NAWSA Subject File Anti-Suffrage Literature Jamison, Heloise Anti Slav. Conv. Cincinnati: - April 12 - THE CHRISTIAN PRESS. CINCINNATI, FRIDAY, APRIL 12. The receipt of the Christian Press, by those who have sent money to pay for it, may be considered as our receipt for that money. Persons requesting acknowledgements of the receipt of their money, will please to notice this as our answer to their inquiries. NOTICE Will our friends please to remember that by our advance pay system, we are obliged to stop the papers of all when their terms expire. We have at present no agent in the field to solicit renewals or new subscribers. We do not wish to lose a single subscriber, and there are many whose terms expire in April. We need all the help which friends can give by prompt renewals, and by sending us new subscribers. Anti-Slavery Convention in Cincinnati. When some weeks since we published that call for this Convention, we stated that this call was free from the objections which we urged against the one of last year, and we are happy to state that the Convention itself was so constituted and conducted, as that all parties felt at liberty to meet on its platform without feeling that in so doing they were even indirectly committed to any special phase of anti-slavery reform. It was the platform of no particular party, but in the most general sense that of an anti-slavery Convention, where no one felt that by his presence he was presumed to endorse the opinion of any particular movement. Doubtless the appearance of a woman as a speaker before the Convention was deemed by many, objectionable, and in our opinion its weight and power were thereby sensibly diminished. Yet, we doubt that expediency of any attempt to exclude woman by vote from such a position, or to force upon her any other rule than that which may be presumed to exist in her own bosom. The sex as a whole may be safely left to the guidance of that delicate and true sense of propriety which God has planted in the soul of woman, and which forbids all wandering from her appropriate sphere. We think that the desire for public speaking especially, will be soonest cured by a somewhat free indulgence. The novelty of such exhibitions is wearing away, and when the same standard of criticism is applied to woman as to man, when the audience forgets the woman, the public platforms will offer few attractions for the female speaker. It no more argues for the inferiority of woman, that God has not fitted her for public speaking, than that she is not so tall or so strong as the man. She is man's equal, but yet she is not a man, but a woman. The large hall where the Convention was held, was crowded during its sessions, and though on the last evening an admittance fee was charged, it was more densely packed than ever, fifteen hundred having actually paid at the door. We are persuaded that so large audiences could not have been gathered for three days in our city at this time for any but an anti-slavery purpose. Upon the whole we think the impression made was deep and salutary, far in advance of any effect produced by the preceding annual Convention, though from the character which the discussions assumed, the attention was held too exclusively to a single point, and through Douglas and Burleigh put on the aspect of a mere debate upon the views of the parties to which they respectively belong. The debate was principally confined to the question of the character of the Constitution and the propriety of acting under its provisions. We heard only the speeches made in the closing evening session. Burleigh's speech maintaining the Garrison view, was ingenious and eloquent, and some portions of it were distinguished by great elegance and power of expression, as well as thought, We have seldom heard one who sustains himself so uniformly with truly classic language through an hour as he. But he failed to carry with him either the conviction or the sympathies of his hearers whose impatience often transcended the limits of courtesy. We could not but feel deep regret that one truly gifted as Burleigh is, should devote himself to the advocacy of such a cause. He has not learned yet the wisdom of the cross, and the true basis of the reforms he pleads for, is therefore hidden from his view. As an argument against the Constitution, we admire its eloquence, not its soundness, and yet he made good and strong points which all who are aiming at the political overthrow of slavery, would do well to heed. The anti-slavery Christians of the country have been lured to waste, almost, their power in a political effort, when they ought rather to have devoted themselves first of all to the creation of an anti-slavery religious sentiment, out of which sound political action will inevitably spring. Truly did this speaker declare, that while it will require a numerical majority in the whole country to repeal or modify what is wrong in the Constitution, or enforce an anti-slavery construction of it, far less than this would have the moral power greatly to weaken, or even to abolish slavery, if the religious sentiment of the people could be extensively aroused and directed against it. The strength of the Garrison party lies in this position. They rightly assume, that slavery is a sin to be proceeded against by moral, and religious, not primarily political action, but by their ill-timed, ill-judged assaults upon the Bible and evangelical religion, they have destroyed themselves, and the battle must be fought by others. To separate the church entirely, and in all her benevolent operations from any connection with this iniquity, this is the first object to be aimed at, and when this is actually accomplished, the doom of slavery will be sealed. All else will follow as the natural, inevitable result. Let anti-slavery Christians turn their attention away from political movements, as their first object, and devote themselves to the establishment and support of means whereby the Gospel of Christ may be brought to bear directly against slavery by newspapers, tracts, Sabbath-school books and missions of the true character, and a new impulse will be given to the cause. Douglas, in his reply to Burleigh, was borne up and aroused but the freely expressed sympathies of his audience, and as he argued powerfully for the anti-slavery character of our Constitution, it was sufficiently apparent that the crowd around him were not only deeply impressed with the value of the instrument, but that they at least, were resolved to give it an interpretation in favor of liberty. Nor were the responses less marked, when he emphatically denounced the practice of making an anti-slavery platform a theater for the exhibition of infidel principles, and for assaults upon the Bible. Douglas has, we think, in this Convention, gained very much in the estimation of those whose opinions he will value most. He avowed himself in favor of the Union on an anti-slavery basis, where he contends that it already is, through the Constitution itself; - a believer in evangelical religion, and in the Bible as the inspired Word of God. The sessions of the Convention were all opened with prayer, and an evangelical character was thrown over the whole. On the last day of the Convention, Burleigh thought proper to make an attack upon the Christian Press, its Editor not being present, and in the evening, when at eleven o'clock the Convention was about to adjourn, the audience seemed determined not to separate until they had called out the Editor of the Press, in order that he might defend his position. This was done, so far as it could be in a speech of ten minutes, which was received in a manner that proved an overwhelming majority of the audience to be in favor of evangelical reform. Tennessee Supreme Law of Tennessee Prohibits the Ratification The Constitution of the State of Tennessee, adopted by the people of Tennessee, March 26, 1870, by a vote of 98,128 to 33,872 (nearly three to one) provides as follows: Article II--Section 32--Amendments to Constitution of United States. No convention or General Assembly of this State shall act upon any amendment of the Constitution of the United States, proposed by Congress to the several states, unless such convention or general assembly shall have been elected after such amendment is submitted. Oath of the Legislator that Prohibits Ratification Article X, Section 2 of the Constitution of the State of Tennessee provides for the following oath or affirmation for each member of the senate and house of the General assembly of Tennessee: Section 2. Each member of the Senate and House of Representatives shall before they proceed to business, take an oath, or affirmation, to support the Constitution of this State, and of the United States, and also the following oath: "I ___________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that, as a member of the General Assembly * * * I will not propose or assent to any bill, vote or resolution, which shall appear to me injurious to the people, or consent to any act or thing whatever that shall have a tendency to lessen or abridge their rights and privileges, as declared by the Constitution of the State." The people of Tennessee, under their Constitution, have a right to elect a new legislature before action on the Nineteenth Amendment. Every legislator has solemnly sworn to safeguard that right. --Chattanooga Times, July 25, 1920. ISSUED BY Tennessee Division Southern Woman's League for Rejection of the Susan B. Anthony Amendment [OVER] Foster V. Brown, Champion of Suffrage, Declares that Ratification is Violation CHATTANOOGA TIMES, JULY 25, 1920 FOSTER V. BROWN, Chattanooga's best known lawyer, once in congress, for eight years attorney-general in this district, a rip-roaring republican and a resolute and avowed champion of woman suffrage, declares in a signed statement to The Times that the present legislature cannot ratify the federal suffrage amendment without violation of their oath of office by the legislators. Mr. Brown's communication was not intended for the play-up of the ratification reference, which feature of his letter is here given. His discussion of the suffrage question was the concluding portion of a communication, the preceding sections of which are elsewhere printed. Concerning the attitude of The Times on the suffrage ratification by the Tennessee legislature, he writes as follows: During these political campaigns I seldom find myself in agreement on many subjects with The Chattanooga Times. I do desire, however, to commend you on your position on the suffrage question in Tennessee. I think it is pretty well known that I am for woman suffrage, whether conferred by the state or to be conferred under the federal amendment, but I cannot agree with the gentlemen who believe that the present legislature has any right, under our constitution, to ratify the federal suffrage amendment at this time. The federal constitution authorizes the ratification of amendments to the federal constitution by the legislatures of the various states, but the federal constitution does not provide at what time or when this ratification shall take place. Our state constitution provides that no convention or general assembly of this state shall act upon any amendment of the Constitution of the United States proposed by Congress to the several states, unless such general assembly shall have been elected after such amendment is submitted. What I maintain is, that this clause of the state constitution does not interfere at all with the federal constitution and is not in conflict with the Constitution of the United States as well as the constitution of the state. The Constitution of the United States does not provide that when the members of the general assembly shall vote for amendments, but the constitution of the state imposes the obligation on them not to vote for the amendment until an election shall have been held after the submission of the amendment to the legislature. It seems to me it would be a violation of the oath of office on the part of the members of the legislature to disregard that provision in our state convention. We have already granted the women of Tennessee the right to vote in all presidential elections, and the members of the legislature are asked now to violate their state constitution in order to give the women of some other states the right to vote in a presidential election. It seems to me that is asking too much of the members of the present legislature. This may doubtless not be the popular view to take of this question, but it is the sound and right view. FOSTER V. BROWN [*Tenn*] Negro Women's Resolutions for Enforcement of Federal Suffrage Amendments The National Association of Colored Women's Clubs in convention assembled at Tuskegee Institute, Alabama, July 12 to 16, 1920, offers the following recommendations: Since it is evident that the women of the Nation are soon to be invested with the right of full franchise, We recommend that the colored women give their close attention to the study of civics, to the laws of parliamentary usage and to the current political questions, both local and national, in order to fit themselves for the exercise of the franchise. As Mrs. Mary B. Talbert, our retiring President, has been named as one of the ten women of America to go as delegate to the International Council of Women to be held in Norway in September next, we express our heartfelt appreciation for this representation given the women of our race. [Mrs. C. C. Catt, President National Suffrage Association, is one of the other nine delegates referred to above.] We heartily commend the Urban League and the National Association of Colored People who are doing so much to bring about justice to the members of our proscribed race. We wish to go on record as asking the instructors throughout this country, especially those in colored schools, to teach our boys and girls the lives of great men and women of the race, who have thus far shaped, and are shaping our destinies. We further recommend that wherever possible the local clubs coöperate with the teachers in building up good libraries in colored schools, and putting upon the shelves authentic publications from our best colored authors in literature, history, science and art. We go on record as endorsing and urging the enforcement of the 18th Amendment to the Federal Constitution of the United States as interpreted in the Volstead Act. And we also urge our National Congress to enforce the 14th and 15th Amendments to the Federal Constitution. Since glaring headlines and detailed accounts in the press of crimes and misdemeanors committed by colored people tend to inflame the passions of the public against members of our race, culminating often in rioting and mob violence, we urge the press of the United States to refrain from thus perpetuating such propaganda against us. We again make solemn protest against the continued prevalence of mob violence in the United States, and we pray for the enactment of a Federal statute against lynch law with severe penalties for the violation thereof and that such statute be enforced if need be, by the military power of this government. We express our grateful appreciation to Dr. Robert R. Moton and his co-workers at Tuskegee Institute for the generous hospitality, courteous attentions and gracious kindness shown the National Association of Colored Women's Clubs while guests at the Institute during our 13th biennial convention and 25th anniversary. Respectfully submitted, Committee on Resolutions Francis E. Keyser, H. A. Washington, Mary V. Parrish, Mary Church Terrell, S. Joe Brown Alice Dunbar-Nelson REPRINTED AND ISSUED BY TENNESSEE DIVISION, SOUTHERN WOMAN'S REJECTION LEAGUE HEADQUARTERS, HERMITAGE HOTEL, NASHVILLE, TENN. Three Federal Suffrage Force Bills in Congress Official U.S. Senate Copies of these Force Bills are on Exhibition at Headquarters, Southern Woman's Rejection League, Hermitage Hotel, Nashville, Tenn. ON MAY 4, Senator Watson, of Indiana, Republican, introduced the third Force Bill proposed in the present Congress to enforce the 14th, as well as the 19th amendment, and to rob certain States of their representation in Congress! WATSON FORCE BILL Senator Watson's force bill was introduced as quietly as possible. The Congressional Record barely mentions it among "bills introduced" but it was intended that it be done as quietly as possible. The Washington Star of May 9, says: "The suffragists had really planned not to have this bill introduced until after the thirty-sixth State had ratified, the idea being that it might have a bad effect upon some of the Southern States, where they like to handle such things themselves." In any event, The Woman Patriot succeeded in getting copies of Senator Watson's force bill (S. 4323) and it provides a fine of $500 or one year's imprisonment for any person who refuses to allow women to vote, "any constitution, law, custom, usage or regulation of any State or Territory, or by or under its authority, to the contrary notwithstanding." This language is the same as that of the Reconstruction Acts! It is a safe prediction that the Force Bill will be passed immediately upon proclamation of the 19th amendment, just as the Reconstruction Acts were passed in 1866 to 1869. MOSES FORCE BILL But this is by no means all! Senator Moses, Republican, of New Hampshire, introduced a joint resolution (S. J. 129) on December 2, 1919, providing for the enforcement of the 14th amendment; for a commission to investigage the election laws of certain States, and to report, "such legislation as will reduce the representation in said State or States, as provided by the 14th amendment." SHERMAN FORCE BILL Moreover, Senator Sherman, of Illinois, Republican, introduced a joint resolution (S. J. 21) on May 23, 1919, providing that Representatives in Congress "shall be apportioned among the several States in the proportion which the total aggregate number of votes cast in any State for Representatives in Congress bears to the total aggregate number of votes cast for Representatives in all the several States in the congressional election next preceding the year in which an apportionment of Representatives in Congress is to be made." LOSS OF REPRESENTATION Senator Sherman's bill attempts to base representation on the 1918 election, as the apportionment is based on the present 1920 census, and the "next preceding" congressional election is that of 1918! On this basis North Carolina loses three seats in Congress! Tennessee loses three seats and a [OVER] total of 77 representatives are taken away from 21 States, including all of the solid South, and transferred to 15 Northern and Western States! If we want three force bill in 1920 - after the heartrending struggle made against one force bill forty years ago - then ratify the Federal Suffrage amendment. The suffragists and the unscrupulous politicians who hope to benefit by such force bills will do the rest. For thirty years, even the most ardent Republicans in Congress have consented to allow the 14th and 15th amendments to rest as lightly as possible on the section for whose punishment they were originally designed in the heat of party passion after a Civil War. "CONGRESS SHALL HAVE POWER" But a ratification of the 19th amendment, as Senator Smith, of South Carolina, so well says, removes the last possible appeal for further non-enforcement: it justifies every one of the Reconstruction Acts, and places the seal of Southern approval on every future Force Bill that may be proposed by a Congress which "shall have power" under the 19th as well as the 14th and 15th amendments, to ruthlessly control every election in this country! If North Carolina and Tennessee want three force bills; if they want to open every old wound of fifty years ago and revive the Reconstruction Acts in their entirety, they will vote for the Anthony Amendment. But Southern manhood is still ready to defend Anglo- Saxon civilization, and these States will vote "No." THE 21 STATES THAT LOSE 77 SEATS State Present Representation Representation Under Sherman Loss in Seats, (Based on Population) and Moses Force Bills House of (Based on Votes) Representatives Alabama 10 3 7 Arkansas 7 4 3 Florida 4 2 2 Georgia 12 3 9 Kentucky 11 10 1 Louisiana 8 2 6 Maine 4 3 1 Maryland 6 5 1 Massachusetts 16 13 3 Minnesota 10 9 1 Mississippi 8 2 6 New Jersey 12 11 1 North Carolina 10 7 3 Oklahoma 8 6 2 Pennsylvania 36 31 5 Rhode Island 3 2 1 South Carolina 7 1 6 Tennessee 10 7 3 Texas 18 9 9 Vermont 2 1 1 Virginia 10 4 6 ----- ----- ----- Total 212 135 77 --From the Woman Patriot. Can the Present Legislature Act? Should the Present Legislature Act? Submitted by the Tennessee Constitutional League Judge Joseph C. Higgins (Democrat), President Foster V. Brown (Republican), Vice President Garnett Andrews, Secretary, Nashville Board of Directors John J. Vertrees (Democrat) Nashville Judge S. F. Wilson (Democrat) Nashville John W. Green (Democrat) Knoxville Foster V. Brown (Republican) Chattanooga G. N. Tillman (Republican) Nashville Lee Brock (Republican) Nashville Object "The protection of the letter and the spirit of our Constitution from the attacks of its enemies, foreign or domestic, present or future" NASHVILLE, TENN., August 7, 1920. To the Members of the Tennessee Legislature: Every member of this body has taken an oath to support the Constitution of Tennessee. The Constitution of Tennessee provides that the Legislature or Convention that shall express Tennessee's will with respect to an Amendment to the Federal Constitution "shall have been elected after such amendment is submitted." This is a part of the Constitution that you have sworn to preserve. It has been respected by Tennesseeans for fifty years. It was wisely designed to insure a reflection of the will of the people. The Federal Woman's Suffrage Amendment was submitted after the members of this Legislature were elected. Therefore, the Tennessee Constitution forbids you to act on this Amendment. Those who would have you act themselves admit that the Constitution which you have sworn to support forbids you to do so. They ask you to do this revolutionary thing upon the ground that this fifty-year-old provision is void. This means no more than that they "think" the provision is void. Only a court can decide the question, and no court has. They base this opinion solely on what is known as the "Ohio Referendum Case." In that case the United States Supreme Court held that, since the Federal Constitution prescribed that Federal amendments should be accepted or rejected by State Legislatures or Conventions, a provision of the Ohio Constitution that such acceptance or rejection should not be valid without a direct vote of the people in a referendum was an attempt to change the "means" and "manner of ratification," and was, therefore, in conflict with the Federal Constitution and void. That was all that was held. The Tennessee Constitution, on the contrary, has not sought to change the "means or manner" of ratification, as the Ohio Constitution did. Tennessee has merely prescribed that the Legislature shall be one elected after the Amendment has been submitted. If the action was by Convention, this would have to be so. There is no "conflict" here. Surely no Tennesseeans--and certainly no lawyers outside of Tennessee--are better qualified to express an opinion on this question that John J. Vertrees, a Democrat, and Foster V. Brown, a Republican and an advocate of woman's suffrage, both leaders of the Tennessee bar. They tell you that this constitutional provision is not void; and so does S. F. Wilson, who has spent nearly thirty years on the appellate bench of Tennessee; and such was the unanimous opinion of the lawyers discussing this question at the recent meeting of the Tennessee Bar Association. Upon this difference of opinion are you going to resolve the doubt against the Constitution that you have sworn to support? Are you going to do so in the face of the sound principle of law that every doubt should be resolved in favor of the validity of a constitutional provision, and in the face of the fact that the United States Supreme Court itself refuses to strike down a provision in a State Constitution unless its conflict with the Federal Constitution is clear beyond a reasonable doubt? Surely you will not say, and have not the right to say, that the invalidity of this provision of the Tennessee Constitution is "clear beyond a reasonable doubt." Those who are urging you to act say that you are not bound by the oath you took. That is a grave matter to volunteer such advice about. And remember that this oath that they tell you to disregard stands in the way of their purposes. There has been a propaganda--largely of people from without the State--to extract promises from you to support this Amendment. If you gave a promise that conflicts with your duty and power under the Constitution, you are released from it; for you cannot lawfully promise to violate your oath of office. There is here also a grave question of public policy. Courts only are authorized to declare laws and constitutions void. Legislators have no power to do so, nor has the Attorney-General. It is, therefore, a revolutionary thing for legislators to assume that a constitutional provision that they have sworn to support is void in order to absolve themselves from the obligations of their oath. If you have the right to do it, succeeding legislators have the same right, and our organic law-- the safeguard of our lives, liberty, and property-- loses its stability. The greatest menace to them is the radicalism that is abroad in the land to-day, that teaches disrespect for the organic law, that urges that the end justifies any means that may be necessary to accomplish it. Tennesseans have not had the opportunity to express their will at the polls with respect to this proposed Amendment. The oath that you took binds you to give them this opportunity. You can fulfill that solemn pledge without violating either Constitution. Are you unwilling to do that? And remember that there is no emergency and no peril that will excuse you from leaving this decision to the Legislature five months away, as in your oath you promised the people you would do. Those who would have you to act know that to do so you must either violate your oath or mutilate the Constitution that you swore to preserve and support. Respectfully, TENNESSEE CONSTITUTIONAL LEAGUE, By Joseph C. Higgins, President. Negro Women's Resolutions for Enforcement of Federal Suffrage Amendments The National Association of Colored Women's Clubs in convention assembled at Tuskegee institute, Alabama, July 12 to 16, 1920, offers the following recommendations: Since it is evident that the women of the Nation are soon to be invested with the right of full franchise, We recommend that the colored women give their close attention to the study of civics, to the laws of the parliamentary usage and to the current political questions, both local and national, in order to fit themselves for the right of franchise. As Mrs. Mary B. Talbert, our retiring President, has been named as one of the ten women of America to go as delegate to the International Council of Women to be held in Norway in September next, we express our heartfelt appreciation for this representation given to the women of our race. [Mrs. C. C. Catt, President National Suffrage Association, is one of the other nine delegates referred to above.] We heartily commend the Urban League and the National Association of Colored People who are doing so much to bring about justice to the members of our proscribed race. We wish to go on record as asking the instructors throughout this country, especially those in colored schools, to teach our boys and girls the lives of the great men and women of the race, who have thus far shaped, and are shaping our destinies. We further recommend that wherever possible the local clubs cooperate with the teachers in building up good libraries in colored schools, and putting upon the shelves authentic publications from our best colored authors in literature, history, science and art. We go on record as endorsing and urging the enforcement of the 18th Amendment to the Federal Constitution of the United States as interpreted in the Volstead Act. And we also urge our National Congress to enforce the 14th and 15th Amendments to the Federal Constitution Since glaring headlines and detailed accounts in the press of crimes and misdemeanors committed by colored people tend to inflame the passions of the public against members of our race, culminating often in rioting and mob violence, we urge the press of the United States to refrain from thus perpetuating such propaganda against us. We again make solemn protest against the continued prevalence of mob violence in the United States, and we pray for the enactment of a Federal statute against lynch law with severe penalties for the violation thereof and that such statue be enforced if need be, by the military power of this government. We express our grateful appreciation to Dr. Robert R. Moton and his co-workers at Tuskegee Institute for the generous hospitality, courteous attentions and gracious kindness shown the National Association of Colored Women's Clubs while guests at the Institute during our 13th biennial convention and 25th anniversary. Respectfully submitted, Committee on Resolutions {Francis E. Keyser, Mary Church Terrell, H. A. Washington, S. Joe Brown, Mary V. Parrish, Alice Dunbar-Nelson} REPRESENTED AND ISSUED BY TENNESSEE DIVISION, SOUTHERN WOMAN'S REJECTION LEAGUE HEADQUARTERS, HERMITAGE HOTEL, NASHVILLE, TENN. [over] Three Federal Suffrage Force Bills in Congress Official U. S. Senate Copies of these Force Bills are on Exhibition at Headquarters, Southern Woman's Rejection League, Hermitage Hotel, Nashville, Tenn. On May 4, Senator Watson, of Indiana, Republican, introduced the third Force Bill proposed in the present Congress to enforce the 14th, as well as the 19th amendment, and to rob certain States of their representation in Congress! Watson Force Bill Senator Watson's force bill was introduced as quietly as possible. The Congressional Record barely mentions it among "bills introduced" but it was intended that it be done as quietly as possible. The Washington Star of May 9, says: "The suffragists had really planned not to have this bill introduced until after the thirty-sixth State had ratified, the idea being that it might have a bad effect upon some of the Southern States, where they like to handle such things themselves." In any event, The Woman Patriot succeeded in getting copies of Senator Watson's force bill (S. 4323) and it provides a fine of $500 or one year's imprisonment for any person who refuses to allow women to vote, "any constitution, law, custom, usage or regulation of any State or Territory, or by or under its authority, to the contrary notwithstanding." This language is the same as that of the Reconstruction Acts! It is a safe prediction that this Force Bill will be passed immediately upon proclamation of the 19th amendment, just as the Reconstruction Acts were passed in 1866 to 1869. Moses Force Bill But this is by no means all! Senato Moses, Republican, of New Hampshire, introduced a joint resolution (S. J. 129) on December 2, 1919, providing for the enforcement of the 14th amendment; for a commission to investigate the election laws of certain states, and report, "such legislation as will reduce the representation in said State or States, as provided by the 14th amendment." Sherman Force Bill Moreover, Senator Sherman, of Illinois, Republican, introduced a joint resolution (S. J. 21) on May 23, 1919, providing that Representatives in Congress "shall be apportioned among several States in the proportion which the total aggregate number of votes cast in any State for Representatives in Congress bears to the total aggregate number of votes cast for Representatives in all the several States in the congressional election next preceding the year in which an apportionment of Representatives in Congress is to be made." Loss Of Representation Senator Sherman's bill attempts to base representation on the 1918 election, as the apportionment is based on the present 1920 census, and the "next preceding" congressional election is that of 1918! On this basis North Carolina loses three seats in Congress! Tennessee loses three seats and a [over] total of 77 representatives are taken away from 21 States, including all of the solid South, and transferred to 15 Northern and Western States! If we want three force bills in 1920—after the heart-rending struggle made against one force bill forty years ago—then ratify the Federal Suffrage amendment. The suffragists and the unscrupulous politicians who hope to benefit by such force bills will do the rest. For thirty years, even the most ardent Republicans in Congress have consented to allow the 14th and 15th amendments to rest as lightly as possible on the section for whose punishment they were originally designed in the heat of party passion after a Civil War. "Congress Shall Have Power" But a ratification of the 19th amendment, as Senator Smith, of South Carolina, so well says, removes the last possible appeal for further non-enforcement: it justifies every one of the Reconstruction Acts, and places the seal of Southern approval on every future Force Bill that may be proposed by a Congress which "shall have power" under the 19th as well as the 14th and 15th amendments, to ruthlessly control every election in this country! If North Carolina and Tennessee want three force bills; if they want to open every old wound of fifty years ago and revive the Reconstruction Acts in their entirety, they will vote for the Anthony Amendment. But Southern manhood is still ready to defend Anglo-Saxon civilization, and these states will vote "No." The 21 States That Lose 77 Seats State Present Representation Loss in Seats, Representation Under Sherman and House of (Based on Moses Force Bills. Representatives Population) (Based on Votes) Alabama...10 3 7 Arkansas... 7 4 3 Florida... 4 2 2 Georgia... 12 3 9 Kentucky... 11 10 1 Louisiana... 8 2 6 Maine... 4 3 1 Maryland... 6 5 1 Massachusetts... 16 13 3 Minnesota... 10 9 1 Mississippi... 8 2 6 New Jersey... 12 11 1 North Carolina... 10 7 3 Oklahoma... 8 6 2 Pennsylvania... 36 31 5 Rhode Island... 3 2 1 South Carolina... 7 1 6 Tennessee... 10 7 3 Texas... 18 9 9 Vermont... 2 1 1 Virginia... 10 4 6 Total... 212 135 77 —From the Woman Patriot. Woman Suffrage—Is it Right for Women to Vote and Hold Office? (Editorial by J. C. McQuiddy, in the Gospel Advocate, July 22, 1920.) As I understand, the argument of the suffragist is that "God created all persons equal" and that "no human being can have any rights unless all have the same." These women argue that woman is man's equal in every particular and, therefore, should have equal rights. They contend that woman suffrage will purify politics. It is clear that those who make such statements are either ignorant of the teaching of the word of God or they do not have the respect for it that they should have. Everybody knows that man and woman are not equal in all respects. It is clear that in some things they are equal and like, but in other respects they are unequal and unlike. I do not believe that the good women of Tennessee want the ballot; but even if they did, the question which man must determine is not affected in the least. It is not a question of what women WANT, but what they OUGHT to have. In the beginning it was Eve that wanted to eat the forbidden fruit, but because she wanted to do so did not make it right. Eve wanted her husband to eat as she had done, but this did not make it right for Adam to do so. He preferred to disobey God rather than to forsake the companionship of the woman. But after their disobedience it should be noted that God did not hold them equal in all respects. "Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy pain and thy conception; in pain thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband and he shall rule over thee. And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in toil shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life; thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field; in the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it was thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return." (Gen. 3: 16-19.) Thus, just after the fall, we find that God placed woman in the home and made it her duty to bring forth children, with the understanding that "thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee." If any are disposed to find fault with this position, they are disposed to complain of the will of God Almighty, and not of the will of man; and this is just what Mrs. Catt and leaders of woman suffrage are doing. Coming down to the New Testament, we again learn that the duties of man and woman are not the same. Paul admonishes Titus to teach the aged women, "that they may train the young women to love their husbands, to love their children, to be sober-minded, chaste, workers at home, kind, being in subjection to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed." (Tit. 2: 4, 5). As the modern woman is demanding not only suffrage, but also political equality, it is clear that she cannot hold office and perform the duties of politics and remain at home at the same time. Whenever woman abandons home, where God placed her as queen and ruler over her children and where she has more influence than any other person, she at once rejects the will of God and loses her influence and power for good. While it is to be regretted that conditions are sometimes such as to make it necessary for a woman to earn her own livelihood, and while, when such conditions arise, it is noble in her to bravely rise superior to such conditions and support herself, yet it is not the ordained will of Jehovah for the race. Of course certain individuals may have to do things, as individuals, that it is not best and proper to encourage the race to do. Dr. Kirch, in "The Sexual Life of Woman," stated the effects of woman's emancipation when he said: "The woman who spends her whole day at a desk, in the law courts, or in a house of assembly, may be a most honorable and most useful individual, but she is no longer a woman, she cannot be a wife, she cannot be a mother. In the conditions of our society the emancipation of women is in its very nature the negation of marriage." The experience of the human race has demonstrated the wisdom of God in ordaining that man should be the head of the woman, as Christ is the head of the church. I quote from an address to the men of Tennessee on "Female Suffrage," by John J. Vertrees, a unanimous opinion delivered by Justice Brewer on this subject. The Court said: That woman's physical structure and the performance of maternal functions place her at a disadvantage in the struggle for existence is obvious. This is especially true when the burdens of motherhood. are upon her. Even when they are not, by abundant testimony of the medical fraternity, continuance for a long time on her feet at work, repeating this from day to day tends to an injurious effect on the body; and as healthy mothers are essential to vigorous offspring, the physical well-being of women becomes an object of public interest and care in order to preserve the strength and vigor of the race. Still again, history discloses the fact that woman has always been dependent upon man. He established control at the outset by superior physical strength, and this control in various forms with diminishing intensity has continued to the present. . . . Even though all restrictions of political, personal, or contractual rights were taken away and she stood, so far as statutes are concerned, upon an absolutely equal plane with man, it would still be true that she is so constituted that she will rest upon and look to him for protection; that her physical structure and the proper discharge of her maternal functions--having in view not merely her own health, but the well-being of the race--justify legislation to protect her from the greed as well as the passion of men. . . . The two sexes differ in structure of body, in the functions to be performed by each, in the amount of physical strength, in the capacity for long-continued labor, particularly when done standing, the influence of vigorous health upon the future well-being of the race, the self-reliance which enables one to assert full rights, and in the capacity to maintain the struggle for subsistence. This difference justifies a difference in legislation and upholds that which is designed to compensate for some of the burdens which rest upon her. When woman, as a class, reverses God's order to assume outside duties that belong to man, it will be a dark day for the world. It would indeed be detrimental to the race if the division of duties were changed so that women looked WITHOUT and men WITHIN in the performance of their work. We can hardly think it best for women to tunnel mountains, work in coal mines, run steam engines, or climb telegraph poles. The work of man is in the field, and the work of woman is in the home. It is not possible for women to attend conventions and spend weeks away from their children and do the work that only a mother can do in rearing and training her children for heaven. It is not possible for a woman to spend her time in an office looking after the affairs of the government and at the same time perform the duties of wife and mother. The breaking down of God's order for the race only tends to destroy the family, which is the support of the State, the nation, and the church. As the church is the light of the world, so the family is the salt of the church. Men should marry women, treat them as their equals, love them as Christ loved the church and gave himself for it, in order that the race may reach the highest and best civilization possible. If woman in the home, where God placed her, cannot refine and ennoble humanity, she cannot do so by entering politics. The experience of those States which have joined the ranks of woman suffrage has proven that it is a failure and that it does not tend to uplift and purify politics. Woman fulfilling her God-given mission, submitting to her husband, living in her home in the manner that God has ordained, wields more influence for good than any other being, and more than she can wield in any other sphere. In concluding this article, I quote what Mr. Brooks Adams said in an introductory address in Quincy, Mass., which admirably expresses what every true man knows: From the remotest antiquity women have formed the cement or core of society; for women have represented the constant and men the variable, principle in human relations. The man has been a farmer, or a hunter, or a shepherd, or a fisher, or a sailor, or a soldier, and to win a livelihood he has been forced to wander far. But he has always returned, hoping to find his wife and children safe at home. Thus the woman, by the law of her being, has incarnated the essence of the family, and the family has been the corner stone of the State, the support of the church, and the standard of morality. And to achieve her destiny the woman has sacrificed herself, just as the man in moments of peril has always given his life for the woman. But to perform her office, the woman has to divest herself of outside interests and to live at home. She could no more quit her family than the soldier could stray from his regiment, the sailor desert his ship, or the shepherd abandon his flock; for all obedience, all discipline, and all moral influence is rooted in unremitting personal supervision. NOTE;--Original copies of the so-called "Woman's Bible" are now on exhibition at Antiratification Headquarters, Hermitage Hotel, Nashville, Tenn. You are invited to see them and other exhibits when in Nashville. -------- Mrs. Catt and Woman-Suffrage Leaders Repudiate the Bible. (J. C. McQuiddy, Editor of the Gospel Advocate, in Nashville Banner, August 8, 1920.) -------- Both the Federal and State Constitutions represent the sovereign will of the people. The government is "of the people, by the people, and for the people." Our State Constitution declares the legislature of Tennessee shall not act on any amendment to the Federal Constitution unless the amendment is submitted before the election of the State legislature by the people. The wisdom and fairness of this provision are self-evident. The Federal amendment provides for ratification by representative institutions representing the will of the people. The amendment to the Federal Constitution was enacted AFTER the present General Assembly was elected; so, if the present General Assembly should ratify the amendment, the voice and will of the people of Tennessee would be completely ignored. Such action would lead to the downfall of the republic. The Federal Constitution does not say WHEN the State legislature shall ratify. If the legislature which is to be elected in November, and which will represent the will of the people of the State on the woman-suffrage question, ratifies in next January, there can be no conflict in the Federal Constitution and the State Constitution, but, on the contrary, perfect accord. Why this UNDUE HASTE to make a conflict? The courts have ruled that such action MUST BE DELIBERATE. No legislator of the present General Assembly who votes to ratify the woman-suffrage amendment can be CERTAIN that he is not violating the Federal Constitution; he KNOWS he is violating the State Constitution. The Bible is very much in the way of woman-suffrage leaders. In order to nullify the following scriptures and other similar passages, they repudiate the Bible: "Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy pain and thy conception; in pain thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee." (Gen. 3:16.) "Let a woman learn in quietness with all subjection. But I permit not a woman to teach, nor to have dominion over a man, but to be in quietness. For Adam was first formed, then Eve; and Adam was not beguiled, but the woman being beguiled hath fallen into transgression: but she shall be saved through her childbearing, if they continue in faith and love and sanctification with sobriety." (1 Tim. 2:11-15.) "That they may train the young women to love their husbands, to love their children, to be sober-minded, chaste, workers at home, kind, being in subjection to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed." (Tit. 2: 4, 5.) To destroy the Bible and its influence, Mrs. Elizabeth Cady Stanton published "The Woman's Bible" in 1895. Mrs. Carrie Chapman Catt, who is the president of the National Woman Suffrage League, and who is now seeking to get the present legislature to ratify the woman-suffrage amendment, was a member of the revising committee of the "Woman's Bible;" so also was Mrs. Robert G. Ingersoll. Whatever we find in this Bible, therefore, has the indorsement of Mrs. Catt. Mrs. Elizabeth Cady Stanton, in her Introduction, on page 10, says: "Whatever your views may be as to the importance of the proposed work, your political and social degradation are but an outgrowth of your status in the Bible." She also says on page 11: "Again, there are some who write us that our work is a useless expenditure of force over a book that has lost its hold on the human mind. Most intelligent women, they say, regard it simply as the history of a rude people in a barbarous age, and have no more reverence for the Scriptures than any other work." In commenting on Gen. 3: 1-24, she calls the whole affair an "allegory," and says on page 24 of the "Woman's Bible:" "As out of this allegory grows the doctrines of original sin, the fall of man, and woman the author of all our woes, and the curses on the serpent, the woman, and the man; the Darwinian theory of the gradual growth of the race from a lower to a higher type of animal life is more hopeful and encouraging." In commenting on Gen. 24: 37-67, on page 47 of the "Woman's Bible," she says: "With our ideal of the great first cause, a God of justice, wisdom, and truth, the Jewish Lord, guiding and directing that people in all their devious ways, and sanctioning their petty immoralities, seems strangely out of place; a very contradictory character, unworthy our love and admiration. The ancient Jewish ideal of Jehovah was not an exalted one." But the entire "Woman's Bible" is so filled with blasphemy and a complete rejection of the word of God that it is entirely unnecessary to multiply quotations of this character. This is but a repetition of what took place thousands of years ago in the garden of Eden. "And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat; and she gave also unto her husband with her, and he did eat." {Gen. 3:6}. As the conduct of our foreparts was downright rebellion against God, so is the action of these women now. The "Woman's Bible" is so blasphemous and sacrilegious, and such a complete rejection of the word of God, that it has never received serious consideration from any one who has any respect for God and his word. Now, this same Elizabeth Cady Stanton said on June 25, 1895: "Progress is the victory of a new thought over an old superstition." "Rev." Anna Shaw, for ten years president of the National Suffrage Association, said: "I would like to make motherhood a governmental institution. I would pension all mothers and have them provided for first to last by the State. I believe that motherhood should be independent of any man." (March, 1913.) She also said: "I have this much to say, and that is that the marriage ceremony should be cut out. It is useless, and has served its day." Our people should remember that wherever the Bible has gone woman has been elevated and, in the true sense of the word, has enjoyed equal rights and privileges with men. It is where the Bible is not obeyed that women have been made slaves. It is time for the ministers to rise up and warn the people to stand by the word of God. The cry should be: "Back to the Bible!" Whenever we depart from it and ignore its sacred teachings and principles, we are sure to degenerate and have a most disastrous downfall. The Bible has done more for woman than anything else in this wide, wide world and she is the last being who should reject it. The men who uphold this rejection of the Bible, like Adam, become partakers of sin with the women. Every one who believes that the word of God is divinely inspired, who desires to see his State Constitution not violated, and who believes in the purity of the family and the sanctity of marriage and would keep women out of politics, should write at once to his Representative in the Tennessee legislature and ask him to use his vote and influence against the ratification of woman suffrage by the present legislature. I close with these impressive lines: "O, what is woman, what her smile Her lip of love, her eye of light? What is she, if her lips revile The lowly Jesus? Love may write His name upon her marble brow, Or linger in her curls of jet; The bright spring flowers may scarcely bow Beneath her step; and yet --- and yet Without that meeker grace, she'll be A lighter thing than vanity." ISSUED BY TENNESSEE DIVISION, SOUTHERN WOMEN'S LEAGUE FOR THE REJECTION OF THE SUSAN B. ANTHONY AMENDMENT. Nashville, Tenn. The Dark and Dangerous Side Of Woman Suffrage "I believe it (the granting of suffrage to women) to be false philosophy; I believe that it is an attempt to turn backward along the line of social development and that if the step ever be taken, we go centuries backward on the march toward a higher, a nobler and a purer civilization, which must be found not in the confusion, but in the higher differentiation of the sexes." -- ELIHU ROOT. "I am unalterably opposed to woman suffrage...from the standpoint of what is best for woman herself, what is best for her husband, and what is best for her children."...CARDINAL GIBBONS (interview, "N.Y. Globe," June 22, 1911). "When I deprecate female suffrage I am pleading for the dignity of woman; I am contending for her honor..." "I regard 'woman's rights' women and the leaders of the new school of female progress as the worst enemies of the female sex."--CARDINAL GIBBONS (message to National Association Opposed to Woman Suffrage, Dec. 7, 1916). "Under the influence of such teachers we find woman, especially in higher circles, neglecting her household duties, never at peace unless she is in perpetual motion, or unless she is in a state of morbid excitement. She never feels at home unless she is abroad. When she is at home, the home is irksome to her. She chafes and frets under the restraints and responsibilities of domestic life." etc.--CARDINAL GIBBONS (letter to Maryland Association Opposed to Woman Suffrage, April 22, 1913). "The tendency of non-Christian and anti-Christian modern movements is to destroy these ideals to override them to defy them; and so we hear much of the new woman--who is not a real woman at all." "The consequences of this gospel of the unsexed, are already visible around us. They affect the family, marriage, progeny, and mostly woman herself."--CARDINAL O'CONNELL (message to Catholic women, "Boston Herald," April 28, 1920). ---- Many well-intentioned women are today claiming to be suffragists without grasping the true significance of the demand for "sex emancipation." Not so, suffrage leaders. Regarding the conventions, duties and ideals wrought of the experience of ages merely as galling chains of "sex slavery," they are bent upon "complete emancipation." They acknowledge that political independence is but a stepping-stone, and social revolution their goal. The issue is clear-cut. The family is either the unit of civilization, inter-dependent, ennobling, worthy of "grappling to our souls," or it is a tyrannical institution to be discarded for a new scheme of social existence. The Feminist and Socialist are demanding the latter. It is the doctrine of the herd. It robs women of their immunities and men of their responsibilities. Under the Feminist-Socialist scheme, men will inevitably become weak and effeminate, dominated by "petticoat government" (duplicating the tragic history of Rome, Athens, Carthage), and the race and nation be doomed to degeneration and decadence. Much Feminist literature is scarcely fit for publication. The following authentic quotations are selected as among the least obnoxious, to indicate, in some slight degree, the inescapable "next step" after woman suffrage. If YOU are truly concerned with the welfare of your Family, your Children, your Country, do not make the mistake of ignoring the REAL MEANING of the demand for "Votes for Women." ---- DOWNFALL OF THE HOME "I would like to make motherhood a governmental institution. I would pension all mothers and have them provided for first to last by the State. I believe that motherhood should be independent of any man." (March, 1913.) Rev. Anna Howard Shaw, for ten years president National Suffrage Association. ---- "The woman should have as much to do in the home as the man -- no more...Who, then, will take care of the sick baby? The nurse , of course...If the child is not seriously ill the nurse is as good as the mother; if the child is seriously ill the nurse is better." (Signed article, "Woman's Journal," Official Suffrage Organ.) ---- "The home of today is a permanent check upon the growth of humanity." "Cleveland Leader," May 24, 1914. Charlotte Perkins Gilman, suffrage leader, lecturer, writer, for twenty years. ---- "It certainly will not be long before the influx to the voting ranks of these millions of younger women whose impressions are being formed in the more alert, stirring air of today will bring the real issue more sharply before us; and it is to be assumed that the institutions most likely to be changed are the home and marriage itself." Mrs. Inez Milholland Boissevain, ("McClure's Magazine," 1913.). Her mother stated that Mrs. Boissevain "didn't use the word "Socialism much until after she had been to Vassar. She got most of her radicalism there." ("The Suffragist," Dec. 23, 1916.) ---- "Here between the lines it would be written that through all the darkest ages of the slavery of women there were always women set free -- to be wantons... "I have never once said that men should 'give' women a Fair Field in Sex. I have shown that women must 'take' it. Helen Ring Robinson, Colorado State Senator ("Pictorial Review," May, 1919). national suffrage lecturer. ---- "The 'feminist' point is an insistence on the economic value to the community of a mother's work in rearing her own children...This work should be recognized by the community and receive a standard wage, as all other work does." Katherine S. Dreier, suffrage leader. "(N.Y. Sun," May 23, 1914.) ---- "As for the home -- the home that we reverence as that fine old institution surrounded with the sacredness of chivalry. It seems to me that the home will be all the finer when we leave off the chivalry bunk and the home bunk." George Creel, suffrage speaker. ("Cleveland Leader.") ---- "It is unwholesome for any woman to be supported by any man." Mary Ware Dennett, corresponding secretary, National American Suffrage Association and director of Birth Control League (Trenton Civics and Suffrage Club). (Another director of this League was Jessie Ashley, former treasurer of National American Suffrage Association and author of the indecent article in "The Progressive Woman," April, 1913, entitled "Who Are the White Slaves?" The "white slaves," from Miss Ashley's viewpoint are the virtuous married women.) (Cooper Union, Feb., 1914.) ---- "Even a kitten can be a mother." Charlotte Perkins Gilman, suffrage leader and writer. ---- "The younger feminists consider that the day is rapidly approaching when to be supported by a man in return for sexual privileges, or mere general housekeeping, or to be paid for motherhood, will be morally revolting to every self-respecting wife...The younger generation of franchise-seekers consider the vote the merest tool, a means to an end -- that end being a complete social revolution." Winifred Harper Cooley (daughter of Ida Husted Harper, official suffrage historian of National American Suffrage Association), "Harper's Weekly," Sept. 27, 1913. ---- "I believe in Woman Suffrage whether all women vote or no women vote; whether all women vote right or all women vote wrong; whether women will love their husbands after they vote or forsake them; whether they will neglect their children or never have any children." Rev. Anna Howard Shaw ("N.Y. Evening Post," Feb. 25, 1915). "Many of us have left our children at home in the care of their fathers, and now we don't have to hide that." Mrs. Norman de R. Whitehouse, President New York State Woman Suffrage Party (Nov. 21, 1917). ---- "An economic earthquake has shaken the old home to pieces. The foundations are crumbling, the walls are spread, the winds of the world blow through. The nation, the State, the municipality, have stepped in, assumed practical control of the family in the most intimate relations and are over parents. The conception of government as an over-parent I would consider primarily and resolve upon understanding." Pamphlet issued by National American Woman Suffrage Association. ---- DEGRADATION OF MARRIAGE "I have this much to say, and that is that the marriage ceremony should be cut out. It is useless and has served its day....I have always believed in making the ceremony fit the occasion. In other words, I have a different service for each marriage. The principals consult me beforehand and we prepare the vows. It is for this reason that the pledge is always different, according to the views and convictions of the couples." Dr. Anna Howard Shaw, from authorized special interview, Philadelphia "North American," June 14, 1914. ---- "Any woman who is kept by a man, whether in marriage or not, is either a parasite or a prostitute." Mrs. Havelock Ellis (English prominent suffragist-feminist playwright), "Forum," April, 1913. ---- "Woman's economic profit comes through the power of sex-attraction. When we confront this fact boldly and plainly in the open market of vice, we are sick with horror. When we see the same economic law made permanent, established by laws, sanctioned and sanctified by religion, covered with flowers and incense... we think it innocent, lovely, and right. The transient trade we think evil. The bargain for life we think good. But the biological effect is the same. In both cases the female gets her food from the male by virtue of her sex-relationship to him,...perhaps even more in marriage because of its perfect acceptance of the situation." Charlotte Perkins Gilman. Woman and Economics, page 63. ---- "Suffrage is but part of the greater propaganda of Feminism....With marriage they (the feminists) are perhaps most concerned. ...They are emphatically arrayed against modern marriage, which they look upon as a slave union....The ultimate aim of Feminism with regard to marriage is the practical suppression of marriage and the institution of free alliance." W. L. George ("Atlantic Monthly," Dec., 1913), Suffrage publicist and lecturer. ---- "I do not believe that the present marriage system is sacred or good." Rev. Geo. D. Herron, Socialist-Suffragist, who, by desertion of his wife and children, embarking on "free love" alliance with Miss Rand (of the Rand School of Socialism," New York), gave demonstration of "Applied Feminism." Herron, with Lincoln Steffens, were envoys from the United States to Lenine and Trotzky's Bolshevik government. ---- "A woman whose temperament has urged her into an irregular union may be obeying her own inner law, and may be, in all but conventional reputation, a highly moral person. Feminists are inclined to believe that marriage should be less lightly entered into than at present and more easily terminated. My own view is that divorce without detriment to the standing of either party is the solution towards which we are drawing, and I find this view shared by the great mass of feminists with whose words or writings I have come in contact." ---- Mrs. Beatrice Forbes Robertson Hale, in "What Women Want," published in 1915 and commended by Mrs. Carrie Chapman Catt as "final authority on the subject." "We do not put any fence around men, and we insist that they shall not put any around us either." Marie Jeney Howe (Mrs. Frederic C.), at suffrage meeting, Cooper Union, New York City. ---- "We have talked about political equality for women and economic independence for women and amid a snarl of feminist details we have lost sight of the fact that men need never be disturbed about losing their political superiority or their economic superiority so long as they hold, as they are holding, to the stark, fundamental assertion of sex superiority. Or so long as women permit themselves to be pickled in sex. Here is the place where we need more light and less foghorn. "A radical change in sex aspects -- sex canons -- is more important than any changes in the educational system of women, important as such changes may be. It is more important even than their complete enfranchisement." Helen Ring Robinson, Colorado State Senator and suffrage lecturer ("Pictorial Review," May, 1919). ---- "Any woman who allows her father, brother or even her husband to be the only wage earner in the family is no better than a kept woman of the streets." Mrs. Philip Snowden, of England (suffrage lecturer in United States). Hall of Industrial Education, Dayton, Ohio, 1913. ---- "In this society (An Unconventional Society) the impulses of sex will not be restricted in their expression to conjugality nor will conjugality itself be considered as necessarily a habit for a lifetime. Marriage will be open to all, but it will be approved of merely for those who find themselves in a period of sexual indolence engaged, for example, in childbearing or in some pressing economic routine." Elsie Clews Parsons (Mrs. Herbert Parsons), Feminist and prominent suffrage leader, in "Fear and Conventionality," pp. 205-218. ---- "FATHERLESS CHILDREN" "The child, by the act of its birth, is made legitimate. Every woman has the right to limit the number of children she shall bear, and the right to know how to restrict the size of her family. Society needs more sexuality in the broader interpretation of the term. Some women are almost insane to be mothers and they should be under no social obligations to kill their child. Woman's assertion of her right to motherhood is a revolution and no one can stop it." Professor W. I. Thomas, Chicago University, chief speaker, advocating the right to motherhood of unmarried women, at Suffrage Convention, presided over by Rev. Anna H. Shaw, president National Suffrage Association, held at La Salle Hotel, Chicago, June 9, 1915. ("Chicago Journal.") ---- "The address (of Professor Thomas) has set every woman who heard it thinking.... Political emancipation is not the only emancipation. There is a greater freedom which women must gain. The freedom of social relations. ...Professor Thomas took the proper place to present those views." Rev. Anna Howard Shaw, commenting upon Professor Thomas' speech at Suffrage Convention, June 9, 1915. ("Chicago Journal.") ---- "One feature manifests itself, and that is a change of attitude in woman with regard to the child. Indications in modern novels and modern conversation are not wanting to show that a type of woman is arising who believes in a new type of matriarchate; that is to say, in a state of society where man will not figure in the life of woman except as the father of her child." W. L. George ("Atlantic Monthly," Dec., 1913.) ---- "The Freewoman must produce within herself strength sufficient to provide for herself and for those of whom nature has made her the natural guardian, her children....She must be in a position to bear children if she wants them without soliciting maintenance from any man, whoever he may be." Dora Marsden, A.B., in copyright pamphlet reprinted by National Suffrage Association, from "The Freewoman," best-known Suffrage organ in England. ---- "For many reasons it may be argued that it is expedient for a couple to marry if they have children, but none of them worth discussion has an ethical basis....The whole edifice of life marriage will at last fall to the ground." The Freewoman (as above) (Vol. 1, p. 153). ---- Resolution urging laws legitimatizing children born out of wedlock, including rights of the child to the father's name and to inherit property of both parents, were unanimously adopted by the National Council of Women at its convention in St. Louis, Mo., Nov. 14, 1919. Mrs. Carrie Chapman Catt and Miss Lucy E. Anthony were elected governors to the International Council which will be held in Norway in September, 1920. "N. Y. Sun," Nov. 15, 1919. ---- A "THIRD SEX" IN POLITICS "What is Feminism? A world-wide revolt against all artificial barriers which laws and customs interpose between women and human freedom." Mrs. C. C. Catt, President, National American Woman Suffrage Association. Signed articles, "Woman's Journal," Official Suffrage Organ. ---- "THE CASE FOR WOMAN SUFFRAGE" "Too many advocates of woman suffrage insist that when woman is enfranchised she will be no less 'womanly' than before, whereas, in point of fact, perhaps the chief thing to be said for the suffrage is precisely that it will make woman less womanly, in the commonly accepted sense of the term....One cannot argue logically on woman suffrage without facing this fact." A Bibliography of Suffrage Literature published by the College Equal Suffrage League and sold by the National American Woman Suffrage Association. ---- "The gaining of the vote is, in the Feminists' view, nothing but an affair of outposts. Conscious propagandists do not intend to allow the female vote to be split....They intend to use the vote to make women vote as women, and not as citizens; that is to say, they propose to sell the female vote en bloc to the party that bids highest for it....Side by side with this purely political action, Feminists intend to use industrial strikes in exactly the same manner as do the syndicalists....And when they are strong enough, hold up society itself." W. L. George ("Atlantic Monthly," Dec., 1913) ---- The League of Women Voters (reorganized National Suffrage Association)..."is for the purpose of preventing the disintegration of women in the fifteen states where suffrage has been granted." Mary Garrett Hay, 1st vice-president, National Suffrage Association, co-founder with Mrs. C. C. Catt of League of Women Voters (non-partisan "sex league"), operating as a Republican as member National Republican Committee. ---- The League of Women Voters is "a scheme under which an attempt will be made to enroll all the present and future women voters of the country into one union to obtain political control of the United States Government." "N. Y. Evening Sun," March 21, 1919. ---- "If the social stigma were taken off the prostitute, if she were no longer a segregated person, prostitution might then become in the sense of a division of labor more consistent with a democratic view.... "It would therefore seem well....to encourage early trial marriage, the relation to be entered into with a view to permanency, but with the privilege of breaking it if it proved unsuccessful and in the absence of offspring without suffering any degree of public condemnation." Elsie Clews Parsons ("The Family," p. 348). "There is a grand army of non-maternal women, who have been finding themselves during the last twenty-five or thirty years, and who care more for liberty than for any happiness their mere sex can give them. This army is growing wider and wider awake every moment, more lustful of power, of complete independence; and it increases in numbers at an incredible rate. "When women have achieved full liberty, ...and stand squarely on their own two feet, they will be just as rapacious, just as dishonest, just as sharp and overreaching as conditions and the law will permit....They will fight man at his own game, and, it may be, eat him up." Gertrude Atherton Feminist-Suffragist. ---- "At the present, in the whole world there are only a few new men. Their numbers are increasing yearly, but still fall far short of the new women. Every male instinct of domination and sovereignty has to be bred out of the individual before you can attain the status of the new man and be a fit mate for the new woman....The new man has to unlearn these deep-rooted habits and instincts of sex. The important fact for women to realize is that this nation....is the nation where the new type of man is the most rapidly developing." Beatrice Forbes Robertson Hale, suffrage leader and speaker (in "What Women Want," chapter "The New Man.") ---- "It is only a mere matter of time until the women will make the laws and the men will make the beds." Alice Stroebel, Milwaukee suffrage leader (Menominee "Herald," April 2, 1919). ---- "Any legislation that will do for man we will abide by most cheerfully....Undo what man did for us and strike out all special legislation for us. We do not tax men to take care of us....These women who are called masculine....this is our type of womanhood. Will you help us raise it up?" Susan B. Anthony (author of Susan B. Anthony Federal Suffrage Amendment), before N. Y. State Legislature, 1860. ---- "We had to make England and every department of English life insecure and unsafe. We had to make English law a failure, and the courts farce comedy theatres. We had to discredit the Government and Parliament in the eyes of the world. We had to spoil English sports, hurt business, destroy valuable property, demoralize the world of society, shame the churches, upset the whole orderly conduct of life." Mrs. Emmeline Pankhurst, in "My Own Story," p. 280. ---- "I would be in favor of women suffrage if it did nothing but harm." Rev. Anna Howard Shaw, April 26, 1913 (before Committee on Woman Suffrage, U. S. Senate). ---- "The trouble is that the women will not stop there (with gaining the ballot). Other questions of sex are vexatious and with which I heartily disagree. The one great argument of the feminist is that it will make better men. As I see it it will make looser women. Here comes a feminist who advocates women choosing the father of her child. In a single stroke she would break down the barriers that have protected the legitimacy of our children for centuries ....The greatest problem that confronts the courts of our cities today is that of illegitimate birth....The very protection that is asked by the courts (for unfortunate women and illegitimate children) has been turned about by feminists to mean greater laxity in the marriage problem....If the ideas that these faddists continue to create grow and spread, the only thing I can see ahead is loose morals and loose marriage laws." Judge Ben B. Lindsey, of Denver. Col. ("Cincinnati Commercial Tribune," Jan. 17, 1914). ---- "Colorado has perfected the science of corrupting men. Its judges, its supreme court judges are owned like office boys. Its lawyers, its business men, all are owned. There are, of course, fearless men, but they have paid a heavy price for their fearlessness." Judge Ben Lindsey, of Colorado, testifying before Federal Commission on Industrial Relations in session in New York, May 28, 1914. "THE WOMAN'S BIBLE." (From "The Woman's Bible," compiled by Elizabeth Cady Stanton, first president National Woman Suffrage Association, copyrighted 1895. On the revisory committee appear the names of Mrs. Carrie Chapman Catt, Mrs. Robert Ingersoll, Mrs. Helen H. Gardner, Lucinda B. Chandler, and other women of their faith and order.) "We have made a fetich of the Bible long enough, and it has been the great block in the way of civilization." "The Christian theory of the sacredness of the Bible has been at the cost of the world's civilization...We are investigating the influence of the Bible upon woman under Judaism and Christianity, and pronounce it evil." Matilda Joslyn Gage, also of the revising committee. "We are told the whole sex was highly honored in Mary being the mother of Jesus. Surely a wise and virtuous son is more indebted to his mother than she is to him and is honored only be reflecting her superior characteristics. Why the founders of the Christian religion did not improvise an earthly father as well as an earthly mother does not clearly appear. The questionable position of Joseph is unsatisfactory. As Mary belonged to the Jewish aristocracy she should have had a husband of the same rank. If a Heavenly Father was necessary, why not a Heavenly Mother? If an earthly mother was admirable, why not an earthly father?" "But when millions have for centuries been brought up to believe that the Bible is the inspired revelation from God, its influence has been mischievous in a thousand ways." Sarah A. Underwood, a member of the revising committee, on page 191 in the appendix. "Our government and religion are alike essentially masculine in their origin and development. All the evils that have resulted from dignifying one sex and degrading the other may be traced to this central error: a belief in a trinity of masculine gods in one, from which the feminine element is wholly eliminated." (From "Official History of Woman Suffrage," published by National American Suffrage Association.) SOCIALISM DOVETAILS FEMINISM "Socialist women know that there is no definite point where their work for suffrage stops and their work for Socialism begins. They know that the two dovetail and even overlap, so that a Socialist woman often appears to be doing the one when she is most decidedly doing the other." Anita Block, editor Woman's Dept., "N. Y. Call" (Socialist organ), Dec. 17 1916. "Woman suffrage would increase corruption. But what of it? Women are morally as bad as men. Politically they are worse...Good government is not what we are after." Lincoln Steffens, Socialist. (Published in pamphlet of speeches of "eminent suffragists," under reprint National American Suffrage Association.) "We are now approaching a social revolution, in which the old economic foundations of monogamy will disappear. Monogamy arose through the concentration of considerable wealth in one hand - man's hand - and from the endeavor to bequeath this wealth to the children of this man to the exclusion of all others...The impending social revolution will reduce this whole care of inheritance to a minimum by changing at least the overwhelming part of permanent and inheritable wealth - the means of production - into social property. Since monogamy was caused by economic conditions, it will disappear when these causes are abolished." Marx and Engels, in "Origin of the Family," p. 91 (founders of modern Socialism). "Socialism annihilates family life...With the abolition of private property, marriage in its present form must disappear. This is part of the program...It converts the abolition of legal restraint into a form of freedom that will help the full development of personality, and make the love of man and woman more wonderful more beautiful, and more ennobling." Oscar Wilde, in "The Soul of Man Under Socialism," published in California. "In the new community woman is entirely independent...Human beings must be in a position to act as freely where their strongest impulse is concerned as in the case of any other natural instinct." "Woman," by August Bebel, Socialist authority. "Woman should be free from all the limitations of law, of dogma, and of custom." Max Eastman, Socialist, editor "The Masses," suppressed by postal authorities, now "The Liberator"; founder Men's League for Woman Suffrage; one of chief national suffrage speakers. (Note: "The Masses," in Jan., 1916, published a blasphemous ballad on the birth of Christ. In the next issue a public appeal by prominent suffragists for funds to support "The Masses" appeared, signed by Mrs. Norman deR. Whitehouse, head New York State Suffrage Association, reading, in part, as follows: "In cartoon, in verse, in editorial, in story, 'The Masses' has stood for us all along the line as no other magazine in America has. When we fight for suffrage, for economic freedom, for professional opportunities, for scientific sex knowledge, there stands 'The Masses,' always understanding and always helping. "Max Eastman, Floyd Dell, Art Young and the rest are genuine warm-hearted feminists. They like us and want us to win." ("Masses," February, 1916) In this disgusting sheet the National American Woman Suffrage Association, for more than a year, addressed a standing advertisement to "Socialist-Suffragists" entitled, "What to Read on Woman Suffrage," headed by Max Eastman's pamphlets on ridiculing the "home and mother sentiment.") "With the transformation of the means of production into collective property the monogamous family ceases to be the economic unit of society. The private household changes to a social industry. The care and education of children becomes a public matter. Society cares equally well for all children, legal or illegal. This removes the care about the 'consequences' which now forms the essential social factor - moral and economic - hindering a girl to surrender unconditionally to the beloved man. Will not this be a sufficient cause for a gradual rise of a more unconventional intercourse of the sexes and a more lenient public opinion regarding virgin honor and female shame?" Marx and Engels, in "Origin of the Family," pp. 91-92 "The ballot in itself means nothing. What prompts the fight for the ballot in England and America is a fight for sex independence, a fight women are making - and which eventually they will win - because women, given economic independence plus the ballot, will then be started on the road toward her right to exact a recognition of the fact that she is entitled to exercise her God-given impulses as much as a man is." Countess of Warwick, lecturer in United States on Socialism-Suffrage. COMPILED BY WOMEN VOTERS' ANTI-SUFFRAGE PARTY HEADQUARTERS, 268 MADISON AVE., NEW YORK, N. Y. Birdsall Mrs Wm W Pa [*T. Case II Drawer 2 File A.*] [* Anti *] Why Women Should Oppose Equal Suffrage. Do you desire the ballot for yourself? Do you believe the ballot would help Women? Do you think the ballot would help the community in which you live? If you do not wish it individually nor for womankind, if you do not think it would help your community, it is your duty to join The Virginia Association Opposed to Woman's Suffrage, and help them to defeat the Equal Suffrage movement which they regard as a menace to their state, and an alarming symptom of this age of unrest. Those who have organized this Association are representative of all that is best in women. Many of them have spent their time and means in philanthropy and in the betterment of their race. The methods of a political campaign are repugnant to them, and the personal notoriety, connected with such a campaign, impossible. Their work will be conducted quietly; their aim being to prove that the large majority of Virginia women are opposed to Equal Suffrage. It is fair to assume that the large majority of Virginia women do not desire Suffrage for themselves individually, nor for womankind, nor do they believe that it would help their community, else they would have asked for it long ago, as they are intelligent enough to ask for what they need. Shall Women be Forced to Vote? The question is not so much shall women vote, as shall women be compelled to vote? When the ballot is once imposed upon women, it becomes a duty which they must unwillingly perform. Equal Suffrage for women is frought with especial danger to our dear Southland. If the ignorant vote is to be doubled, the vicious vote increased, and a highly undesirable and probably pur chasable vote added to that allowed under present electorate, the good women of Virginia cannot lend all their strength to help the men in their struggle with existing conditions, but must use it in a similar struggle with the vote of their own sex. The Suffragists do not ask do not ask for the ballot for themselves, but for all women. The Association does not believe that it should be in the power of a small minority, who wish the ballot, to not wish it, should be forced to face its responsibilities. Is the Right to Vote Inherent The right of ballot is not inherent. The Bill of Rights make no claim to it as an inalienable right. The Framers of the Constitution gave the ballot to men because they had the strength to enforce the laws they made. Woman has not right to vote on questions which concern offices which she cannot fill. She has not right to vote to send men to war when she cannot stand beside them to take the risk of wounds or death. God did not create woman to be a soldier, a sailor, a civil engineer, a juryman, a magistrate or a policeman. He founded her relations in nature's law when he made her mother of men. Should Women Enter Politics? The Association believes that there are mental and emotional differences between men and women which should prevent women from being forced into political strife, or from having additional responsibilities thrust upon them. Daniel Webster has reminded women that: "The rough contests of the political world are not suited to the dignity and delicacy of your sex. It is the promulgation of morals in the community, and, more especially, by the training and instruction of the young that woman performs her part towards the preservation of a free government." The Association believes that it is impossible for women to follow men in habit, or in political life, and be true to their nature. They do not think that women will come out of political strife with calm minds. They believe that in political parties composed of women and men, women are less likely to elevate the men, than to degrade themselves. It is of vital importance that women have no political ends to serve. Men knowing that woman's controlling influence is purity of thought and action, can look up to her as the embodiment of all that is good. When woman has lost this influence, she has lost her best protection. She influences legislation more by appeals from a united band of women than as a member of any political party. Is the Ballot an Educational Force? The ballot does not educate men, neither would it educate women. The Association desires the highest and best education for women, knowing that as a mother trains her son, so shall he make a good citizen. The health and morals of a community are rooted in the home, and they make its strength. As the coercive power of public opinion is greater than the law, so woman helps most when she holds a high ideal. If men do not vote right, let her help them to do better. Should Women be Taxed Without a Vote? The man who owns one acre votes beside the man who owns one thousand. Each of them has one vote. The woman who is a millionaire will cast her vote with the factory worker - one vote can annul the other. Property is taxed for the expenses of government which protects the property of women as well as men. What is good for one is good for the other. Equal Pay for Equal Work? There are many positions which a woman cannot fill as well as a man because of the limitations of sex. She may have greater ability, but if a larger salary is demanded, the employer wants a more certain assistant. His man clerk is all the more firmly tied when he marries, but the woman is needed to make a home when she takes a husband. Economic conditions regulate wages. The Virginia Association Opposed to Woman's Suffrage desires your co-operation in their work. Associate Members give their name and influence. No dues required. Active Members pay fifty cents a year. Contributing Members pay five dollars or more a year. Officers of the Association Opposed to Woman's Suffrage PRESIDENT Miss Jane M. Rutherfoord 822 West Grace Street, Richmond, Va. HONORARY VICE-PRESIDENT Mrs. Wm. F. Gray VICE-PRESIDENTS Mrs. Arthur P. Wilmer Miss Annie Rose Walker Mrs. Hunsden Cary SECRETARY AND TREASURER Mrs. Chiles M. Ferrell 1616 Grove Avenue, Richmond, Va. CHAIRMAN OF LITERATURE COMMITTEE Mrs. Bland S. Smith 301 East Grace Street, Richmond, Va. CHAIRMAN OF MEMBERSHIP COMMITTEE Miss Evelyn Gordon 310 East Grace Street, Richmond, Va. CHAIRMAN OF PRESS COMMITTEE Miss Martha Robinson 818 1/2 West Franklin Street, Richmond, Va. EXECUTIVE BOARD Mrs. Henry Taylor Miss Augusta Daniel Mrs. George Bryan Mrs. John. C. Freeman Mrs. Mann S. Valentine Mrs. E. V. Valentine Mrs. James Lyons Mrs. James Dooley Mrs. Thomas Cary Johnson Miss Maria Blair Miss Anna Boykin Mrs. James D. Crump Mrs. J. W. Henson Mrs. William Powers WOMAN SUFFRAGE and The WORKING WOMAN By MRS. WILLIAM W. BIRDSALL[1] ACCORDING to the United States census of 1910 there are 7,000,000 women engaged in gainful occupation in this country-- approximately 15 per cent. This 7,000,000 includes artists, authors, milliners, dress-makers, boarding-house keepers, and other independent workers, as well as stenographers, saleswomen and others, to whom a law limiting the hours of labor is significant. Of this number 40 per cent are in our kitchens, 23 per cent. in factories, and one-third of the whole number are under 21 years of age. The welfare of the 40 per cent. of working women who are in our kitchens is, and always has been, in the hands of women. The health, comfort and wages of this large number, if satisfactory, would be a great factor in the happiness of the world, and incidentally in the homes which they serve. But what do we find? The domestic problem is the farthest from solution of any that complicate economic condition. With the supply of workers small, and, in the main, untrained, and the demand so great as to send wages skyward, other conditions, entirely in the hands of women, deter those girls who are crowding the factories and stores for meagre wages from accepting the safety, better wages and conditions of the average kitchen. It has been the general report of vice commissioners and many social workers, that more recruits for the street come from this class than from any other. Will votes make the average woman more mindful of her sex than she is of those with whom she comes in daily contact? Will the vote better the condition of the woman whose daily life is already controlled by her sister women? Decidedly not. The Factory Situation Of the 23 per cent. who are in the factories the pitiful fact is that they are so young and there are so many of them. How much would the vote help them?[2] One cry of the suffragists has been, "We want to protect the working girl," but they have never explained in what way they are to accomplish this, when shorter hours, higher wages and better working conditions have never been obtained by men with the vote. Such improvements have only been obtained by the men through labor unions, and those trades are best protected in which labor unions are strongest. "Don't you suppose I know that if we girls were willing to organize and stay organized as firmly as 1 Mrs. William W. Birdsall is the wife of the former President of Swarthmore College. 2 A very large proportion of them are under 21. the men," said one factory girl, "and if we were organized strongly enough to make our demands rest on supply and demand, if we could withdraw the supply and if we could persuade the girls who are working for pin money to agree not to work for less than one of us who are really up against it, don't you think we know then we would be protected, and better so than all the women's votes in the world could do for us?" Charge Lack of Interest The fact is that the suffragists over the country have not been able to arouse the interest in their cause of the business and wage earning women. During the recent campaign in Ohio they tried in vain to organize these girls. They are not lacking in intelligence or a desire to better themselves. "The only kind of protection they can give us," said a girl in a ready-to-ear store, "is to be reasonable in their demands on us. When they come in here and demand a garment altered on a few hours' notice, threatening to withdraw their patronage, we are the ones to suffer. If women in their dealings with us would be not charitable, but reasonable, we would be fully protected." Said a factory girl: "We have one source of protection, which would become real protection the minute the women wanted to make it so; that the label of the Consumers' League. But how many of the most ardent suffragists would refuse a bargain, just because it isn't tagged with that?" In that class of woman's labor which might be considered as higher in the social scale and in which the pin money women are most in evidence, the working of the law of supply and demand is more obvious. Said on of this class: "It is the same old question; girls come pouring out of the colleges who only have to buy their clothes with that they can earn, and they're around everywhere, offering their services for half a living wage. What can you expect?" Yet suffragists are endeavoring to increase this unequal competition by urging upon all woman, married and mothers as well, to become "economically independent" and further complicate the situation. This is one of their numerous little inconsistencies which is recognized by the working women as not exactly compatible with the loudly expressed desire "to protect and better conditions" for the woman laborer. The impermanency of women in the labor world is a large factor in the inequality of their wages compared with those of men. While the natural and proper anticipation of marriage by a woman often results in her being satisfied with attaining only moderate skill, and the fulfillment of this anticipation leaves a vacancy to be again filled by an untrained worker, causing unstable conditions, the same proper anticipation in the man will cause greater ambition, an increased devotion to business and the attainment of greater skill, because the man is a permanent factor in the labor world, and upon him devolves the maintenance and protection of the home to be established. But the partly unnecessary entrance of women in labor has made conditions such that men are often no longer able to make a living and support a family. Men are much better paid in those trades where not in competition with women. Has anything been gained, then, when it requires the labor of both the man and woman to support the family where formerly the man was able for the task? Employers, women as well as men, will employ the labor which comes cheapest - all things considered. Consequently the case of the boy, who, when asked why he was not at work, replied: "Me sister's got me job," is by no means a rare one, and even this condition, suffragists tell us, is to be remedied by giving woman a vote. But how? Ah, that they never tell us. A man is displaced by another who will work more cheaply; that is, he would be but for labor unions. Both have votes. The "Privilege" Demand Suffragists demand equality. "Away with privilege," they cry. "We want the vote, equal wages, equal opportunities (never mind the equal qualifications)." At the same time the demand for more special laws, shorter hours, better conditions, etc. - absolutely sane and just demands for conserving the mothers of the race, and readily conceded by law-makers - is scarcely consistent with the demand for equality since they are not demanding them for men. Mrs. Fitzgerald, of Boston, during the Michigan campaign said: "We do not want any laws discriminating in our favor, we want exactly the treatment that men have." This illustrates another suffrage inconsistency. When an ordinance was proposed in Denver, preventing the serving of unescorted girls and women in cafes and restaurants with liquor, after 8 o'clock in the evening - a just regulation, and in the interest of morality - a loud protest was made by political women, in that it was an infringement of their liberty. The same thing happened when the post-office authorities decided to prevent in large cities the delivery of mail to girls at the general delivery window, a prolific source of evil, as need not be explained to any thinking person. Workingmen know that they great hope for protective legislation lies in the education of public opinion by having such laws first passed for women. "Our only hope for an eight-hour law for men in the State of Ohio, lies in the passage of such a bill first for women," said Harry Thomas, secretary of the Cleveland Federation of Labor. So when suffragettes protest, as many of their speakers do for effect, against such laws for women, not only the working women suffer, but the working men. Wage-earning women compose the greater part of the anti-suffrage ranks,3 and it is because they earnestly believe that "votes for women" means much more than simply the "burden of the ballot" alone, and because they believe the franchise is not an essential instrument of industrial freedom, since industrial freedom is a fact, and has come to pass entirely without the use of the ballot. They also believe that the ballot in the hands of women would in no way further the protection of the homes of working people, and for such reasons the organization against woman suffrage grows stronger day by day, as the public becomes aware of the unsupported statements for and the unanswerable arguments against "votes for women." 3 The N. J. Association, which is only 19 months old, has 8000 members, of whom 90% are wage earners. Virginia Virginia Warns Her People Against Woman Suffrage TWENTY-NINE COUNTIES WILL GO UNDER NEGRO RULE OVER SIXTY COUNTIES IN THE STATE OF GEORGIA THE ENTIRE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI WHAT OF YOUR STATE, YOUR COUNTY? ISN'T IT ABOUT TIME FOR REFLECTING MEN AND WOMEN TO THINK - AND ACT? THE THREATENED COUNTIES From the Richmond Evening Journal May 4, 1915 - Republished by Request. Several times The Richmond Evening Journal has been asked to say which counties of Virginia have more colored than white female inhabitants. The question, of course, is in connection with the somewhat noisy demands we read of in the newspapers for "votes for women." Here is the list, from the United States census of 1910: Colored Females. White Females. Amelia 2,658 1,578 Brunswick 5,549 3,843 Buckingham 3,881 3,738 Caroline 4,314 3,934 Charles City 1,817 645 Charlotte 4,267 3,599 Cumberland 2,966 1,604 Dinwiddie 4,619 2,866 Essex 2,618 1,868 Goochland 2,585 1,914 Greenesville 3,720 2,177 Halifax 10,330 9,815 Isle of Wight 3,720 3,633 King and Queen 2,635 2,069 King William 2,409 1,698 Lancaster 2,531 2,279 Lunenburg 3,338 2,856 Mecklenburg 8,280 6,160 Middlesex 2,148 2,053 Nansemond 7,847 5,602 New Kent 1,317 802 Norfolk 15,936 10,039 Northampton 4,587 3,536 Nottoway 3,715 3,016 Powhatan 1,818 1,168 Prince Edward 4,367 2,905 Prince George 2,257 1,601 Princess Anne 2,883 2,683 Southampton 8,005 5,001 Surry 2,804 1,763 Sussex 4,458 2,270 Warwick 2,053 819 Westmoreland 2,279 2,193 We may assume that the proportions of females twenty-one years of age, or over, or who have come of age since the census was taken is the same in the two races. Assuming that the women of the two races would quality to vote in the same proportions and that the white and colored male vote would remain as they were shown to be by the returns of the last presidential election, the colored people would have absolute and immediate control of the counties of Amelia, Brunswick, Caroline, Charles City, Charlotte, Cumberland, Dinwiddie, Essex, Goochland, Greenesville, King and Queen, King William, Lunenburg, Mecklenburg, Nansemond, New Kent, Norfolk, Northampton, Nottoway, Powhatan, Prince Edward, Southampton, Surry, Sussex, Warwick and Westmoreland. In Buckingham, Halifax, Lancaster and Princess Anne the whites would have a fighting chance if their women vote and present white male vote combined solidly against the colored woman and present colored male vote. It is to be remembered that the literacy test would not work in choking off the colored woman vote. The colored people are decreasing their percentage of illiteracy very fast, especially among their women and girls. The ladies of the suffrage league will hardly come forward with a property test. No safeguard would be left but the poll tax; and if colored women knew they could get votes and rule some very rich and important counties by paying $1.50 apiece, we are inclined to think most of them would be willing to go hungry, if necessary to do it. Probably the ladies engaged in this suffrage movement are not very practical or very logical or very well informed or disposed to bother their heads with the actual facts of politics. Most of them, we surmise, hold the somewhat vague, but firmly established feminine line of reasoning that when they want something, or think they want it, they ought to have it by all principles of wisdom and justice; and are prepared always to fall back on the traditional conclusive feminine argument "because." No other argument, however profound, is quite so convincing or fascinating as that word "because," accompanied by some pouting or alluring and scarlet lips - especially if there be dimples by way of re-enforcement. But men are compelled and accustomed to face and deal with hard facts when considering important affairs in business or in politics. It is a hard fact that twenty-nine counties of Virginia would be condemned by woman suffrage to colored rule and five others would be in serious peril of it with woman suffrage. We do not suppose, or imagine, that the suffrage ladies would suggest resort to counting out the colored people of their own sex or to stuffing ballot boxes or padding registration lists. We wicked and inefficient and tyrannical men who are supposed to have made such a sad mess of government in Virginia, became ashamed of such methods and alarmed by them and contrived to remove the necessity for them. Surely, we are not to be incited to return to the slimepit from which we dug ourselves. The population and the votes are in these counties as stated. We can't get away from the figures and facts, ladies. Take twenty-nine counties and make them Republican and add them to the counties already Republican, or close, and the Democratic party and white rule in Virginia will be swinging on a mighty thin line. So. Dakota LETTER FROM GAIL HAMILTON. REPLY TO THE FOLLOWING EXTRACT FROM THE "WOMAN'S JOURNAL." "Yet on some accounts we must regret that the leading remonstrants did not appear this year. Their arguments against woman suffrage would have been published widely in the papers; and the oftener we can get these objections stated and reiterated by the press, the more clearly their weakness appears, and the better it is for woman suffrage. As Gail Hamilton says:— " 'A remarkable feature of the discussion is the scarcity of reasons brought against female suffrage. There seems to be a sort of instinct against it, but no reason. This instinct may be itself be the best of reasons, and if opponents would only plant themselves there, they would hold a strong position. But the things brought forward as arguments are so flimsy that argument and instinct are blown away together.' " AUGUSTA, MAINE, February 9, 1886. MY DEAR MADAM,—If any "woman's journal" or man's journal has done me the honor to consider my opinion worthy of misquotation or misrepresentation, I accept the compliment while repudiating the testimony. The paragraph to which you refer is not a misquotation, but, appearing without its context, may mislead those who have not read the classics of their country as they ought. It is an extract from "Woman's Wrongs," a little book of which the first part—72 pages—was devoted to tearing in pieces some of the flimsiest of these anti-female-suffrage arguments; the second part—20 pages—was intended to set in their strongest light the arguments for female suffrage; the third part—112 pages—attempted to show that these arguments also availed nothing, and that female suffrage would not mend matters. 2 If I were to do the work over again, I hope I should do it better; but I should reach, even more confidently, the same conclusions. Without in the least degree impugning the motives or decrying the character of woman suffragists, I sincerely hope that their cause will be unsuccessful, in so far as it would impose the ballot upon women. In their desire for the better education of women they have my warmest sympathy, though we might not always agree as to what the better education is, or how it is to be effected. But my earliest instinct and my latest judgment combine in maintaining that women have a right to claim exemption from political duty and responsibility, and that men have no right to lay the burden upon them. If the public work is ill done by men, the remedy is to do it better, not to shift the weight to shoulders already heavily laden, and whose task they do not propose in any respect to lighten. I regret to see women engaged in the movement, because it indicates a failure to discern the natural place of woman in the order of creation—the place of eternal superiority and supremacy. It is a movement backward towards men and mastodons, the miocene hipparion and eocene anchitherium —instead of forward, in the direction of woman, and the spiritual universe, and everlasting light—and there is not a man in the Massachusetts Legislature who would not tell you so if he were only woman enough to know what I am talking about! I beg you to believe me very sincerely yours, GAIL HAMILTON. Printed by the Massachusetts Association opposed to Extension of Woman Suffrage. Pamphlets and leaflets may be obtained from the Secretary of the Association. [MRS. ROBERT W. LORD, P. O. Box, 2262, Boston.] ADDRESS THE SECRETARY, BROOKLINE, MASS. P. O. Box 134. [*T. Cace II Drawer 2 File A.*] CAMPAIGN SLANDER IS REFUTED ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES DENIES THAT BREWERS HAVE BEEN INDICTED FOR CONTRIBUTING TO ANTI-SUFFRAGE WORKERS Letter to Attorney General Pierre, S. D., Sept. 25, 1916. Hon. Thos. W. Gregory, Att'y, General of the United States. Dear Sir: The following statement, the substance of which has been printed and spoken in various parts of the country this year, appeared editorially in the Pierre Capital-Journal of September 9th, 1916. "At the present time there are a whole lot of brewers in Pennsylvania and New Jersey, and elsewhere in the east, under indictment in the United States Court for making false returns on Federal Income Tax because of their including contributions to Anti-Suffrage and other political workers as expense fund." On receipt of this letter kindly wire at my expense, stating whether or not the assertion here quoted is true. Do the records of the Department of Justice show that certain brewers in the states mentioned have been indicted for making false returns concerning the income tax? Do the indictments allege that these false returns involved the illegal charging to expense fund of contributions made to organizations formed to oppose woman suffrage? Do they name those organizations, and, if so, will you kindly state their names and places of business? As this subject is one of great and general interest in South Dakota just at the present time, I trust it will receive your prompt attention. Very truly yours, Mrs. Ethel C. Jacobsen, Secretary Women's Anti-Suffrage Association of South Dakota. Attorney General T. W. Gregory's Reply Washington, D. C., Sept. 28, 1916. To Ethel C. Jacobsen, Secretary Women's Anti-Suffrage, Pierre, S. D. Your letter Sept. 25. No indictments save in Pennsylvania and none for making false income returns, but only for corporate political contributions. Indictments do not specify that anti-suffrage organizations were recipients of contributions. T. W. Gregory, Attorney General. LIBEL IS CHALLENGED Rev. Dr. M. W. Jacobus Denies That Liquor Interest Finances Anti-Suffrage Organizations The following letter has been sent to the Capital-Journal, Pierre, South Dakota, by Rev. M. W. Jacobus, Dean of the Hartford Theological Seminary, Hartford, Connecticut. Dr. Jacobus is Secretary of the National Anti-Suffrage Association whose president in Hon. Chas. S. Fairchild of New York, Secretary of the Treasury under President Cleveland: To the Editor of the Capital-Journal, Pierre, South Dakota. Dear Sir: My attention has been called to an editorial which appeared in your paper on Sept. 9, 1916, and in which it is asserted that "every newspaper man in America knows that the liquor interests have been the great contributors to the anti-suffrage campaigns," and the doubt is expressed "whether there is an anti-suffrage organization in the world that does not get its support directly or indirectly from men who have financial interests in the liquor business." Permit me, as secretary of the Men's National Organization Opposed to Woman Suffrage, to relieve your doubt and to controvert your assertion by saying that I know where the money comes from that has been contributed to the anti-suffrage campaign in your state and that not one dollar of it has been furnished by persons who are either directly or indirectly interested in the liquor business. Such statements as are contained in your editorial are not only not founded on fact, but are evidence that those who make them and accept them have no conception of the grave issues at stake in this suffrage movement which threatens the constitutional life of our country. M. W. Jacobus, Dean of Hartford Theological Seminary. Hartford, Conn., Sept. 29, 1916. A Challenge to Universal Franchise League Pierre, S. D., Oct. 4, 1916. Editor Rapid City Journal: The statement in your issue of Tuesday, Oct. 3, 1916, by the officers of the Universal Franchise League begins thus: "The vice interests of the whole country are pouring their money into this state for the purpose of defeating woman suffrage. The women of our state, and all fair minded men, should rise in their might and smite this monster machine that dares, in its wily way, to use every avenue possible to attempt to prejudice the voters against granting the women of South Dakota the rich of the ballot." Representing the Women's Anti-Suffrage Association of South Dakota, I hereby demand of the State Universal Franchise league that it at once show to the public what "vice interests" are "pouring" or in any way contributing money to the defeat of suffrage in this state, where and how it is being used, and by whom. If you cannot, in the interests of fairness, publish this as a communication, please give it proper heading and print at your usual rates, sending the bill to me. Our state officers are as follows: State President -- Mrs. Ernest Jackson, Dallas. State Vice Presidents -- Mrs. Geo. B. Mansfield, Rapid City; Mrs. R. M. Wheeler, Hot Springs; Mrs. C. M. Barnes, Aberdeen; Mrs. M. R. Hinckley, Hoven. State Secretary -- Mrs. Elias Jacobsen, Pierre. Pierre Executive -- President, Mrs. C. M. Hollister; vice president, Mrs. J. L. Lockhart; treasurer, Mrs. S. S. Ruble; secretary, Mrs. E. Jacobsen. Literature -- Mrs. E. B. Northrup, Mrs. E. D. Morcom, Mrs. C. O. Bailey, Mrs. E. A. Howland, Mrs. M. D. Scott, Mrs. E. G. Kennedy, Mrs. Jno. P. Bleeg, Mrs. C. C. Crandall, Mrs. Arthur Shepherd, Sioux Falls, Mrs. J. W. Campbell, Huron. Ethel C. Jacobsen, Secretary. [*T. Case II Drawer 2 Files A*] Why Most Women [*"*] Don't Wish the Ballot TO THE VOTERS OF SOUTH DAKOTA: The women of South Dakota who have formed an association to oppose the woman suffrage amendment to be submitted to the voters of this state on November 7, 1916, have undertaken this task only with much reluctance and from a sense of duty to their sex, to the state and the common and permanent interests of humanity. They believe with the most distinguished churchmen and philosophers in America, with Cardinal Gibbons, Bishop Vincent, the Reverend Dr. Lyman Abbott, and Rabbi Silverman, with Thomas Jefferson, Daniel Webster Elihu Root, William Howard Taft, with John Bright, Darwin, Huxley, Herbert Spencer, and Prof. Goldwin Smith, that, by her nature and the nature of the social compact is designed to bear her responsibility respecting the preservation of a free government by means other than participation in the rivalries and contentions of politics. They believe with scores of American women who have won eminence in various fields of social service and philanthropic effort that the influence of intelligent and sincere women upon public opinion, and in securing legislation which reflects the sentiments of an enlightened and progressive majority, is greatest when such women are not arrayed against each other in rival political parties, each intent upon securing power and patronage and the honors and emoluments of office by whatever means may be for the time being seem most expedient. They believe with the Supreme Court of the United States, and with the political scientists and most eminent philosophers throughout Christendom, that the suffrage is not a natural right, not a privilege to which the individual is entitled without regard to what the government may consider the requirements of its stability and welfare, but a responsibility to be imposed or withheld by the state at its own pleasure. They believe that, when Justice holds the scales, Power and Responsibility balance each other, that government in the last analysis rests upon physical force, and that those whom nature has not designed to sustain the state by this means are not entitled to direct it, except as they may do so through the salutary influence of their example and precept upon the youth destined to exercise direct responsibility in the government. These general considerations against woman suffrage are supported by the concrete and historical evidence. In general this evidence is that the state, by drafting the women for service at the polls, and thereby imposing on them a responsibility so distasteful to the majority of the sex that many of them have shirked it, has gained nothing for itself. It has made more expense for the state and the candidates, more stay-at-home voters, in additional cause for dissension among women, and it has developed the woman politician. For all desirable legislation accomplished in any of the double suffrage states, legislation on temperance, or the protection of wage earners or children, man-suffrage states have furnished the models, while California, Montana, Nevada, Utah, and Wyoming, double suffrage states, are still "Wet." Hence it is that Dr. Anna Howard Shaw, former President of the National Equal Suffrage Association, turns from the record, pronounces the historical evidence immaterial, denies obligation to prove that woman suffrage has improved or will improve conditions for men or women, and elects to rest her cause on the plea of "Natural Right" which has been emphatically rejected by the Supreme Court of the United States and the common instinct of the most powerful, progressive and enlightened nations on earth. Furthermore, the rights of the sex, whatever they may be, belong as much to the opponents as to the friends of woman suffrage; and that the women of the United States in the majority prefer not to have the franchise responsibility thrust upon them is admitted by the National Equal Suffrage Association. That the same preference exists among the women of South Dakota is virtually confessed in the pending proposal to draft them for service at the polls without submitting them beforehand the question of whether they wish such responsibility imposed upon them. In defense of our ideals, our sex, our state, and the nation to which we are all sincerely devoted, we as the men of South Dakota to VOTE NO on the woman suffrage amendment November 7th. Respectfulls, MRS. E. B. NORTHRUP, MRS. E. D. MORCOM, MRS. C. O. BAILEY, MRS. E. A. HOWLAND, MRS. M. D. SCOTT, MRS. E. G. KENNEDY, MRS. JOHN P. BLEEG, For the Women of Sioux Falls Opposed to Woman Suffrage. Published September, 1916, by the Women's Anti-Suffrage Association of South Dakota. Correspondence solicited. Address all communications to Mrs. E. Jacobsen, Secretary, Pierre, So. Dak. "The Will of the Majority - The Law of the Land" POPULATION VOTES- NOT AREA POPULATION OF THE 12 STATES DEFEATING WOMAN SUFFRAGE AT THE POLLS IN THE LAST 4 YEARS.. 40,234,724 COMBINED POPULATION OF THE 11 FULL SUFFRAGE STATES.......... 8,189,469 The suffragists figure it out that 49 1/2 per cent of the territory of the United States is suffrage territory. That sounds impressive. However, it is not territory but people that vote. Would it not be more candid if they said that only 8.9 per cent of the population of the United States lives in full double suffrage territory, or 15 per cent, including Illinois? Tennessee Southern Women's League [??] For Rejection of the SB anthony amendment Broadside America When Feminized by Southern Women's League for rejection of the Susan B. Anthony Amendment Unite Carolina Thomas Nelson Page Late Ambassador to Italy and Distinguished Virginia Novelist Warns Against Legislative Ratification of the Woman Suffrage Amendment The question of whether a constitutional amendment should be adopted, placing the suffrage under the control of the United States, is a widely different one from the question whether or not female suffrage shall be adopted in the various States; and these two questions should not be confused in any way. Whatever the merits and demerits of the latter may be, and on this point I do not wish here and now to express an opinion, I cannot imagine how any one, man or woman, who is in the least familiar with the history of suffrage in Virginia and other States of the South, could think for a moment of advocating placing the suffarger under the control of the National Government. During more than a generation the South lay in the throes of a great struggle to preserve its local self-government and everything on which its civilization rested from from destruction, and it has only been in the last few years, since the new constitutions of the several States were adopted and were held to be constitutional by the highest court in the land, that the people of Virginia and of the other Southern States have been able to breathe feely. To reopen this question now by an attempt to bring about a new amendment to the Constitution of the United States, dealing with suffrage, would, in my judgment, be an immeasurable injury to the South, and indeed to the whole Nation. At no time in the last twenty years have the States of the South, and that which they represent our national, life, been placed in such jeopardy as they have been since this question of putting suffrage under the control of the National Government has been requickened. If any doubt be suggested as to this, let him who doubts, or perhaps, I should say her, who doubts, read the recent editorials in the negro press published in New York and other cities of the North. There they will find that in the minds of those advocates of the constitutional amendment, the fundamental question is that which South fought against during the entire generation following our war, the question not only of the equality of the sexes, but the equality of the races. THOMAS NELSON PAGE Washington, D.C, December 2, 1919 86495 EDWARDS & BROUGHTON PRINTING CO., RALEIGH, N.C. Southern Rejection League Headquarters: Raleigh Hotel RALEIGH, N. C. Republicans Urge Tennessee to Ratify Suffrage Resolution Passed Unanimously by Executive Committee of the Republican National Committee at Columbus, Ohio, July 21, 1920 "Resolved:--That it is the sense of the Executive Committee of the Republican National Committee that the REPUBLICAN MEMBERS OF THE TENNESSEE LEGISLATURE should be and hereby ARE MOST EARNESTLY URGED and requested by this resolution TO VOTE UNANIMOUSLY FOR RATIFICATION OF THE WOMAN SUFFRAGE AMENDMENT in the special session of the Tennessee legislature which is to be called; and the chairman of the Republican National Committee is hereby authorized to communicate this resolution to each Republican member of said legislature." Plank in Republican National Platform, Adopted at Chicago Convention, June, 1920 "We welcome women into full participation in the affairs of government and the activities of the Republican party. "We earnestly hope that Republican legislatures in states which have not yet acted upon the suffrage amendment WILL RATIFY the amendment to the end THAT ALL THE WOMEN OF THE NATION OF VOTING AGE MAY PARTICIPATE IN THE ELECTION OF 1920, which is so important to the welfare of the country." Plank in Tennessee Republican Platform, Adopted April 14, 1920, Chattanooga, Tennessee "We rejoice that the women of our state have at last the opportunity to express their choice for those who shall conduct the affairs of the national government, on an equal footing with men, and we express the hope that the Nineteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States shall be adopted at such time that universal suffrage shall prevail at the next general election." NATIONAL WOMAN'S PARTY LAFAYETTE SQUARE WASHINGTON, D. C. Republican Candidates for President and Vice-President Urge Ratification of Suffrage Amendment . . . Suffrage Statement in Speech of Senator Harding Accepting Republican Nomination for President, Marion, Ohio, July 22, 1920 "The womanhood of America, always its glory, its inspiration and the potent, uplifting force in its social and spiritual development, is about to be enfranchised. In so far as Congress can go, the fact is already accomplished. By party edict, by my recorded vote, by personal conviction, I am committed to this measure of justice. "It is my earnest hope, my sincere desire that the one needed state vote be quickly recorded in the affirmation of the right of equal suffrage and that the vote of every citizen shall be cast and counted in the approaching election." . . . Suffrage Statement in Speech of Governor Coolidge Accepting Republican Nomination for Vice-President, Northhampton, Mass., July 27, 1920 "Equal suffrage, for which I have always voted, is coming. It is not a party question, although nearly six-sevenths of the ratifying legislatures have been Republican. The party stands pledged to use its endeavor to hasten ratification, which I trust will be at once accomplished." . . . NATIONAL WOMAN'S PARTY LAYFAYETTE SQUARE WASHINGTON, D. C. South Carolina Feb. 12 - 1918. These pamphlets still being circulated by Senator Tillman 63D CONGRESS 1st Session SENATE DOCUMENT No. 174 THE MISSION OF WOMAN AN ARTICLE BY ALBERT TAYLOR BLEDSOE, LL. D. PRINTED IN THE SOUTHERN REVIEW OCTOBER, 1871 [*So Carolina*] PRESENTED BY MR. TILLMAN AUGUST 18, 1913. -- Referred to the Committee on Printing WASHINGTON 1913 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, August 26, 1913. Resolved, That an article entitled "The Mission of Woman," by Albert Taylor Bledsoe, LL. D., which was printed in the Southern Review of October, 1871, be printed in the Congressional Record, and also as a Senate document, as reported by the Committee on Printing. Attest: JAMES M. BAKER, Secretary. 3 THE MISSION OF WOMAN. (By ALBERT TAYLOR BLEDSOE, LL. D.) [This discussion by this distinguished scholar, philosopher, and writer first appeared October, 1871, in the Southern Review of which he was the brilliant editor. It is even more pertinent at the present time than when Dr. Bledsoe first gave it to the public.] One of the subjects which now, for the first time in the history of the world, is beginning to attract the attention which its importance demands is the mission, the education, and the influence of woman. In his History of Morals, Mr. Lecky devotes the last and best chapter of the work, consisting of more than a hundred pages, to a learned, comprehensive, and eloquent survey of "the position of woman." And among the discourses of the celebrated Adolph Monod there are several on "the mission” and on "the life" of woman. We mention these productions only because of all the innumerable discussions of the same subject they are the only ones to which we shall have occasion to refer. NOTHING TOO ABSURD TO SUCCEED. We have been accustomed to regard the woman's rights movement as too insignificant and too absurd to deserve serious attention. But in some portions of the border States, as well as in the universal North, this movement is assuming proportions and manifesting a spirit which inspire some of our most thoughtful minds with no little alarm. They are beginning to fear that, after all, this most absurd movement may gain the ascendancy in this country. One thing is certain, namely, that nothing is too absurd to fail of success in this "the most enlightened Nation on the face of the globe." We appeal to facts. We now see recently emancipated slaves-utterly ignorant and wholly unfit for such duties-in our legislative halls, in the highest judicial offices of some of the Southern States, and on the boards of trustees as the conservators and guardians of the interests of the higher education. Could anything be more absurd? Or would anything, only a few years ago, have been pronounced more utterly impossible, if anyone had been bold enough to predict such a result? In view of such facts, indeed, we are almost inclined to believe that the more absurd anything is the greater are its chances of success under the radical rule of the present day. * * * Women may never have the right to vote in this country; but whether they have or not, their prospects for the enjoyment of that "right" are now apparently better than were those of the blacks previous to the late war. Who knows, then, what may happen, or, in the course of time, go down with the sovereign people composed of all colors, all ages, and both sexes? 5 6 THE MISSION OF WOMAN. A SIMILAR MOVEMENT IN THE ROMAN EMPIRE. If however, the movement in question should succeed, it would be nothing new under the sun. History would only repeat itself; and, in the light of past facts, we may easily predict the result. The women of Rome at one period succeeded in securing all "their rights," as they are called, and the effects of their emancipation from the laws of God and nature are recorded in the annals of the Empire. A complete revolution - says Mr. Lecky - had thus passed over the constitution of the family. Instead of being constituted on the principle of autocracy it was constituted on the principle of coequal partnership - the very thing now aimed at in this country. The legal position of the wife had become one of complete independence, while her social position was one of great dignity. How glorious! But, adds the historian, "The more conservative spirits were naturally alarmed at the change." And the effects of the revolution, as they now stand recorded on the page of history, justify their alarm. THE FRIGHTFUL RESULTS THAT FOLLOWED. "Another and still more important consequence," said Mr. Lecky, "resulted from the changed form of marriage." Being looked upon simply as a civil contract, entered into for the happiness of the contracting parties, its continuance depended on mutual consent. Either party might dissolve it at will, and the dissolution gave both the right to remarry. There can be no question that under this system the obligations of marriage were treated with extreme levity. We find Cicero repudiating his wife, Terentia, because he desired a new dowry; Cato ceding his wife, with the consent of her father, to his friend, Hortensius, and resuming her after his death; Maecenas continually changing his wife; Sempronius Sophus repudiating his wife because she had once been to the public games without his knowledge; Paulus Aemilius taking the same step without assigning any reason and defending himself by saying, "My shoes are new and well made, but no one knows where they pinch me." Nor did women show less alacrity in repudiating their husbands. Seneca denounced this evil with especial vehemence, declaring that divorce in Rome no longer brought with it any shame, and that there were women who reckoned their years rather by their husbands than by the consuls. Christians and Pagans echoed the same complaint. According to Tertullian, "divorce is the fruit of marriage." Martial speaks of a woman who had already arrived at her tenth husband; Juvenal of a woman who had eight husbands in five years. But the most extraordinary recorded instance of this kind is related by St. Jerome, who assures us that there existed at Rome a wife who was married to her twenty-third husband, she herself being his twenty-first wife. INCREASING CELIBACY AND A DECREASING BIRTH RATE. The evil did not stop here. The family being constituted, not on the principle of autocracy, but on that of a coequal partnership, it became instead of a well-organized social unit a two-headed, self-fighting monster. Hence, in the language of Prof. Seeley, "precisely THE MISSION OF WOMAN. 7 as we think of marriage, the Roman of imperial times thought of celibacy; that is, as the most comfortable but the most expensive condition of life. Marriage with us is a relation for which a man must pay; with the Romans it was an excellent pecuniary investment, but an intolerable disagreeable one." The marriage relation, in one word, having degenerated into a civil contract for convenience merely, it became so "intolerably disagreeable" that men shunned it as they would have shunned the plague. And to this cause it is that Prof. Seeley ascribes the decline, the fall, and the ruin of imperial Rome. "Whatever the remote and ultimate cause may have been," says he, "the immediate cause to which the fall of the Empire can be traced is a physical not a moral decay. "In valor, discipline and science the Roman armies remained what they had always been, and the peasant Emperors of Illyricum were worthy successors of Cincinnatus and Caius Marius. But the problem was how to replenish the armies. Men were wanted; the Empire perished for want of men." "A stationary population," he continues, "suffers from war or any other destructive plague far more and more permanently than a progressive one." Accordingly we are told "that Julius Caesar, when he attained the supreme power, found an alarming thinness of population. Both he and his successor struggled earnestly against this evil. The grand maxim of Metellus Macedonicus, that marriage is a duty which, however painful, every citizen ought manfully to discharge, acquired great importance in the eyes of Augustus. He caused the speech in which it was contained to be read in the senate. Had he lived in our days, he would have reprinted it with a preface. To admonition he added legislation. The Lex Julia is irrefragable proof of the existence at the beginning at the imperial time of that very disease which four centuries after destroyed the Empire. How alarming the symptoms already were may be measured by the determined resolution with which Augustus forced his enactment upon the people in spite of the most strenuous resistence. The enactment consisted of a number of privileges and precedences given to marriage. It was, in fact, a handsome bribe offered by the State to induce the citizens to marry. How strange, according to our notions, the condition of society must have been; how directly opposite from the present one the view taken by the statesmen of the question of population, and how unlike the present one the view taken by the people in general of marriage were may be judged by this law." That is, the women of Rome, having acquired the independence and dignity for which so many in this country are now struggling, the marriage relation became so "intolerably disagreeable" that neither the laws of the Empire nor the interests of man kind could save the Empire from ruin. Mr. Lecky arrives at the same conclusion. "Augustus attempted in vain," says he, "to arrest by laws against celibacy and by conferring many privileges on the father of three children a great and general indisposition toward marriage." "If Romans," said Metellus, in a singularly curious speech, "could live without wives, we should keep free from that source of trouble; but since nature has ordained that men can neither live sufficiently agreeable with wives nor at all without them, let us consult the perpetual endurance of our own race rather than our own brief enjoyment." 8 THE MISSION OF WOMAN. WHY THE ROMAN EMPIRE FELL. "In the midst of this torrent of corruption a great change was passing over the legal position of Roman women. They had not at first been in a condition of absolute subjection or subordination to their relations. They arrived during the Empire at a point of freedom and dignity which they subsequently lost and have never altogether regained." So true is it that the right constitution of the family, or the marriage relation, lies at the very root of national greatness, power, and glory. The women of Rome, indeed, acquired the rights of men; but the consequence was that woman, with all her short-lived independence, dignity, and glory, soon sank beneath the ruins of the Empire. She tasted the forbidden fruit, and it proved fatal to the glory for which God had intended her. "Men were wanting, and the Empire perished for the want of men. The proof of this," says Prof. Seeley, "is in the fact that the contest with barbarism was carried on by the help of barbarous soldiers." The Emperor Probus began this system, and under his successors it came more and more into use. As the danger of it could not be mistaken, we must suppose that the necessity of it was still more unmistakable. It must have been because the Empire could not furnish soldiers for its own defense that it was doomed to the strange expedient of turning its enemies and plunderers into its defenders. Yet on these scarcely disguised enemies it came to depend so exclusively that in the end the Western Empire was destroyed, not by the hostile army, but by its own. How different had been the result if, instead of aspiring to the independence and dignity and the rights of men, the women of Rome had been, as in the days of the glory of the Republic, content to furnish, educate, and train men for the defense of the Empire. Shall we repeat the same stupenduous folly? Shall we, in spite of the Word of God and the lessons of experience, run the same race of madness and ruin? Shall we, too, in spite of all our boasted wisdom and high Christian civilization, fall miserable victims to the reforms instigated by the strong-minded women and supported by the weak-minded men of this age and nation? We hope not. We do trust that God, in His good providence, has no such awful, no such unutterable calamity in store for us. THE ROOT OF THE MISCHIEF. The root of all this mischief is the idea that woman is the equal of man, is cast in the same mold with man, and is appointed to do the same work as man. No greater mistake could be made. "It would take many Newtons," said Coleridge, "to make a Milton." True; but, then, it would take as many Miltons to make a Newton. The truth is that the one could not be made out of the other at all without a very great waste of material. We propose, then, to leave them just as God has made them; the one for science and for song the other. If Milton had been required to write the Principia or Newton the Paradise Lost, he would have been ruined, utterly lost to the world. In like manner, if woman were required to do the work of man or man the work of woman, human affairs would be turned out of their natural channels and thrown into hopeless confusion. Let man and woman, then, like twin stars or like the sun and moon, move in their own THE MISSION OF WOMAN. 9 appointed spheres or obits, unless the object be not to preserve the harmony of the world, but to "uprear the universal peace." Does anyone ask whether woman is equal to man? If so, we reply that she is neither equal nor superior nor inferior to a man. She was made for a different sphere, and in her own sphere she is without a peer or rival. "One star is different from another star in glory." If anyone ask, then, whether Venus is equal or superior or inferior to Jupiter, we answer she is neither. Jupiter is superior to Venus in size and in effulgence; but, then, Venus, the evening and the morning star, exerts a far more powerful influence over our heart and feelings and imagination than Jupiter. Everything which God has made is beautiful in its own place and season, and hence it is no part of our aim or philosophy to revise or to reconstruct the work of His hands. We would not for the world have Venus put in the place of Jupiter or Jupiter in the place of Venus. Much less would we have woman thrust into man's sphere or man into woman's sphere. And woe, woe, to the people or nation or society by whom they shall be made to exchange places or to occupy the same sphere. We are, for our part, satisfied with the world as God made it without feeling the least desire to revise or correct the moral code of the universe. MADE FOR A DIFFERENT WORK. First a strong-minded woman and then a weak-minded man wrote a great book consisting of some 600 pages or more to prove that Lord Bacon wrote Shakespeare's plays. Now, the man or the woman who can not see the difference between Shakespeare and Bacon ought to be excused for denying the difference between man and woman and for joining the woman's rights movement. They have, in our humble opinion, an inherent and inalienable right to make such fools of themselves; that is to say, if nature has not done the business for them. Bacon could no more have written the least of Shakespeare's plays than Shakespeare could have written the "Novum Organum" or the "Advancement of Learning." The attempt of the author in question to show that Bacon was a great poet is simply ridiculous. He had the reason, but he lacked the rhythm of the poet. He had the imagination, but he wanted the plastic power and soul of a Shakespeare. In one word, to use the language of Shakespeare, "he had no music in his soul," and was therefore better fitted for "stratagems and spoils" than for the building of "the lofty rhyme." His villainous translation of some portions of the Psalms stands in the way of our author's theory, but he apologizes for this on the ground that the "thoughts were not his own." True, the thoughts were not his own; they were too grand and beautiful for any uninspired mind; but then, "the rhythm" was all his own. Let us look at this, then, and see the likeness between Shakespeare and Bacon. A single specimen will suffice, and here it is: Ye monsters of the mighty deep, Your Maker's praises spout; Up from the sound ye codlings peep; And wag your tails about. How like the sublime strains of Othello or Macbeth or Lear or Hamlet! Who, after reading such glorious lines can doubt that Bacon composed Shakespeare's dramas? 10 THE MISSION OF WOMAN. UNITY IN DIVERSITY. The universe everywhere presents itself to our contemplation under the great law of unity in diversity, or diversity in unity. To select only one out of innumerable examples which might be adduced if we look at the extremities of the limbs of different animals, we see this wonderful unity in diversity, or diversity in unity. For, as Prof. Owen, the greatest of living comparative anatomists, assures us, the hand of man, the hoof of horse, the paddle of the mole, the fin of the fish, and the wing of the bat are all constructed in the same archetypal idea or internal plan. Here in all these diversified forms we have a unity of design or plan. The human hand, with its manifold flexible fingers and delicate tactual sense--how admirably is it adapted to the uses and purposes of man! We find the same bones or parts in the forefoot of the horse, but there they are sheathed in a solid hoof with which he strikes the hard earth with impunity, In like manner the same parts and the same internal plan exists in the paddle of the mole, but yet in its eternal form it is so modified and adjusted to the little animal's mode of life that it "may almost be said to swim though the earth." Again, how admirably is the fin of the fish, with the same internal structure or relation of parts, adapted to its peculiar wants or mode of life. How admirably, in other words, it answers the purpose of an oar, cleaving the waters and directing the course of the fish as it darts through the element in which it lives. Finally, the wing of the bat, without departing from the same structure of parts, is so formed that the animal beats the air therewith and flies above the earth. One model, and yet how many different modifications, to answer different purposes or spheres or modes of life. Innumerable illustrations of the same great law and the same wonderful adaptation exist in all departments of nature. In the language of the great comparative anatomists already referred to we everywhere behold "the same organ in different animals under every variety of form and function." Moreover, we may add, we everywhere behold “the same organ” exactly and wonderfully adapted to the particular function it is required to perform. THIS LAW APPLIES TO MAN. But man, who in this lower world is the brightest of all God's creatures, is also the brightest manifestation of this great law of the universe. He is one, and yet two. "God said, 'Let us make man in our own image, after our own likeness.'" "So God created man in his own image; in the image of God created He him;" and yet "male and female created He them." Now it was the mind of man and not the body which God created in his own image; and it was this image, this mind, which He created "male and female." Hence, when Coleridge says "there is a sex in our souls," he but echoes the voice of God. In the work of Mrs. Elizabeth Strutt, entitled "The Feminine Soul; Its Nature and Attributes," this "sex in our souls" is well, is admirably, illustrated. In the two celebrated discourses, also, on "The mission of woman," by Adolph Monod, the difference between the male and female soul is unanswerably established by an appeal to both reason and revelation. 11 THE MISSION OF WOMAN. The sphere or mission of woman given, as presented in the Word of God, it is easy to see that the nature and attributes of the feminine soul are exactly adapted to the design of the Creator. Or, on the other hand, the nature and attributes of the "feminine soul," being good, as they are set forth both in the work and the Word of God, it is easy to determine the sphere and mode of life for which she was created. Let not the sphere of woman, then, be confounded with that of man, and let not her soul be unsexed to do the work of man; unless, indeed, it be our object to subvert the order of nature, to "uproar the universal peace and pour the sweet milk of concord into hell." This thing was done in Rome; let it not be done in America. THE QUEENS OF WIT AND BEAUTY. "After the revival of letters," says Miss More, "the controversy about the equality of the sexes was agitated with greater warmth than wisdom. The process was instituted and carried on (precisely as it is at the present day) with that sort of acrimony which always raises suspicion of the justice of any cause." No wonder this war of words was carried on with such acrimony and bitterness, for, as Miss More says, it was urged then, as it is in our day, by "women vain of their wit." The beauties took no part in the contest. "There is," says Miss More, "a singular difference between a woman vain of her wit and a woman proud of her beauty. The beauty, though anxiously alive to her own fame, is indifferent about the beauty of other women. Provided she is sure of your admiration, she does not insist on your thinking that there is another handsome woman in the world. The wit, more liberal at least in her vanity, is jealous for her whole sex and contends for the equality of their pretensions, in which she feels her own involved. The beauty vindicates her own rights; the wit, the rights of women. The beauty fights for herself; the wit for a party. The beauty would be a single queen for life; the wit would abrogate the Salique law of intellect and enthrone a whole sex of queens." Now, for our own part, we infinitely prefer the silent queen of beauty to the wrangling queen of wit. The queen of beauty, seeing man at her feet, is content to reign over his heart, his house, and his home. But the queen of wit, seeing nobody subject to her dominion, denounces all men--the ungallant wretches--as tyrants and seems determined to put them under her feet, even as Jezebel did Ahab. WHAT THE SCRIPTURES TEACH. "A woman," said Miss Olive Logan, "has a right to vote and to hold a seat in Congress, because she is as good as a negro." We think, for our part, that a woman, especially if she is not a strong-minded ones, is far better than a negro, and that, therefore, she had far better eschew the dust and dirt, the fray and fury of a contest with negroes for a seat in Congress or in the places of political power and profit. We think she is better than a negro, or a white man, either, and had, therefore, better keep within the high and holy sphere for which both nature and the God of nature intended her. 12 THE MISSION OF WOMAN. It may be deemed a want of gallantry in us, but still we must insist on "the Salique law of the intellect. For, in fact, the sun shines not more clearly in the heavens than this law does in the Word of God, as well as in His works. "The man," says St. Paul, "is the head of the woman." The family, as organized by Christ, is constituted on the principle of autocracy and not on the principle of an equality in power and dominion between man and wife. The family, as organized by Christ, is a social unit, a harmonious whole, with one head and not a two-headed, discordant, self-fighting monster. "Husbands, love your wives," is the word of divine wisdom, in which is so tenderly summed up all the obligations of the husband. "Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ loved the church"; therefore, as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be subject to their own husbands in everything." Again writes St. Paul to the Ephesians, "Wives, submit yourselves unto your husbands as unto the Lord"; "for the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church." As in writing to the Corinthians he sad, "the head of the woman is the man," so here he specially applies this doctrine to the marriage relation, saying, "the husband is the head of the wife." St. Peter expresses the same thing: "Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands that, if any obey not the word, they also may, without the word, be won by the conversation of the wives, while they behold your chaste conversation coupled with fear." * * * "Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel. But let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price. For after this manner in the old time, the holy women also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection to their own husbands." THE DIVINE STANDARD OF SERVICE AND GREATNESS. Ah! ye strong-minded women, how ye must hate these words--"being in subjection unto their husbands"! Have you no husbands because you hate these words? Or do you hate these words because you have no husbands? Have you no husbands because the old-fashioned forms require you to "love, honor, and obey" or because nobody has asked you? Be this as it may, it is certain that many nowadays are willing enough to promise to love and honor, but not to obey in order to tie the matrimonial knot. They take their stand against the word "obey" as if it were a degradation of their sex. They know neither the word nor the spirit of the great Teacher, who says" "Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that be great exercise authority upon them. But it shall not be so among you, but whosoever will be great among you, let him be your minister; and whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant, even as the Son of Man came not to be ministered unto but to minister, and to give His life a ransom for many." If any woman is, then, offended by the leading idea of the present paper, this is because she is animated by the spirit of the worlds and not by the spirit of Christ. It is because the love of power and the lust of dominion rather than the sublime meekness and humility of the Lamb THE MISSION OF WOMAN. 13 of God rules in her wretched, restless heart. It is, in other words, because that which is most hateful in man--the domineering pride of a wicked heart--reigns over and obscures in her that which is most lovely in woman--"a meek and quiet spirit." The first caused Lucifer "to fall like fire from heaven"; the last alone can raise a "mortal to the skies." We seek, then, not to degrade, but to elevate woman when we say it is her mission "not to be ministered unto but to minister." This was the mission of Christ Himself. Though it reduced Him physically to the form of a servant, it raised Him spiritually to the highest and holiest sphere in the universe. Hence when He brought His "first begotten into the world" He said, "Let all the angels of God worship Him." For even when exalted above "all principalities and powers and dominions" He was not so fair in the eyes of the everlasting Father or so much an object of worship to all His angels as when He took upon Himself the form of a servant and rendered forever illustrious and beautiful the path which He has prescribed for woman. Do we, then, seek to degrade woman merely because we wish to see her tread in His footsteps and become more and more assimilated to His character, who was "the fairest among ten thousand and altogether lovely"? On the contrary, it is just because we wish to see her become more and more an object of worship to all true men that we so earnestly contend that the Christian religion has rightly defined her mission and marked out the sphere of her real glory. As everyone knows, indeed, it is one of the distinctive peculiarities of this religion that from a beast of burden it raises woman to her rightful position in human society and crowns her as the queen of the world. * * * * * * INFERIOR ANIMALS BUT SUPERIOR BEINGS. Woman is sometimes contemptuously called "the inferior animal." "What," several ladies once asked us, 'do you think of that sentiment?" "We think it perfectly just," was the reply. "What!" they exclaimed, "do you, with all your pretended gallantry and admiration of the sex, call woman the inferior animal?" "Yes," we fearlessly replied, "that is precisely our opinion of the sex--inferior animals but superior beings." In brute force, in all that constitutes the mere animal frame and nature, women are inferior to men; but in purity of mind, in refinement of sentiment, in all that most nearly assimilates our race to the good angels above, they are superior to men. Mr. Darwin in his "Descent of Man" has proved at least one thing, namely, that man is actually an animal. No one after reading his very learned work can doubt that man is really an animal or deny that the proud biped eats and drinks and sleeps like his four-footed brethren that perish. But, after all, we are inclined to think that we are, in nature and in kind, a little better than baboons. Many of our strong-minded women do, we are aware, differ from us respecting Mr. Darwin's great discovery of the essential identity of nature between men and monkeys. Hence, rather than quarrel with them or with women of any description we are willing to admit that they are superior animals and also to allow them to choose the species of beast with which it is proper to classify them. * * * 14 The Mission of Woman First Symptoms and Cure of the Disorder. There are, we are sorry to say, some of the sweetest and most intelligent and most lovely young ladies in our land who seem favorably inclined toward the woman's rights movement. We would do anything to save them, except marry a strong-minded woman; and if we were a widower we fear we might be induced to do even that, in order to rescue the beautiful creatures from their perilous condition, for, indeed, widowers do so many strange and unaccountable things that no man can say what he would not do if he were deprived of his "better half." But if we know ourself we would never marry a strong- minded woman. In this respect we feel as if we were like the ole Romans who, after the women had acquired "all their rights," absolutely refused to marry them; consequently, as Prof. Seeley says, "the Empire perished for the want of men." It is, however, a hardly supposable case that any really beautiful and lovely woman will in her right mind actually join the ranks of the woman's rights movement, for whatever her nascent inclination or premonitory symptoms, matrimony will be apt to arrest her in her career and cure her of the incipient disease. The first symptom of the disorder is perhaps the determination never, in case of matrimony, to use the word "obey." This symptom is a dangerous one and requires heroic treatment, such as that which Bishop Hobart is said to have administered to a young lady in New York. This young lady, so the story goes, vowed that if she were to get married a hundred times she would never once promise to obey her husband. Accordingly, when the bishop, who had been called in to marry her, came to the words "love and honor and obey" she held down her head meekly and remained silent, hoping he would attribute her silence to her modesty and so pass on. The good bishop, always stern and inflexible in the discharge of his official duties, repeated the words, but still no response. A third time he pronounced the words and with a still firmer voice, but the bride, still adhering to her vow, refused to repeat the promise. She only blushed the more beautifully and arrayed herself more radiantly in the charms of maiden modesty. But, it was all lost on the bishop. He deliberately closed his prayer book and, turning away from her, said, "Madam, when you are ready to get married I will marry you." At these words the blooming bride started up and, wild with terror, exclaimed, "Love, honor, and obey; love, honor, and obey; love honor, and obey." The treatment is what the doctors call "heroic," but the cure was perfect. Both Weaker and Stronger than Man. We can not deny, however, that, although woman is the "superior being," she is the "weaker vessel," for such is the express declaration of the Word of God. She is evidently the "weaker vessel." The frailer form, the more delicate organs, the more sensitive and timid nature, all proclaim her "the weaker vessel." Above all, the ease with which the balance of her judgment is disturbed by the impulses of kindness or of cruelty show that she is "the weaker vessel." While man, during the Civil War, displayed his strength by the greatness and the heroism of his deeds, woman betrayed her weakness by the violence of her sentiments. She would have raised the The Mission of Woman. 15 black flag and caused it to wave in all the darkness of desolation over the heads of her enemies even while she was the ministering angel of mercy to her friends. It is the weakness of human nature, and especially in the female sex, that it is the weakness of human nature, and especially in the female sex, that it is always prone to rush into extremes of both hate and love. But, on the other hand, it must be conceded that woman is weaker than man only in regard to the mission or the work of man. For her own sphere or mission she is endowed with far greater strength than man. In strength of passive will, in the courage and fortitude to endure, to bear the ills that flesh is heir to, she is far, very far, superior to man. In force of aggressive will, in the sublime capacity to do and to dare, she is comparatively weak; but in the meek, Christlike capacity to suffer and to bear she is superior to man. She is more like the Lamb of God - a willing sacrifice for the good of man; and this is her glory. In this respect, as well as in many others, she is most admirably adapted to the sphere of private life, and, above all, to the home circle. This, it is true, is a narrow sphere, but it is nevertheless a high and holy one - the very highest and holiest upon earth. Of all the institutions of society that which is the most important to its order and happiness is the constitution of the family and its government. Over this government woman is, in a special manner, called to preside. From the center of the home circle, nay, from innumerable centers of such circles, woman sends forth an influence, either for good or for evil, in comparison with which the influence of heroes and legislators and statesmen sink into insignificance. She does not occupy the throne, it is true; but yet behind the throne she wields a power greater than the throne itself, and without which the Nation and the glory of all nations depends upon the ministry of woman, on the influence of wives, and daughters, and sisters, and mothers. Only the Mother Adequate to the Task. "As a general rule," says a celebrated historian, "superior men are the children of their mother." Infancy is the decisive moment in education. In the earliest years is formed the strong bias which gives shape to the entire life. But these years belong to the mother. Paganism took them from her and gave them to the State, but Christ took them from the State and gave them back to the mother. They are too delicate and important for the State or for strangers to meddle with, and they are too exacting for the father. For the training of the young aptness, time, opportunity, patience, long suffering, and self-sacrifice are wanting to all persons, except to the mother. She alone is fit for the work which God in his providence has appointed her to do. Consider, for example, the man whose strong heart and unconquerable courage now braves alike the wrath of a prince and the fury of the people, and who seems determined to justify the proud maxim. "Man can do what he will." You ascribe, perhaps, the glory of the man to the energy of his nature. But know that in his childhood he appeared so irresolute and so vacillating in his character that everyone said, "He will never make a man." He will, on the contrary, always be a "reed shaken of the wind." But a woman has made him a man, and that woman is the same who brought him into the world. 16 THE MISSION OF WOMAN. She alone has never despaired of him. Sustained by love and guided by instinct, she alone has discovered beneath all his weakness the hidden germs of greatness, which by her tender, her humble, her patient, and persevering labors she has developed into his present glorious manhood. The child was not and never could have been the father of the man but for the constancy and the care of the woman. She is, indeed, the mother of the man as well as of the child. She has divined everything, conceived everything, planned everything, and watched over the operation and development of everything. By trials and conflicts, wisely graduated to his growing strength. she has developed the hidden germs of virtue in his soul, until by degrees the weakness of the child has passed away, and “nature herself can stand up and say to the world this is a man." Such is the work, the mission, the glory of woman. • • • • • SOME REFLECTIONS. The divorce evil, by its rapid and widespread growth in the United States, has become a danger so deadly that it threatens not only the moral health, but the very life of the Nation. Within the last 50 years divorce has increased on an average more than three and one-third times as fast as the population. In the year 1912 it may safely be said that 100,000 divorces were granted; and it is conservative to say that 100,000 children, mostly under 10 years of age, wore made divorce orphans, being deprived of one or both parents. (Illinois Commission on Uniform Marriage and Divorce Laws.) The late census shows a steadily increasing decline in the rate of growth for the native white race of the United States. From 1880 to 1890 the rate of increase was 24.5 as against 23.1 from 1890 to 1900 and 20.8 during the decade 1900-1910. • • • Your suffragette may say that her right to vote has nothing to do with the birth rate, and that such right, can not militate against the highest ideals of motherhood. But mothering requires the very flower of a woman's days. If she is to bear and mature children under wholesome conditions, she must have the blessed quiet, of a home free from the nerve strain of publicity. (Mrs. F. L. Townsend, in the Methodist Review.) As for America, I appeal to the twentieth century. Either some Omar or Napoleon will seize the reins of Government with a strong hand, or your Republic will be as fearfully plundered and laid waste by barbarians in the twentieth century as the Roman Empire was in the fifth century, with this difference, that the Huns and Vandals who ravaged Rome came from without her borders, while your Huns and Vandals will he engendered within your own country and by your own institutions. (Thomas Babington Macaulay.) DR. BLEDSOE'S "MISSION OF WOMAN" AND WOMAN SUFFRAGE. "Of man's whole terrestrial possessions and attainments, unspeakably the noblest are his symbols." THOMAS CARLYLE SPEECH of HON. BENJAMIN R. TILLMAN of South Carolina in the SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES AUGUST 18, 1913 WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1913 6412-12229 SPEECH OF HON. BENJAMIN R. TILLMAN. Mr. TILLMAN. Mr. President, those Senators who served with me here before I was taken ill know that I never read speeches in the Senate, and I regret very much that my physical weakness compels me to do so now. A few days ago I asked permission of the Senate to insert in the RECORD and to have printed as a public document an article entitled "The Mission of Woman," by Dr. Alfred Taylor Bledsoe. When the RECORD appeared the next morning it was found that the article in question contained what many Senators thought was an unkind and unjust reference to northern women. I had not read the entire article before submitting it to the Senate. I had read only the first part, and was struck by the force of the historical references quoted in it as to the cause of the decay and fall of Rome. I felt that the article was very opportune just at this time, and that was why I wanted it given circulation in the RECORD and printed as a public document. On discovering the attitude of my brother Senators toward it, which I can readily see was natural, if not justifiable. I promptly joined them in requesting that it be stricken from the RECORD. I wished to avoid even the appearance of harboring mean thoughts or uncharitable sentiments toward the women of the North. Some of the very finest women I have ever known were northern women; and good women, thank God, are not confined to any section of our great country. They are to be found everywhere in the United States, and they will be the greatest factors in saving our civilization and institutions from degeneracy and destruction. The expunging of the article from the RECORD did not prevent its reaching every part of the United States, for the copies 2 6412-12229 3 containing it had been mailed before the action of the Senate ordering it to be expunged and countermanding the order for it to be printed as a public document had been taken. Comments more or less vitriolic, and some of them unjust and wholly unfair, have come to me through the mail. I have been astounded to see how much ignorance has been shown. Some of the most scholarly northern magazines and periodicals, like the Independent, whose editors ought to be ashamed of their ignorance, discuss "The Mission of Woman" as though it had just appeared, instead of having been published forty-odd years ago. I have received a number of requests for copies of "The Mission of Woman," and I am sorry that the Senate refused to have it printed as a public document, because the action of the Senate expunging it from the permanent RECORD only attracted attention to it the more and caused people to be curious to see what had stirred up all the row in Washington. I have investigated the matter fully, and feel that in justice both to Dr. Bledsoe and to myself I ought to make a further statement. He was a profound scholar, a courteous gentleman, and a godly man; and I feel that it is due his memory to explain fully how the article came to be written and under what circumstances it was given publicity. Dr. Bledsoe died in 1877, so nothing that has been or will be said about "The Mission of Woman" here or elsewhere will affect him in the slightest. He has gone "somewhere past the sunset and the night," to a land where worldly praises can not please nor worldly censures wound or crush. But I want to clear his memory and his name from any suspicion of sectional narrowness of any kind, and above all of narrowness and bigotry toward the women of any part of our common country. A chief tenet of the school in which he was reared was chivalrous respect and reverence for women; and to him a good woman, wherever and under whatever circumstances she might live, was a superior being, a sort of divinity whose high and holy purpose on earth was to bear, to rear, and to mold man into the image of his Maker. In sadness, not in anger, he saw, or thought he saw, northern women surrendering their divinity and high privileges for mere human rights, and as an honest 6412-12229 4 man, true to the training he had received from his own mother and to the ideals which that training had engendered, he kindly but firmly spoke his sentiments. The article first appeared in print in 1871, in the October number of The Southern Review, one of the broadest and most scholarly periodicals of its day. It was the lineal descendant of the once famous DeBow's Review. From 1846 until the close of the Civil War, this latter magazine was a leading exponent of the hopes and aspirations of the South; and when it, mortally wounded, as it were, by the collapse and fall of the Southern Confederacy, suspended publication shortly after the end of the war, the Southern Review was founded to take its place. Dr. Bledsoe was chosen editor of the new periodical, and it was his review of the then newly published "History of Morals," by Lecky, which led his to write "The Mission of Woman." The last chapter of Lecky's history is a very brilliant and profound exposition of the condition, social rights, and political privileges of women in all ages. The criticism, as it appeared in The Southern Review, had been reprinted in pamphlet under the title "The Mission of Woman" by some admirer of Dr. Bledsoe; and Senator JOHNSTON of Alabama - now, alas! gone from us to his long resting place - had come into possession of a copy. He showed it to me and asked me to have it printed as a public document. I glanced through it hurriedly and was so forcibly impressed by the author's apt application of Lecky's facts to the question of woman suffrage, divorce, and materialism, now so apparent everywhere, that I asked to have it printed in the RECORD as well as a public document. I thought it could not be given too wide publicity, because the country needs educating along these lines more than any other just at this time. But Lecky's history was only the occasion of "The Mission of Woman." The real reason for its being written was undoubtedly the deplorable condition of southern politics at that time. As Senators will remember, the reconstruction of the South was completed in 1868. Universal suffrage had been decreed by Congress, and men with Federal uniforms on their backs and rifles in their hands marshaled the newly freed 6412-12229 5 negroes to the polls and directed how they should cast their ballots. Thus, under the leadership of Thad. Stevens and others, the northern fanatics sowed the seed, and by 1871 the harvest of evils and crimes began to ripen. The South, prostrate and bleeding at every pore, her past a hopeless memory of better times, her present a slough of despond, and her future a hideous nightmare - the South, I say, was literally wallowing in violence, corruption, dishonesty, and political debauchery. It was pitiful. The great South - "Than which no fairer land hath fired a poet's lay" - was become a loathsome region, full of hideous sights and sounds and things unholy. Negroes, very few of whom could read or write, and some of them not three generations removed from the jungles of Africa, controlled our legislatures, while white scoundrels and thieves from the North ruled the negroes and robbed our people through them. Many of the magistrates and judges were negroes. The State colleges and universities of the South, maintained by taxation, were controlled by trustees elected by the negro legislatures. Carpet-baggers, scalawags, and negroes were among these trustees, and Dr. Bledsoe and other southerners like him were ready to cry out: Ichabod! thy glory has departed. At the thought of women anywhere, especially of the South, entering this monstrous and filthy arena, Dr. Bledsoe's chivalrous, sensitive spirit recoiled with horror. He pointed to the women of the North, not for what they were but for what they might become and would become if they persisted in their determination to abandon the sphere in which God had placed them. He lifted the kindly finger of warning; he drew the knightly sword of protection; he did not level the brutal pike of censure and condemnation. His scholarly mind appreciated the cause of the decay and rottenness of imperial Rome, and believing that history repeats itself he trembled for his country. I know from experience how hard it is for old men to adopt new notions or to accept new ideals. Visions are for young men; old men can only "dream dreams" and cling to their traditions. They dislike to be rudely awakened and are ever holding back against innovations and changes. The world moves forward, ever for- 6412-12229 6 ward, because the young men will seek to progress. It is the ideal civilization or condition in society when the two forces are equalized, and the young and progressive visionaries are counseled and directed and held back by the wisdom of their seniors. Old men see the world rushing along pell-mell, helter-skelter, "going to the devil," so to speak, and we mourn in spirit. "The old order changeth, yielding place to the new," and the transitions are so rapid and startling that they hurt us cruelly. I am led to make a few remarks on woman suffrage, although it is a dangerous topic to handle just at this time. I flatter myself, however, that my well-known reverence for good women will shield me from being misunderstood. The idea is fast becoming a practical issue, and Senators will realize the importance of our obtaining as much accurate information in regard to it as the nature of the subject will permit. Much valuable data could be obtained in States where the experiment is now being tried. Vital statistics should by all means be gathered in those States where women suffrage already obtains. We ought to have records made of the birth rate, death rate, divorces, and other things affecting the everyday social life of the people, which would in a hundred years, say, show us whether female suffrage has affected these things injuriously or not. Such a radical change as would be produced in the manners and customs of the people by woman suffrage would put in motion influences that would be bound to revolutionize society. It might be, and the woman suffragists claim it will be, beneficial in every way. But it is the duty of statesmen to see that no rash experiments are made; and we ought to watch carefully and study all the facts obtainable in order to reach just conclusions. We can only be enlightened in such matters by the study of history. It would take three or four generations of men and women under woman suffrage before any just conclusions could be reached at to what direction we were going, and then only guesses could be made as to the ultimate results. In Rome when the manners and customs with regard to women began to change, and they were given more privileges than they had ever enjoyed before, divorces were so largely 6412-12229 7 increased that free love became the rule. The birth rate correspondingly decreased, as Lecky's history shows. Now it is a beautiful dream that female suffrage will purify politics, because our ideals of women are so high, and we regard them so absolutely as the sources of goodness and purity, that we can not conceive of their not elevating and helping anything they touch. But the really vital and important thing for us to consider is the effect on the women themselves. We had better endure the evils of corruption in politics and debauchery in our Government, rather than bring about a condition which will mar the beauty and dim the luster of the glorious womanhood with which we have been familiar, and to which we have been accustomed all of our lives. We can better afford to have degraded and corrupt politics than degraded and bad women. To have both in ever-increasing degree, as was the case in Rome, would make the world so unspeakably horrible, as well as so corrupt, that good men and women both would disappear from the face of the earth, and civilization be blotted out like it was in the Dark Ages after the fall of Rome. Indeed, I am so thoroughly in convert to the belief that "you can not touch pitch without being defiled," that I shudder to think of the consequences to the womanhood of America should suffrage become universal, taking in both sexes and all races. Yet the experiments is going to be tried, I fear. I know the demand for suffrage on the part of women is growing too fast for old fogies like me to stop it, except possibly in the South and New England, where conservatism is more strongly intrenched than anywhere else in this country. I believe religiously that whatever the women ask for the men will give them, even though t be to their ultimate injury; and the country will have to test and be tested along these lines in spite of all the theories and ideals which have governed us heretofore. Fortunately, the United States Supreme Court has declared that casting the ballot is a privilege - not a national right - and that the States alone can confer this right on its citizens. Neither the suffragists, nor the suffragettors - as Representative HEFLIN calls their masculine sympathizers - ever consider or 6412-12229 8 seems to pay any regard to the effect of politics on women; but I sincerely believe that the usefulness and goodness of woman vary inversely as the extent of her participation in politics. I believe she will improve politics, but ultimately politics will destroy her as we know her and love her; and when good women are no longer to be found, and we have lost the breed, the doom of the Republic is near. It may be contended that information such as I have described would be partial and fragmentary, and that any conclusions based on it would therefore contain a large factor of uncertainty. That may or may not be true. But there is at least one subject about which mathematically exact knowledge can be obtained. The number of divorces granted in a State with woman suffrage can the birth rate may be compared with the number in the same State before equal suffrage was adopted, and the relation between the two phenomena inferred. I thank God that my lot was cast in a State where there is no such thing as divorce. To get married in South Carolina is the easiest thing imaginable. To get "unmarried" is impossible. "Once married, always married," for better or for worse, in poverty and in wealth, in sickness and in health, till death do them part," the twain are one. It is true that, if life together becomes unbearable, a man and wife may separate and live apart, but even then the bonds that bind them are only stretched, not legally broken. In South Carolina we tie a matrimonial knot that baffles alike the skill of legal logic, the dexterity of sophistry, the nimble fingers of a false expediency, and the brute strength of a statute. The knot we tie holds faster than the fabled "Gordian knot" of antiquity. Ingenuity can not unfasten nor force destroy it. The skeleton fingers of death alone can loose it. We in South Carolina do not believe in the modern idea so prevalent in this day and time of permitting a man to marry a woman in her youth and beauty and then, when her neck begins to grow skinny and shrunken, her face sallow and splotched, and her eyes dim, to search out among his women acquaintances some young and buxom girl who suits his lustful 6412––12229 9 eyes better and straightway set to work, systematically, to treat his old wife so that she in self-defense and to maintain her self-respect seeks a divorce to get rid of him. There have been glaring cases of this kind of world-wide notoriety wherever the divorce evil flourishes. When we contrast this type of man and woman with the glorious picture drawn by Burns, those men who have souls are bound to recoil from the one type and bow down and worship the other. Lest you have forgotten the verses, I will recite them for you: John Anderson my jo, John When we were first acquent, Your locks were like the raven, Your bonie brow was brent; But now your brow is beld, John, Your locks are like the snaw, But blessings on your frosty pow, John Anderson my jo! John Anderson my jo, John, We clamb the hill thegither, and monie a cantle day, John, We've had wi' ane anither; Now we maun totter down, John, And hand in hand we'll go, And sleep thegither at the foot, John Anderson my jo! This son, one of Robert Burns's best, is the very apotheosis of married life among the virtuous and good people of the world. In thinking about the widespread, progressive character of the divorce evil, like all thoughtful men, I have been led to consider the cause of it and the great demoralization which has followed it. The law of sexuality is the most powerful law in nature, and it is the wise provision of the good God who created us with it to compel reproduction, the perpetuation of the race. Wherever the marriage bond is regarded as a sacred one women are virtuous, and virtuous women nearly always make virtuous men, just as good mothers are more apt to raise up brave and noble sons than bad ones. As long as Rome had women of the type of Virginia and Lucretia the Romans conquered all their neighbors and all other nations in Europe. When the women grew to be loose in their virtue, and lost it altogether 6412-12229 10 in many cases, and the women came to be of the type of Nero's mother, who committed incest with her own son, as the historians tell us, Rome rapidly decayed and ceased to be mistress of the world. Therefore, it can be safely claimed that civilization itself is dependent on good women, and by good women I do not mean only amiable women, I mean virtuous women. The divorce evil does not directly affect South Carolina, but our State is the only one that does not permit divorce in some form. North Carolina and Georgia, States on our borders, both grant them, and on increasingly trivial grounds, if report be true. Mr. BACON. I hope the Senator will permit me, in order that what I say may go out in connection with his speech, as he specially mentions my State, to day two things. In the first place, divorce is not respectable in Georgia-- Mr. TILLMAN. The Senator means divorced people are not respectable. Mr. BACON. I mean the institution of divorce. Mr. TILLMAN. How is it that anything the Legislature of Georgia has enacted into law is not respectable? Mr. BACON. Will the Senator permit me to make a remark? I do not want to enter into a colloquy with him. Mr. TILLMAN. I will sit down while the Senator proceeds. Mr. BACON. If it excites the Senator at all, I will not interrupt him. Mr. TILLMAN. The Senator knows my weakened condition, and I have been hurrying to get through. The Senator can make his explanation after I have finished. Mr. BACON. I beg the Senator's pardon. Mr. TILLMAN My State is a lonely isle, surrounded on all sides by a turbid flood of raging, maddened waters; and lest we, too, be submerged, I would see the waters subside and the dry land appear, and under the blessed rays of God's moral sunshine would behold once again over our whole country the fruits and flowers of domestic peace, love, and affection, confidence, joy and contentment. I beg Senators' pardon for having digressed. But as I was going on to say, statistics on the number of divorces granted in States where women have the vote would be very valuable. It 6412-12229 11 would enable us to see the connection between woman suffrage and family life. It appears to me that the relation between "votes for women" and divorce, if not one of cause and effect, is at least one of mutual acceleration. I am no pessimist, but I am enough of a scientist to accept the truth wherever I find it, be it pleasant or unpleasant, and I have read history to no purpose if it has not taught me that the purity and stability of the family has in all ages been the surest bulwark of the State. It has ever been that when the marriage relation became insecure and women quitted their own sphere to enter that of man, the decay and fall of States followed. So often has this happened that I must believe that the one set of events is the result of the other. I have, therefore, sounded this feeble note of warning. As Hannibal gazed mournfully on the bloody head of his dead brother. Hasdrubal, which the Romans threw over the wall into his camp, and prophetically exclaimed, "Carthage, I see thy fate," so I, looking at the growing craze of woman suffrage and the rapid increase in the number of divorces granted in this country, sadly think, if I do not say, "America, thy race is almost run unless something is done to check thy headlong speed." The demoralization and consequent degradation which has been produced by the divorce evil are illustrated by the notorious Diggs-Caminetti affair in California. The ease with which divorces are obtained in Reno led to the place being selected as the one to carry the two once respectable girls from Sacramento, and the promise to marry these women after divorces were obtained no doubt had much to do with overcoming their scruples. Such a tragedy in domestic life could not happen at all in South Carolina. It could not happen anywhere in the South, even in those States where divorces are obtained, and I say it in no boasting spirit. We have bad women in South Carolina and throughout the South. But the habits of our people and their customs, inherited from our forefathers, all make it dangerous to "monkey with men's womankind." Some northern people call us barbarians because we shoot the seducer and lynch the rapist. If the California men had our customs Diggs and Caminetti would 6412-12229 12 not be alive now, because they would have been shot like dogs, and the fathers of the girls they have ruined would be acquitted almost without the jury leaving the box. The "unwritten law," as it has been called, is the best law to protect woman's virtue that I have ever heard of, though there have been abuses of it and men at times have gone scot free who ought to have been punished. The more I think about the Diggs-Caminetti case, the more outraged I grow at the state of morals and society which not only permits such crimes but encourages them. I am too much of a savage myself to think upon such things with calmness and equanimity. However, this case is now being tried, and perhaps I ought not to comment on it. But I am speaking as I do, not for the purpose of influencing the jury or public opinion for or against the men who are indicted. I am only using the case to illustrate the argument I am making on the demoralizing effects of woman suffrage and easy divorces. Among our very rich people in America degeneration and bestiality have gone so far that swapping wives is a common practice. Family life is no longer what it ought to be and once was, and the watering places by the seaside and hotel resorts in the mountains afford opportunities for getting acquainted with other men's wives and other women's husbands. Lust takes the place of love, with the result that divorces are soon arranged and the swap is perfected under the forms of law. The women are just as bad as the men and divorce their husbands on any slight pretext if they come across a man they like better who makes love to them. A most disgraceful and mortifying fact which every American must blush for is to see how the American millionaires are buying their daughters titled husbands. Some count, baron, or lord, no matter how much of a debauchee and scoundrel he may be, but always with an empty purse, is looked up by the rich father and purchased in the open market just as he would purchase a bull or a stallion. The woman submits to legal prostitution for a time. Then the titled debauchee whose relatives have sneered at the plebian wife all along are relieved of her presence. She finds a title a poor substitute for manhood and love and tires of her bargain. A divorce follows, 6412-12229 13 and the unnatural alliance between money and scoundrelism is ended. O, the shame of it! but that is the way modern society is "progressing." God save the mark! To me such people seem to be going straight to hell, and I am no stickler for religion either. I only abhor from the bottom of my soul the degradation and rottenness now becoming too common in society. The danger, if danger there be, in giving woman the ballot at all is increased by the cowardice of public men everywhere. Politicians the world over have always had a keen eye to see which way they think the people are going; and it seems to me that the men politicians are trying to make peace with the women politicians and get on their good side now while it is fair weather. I noticed in Saturday's paper that the headlines threatened dire consequences hereafter to any public man who dared oppose the demand for woman suffrage now. I am afraid some of the weak-kneed men will be influenced in their attitude on this momentous subject by this fear. No man who is a man worth standing in shoe leather will be influenced by any such motive, and only cowards will yield their convictions and vote to give the women the ballot unless they believe honestly that it is for the best interests of the women and of the country. The history of the world is full of "crazes," or what they now call obsessions. The crusades are an illustration of what I mean. Peter the Hermit, a fanatical monk, who was very eloquent, aroused the religious fervor of the Christians in western Europe to such a pitch that hundreds of thousands enlisted for the holy war against the infidels. No doubt this fervor was necessary to prevent the crescent from supplanting the cross. It was like two storms coming from opposite directions and meeting. The Saracens overran Egypt and northern Africa and crossed the Strait of Gibraltar into Spain. They crossed Spain and invaded France, and were only beaten back by Charles Martel, who defeated them at the Battle of Tours. It was six centuries before the Moors were expelled from the Spanish Peninsula and compelled to return to Africa. Later when the Turks had conquered Constantinople the followers of the crescent overran southeastern Europe up to the 6412-12229 14 walls of Vienna, where the rising tide of Mohammedanism was checked and beaten back by John Sobieski, the hero King of Poland. After centuries of enslavement to the followers of the crescent, Christianity triumphed and the so-called Christian people of the Balkan Peninsula with the aid of Russia regained their independence. The liberty of Greece and the restoration of its kingdom came about in 1820 largely through the help of England. The recent war in the Balkans has wrested almost all of that peninsula from the Turks, but there was so little Christianity, patriotism, and sense among the allied nationalities that radical and religions prejudices and hatreds brought on a fratricidal strife among themselves to the disgust and horror of all Christendom. Patriotism and love of liberty drove them to combine against the Turks, and their preparedness and valor surprised the world. After winning great victories, each of the four small nations covering itself with glory, peace was forced upon Turkey, with the loss of all but a small slice of her territory in Europe. Then the pitiable spectacle was presented of their fighting each other like cats and dogs over the carcass they had brought down together. This last war cost more blood and treasure, perhaps, than the first one, but there was no glory in it for anybody. It is probable that another will soon break out, for those peoples seem hardly half civilized. In one of the crusades the children were crazed by the priests and tens of thousands of them gathered and began to march toward the East. What they could do after they got there never seemed to enter their minds at all. They were simply lunatics frenzied with the religious idea, and thus made into fanatics. First and last, historians tell us that upward of 1,100,000 people perished. The pitiful story is told that five shiploads of these children who started for Palestine were sold into slavery to the infidels by their so-called Christian leaders. The greater part of the rest of the children died from exposure and starvation. It may not be worth while to recall these things, and I only mention them for the purpose of directing attention to the 6412-12229 15 dangerous forces which are being set in motion by those who are preaching and agitating for female suffrage. Priests and princes for their own selfish purposes appealed to the religious instinct for the people and produced a thousand years of war, bloodshed, and horror; selfish and sordid politicians of to-day, by appealing and yielding to the beautiful but fatuous idea of "woman's rights," may usher in another thousand years of moral blight and sexual depravity and degradation. I am aware that in reciting all these horrid and cruel things I am chargeable with making a jeremiad or lament for the decay of our civilization. To others there may be no appearance of decay at all. I may be blinded or giving way to vain imaginings, but it seems to me very real, and I speak my thoughts frankly and bluntly as I have always done, for I was taught by my mother long ago to always tell the truth and to shun anything like hypocrisy, falsehood, or double-dealing. "Of man's whole terrestrial possessions and attainments, unspeakably the noblest are his symbols," says Thomas Carlyle, and his highest earthly symbol is woman. She is his goddess of innocence and purity, and if ever she steps down, or man removes her from her high place at our altars, then God have mercy upon us, for the golden bowl of purity will be broken; the silver of chord of chastity will be loosed; the sound of mourning will be heard in the streets; and the "reign of Chaos and old Night" will have come. I pray God my foreboding of evil and prophecies of disaster may never come true. I would depart when my time shall come with much more confidence in the future of my country if I could believe that the women of our great land would always remain as pure and as high as most of them now are. Mr. OVERMAN. Mr. President, I wish to say right here that the Senator from South Carolina has been misinformed in regard to North Carolina. I doubt if there is a State in the Union, except South Carolina, that has so few legal causes for divorce as North Carolina. I wish to say to the Senator, 6412/12229 16 also, that several years ago, I regret to say, we did have many causes for divorce. Some, in the language of the Senator, were trivial. They have all been repealed except two— Mr. TILLMAN. Thank God! Mr. OVERMAN. And now there are but two legal causes for divorce in my State—impotence and adultery. 6412—12229 Pennsylvania THE INJUSTICE of the Federal Suffrage Amendment To many people it is not quite clear just what the Federal Suffrage Amendment is and how the suffragists aim to secure it. Such an amendment to the Constitution of the United States would make woman suffrage universal throughout the country without giving the people and opportunity to vote upon it. It is necessary for the passage of such an amendment that it should secure a two-thirds vote in the House of Representatives and in the Senate, and that it should be signed by the President. It then goes before the Legislatures of all the states, and of 36 of these endorse it, it becomes a law in all the states. That is, if the Legislatures of 36 of the smaller and more sparsely settled states will endorse the amendment, woman suffrage can be forced upon the millions of people in Massachusetts, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, Missouri, Iowa, Nebraska, North and South Dakota, where suffrage has recently been defeated by big majorities. When the Federal Constitution was framed, its makers left the question of suffrage to the several states. Except for the abortive Fifteenth Amendment, it has always remained with the states. The reasons are obvious. It is the state governments and the local governments which touch most closely the daily lives of the people, and the national government is merely representative of the voters of these states. Conditions varied in the different states in respect to property, to education and to industry. It was evident that there could be no universal qualifications of suffrage, and that the people of each state must judge for themselves how far the franchise ought to be extended. They have so judged, and their Constitutions, ratified by popular vote, have fixed the standards of suffrage. If the states are to be stripped of all power to regulate the franchise which controls their governments, it is hardly worth while to maintain the states. They have been deprived of the fundamental authority over their own institutions which gives them stability. When the day comes that the people of a state can no longer say who is to vote and who is not to vote in a local election, the state might as well shut up shop and give all its domestic affairs into the hands of an omniscient and omnipotent Congress. Why have the suffragists resorted to this method, which so obviously controverts the will of the people? Simply because it is their last hope. They have failed utterly to convince the women of the country of the desirability of entering politics. On the only occasion on which a state referendum of the women has been taken on woman suffrage - in Massachusetts in 1895 - only four per cent. of the women voted in favor. The suffragist leaders of Massachusetts admit that this set back their cause twenty-five years! Since that time suffragists everywhere strenuously oppose allowing the women to vote on this question. Christabel Pankhurst frankly admitted that a referendum to the women would be a dose of cold poison to the cause. In this crisis the thing for anti-suffragists to do is to carry on with renewed vigor and energy the campaign of education which made possible their splendid victories in 1915 and 1916; to point out the serious evils of woman suffrage where it has been tried - the weakening of government in Colorado, the increasing immorality in Chicago and San Francisco, the demoralization of the public schools in Chicago, owing to the teachers entering politics; to show that democracy itself is at stake, and that for the electorate to surrender its rights to decide for itself a question of such tremendous importance as woman suffrage would augur ill for the future of our Republic. If the facts and their extreme seriousness can be brought to the voters, they can be depended upon to defeat this pernicious attempt to force woman suffrage upon them against their will. If you are opposed to votes for women, write to your representatives in Congress and in the Legislature, also to candidates for office, urging them to oppose all woman suffrage measures. For information and literature, apply to Pennsylvania Association Opposed to Woman Suffrage 1324 Widener Building, Philadelphia, PA. "80 Per Cent. of the Women in California Do Not Want the Vote" Mrs. Frederick H. Colburn, Press Chairman of the San Francisco District of the Federation of Women's Clubs. Leading Federationist Considers Conditions Before and Since Equal Suffrage and Sees Possibility of Reaction That May Lead to Abolition of Franchise - Notes Marked Effect on Individual Women. Reprinted by permission from the Brooklyn Daily Eagle, October 4, 1915. There are a lot of women in California, and especially in San Francisco, who remain to be converted to equal suffrage, although the question is supposed to have been settled when the men voters of the State extended the franchise to women. There is no organized opposition to equal suffrage in San Francisco, but there are women who have never ceased to raise their voice against the granting of suffrage. Some, having opposed women suffrage on principle, now base their opposition upon actual experience. Mrs. Frederick H. Colburn, press chairman of the San Francisco district of the Federation of Women's Clubs, is a pronounced "anti." She votes, she says, because she feels it her duty to do so, but she feels more strongly than ever that the granting of equal suffrage was a mistake. Mrs. Colburn is known as a lecturer and archaeologist, and has written several books dealing with Indian legends. "Yermah, the Dorado," is one of these, written under the name of Frona Eunice Wait. Says Women Take Very Little Interest in Elections. "Women take very little interest in election, and the registration at the present time, if it shows any increase over the past, is easily explained. The last election was on the question of issuing bonds for Spring Valley water. This was preceded by a lot of agitation. One of the curious things about the campaign was that this was one reform measure that has been voted down. "Some of the shining suffrage lights were especially active before election. They hired jitneys and went down on the waterfront and harangued crowds and urged them to vote for the measure. When the returns were all in it was found that it was the working element, in the sections where the suffragists had done their campaigning, that had voted it down. It had been supported in other districts. "This year there has been a heavy registration because of interest in the non-partisan election bill. By the passage of this measure Governor Johnson hopes to prolong his hold in the State by abolishing all the old parties. You know the Republicans were disfranchised at the last Presidential election. There were no Republicans on the ballot, and we were not allowed to vote for Taft. This non-partisan measure has been forced upon the people at a cost of $750,000 in an effort to perpetuate the Johnson machine. Women Going to Put the Quietus on Governor Johnson They Say. "The people in other States say that in matters of government if there is anything so wild that Kansas doesn't do it, California will. But there are a lot of really sane people here, and there is going to be a line up on the Johnson programme. There are plenty of members of the Republican, Democratic, Prohibition and Socialist parties, and they all object to being wiped out. There has been talk of help from national parties, but we are going to put the quietus on Governor Johnson ourselves. It is our problem and we are going to settle it. "All this has a direct bearing upon woman suffrage in California. The State Federation of Women's Clubs was made a part of the Johnson machine. It was certain women, in the organization, working with Johnson who 'put over' suffrage, but their power is growing beautifully less. There was a split in the Federation at the convention in May over this very question. The Federation has 35,000 members. There are about 6,000 members in the San Francisco district. The constitution especially prescribes that there shall be no political or religious activity. "The question of political activity was brought up at the convention and tabled by as smooth a bit of sharp practice as could be imagined. It was simply 'raw,' and women from the interior never knew what was being done. Tammany methods are tame by comparison. Naturally there were some angry women and they were silent, but they soon brought results. The Ebell Club of Los Angeles, with a membership of 1,500, the largest club and the mother club of the district, withdrew from the Federation, because certain women were trying to use the Federation for political purposes. "Other clubs are in sympathy with the Ebell Club, and if it rejoins the Federation, as it probably will, it will be for the purpose of maintaining its standing in order to fight the Johnson machine. At the next convention you may look for a warm time. The matter will be put squarely before the convention. Convinced 80 Per Cent. of Women in State Do Not Want Suffrage. "I am convinced that 80 per cent. of the women of the State do not want suffrage. The suffragists prove that themselves by keeping up the agitation here. The latest, the Woman's Voters' Convention, which was really the Congressional Union, was a farce, and broke up in a row. The figures at the exposition gates show that the attendance was not 500 above the normal weekday totals. If it had not been for a certain curiosity to see Mrs. Belmont it would not have been as large as that. I don't believe there are fifty members of the Congressional Union here. "The rank and file of suffragists realize that they have to continue to keep up interest in California. I vote because I feel that, as it was forced upon us, we should use it, and because my husband asked me to at the last election. We exchanged ideas; he advised me on certain points and accepted my views on others, and we marked our ballots alike. But if we had a referendum now I would vote against suffrage, based upon actual experience. "You have only to consider the position of women before and since equal suffrage. Take their legal status: Before, a widow could file a homestead on her husband's estate and exempt $5,000 from any debt whatever. To-day a wife may be sued for alimony; she must assume responsibility and pay rent and house bills if her husband fails to do so. It is possible for a husband to run her into debt. He may even buy a ring for another woman and make his wife pay for it. A wife can not exempt a single cent, and if her husband dies she is liable for his debts. If she acquires property later, it can be taken from her to pay the husband's creditors. If the husband goes bankrupt the wife is liable. "This has come since women have had the franchise. Women do not begin to have the same status in law. If they are citizens they must expect that. They can not go to court as they used to and weep a little and play upon the sympathies of a judge and jury, and get a verdict. "Women take very little interest in elections. There are fully 100,000 eligible women voters in San Francisco. How many of them ever register or vote? The registration at its heaviest shows that the interest and excitement ment is all over and the percentage of those who oppose suffrage is larger than before. There is no organized effort against it for the reason that most of us feel that if it is left alone it will fall through of its own dead weight. I see a possibility of a reaction that may lead to the abolition of suffrage here. No one knows that better than the suffragist leaders, who keep on agitating. "Red Light Conditions Worse Than Before" "One thing that women fought for and put through was the red light abatement law. Conditions are worse now than before. "A large majority of business women are opposed to voting, for they feel that women do now know enough about public affairs to vote intelligently. As to what suffrage has done for women, as women, I must say that they have become postmistresses of every bit of political trickery. They have learned the art of 'plumping', of picking one name on a ticket and voting so that the candidate who gets the woman vote will run ahead of his ticket. And still I don't believe there is a suffragist leader in the State who could state clearly the difference in principles of the national parties. They are not concerned with national issues, or principles. They are out for what they can gain. Effect of Women Suffrage on the Individual Woman. "The effect upon the individual woman has been marked. It has put lines in her face; sharpened her temper; given her a hawk-like expression, and lowered the whole tone of the public relationship of men and women. Women now stand in the cars; they are crowded away from ticket windows; men have ceased to remove their hats in elevators, and in other ways have altered their attitude. That is a permanent result, and it is a high price for women to pay for the right to vote. "The thing that hurts me most is the silent, stunned attitude of men toward women to-day. They look at women as though wondering what she would do next. You see it in the attitude of employers to women, who no longer show them deference, since they now insist upon taking care of themselves. Men rush ahead of women to board cars, and it is the old-school man who opens a door or lifts his hat. These are some of the results of equal suffrage and agitation for the equality of men and women that have come under my observation." Issued by THE PENNSYLVANIA ASSOCIATION OPPOSED TO WOMAN SUFFRAGE 1108 Finance Building, Philadelphia, Pa. Judge W. H. Snell of Tacoma, Washington, says Woman Suffrage is a Failure. "I favored woman suffrage in Washington and voted for it. But, in common with thousands of others who looked at the question as an abstract proposition, and hoped for the best, I am so greatly disappointed at the way it has worked out that I would to-day welcome and opportunity to vote for its withdrawal; and I believe if it were resubmitted to the people of Washington, and every man and woman of voting age were compelled to vote upon it, woman suffrage would be defeated by an overwhelming majority. "Many of us were led to support woman suffrage in Washington by the familiar argument that it would tend to purify politics and make for better government. But, after four years of experience we are forced to conclude that it has done neither. "In Washington we have found that the same motives which control men in their exercise of the franchise also control women. Women are hired to do political work at so much per day, just as men are hired, except that women work cheaper. Women are actuated in their use of the ballot by the same selfish motives as men, and they look forward to securing political 'plums' for themselves or relatives in return for their political influence, just as men do--and they get their reward, too. "Our experience with woman suffrage in Washington is that women divide on public questions just as men divide, and when I say public questions I mean to include moral questions. And they are at least as inconsistent and vacillating in their judgments as men. In Seattle the women tied up with the ministers and secured the recall of Hy Gill; and then, when he became a candidate for the same office at the next election women gave him their hearty support and elected him. "In Tacoma the women tied up with the saloon element and secured the recall of Mayor Fawcett, and then when he became a candidate for re-election they worked and voted for him and he was returned." --From Boston Post, March 31, 1915. [OVER] WHY WOMEN OPPOSE VOTES FOR WOMEN Suffrage is not a question of right or of justice for the individual, but of what is best for the state and for all within the state. The demand for the ballot is made by only a small minority of women and the majority of women do not want it. The great advance of women in the last century--moral, intellectual and economic--has been made without the ballot, which goes to prove that the ballot is not needed for their further advancement along the same lines. Women, standing outside of politics, and therefore free to appeal to any party, are able to achieve reforms of greater benefit to the state than they could possibly achieve by working along partisan political lines. Woman suffrage has always added greatly to the percentage of stay- at-home voters--the greatest possible menace to government--and increased cost of government within any counterbalancing good. The basis of government is physical force. It isn't law, but law enforcement, that protects society, and the physical power to enforce the law is neither possible nor desirable for women. For information and literature, apply to Pennsylvania Association Opposed To Woman Suffrage 1108 Finance Building, Philadelphia [Over] DO YOU OWN YOUR OWN HOME? Do you want taxes so high that you cannot afford to own property? Do you want taxes so high that you cannot sell your property because no one else can afford to own it? Woman Suffrage brings enormous taxes and great hardship to property owners. Read what happens in the communities where woman suffrage has doubled the cost of elections and increased enormously the cost of city and state government. IN ILLINOIS taxes have increased in some places 190 per cent. in the four years since women have voted. IN COLORADO taxes are so heavy that property is unsalable. A Denver real estate company in a business advertisement in November, 1915, says: "Fine houses and properties are for sale at any price you may offer. Lots in the best sections that sold for $500 each twenty years ago now beg for buyers at $50 each. Values have been squashed to a pulp. The cause is not hard to locate. It is hysteria, social, political and industrial." A Massachusetts man who owns fifty lots in the environs of Denver has decided to abandon them utterly rather than pay the enormous taxes levied on them. The Rocky Mountains News (Denver) of November 24th, 1916, says that land in Denver "was never so low as it is today. It is exceptionally depreciated in every section of the city." The same paper said, on January 29th, 1917: "Denver realty is at the bottom rung now." IN CALIFORNIA since 1910 the cost of government has increased 101 per cent. The population in the same time has increased only 19 per cent. Women have voted in California since 1911. The Seattle Post-Intelligencer of March 17th, 1917, says: "San Francisco, Los Angeles, Portland and Seattle, as well as Tacoma and other smaller cities along the coast, are all struggling with the same problem of expensive and inefficient government. It has become an issue of importance to all of them because tax rates have reached such high levels as to interfere with growth and progress." The Los Angeles Times of December 6th, 1916, said: "The gross cost, net cost and departmental cost of state government had doubled in California during six years of Progressive rule. Promised twice the efficiency at half expense, we have received half the efficiency at twice the expense." The Seattle Post-Intelligencer of March 24th, 1917, says: "In ten years the value of real estate and improvements in the city (San Francisco) has increased 58.5 per cent., population has increased 22.5 per cent., and tax collections have increased 159 per cent. The variety of [*Return this to me Edna B.*] record is, of course, a heavy handicap to city growth and progress and is discouraging to investments and to new citizenship." Under the heading: "The Rapidly Growing Burden of Municipal Taxation," the San Francisco Chronicle of April 2nd, 1917, prints a full page article on the alarming financial situation in San Francisco, where taxes have mounted within the last few years to a height which is paralyzing to development. It says: "The owner of a house and lot which represents years of self-denial is beginning to ask himself whether his thrift is benefiting him when he finds that an increasing tax rate, necessary repairs and incidentals cost him as much as he formerly paid in rent, and when he reaches the conclusion, as he often does, that it would pay him to sell his little holding, he learns to his surprise that there are so many of like mind that he can find no purchaser. "These are unpleasant facts to dwell upon, but they should be stared in the face, and an earnest attempt should be made to ascertain the cause of the trouble, with the view of abating the evil, for it will be conceded that any system of government, or lack of system, which discourages home building and militates against the desirability of investing in real estate must prove prejudicial to the best interests of the city. In 1916-17 the rate for city purposes was nearly double that of ten years ago, and this year it promises to be still larger." In Portland, Oregon, where women vote, it takes 47 columns of fine type to print the list of men whose property in that one county is to be sold for taxes! Real estate dealers are protesting against having the list published, as it gives a community such a black eve. The Oregon Journal says sarcastically: "It is a tremendous encouragement to an intending homeseeker to read forty-seven straight columns, set in fine type, of men in Portland who cannot get enough money to pay their part toward the support of government. It gives a wonderful boost to real estate values to have forty-seven columns of Portland property advertised to the world as near the mire of bankruptcy." Do you want these condition in your state? If not Wake Up and Defeat Woman Suffrage For information and literature apply to Pennsylvania Association OPPOSED TO Woman Suffrage 1324 Widener Building, Philadelphia SPEECH of Hon. Stanley E. Bowdle DELEGATE FROM HAMILTON COUNTY ON WOMAN SUFFRAGE BEFORE THE OHIO CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION REPRINTED BY The Pennsylvania Association Opposed to Woman Suffrage 261 SOUTH FIFTEENTH STREET PHILADELPHIA Speech of Hon. Stanley E. Bowdle Delegate from Hamilton County, on Woman suffrage Ohio Constitutional Convention MR. PRESIDENT AND GENTLEMEN: The time has been so shortened by the attitude of the proponents of suffrage that I have reduced my address, with some difficulty, within the ten minutes prescribed. But I beg leave to ask that should appear to be about to exceed the limit, that some "dry" advocate who the other day denounced me, arise and graciously move to extend my time a minute or two. A vote for or against this proposition does not necessarily indicate one's position on the ultimate question of the feminine franchise. Several classes are represented in this Convention. There are those who oppose suffrage, but are willing to submit the question to the people. There are those who oppose suffrage, but are unwilling to submit the question to the people, because they do oppose it, and who feel that they can not in good conscience present issues to the people in which they themselves do not believe. There are those who do not oppose it, but are opposed to submitting the question because it may offer to the enemies of the new Constitution simply another argument with which to defeat the document. (These persons believe that their full duty is done when they give the Initiative and Referendum as a means through which Women's Suffrage may be gotten.) There are those who do not oppose it, but believe that the question should be submitted to the women themselves. Such men accept the position of such noted persons as Lyman Abbott and Theodore Roosevelt. Representative government is an undefined thing. Who is represented by the representatives? If he is "unpledged," does he represent his own view? If so, ninety per cent. of those who voted for me are opposed to feminine suffrage. Does he represent the women who did not vote for him, and who (as in my case) denounced him publicly? Well, hardly. Why should he not say that he represents that vast mass of women, wives and mothers who are opposed to the suffrage? Are they not worthy of representation? One has extreme difficulty in defining just what is meant by representative government. 4 I stand with Judge Worthington. I should favor feminine suffrage is a majority requested it under a referendum taken by them. You have all heard a great noise in the barnyard, but on looking it was one egg only. So with this apparently great clamor for the ballot. It was just a handful of vocally gifted persons. Are women represented in the State? Are women represented in the cabs of our locomotives? Ah, yes. Are women represented in the wheelhouses and engine rooms of our ocean liners? Are women represented on the frontiers of medicine by proper surgeons? (A woman would not care to have a woman surgeon operate on her.) Are women represented at front in war? Are women represented by men on juries? Why, men give her a more liberal deal than any jury of women would give her. Are women represented on the bench of America? They know that they are. Are they represented in the great departments of thought and philosophy? Ah, yes. Yes, that plain fellow, man, is there struggling for her. Represented! When did the race become divided? When did our interests become severed? This severance of sex interest is not a reassuring political symptom. Is not man represented in the home? Yea, verily, and by his wife and sisters. Is not she represented in the state? Yea, verily, and by husband and brothers. He is represented in the home by one of superior sex morality--sex virtue adapted to the maintenance of the home. She is represented in the State by one of superior pecuniary and contractual honor--adapted to the maintenance of the State. All this is the Divine order. Away, then, with these comparisons? There can be none. The race is mystically one--in the eye of Him before whom there is neither "male nor female, barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free." It is curious to observe how Lincoln seems to have said something on every question of reform--even on reform undreamed of in his day. (Every human reform is strangely like the anti-slavery movement, and hence each reformer of consequence is by analogy a Wendell Phillips or a Lucretia Mott.) The member from Trumbull County quoted Lincoln on the suffrage movement, but I assume that the question may 5 have been handed to him by a suffragette, for it was far from correct. What Lincoln said was this: "I go for all sharing the privileges of the government, who assist in bearing its burdens, consequently I go for admitting all whites to the right of suffrage, who pay taxes or bear arms, by no means excluding females." These words, limiting the franchise to white and taxpayers, are found in the New Salem Journal of June 13, 1836, and are quoted by Ida Tarbell, page 127, in her "Life of Lincoln" - Miss Tarbell being an anti-suffragist. Here was a most aristocratic view of the franchise, used by the suffragists as a most democratic view. Yes, I agree with the distinguished member from Hamilton, Judge Peck. It is no longer a joke. It is war. As the very Rev. Anna Shaw said: "It is bullets for ballots." Any one who reads the reports from London will understand how correct Judge Peck really is about it. It is a sex war. No, no, let me not say that. It is a mere handful of women breaking windows, assaulting government ministers - a coterie whose (possible and soon) presence at the ballot box has already served to bring about a curious condition of mental obsequiousness among men, so on the floor of this Convention we hear members vociferate "it is a perfect enigma that any man can take the other side of this question." "He must have some sinister motive." I tell you the whole movement is but part of the effeminate superficiality of this generation. This superficiality finds its consummation in the present masculine abasement now witnessed in America and here on this floor. "Women are more capable than men." "Women are more honorable than men." "Women live on a higher plane than men." "Women are more moral than men." "Women will purify the ballot." And so on ad nauseam. And when an obsequious bower to women is asked whether he would care to go to war at the request of a female President or female Senator, he deftly avoids the issue by saying, "Woman is greater than the soldier, because she produces the soldier." What an answer! I say to you who approve this effeminate spirit of the age, why don't you be just and right about it; why don't you agree to turn over this government to women, if they are indeed your superiors - why not have woman justices, woman President, woman Senators? Ah, no, even you do not bow so obsequiously as this - your trembling knees will not kink thus far. You assert that Female Suffrage will accomplish tremendous things. I deny it. It is impossible. In political and 6 pecuniary matters women are quite as selfish as men. And, as Judge Peck admitted frankly, in the broad contractual matters of life they are really less careful. Denver - where for twenty years women have voted for everything from President to poundmaster - is as corrupt as Philadelphia. Don't think for an instant that I blame women with this. Ah, no. I speak of it because it denies the wonderful purity and excellence of female voting. Judge Lindsey's book, "The Beast," was written but a year ago. It tells of Colorado politics for the past ten years. And, mark you, he tells how Senatoress Alma Lafferty and the Hon. Mary Bradford, two suffragettes, stumped Colorado against him. When women exercise the governmental function, a change quickly comes over her entire status. Now her fortune, as a wife, is immune from the husband's creditors (for all family accounts). This came some time ago in Colorado. It is evident that when women occupy these halls side by side with men - when the wife's vote may veto the husband's - when she votes for the war which men must fight - it is evident, I say, that when this comes about, her entire stage and status change. She then becomes the pecuniary head of the house. Here in Ohio the wife has a dower interest in every piece of real estate owned by the husband. In Colorado she has no such interest. He can sell every acre he has free from the wife's claim, save only the homestead. When she assumed the governmental function, she consented to enter the arena of the individualistic struggle where there is no sex known. The legal curtain fell from about her. Why, when women got the ballot in Colorado it took many years for the good women to stop the outcast women vote. Denver has a large abandoned woman vote. The prevailing gang used to vote them by the hackloads. It was merely another evil added to the electorate. I stand here as the apostle of the old man - mere man - tyrannical man. The old fellow who brings home the rent - who eats out of a kettle at noon - and fills it with kindling to carry home in the evening. The old fellow who pays for the food and heat and light, who puts up the insurance premiums, and occasionally wrestles with a chattel mortgage - and who does trifling things like that. I represent the old fellow about whom little poetry is written, who buys the millinery and high- priced clothes, and theatre tickets, who gets black looks when the struggle gets hard and the money short. I stand here for that common old fellow who has gallantly made a legal condition of refuge for women, who has secured for them an 7 interest in his property so that he can not mortgage or dispose of his own without woman's consent. The old duffer who has created a condition of refuge where she, and her private fortune, are immune even from creditors who have furnished her the very food she eats and Paris clothes that she wears - that old fellow, that tyrant, who has secured to her all rights of contract enjoyed by himself, all the privileges of civil life with few of its duties or responsibilities - the old codger who furnishes the world with a meal ticket, who struggles on amid a harsh civilization while multitudes of (her) parade our streets, wearing beautiful clothing. I stand here as the apostle of the old fellow who has hewn the wood and drawn the water, who has tunneled our mountains, who has bridged our rivers, who has built our railroads, who has endured the privations of construction camps, who has breathed the compressed air in caissons, who has united our continents by marvelous marine greyhounds, who has with infinite thought and back-breaking labor constructed the astonishing apparatus of civilization, and all that is worthy, up-to-date in government, and who now stands in the presence of it all wearing plain clothes, holding up horny hands, weary in body and mind, quietly receiving the assurances that he is indeed a tyrant. That plain old fellow I stand for who has fought the bloody battles of the world, who has filled the war trenches with himself - who in times of peace and in hours of prosperity has not sought for or married duchesses, or princesses of the blood, who has married American women. Yes, I represent him who has lied for and died for women, him who in America is so gallant toward her that a jury (of him) will not believe him when a woman is involved, and this though he knows full well that in court and out of it she is quite as capable of dissimulation as himself. Let me give you a picture of a true woman, as she existed in Solomon's day, and lasted down to the days of our own mothers. Solomon says (Proverbs: 31, 10) "Who can find a virtuous woman? for her price is far above rubies." "The heart of her husband doth safely trust in her, so that he shall have no need of spoil." "She will do him good and not evil all the days of her life." "She seeketh wool, and flax, and worketh willingly with her hands." "She riseth also while it is yet night, and giveth meat to her household, and a portion to her maidens." 8 “She considereth a field and buyeth it: with the fruit of her hands she planteth a vineyard.” “She perceiveth that her merchandise is good: her candle goeth not out by night.” “She stretcheth out her hand to the poor; yea, she reacheth forth her hands to the needy.” “She layeth her hands to the spindle, and her hands hold the distaff.” “Her husband is known in the gates, when he sitteth among the elders of the land.” “She openeth her mouth with wisdom, and in her tongue is the law of kindness.” “She looketh well to the ways of her household, and eateth not the bread of idleness.” “Her children arise up and call her blessed; her husband also, and he praiseth her.” “She layeth her hands to the spindle, and her fingers hold the distaff.” Not a bit of it. She layeth hold of a brick and assaulted the Prime Minister. “She looketh well to her household.” Not a bit of it; she reacheth for the Home Secretary and pulleth his whiskers. “Her husband is known in the gates.” Forget it. He is the mollycoddle of the community, and doeth the housework. He spendeth his leisure hours telling of her superiority. Oh, yes the home is great and women are great, and our homes were great, yes, greater in former days—the days of our mothers, when there was no clamor for the ballot. Is the home today as great as in former days? Gentlemen, pause! Be honest! The deplorable state of the home is the doleful sociological fact of this feverish hour, yet in spite of all, I say that if the women of America really desire the ballot, they must be given it, and I should not stand in the way of their evolution. But they do not desire it now. I have done. Suffrage vs. Taxation From an article by Dr. Rossiter Johnson, quoted in The Unpopular Review for January-March, 1916. “But,” says a woman who seeks to a voter, “I own property, and I pay taxes on it, and I cannot think that taxation without representation is just.” There Are Two Kinds of Taxes, a money tax, and a service tax. The service tax is levied on men alone. It calls for jury service, police service, military service, and every man takes his chances on it. Representation goes with this kind of taxation, and not with the other. Property is protected by the Government, as women are; but property, whether man’s or woman’s, has no representation. Mr. Astor has one vote, the sweeper has one vote, and I have one vote. And the Reason is Plain and Unanswerable It is because Mr. Astor can carry one musket, the sweeper can carry one musket, I can carry one musket. Mr. Astor enjoys his great property because the sweeper and I are ready to shoulder our muskets to protect him in it; the sweeper is secure in his little earnings because Mr. Astor and I are ready to stand by him, with our muskets; I find it worth while to be industrious because Mr. Astor and the sweeper make it dangerous for anybody to molest me. Without this protection, our possessions would be of no value; this protection we contribute in equal measure, man for man; and this same protection we extend to our sisters, our cousins, and our aunts. The Woman-Suffragists, so far from suffering taxation without representation, are asking to be represented where they are not taxed. [OVER] Don't be Deceived by this Suffrage Slogan: "Taxation Without Representation is Tyranny." The Real Tyranny would be a Vote Based on Property. The woman taxpayer gets for her taxes exactly what the male taxpayer gets--public improvement and protection of life and property. The interests of all taxpayers in the same community are identical, and the male taxpayers can't represent themselves without representing the women taxpayers as well. Because of its great injustice, the property qualification for voters was abolished in our country nearly half a century ago. If women should vote because they pay taxes, then all other taxpayers should vote for the same reason. Aliens and minors pay taxes on millions of dollars in the United States, and are yet justly deprived of the vote. A man may hold property and pay taxes in a hundred different towns and yet can vote in only one. The one where he votes may be the one in which he does not pay taxes. If voting and taxpaying went together, a man should have a vote in every community where he paid taxes. A system of government in which the vote was based on property would give the rich a power over the poor that would destroy democratic government. For information and literature, apply to PENNSYLVANIA ASSOCIATION OPPOSED TO WOMAN SUFFRAGE 1108 FINANCE BUILDING, PHILADELPHIA [Over] SUFFRAGE was DEFEATED FOUR TIMES IN TWO STATES IN TWO YEARS. In 1912--Michigan defeated woman suffrage by 760 votes. The "antis" were not organized. In 1913--Michigan defeated woman suffrage by 96,144 majority. The "antis" WERE organized. WOMANLY women swamped SUFFRAGE. In 1912--Ohio defeated woman suffrage by 87,000 votes. The suffragists made a great campaign. In 1914--OHIO defeated woman suffrage by 183,000 majority. The suffragists made the greatest campaign ever waged for votes for women. They PREDICTED A LANDSLIDE. The WAS ONE--the WOMANLY women SWAMPED SUFFRAGE. VOTE NO on WOMAN SUFFRAGE NEXT NOVEMBER--HELP THE WOMANLY WOMEN. MAKE 1915 a WATERLOO for SUFFRAGISM. Help us hasten THE COMING OF COMMON SENSE about woman's REAL RIGHTS, the right to PROTECTION, the right to remain FREE from POLITICAL duties, JURY service, etc.--the BURDEN of the ballot. Over 90% of the WOMEN DO NOT WANT TO VOTE--if you believe in DEMOCRACY, in MAJORITY rule, or in the INTELLIGENCE of women to decide ANY political question, ASK THE WOMEN THAT YOU KNOW BEST. Vote NO on Woman Suffrage Amendment No. 1 Next November FOR THEIR SAKE. The will of "one woman in the world," or of 10% of ONE SEX, IS NOT the will of the PEOPLE. DEMOCRACY DEFINED--BY THOMAS JEFFERSON (Father of American Democracy; author of the Declaration of Independence.) "Governments are republican ONLY in proportion as they embody the will of their people and EXECUTE IT." "The first principle of democracy is the law of majority rule." "I am convinced that no one has a natural right in opposition to his SOCIAL duties." "AMERICAN women have the GOOD SENSE to value DOMESTIC happiness above all other, and to CULTIVATE it above all other." "I readily suppose MY OPINION WRONG, when opposed by the majority." "It is an honorable circumstance for man, that the first moment he is at his EASE, he allots the internal employments to his feminine partner, and takes the external to himself. And THIS circumstance, or its REVERSE, is a pretty good indication that a people are, or are not, at their EASE." SUFFRAGISTS ARE NOT AT THEIR EASE They are the agents of unrest among women, the disciples of discontent, the makes of misogamy. NO RIGHT TO VOTE "The rights of suffrage may be regulated, modified, or withdrawn by the authority which conferred it. It is NOT a NATURAL RIGHT of which a person CANNOT BE DEPRIVED, but a PRIVILEGE which may be GRANTED or DENIED by the PEOPLE, or by the DEPARTMENT of GOVERNMENT to which they have DELEGATED POWER in the matter, as the GENERAL POLICY MAY REQUIRE."--Cyclopedia of American Government. Not one Section, of any Constitution in the World, grants any one an unqualified, inherent right to vote. The right to the vote rests upon the will of the people and the good of the State. Woman suffrage is a menace, instead of a means to representative government. Suffragists have NO RESPECT for MAJORITY RULE or DEMOCRATIC PRINCIPLES. ISSUED BY THE PENNSYLVANIA ASSOCIATION OPPOSED TO WOMAN SUFFRAGE 261 S. FIFTEENTH STREET, PHILADELPHIA "It's Coming!" ---- Great, Popular, Democratic Defeat of "Votes for Women" Socialism and Feminism ---- Since November 1st, 1914 - TWENTY STATES HAVE REJECTED RADICALISM DISGUISED as WOMAN SUFFRAGE. By November 3d, 1915 - FOUR MORE GREAT STATES - Pennsylvania, New York, Massachusetts and New Jersey - WILL HAVE DEFEATED IT, if the men learn how the VAST MAJORITY of the WOMEN stand AGAINST SUFFRAGE, and GET THE FACTS AND FIGURES, showing how "votes for women" in SUFFRAGE STATES has INCREASED TAXES, lessened RESPECT FOR LAW, WEAKENED GOVERNMENT and LOWERED the status of WOMEN. WITHOUT BRINGING ONE BETTER LAW IN A SINGLE STATE of benefit to WOMEN or CHILDREN; or uplifting SOCIAL conditions. ---- Since November 1st, 1912 - ONLY TWO STATES have adopted full suffrage for women - Montana and Nevada. Montana and Nevada are the WETTEST STATES IN THE UNION. Montana and Nevada have the SMALLEST PERCENTAGE of WOMEN to MEN in America. Montana and Nevada have the smallest proportion of MARRIED MEN in this country. Montana and Nevada combined gave 7,386 majority for women suffrage. Over 5,000 of these votes were SOCIALIST VOTES. Over 2,000 were MORMON votes. Pittsburgh alone has 100,000 more people than Montana and Nevada combined. Pennsylvania alone has 15,000 more women than all eleven of the suffrage States. Less than 9% of the people of the United States live under DOUBLE SUFFRAGE. NO STATE has EVER given over 30% of its electoral votes IN FAVOR of woman suffrage. In forty-five years it has "slipped through" eleven sparsely settled States on waves of Populism, Mormonism and Socialism, by the AVERAGE majority of less than 9,000 votes per State - while 70% of the electorate DID NOT vote in favor. Since November 1st, 1912 - SUFFRAGE HAS BEEN DEFEATED AT THE POLLS NINE TIMES, by Ohio, Michigan, Missouri, Wisconsin, North Dakota, South Dakota and Nebraska (over SIXTEEN MILLION POPULATION) by an AVERAGE MAJORITY of over 78,000 votes per STATE. (A higher plurality percentage than EVER GIVEN A PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.) [*From Pittsburg Pa*] WOMAN SUFFRAGE IS HERE OPPOSED BECAUSE it is believed it will produce conditions by further extending feminine political, commercial and professional with men, deleterious to the best interests of both men and women. Many political, commercial, and professional positions formerly men's, would be women's. Men would be obliged sometimes, through a dearth of work, to take subordinate positions to women or do women's work, thereby submitting themselves to ridicule. Hard times which are bound to arrive sometime, would make it more pronounced. Man's earning capacity would be less generally. His spirit and morale threatened through the humiliating conditions. And life made more burdensome for him as well as women with a larger and larger percentage of women coming out of the home to outside activities. The condition would tend to establish a custom whereby all men and women would have to work competitively with wages less. The process of arriving at these conditions might be slow, or it might be more rapid than anticipated. But in the first place, woman suffrage is unnecessary. Men's vote is sufficient to express the will of the people. There is no woman in the community but what there is a man, taken in the aggregate, whose political and commercial interests are identical, and his vote expresses her desire. His judgment ought to be good through experience. Voting fastens a responsibility on women and adds to the expense of the community. In the second place, it seems that woman suffrage ought to be defeated principally because of its ugly effects which we regret to have to state as follows: If women vote, they will hold office which will be important ones unless the extension of suffrage is stopped now. If more suffrage is given than now existing, political agitators will always be working to gain women's favor by trying to get them greater suffrage and power, and with more or less success. If women are elected to any office, it establishes a precedent. It will educate some of the people that have disapproved, to accept her in that office and to accept future women candidates for the office. This would be a stepping stone to her acceptance in higher offices. Holding these offices formerly men's it would automatically suggest her occupying important commercial and professional positions, all the while urged on, as in the past, by a certain set of women agitators and assisted by favors extended to themselves in the professions and in commerce through their political power. Let men not take it for granted that women will favor men for public office. There are reasons for thinking women will be more inclined to vote for women, especially after the precedent is established. If men see fit to persist in their recklessness, and establish customs which encourage women to disrespect the men of the family and their opinions, it is believed women will generally favor women and many men will, after the precedent is established. It seems to the writer that there is an inherent preponderance of interest on the part of women in the performances of those of their own sex, and that lionizing of men by them, although indulged in, is not as heavy as some egotistic men would think. What minor attention women now give men is partly occasioned by the custom of generations and their dependence on men, not an inherent inclination. Men are interested in women rather than in one another. Are more inclined to extend favors to women. This throws the preponderance of public attention toward the woman. It is recognized that the popularity of the candidate influences the voter considerably. Fitness is often secondary. Not considered at all by some voters. Popularity, men as compared with women, set forth in another line, namely the moving picture line (which commands a tremendous attendance of men and women from the largest city to the smallest town) shows women actresses leading in a popularity public voting contest the writer heard of. Women were the favorites of men and women voters. General conditions are more favorable to women. Therefore if women are given further suffrage they might hold any office, Judge, Senator or by political accident President of the U. S. Their advancement could be extended rapidly by the ruthless man office holder who would not care if a woman was second so long as he was first. Would be satisfied with a woman lieutenant-governor just so he was governor, caring not that the woman lieu-governor subordinates many men in inferior positions to her. It might be his lot later on, to be pushed down and out politically by some woman politician. He might then begin to regret conditions. It is not the right order of affairs to expect men to take orders or directions from women officials, to train men to do so or encourage women to exert that authority. The noblest democracy should see to it that woman suffrage is defeated, because non-woman suffrage conditions give man the best opportunity and encouragement to maintain his present superior standing politically, commercially and professionally and he needs these conditions to make good; and, maintaining a slightly superior earning power, he is enabled to assume the ennobling position of being the head of the family, where he is a more important support than women in the family. By this and other means he is enabled to maintain a certain amount of pride in himself, a characteristic of the male, the gratification or realization of which is essential to his mental and physical well being. It is more necessary to him than it is to women. More has been expected of man. It is a spur to his ambition to be looked to and leaned upon. In forcing suffrage on women and thereby encouraging and assisting her in general competition with men, it will lure out from the home, women who are not obliged to work, who will become imbued with an unhealthy ambition to make a name for themselves politically and commercially, replacing, to that extent, men who need the work. Picture the depressing position of the ordinary husband of a woman prominent politically or commercially. It is hoped woman suffrage will be defeated so that the ambition will not be killed that still exists among men, to work to support the family and secure one of the rewards, which is - to be recognized as the provider or principal provider. He has been happy in this responsibility and usually tries to fulfill. The contentment, self respect and good spirit of the men is essential to the welfare of the country. It is hoped a few careers will still be known as careers for men, such as a political one, where a man can feel it a MAN'S work worthy of a MAN AMONG MEN, where is given free rein and encouragement in a laudable ambition to be respected and honored by the community through good deeds. Competition tends to arouse antagonism between men and women. Tends to lessen women's attractive qualities of modesty, dependence and delicacy, developing arrogance and self sufficiency. Discourages marriage. Favoring suffrage may force something not wanted by women generally. The largest crowd of suffragists that have gathered at a Capitol to lobby is as nothing compared with the women who are indifferent and are opposed. The fact that excellent women have taken the trouble to organize against it makes the [?] increased activity of women is unnecessary. give man the best opportunity and encouragement to maintain his present superior standing politically, commercially and professionally and he needs these conditions to make good; and, maintaining a slightly superior earning power, he is enabled to assume the ennobling position of being the head of the family, where he is a more important support than women in the family. By this and other means he is enabled to maintain a certain amount of pride in himself, a characteristic of the male, the gratification or realization of which is essential to his mental and physical well being. It is more necessary to him than it is to women. More has been expected of man. It is a spur to his ambition to be looked to and leaned upon. In forcing suffrage on women and thereby encouraging and assisting her in general competition with men, it will lure out from the home, women who are not obliged to work, who will become imbued with an unhealthy ambition to make a name for themselves politically and commercially, replacing, to that extent, men who need the work. Picture the depressing position of the ordinary husband of a woman prominent politically or commercially. It is hoped woman suffrage will be defeated so that the ambition will not be killed that still exists among men, to work to support the family and secure one of the rewards, which is - to be recognized as the provider or principal provider. He has been happy in this responsibility and usually tries to fulfill. The contentment, self respect and good spirit of the men is essential to the welfare of the country. It is hoped a few careers will still be known as careers for men, such as a political one, where a man can feel it a man's work worthy of a man among men, where is given free rein and encouragement in a laudable ambition to be respected and honored by the community through good deeds. Competition tends to arouse antagonism between men and women. Tends to lessen women's attractive qualities of modesty, dependence and delicacy, developing arrogance and self sufficiency. Discourages marriage. Favoring suffrage may force something not wanted by women generally. The largest crowd of suffragists that have gathered at a Capitol to lobby is an nothing compared with the women who are indifferent and are opposed. The fact that excellent women have taken the trouble to organize against it makes the "cause" look weak. Increased activity of women is unnecessary. They are at present provided for or else have means and elaborate opportunities of providing for themselves, and in very many instances seem to be preferred by employers. In years past, when their sphere was limited, they lived happily. Surely no one can say they are not generously provided for and protected in the law, viz: the widow's dower, etc. In fact the law can be easily misused by women at the expense of men. Men are mentally able and morally worthy of running the government. Some suffragists insinuate they are not. It is hoped that the claim that women and morally superior and will reform conditions, will not mislead. If there is any moral difference between men and women, women placed in the same environment as men over a long period, will become of the same moral make up. So called reformers always make promises. But it takes action and ability to fulfill. It is human nature to attribute all the virtues to the untried, which when tried, often prove the opposite. Man is now called on to do deference to that sect of women, included among which, are those who harassed the government during the war and tried to belittle its officials. What foreign countries have shown any consideration toward woman suffrage were mostly tottering and desperate, and the end is not yet. If man's dissatisfaction with an insufficiency, produced a war then, it appears there will be more occasion for his unrest in the future. The effects of woman suffrage takes from man, does not add to. The manifestation of lesser primitive instincts sometimes precipitate big calamities. He may be more willing to resort to war as one of the few remaining means of impressing woman with at least a slight superiority. In the freest and noblest democracy, man is doing right in defeating woman suffrage when it threatens to take away his happiness and self respect. Man has demonstrated his worthiness of trust in this country by his kindness and deference toward women even to the point of servility, made laws favoring and protecting her and gladly works for her or is willing to. He has gone as far as a man should. If certain women want certain conditions, men are also entitled to a say as to whether men want to live under those conditions. WOMEN, WAKEN UP! Women waken up! Are you willing to have the responsibility of Suffrage thrust upon you? If so, you must either add it to your present duties, or else give up present duties in order to be qualified for voting. NOT A NATURAL RIGHT Suffrage is not a "natural right" in spite of what the Suffragists tell you, because it does not exist for the benefit of the voter but for the benefit of the State. You cannot legislate for the few, you must legislate for the whole. The framers of the Constitution of the United States by their limitations showed that they did not consider Suffrage an "inherent right." The Article of the Bill of Rights which refers to inalienable rights has nothing whatever to do with Suffrage. TAXATION NOTHING TO DO WITH VOTING When Suffragists tell you that women are taxed without representation they show that they do not understand the theory which the franchise is based upon. The standing army, unnaturalized foreigners, non-residents and corporations pay taxes, but do not vote. Property of a town, city, or state is justly liable for the current expenses of the government which protects such property. Woman's property receives exactly the same protection as man's; if she lives in the city she also, gets fire protection, police protection, lighted and paved streets. She benefits equally with man, therefore there is no injustice done her. How could a vote help her property, when the votes of two other women without property would more than annul hers. Men have acquired suffrage not because they own property and pay taxes, (a man who has no property has the same voice in voting as a millionaire), but because they are able to enforce law and order. Women are not physically able to enforce law. Behind all law must be the power of enforcing law. SUFFRAGE NO BENEFIT TO COMMUNITY OR INDIVIDUAL WOMAN In all the Suffrage arguments there cannot be found one definite certain benefit either to the State or to the woman - you cannot enfranchise a few women in a community and not all women. If one worthy woman in a State is given the vote - so must all women of legal age (not disfranchised for special causes now applying to men) be given the vote; black and white, drunken and sober, without respect to character or intelligence. DOES NOT HELP THE WORKING WOMAN The ballot does not help the working woman in the way Suffragists claim, as legislation affects the business of the country only in a general way. The question of wages is one of supply and demand. The general wages of women will always depend on the amount of skill acquired by the mass of them. Woman's work is temporary in character, not permanent like a man's, as the average woman marries and leaves work at the age of 24. The problem then is, how to regulate justly the distribution of wages between men who work through life and women who usually withdraw in order to marry, taking with them acquired skill, and leaving their places to be filled by new untrained workers. Suffrage has not begun to solve the problem. BALLOT OF NO EDUCATION VALUE Suffragists say that women will be educated by the ballot. Has the ballot proved of much educational value to men, or to women already enfranchised? Are the Equal Suffrage States leaders in Good Government, Temperance, Ideal Home-life? WHY THE MAJORITY OF WOMEN DO NOT WANT TO VOTE Because Suffrage involves office-holding which is inconsistent with the duties of most women. Because they feel that their obvious duties and trusts - as sacred as any on earth - already demand their best efforts. Because political equality will deprive women of special privileges now accorded to her by law. Because they hold that Suffrage, by allying her with party interests, - weakens rather than increase her influence for good. Because in the oldest Equal Suffrage States, divorce is from 4 to 7 times greater than in the oldest male suffrage States. Because until November, 1914, no State with "votes for women" ever adopted Prohibition. (Kansas went dry in 1880 - but it's women did not get the vote until 1912.) WOMAN'S INFLUENCE WITHOUT THE BALLOT If the Suffrage movement were to disband today, and no woman ever vote, not a single great interest would suffer. None of women's wide philanthropies would be harmed; woman's colleges would be unaffected; women would still be admitted to all the professions; good laws would still be framed; woman's civic work would not cease. The influence of woman without the ballot is immeasurable - knowing that she has no selfish political interests to further, men look to her for all that is noblest and best. She has influence with all parties alike; if a voter she would have only the influence of her own party. The woman's vote is always divided against itself. It is of vital importance to posterity that women should have no political burdens. Let all true women, loyal citizens of our republic, look to the public interests, not striving for any false "equality" since there is no question of comparison between men and their duties, and women and theirs. Women waken up! The family and the home is the safe-guard of the State, and Woman Suffrage tends to weaken the mainstay of the Nation - by bringing into it elements of discord and disunion. You should demand "homes for women" not "votes for women." PITTSBURGH ASSOCIATION OPPOSED TO WOMAN SUFFRAGE, 412 UNION BANK BLDG., PITTSBURGH, PA. VOTE AGAINST WOMAN SUFFRAGE AMENDMENT, NOVEMBER 1915 VOTES FOR MEN "It's up to you, Son," says Uncle Sam. Stand by the Women! Vote for Women's Rights! The one indisputable right of woman in relation to the State is exemption from political duties. If you vote for the ballot for women, you vote to start a corrupting force for all heedless women, a burden on good women. The man who opposes women's so-called emancipation is the far-sighted lover of his country and his kind. Can man do woman's work? No, no more can woman do man's work. Man and Woman stand side by side as two EQUAL but DIVERSE human entities. Woman's nature is fundamentally organically different from man's. Her right is the right to protection. The whole duty of man toward woman is to protect her, even against herself, [*How about protecting her from lawsuit too E. A. B.*] if need be. She has a right to be protected, because she can't live a normal life without protection. BOOKS RECOMMENDED FOR READING The Ladies' Battle ($1.00)......................................Molly Elliott Seawell The Business of Being a Woman ($1.50)...........................Ida Tarbell Votes for Men (50c)..........................................A Book for Men by a Man Unrest of Women ($1.00)..............................................E. S. Martin Woman Adrift (English) ($1.50)................................Harold Owen The Eden Sphinx.................................................Annie Riley Hale Subscribe to "The Protest" ($1.00) For information and literature apply to PENNSYLVANIA ASSOCIATION OPPOSED TO WOMAN SUFFRAGE 1108 FINANCE BUILDING, PHILADELPHIA Woman's Rights Herbert Spencer: "Are the political rights of women the same as those of men? The assumption that they are the same is now widely made. Along with that identity of rights above set forth as arising from the human nature common to the two sexes, there is supposed to go an identity of rights in respect to the direction of public affairs. At first sight it seems that the two properly go together; but consideration shows that this is not so. Citizenship does not include only the giving of votes, joined now and again with the fulfillment of representative functions. It includes also certain serious responsibilities. But if so, there cannot be equality of citizenship unless along with the share of good there goes the share of evil. To call that equality of citizenship under which some have their powers gratis, while others pay for their powers by undertaking risks, is absurd. Now men, whatever political powers they may in any case possess, are at the same time severally liable to the loss of liberty, to the privation, and occasionally to the death, consequent on having to defend the country; and if women, along with the same political powers, have not the same liabilities, their position is not one of equality, but one of supremacy. "Unless, therefore, women furnish contingents to the army and navy such as men furnish, it is manifest that, ethically considered, the question of the equal 'political rights,' so-called, of women, cannot be entertained until there is reached a state of permanent peace. Then only will it be possible (whether desirable or not) to make the political positions of men and women the same." John Bright: "When women are not safe under the charge or care of fathers, husbands, brothers, and sons, it is the fault of our non-civilization and not of our laws. As civilization founded on Christian principles advances, women will gain all that is right for them to have, though they are not seen contending in the strife of political parties. In my experience I have observed evil results to many women who have entered heartily into political conflict and discussion. I would save them from it." Mrs. Humphrey Ward: "Women should not vote on questions in the solution of which they can never play a responsible part. Fancy a female general, a female admiral! Fancy a railroad run by women, roads built or mines worked by them! If there is this inevitable physical limitation to a woman's activity... is it just that she be given a vote on matters that involve these activities? The national government... is concerned in all of these things, and is maintained by the votes of the male portion of the population, which thus indirectly decides on the army, the navy, the railroads, and the scores of material interests in which women cannot by nature take an active part." Miss Ida M. Tarbell: "The assumption that the improvement of woman's position depends upon the vote is quite as unsound as the charge of her inferiority.... Woman proves her equality by doing the things for which she is fitted and which the world needs from her.... It is the gravest weakness of this country at present to ignore certain fundamental things, that life is not saved by politics but by principles, and that principles are not taught by votes and legislation, but by precept and by practice." [Over] Suffrage Statements Answered. The claim that woman suffrage is in the line of progress is a mistaken one. Evolution and civilization have led steadily toward differentiation of function between the sexes, not toward similarity. Suffrage proposes to set them at the same task, and demands that two people shall do the work of one; it is therefore retrogressive. It is a simple justice that in a democracy the majority should rule, and the great majority of women are opposed to suffrage. That the suffragists know this is shown by their unwillingness to have the question submitted to a referendum of the women. In regard to taxation, there is no connection in America between property and the vote. A man may own property and pay taxes in ten States without the right to vote in any one of them; and in the State where he does vote and where he can be called on for jury and militia duty he may possible pay not a cent of taxes. The argument of suffragists that women did not help to make our laws and therefore ought not to have to be governed by them is a fallacy. If there were any logic in this argument we should have to make over all our laws every time a new citizen or immigrant came into the nation. Men who spend their vacations outside their own State would be free from obligation to obey the laws of that State, because they had had no voice in making them. Men and women being unlike it is foolish to insist that their relation to government should be the same. There are many effective methods for the expression of the feminine point of view besides the vote. Women's clubs are responsible for more good laws than women voters. Women as home-makers and mothers have not obtained better sanitary and moral conditions for their children in suffrage States than in non-suffrage States. In Colorado little girls of ten and boys of any age can carry on street trades, and Judge Lindsay is reported as saying that cases in his Juvenile Court on sex charges have multiplied 300 per cent. in the last few years. In Utah a girl of twelve can carry on a bootblack's trade. In Washington, a child of ten, boy or girl, can beg, peddle, or sing on the street, for gain; and child labor at night is prohibited in bake shops only. These laws compare very unfavorably with those in many male suffrage States. As the laws for the protection of women in industry are better in male suffrage States than in woman suffrage States, wage-earning women cannot be said to need the ballot for their own protection. A considerable fraction of them are under twenty-one, and could not vote if the ballot were given to women. The number of opportunities for women to have "broadening and democratic" interests are so innumerable that she cannot begin to exhaust them. The vote will add nothing to these opportunities. It is true that women already have the vote in the most sparsely settled regions of this country where there are no large cities and where conditions are very unlike those in the great, thickly populated States of the Union. Utah has a population of about four to the square mile; Wyoming, which is one and one-half times as large as all New England, has a population about the size of Worcester, Mass. The whole eleven suffrage States have a population much smaller than that of the State of New York. In several of these States Mormonism also has a strong hold, and populism and free silver have been popular causes. They are not models for Eastern States to follow. Impartial testimony is far from agreeing that suffrage even there is of benefit to the community. Its result is to weaken the electorate by increasing the proportion of boss-controlled and easily misled voters, and the proportion of stay-at-homes among the intelligent and respectable. [Over] Count the Cost? YOU CANNOT double the electorate without increasing the cost of government. YOU CANNOT increase the cost of government without increasing taxation. YOU CANNOT increase taxation without raising the cost of living. Count the Cost Work Against Woman Suffrage! For information and literature apply to PENNSYLVANIA ASSOCIATION OPPOSED TO WOMAN SUFFRAGE 1108 FINANCE BUILDING, PHILADELPHIA [Over] A Talk on the Tax Paying Woman BY THE ANTIS Government is protection. The whole science of government is the science of protecting life and liberty and the pursuit of happiness, of protecting our person, our property, our homes, our wives and our children, against foreign aggression, against mobs and riots rearing their fearful heads within this peaceful land during the very sessions of this Convention. Against crime and disorder, and all the army of evil, civil society wages its war, and government is the method of protection, protection of us all. * * * In the divine distribution of powers, the duty and the right of protection rests with the male. It is so throughout nature. It is so with men, and I, for one, will never consent to part with the divine right of protecting my wife, my daughter, the women whom I love and the women whom I respect, exercising the birthright of man, and place that high duty in the weak and nerveless hands of those designed by God to be protected rather than to engage in the stern warfare of government. -Elihu Root. ISSUED BY THE PENNSYLVANIA ASSOCIATION OPPOSED TO WOMAN SUFFRAGE 1108 Finance Building, Philadelphia, Pa. "What about the taxpaying woman? Don't you Antis agree with our forefathers that 'Taxation without representation is tyranny?'" we are often asked. Yes, we reply, we agree with our forefathers that "Taxation without representation is tyranny," but we do not agree with the Suffragists that taxation without votes is tyranny. That is a very different proposition. What our forefathers demanded was not votes, but representation. They said if the British Parliament intends taxing the American Colonies, these colonies should have representation in Parliament. The right of the Mother Country to tax dependent colonies without giving them representation in Parliament is what they contested. But Suffragists believe that, as a matter of justice, all taxpayers should have the vote that they may have some say as to how their money is spent, we are told. Well, this would mean giving the vote to men, women and children, Americans and foreigners and, if it is to be a matter of justice, then those who pay large taxes should have more votes than those who pay small taxes. Moreover, taxpayers should then vote wherever they held property that they may have some say as to how their money is to be spent. At present a man who lives in Pennsylvania. Residents of the District of Columbia pay taxes and cannot vote anywhere, foreigners and children pay taxes and cannot vote. You see, it is property, not a person, that is taxed for the support of the Government and the protection of the property. The President of the National Woman Suffrage Association, Dr. Anna Howard Shaw, is opposed to taxation without votes, and a number of Suffragettes, from time to time, have adopted the slogan, "No vote, not tax." The Government might reply, No tax, no police or fire protection; no tax, no schools; no tax, no roads, and so on. The property of the taxpaying woman is as well protected as the property of the taxpaying man. After all, only ten per cent. of the women of the United States pay taxes, and most of these inherited their property from men. Moreover, women have municipal or school suffrage in many States, but very few vote. The fact is, very few taxpaying women want to vote or are in favor of woman suffrage, which they know means higher taxes, and most of them feel there is no compensating gain. A Pennsylvania woman, a large property owner, taxpayer and a widow, when asked if she favored woman suffrage, replied: "I do not employ a woman lawyer, a woman broker, or a woman business adviser, and I do not want women in the Legislatures making laws for my property." When asked if she would favor limited franchise for women, she replied: "My suffrage friends are educated, taxpaying women, but I would hate them to have anything to do with the management of my affairs." A Limited Suffrage League, working to add unlimited woman suffrage to unlimited man suffrage, and saying "When we get unlimited woman suffrage we will limit all suffrage," had better address the members of the Cradle Roll of the Woman Suffrage Association. The proposition would no doubt be seriously entertained and applauded by the "kids who want to vote for Mother." Woman suffrage is not a right. The Supreme Court of the United States has so decided this question, and Senator Elihu Root says: "If there be any one thing settled in the long discussion of this subject, it is that suffrage is not a natural right, but simply a means of government, and the sole question is whether government by the suffrage of men and women will be better government than by the suffrage of men alone." "I think suffrage would be a loss for women," he adds, "because suffrage implies not merely the casting of the ballot, the gentle and peaceful fall of the snowflake, but suffrage, if it means anything, means entering into the field of political life, and politics is modified war. In politics there is struggle, strife, contentions, bitterness, heartburnings, excitement, agitation, everything which is averse to the true character of woman." Dr. Anna Howard Shaw, President of the National Woman Suffrage Association, says: "I believe in woman suffrage, whether all women vote or no women vote; whether all women vote right, or whether all women vote wrong; whether women will love their husbands after they vote or forsake them; whether they will neglect their children or never have any children." Miss Shaw says these things have nothing to do with the question, what she wants is justice and democracy. Mr. Root, the statesman, says these things have everything to do with the question. He says: "The question is a question of expediency, and the question of expediency upon this subject is not a question of tyranny, but a question of liberty, a question of the preservation of free constitutional government, of law, order, peace and prosperity." Mr. Root, you see, stands for American democracy, but this American democracy is not what the Suffragettes want. The Suffragettes are asking for the democracy advocated in France at the time of the French Revolution, the democracy rejected by the founders of our American Republic. This Socialist democracy has never made stable or successful government, while under American democracy, which is representative constitutional government, we have become a great, self-governing people. Let us guard our heritage. Thomas Jefferson, who wrote the Declaration of Independence and is called the "Father of Democracy," said: "The first principle of democracy is the law of majority rule." This is what we Americans mean when we speak of "Government of, by and for the people." Now not more than ten per cent. of the women of the United States are asking for the ballot, and to force ninety per cent. of the American women into political life and ask them to give up the rights and privileges they now enjoy as women under the law (for example, to make a married woman responsible with her husband for the support of the home and the family), cannot be considered by Americans as a democratic or a just proposition, therefore, men should Vote NO on Woman Suffrage Woman's Power "The highest exercise of power is that which forms the conscience, influences the will, controls the impulses of men, and there to-day woman is supreme and woman rules the world. Mr. President, the time will never come when this line of demarcation between the functions of the two sexes will be broken down. I believe it to be false philosophy; I believe that it is an attempt to turn backward upon the line of social development, and that if the step ever be taken, we go centuries backward on the march towards a higher, a nobler and a purer civilization, which must be found not in the confusion, but in the higher differentiation of the sexes." -Elihu Root. An Appeal Men in the four States where the question of Woman Suffrage will be decided this year, we women expect you to discharge your duty, as Mr. Root says: "With a manliness and decision of character which, after all, the women of America, God bless them, admire and respect more than anything else on earth." WOMAN'S SUFFRAGE AND THE LIQUOR INTERESTS BY MRS. GEORGE P. WHITE Many suffrage speakers insist that if the franchise is given to women they will be for prohibition. The map issued by the Woman's Christian Temperance Union, shows plainly what we have stated before, that six States having full woman's suffrage - Colorado, Wyoming, Utah, Idaho, Washington and California - have not voted for prohibition. Kansas is the only suffrage State that has prohibition. Woman's Suffrage and the Liquor Trade THE QUESTION has been asked by a writer on suffrage: "Who would parade in an anti-suffrage parade?" She goes on to answer her question in the most amusing manner. Has she culled her answer from her own knowledge of those good women who have ranged themselves among the "antis," or has the wish been father to the thought, and the mind supplied the answer to the question according to its wish? She makes the sweeping assertion that there is almost no woman of national reputation because of her own "good works" who is an anti-suffragist. This, indeed, from an upholder of that organization which asks its members to sign a pledge "not to contribute any money to charity until suffrage has been granted to the women of this country." The poor and sick in our hospitals may die for lack of that food and attention which suffragists are pledging themselves not to give. The pledge reads as follows: "The undersigned pledges herself not to subscribe for any charity or any public object of any kind until such time as a law shall be passed giving the vote to women," and in the face of that pledge the assertion is made that no woman known for her good works would be found among the "antis." Furthermore, of "national reputation" - if you please; may I refer you to Mrs. Thomas Preston, who, for eight years, as Mrs. Grover Cleveland, was first lady of the land. Mrs. Preston is vice-president of the anti-suffrage organization of New Jersey, and is a lady of the most dignified and gracious national reputation. Also of national reputation are Mrs. Arthur M. Dodge, president of the National Association Opposed to Woman Suffrage, who is president of the Federation of Day Nurseries, president of the Day Nurseries in New York (90 nurseries), member Board of Child Labor, vice-president of Legal Aid Society, Director of Public Education Society, who started and for ten years was president of the Needlework Guild of New York, and Miss Gertrude Beeks, secretary of the Welfare Department of the National Civic Federation, who helped Col. Goethals clean up Panama. Then, too, there is Mrs. Kate Waller Barrett, National President of seventy-eight Florence Crittenton Missions for Unfortunate Girls; while ministering to, saving, and redeeming unfortunate girls, Mrs. Barrett has no time to pledge herself "not to contribute money to charity until woman suffrage has been granted." Also of national reputation is Miss Mabel Boardman, who has taken the place of Miss Clara Barton as head of Red Cross Work, and Miss Emily P. Bissell, has a national reputation as the one who introduced Red Cross stamps in America, and Mrs. Riggs (Kate Douglas Wiggin), of the Washington Association, is also first vice-president of the Kindergarten Association of New York and founder of the Free Kindergarten System of California; while in Pennsylvania, Mrs. Horace Brock, the president of the anti-suffrage organization, was the first president of the State Federation of Woman's Clubs of Pennsylvania, serving in that capacity four years, and still is one of its honorary presidents. For two terms she was chairman of the Woman's Department of the National Civic Federation, and has served in many other public positions. All of these women and many other leaders of the anti-suffrage cause are noted for their good works. PROHIBITION MAP OF THE UNITED STATES WHITE - Prohibition Law BLACK - License Law STRIPED - No License ISSUED BY THE W.C.T.U. One might ask who are the suffragists? Are they women who are leaders in religious and charitable works, christian women noted for their piety and philanthropy, examples in their homes and in society of the christian virtues? Yes, a few, but only of a few can this be said. Who would parade with the suffragists? One, famous indeed, Mrs. Pankhurst, but NOT for her good works! This writer goes on to say that, if the antis parade, it would appall the nation. Granted, it would. The nation well might stand appalled at the sight of all its women gone mad! But, she says: "In that parade would follow all who are engaged in the liquor business, from the great manufacturers, to the keepers of the smallest groggery." Again I must ask: Where does this careless writer obtain her facts? Not from the map printed in the program of the suffrage convention which met in Philadelphia, November 1, 1912. I hope not from that map, for, if we examine it in connection with the map, issued by the Woman's Christian Temperance Union, we shall find that all the States printed white, as full suffrage States, are printed in black, as liquor States, in the temperance map; and those States that, not having given their women suffrage, are blackest on the suffrage map are the whitest of the prohibition States. The western half of the United States, which the suffragists print white, having suffrage, the Woman's Christian Temperance Union prints in doleful black, having also liquor. But, you may say, all this will be changed by women's votes. "Will be!" Wyoming has had suffrage for forty-four (44) years, but Wyoming is very black on the temperance map, and forty-four years is a generation - time enough for the mothers who began to vote when suffrage first went into effect to raise families of temperance voters, had they been so inclined. Colorado - black - has had suffrage for twenty-three (23) years, and Idaho for twenty (20) years. The only State wholly white on both maps is Kansas. How did the suffragists let Kansas escape to become a prohibition State? There must be some antis living there, in numbers strong enough to swing it to the temperance side. Alabama, Georgia, Florida, North Carolina and Tennessee, very black, unenlightened on suffrage, are yet white as snow in the eyes of those women who count temperance as a desirable thing. "Liquor dealers, keepers of groggeries" - open your eyes, writers on suffrage, and study your maps before you dare to say the liquor interests will be found parading with the antis! SUFFRAGE MAP OF THE UNITED STATES WHITE STATES - Full Suffrage; SHADED STATES - Partial Suffrage; DARK STATES - No Suffrage. ISSUED BY THE NATIONAL WOMAN SUFFRAGE ASSOCIATION. "Ending the procession," she would put "the anti-suffrage association which does not admit men to its membership." I wonder which anti-suffrage association this is - not the one in Pennsylvania, for it has an active Men's League of several hundred members. It was formed at a meeting held at the home of Mrs. Brinton Cox, and addressed by the Hon. Charles Fairchild. Mr. Fairchild, Secretary of the Treasury under President Cleveland, and a man of national reputation, is a member of the New York Men's League Opposed to Suffrage. Mrs. Fairchild, by the way, would be found in the anti parade, should that ever take place. Let us now ask: Whom shall we find parading with the suffragists? The Socialists, for one; we will yield them the Socialists. They paraded with them in Washington last spring. The red flag of socialism was proudly displayed among the banners carried in the suffrage parade in Washington on March 3, 1913. It bore the words: "One million Socialists are working and voting for woman suffrage." Miss Annie Bock, late secretary of the California Political Equality League, the largest suffrage organization in California, says, in a statement written for presentation to the United States Senate Committee on Woman Suffrage: "My observation has led me to think that the majority of women wanting suffrage (outside of Socialist women) are the dupes of the Socialists." The dupes of that party which, among its principles hold that "property is robbery"; that "rent profit or taxes is theft"! Miss Bock go on to say: "There are hundreds, yes, thousands, of men and women who are advocating women suffrage in this country alone who scorn the law, denounce the Bible, trample our flag and work to tear down our Constitution." Oh, suffragists, we will not dispute with you the McNamaras and Parkhursts of society; they parade in your ranks; leave to us those gentle women of charity and good works who spend their years in efforts to uplift and conserve the homes of our nation, around which all social order revolves. There is another body of people in this country who would not parade with the antis-the Mormons. We don't want them. They acknowledge they are out-and-out supporters of woman suffrage, according to a letter to the New York Times, dated May 20, 1913, signed by Robert E. Pratt, of the Eastern Church Mission of the Church of Latter Day Saints. He claims for the Mormon Church the origin of the votes-for-women idea in this country, and in part says: Utah initiated woman suffrage with her own Statehood," and adds: "Now we are not only - we of the Mormon Church - delighted at the results of our own attitude toward suffrage, but we ardently hope to see the idea spread down from our mountain country even to the eastern as it has already spread to the western sea." Women of Pennsylvania, are you going to assist the Mormons in spreading their idea of votes for women until it reaches the eastern sea, or will Pennsylvania, with its good old common sense, stand as a bulwark against the oncoming flood of Mormons and Socialists? Again reversing facts, the writer of the article in question says: "The anti opposition cannot hold out, as it is entirely negative and destructive." The antis are "negative and destructive" -- strange charge from a member of that organization whose president threatens hatchets! Strange charge, when made by one of that party whose representative writer, Edna Kenton, in a recent article, asserted: "This is a sex war; who doubts it?" Let us examine sex war. There are only two sexes--men and women-- unless we add a third unsexed part of humanity and call them suffragists. So it is a fight between men and women; but the men are our fathers, our husbands and our sons. That is true, but we must fight them! The mother must fight her son, whose baby feet she cuddled and kissed. You must fight your father, who watched over your childhood with so great a pride, who struggled day by day to build up a competence that he might educate you, and who laid awake many a night, terrified lest he be called away from his wife and daughters without having laid by enough to support them when he was gone. Now our sex is to turn out and fight these devoted fathers! It is sex war! But, you say, I cannot fight MY father--impossible! Very well, you may fight mine, while I tackle yours in this battle of the sexes; and similarly, mother will fight son, husband against wife, in this effort to build up Harmony and Good Works. Is it not a mad whirl into which the suffragists are pointing the way? Do you wonder that the antis, in dismay at the hysteria which threatens womankind, are rallying to fight it while there is yet time? On all sides it is asserted that hysteria, as it is now affecting British women, could never find a lodgment in America. Yet hysteria knows no geographical laws. The arbitrary divisions of a map are unknown to hysteria, but woman nature is the same all over the world, and what the women of England have done the women of America will do. It is against this unnatural thing that the anti-suffragists are, all over the United States, organizing and their ranks daily growing, in their battle to conserve the country and the home. ISSUED BY The Pennsylvania Association Opposed to Woman Suffrage 261 S. 15th Street Philadelphia, Pa. Oklahoma Oklahoma Anti-Suffrage Association Ready-to-Print Plates Supplied to Newspapers of the State Under the Supervision of the Oklahoma Association Opposed to Woman Suffrage Stereotype Plates Manufactured and Shipped by Western Newspaper Union Anti-Suffrage Page Notice To Publishers: Plates of the matter shown on this proof are sent you free of charge, carriage charges prepaid, on the order of The Oklahoma Association Opposed to Woman Suffrage. We act only as manufacturer. The metal remains our property to be returned in usual manner. WESTERN NEWSPAPER UNION. FEMINISM AND WOMAN SUFFRAGE ONE PHASE ALONE SHOWS WHY WOMEN OF OKLAHOMA ARE OPPOSED TO SUFFRAGE MEN'S NOTION OF SUFF LEADER Isn't Very High When the History of the Movement and Those Back of it for the Past Ten Years are Studied. Oklahoma City. - "You do not need to mention the connection of Socialism, or Pacifism or even the Negro question with woman suffrage in your campaign, if you will tell the people of Oklahoma of the infamous doctrines of the Feminists and show them that woman suffrage is but the application to politics of their theories of social, economic and political independence for women" was the statement of a prominent Oklahoma jurist the other day to an anti-suffrage worker. Oklahoma men don't know much about "Feminism" except that it is a word more or less frequent now-a-days in the vocabulary of would-be intellectuals. The average man down here would throw a book containing feminist propaganda through the window before he had read an entire page, so offensive are their teachings. Oklahomans inherit the chivalrous ideals of the "southern gentlemen," at whom the feminists point with so much derision, and they find it hard to realize that a great sex war is being waged by the Feminist-Suffragist. But once an Oklahoma man begins to dissociate the Suffrage movement from the few women he knows who are suffs., and begins to judge it by its National leaders and by the things they have spoken and written during the past ten years, there arises in him an anger which is slow but mighty. The man of Oklahoma is opposed to woman suffrage because of the simple fact that his wife does not want the ballot; but how much more is he opposed to woman suffrage when he realizes that it means that his little girl and your little girl is to grow up under the influence of those feminist leaders who advocate "free love," "no marriage ceremony" (and that is what Dr. Anna Howard Shaw has advocated for years,) and the control by the state of the child? The application MRS. T. H. STURGEON. Newspaper woman and President of Oklahoma Association Opposed to Suffrage. SUFFS STARTED THE AGITATION AND FORCED THE ANTIS TO ORGANIZE Mrs. Eugene Lorton Explains Cause of Present Activities of Those Opposed to Suffrage. Tulsa -- "Of course it is an inopportune time to organize a state association opposed to woman suffrage," was the answer of Mrs. Eugene Lorton, Secretary of the Oklahoma Association to a woman here who criticized the antis for creating an agitation at this time. "No one knows better than the 'antis' how disagreeable it is," continued Mrs. Lorton, "but we are not to blame for the Suffragists started this agitation; and if we did not oppose them they would force suffrage upon the women of Oklahoma, eighty per cent of whom do not want it, but who are so engrossed in their war work that they take it for granted that the men will vote the measure down. The Suffragists started this agitation; and if we did not oppose them they would force suffrage upon the women of Oklahoma, eighty per cent of whom do not want it, but who are so engrossed in their war work that they take it for granted that the men will vote the measure down. The Suffragists have declared for woman suffrage as a war measure, and they have counted on the fact that thousands of Oklahoma mothers have but one thought, and that is of the boy 'over there.' They believed that the men of Oklahoma would believe their statements because they would be unopposed. We 'antis' want the men to know that the women of Oklahoma do not want woman suffrage." This statement of Mrs. Lorton's has received much approval in Tulsa where it is well understood that DO YOU DOUBT THE SUFFRAGE-SOCIALIST ALLIANCE Men of Oklahoma, with your own Socialist problem, read the following extracts from the New York "Call" the official Socialist organ of November 7, 1917. Can you doubt whose vote will carry woman suffrage in Oklahoma if it wins? Page 1. 7th col. -- "Socialism and suffrage, inseparable companions in revolutionary thought and action, have triumphed in the election in New York City and state." Page 2. 1st col. -- "It is pointed out that the Socialist vote throughout the Empire State was the decisive factor in the victory for women suffrage." 1st col. -- "It is certain that if the women had had the vote before this election, Morris Hilquit would have been elected Mayor and the whole Socialist ticket would have been triumphant. 5th col. -- "At the last referendum in New York on woman suffrage, only two years ago, the issue was snowed under. So was the issue of Socialism. And yesterday, hand in hand (you bet!) Socialism and feminism forced the Fates to reverse their dictum and the voters to act accordingly." 6th col. -- "HILQUIT:: 'Socialists can take the credit in a large measure for success of the woman suffrage amendment. From all indications the Socialist vote in the State exceeded 200,000 all of which counted for suffrage. Furthermore our campaign with its social and political background had a visible effect on the increase of the suffrage vote. That alone was a great Socialist achievement. Page 3. 1st col. -- "HILQUIT: 'I am delighted to learn that the suffrage amendment carried and I attribute it greatly to the efforts of the Socialist party in this campaign. Our campaign helped largely to clear the political atmosphere and paved the way for radical opinions. Next to our tremendous gains it is the greatest victory of the year. 1st col. -- "It is estimated, also, that with women having the right to vote, it will be much more difficult to lead the country into war. Suffrage is regarded by many radicals as the greatest step toward peace which could have been made. "Every tribute has been paid to the Socialist suffrage workers by the suffrage organization. They have been out with literature and newspapers all year round, and have held meetings for the cause in which no other but a Socialist woman could reach the crowds." A SOUTHERN WOMAN SPEAKS HER MIND Mr. James Callaway, in a column conducted by him in the Macon (Georgia) Daily Telegraph, prints the following remarkable letter on November 30, from a distinguished Southern woman who sent it to him with the request that it be published. "Has woman suffrage, with, comparatively speaking, a little band willful women, 'made cowards of us all?' "For every woman who stands and shrieks for the ballot there are hundreds, aye thousands, telling you they do not wish it. Do not force their patience too far! "The women of the South do not come to plead, gentlemen; they demand that the sovereignty of their States be not disturbed at this most critical hour. " ' New York went for suffrage' we are told with bated breath. With over 400 per cent increase in Socialism, more than 70 per cent foreign-born, is that surprising? [?] what is that to the South? The purest American blood in the nation [?] veins and people. Instead of following, as sheep led astray, let [?] experience of New York and stand firm in the [?] ever safe [?], the sovereignty of our MISS MAYBELLE STAURD. Well-known in newspaper and political circles; Field Secretary of the Oklahoma Association Opposed to Woman Suffrage. TWO LEADERS UNDER ONE FLAG PECULIAR SITUATION DEVELOPES IN OKLAHOMA Principles Back of the Anti-Suffrage Movement Draw Support of Politicians of Both Parties. Oklahoma City. -- It is an unusual movement indeed which will bring under one flag the leaders of the two opposition parties in Oklahoma. Only a recognition of the fact that a blow of the fundamental principle of Christian civilization is threatening, could have taken the mind of loyal Oklahomans from the all absorbing question of winning the war, long enough to say "God Bless You, We're With You" to the newly organized Oklahoma Association Opposed to Woman Suffrage. "Perhaps it is because Oklahomans are so truly Americans, that even the men who are politicians and might be expected to fear the vitruperant attacks of the Suffragists had the courage of squarely facing the perfunctory endorsement o woman suffrage by both the Democratic and Republican parties, and then saying to us, 'We are opposed to woman suffrage in Oklahoma and will help you fight it.'" Thus Maybelle Stuard, field secretary of the Oklahoma Association, sizes up Oklahoma sentiment after an extensive trip through the state. OKLAHOMA "ANTIS" START CAMPAIGN STATE ORGANIZATION HAS BRANCHES IN TWENTY-FIVE SECTIONS PROMINENT PEOPLE LEADERS Mrs. T. H. Sturgeon of Oklahoma City at Head of Group of Officers Including Many Well Known Women of the State. The Oklahoma "antis" are aroused. The dormant opposition to woman suffrage on the part of the majority of the people everywhere is becoming active in Oklahoma, and the campaign against "votes for women" will be prosecuted with vigor, system and success. Oklahomans are not disposed to accept second place in any contest, and they feel that if West Virginia and Iowa "antis" could organize sufficiently in six months to defeat woman suffrage, feminism and Social ism at the polls, they can do at least as well. There is no State where the women from the National organization, invited by local opponents of suffrage, have met with a more courteous reception on the part of the people at large. The Oklahoma Association Opposed to Woman Suffrage, recently organized, has met with instant success. Mrs. T. H. Sturgeon, of Oklahoma City, is president; Miss Alice Robinson, of Muskogee, vice-president; Mrs. E. Constantin, of Tulsa, treasurer; Mrs. Eugen Lorton, of Tulsa, secretary; and Miss Maybelle Stuard, of Oklahoma City, field secretary. An Executive Committee of twenty prominent women, each an auxiliary charman in as many sections of the state, is headed by Mrs. Frank Greer, of Tulsa while an advisory board of twenty-five men includes Democratic nad Republican leaders, educators, bankers and influential business men. The Socialist menace is peculiarly acute in Oklahoma. Its 80,000 Socialist votes will go solid for woman suffrage; and the problem of the patriotic men and women of the State is to arouse the patriotic voters to a realization of the dual menace of Feminism and Socialism. -- From the Woman Patriot. POOR TIME TO AGITATE day to an anti-suffrage worker. Oklahoma men don't know much about "Feminism" except that it is a word more or less frequent now-a-days in the vocabulary of would-be intellectuals. The average man down here would throw a book containing feminist propaganda through the window before he had read an entire page, so offensive are their teachings. Oklahomans inherit the chivalrous ideals of the "southern gentlemen," at whom the feminists point with so much derision, and they find it hard to realize that a great sex war is being waged by the Feminist-Suffragist. But once an Oklahoma man begins to dissociate the Suffrage movement from the few women he knows who are suffs., and begins to judge it by its National leaders and by the things they have spoken and written during the past ten years, there arises in him an anger which is slow but mighty. The man of Oklahoma is opposed to woman suffrage because of the simple fact that his wife does not want the ballot; but how much more is he opposed to woman suffrage when he realizes that it means that his little girl and your little girl is to grow up under the influence of those feminist leaders who advocate "free love," "no marriage ceremony" (and that is what Dr. Anna Howard Shaw has advocated for years,) and the control by the state of the child? The application of the advanced feminist program in Socialist Russia takes on a new and hidious meaning when the fathers of Oklahoma realize that hidden beneath this pretty plea of "Please give us the ballot" lurks the thing known as "Feminism." ANTI-SUFF MOVE GROWING Oklahoma Will Vote Against the Proposed Constitutional Amendment. Tulsa, Okla.---Interest in the movement to defeat the Women Suffrage amendment to be voted upon this fall, continues to grow, despite the heat of mid-summer and the fact that activity on the part of anti-suffrage leaders has been deferred until cooler weather. Tulsa is a splendid example of the snow-ball tendency of public opinion, once aroused, to grow and grow and grow. When Charlotte Rowe of Washington, a representative of the National Association Opposed to Woman Suffrage, came to Tulsa, the only definite opposition to woman suffrage to be found here was that of a small group of women who were sufficiently alert to realize the menace of suffrage in Oklahoma, and its effect in other states. Miss Rowe spoke before every prominent men's club in Tulsa, and at the end of the week she was here, public opinion, as represented by the thinking men of the community, was beginning to crystalize. So convinced were the business men of Tulsa that the position of the "antis" was fundamentally sound, that they decided to ask the suffragists to present their side of the argument in a joint debate at the Auditorium to be sponsored by the Men's Clubs of Tulsa, the Ad Club in particular taking the lead. No clearer admission that they knew they were defeated in the public mind of Tulsa could have been made than the refusal of the suffragists to meet the anti argument on a public platform. MOTHERS OF OKLAHOMA. Oklahoma City,---An interesting fact pointed out here concerning the recently organized Oklahoma Association Opposed to Woman Suffrage is that every woman on the State Executive Committee is the mother of a family and and busily engaged in some sort of war activity. Of the three married women who are state officers, Mrs. T. H. Sturgeon has a son in the Aviation service, and a married daughter, Mrs. E. Constantin has two sons in the war, and Mrs. Eugene Lorton is the mother of a sturdy six year old son. These women are all too busy to leave their homes and go campaigning over the state, but they are making a powerful appeal to the men of the state to vote against the proposed Woman Suffrage amendment which would inevitably plunge them into the political world, for the woman with the vote who did not vote, would be a slacker. Mrs. Eugene Lorton Explains Cause of Present Activities of Those Opposed to Suffrage. Tulsa---"Of course it is an inopportune time to organize a state association opposed to woman suffrage," was the answer of Mrs. Eugene Lorton, Secretary of the Oklahoma Association to a woman here who criticized the antis for creating an agitation at this time. "No one knows better than the 'antis' how disagreeable it is," continued Mrs. Lorton, "but we are not to blame for the Suffragists started this agitation; and if we did not oppose them they would force suffrage upon the women of Oklahoma, eighty percent of whom do not want it, but who are so engrossed in their war work that they take it for granted that the men will vote the measure down. The Suffragists have declared for women suffrage as a war measure, and they have counted on the fact that thousands of Oklahoma mothers have but one thought, and that is of the boy 'over there.' They believed that the men of Oklahoma would believe their statements because they would be unopposed. We 'antis' want the men to know that the women of Oklahoma do not want woman suffrage." This statement of Mrs. Lorton's has received much approval in Tulsa where it is well understood that the only woman who criticized the 'anti' for taking time from her war work to oppose suffrage, is the very woman who hoped to take advantage of the preoccupation of a majority of our women to put over an unwelcome measure. THE WOMEN, THE WAR, AND THE VOTE Suffragists are demanding the vote as pay for the war work which they have done. For the first time in history women are demanding pay for their patriotism. Harold Owen, author of "Woman Adrift," has the following to say concerning the claim of the Suffragist that she has a right to the ballot in return for her war work. "It is indisputable that women have rendered invaluable services during the war. But what ground have the political friends of the suffragist for the bold initial assumption that the women who want the vote and the women who do the work are conterminously the same set of women? "The women who want to vote wanted it before the war, want it on grounds apart from the war, and are exploiting woman's services during the war as a sentimental advantage which they think will escape challenge for much the same polite reason as that which moves a man to raise his hat. But there must be at least as many non-suffragist and anti-suffragist women engaged in war work as suffragist. Are the anti-suffragists to find that the penalty of their patriotism is that it shall be the very ground on which the revolutionary change they don't want is to be thrust upon them?" SUFFS SEEK BLACK VOTE Mrs. Howard Gould Airs Her Silks and Satins Before Negro Audience. In the southern states, the suffragists are making a valiant effort to camouflage the fact that they have repeatedly catered to the negro vote in the eastern state, and particularly in the city of New York. This is what the New York Sun of Feb. 27th, 1918, has to say concerning the address of Mrs. Howard Gould, a prominent suffragist, before a negro audience of 2,000 men and women during the congressional campaign at that time: "Never in her career as an actress did Mrs. Gould win more complete success with an audience. Applause punctuated her speech throughout. When she said, "Let us kill the solid South; break it up and destroy it altogether," the outburst of cheers and cries had something of the [i???ty] of the answer ti an emotional religious appeal at a camp meeting. -ment carried and I attribute it greatly to the efforts of the Socialist party in this campaign. Our campaign helped largely to clear the political atmosphere and paved the way for radical opinions. Next to our tremendous gains it is the greatest victory of the year. 1st col.---"It is estimated, also, that with women having the right to vote, it will be much more difficult to lead the country into war. Suffrage is regarded by many radicals as the greatest step toward peace which could have been made. "Every tribute has been paid to the Socialist suffrage workers by the suffrage organization. They have been out with literature and newspapers all year round, and have held meetings for the cause in which no other but a Socialist woman could reach the crowds." A SOUTHERN WOMAN SPEAKS HER MIND Mr. James Callaway, in a column conducted by him in the Macon (Georgia) Daily Telegraph, prints the following remarkable letter on November 30, from a distinguished Southern woman who sent it to him with the request that it be published. "Has woman suffrage, with, comparatively speaking, a little band of wilful women, 'made cowards of us all?' "For every woman who stands and shrieks for the ballot there are hundreds, aye thousands, telling you they do not wish it. Do not force their patience too far! "The women of the South do not come to plead, gentlemen; they demand that the sovereignty of their States be not disturbed at this most critical hour. "'New York went for suffrage' we are told with bated breath. With over 400 per cent increase in Socialism, more than 70 per cent foreign-born, is that surprising? "But what is that to the South? The purest American blood in the nation flows in her veins and people. Instead of following, as sheep led astray, let us take warning from the experience of [New] York and stand firm in the faith of our fathers, and that ever safe [rock of] ages, the sovereignty of our States! "Barter your own souls and your manhood if you must; play your cheap political games; weaken your government when its united strength is most needed, but spare your women! "The fifteenth amendment and the force bill! How proudly they boast of these two dastardly achievements in their Official History of Suffrage! To 'dear Anna Dickinson, Frederick Douglass and Susan B. Anthony we owe them!' Suffragettes all! "The wound is scarce healed, and some way we feel that our statesmen, no matter how great the pressure, be it under the thinly buttered sop of 'war measure,' that unspeakable insult of 'reward' or any other trumped-up vaporings of political expediency, will indeed hesitate, ere they loose these upon the Southern women for the second time, and add to them that pestiferous old maid and her legacy of hell, the Susan B. Anthony amendment! "To the naked eye it is not visible, but a careful examination of the 'inside of the suffrage cup' shows these startling words: 'Made in Germany.' "Beware, indeed, oh woman of the South, of these Greeks who would bear to you this gift. "A SOUTHERN WOMAN." "IT IS COMING" POOR ARGUMENT Oklahoma City.---"The only argument which is advanced by such men in Oklahoma as are for Woman Suffrage, seems to be that It Is Coming," said Mrs. T. H. Sturgeon, President of the newly organized Oklahoma Association Opposed to Woman Suffrage, in a recent interview. "This very erroneous impression is the result of Suffrage propaganda and publicity and is very far from being the truth," said Mrs. Sturgeon in pointing out the facts that during the past six years, Woman Suffrage as an issue has been submitted to the voters in nineteen states, and that in but three states, Nevada, Montana and New York, had it carried, and in each instance it carried by the direct aid of the Socialist vote. In sixteen states the voters of the state emphatically voiced their disapproval of Woman Suffrage. The impression has also been sent broadcast over this country that the National Suffrage amendment would soon be carried. The facts are that the Susan B. Anthony Amendment carried in the House of Representatives with but one vote to spare, and that the amendment was decisively defeated in the Senate on June 27th, when in spite of the fact that every prominent Suff from Mrs. Pankhurst to Mrs. Catt had been lobbying for days, they found themselves unable to swing enough votes to even make it desirable to bring up the measure. "Woman Suffrage is not coming," says Mrs. Sturgeon, "it is now on the wane, and this fall sees the last big offensive of the suffs, and we expect to defeat them so decisively that we can carry the campaign into their own territory and repeal Suffrage in such states as Colorado and Montana and California." Concerning the Suffrage argument that Women should have the vote because they are taking men's places while the men are at war, Mrs. Sturgeon pointed out that the Suffs were demanding the ballot as a permanent thing, although the taking of men's places shold most certainly be considered a purely temporary matter to last only until the end of the war for women are not really taking men's places, for a man's place today is at the front, and carrying on while men are at war has always been and will always be woman's place. HENRY A. WISE-WOOD ATTACKS SUFFRAGE National Defense Council Head Sees the Error of His Ways. Washington, D. C.---Suffrage forces have not yet recovered from the effect upon their cause of the terrific attack of Henry A. Wise-Wood, a former suffragist, but an avowed anti-suffragist ever since he began his campaign for preparedness three years ago. Mr. Wise-Wood is head of the National Council of Defense, and before a suffrage hearing in the House of Representatives he was being questioned as to the reasons for his opposition to woman suffrage. The following is from the record of the proceedings: "How is it," asked Mr. Mondell, "that so many masterful men, having to do with our governmental affairs, have come to espouse suffrage?" Mr. Wood: "My reply is that if the figures of 1920 were not upon the horizon, suffrage would not be an issue here today." "I have no political aspirations. I never held office and do not want to. I am merely a man who for three years has tried to make safe his country, and my objection to suffrage is that it is going to unman our government. We know not how long the war may last, but we need to have the strongest masculine government that this country ever had. And I say for any sentimental or political reason it is a damnable thing that we should weaken ourselves by bringing into this war the women, who has never before been permitted in the war tents in the history of any strong, virile dominating race." -VELOPES IN OKLAHOMA Principles Back of the Anti-Suffrage Movement Draw Support of Politicians of Both Parties. Oklahoma City.---It is an unusual movement indeed which will bring under one flag the leaders of the two opposition parties in Oklahoma. Only a recognition of the fact that a blow of the fundamental principle of Christian civilization is threatening, could have taken the mind of loyal Oklahomans from the all absorbing question of winning the war, long enough to say "God Bless You, We're With You" to the newly organized Oklahoma Association Opposed to Woman Suffrage. "Perhaps it is because Oklahomans are so truly Americans, that even the men who are politicians and might be expected to fear the vitruperant attacks of the Suffragists had the courage of squarely facing the perfunctory endorsement o[f] woman suffrage by both the Democratic and Republican parties, and then saying to us, 'We are opposed to woman suffrage in Oklahoma and will help you fight it.'" Thus Maybelle Stuard, field secretary of the Oklahoma Association, sizes up Oklahoma sentiment after an extensive trip through the state. "There is too much pure air in Oklahoma," says Miss Stuard, "and too much sanity among its people for them ever to accept the degenerate theories of feminism and suffragists which flourish most in the mongrel atmosphere of the great city of New York where sixty-five languages are spoken. Feminism finds it hard to make itself understood in plain American such as we speak here, but the insult offered the fathers of Oklahoma by Jeanette Rankin, Feminist-Suffragist representative of this movement in Congress, when she referred in Congress to these self-same fathers as 'casual parents' was one feminist term which was understood. And the fathers of Oklahoma will answer in November." ANTIS DO BEST WAR WORK Two Strong Newspapers Are Opposing Female Suffrage. The award of prizes left by the will of the late Joseph Pulitzer of The New York World, in the care of Columbia University, is of deep interest to all anti-suffragists. Col. Henry Watterson, of the Louisville Courier-Journal, is awarded a $500 gold medal for "the best editorial article, the test of excellence being clearness of style, moral purpose, sound reasoning and power to influence public opinion in the right direction." The New York Times was awarded a similar $500 gold medal for "the most disinterested and meritorious public service rendered by any American newspaper during the year." It is of no small significance that Col. Henry Waterson has enlisted his mighty pen as a contributing editor to The Woman Patriot, the anti-suffrage organ. Nor is it of less significance tha The New York Times, one of the great papers which Col Watterson mentioned as "able to call its soul its own" on the question of woman suffrage, has rendered "the most disinterested and meritorious public service." Both Henry Watterson and The New York Times won these prizes for war work, for giving the American people the best and clearest information about the war. But it is a supreme satisfaction to note that the greatest editor and best newspaper in the United States after a year of war with Germany have constantly opposed woman suffrage as bad for the women and bad for the country. Defeated 16 Times at the Polls. "Woman suffrage has been voted upon 19 times since 1912. Sixteen times it has been defeated at the polls. Three times---in Montana, Nevada and New York---it carried as the direct result of the socialist vote. This fact has been demonstrated mathematically, and is admitted by socialists themselves. least as well. There is no State where the women from the National organization, invited by local opponents of suffrage, have met with a more courteous reception on the part of the people at large. The Oklahoma Association Opposed to Woman Suffrage, recently organized, has met with instant success. Mrs. T. H. Sturgeon, of Oklahoma City, is president; Miss Alice Robinson, of Muskogee, vice-president; Mrs. E. Constantin, of Tulsa, treasurer; Mrs. Eugene Lorton, of Tulsa, secretary; and Miss Maybelle Stuard, of Oklahoma City, field secretary. An Executive Committee of twenty prominent women, each an auxiliary charman in as many sections of the state, is headed by Mrs. Frank Greer, of Tulsa while an advisory board of twenty-five men includes Democratic nad Republican leaders, educators, bankers and influential business men. The Socialist menace is peculiarly acute in Oklahoma. Its 80,000 Socialist votes will go solid for woman suffrage; and the problem of the patriotic men and women of the State is to arouse the patriotic voters to a realization of the dual menace of Feminism and Socialism.---From the Woman Patriot. POOR TIME TO AGITATE Boston Paper Says Suffragettes Are Helping Out the Kaiser. A letter from Morrison Swift published in the Boston Herald and Journal of December 12 says: "Women's fitness to receive the vote at this time should be tested by their attitude toward the greatest question of the epoch---the world war. By this test so many of the vote-demanding women have failed that women should not be granted the ballot while the war lasts. Their possession of the franchise would only render democracy more insecure than it is. Of course there are many exceptions but the great majority of the suffragists have shown themselves incapable of thinking intelligently about the war. And the war is infinitely the greatest present subject, infinitely greater than the subject of women's votes. In their unintelligence about this supreme matter they rival the blind Russian Bolsheviki. They rank far below the British suffragettes in perspicacity, for when the war came the latter halted their propaganda to help save the world. Should we lose the war, the ballot both for men and women would become and empty form in this country. By turmoiling for the ballot now, while the very existence of the ballot is at stake, these women are assisting the Germans to triumph, and thus are laboring to cancel the value of the vote, which they claim so highly to revere. And the women do not see this! But they tell us they are competent to vote! A federal amendment enfranchising such women in this crisis would be worth a million soldiers to Germany. SLACKERS OR PLAIN LIARS Suffragettes Step Into a Trap in a Recent Statement. Another group of prominent suffragists recently issued a public statement to the effect that the delay in the passage of the Federal amendment is "hindering women's war service." This charge is either true or untrue. If it is true, if there are any women who are sulking and acting as slackers in time of war because they do not get the political price they ask for their "patriotism," these women are suffragists. If the charge is not true, the suffragists who are making it are lying about women, making them out slackers when they are really serving their country whole heartedly. They have made their statement and they can take their choice: Are the suffragists slackers or liars in respect to the war service of American women? Yes, we will confess that we do not like the "short and ugly word" but the honest, proper and truthful way to use the English language is to call a thing what it is.---"The Woman Patriot." Western Newspaper Union Fully equipped offices in the following cities: Atlanta, Ga. Baltimore, Md. Billings, Mont. Birmingham, Ala. Boston, Mass. Buffalo, N. Y. Charlotte, N. C. Chicago, Ill. Cincinnati, O. Cleveland, O. Columbus, O. Dallas, Tex. Denver, Colo. Des Moines, Ia. Detroit, Mich. Fargo, N. D. Ft. Wayne, Ind. Houston, Tex. Indianapolis, Ind. Kansas City, Mo. Lincoln, Neb. Little Rock, Ark. Memphis, Tenn. Milwaukee, Wis. Minneapolis, Minn. New York, N. Y. Oklahoma City, Okla. Omaha, Neb. Philadelphia, Pa. Pittsburgh, Pa. Portland, Ore. St. Louis, Mo. Salt Lake City, Utah. San Francisco, Cal. Sioux City, Ia. Sioux Falls, S. D. Wichita, Kans. Transcribed and reviewed by contributors participating in the By The People project at crowd.loc.gov.