NAWSA. Subject File. Anti-Suffrage Literature. ADDRESS OF MRS. A. J. GOERGE AT HIGHLAND CLUB JUNE 25 AT 8 P.M. The importance of the woman suffrage question can hardly be overestimated. It is more important than the election of a Governor, or of a President or a Senator of the United States. Such elections are merely for the present. But the change proposed in the woman suffrage referendum is revolutionary and strikes at the very vitals of our organic law. It is a simple statement of fact, therefore, to say that the way in which the men of Massachusetts vote upon this question in November is of grave concern to all who have the future welfare of the state at heart. This is important to remember, because in precise proportion to the interest taken in the question by the voters will be the wisdom of the decision. Woman suffrage has never been adopted in any state where the men took sufficient interest in the question to vote upon it. When we remember that only forty-four men in ever hundred voted one way or the other on Woman suffrage in the states which have adopted it, it is clear that popular indifference is the chief hope of the movement. Anti-Suffragists claim no monopoly of intelligence or sincerity in the discussion of this question. We believe it is, in the main, an honest difference of opinion that separate suffragists and anti-suffragists. All we ask is that the voters study the question carefully, hearing both sides, and then vote as their consciences dictate. If they do, we have no fear of the result. The suffrage question should not be decided by virtue of a theory, or from motives of chivalry. Mrs. Funk, one of the officers of the National Woman Suffrage Association, says they are going to keep the question before the voters "until in desperation or self-defense they give women the ballot." This is a good deal like marrying a man to get rid of him, a thing that has been done by women. But I believe the suffragists will get tired before the men of Massachusetts are driven to the desperate resort of marrying woman suffrage to get rid of it. As Mr. Root has so well shown, there are two things clear in this discussion. One is that the vote is not a right. The other is that there is no question of superiority or inferiority involved. Men and women are essential to each other and to the race, but in different ways. They were designed to supplement and co-operate and not to compete or antagonize. In some ways men are clearly superior to women. In other ways women are clearly superior to men. But the great divide of sex was established by nature and cannot be bridged. On the question of "right", we must hold the decisions of the Supreme Court, which holds that the ballot is an instrument of government designed for the benefit of the state and not for the benefit of the individual. And we must also hold to the dictates of reason, which shows us that if the ballot were an inherent right, like life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, it could be withheld from any individual, man, woman or child. The ballot is merely an instrument devised by the state for its own purposes, and the state has the right to say who shall use it. And when the state steps in and says women shall not vote, it says so because it believes that the best interests of all concerned cannot be conserbed by adding to the electorate, in the case of Massachusetts, more than one million voters whose training, experience and natural functions are entirely foreign to politicans and not such as to fit them for business of -3- government. The addition of one million inexperienced voters to the electorate of Massachusetts may seem to some a not very hazardous experiment, but it assumes a different aspect when we consider that there are in this state 53,000 more women of voting age than men of voting age. This means that if given the ballot, the women of Massachusetts would have the balance of power, and could, if they cared to exercise their power, swing any election contrary to the will of the majority of men. Do you think it would conduce to the safety and welfare of the state to have it subject to the control of a majority of inexperienced and emotional voters? Woman suffrage is not expedient because it violates the basic principles of economy and efficiency. It means sending a man and a woman to do a job that the man can do at least as well alone, and it means diverting the attention of the woman from work which she alone can do while she is engaged in work which can be done as well or better without her. Some men may, considering the matter as of not very great importance, "Well, if women want the ballot, why not let them have it?" This involves an assumption which is not warranted by the facts -- the assumption that the ballot is demanded by women. The truth is that the ballot is not demanded by women, but by a very small fraction of women known as suffragists. In Massachusetts this fraction amounts to less than 6 percent, of the women of voting age. What the other 94 per cent, want may be unknown, but as long as it is unknown the suffragists have no right to demand the ballot in the name of women. It is incumbent on the suffragists to prove, before they -4- demand the ballot that a majority of their sex want to vote; but the great outstanding fact in this connection is that the last thing the suffragists desire is a vote of the women on this question of whether women desire to vote. They know that such a test would show the utter hollowness of their demand. And so they would rather trust the chivalry of men than to the convictions and desires of their own sex. Here is a fact that the men of Massachusetts should ponder well before they cast their ballots in November, because it is one over which there is no room for controversy and which reaches the vitals of this question: The great opposition to woman suffrage is not from men, but from the great mass of women themselves. Why should the men of Massachusetts impose upon women the burdens and responsibilities of government when they know that women do not want them? I sometimes wonder whether even the suffrage women want to vote, or whether they want simply to talk about voting. They talked about it in 1879. "Give us the school vote," they said, "as a test of womens interest in the vote, and we will show you what we will do." Well, they were given the vote and they have shown us what they will do. In the last 15 years about 4 per cent of the women of Massachusetts have registered, and about 2 per cent have remembered when election day came around! In 45 per cent of our towns there were years when no woman thought of the ballot! In the full-suffrage states, the figures show that women do not use the ballot as generally as men. So that we have this situation: If the women, when given the ballot, do use it as generally as men, we have the danger of the blank cartridge ballot, which, in Massachusetts, might mean the women controlling -5- every election result. On the other hand, if women do not vote as generally as men, which is the experience in suffrage states, then we have the certain result of an increased percentage of stay-at-home voters and the consequent increase in the power of the controlled vote. It is the fashion for suffragists to belittle the record of Massachusetts in humanitarian legislation. But that facts show that, while here and there some other states may have better laws, as a whole the laws of Massachusetts are more favorable to women and children than those of any state in the Union, woman suffrage or male-suffrage. Massachusetts has always led in real progressive, humanitarian legislation; and certainly if anywhere in the world women need the ballot for their own protection, it is not in this Commonwealth. The demand for the ballot carries with it the implication that the men of Massachusetts have failed in their duty towards the women of Massachusetts. Suffragists boldly assert that men have not represented women and cannot represent them in public affairs. We anti-suffragists dispute that statement and resent it as an unjust reflection upon men. We know that the men of Massachusetts have represented us; and in proof of that statement we have only to point to the special privileges they have given us and the special laws they have passed for our protection. We know that we can trust our father, husbands, brothers, and sons to represent us in public life, just as they trust us to represent them in private life and in our department of the social structure. In a healthy state of society there is no rivalry between men and women; and if the men vote, as I am -6- sure they will vote, there will be no rivalry between the men and women of Massachusetts for many years to come. ---###---- NAWSA - 1918 9th Street and Halket Ave. Braddock, Pa., December 9, 1918. [*Cornelia this is worth presenting as a relic of the dark ages if you don't want it, I do.*] Hon. Charles L. McNary, The Farragut, Washington, D.C. Dear Sir:- In re: Woman Suffrage. Sincere thanks to those, who have thus far thwarted this calamity. The writer earnestly implores your reading the enclosed on this vital subject. It takes three minutes to read it. Am anxious to elaborate, if you need it or desire it. Thanking you in anticipation, I am, Yours truly, Alex C. Walker An Effort Opposing Woman Suffrage Woman Suffrage will injure and may ruin the morale of the men of the country. Consider the nature of the male of the species and don't buck human human nature. With the utmost consideration for women and their welfare, don't let it run to the extreme of stifling and almost killing the natural instincts of the male. Man likes to read and rule. It is more naturally his place and quality. Likes to be admired and respected by women, and does not like to take orders from them or work in an inferior capacity to them mentally or physically. Under woman suffrage such individual cases of man's subservience could be pictured too numerous to mention. The argument is not -- "give him these conditions, because he likes them" -- but because suppression of same is a positive injury to his physical and mental status. Continued mental dissatisfaction or discontent becomes torture in time. Don't kill the ambition that still exists among men to work to provide for the family and secure one of the rewards -- which is the recognition that he is the provider or the principal provider. If women vote, they can hold office-- Because, whether you restrict them on office holding, their votes, properly marshalled with the assistance of a few men, will get them anything they want. Will men relish taking orders from women officials? Even if women officials are in the minority, it is a hardship for the men, who have to serve under them. How about the unpleasant sight of having some well known little lady movie star, whom the women and some men worship, for a prominent official? Competition of men and women politically and otherwise is unpleasant. Let men not take it for granted, that women will favor men for public office. Woman Suffrage would undoubtedly encourage competition with men in other lines. Increased activity of women is unnecessary, They are at present provided for, or else have means and opportunities of providing for themselves. In years past, when their sphere was more limited, they lived happily. Increased feminine competition lessens man's earning power, and subjects him to the humiliation of not being an ample provider for the family. Picture the depressing position of the ordinary husband of a woman prominent politically or commercially. Discourages marriage Competition tends to arouse antagonism between men and women Tends to lessen woman's attractive qualities of modesty, dependence and delicacy, developing arrogance, knowledge and independence. Although suffragists may seem numerous to you, may not represent the sentiments of the majority of the 30,000,000 or more women. Quite likely do not. May be forcing something not wanted. When very estimable women have taken the trouble to organize against it, the cause looks rickety. If suffrage is forced through, do not grant them office holding Leave at least a few careers open for men, such as a political career, where a man can feel it a MAN'S work worthy of a MAN AMONG MEN, where he is given free rein and encouragement in a laudible ambition to be respected and honored by the community. If one of the impelling forces (as it often is), is the desired admiration of a woman, let the political office he has won be such, that his woman cannot say, "It is only such as has been held by one of our own sex." 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 civil and political interests are identical and his vote expresses her desire. P.O. Box 400, Braddock, Pa. From Mrs. George's Talk on Women's Suffrage. [*Mrs AJ George*] This is a very serious question. We are living in serious times, and it would not be proper to ask your attention to a political or academic discussion of something which was going to affect woman's or man's welfare in the hazy future, unless it were an important one. The question is one men will decide at the polls on the 2nd of November. We have come here tonight to ask you to consider this question of Woman's Suffrage. It is not a question to be decided upon lightly or off-hand. It is not to be decided on the opinion that the generality of woman want it; nor, on the grounds of "Let the dear things have what they want!" or, because you men are weary in spirit you say, "For heaven sake, let us have peace and let them have it." The woman has charge of our congressional [of] work of our National Suffrage Association suggests that the women of this country pester voters until in utter weariness of spirit they will give us the vote. This does not stand for true patriotism. We are here to discuss dispassionately without personalities some phases of the question involved,-whether women shall be given a representation in this government. Government is not a pink tea or club affair. Mrs. Catt said -----------------. We will have them in proportion as we have just systems of taxation, so we have safe interlacing laws which go to make up our international policy. We Antis contend that somehow or other owing to their physical and mental makeup, men are better equipped to carry on the government which has to do with the protection of property. I am not here to talk against Suffrage. I have been a Suffragist. Because, if anything is said against their propaganda, they say you are saying things unflattering to women. But in a highly developed order of society we find that the individual unite which go to make up that society--------------. You may be told today that we have a sham democracy, Mass. women are slaves, Colorado with woman's Suffrage has the highest per capita tax in the country and the worst government. Woman's Suffrage means higher taxes and increased cosst of living. The question is not what will it do, but what has it done? Margaret Foley in one of her talks to the factory girls said "Girls, if you had the vote your wages would be raised. Won't you sign these cards?" Miss Foley knew this wouldn't happen; but wouldn't you sign if a person in higher authority told you that your wages would be raised? It is not to the suffrage states that we look for the best Child Labor laws. It has been the fashion among the Suffragists( and [the] a thing I disapprove of heartily) to put aside our own American flag and advance their own Suffrage flag. The Secretary of the National Suffrage Association says, we don't want any special laws, we don't want any special rules. We want to be treated, said she, exactly as the men are treated. Equal rights with avengeance. Do they stand ready to give up rights today accorded to women? The 54-hour law,- the prohibition of night work for women etc, and still insist on fair field [in] and favor to none. "We will take everything the men take and with it the elective Franchise." In Illinois they have a limited Suffrage,- they have the votes of the men kept separate from the votes of the women. They are not kept separate in in any other states. In chicago the other day they had an election,-it was found that 88% of the registered men voted and only about 50% of the women,- an election which cost the city of Chicago one million three hundred and forty thousand dollars,- a considerable sum for the tax payer to arrange for later. They found that if not a single woman voted the result would have been the same,- double the amount of expenditure and time. There are two ways for a married woman to vote,- with her husband The work of the Suffragists with their own sex is to persuade women that they are slaves and cannot hope for profress or to take their place in the sun until have the responsibilities of Government. And we are beginning to find out that uplift of Legislation does not work. There is something in human nature which early loves to hear what a hard time it is having. We have got to improve the units that go to make up society and this mania for uplift of legislation leaves the people not where they found them, but leaves the people not where they found them, but leaves the people with the wrong idea that you can accomplish through the law what you cannot accomplish in the formation of character in the rearing of children. Women's work is supreme; and nine tenths of our legislation,- socalled reform legislation seeks to corrects the evils of faculty home training. All this disturbance about votes for women and tends to minimize the necessity of the work in the family, in the home, in the church, and in the school; and to everlastingly emphasize the other phase of life. There are some of us who are carefully asking ourselves if by any chance we stand in the way of a working girl. Inez Milholland said ten million women are driv en to factories for a living and must have the vote. Eight million are females ten years of age and over!- woman means 21 years according to law. Gainfully employed; nearly 40% of them in domestic or personal service, as many of them in mercantile and commercial pursuits; nearly half of them under twenty-five years (and always stay at that low age limit); because, women, unlike men, leave work when entering matrimony. A statement of our suffrage friends is that when women get the vote women will have equal pay for equal work. Mr. Samuel Gompers says that the vote never raised a man's wage or never gave him a job. If Woman's Suffrage was going to raise and equalize the wages of women,- in Colorado women have voted twenty three years,- the commissioner of labor there said,women have comein and underbid men in the labor market. Women's wages have lowered in market value. [5?] Children pay taxes (if they have money)---let them vote. Aliens pay taxes---Aliens obey the laws---let them vote. Non-residents pay taxes---non-residents obey the laws---let them vote. Please remember that democracy is placed on the consent of the government and the consent of the government implies that the majority rules,- and our friends the suffragists say that they have behind them at least a majority of the women. Do you know that the Suffragists are so enthusiasts in their advertising that certain ones in New York instead of saying Hello when they receive a telephone call, take the receiver off and say "Votes for Women"! The Suffragists have their soap-box oratory and blacklists. Do you know that the Rev, Anna Shaw, President of the National Suffrage Association singled out Henry Cabot Lodge particularly for defeat? She gave out over her official signature this statement:"The women of Mass. have two years in which to defeat this man." Mr. Lodge is still on the blacklist. When President Wilson was in New York two Suffragists forced themselves into his presence and he had a banner with "Votes for women" pushed before him until he was bound to decide. They have their heckling committees, their Hague Conference, and whatnot; and yet, after seventy years of this sort of propaganda and advertising (all quite legitimate if you like this sort of thing) they have not reached a considerable number of their own sex. They trust to the chivalry of men. On the question of Suffrage we think that men are quite competent to decide. The Fact in regard to Mr. Lodge is not newspaper copy. 4 Now when you talk about Woman Suffrage and say it is bound to come, bound to come (laughter) you have taken a phrase which has been stimulated in circulation. There is no reason under heaven why any women should say it is bound to come. Double suffrage has never been. California has shown no progress which we cannot duplicate in our own male state of Massachusetts. It is a fact worth remembering that it is in Massachusetts and not in any Suffrage state that night work for women in factories is prohibited. That it is Massachusetts,- and not any Suffrage state that was the first to establish a Minimum Wage Commission and the first to pass a Maternity Act. What becomes of the claim that it is only through women's votes that such laws can be secured? Why don't we hear about Wyoming from the Suffragists? Do we look to Wyoming for example? Mrs. Catt told us in Pittsburg that Woman's Suffrage has made no headway except in times of Political unrest. It came into the Pacific Coast states on a wave of Socialism and when Woman's Suffrage was submitted in Wisconsin what happened? The people of Wisconsin,- that great progressive state,- Mr. La Folette's own state by the way,- voted against Suffrage by a majority of 92000. In Ohio in 1912 8000 voted against Suffrage and in 1914 182000 voted against it. Michigan almost let it go through in Nov. 1914,- they got a majority of 732 votes against Suffrage. They did not want to get it through before the Antis could organize. They did not. get it before the voters before the Antis could organize and I am proud to say I had a part in that organization. The Suffragists went up and down state talking economic independence and sexual independence to the men and to the women. The women didn't like it, nor did the men of Michigan like it, and they registered against Suffrage in April,- after only six weeks campaign on the part of the Antis. There is a sign in Copley Square reading, there is no democracy until women can vote. I am going to offer a few suggestions to the Suffragists for cartoons: 9 or against him. If she votes with him you get the same results as you got in Chicago, and if she votes against him, according to my interpretation the family is disenfranchised. We are bound to have differences on religious and educational matters, bringing up of the children; certainly in regard to the expenditure of the family income. But, we Anti-suffragists believe somehow that those differences should be discussed in the privacy of the family. Mrs. Forbes-Robertson Hale and Mrs. Park say that it is impossible for any man to represent any women. The Antis say that the men represents the woman in politics and government, just as the woman represents the man in other phases in life. -------- --------The vote is not detached but in a political phase of the whole feministic movement, not in its original shape but used to describe economical, social and sex independence. We don't believe in these things. Some people do. I am not here to talk Socialism------------ I am talking about socialists who voted for Eugene Debs in 1906 and may it in desirable to forward the cause of suffrage in order that the gospel of Socialism may be preached to all the people of New York City. Women who walked in Washington with one mile of Socialists to vote for Women's Suffrage,- Mise Shaw said to welcome every socialist vote. I have respect for the Socialists but I do not like their promises. (Mrs. George holds small red banner with Votes for women printed in black letters) (Now this banner is usually applauded. Thousands were [?] in a parade headed by Miss Inez Willholland,- carrying these banners with red to the sound of the Marseilles. Perhaps you like it. We don't. It is no political trick to insist that there are two ideals of Society. One unit of government is the self-governing group called the family out of which we build the larger group, the state. [3?] With the double electorate vote would be added one million one hundred thousand elective votes. With this would we got an average vote which would be more none or more intelligent then the average vote of men is today! Nor do some women want to vote. Would you get better results for the double cost of election and the enormous increase of the high cost of living? Now compare like with like. I hope you can see the light. (Pointing to comparison picture) Each one of these men represents a state in our Union. The man with the yellow coat has partial suffrage, full suffrage will be voted upon on the 2nd of November. Illinois by a very doubtful procedure, boosted by ------------ put through ------------which would be a disgrace to the most corrupt politician. Then is not full Suffrage in Illinois tho' they tried to get the measure, but failed to get one hundred thousand votes,- although the Suffragists offered through an advertisement $1. a piece for signatures. (I know because I have the advertisement in my possession.) I have to be careful what I say because the Rev. Anne Shaw has done me the honor to say I am the biggest liar on earth. Again pointing to comparison picture. You have to go way down here before you get to another man in yellow. California has double Suffrage. The next state in size which has double Suffrage is Kansas. Here you come to the next state in size (pointing to Nevada) which has tried double Suffrage. I will tell you why I don't say Equal Suffrage a little later. Nevada was won by Miss Margaret Foley, and she said either danced, gossiped or sand with every voter in the state,- not a hard job as the population cover not over a hundred thousand square miles of territory and in eight thousand less than the population of Lynn Massachusetts. 9 and until they get the elective franchise they cannot be free. What Anti-Suffragists contend is that suffrage is not a right and women's inferiority or superiority to men does not hinge on the possession of the elective franchise. I will tell you a story: I love Suffrage parades. I have seen a great many of them. First in Baltimore, Md. At that time certain women set out to represent to the voters of Maryland the condition of unenfranchizement in their state. One of them was a friend of mine. They dressed themselves in black, bound their hands in fetters, - to show the condition of women in unenfranchized Maryland. It was a rainy day and the fetters were made of paper, - you can imagine what rain would do paper and paste. The rain came down in torrents and the paste and paper separated. They still marched but the fetters had disappeared. Nature had taken care of it. These fetters, - so called by the Suffragists, - are not made by the state but are made by the imagination [by] of our Suffrage friends. Please do not think that women in Mass. are slaves because they do not have the responsibilities in the government, for this is not so. The thing to be decided will not be whether a few women will be displeased, but whether you are going to get a better Commonwealth of Mass. to live in. Are you going to get a better gown of Swampscott, a better town of Brookline. a better city of Lynn or a better city of Boston? The right of the individual to vote must be subservient to the question of whether or not we shall double our electorate vote. You have probably seen the suffrage cartoon, - (a Horrible thing:) A drunken man sitting at the table with his head on his arms and at his feet a woman scrubbing the flour. Underneath the legend, "He can vote, she can't." - Horrible: What of it? Society is not divided between drunken men on one hand and scrubbing women on the other. 10 (Mrs. George holding pamphlet up to audience) I will read from this book. The book is printed by the National Suffrage Association. It is called Bondswoman. They are sold two for five cents. I bought a thousand and considered it a good investment. "We are all Bondswomen now until we get the elective Franchize. When we are free to have children, free to choose-------------------------there will be baby gardens-----------------and follow a life work -------------as a solution." These are put out with the zeal of the NATIONAL Suffrage Association, on them - putting this sort of thing out and also a paper called the Masses , - a blasphemous sheet, just a they put out these----------------to relieve women of the care of children.-------------------------------to have a more [and] individual and more independent life work. But the State comes along and says, we will divine mothers' pensions and widows' pensions.-------------- Experts have agreed that a child is better in a poor home than in a good institution. The demand for a broader sphere is nine times out of ten the demand for a more conspicuous and public sphere. And we believe that the average man does some tings in life ---------- circumstances ---------- of their life are not identical. I will tell you a story of a friend of mine in Maine. She is seventy years old and has five sons and daughters of whom she has thought more than she has of her rights? . I said to her, do you want to vote: For the Lord sakes said she, Let the men do something. Unless you are ready to acceed that women's votes must divide------------ you are not a consistant Suffragist. We find that women for one reason or another are doing splendid constructive work in proportion as they keep out of politics. If they divide, they do precisely as the men have done and simply duplicate men's work, --------------------. A conspicuous exampke for a women to whom I will yield --------------- for the splendid constructive work she did in her own department, but since she went into politics her power is divided by three in her own city because she has set up work along educational and Social lines, has been particularly generous, - particularly appreciative, - let us put it that way, - in recognition. Judge Lindsay says that we are at least thirty years ahead of Colorado despite Woman's Suffrage. I appeal to you men to represent the majority of women of the Commonwealth by voting against Woman's Suffrage on the 2nd of November. Man Anti Suff stuff Transcribed and reviewed by contributors participating in the By The People project at crowd.loc.gov.