It can’t be denied, that the correct or energy of a State to exclude a portion of its male citizens from the correct to vote, is acknowledged by this second section; from which it follows, that the right to vote will not be one of many “privileges or immunities” which the first part declares shall not be abridged by any State. XV. Amendments, voting shouldn’t be handled as, or denominated a privilege, and evidently was not supposed to be, nor thought to be included in the “privileges or immunities” of a citizen, which no State can abridge for any cause no matter. All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are residents of the United States and of the State whereby they reside. State of Illinois, County of Cook, ss.: Myra Bradwell, being duly sworn, doth depose and say that she was born in Manchester, in the State of Vermont, and that she was a citizen of said State final named, that she is now a citizen of the United States; that she is and has been for many years last past a resident of Chicago, in said State of Illinois, and additional deponent says not.
A colored citizen, authorized to carry property in Massachusetts, emigrating to South Carolina, the place all colored persons have been excluded from such proper, derived no assist, on this respect, from the Constitution of the United States, however was compelled to submit to all of the incapacities laid by the legal guidelines of that State upon free persons of colour born and residing therein. Encouraged by the opinions of in a position legal professionals and judges, they promptly made a sensible take a look at of this query by registering and voting through the State and Presidential elections of 1871 and ’72. She made this denial of her civil rights a check case by bringing suit towards the State of Illinois within the Supreme Court of the United States. Because he is a citizen, and that is one of the avocations open to every citizen; and no State can abridge his proper to pursue it. Your petitioner claims that a married woman is to not be classed with an infant for the reason that passage of the Act of 1869. A married girl might sue in her own name for her earnings, an infant can not. VII. Your petitioner claims under the XIV. It is obvious that there are certain “privileges and immunities” which belong to a citizen of the United States as such; in any other case it can be nonsense for the XIV.
Article of the Constitution of the United States, which is in these words, “The residents of each State shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of residents in the several States,” she has guaranteed to her the privileges and immunities which each other citizen of the State of Illinois has, amongst which could also be named the safety of the government, the precise to the enjoyment of life and liberty, to acquire and possess property, to reside within the State, to hold on commerce, and the precise to observe any skilled pursuit below the laws of the State, which must work equally upon all of the citizens of the State, and that under this section of the Constitution she has a proper to receive a license to follow regulation upon the same phrases and situations as essentially the most favored citizen of the State of Illinois. We agree with him that there are privileges and immunities belonging to residents of the United States, in that relation and character, and that it is these, and these alone, which a State is forbidden to abridge. The premise of illustration therein shall be diminished within the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male residents in such State.
But when the best to vote at any election, and many others., is denied to any of the male inhabitants, being twenty-one years of age, and so on., the premise of representation therein shall be diminished in the proportion which the variety of such male citizens shall bear to the entire number of male residents twenty-one years of age in such State. Amendment to prohibit a State from abridging them; and it’s equally evident from the XIV. The inspectors had been young men, totally unversed within the intricacies of constitutional regulation, so that when Miss Anthony expounded to them the XIV. December 19 1917 a two-thirds majority was secured in Congress for a prohibition constitutional amendment-the 18th amendment-which was at once submitted to the states. The United States of America to the State of Illinois:-The State of Illinois is hereby cited and admonished to appear and be on the Supreme Court of the United States to be holden at Washington City within the District of Columbia, on the first Monday of December next, pursuant to a writ of error filed in the clerk’s office of the Supreme Court of the State of Illinois, whereby Myra Bradwell is plaintiff in error, and the State of Illinois is defendant in error, to point out trigger, if any there be, why the judgment in the mentioned writ of error talked about shouldn’t be corrected, and speedy justice should not be performed to the parties in that behalf.