-day, it is inconsistent, it is incompatible with reason. Who of us would like to see our wives and our mothers or our much beloved sisters in the jury box, locked up night and day while the question is being discussed among the jurors? I would not like to see it. I remember once over in Wyoming soon after equal suffrage was given to the people of their state, that a lady in Green River was elected justice of the peace. The boys filled her husband up with liquor and then took him before her to be tried for that misdemeanor, and she fined him and resigned her office. I do not wish to see such spectacles in this country; but I found in traveling from Idaho in the north to Arizona in the south, visiting every settlement of Utah's people, women of intelligence, woman capable of discussing intelligently all the questions that were before our male voters. I have found some of them deep thinkers, but I have yet to meet one who has asked for office, who ask the same privilege to sit on juries or to officiate in these different

offices that men occupy, and I say that we should be careful in our work here, that we do not perform the work of legislators, that we leave those things for legislatures. It has been asked here what have the mothers of Utah taught their children? I can tell you from experience, because I was raised by a mother in Utah. They have taught them to be patriotic, they have taught them to love their country, they have taught them to revere the Constitution of the United States as a God-inspired instrument. That is what the mothers of Utah have taught. That is what the mothers of the future State will teach their sons and daughters, to love this great and glorious country of ours, to revere its laws. And when we go back into the buried past, when we resurrect things that have been dead and buried, we stir up a stench that is nauseating. Let us live for the future, let us enact things that will please us in the future, that which will make our State shine with glory, and let us lay, aside what has been in the past in the hope of the glories of the future.

We can afford to live for the present, with hope extended out to the future, and let us live in that way; but let us not legislate in making that instrument that we hope will please and benefit mankind. Let us give to the women of Utah the franchise and then let us leave the rest for our Legislature to do.

Mr. CORAY. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, this is the first time I have occupied this floor since the Convention convened, and I promise you that I will not detain you very long. I am not practiced as a public speaker and I did not think to have spoken on this question, but my constituents from Chicken Creek demanded, and therefore I will be obliged to accede to their demands. It has been asserted here on this floor by gentlemen from different parts of the Territory that this question was introduced into the platforms of the different parties, that is, the republican and the democratic parties, for the purpose of catching votes. I was not a member of either of these conventions, and I do not know what {555} their motive was, but this one thing is very evident, and that is that if it was the motive to catch votes, they were eminently successful in doing so, for they got every vote in this Territory excepting about 500 populists. It has also been asserted that this action is premature, that the people are not ready for it, that it has not been discussed. Why, gentlemen, I submit that this question has been before the people for the last twenty years, or at least, ever since the women of Utah were disfranchised. It has been discussed by literary societies, it has been discussed by the teachers' associations, it has been discussed by the debating societies, it has been in everybody's mouth for the last ten or fifteen years that I know of. Ten years ago, when I was going to school in Ogden City, I remember distinctly that this question came before the teachers' association there. Professor Lewis was the principal of the high school and he and his corps of Ogden teachers discussed this question for two or three nights that I remember. It first came up in the shape of a resolution that women should have the right to higher education, and then from that it went to woman's suffrage, and it has been discussed in the Salt Lake Theater, it has been discussed everywhere, and I claim that the people are ready for the question and were ready for it when it was submitted to them for their approval in the different platforms of the two parties. And if there is anybody who doubts it, I wish to call their attention to the action taken by the the people of Davis County, in calling on Mr. Roberts for his resignation for opposing this proposition. No, gentlemen, I think it would be better for us to keep our pledges. Let us form this Constitution on the principles of justice and right, then Utah the divine, Utah the sublime, will take her place among the galaxy of stars that bespangle the great American flag, and there she will shine as the dogstar Sirius now shines from

the zenith when Morpheus folds. Apollo to his breast; and like Sirius, the brighest star in the firmament, whose beams almost penetrate the immensity of space, her light will shine forth in ever-divergent rays through the incalculable cycles of time. Gentlemen, I shall vote against every substitute to this proposition. I shall sustain it pure and simple as it is. I wish the reporters of the press to write me down in favor of woman's suffrage. I want them to underscore it, and I want them to follow it with three exclamation points, that I for one, gentlemen, am in favor of woman's suffrage. I need no pledge. I have been pledged to the party, I have pledged myself to the people of Juab County, but so far as that is concerned, I do not need any pledges, I will vote for this proposition without any pledge.

Mr. EVANS (Utah). Mr. Chairman, I have waited long and patiently, hoping that peradventure I might be able to see the end of this discussion, but it seems to use that it has taken upon itself the form that it has become necessary that each delegate shall express his views upon it, and that as long as lie desires. I would not deign to mingle my views with others of this intelligent body, were it not for the fact that I feel that the head has said to the foot, “We have need of thee;” and taking that view of the question, I concluded that it was necessary that I should express my views upon this question. Going back to the history of our world, I remember reading where the great Creator, when He had rolled into existence the earth, He divided the darkness from the light, he had created fish that they might permeate the waters, noble fowls that they might soar amidst the heavens, the green verdure that it might make beautiful the earth, and at last it was concluded that there must be some being to dominate those conditions, and the great Ruler of the universe said: “Come, let's go to and make man.” He proceeded {556} to make man in His own image_“In the image of God created He him, male and female, created He them.” Sir, when this first proclamation was made, the word man included woman. Through the long ages of history there had been periods in the world's history when that was almost lost sight of, and in tracing down the history of the past we are confronted with the fact that to the greater extent that that separation is made, just to that degree has woman been placed beneath man. As nations have been uncivilized, so also have the fairer sex borne the burdens of that generation. When we come forth unto the period of our own country's history, we find again that the immortal Jefferson brought forth this declaration: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, among which are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” Governments were instituted among men to secure unto them these inestimable privileges, and “All governments derive their just power from the consent of the governed,” This, through the past ages of history, was the first time that the declaration was uttered that all men are created equal, incorporating women. Reverting back to the great proclamation that was made by Him who rolled the world into existence, Thomas Jefferson re-enunciates that great doctrine. Mr. Chairman, we have heard upon the floor of this house, men who have towered like giants among their fellows. They have taken the question upon either side, they have discussed it ably, they have discussed it as I believe honestly, but it is evident and apparent upon its face that some are right and some are wrong. It is recorded in ancient history by one of the great prophets, that if you speak not to the law and to the testimony, if you speak not according to that, it is because there is no light in you.

We have had the history of this question before us. Taking our own fair Territory here for an example. The women of this Territory exercised the elective franchise for seventeen years, and I

have yet to see the first gentleman who has taken the other side of this question point to a single instance where they have disgraced that sacred trnst [*note*].

I have noticed in looking over the papers here, that we have some testimony that comes from those upon the east of us, and I shall beg indulgence to read it, it is short:

Governors of western states on woman suffrage.

Baltimore, March 31st.

In the discussion of woman suffrage at the Friend's Circle last night, J. K. Taylor, president, read extracts of letters which he received from governors of western states.

Governor Morrill of Kansas writes, “There has been no complaint. It seems to be successful.”

Governor McIntyre, of Colorado, “Their advent into political life will positively and permanently benefit all the people.”

Governor Richards, of Wyoming, “Women are allowed all the privileges men have in voting. They are not allowed to sit on juries and don't ask for it any more than they ask for military rights.”

Justice Groesbeck, chief justice of the supreme court of Wyoming, says, “It has been tried and not found wanting.”

I come here from a county where I went before the people and told them in almost every hamlet and village, that I expected to come to this Convention, if elected, and stand upon its pledges. I read the platform or that portion of it relating to woman's suffrage, and I told the people that I expected to be found upon that side of the question. It has been stated upon the floor of this

Convention that men did not feel themselves bound to party pledges and their platforms. Let me beg your indulgence for a moment and ask those gentlemen whether it is a fact_whether that is true or not? I will read from the platform that was adopted last fall upon which every delegate that is here was elected, or at least the democratic ones, and I take it for granted that the same principle will apply in behalf of every delegate from the side of the majority in this Convention:

We demand that economy shall rule in all branches of the public service. That public money shall be expended only for public uses, and that no class of the community shall be especially favored by the State to the detriment of any other class.

Mr. FRANCIS. Mr. Chairman, and gentlemen of the committee, I shall not worry you with any very long speech. {558} But I thought it a duty incumbent upon me to rise and speak my impressions and convictions upon this great and important question. I am opposed to the substitute presented here this morning. I am opposed to the minority report. I am in favor of the majority report as it is incorporated in section 1; I shall vote that the women of Utah shall enjoy equal rights with their fellow men. I do this from the convictions of my heart. I do not come here cringing or bowing to any party or to any person. I have been convinced for many years that this is a right that our mothers, daughters and sisters ought to have had long ago. It is a right that has been long deferred, but I am thankful that it is coming, that there is a majority in this Convention that is willing to vote for it, and I do not look with pleasure upon the pleas that have been made here to dissuade us from our fealty, from our duty, as we owe it to the people who have sent us here. It has been said by gentlemen upon this floor, that during the late campaign there was no mention made of woman's suffrage. I say so far as our county is concerned, it was said there, and the public speakers, democrats and republicans, that came there, said that a vote for their party meant the incorporation of just such an article as is incorporated by the committee, giving to our women equal rights with men. There are great fears resting down upon some that feelings may result from this. I can say that I have no such fears. I believe that woman will find her place in the government as she does in the home. She will not seek any position that she is not qualified for.

She will not be hunting for something she does not want, and we all know that her natural modesty will not ask for this. There may be some unnatural outgrowths, as there are amongst our own sex, which we may disclaim, but the women will help us. They will have an influence for good in our society. I have listened, like you, to the orations of honorable gentlemen here holding up views against women. My mind has been open to conviction, but I have heard nothing that has weakened my knees, or that has in the least changed my mind. I have heard some very startling assertions, that I never expected to hear upon this floor. When it has been declared in very emphatic language that man is born to rule and woman to obey. I hear this as the very essence of despotism. It was the proclamation of kings years ago and perhaps is to-day, that they by the right of God are inherent to rule and the people to obey; it is the same principle I understand that this is founded upon antediluvian revelation; but I wish to say, gentlemen, that we have modern revelations; God has spoken in our day; He has given us revelations in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States. It is the great magna charta of our country. It is the highest authority and the greatest authority from which we should speak, because from it we derive all our rights, and we should be willing that our mothers, our daughters, and our sisters should enjoy these. And can we say, speaking from this authority, that our mothers, our daughters and our sisters should not enjoy this right? It has been said that one of the speakers here last Saturday was inspired. Gentlemen
of the committee, and Mr. Chairman, I wish to say that we all ought to be inspired like our fathers in this work, and it should be our desire to do that which is right, that we should give unto our people that liberty that they ask for and that we have been sent here to give them.

Without worrying you further, I will say that I shall hold up my hand_or I shall say yes when it comes to the vote to give unto the women of Utah the same right we now enjoy.

Mr. SNOW. Mr. Chairman, my colleague from Washington County this {559} morning told the committee of the platform upon which he and I were nominated to this Convention. Unlike a great many delegates who have seats in this deliberative assembly, as it appears to me, we brought along with us, with our credentials to this Convention, our convictions, and those convictions were in line and in harmony with our platforms, both state and county. I pity from the bottom of my heart men in this Convention who did not bring convictions here with them in line with the principles as enunciated and laid down in their party platforms. I see here men who get up and argue against their judgment_and say that their judgment_their convictions, their conscience is opposed to their platform, and yet they will vote it. If there is anything that comes within the definition of hell I think this does, “to want to and can't.” They want to oppose the insertion of an equal suffrage plank in the Constitution, but they cannot because they are bound down by a party chain and they are surrounded with flame that has no end, and the worm that dieth not.

I tell you it must be gall and wormwood to them to sit and listen to the scathing denunciation of insincerity by my eloquent friend, Mr. Roberts from Davis County. I am proud of this gentleman that he belongs to these mountains and was reared here, and that he belongs to the democratic party. Unlike a fellow democrat upon this floor this morning, I would not trade him for all the republicans in Utah. [Applause.]

They have forgotten that it is the tendency of the age not to marry women, but to let them enter the race in life with men upon the principle that there must be and necessarily is a survival of the fittest, and when woman enters this race she enters so handicapped and discriminated against, that she has no voice in the questions that are of vital importance to her_her labor and the produce of her labor.

Mr. Chairman, I say woman is fast becoming the industrial class. The history of the world shows that along the line of a free ballot labor has its just rewards, and when you disfranchise a class, you discriminate that class, you decrease the demand for their labor and the remuneration for her labor. And again, I will tell you what you do when you discriminate against that class, you degrade their labor, you degrade their situation in life, and it too often occurs_it too frequently happens, that from that employment follows the public example. Mr. Chairman, I think that while we are entering upon a new State that now is the time to give equal suffrage, if we ever intend to give it at all. Why? Because this is the principal argument, it is the great objection in all the older states where this question is discussed. In New {560} York in the constitutional convention the great objection and the only one that carried weight with the members of that body was this:

That if woman was given suffrage she would enter into sharp competition with men, not only in labor that had already taken its defined line, but she would have a ten-fold force of power to force recognition of that labor, and the remuneration for that labor which man had intended not, and that it would cause an advance of thirty-three and one-third per cent. in her wages. It is because of the position that woman will hold and acquire in social economy, that the opposition to woman's suffrage comes principally in the eastern states. And I therefore say that if woman's suffrage is ever to come, now while we are in a new state, while our conditions have not settled down into social lines of polity_now is the time to give it to them, for it is inevitable, it will come, we cannot resist it, and now or never is the time to give our women suffrage.

Mr. Chairman, this is purely an intellectual fight on their part. They do not come here, they do not anywhere go to conventions, which have the right to give them their suffrage with an armed force, with any physical force, it is purely intellectual; they come before you relying entirely upon the generosity of men to give them their franchise, for they realize that it lies in their hands. If

they had the power of the ballot, or had any other force to bring to bear upon us, we would not treat their demands with such flippancy. I say, Mr. Chairman, that the same intolerant spirit that opposes the advance of women in educational circles, now throws out its objection against her enfranchisement, but the progress of the world, the civilization of the age, has broken down all these barriers and woman has triumphed over them all in the scale of progress, she has mounted higher and higher, and shown that she is as capable and fit as man to occupy the highest chairs in our educational colleges, until to-day they are all open to her wits and her abilities, and she grapples with questions of political economy with as much zeal and ability as man.

I claim another thing for women, and that is, that in nine households out of ten she is a better financier than the man. [Applause.] Women are naturally financiers, Whenever in a household it becomes necessary for the most rigid economy to be practiced, you will find woman's powers brought into its noblest sphere and with the most telling effect. I sincerely believe that if ever a national crisis with woman's suffrage, that their financiering will help us much better throughout than we have gone through the last few years. We have every reason to believe that whatever woman is in the home she will be in the state, and if there is any place on earth, in any department of the civil government, where economy needs to be practiced, it is in the administration of public affairs. And for that reason I think woman's suffrage will help the new State of Utah.

Mr. Chairman, I am in favor of the article as it was reported by the committee. I do not share in the fears that are expressed here as to endangering statehood. I cannot see how it can possibly come if men are sincere in Utah. I feel like the historic character who was urged to temporizing to a temporary expediency, and I believe that every delegate who has the conviction that I have upon this question, is just like that character:

He either fears his fate too much or his deserts are small,

Who dare not put it to the test and win or lose it all.

I am not a politician. I have not been in politics for many years, as it has been my privilege to be disfranchised, and I was not willing to pick up merely the crumbs that fell from the masses, table, I keep aloof therefore from politics; even when the nomination was suggested to me for this Convention, I protested against it, and only by the earnest solicitation of my democratic friends, and a great many republican friends, I accepted the nomination and was elected by the votes of the democrats and a good many republicans too. This, therefore, is my first study in politics, and my first study in politics was for to get the key for my future course in politics in the new

State_the key. Is it fear that was hinted at and plainly spoken and expressed that fills the hearts of some delegates here yet, that if women should receive the franchise_fear? Is that the keynote for the politics of the future State of Utah? Why, we stand on a platform higher than the democratic, higher than the republican platform. They both express themselves in favor of female suffrage. Why it is, perhaps, in the language of an Italian diplomat, that language was only a veil to cover the thoughts with, or does it mean what it says? I was asking myself that question and trying to find an answer for it here in this Convention. I don't intend to make a long speech, I think I will get through within my five minutes; I hope so. But, gentlemen, at this, the threshold of our statehood here in Utah, with the eyes of the nation upon this Convention, let us not be politicians, let us try to be statesmen, and execute the highest workmanship of statesmanship, that is, the drafting of a Constitution for a free people.

Let us go on, and all our intrigues, let them all be put aside, and let these women of ours_these noble women, the mothers and wives and daughters and sisters of our people, have their rights. If by some trickery, (excuse the word, I do not know what better term I might use, perhaps there are a great many better than this, but that is the only word I can think of,) let us not spoil our work by trickery and procrastination from day to day. Gentlemen, I quote another European diplomat, who once said to some statesmen of Europe, “Gentlemen, that is worse than a crime, it is a mistake;” and that would be the mistake if we denied women the suffrage.

Mr. BOYER. Mr. Chairman, unfortunately my organization is somewhat different to other men, otherwise I would not rise to speak this afternoon; it has been stated here by a number of gentlemen upon this floor, that they have no political aspirations, they had no desire of notoriety. I admit that I am not so wholly unselfish. I desire that my name shall go upon the stenographer's record, and if necessary handed down upon the page of history for coming generations, if necessary to use in that record, that I, too, am an advocate of woman's suffrage. And right here I will say that if there is any one thing that gives me pleasure above another, it is to see so many people disappointed this afternoon. I think that so many of the fair sex that have come in our midst, have come here to listen to the eloquent oratory of some other gentleman than few the that have already occupied the time this afternoon. How ever, {562} that may be, I desire to impose upon them one or two moments, and in so doing I trust that I am in harmony with the sentiment that has brought them here. That is the underlying sentiment of obtaining a full expression of the gentlemen that shall speak upon the subject. This question of woman's suffrage evidently has been in the minds of men many, many years; much thought has been given to it, and, as it has been remarked here by some of the speakers, great battles are ofttimes fought and won before going on to the battle ground, and I believe that this question is already fought and won, and that it is only a question of a little time until woman will receive her proper place and will be given the elective franchise to its fullest extent. Mr. Chairman, when I think in the history of the past of the innovations that have been made upon the iron hand of despots and look to the great degree of liberty that we enjoy to-day in this public land, and that you and I under God's benign influence are privileged to dwell here in this great Republic of ours, and then pick up this minority report and canvass the names and see that only_the chairman that brings in this minority report was, in the youthful vigor of manhood's life, a resident and a citizen of the stormtossed and downtrodden Erin's soil, and another from the land from which my father came, who might trace his ancestry back to the Puritan fathers that sought liberty in this land, and another coming

from the cliffs and glens of liberty-loving Scotland, all at one time foreigners coming to this land, and for what? For that greater degree of liberty that is vouchsafed to man under the Stars and Stripes; that is a warning to all men of equal rights upon earth_when I see this I am surprised; and yet I thank my God that it is not a native son of America that has thus presented a minority report. [Applause.]

While I look upon those gentlemen and uphold them as men of renown and as men of great worth in our community, I believe that there is clinging in their breasts that superstitious nature and bigotry that was also in the Puritan fathers, that came so many years ago and landed upon Plymouth Rock, and when they had seen and obtained so much of freedom in this land, they, too, became the persecutors of men, and would if they could, have chained conscience down and not given it the liberty that they claim to enjoy in this land; and I believe that this thing is only the relics of a superstition that is handed down, and that it will all wear away, and that we will be on that plane that makes of one and all one common blood in the interests of this our Republic. I trust that such may be the case, and when I read here one of the clauses in this minority report, I am somewhat surprised. I desire to read it: “As a people we are poor, we need the strong arm and the capital of the more thickly settled portions of our country. To adopt the report of the majority will be to keep both away until the unnecessary experiment shall have been tried.” Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, is this the truth? I trust not. I want to call your attention to this fact, as a people we are poor; this we grant, but is it a crime to be poor? I would rather be poor than to be enshrined with the splendor of wealth, and have the confidence of my constituency, the conscientiousness of knowing that I had done my duty. I would rather have the privilege of going to my constituency and know that I had their support than to have the strong arm of wealth. I care more, gentlemen and Mr. Chairman_not that I am particularly a ladies' man, but I wish to say that I care more for the arms of the fair sex in this beautiful land of ours [laughter] than I do for the strong arms of wealth. [Laughter.] Hence, gentlemen, I am in favor of this proposition {563} of universal franchise of mankind.

I will not take up the time of this Convention any longer, but I will say this, when I yesterday and this afternoon looked upon the beautiful bouquets of flowers presented here and that were presented, too, in the advocacy of the opposition to this question_or I will say in favor of the substitute, I could not help thinking that it is well that the brows of those that are passing to the land that is unknown should be bedecked with flowers, and that this was certainly a fair warning of the obituary scene that will soon be seen in this Convention, and as an admonition to those who have signed this minority report_men for whom I have the highest regard_I wish to admonish them not to place themselves in a position that it became my privilege, with some of my particular friends, to witness in the early days of the excitement in Carson City_in the good old days of the six-mule team and the overland stage coach. Many of you here remember it. My friend, Mr. Kiesel, will excuse me, for it happened to be one of his countrymen; he had been to Carson; he had gone in there with some five or six thousand dollars of hard money. I will say he had been admonished by his friends not to go there, for the reason that it was thought that his power was not equal to cope with the sharpers of a mining camp. However, he was full of zeal, and he went there with a view of investing his hard earned money, and he did so and lost it all, and after losing his cash he became so disgusted with himself and with the surroundings in general that he started home. After traveling a day's journey out of Carson, being overtaken by an

honest freighter, the driver of the six-mule team asked the gentleman, who had his blankets on his back and a cane over his shoulder, whether he wouldn't ride. The gentleman said, no sir; he didn't care to ride. It was insisted that he should ride. No, sir; he would not ride. Finally it was extracted from him as to why he would not ride_what reason he had to give, he says, “Gentlemen, I goes to this town mit five thousand dollars and I put him all in the mining claim and I lost every damn cent. Now, before I ride, I will learn this damned Dutchman sumtings, and I will make him walk home every step of the way.” [Laughter.]

Now, I hope and pray that my friends may not be in that forlorn path and walk and eventually kick themselves for the course they have taken, but let them come under the banner of the Republic and say, “Ladies, we extend to you our friendship, our good will and our feelings, and we know that you are equal to the occasion to vote and to vote honestly.”

Mr. JAMES. Mr. Chairman, I suggest for the good of this Convention, and in the interests of this large assembly
gathered here, that we suspend our remarks and permit the distinguished gentleman from Davis County to proceed with his argument.

Mr. KEARNS. I second that motion.

Mr. JAMES. It is evident that the people are assembled here for that express purpose. There is nothing that I can say to you or to them that would keep them here five minutes and I doubt if there is anybody else in this assemblage that can do it. I don't speak disparagingly of any gentleman, but I do speak encouragingly of that distinguished man, and I hope, gentlemen, you will let him go on. We can not legislate, we can not do any good, with all this vast congregation here. Let him finish his speech and let us to-morrow, when the people don't want to hear us, go on and settle this question. I ask the unanimous consent.

Mr. ROBERTS. I object for the present.

Mr. JAMES. Oh, Mr. Roberts, do not interfere with our work.

Mr. BOYER. Mr. Chairman, I desire {564} to submit this, that Mr. James and I now have had our talk, and of course we can conscientiously and freely submit to the gentleman from Davis; however, there are others here that perhaps would like to talk, and as the rules have already been suspended I would object.

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. Chairman, my only objection is, that the arrangement proposed by the gentleman from Salt Lake would not leave me to close the debate, and that I must insist on doing so.

Mr. JAMES. I will say to the gentleman that this debate will not close for days.

Mr. ROBERTS. Well, then, I wish to wait for days, until it does close.

Mr. IVINS. Mr. Chairman, inasmuch as this whole proceeding is a little out of the way, I would like to move again that it be the sense of this committee that Mr. Roberts now close the debate on this question.

The CHAIRMAN. It can only be by unanimous consent.

Mr. SMITH. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, I had fully designed myself not to speak upon this question which has detained us so long, but in order that I may not be misunderstood as to my position upon the same, I feel that it is but just to myself and to my friends that I should declare myself, not with the idea in any sense of trying to sway or change the views of any gentleman upon this floor. There have been during the discussions that have been held upon this question, some recriminations back and forth, and some questions as to who were possibly the movers in this matter, looking to this question of suffrage. It is highly probable that I myself am as fully conversant with it as any other gentleman upon this floor, and will say that so far as the party of which I am a member is concerned (and you will pardon me for making reference to my party, because I regard this as eminently out of place in consideration of this question), it was the result of the deliberate counselling together of men of all shades of views, members of that party. I was not myself a delegate to what is known as the Provo convention, but I have been an active participant in the discussions that have occurred upon these political questions throughout this Territory, and I regard myself as fully and as thoroughly committed to the question of equal suffrage as it is possible for man to commit himself. The discussions that have been held thus far in this room, by the various gentlemen upon this floor, have in no way changed or altered my views; there was a time in the Territorial Legislature of Utah, when I fought the question of equal suffrage because my convictions were that it was improper at that time. I honor the courage and fortitude of my friend from Davis County; I respect his judgment. I respect his observations of the rule of his conscience, because I know that he stands upon this position in honesty, and that did he not honestly believe the views he has uttered, no more than any other gentleman would he have spoken upon this floor. And while I might differ with him in regard to these views and their announcement, I do not in any sense desire, nor would I in any sense utter one word to reflect upon him as a man and as a gentleman, and I regret the evidence of intolerance that came from some members upon this floor in calling him to account for an honest expression of his judgment and sentiment. [Applause.]

This question of suffrage to my mind is the question of questions among the American people. It lies at the foundation of all liberty, it is the structure upon which the American people have been building step by step, degree by degree, the uplifting of the race, the upbuilding and blessings of the children of one common parent who have found a home upon this broad soil. There is {565} no argument that man can produce, no word that he can utter, that would in any sense discredit woman in the exercise of the franchise, that it does not apply in the same sense to every man. You may discuss, you may argue, you may reason upon the inequalities of the conditions, you may laud the virtues of woman, you may point to her with pride, and rejoice in her peculiar characteristics, say that you do not want to lower her to that condition in which man has fallen. These things are simply nonsense; she eats, she drinks, she sleeps, she moves just as man moves.

Her aspirations and ambitions are as man's are. No man has ever made a mark among the human race or exercised power and dominion among his fellowmen, but that, standing at his head and implanting within his breast, a love of liberty and respect for right and regard for government or the uplifting of any court or proper principle, has been a noble woman who taught him every lesson that enabled him to perform his part no matter where it may have been upon the field of battle, as a soldier, or in the forum in the discussions of those public questions and in the consideration of the interests and well-being of his and her kind. We may consider these and look with fear and doubt upon each other in regard to the basis upon which we stand. We may feel our fears and our doubts in regard to this matter, but where is the woman that ever betrayed her trust half so many times in this life as has her brother broken faith and betrayed his trusts. In the midst of distress, they have ever been true, in the midst of trial they have ever been true, upon the field of battle following the wake of armies that have gone forth to accomplish victories in the interests of the upbuilding of our government, and in the maintenance of that government, they have been found nursing the sick and wounded. They have said to their sons, “The liberties of the people are at stake, go, my heart goes with you, and all that is possible for me to do I will do for your interests and for your well-being. I brought you into the world, but I give you to your country, and will stand by you in the midst of your distress.”

The same has been true in their husbands; the same has been true in their brothers; the same has been true in their utterance to lovers; ever ready to make a sacrifice to perform their part in honor before their fellow beings, and with justice and propriety to themselves.

It seems to me that the range of discussion that this question has taken is entirely improper and wrong. We stand here as citizens, we stand here upon the basis of right, we stand here as the lovers of wives, as the lovers of mothers, as the lovers of sons, as the lovers of daughters. We are not here to place laurels on the brow of the son to displace one from the brow of the daughter. We are not here in any sense to rob either of them of any right or any privilege, but we are here considering the conditions that have existed in the world. As has been explained, in the history of the past woman has been the beast of burden to a very great extent among our brothers, but I do thank Providence that in the uplifting and establishment of the government of which we propose forming a part, that the spirit has changed. An eloquent lecturer upon a certain occasion said, “You note the advancement that is made in this, for entering a dining room of a hotel in England, you see the husband leading the way and his wife following; entering a dining room of a hotel in France, and you see the husband and the wife side by side entering the dining room holding pleasant converse; but entering the dining room of an American hotel you notice that the woman comes in at the {566} head of the column swinging her skirts and her husband comes straggling after.”

Yes, it is true, and it is miserably true; and they have been worthy of the confidence that has been placed in them. They have been found in every place of honor true to the trust reposed in them, and in this proposition we are but taking a step in the direction of universal progress, looking to the placing of man and woman in the positions of honor side by side, guided by every hope and aspiration, looking to the accomplishment of every given purpose, and seeking to enhance the interests and well being of their sons, of their daughters, of their brothers, of their sisters, and to- day standing upon this floor I take the ground I do on the question of equal suffrage, believing

that it is a right that is theirs, as it is a right that is mine. Not because, forsooth, I hold the views of any special body of men, but I believe the handwriting upon the wall, the forefinger of destiny, the purpose of God himself, as well as the purpose of the American people, is that they, with their brothers, shall have and enjoy every right that humanity can enjoy and that it shall not be taken from them, and that my vote shall not be cast to retard their advancement or interfere with their progress in the accomplishment of this great step, that by them and with them we may accomplish our mission in the world, and indeed have liberty among the human race.

One of the gentlemen in speaking, spoke glowingly of the services of that gifted man, Thomas Jefferson. We are informed that the Declaration of Independence for which he received so much credit, was the work of a woman; we have seen the heroic efforts of the ladies of various parts of the world, we know their worth in these directions, there is no need of our discussing that they have faults; they have their faults. Have not men? But they sometimes quarrel. Don't men? But they sometimes are selfish; are not men? But are not they more generous than men? Are they not willing and always willing to make the sacrifice as a rule that men are not willing to make? Is there a thing that can be applied to women in these various directions, that men are not guilty of to a greater degree in every sense? And have they and do not they, and will not they, as we go on in the accomplishment of the history of our race, display greater heroism, greater devotion, greater truth, greater worth, greater purity, greater consistency, and greater honor in every walk of life, where they may be brought in competition with man? It is but just and right that the opportunity should be theirs, and so far as I am concerned, I go upon the register as one in favor, as I believe in my conscience it is right, or if I did not believe it was right, I would stand side by side with my friend upon this proposition and combat it to the last inch. But it is right, it is just, and I say to you, you may discuss it, argue it till doomsday, and the same proposition that would deny to woman the right of franchise, applied would deny the same right to man. [Applause.]

Mr. LOW (Cache). Mr. Chairman, I have a request to make of the house by unanimous consent. While I have no desire to cut off the debate, I think that a definite conclusion can be arrived at that will be an advantage to Mr. Roberts, by way of concluding this question, provided we agree to it. It is that if the sense of the Convention can be obtained, so that we can ascertain before the time for closing this afternoon's session, whether the debate can be closed for the field, that some provision should be made that the honorable gentleman from Davis County could be heard this evening, and that a committee could be appointed to make such arrangements that the information could be given before the close of this afternoon's session. Whether this would meet the approval of the gentlemen present in the committee or not_I {567} merely present it for their consideration; and if there is a possibility that the field shall finish their arguments, since he is pitted against the field, allowing the closing of the debate to-night, and ample provisions could be made for his hearers, for he seems to be the attracting card in this matter.

Mr. KIESEL. Mr. Chairman, I would move that when we adjourn we adjourn until tomorrow morning, and at that time Mr. Roberts shall be allowed to close the debate.

Mr. EVANS (Weber). Mr. Chairman, Mr. Roberts has just informed me, that he would just as soon conclude this evening, provided we could have an evening session; it would save a good deal of time, and, therefore, I will oppose the motion made by the gentleman from Weber.

Mr. LOW (Cache). And about what time they would occupy.

Mr. ELDREDGE. Mr. Chairman, I arise to a point of order. I suggest the motion of the gentleman from Weber County is out of order, that it is not within the purview of this committee to adjourn.

Mr. CHAIRMAN. That is technically correct.

Mr. LOW (Cache). Mr. Chairman, I offer my suggestion so that if there be no objection to it it might go into effect.

Mr. THURMAN. I object.

Mr. C. P. LARSEN. Mr. Chairman, surrounded here as I am by the beauty and grace of our capital, it may be somewhat difficult for me to express my feelings, but I would not feel justified in not saying a few words on this question. As this seems to be a testimony meeting, I desire to just bear my testimony as well. There have been same things said that perhaps had better never been said. There is apprehension that if we give the women the franchise that conditions will be brought about that none of us will like. I am in favor, sir, gentlemen, of the enfranchisement of the women, and I do not see, as some of the gentlemen have expressed themselves here, that this question has not been talked about, some of them saying that it is just now that we are beginning to think how serious a matter it is. It does not certainly, sir, speak much for the intelligence of these delegates that are here present. Is this the first time we have thought we would have to meet this question? I hardly think so. I hardly think that there is one delegate here present but what has given this some thought, but it seems to me that they have made it convenient during the campaign to say at least nothing against it if they could not say anything in favor of it. It has been told here that these pledges are nothing, that they are not sacred. I look upon it in a different light altogether. It has been said that the republicans by putting in the platform this plank, were making a bid for a certain class of voters of this Territory. I deny it. I say it is not so. I was not there at that convention, but I say it is not a fact. It has been practically acknowledged as a fact by a number of my own party. I say it is not so.

I think that we have given this question many serious thoughts. How would you feel, you that belong to a party, that has ever said that we will meet a question fair and square, we don't believe in dodging and straddling and sidetracking, but we will meet an issue fair and square_how would you feel to go before the public this fall? Do not deceive yourselves, do not think for a moment that you can deceive the people. You are only deceiving yourselves, and of all deceptions that is the worst. We were elected on this platform, {568} democrats and republicans, with that plank in both platforms.

Gentlemen, let us not deceive ourselves, let us do what we have said we would do; I am conscientious in this matter. I believe that side_I believe that politics will gain through the women having a voice in political matters as they now have in social matters. I believe in the great principles enunciated in the Declaration of Independence by those men whom we are inclined to look upon more to-day like gods among men than men. I am in favor of the clause as introduced by the committee.

Mr. HART. Mr. Chairman, as it has been made known that it is not the wish of this committee that there should be no more discussion, I do not rise to make a speech, but I think it is only justice to myself to take the time to state that I wish to vote in favor of the first clause as reported by the committee and against all the substitutes.

Cache County is in favor of equal suffrage for women, and I think her delegation_I believe that I may speak for them, when I say that every one of them will vote in favor of equal suffrage for women, not only for the pleasure in so doing of casting my vote in line of redeeming a party pledge and party platform, that at least is binding upon me, and I have at the same time the pleasure of voting for a doctrine that I have for many years dearly cherished. [Applause.]

Mr. ANDERSON. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, I am opposed to the substitute of submitting woman's suffrage as a separate article to the people for many reasons, the chief of which is, because I am unwilling to give the saloon men, liquor dealers, gamblers, and the bad element of society, who are afraid of a good vote, an opportunity of defeating it by corrupt influences and the fraudulent use of money, and if it is so submitted no one can deny that such influence will be used. I have listened earnestly and attentively throughout the entire discussion of this question, but I do not think there has been one logical argument made against woman's suffrage that it would not as consistently apply to men. The gentleman from Davis has laid great stress on what he styled a decree of the Almighty which has been handed down from the mythical and barbarous realms of the past at a time when all forms of oppression were justified by law, and of course such decree was interpreted in accordance with the uncivilized ideas of that age; but truth and justice would make the decree of the Almighty to read, “Woman, thou art man's equal and companion, together thou shalt travel the journey of life, and enjoy equally with him all rights and privileges.”

I believe and shall support woman's suffrage for many reasons, the chief of which is because I

think it is right and just and necessary for the protection and perpetuation of the principles of a {569} free government, and also because I am pledged to do so by the platform of my party and by solemn promises made to my constituents, and I would be a traitor indeed if I would break my faith with my constituents and my own convictions. During my whole life I have endeavored to follow the star of duty and sincerely trust that its light may ever continue to guide my actions.

Would it be any argument against men exercising the right of franchise, to bring up examples of their incompetency and wickedness? If so, a dark and gruesome record could easily be established that would forever bar them from exercising such right. If some women do not want the right of franchise it is no reason that it should be denied to those who desire it. If mankind had always remained in the grooves of the past and had made no changes, we would still be barbarians, with our minds enslaved by bigotry and superstition; therefore, the road to progress and advancement lies in the direction of changes and innovations and in breaking loose from old forms and customs, and it has been upon that road that all the great principles of truth and liberty have been discovered.

We are certainly all pledged to support woman's suffrage, and no member can absolve himself therefrom by saying even publicly that he disapproved the same. It would have been his duty if he could not support it, to have resigned before election, and if he did not do so, and now opposes it, he places himself in a false position before the people, and future history will so record it. I am surprised to hear some of my republican colleagues get upon this floor and say that we are not bound by the principles and platform of our party, intimating that the republican party is a party of broken promises and pledges, which I deny. It would be just as consistent to repudiate any or all principles of our platform. We do not come here to express our own individual views, if they
are opposed to the majority of our constituents as expressed by platforms on which we are all elected. What confidence would the people have in political speakers if such dishonesty was practised in politics. They would say, your principles are beautiful, but they are only made to catch votes, and members of your party may repudiate them at any time when at variance with their individual ideas. I have always considered the republican party to be a party of honor, a party true to its promises and pledges, and I think it is so considered by its supporters. But if it should break this pledge, after holding it out to the hopes of the people, then good-bye to the republican party in Utah; for the people would have no more confidence in any of its promises. There is nothing that would so demoralize the party and bring it into disrepute with the people. Therefore, our sacred honor and future success are at stake, which we cannot afford to sacrifice.

The gentlemen comprising the opposition offer the following reasons why woman should not be granted the right of franchise, viz:

First._Because woman is better than man.

Second._Man has too much respect for woman.

Third._Good women will not vote if given the opportunity.

Let us examine these reasons.

First._Women are better than men. The same line of reasoning would disfranchise all honest men and give the franchise to the villain and drunkard.

Second._Man has too much respect for woman. It is claimed by woman that man cannot respect her when he looks upon her with so much distrust and suspicion that he cannot accord her the right of franchise, and it is also claimed that the truest can only exist where there is perfect equality. The opposition {570} admit that woman is morally superior and mentally equal to man, and yet they are unwilling to allow her equal rights. It was this same spirit of intolerance that caused such a withering blight upon the progress and liberty of the people during that period known as the “Dark Ages.” The opposition misrepresented the question by conjuring up improbable conditions and scenes for the very purpose of working upon our sentiments and sympathies.

Third._Good women will not vote if given the opportunity, which has been proved false repeatedly in Wyoming, Kansas and Colorado, where women have cast their votes repeatedly in the direction of reforms.

Fourth._It is not expedient because it will endanger the ratification of the Constitution. Now, I can say for myself, that I would rather Utah remain in territorial bondage throughout the endless cycles of time than to have her admitted disfranchising one-half the citizens of the new State, and I think I voice the sentiments of thousands throughout the Territory.

All eyes are now upon Utah. Let us get out of the ruts of bigotry, intolerance and injustice, and ascend to the broad, bright plane of liberty and equal rights, and our star of destiny will rise and shed its brilliant lustre on all mankind.

Mr. HAMMOND. Mr. Chairman, I was afraid this thing was going to close up before I had an opportunity of expressing a few of my feelings. I am getting tired of it, and I presume most of the people are who are spectators here. They are anxious to hear this tall cedar from Davis County, and I do want to hear him myself. I was a member of the committee on suffrage that presented this majority report; there was a good deal said about the rushing of this matter, and that the minority could not get heard or get their report ready. I want to state that this was one of the first matters that was entered into the first day of the meeting of the committee. I was not there, I had not arrived, but when I met with the committee the next morning, they told me what they had done; says I, “Gentlemen, I am with you to give the girls suffrage_female suffrage.” That is what it is called here, I believe, and says I, “I go you one better, and let the girls vote when over eighteen years of age.” Says I, “That is where I stand on that matter, for I believe they are just that much smarter than our dead-head boys that are holding up the corners of the saloons around here.” Some years ago, I don't remember how many, while I was in the east, a mass meeting was called in Ogden. I was then a resident of Ogden, and I was told that my wife made one of the grandest speeches made there in favor of woman's suffrage. I was in favor of it before that time, I

could not tell when I had not been in favor of equal rights to all the citizens of these United States, and for all in the world for that matter. Now, I represent, I am happy to state, the southeastern county of this Territory, bordering on New Mexico, Colorado, and Arizona. We are right down there in those four corners: there is not another spot like it on the map that I know of. Now, sir, I am happy to state as the young gentleman did the other day, they were a unit in their representation_I am a unit and have no differences to quarrel about it, with the delegates from that county, I am heartily in favor of equal suffrage to the women as well as the men; that is the sentiment of the women down there. They did not give me any particular instructions, for I know their sentiments, and as fine a class of women as I ever knew upon the earth, good housewives, good mothers, and attending to their duties as becomes them in the midst of the troubles and difficulties that we have there; they have stood shoulder to shoulder and side by {571} side with their husbands in every difficulty. I was told by a very eminent lady a few years ago, before I moved from Weber County, journeying up Ogden canyon in my buggy, and her by my side, says she, “Bishop, women led in the downfall of man_the degeneration_and it is their high destiny in the regeneration of man, that they should lead.” Now, I appreciate that sentiment and it has sounded in my ears and my whole heart from that day to this. I believe in it. Talk about women_they are capable of anything. [Laughter.]

Now, I have said about my say, I have listened to speeches until my old head ached and cracked with them, hearing Cicero, Caesar, Demosthenes, and the Websters and Clays, until I was fairly bursting wide open with them, and I would go to sleep and forget the whole business.

Mr. HEYBOURNE. Mr. Chairman, I am of the opinion very strongly, sir, that if this debate is continued much longer, provided we get a favorable vote on the woman's suffrage question, that there will be quite a number of the ladies that will not be able to exercise it, in their interests; I do now move you sir, that the committee rise and report.

Motion seconded.

Cries of no.

Mr. ALLEN. The gentleman that spoke just before me said that he was getting tired of this debate. I was getting tired of it two or three days ago, but I am getting used to it. I expect that in several years from now, when the young ladies come to examine the record of this Convention, they will find some men there recorded in favor of woman's suffrage, as many gentlemen upon this floor have made speeches for the purpose of pleasing the ladies. It is not necessary as far as I am concerned, because I will expect to live until that day when seven women will hang on to one man.

Mr. BOWDLE. Mr. Chairman, I have not occupied my own time nor sold it. I move you that it be the sense of this Convention, that this debate close at 5:30 this evening.

Mr. HART. Mr. Chairman, the motion is out of order. I believe it is already the sense of this house that the debate close within a reasonable time, but I am opposed to the motion. There may be gentlemen who wish to talk. The motion is certainly out of order.

The CHAIRMAN. That matter has been forestalled. The Convention has already agreed to give Mr. Roberts all the time he wants to close this debate.

Mr. EICHNOR. Mr. Chairman, I arise to a point of order.

Mr. HEYBOURNE. I made a motion that we rise and report progress. The motion was duly seconded and that motion is also in order under our rules.

The question being taken on the motion of Mr. Heybourne, it was rejected.

Mr. CRANE. Mr. Chairman. I desire to say a few words on this important question. It cannot be said that I have been extremely garrulous on the floor of this Convention, nor have I squandered much of the time. But, sir, on this question I desire to occupy five minutes of your time to express the sense of the people who honored me by sending me as their delegate. I have been highly edified the last three days by the eloquence of the gentlemen who have preceded me_eloquence worthy of Demosthenes and Cicero. I think I have never listened to such orations as have fallen from the lips of at least two of the gentlemen from Salt Lake and one from Davis, nor do I know, Mr. Chairman, that I can give any further enlightenment upon this subject, although I do not propose to thrash old straw any more than I can help. There are phases in this discussion that I think have not been fully touched upon. This is a very grave question, Mr. Chairman, {572} grave not only to the people in Utah to-day, but to those who wish to come after them. It is a question that has been agitated in this Territory for at least six or seven months, agitated by both political parties during one of the most bitter campaigns that perhaps was ever fought in any state or territory in the Union, and yet there are gentlemen on this floor who have intimated that they did not know that woman's suffrage was in the platform. Mr. Chairman, I am not here to express my individual sentiments as to my individual opinion. Public office is a public trust, I have heard. I am here simply to express the opinions of the people whom I represent in southern Utah. Since this Convention has met I have received letters from almost every person in my county, urging me as best they knew how, to vote for and support this plank in the republican platform, to which party I belong. But, sir, when I express my own individual desires and opinions, and they coincide with the opinions of those who have sent me here, a double pleasure has been given me. I received a note this morning, Mr. Chairman, from one of my friends in this city, I presume. He urged me not to speak upon this question, as like yourself I would be digging my political grave. Several gentlemen on this floor have intimated the same thing. They said they had no political aspirations. They said that they had no political stars in the horizon; whether I have or not. Mr. Chairman, that is not my province to speak of to-day, that is something which the people of Utah have in their power to say; but I want to say here and I want it fully understood, that if to express my honest sentiments or hopes and desires of the people of Millard County, which I in part have the honor to represent; if so doing, I dig my political grave, then let it be dug deep. If I should sink below the wave of the bubbling waters unhonored, unwept and unsung, I want to say, Mr. Chairman, that there is only one desire that I have and that is that you yourself should write my obituary. I want to draw the attention of every gentleman on this floor whose memory in some way seems to be extremely deficient, to the platforms upon

which they stood and upon which they stand to-day. I do not wish to discuss the political aspects of the day, that is not what I am here for. I am not here as a partisan, none of us are here as partisans, but for a greater, grander and nobler purpose, to lay the foundation of the future laws of the State, a Constitution that in the language of yourself, Mr. Chairman, shall go tumbling down the ages in the last syllable of recorded time.

I want to draw the attention of the gentlemen to a platform that was created on the 15th day of September, 1894, I want to read it. There are gentlemen who differ, Mr. Chairman, and I honor them for it, if they have seen a new light; if they have received a revelation, I have nothing to say, but speaking for the great masses of the people of this Territory, I believe they have not yet received that revelation nor have they like Saul of Tarsus yet seen that great light. Forty thousand people on the 6th of last November voted for woman's suffrage in all its meanings, in all its ramifications, whatever they may be. Twenty-one thousand people in this Territory voted for this plank in this platform, “We favor the granting of equal suffrage to women.” But, sir, below that plank in this platform, and this plank I learn was written by one of the distinguished gentlemen who has occupied a responsible position in this Territory for many years, “We demand for the new State of Utah a liberal Constitution.” Mr. Chairman, there are gentlemen on this floor who differ with me in the meaning of this plank, perhaps, and I do not wish to be understood as doubting their honesty nor their integrity; but, sir, there is not a {573} republican on this floor, I hope, who did not read that platform upon which he stood before he accepted the nomination from his constituents. Consequently there was another political convention held by a political party, that was then the dominant political party in this Territory; they intimated that the republican platform was a platform to get in on and not to stand upon, but just as soon as they were in they could look out of the windows at the poor dupes who sent them there, and they went the republican platform one better, “The democrats of Utah are unequivocally in favor of woman's suffrage and the political rights and privileges equal with those of man, including the eligibility to office, and we demand that such guaranty shall be provided in the Constitution of the State of Utah as will secure to the women of Utah these inestimable rights.” There are republicans and there are democrats on this floor who will not stand by these planks in these platforms, and it is not my purpose, nor do I so desire, Mr. Chairman, to criticise their changed opinions; but, sir, when those two planks were written and presented to the people of this Territory, whose honesty and whose integrity, whose loyalty and whose patriotism not a single man on the floor of this Convention dare doubt for one moment_40,000 votes were given on the promise of the platforms and these pledges made to them in these two conventions. I believe, Mr. Chairman, in being honest in every walk of life as well as in political promises made at political conventions, and I want to say to my political friends here, of both political parties, that the people of this Territory will strike from place and power that political party or parties that have been holding the cup of promise to their lips and drugging it to their hearts.

Mr. Chairman, speaking for the people of my county, I say that every man and every woman so far as I know are in favor of equal suffrage of the sexes. They demand it. They have asked me to advocate it, and I am their servant. Already five hundred women in my county away down in southern Utah are watching and waiting the electrical flash that will herald to them the glad tidings of their emancipation.

Mr. PARTRIDGE. I wish to bear my testimony. [Laughter.] While I occupy the floor, I would ask that the gentlemen and ladies present would refrain from any applause, and I will promise them that I will not be lengthy. The main object that I have in standing up here on this floor at the present time, is that I may register my protest against the proceedings that we have been engaged in for the last few days. At the commencement of this debate the gentleman who precipitated it upon us, gave us the assurance, or at least made the statement that he knew that it would have no effect, that it was a foregone conclusion that the section giving suffrage to women would be incorporated in the Constitution. Since that time I have been ready at any time and all the {574}
time to dispense with any further discussion on the subject and to enter upon a vote. I have never yet been able to see any particular good that would result from all this time that has been wasted in this discussion of this subject upon this floor. True it may be a very nice thing to have an audience paid $4 a day by the government to listen to two-hour speeches, but I question the propriety of it; but while I am on the floor I wish to state that I have a great many ideas that I thought I would bring forth in favor of woman and in refutation to the arguments of gentlemen who have expressed themselves here, but as was remarked by a gentleman from Salt Lake, the ammunition that I had stored up has been exploded and shot out without my consent. But there is one thing in particular that comes to me with considerable force, that I have not heard any gentleman lay much stress upon, and that is, it seems to be understood by those gentlemen who oppose giving women the right of suffrage, that it is an absolute necessity that they must hold office if they have the right.

Now I submit, Mr. Chairman, that there are many of these gentlemen here who have expressed themselves in that way, They may, perhaps, never get a chance to act as justice of the peace hereafter, especially if they record their vote in opposition to this measure. One gentleman cited us to an instance where a lady had been elected to the office of justice of the peace, and in the dispatch of her duty she was forced to sit in judgment upon her worthless husband, who was brought before her, and the argument or facts in the case simply brings the matter to my understanding that she was a competent person to dispatch the duties of that office, because she condemned him, she sent him to prison where he belonged; and for shame that she was connected with such an individual, linked to such a being in life, she resigned her position. I say that this
is an argument in favor of the women, that they are honorable, that they will even dispatch their duties in the face of those circumstances.

Is this a lesson that is to be taught to these ignorant Mormons? I am sorry, Mr. Chairman, that the question of Mormonism or Gentileism has ever been introduced into this discussion. I am sorry that the minority report refers to any matters that past. We do not want to open up old issues, at least I do not, and I do not believe that the majority of this people do, and I wish to protest against anything of this kind being introduced here.

Men may think, perhaps some of them, that questionable jokes and language, which I consider unbecoming in the presence of ladies, may pass for argument, but I do not think it. I think that the presence of women at the polls would have a good effect upon the community. Therefore, as I said, I do not wish to make a long sermon, I just simply wish to bear my testimony and I will give way.

Mr. LOW (Cache). I am reminded of {575} the old adage, that desperate diseases require desperate remedies. If that is the case, the desperation of this question which is before the house is supported with desperate remedies, by the length of speeches that are given by the anti- suffragists. I am reminded also, that notwithstanding the fact that our sister State on the east enjoyed equal franchises in their organic act, while under territorial vassalage, also refused statehood without the same privilege being granted to them in their constitution. And therefore, if the true sentiment and the sincerity of the sections, from which the honorable gentlemen have spoken, upon this floor is voiced by the length of their speeches, and their lack of desire to tire us by their onerous work, I desire also to add strength to a motion that has been presented here before this house, and as a motion is of no value without a second, I shall second, hurriedly, this sentiment expressed by Mr. Hart, of Cache County, from which county I also come, and that our desires are in favor of woman's suffrage, first, last and all the time.

Mr. ROBISON (Wayne). Mr. Chairman. I want to say this, that I am in favor of woman's suffrage, and I want it recorded on the minutes of this Convention that when the vote does come, that my name will be found recorded in favor of that proposition; and I do not, sir, know that I could say any more if I should stand here an hour, consequently I will give way.

(Calls for Mr. Roberts.)

Mr. EICHNOR. Mr. Chairman, I think it would be unfair to insist on Mr. Roberts making his speech this evening; I therefore, move that the committee rise.

Mr. GIBBS. I would just like to state the position that I occupy before this house in regard to the question that is before us. I notice from the remarks of my friends that if a man does he is damned and if he don't he is damned; if he stands up to the plank in his platform and his convictions may be otherwise, then whatever his platform is he is damned because he does not vote his convictions, and if he fly from the party plank he is damned on that side. So it makes no difference which side of the house we take on this question, it appears as though we are going to be damned anyway, and I wish to state that neither the report of the majority or the substitute that has been offered exactly meets with my approval. My friend Mr. Hill this morning voiced my sentiments. If a substitute be drawn up that it be submitted as a separate article and for the ladies to vote upon it this fall and decide the question for themselves, I am in favor of woman's suffrage. I only just wish in justice to myself to state the position that I occupy upon this floor.

Mr. EICHNOR. Mr. Chairman, I offered an amendment this morning to submit this question separately to the qualified voters of the people of the Territory. I will state that_I will be very brief in my remarks, and furthermore, that I have no apologies to make for offering that amendment. If we are bound by party platforms we are bound by party planks, what does either plank in the respective platform say? What does the plank say? It says that it desires it. Do they say that it shall be submitted, or put directly in the Constitution?

Mr. SQUIRES. The democratic platform does.

Mr. EICHNOR. Well, I was not familiar particularly with the democratic platform. Now, I will state right here, it has been intimated that the only class of people that are opposed to this proposition are the gamblers and saloon men and the bad element of society. Now, I will state to the gentleman that made that remark that he is sadly mistaken. There are a great number of people who supported me in our primary, {576} who supported me on election day, that requested me to introduce an amendment of this kind, so that the people can have an opportunity to vote upon it. Now, gentlemen, if I am wrong, and I hope I am, I will say this, if you imperil that Constitution either here or in Washington, my hands are clear. If this measure is in accord with the laws of Almighty God no power on earth can defeat it. If it is contrary to the mandates of the Divine Master, by sheer force you may build it mountain high yet of its own weight it will crumble into fragments and to dust. You may appeal to party platforms, I appeal to patriotism on this question. All we ask is, submit it separately; you must be fearfully afraid of the people. If the people want it they will vote for it; and I will say right here, if this is submitted as a separate plank I shall support it and vote for it, the same as if it is in the Constitution. But give the people a chance who earnestly ask that this matter be submitted to a separate vote. If you have lost faith in the people, you are afraid of their votes.

Mr. THURMAN. Who is asking to have it submitted to a separate vote?

Mr. EICHNOR. Mr. Chairman, if you will believe me, if I speak to you, that if one man has spoken to me in this city, more than 500 have requested me to vote in this way.

Mr. EICHNOR. Mr. Chairman, if you desire, I guess they can place themselves on record.

Mr. KIESEL. For the information of Mr. Thurman, I think this little dispatch may be in order.

Mr. EICHNOR. I will give way to Mr. Kiesel for a few moments.

Mr. KIESEL. I will just simply read the dispatch. I think there is a sentiment awakening here. The people all over the country are waking up, and they telegraph to the delegates of Weber County: “Mass meeting here to-morrow night to consider woman suffrage. Have action delayed until after this meeting if possible.” Now, if you will give the people time, you will hear from them. In two or three days you will hear from them all over the country.

The CHAIRMAN. Who is that signed by?

Mr. KIESEL. R. H. Whipple, chairman republican committee, H. H. Henderson, chairman democratic committee; it is dated to-day. Now, if you give them time you will hear from the people on this question.

Mr. BOYER. May I ask the gentleman a question?

Mr. EICHNOR. Yes, sir.

Mr. BOYER. Should the substitute, being submitted to the people to be voted upon as a separate article, be carried, will it or will it not become a part and portion of the Constitution?

Mr. EICHNOR. Yes, sir; if a majority vote in favor of that separate article it will be a part of the Constitution.

Mr. BOYER. Then another question. Will or will it not equally imperil the Constitution if it becomes a part of it?

Mr. EICHNOR. I answer no, and I will say to the democratic side of the house that the fire in the rear with respect to statehood is not coming from the republican side of the house. I think it has a proper place in our schedule as a separate article, and then when the majority of the people say yes, let it be a part and parcel of this Constitution. It won't do, gentlemen, to say that only the gamblers and saloon men and the bad element of society are opposed to this proposition. I will state that I am not opposed to it, but I speak in behalf of the people that are opposed to it, and that follow legitimate business, that demand {577} that they have the right to express their views on it.

I believe that it is the patriotic duty to place this in a separate article that the people can express

their views upon it, and not crack the party lash and look upon a party mandate as a divine institution. I think we owe a higher duty to the people than party planks, and that is patriotism. The matter has been stated here that the Constitution of the United States is an inspired document. I hope it is. If God inspired the men that wrote that Constitution, they did not give equal rights to the women, but left it to the people of the United States. Now, Mr. Chairman, I have no quarrel with any man that desires to place this right in the body of the Constitution. I make this amendment in the interest of peace and harmony, because on Saturday afternoon there was a feeling rampant in this Convention that every person should have his way. I believe that this would remove the question and there could be no jar among the delegates. As for one I do not care who framed the plank in the republican platform. I will state that if the gentleman framed it whose name has been mentioned_that as for one I never signed a petition to disfranchise the Mormon people of this Territory.

Mr. BUTTON. Mr. Chairman, I move that the committee now rise.

The motion was rejected.

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. Chairman, we have been discussing for some time a very important question, and I presume from the fact that no one else has requested the floor, the gentlemen of the Convention have now said all they wish to say; it has come now my turn, and that what remarks I have to make will close the discussion. I call attention to the fact, however, that this great concourse of people have been assembled for some length of time, and their position is very uncomfortable and I think it is alike unjust to them and to myself also, and to the great question that is before us, to insist on me going into a discussion of it, which I am sure I could not close before both the delegates and those who are here as spectators would become exceedingly weary; there would be a constant confusion, and therefore, in justice to myself and the cause in which I am to speak, I ask the delegates that the committee might rise, or take a recess until to-morrow and then I have the privilege of closing this discussion. It would be, sir, eminently unfair to ask me at this stage of the proceedings to enter upon my discussion upon the issue.

Mr. CRANE. I make a motion that we rise and report.

Mr. VARIAN. I hope that this committee will recognize the fact as suggested by my friend from Davis County, that it is, perhaps, absolutely necessary to enable him to respond to the acknowledged wish of the committee, that it do rise. Let us not interpose any further objection to the matter. I move that the committee do now rise.

The motion was agreed to.

The committee then rose and reported as follows:

The committee of the whole has had under consideration the article on election and rights of suffrage and report progress.

Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I desire to move that we adjourn until some hour to be fixed this

evening and secure a convenient place in which to assemble. If it will be agreeable to the gentleman from Davis County to speak to-night, I think it would be a great saving to the Convention. We are under an expense of $300 for a half day, and if a half day should be consumed, which I doubt not will be the case, it would be that much more saved if we could meet to-night, unless the gentleman is weary from being here; unless he objects, I move that a committee be appointed to look into the procurement of the Salt Lake Theatre for this evening.
{578}
Mr. EICHNOR. Mr. President, I hope that motion will not prevail.

Mr. VARIAN. I rise to a point of order, Mr. President. This Convention is not on wheels and it is not necessary to make a grand display like that.

Mr. GOODWIN. Mr. President, there are several committee meetings set down for to-night and I know this Convention is tired. I hope the request of Mr. Roberts that we adjourn until to-morrow morning will be treated with respect.

The Convention then, at 4:40 p. m., adjourned.