50th Congress, ) 
 2d Session, i 
 
 SENATE. 
 
 ( Kept. 2543, 
 \ Part 2. 
 
 IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES. 
 
 February 22, 1889.— Ordered to be printed. 
 
 Mr. CocKRELL, from the Committee on Woman Suffrage, submitted the 
 
 following 
 
 VIEWS OF THE MINORITY: 
 
 » [To accompany Report No. 2543. ] 
 
 The undersigned, minority of the Committee on Woman Suffrage, dis- 
 seut from the views of the majority. 
 
 In the Forty-ninth Congress the minority of the committee submit- 
 ted the following views : 
 
 (Senate Report No. 70, part 2, Forty-nintli Congress, first session.] 
 
 The undersigned, minority of the Committee of the Senate on Woman Suffrage, to 
 whom was referred Senate resolution No. 5, proposing an amendment to the Consti- 
 tutiou of the United States to grant the riglit to vote to the women of the United 
 States, beg leave to submit the following minority report, consisting of extracts from 
 a little volume entitled Letters from a Chimney Corner," written by a highly cul- 
 tivated lady, Mrs. C. F. Corbin, of Chicago. This gifted lady has discussed the 
 question with so much clearness and force that we make no apology to the Senate 
 for substituting quotations from her book in place of anything we might produce. 
 We quote first from chapter 3, which is entitled, "The value of suffrage to women 
 muc^ overestimated." 
 
 The fair authoress says : 
 
 *' If women were to be considered in their highest and final estate as merely indi- 
 vidual beings, and if the right to the ballot were to be conceded to man as an indi- 
 vidual, it might perhaps be logically argued that women also possessed the inherent 
 right to vote. But from the oldest times, and through all the history of the race, has 
 run the glimmer of an idea, more or less distinguishable in difierent ages and under 
 different cij^cumstauces, that neither man nor woman, is, as such, individual ; that 
 neither being is of itself a whole, a unit, but each requires to be supplemented by the 
 other before its true structural integrity can be achieved. Of this idea, the science of 
 botany furnishes the most perfect illustration. The stamens on the one hand and the 
 ovary aud pistil on the other, may indeed reside in one blossom, wJiich then exists in 
 a married or reproductive state. But equally well, the stamens or male organs may 
 reside in one plant, aud the ovary and pistil orfemale organs may reside in another. In 
 that case, the two plants are required to make one structurally complete organization. 
 Each is but half a i)lant, an incomplete individual by itself. The life principle of 
 each must be united to that of the other ; the twain must be indeed one flesh belore 
 the organization is either structurally or functionally conii)lete. 
 
 "Now, everywhere throughout nature, to the male and female ideal, certain dis- 
 tinct powers and properties belong. The lines of demarkation are not always clear, 
 not always straight lines; they are frequently wavering, shadowy, and difficult to 
 follow ; yet on the whole, wherever physical strength, personal aggressiveness, the 
 intellectual sc^ope and vigor which manage vast material enterprises are emphasized, 
 there the masculine ideal is present; ou the other hand, wherever refiiuMiuMit, tender- 
 ness, delicacy, sprightliness, si)iritua.l acumen and force are to the fore, tlune the feuii- 
 niue ideal is represented, and these terms will be found nearly enough for all i)ructical 
 purposes to represent the dittering endowments of actual men and women. Dilferent 
 powers suggest different activities, and under the division of labor here indicatetl the 
 control of the State, legislation, the power of the ballot would seem to fall to the 
 share of man. Nor does this decision carry with it any injustice, any robbery of just 
 
\ 
 
 2 WOMAN SUFFRAGE. 
 
 or natural right to woman. In her hands is placed amoral and spiritual power far 
 greater than the power of the ballot. In her married or reproductive state, the form- 
 ing and shaping of human souls in their most plastic period is her destiny. Nor do 
 her labors or her responsibilities end with infancy or childhood. Throughout his 
 entire course, from the cradle to the grave, man is ever under the moral and spiritual 
 influence and control of woman. With this power goes a tremendous responsibility 
 for its true management and use. If woman shall ever rise to the full height of her 
 power and privileges in this direction, she will have enough of the world's work upon 
 her hands without attempting I'egislation. 
 
 " It may be argued that the possession of civil power confers dignity, and is of itself 
 a re-enforcement of whatever natural power an individual may possess ; but the dig- 
 nity of womanhood, when it is fully understood and appreciated, needs no such re-en- 
 forcement, nor are the peculiar needs of woman such as the law can reach. When- 
 ever laws are needed for the protection of her legal status and rights, there has 
 been found to be little difficulty in obtaining them by means of the votes of men ; but 
 the deeper and more vital needs of woman and of society are those which are outside 
 altogether of the pale of the law, and which can only be reached by the moral forces 
 lodged in the hands of woman herself, acting in an enlarged and general capacity. 
 For instance, whenever a man or woman has been wronged in marriage, the law may, 
 indeed, step in with a divorce ; but does that divorce give back to either party the dream 
 of love, the happy home, the prattle of children, and the sweet outlook for future years 
 which were destroyed by that wrong? It is not a legal power which is needed in 
 this case ; it is a moral power, which shall prevent the wrong, or, if committed, shall 
 induce penitence, forgiveness, a purer life, and the healing of the wound. This 
 power has been lodged by the Creator in the hands of woman herself, and if she has 
 not been rightly trained to use it there is no redress for her at the hands of the law. 
 The law alone can never compel men to respect the chastity of women. They must 
 first recognize its value in themselves, and by their own courageous and upright liv- 
 ing — by living up to the high level of their duties as maidens, wives, and mothers — 
 they must impress men with the beauty and sacredness of purity, and then whatever 
 laws are necessary and available for its protection will be easily obtained, with a 
 certainty, also, that they can b*e enforced, because the moral sentiments of men will 
 be enlisted in their support. 
 
 "Privileges bring responsibilities, and before women clamor for more work to do, 
 it were better that they should attend more thoughtfully to the duties which lie all 
 about them, in the home and social circle. Until society is cleansed of the moral foul- 
 ness which infests it, which, as we have seen, lies beyond the reach of civil law, wom- 
 en have no call to go forth into wider fields, claiming to be therein the rightful and 
 natural purifiers. Let them first make the home sweet and pure, and the streams 
 which flow therefrom will sweeten and purify all the rest. 
 
 ''As between the power of the ballot and this moral force exerted by women there 
 can not be an instant's doubt as to the choice. Nor is it very plain to be seen how 
 women can yield both. It is a question of having your cake and eating it too. In 
 natural refinement and elevation of character the ideal woman stands a step above 
 the ideal man. If she descends from this fortunate position to take part in the coarse 
 scramble for material power, what chance will she have as against man's aggressive 
 forces; and what can she possibly gain that she can not win more directly, more ef- 
 fectually, and with far more dignity and glory to herself by the exerci|e of her own 
 womanly prerogatives ? She has, under God, the formation and rearing of men in her 
 own l^auds. If they do not turn out in the end to be men who respect woman, who 
 will protect and defend her in the exercise of every one of her God-given rights, it 
 is because she h^s failed in her duty toward them ; has not been taught to compre- 
 hend her own power, and to use it to its best ends. P^or women to seek to control 
 men by the power of suffrage is like David essaying the armor of Saul. What woman 
 needs is her own sheepskin sling and her few smooth pebbles from the bed of the 
 brook, and then go forth in the name of the Lord God of Hosts, and a victory as sure 
 and decisive as that of the shepherd of Israel awaits her." 
 
 Again, in chapter 4, entitled "The power of the home," the author says: 
 
 "It is perhaps of minor consequence that women should have felt themselves eman- 
 cipated from buttons and bread-making ; but that they should have learned to look 
 in the least degree slightingly upon the great duties of women as lovers of husbands, 
 as lovers of children, as the fountain and source of what is highest and purest and 
 holiest, and not less of what is homely and comfortable and satisfying in the home, 
 is a serious misfortune. Women can hardly be said to have lost, perhaps, what they 
 have so rarely in any age generally attained, that dignity which knows how to com- 
 mand, united with a sweetness which seems all the while to be complying ; the power, 
 supple and strong, which rescues the character of the ideal woman from the charge of 
 weakness, and at the same time exhibits its utmost of grace and fascination. But 
 that of late years the gift has not been cultivated, has not, in fact, thrown out such 
 natural off-shoots as gave grace and glory to some earlier social epochs, must be evi- 
 dent, it would seem, to any thoughtful observer. 
 
WOMAN SUFFRAGE. 
 
 3 
 
 " If, instead of striviDg to grasp more material power, women would pursue those 
 studies and investigations wLich tend to make tliem familiar with what science 
 teaches concerning the influence of the mother and the home upon the chikl, of how 
 completely the Creator in giving the genesis of the human race into the hands of 
 woman has made her not only capable of, but responsibh^ for, th<; regeneration of 
 the world; if they would reflect that nature by making man the bond-slave of his 
 passions, has put the lever in the hands of women by which she may control him, and 
 if they would learn to use these powers not as bad women do, for vile and selhsh ends, 
 but as the mothers of the race ought, for pure and holy and redenii)tive x>"rposes, 
 then would the sphere of women be enlarged to some purpose ; the atmosphere of the 
 home would be purified and vitalized, and the work of redeeming man from his vices 
 would be hopefully begun." 
 
 From chapter 1 we make the following extract : 
 
 ''Is this emancipation of women, if that is the proper phrase for it, a fmal end, or 
 only the means to an end ? Are women to be as the outcome of it emancipated 
 from their world-old "sphere" of marriage and motherhood and control of the moral 
 and spiritual destinies of the race, or are they to be emancipated, in order to the 
 proper fulfillment of these functions ? It would seem that most of the advanced 
 women of the day would answer the first of these questions affirmatively. Women, 
 I think it has been authoritatively stated, are to be emancipated in order that they 
 may become fully developed human beings, something broader and stronger, some- 
 thing higher and finer, more delicate, more esthetic, more generally rarefied and 
 sublimated than the old-fashioned type of womanhood, the wife and mother. And 
 the result of the woman movement seems more or less in a line thus far with this 
 theoretic aim. Of advanced women a less proportion are inclined to marry than of 
 the old-fashioned type ; of these who do marry, a great proportion are restless in 
 marriage bonds or seek release from them, while of those who do remain in married 
 life many bear no children, and few indeed become mothers of large families. The 
 women's vitality is concentrated in the brain, and fructifies more in intellectual than 
 X)hysical forms. Now women who do not marry are one of two things, either they be- 
 long to a class which we shrink from naming, or they become old maids. An old nuiid 
 may be in herself a very useful and commendable person, a valuable member of so- 
 ciety — many are all this — but she has still this sad drawback, she cau^not perpetuate 
 herself; and since all history and observation go to prove that the great final end of 
 creation, whatever it may be, can only be achieved through the perpetuity and in- 
 creasing progress of the race, it follows that unmarried woman is not the mo^t neces- 
 sary, the indispensable type of woman. If there were no other class of females left 
 upon the earth but the women who do not bear children, then the world would be a 
 failure, creation would be nonplused. 
 
 "If then, the movement for the emancipation of woman has for its final end the 
 making of never so fine a quality, never so sublimated a sort of non-chil^-bearing 
 women, it is an absurdity upon the face of it. 
 
 " From the stand-point of the Chimney Corner, it appears that too many even of the 
 most gifted and liberal-minded of the leaders in the woman's rights movement have 
 not yet discovered this flaw in their logic. They seek to individualize women, not 
 seeing apparently that individualized women, old maids, and individualized men, 
 old bachelors, though they may be useful in certain minor ways, are, after all, to 
 speak with the relentlcssness of science, fragmentary and abortive so far as the gn-at 
 scheme of the universe is concerned, and often become in addition seriously detri- 
 mental to the right progress of society. The man and woman united in marriage form 
 the unit of the race; they alone rightly wield the self-perpetuating i)Ower upon which 
 all human progress depends; without which the race itself must perish, the universe 
 become null. 
 
 " Reaching this point of the argument, it becomes evident that while the devehtp- 
 ment of the individual man or the individual woman is no doubt of great im[)ortanco, 
 since, as Margaret Fuller has justly said, "There must be units before there can be 
 union," it is chiefly so because of theirrelation to each other. Their characters should 
 be developed with a view to their future union with each other, and not to be indo- 
 l)endent of it. When the leaders of the woman's movement fully realize this, and 
 shape their course accordingly, they will have made a great advance, both in the 
 value of their work and in its claim upon public sympathy. Moreover, they will ha ve 
 reached a point from which it will bo possible for them to investigate, reform, and 
 idealize the relations existing between men and women, as it is now irai)os8ible for 
 them to do, and to meet in a practical manner the question which more than all others 
 appalls the philanthropist and staggers the practical reformer, namely, the preven- 
 tion and cure of licentiousness." 
 
 Wo make a few additional quotations from the appendix, entitled, "The relation 
 of woman to the state; practical suggestions :" 
 
 "A publication of the foregoing letters in the Chicago Inter-Ocean brought out so 
 many protests from the woman suffragists that in submitting the letters to the i>ublic 
 
4 
 
 WOMAN SUFFRAGE. 
 
 the writer feels constrained to add a few words concerning what appears to her to be 
 the true place of woman in the state. 
 
 " To say that the power of woman is essentially a moral one does not necessarily im- 
 ply that all women are more moral than all men, nor even that in any given commu- 
 nity a majority of women, if allowed to vote, would ho found upon the side of meas- 
 ures proposed in the interest of abstract moral excellence. In most communities, 
 notably in large cities, where prostitutes abound, and where thieves and gamblers 
 and saloon-keepers, and the vicious classes generally have their multitude of female 
 adherents, and where, on the other hand, frivolity and the fashionable forms of vice 
 absorb so many women, it may well be doubted if upon any great moral question the 
 majority of women would be found on the side of even practical morality. 
 
 "One strong assertion — it can hardly be called an argument — of the woman suffra- 
 gists is, that if the wives and mothers of any community were allowed to vote they 
 would close saloons, brothels, and gambling houses. But setting aside the question 
 of whether the absolute closing of these places would be, on the whole, a gain to so- 
 ciety in its present condition of impurity ; whether the best that can be done is not 
 to heal the open ulcer, which indicates and at the same time gives relief to the in- 
 famous disease within, but rather so to restrain and circumscribe it that it may not 
 spread the plague by its foul inoculation. Setting this question wholly aside, it is by 
 no means'clear to the minds of some who have given the matter deep and i)rayerful 
 consideration, that the majority of all the women of any community ia which vice is 
 openly rampant would vote for such suppression. The good wives aud mothers, the 
 pure and true women generally, of any community, are, indeed, invested with a moral 
 force, which if intelligently wielded, is well nigh supreme ; but if it is not a force of 
 numbers, like that which prevails in the political world. As a voter, a good woman 
 has no more power in the state than a bad one. At the polls the woman of gifts, 
 culture, of eminent social position, i)uts herself upon an absolute equality with the 
 vilest drab in the streets. This fact, as expressed in manhood suffrage — the absolute 
 political equality of all male voters — already constitutes in the eyes of many wise 
 statesmen an imminent and deadly peril to the Republic ; a peril which would not 
 be in any wise lessened, but greatly complicated by the admission of all women to the 
 privilege of the ballot. In England, where suffrage is bestowed by classes, the fyrce 
 of this objection is greatly diminished. Much as some female leaders of opinion in 
 that country may desire the parliamentary vote for themselves, I greatly doubt if they 
 would rejoice to see it bestowed upon the women of St. Giles and Billingsgate. 
 
 Ought then this moral power, which resides in the good and true women of, any 
 community, to be excluded from influence upon the state ? By no means. Probably 
 few women have deeper, more positive, or more earnest convictions on this subject 
 thau the writer of these lines. But let us examine briefly the foundations upon which 
 the state rests. 
 
 One of the wisest and purest of European republicans, Joseph Mazzini, is recorded 
 as believing that not right, but duty, is the watchword of human progress. Not an 
 unconditional liberty is the fouudation of a true state, but the restrained and orderly 
 exercise of proper individual prerogatives. 
 
 " Long before you can predicate political duties for woman, you must recognize her 
 duty as wife and mother; as the queen regnant of the home, as the fountain of order, 
 justice, virtue, and charity, the giver of life, and the former of character for future 
 generations. Heaven's supreme^excellences center around and find their best earthly 
 expression in the ideal woman and her work. 
 
 " To this high office the duty of man is subordinate. He is to furnish the mate-- 
 rial supplies by means of which the great work of re-creation may be carried on. It 
 is his duty to support the family by his labor, to give it the strength of his counsels, 
 and the protection of his valor. Few women who are good, and true, aud faithful 
 mothers, would not resent the idea that it was their duty, also, to furnish the mate- 
 rial supplies which nourish the outward form or body of the home. 
 
 " ' No,' they would say, and say rightly ; ' We peril our lives for our children, we 
 give our days and nights to care and anxiety, to burdens of pain and jierplexity, 
 which men know nothing of. It is their duty to minister to the material necessities 
 of ourselves and our children, without toil or trouble on our part.' 
 
 " Let us carry a similar division of labor into the state. Does not the voice of the 
 true woman respond, ' We furnish citizens, bone of our bone, aud flesh of our flesh; 
 we train them up to manhood in all manly, noble virtues ; we give them ouri)atience 
 our faith, our watchfulness, our prayers, and it is little to ask in return that the state, 
 which is managed by them, shall be just and impartial, nay, generous and munificent, 
 to us, who trust our all in their hands.' As a matter of fact, women have too seldom 
 put forth such appeals as this, but whenever aud wherever they have done so, at least 
 in this American Republic, they have always found a respectful hearing and a gen- 
 erous response ; and the simple and sole reason why women are not endowed with 
 suffrage to-day is, that the majority of the wives and mothers, and good women gen- 
 erally, of this land, have never asked for nor desired it, 
 
WOMAN SUFFRAGE. 
 
 5 
 
 "Civil law is the growth of the ages, and, like all other imnieraorial institutions, 
 it cherishes many imperfections ; but these are being removed as rapidly, perhaps, as 
 is consistent with true progress. That there still remain laws upon the statute; books 
 which are relics of barbarism, and bear hardly upon woman, is true enough; l)ut let 
 the women of any community unite to deline these wrongs and suggest the redress, 
 and there will be no difficulty in obtaining it, not in spite of men, but by means of 
 them. If a woman wants a new house she does not go at work with a pick and spade 
 and trowel to build it herself; she simply sets the men about it, aud if aho is worthy 
 of a home at all, she has her parlor and kitchen and closets just where she wants 
 them, too. If she desires civil or political improvements, let her go about the work 
 in the same fashion. 
 
 '* It is this united action, the inspiration coming from women, the execution from 
 men, and the two forces working harmoniously and lovingly together, not pulling 
 awkwardly and angrily apart, that is destined to save the state aud save the world." 
 
 The above quotations, from the valuable little book aheady mentioned by our 
 gifted authoress, are so appropriate, so Avell and so forcibly expressed, that we cheer- 
 fully, as already stated, substitute them in place of any production of our own, and 
 respectfully commend them to the Senate and to the country as worthy of careful con- 
 sideration and reflection. 
 
 We also append hereto the minority report submitted by the undersigned in the 
 Forty-eighth Congress. 
 
 Joseph E. Brown, 
 f. m. cockrell. 
 
 f Senate Report No. 399, Part 2, Forty-eighth Congress, first session.] 
 
 The undersigned minority of the Committee of the Senate on Woman SufiVage, to 
 whom was referred S. Res. 19, proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the 
 United States, granting the right to vote to the women of the United States, beg 
 leave to submit the following report : 
 
 The undersigned believe that the Creator intended that the sphere of the mjiles 
 and females of our race should be different, and that their duties and obligatious, 
 while they differ materially, are equally important and equally honorable, and that 
 each sex is equally well qualified by natural endowments for the discharge of the 
 important duties which pertain to each, and that each sex is equally competent to 
 discharge those duties. 
 
 We find an abundance of evidence both in the works of nature and in the Divine 
 revelation to establish the fact that the family properly regulated is the foundation 
 and pillar of society, and is the most important of human institutions. 
 
 In the Divine economy it is provided that the man shall be the head of the family, 
 and shall take upon himself the solemn obligation of providing for and protecting 
 the family. 
 
 Man, by reason of his physical strength and his other endowments and faculties, 
 is qualified for the discharge of those duties that require strength and ability to com- 
 bat with the sterner realities aud difficulties of life. The different classes of outdoor 
 labor, which require physical strength and endurance, are by nature assigned to man, 
 the head of the family, as part of his task. He discharges such labora as require 
 greater physical endurance aud strength than the female sex are usually found to pos- 
 sess. It is not only his duty to provide for and protect the family, but as a member 
 of the community it is also his duty to discharge the laborious and responsible obliga- 
 tious which the family owe to the state, and which obligation must be discharged by 
 the head of the family, until the male members of the family have grown up to man- 
 hood and are able to aid in the discharge of those obligations, when it becomes their 
 duty in their turn to take charge of and rear each a family, for which he is responsi- 
 ble. 
 
 Among other duties which the head of the family owes to the state is military duty 
 in time of war, which he, when able-bodied, is able to discharge, and which the fe- 
 male members of the family are unable to discharge. 
 
 He is also under obligation to discharge jury duty, and by himself or his represent- 
 ative to discharge his part of the labor necessary to construct and keep in proper order 
 roads, bridges, streets, and all grades of public highways. Aud in this progressive 
 age upon the male sex is devolved the duty of constructing our railroads, and the 
 engines and other rolling-stock with which they are operated, of building, equipping, 
 and launching shipping and other water-craft of ever^'^ character necessary for the 
 transportation of passengers and freight upon our rivers, our lakes, and upon the 
 high seas. 
 
 The labor in our fields, sowing, cultivating, and reaping crops must be discharged 
 mainly by the male sex, as the female sex, for want of physical strength, are gener- 
 ally unable to discharge these duties. 
 
6 
 
 WOMAN SUFFRAGE. 
 
 As it is the duty of the male sex to perform the obligations to the state, to society, 
 and to the family, already mentioned, with numerous others that might be enumer- 
 ated, it is also their duty to aid in the government of the State, which is simply a 
 great aggregation of families. Society can not be preserved, nor can the people be 
 prosperous without good government. The government of our country is a govern- 
 ment of the people, and it becomes necessary that that class of people upon whom the 
 responsibility rests should assemble together and consider and discuss the great ques- 
 tions of governmental policy which from time to time are presented for their decision. 
 This often requires the assembling of caucuses in the night-time as well as public as- 
 semblages in the day-time. It is a laborious task, for which the male sex is infinitely 
 better fitted than the female sex, and after proper cor sideration and discussion of the 
 measures that may divide the country from time to time, the duty devolves upon those 
 who are responsible for the Government, at times and places to be fixed by law, to 
 meet and by the ballot to decide the great questions of government upon which the 
 prosperity of the country depends. These are some of the active and sterner duties 
 of life to which the male sex is by nature better fitted than the female sex. If,jn 
 carrying out the policy of the state on great measures adjudged vital, such policy 
 should lead to war, either foreign or domestic, It would seem to follow very naturally 
 that those who have been responsible for the mauagemement of the state should be 
 the parties to take the hazards and hardships of the struggle. Here, again, man is 
 fitted by nature for the discharge of the duty ; woman is unfit for it. 
 
 So much for some of the duties imposed upon tbe male sex, for the discharge of 
 which the Creator has endowed them with proper strength and faculties. 
 
 On the other hand, the Creator has assigned to woman very laborious and responsi- 
 ble duties, by no means less important than those imposed upon the male sex, though 
 entirely diflerent in their character. In the family she is a queen. She alone is fitted 
 for the discharge of the sacred trust of wife and the endearing relation of mother. 
 While the man is contending with the sterner duties of life, the whole time of the 
 noble, att'ectionate, and true woman is required in the discharge of the delicate and 
 difficult duties assigned her in the family circle, in her church relations, and in the 
 society where her lot is cast. When the husband returns home weary and worn in 
 the discharge of the difficult and laborious task assigned him, he finds in the good 
 wife solace and consolation which is nowhere else afforded. If he is despondent and 
 distressed, she cheers his heart with words of kindness ; if he is sick or languishing, 
 she soothes, comforts, and administers to him as no one but an affectionate wife can 
 do. If his burdens are onerous, she divides their weight by the exercise of her love 
 and her sympathy. 
 
 But a still more important duty devolves upon the mother. After having brought 
 into existence the offspring of the nuptial union, the children are dependent upon the 
 mother as they are not upon any other human being. The trust is a most sacred, 
 most responsible, and most important one. To watch over them in their infancy, and, 
 as the mind begins to expand, to train, direct, and educate it into the paths of virtue 
 and usefulness, is the high trust assigned to the mother. She trains the twig as the 
 tree should be iucliued. She molds the character. She educates the heart as well as 
 the intellect, and she prepares the future man, now the boy, for honor or dishonor. 
 Upon the manner in which she discharges her duty depends the fact whether he shall 
 in future be a useful citizen or a burden to society. She inculcates lessons of patriot- 
 ism, manliness, religion, and virtue, fitting the man by reason of his training to bean 
 ornament to society, or dooming him by her neglect to a life of dishonor and shame. 
 Society acts unwisely when it imposes upon her the duties that by common consent 
 have always been assigned to the sterner and stronger sex, and the discharge of which 
 causes her to neglect those sacred and all-important duties to her children, and to the 
 society of which they are members. 
 
 In the church, by her piety, her charity, and her Christian purity she not only aids 
 society by a proper training of her own children, but the children of others, whom 
 she encourages to come to the sacred altar, are taught to walk in the paths of recti- 
 tude, honor, and religion. In the Sunday-school room the good woman is a princess, 
 and she exerts an influence which purifies and ennobles society, training the young 
 in the truths of religion, making the Sunday-school the nursery of the church, and 
 elevating society to the higher planes of pure religion, virtue, and patriotism. 
 
 In the sick room and among the humble, the poor, and the suffering, the good 
 woman, like an angel of light, cheers the hearts and revives the hopes of the poor, the 
 suffering, and the despondent. 
 
 It w.ould be a vain attempt to undertake to enumerate the refining, endearing, and 
 ennobling influences exercised by the true woman in her relations to the family and 
 to society when she occupies the sphere assigned her by the laws of nature and the 
 Divine inspiration, which are our surest guide for the present and the future life. 
 But how can woman be expected to meet these heavy responsibilities and to dis- 
 charge these delicate and most important duties of wife. Christian, teacher, minister 
 of mercy, friend of the suff'ering, and consoler of the despondent and the needy, if 
 
WOMAN SUFFKAGE. 
 
 7. 
 
 we impose npou lier tlie grosser, rougher, and harsher duties which nature has as- 
 signed to the male sex f 
 
 If the wife and the mother is required to leave the sacred precincts of homo, and 
 to attempt to do military duty when the state is in peril, or if she is to be required 
 to leave her homo froui day to day in attendance upon the court as a juror, and to be 
 shut up in the jury-room from night to night, with men who are strangers, while a 
 question of life or proi>erty is being considered, if she is to attend political meetings, 
 take part in political discussions, and mingle with the male sex at political gather- 
 ings, if she is to become an active politician, if she is to attend political caucuses at 
 late hours of the night, if she is to take i)art in all the unsavory work that may bo 
 deemed necessary for the triumph of her party, and if on election day she is to leave 
 her home and go upon the streets electioneering for votes for the candidates who re- 
 ceive her support, and mingling among the crowds of men who gather around the 
 polls, she is to x)ress her way through them to the ballot-box and deposit her sulliage, 
 if she is to take part in the corporate struggles of the city or town in which she re- 
 sides, attend to the duties of his honor the mayor, or councilman, or of policeman, 
 to say nothing of the many other like obligations which are disagreeable even to the 
 male sex, how is she, with all these heavy duties of citizen, politician, and office- 
 holder resting upon her shoulders, to attend to the more sacred, delicate, and refining 
 trust to which we have already referred, and for which she is peculiarly fitted by 
 nature? If she is to discharge the duties last mentioned, how is she, in connection 
 with them, to discharge the more refining, elevating, and ennobling duties of wife, 
 mother. Christian, and friend, which are found in the sphere where nature has placed 
 her ? 
 
 Who is to cave for and train the children while she is absent in the discharge of 
 these masculine duties ? 
 
 If it were proper to reverse the order of nature and assign woman to the sterner 
 duties devolved upon the male sex and to attempt to assign man to the more refining, 
 delicate, and ennobling duties of the woman, man would be found entirely incompe- 
 tent to the discharge of the obligations which nature has devolved upon the gentler 
 sex, and society must be greatly injured by the attempted change. But if we are 
 told that the object of this movement is not to reverse this order of nature, but only 
 to devolve upon the gentler sex a portion of the more rigorous duties imposed bjr na- 
 ture upon the stronger sex, we reply that society must be injured, as the woman 
 would not be able to discharge those duties so well, by reason of her want of physi- 
 cal strength, as the male, upon whom they are devolved, and to the extent that the 
 duties are to be divided the male would be infinitely less competent to discharge the 
 delicate and sacred trusts which nature has assigned to the female. 
 
 But it has been said that the present law is unjust to woman; that she is often re- 
 quired to pay taxes on property she holds without being permitted to take part in 
 framing or administering the laws by which her x^roperty is governed, and that she 
 is taxed without representation. That is a great mistake. 
 
 It may bo very doubtful whether the male or the female sex, in the present state of 
 things, has more influence in the administration of the affairs of the Government, and 
 the enactment of the laws by which we are governed. 
 
 While the woman does not discharge military duty, nor does she attend courts and 
 serve on juries, nor does she labor on the public streets, bridges, or highways, nor 
 does she engage actively and publicly in the discussion of political afiairs, nor does 
 she enter the crowded precincts of the ballot-box to deposit her suflrage, still the in- 
 telligent, cultivated, noble woman is a i>ower behind the throne. All her influence is 
 in favor of morality, justice, and fair dealing ; all her eftorts and her counsel are in 
 favor of good government, wise and wholesome regulations, and a faithful adminis- 
 tration of the laws. Such a woman, by her gentleness, kindness, and Christian bear- 
 ing, impresses her views and her counsels upon her father, her husband, her brothers, 
 her sons, and her other male friends, who imperceptibly yield to her influence many 
 times, without even being conscious of it. She rules, not with a rod of iron, but with 
 the queenly scepter; she binds, not with hooks of steel, but w-ith silken cords; she 
 governs, not by physical eflbrts, but by moral suasion and feminine purity and deli- 
 cacy. Her dominion is one of love, not of arbitrary power. 
 
 We are satisfied, therelore, that the pure, cultivated, and pious ladies of this coun- 
 try now exercise a very powerful but quiet, imperceptible influence in popular attairs, 
 much greater than they will ever again exercise if female suft'rage should be enacted 
 and they should be com[>elled actively to take part in the aftairs of state and the cor- 
 ruptions of party politics. 
 
 It would be a gratification, and we are always glad to see the ladies gratified, to 
 many who have espoused the cause of woman 8\iffrage if they could take active part « 
 in political ali'airs, and go to the polls and cast their votes alongside the male sex; 
 but while this would be a gratification to a large number of very worthy aiid excellent 
 ladies, who take a different view of the question from that which we entertain, we 
 feel that it would be a great cruelty to a much larger number of the cultivated, re- 
 S. Re p. 1 30 
 
8 
 
 WOMAN SUFFRAGE. 
 
 fined, delicate, and lovely women of this country who seek no such distinction, who 
 would enjoy no such privilege, who would with woman-like delicacy shrink from the 
 discharge of any such ohligation, and, who would sincerely regret that what they 
 consider the folly of the state had imposed upon them any such unpleasant duties. 
 
 But should female suffrage he once established it would become an imperative ne- 
 cessity that the very large class, indeed much the largest class, of the women of this 
 country, of the character last described, should yield, contrary to their inclinations 
 and their wishes, to the necessity which would compel them to engage in x)olitical 
 strife. We apprehend no one who has properly considered this question will doubt, 
 if female suffrage should be established, that the more ignorant and less refined por- 
 tions of the lemale population of this country, to say nothing of the baser class of 
 females, laying aside female delicacy, and disregarding the sacred duties devolving 
 upon them to which we have already referred, would rush to the polls and take pleas- 
 ure in the crowded association which the situation would compel of the two sexes 
 in political meetings and at the ballot-box. 
 
 If all the baser and all the more ignorant portion of the female sex crowd to the 
 polls and deposit their suffrage, this compels the very large class of intelligent, vir- 
 tuous, and refined females, including the wives and mothers who have much more 
 important duties to perform, to leave their sacred labors at'honie, relinquishing for a 
 time the God-given important trust Avhich has been placed in their hands, to go, con- 
 trary to their wishes, to the polls and vote, to counteract the suffrage of the less wor- 
 thy class of our female population. 
 
 If they fail to do this the best interests of the country must suffer. 
 
 It is now a problem which perplexes the brain of the ablest statesman to determine 
 how we will best preserve our republican system as against the demoralizing influ- 
 ence of the large class of our present citizens and voters, who, by reason of their il- 
 literacy, are unable to read or write the ballot they cast. 
 
 Certainly no statesman who has carefully observed the situation wou^ld desire to 
 add very largely to this burden of ignorance. But who does not apprehend the fact 
 if universal female suffrage should be established that we will, especially in the 
 Southern States, add a very large number to the voting population w hose ignorance 
 utterly disqualifies them to discharge the trust. If our colored population, who were 
 so recently slaves that even the males who are voters have had but little opportu- 
 nity to educate themselves, or to be educated, whose ignorance is now exciting the 
 liveliest interest of our statesmen, are causes of serious apprehension, what is to be 
 said in favor of addiug to the A'oting poj)ulatiou all the females of that race, who, on 
 account of tho situation in which they have been x)laced, have had much less oppor- 
 tunity to be educated than even the males of their own race? We do not say it is 
 their fault that they are not educated; but the fact is undeniable that they are 
 grossly ignorant, with very few exceptions, and i)robably not one in a hundred of 
 them could read and write the ballot they would be authorized to cast. What says 
 the statesman to the propriety of adding this immense mass of ignorance to the vot- 
 ing population of the Union in its present condition? 
 
 It may be said that their votes could be oflset by the ballots of the educated and 
 refined ladies of the white race in the same section, but who does not know that the 
 ignorant voters would be at the polls en masse, while the refined and educated, shrink- 
 ing from public contact on Such occasions, would remain at homo and attend to their 
 domestic and other important duties, leaving the country to the control of those who 
 could afford, under the circumstances, to take part in the strifes of i)olitics, and to 
 come in contact with the unpleasant surroundings before they could reach the polls. 
 
 Are we ready to expose the country to the demoralization, and our institutions to 
 the strain, which would thus be placed upon them, for the gratification of a minority 
 of the virtuous and the good of our female population, at the expense of the mortifi- 
 cation of a much larger majority of the same class? 
 
 It has been frequently urged with great earnestness by those who advocate woman 
 sufl'rage that the ballot is necessary to the women to enable them to protect them- 
 selves in securing occupations, and to enable them to realize the same compensation 
 for the like labor which is received by men. This argument is plausible, but upon a 
 closer examination it will be found to possess but little real force. The price of labor 
 is, and must continue to be, governed by the law of supply aud denuind ; and the per- 
 son who has the most i)hysical strength to labor, and the most pursuits requiring 
 such strength open for emfDloyment, will always command the higher prices. 
 
 Ladies make excellent teachers in the public schools ; many of them are every way 
 the equals of their male competitors, and still they secure less wages than males. The 
 reason is obvious. The number of ladies who oifer themselves as teachers is much 
 larger than the number of males who are willing to teach. The larger number of 
 females offer to teach because other occupations are not open to them. The smaller 
 number of males offer to teach because other more profitable occupations are open to 
 most males who are competent to teach. The result is that the competition for posi- 
 tions of teachers to be filled by ladies is so great as to reduce the price, but as males 
 
WOMAN SUFFKAGE. 
 
 9 
 
 can not be employed at that price, and are neceHsary iu certain places in the schoolH, 
 tho8e seeking their services have to pay a higher rate for them. Persoim having a 
 larger number of places open to them wir li fewer competitors command higljer wages 
 than those who have a smaller numher of places open to them with more competitors. 
 This is the law of society. It is the law of su^iply and demand, which can not be 
 changed by legislation. 
 
 Then it follows that the ballot can not enable those who have to comi)ete with the 
 larger number to command the same prices as those who com[»ete with the smaller 
 nnml)er in the labor market. As the legislature has no power to regulate in pra<:tice 
 that of which the advocates of female surtVago complain the ballot in the hands of 
 females could not aid its regulation. The ballot cannot impart to the female physical 
 strength wUich she does not possess, nor can it open to her ])ursuits which she does 
 not have physical ability to engage iu ; and as long as she lacks the physical strength 
 to compete with men in the ditt'erent departments of labor there will be more compe- 
 tition in her department, and she must necessarily receive less wages. 
 
 But it is claimed again that females should have the ballot as a protection against 
 the tyranny of bad husbands. This is also delusive. If the husband is brutal, arbi- 
 trary, or tyrannical, and tyrannizes over her at home, the ballot in her hands would 
 be no protection against such injustice, but the husband who compelled her to conform 
 to his wishes iu other respects would also compel her to use the ballot, if she pos- 
 sessed it, as he might please to dictate. The ballot could therefore be of no assistance 
 to the wife in such case, nor could it heal family strifes or dissensions. On the con- 
 trary, one of the gravest objections to placing the ballot in the hands of the female 
 sex is that it would i>rouiote unhappiuess and dissensions in the family circle. There 
 should be unity in the family. 
 
 At present the man represents the family in meeting the demands of the law and 
 of society upon the family. So far as tbe rougher, coarser duties are concerned, the 
 man represents the family, and the individuality of the woman is not brought into 
 prominence, but when the ballot is placed in the hands of the woman her iiulividu- 
 ality is enlarged and she is expected to answer for herself the demands of the law and 
 of society on her individual account, and not as the weaker member of the family to 
 answer by her husband. This naturally draws her out from the dignilied and culti- 
 vated relinement of her womanly position, and brings her into a closer contact with the 
 rougher elements of society, which tends to destroy that higher reverence and respect 
 which her retiuement and dignity in the relation of wife and mother have always in- 
 spired in those who approached her in her useful and honorable retirement. 
 
 When she becomes a voter she will be more or less of a politician, and will' form 
 political alliances, or unite with political parties, which will frequently be antago- 
 nistic to those to which her husband belongs. This will introduce into the family 
 circle new elements of disagreement and discord, which will frequently end in un- 
 happy divisions, if not in separation or divorce. This must frecjuently occur when 
 she becomes an active politician, identihed with a party which is distasteful to her 
 husband. On the other hand, if she unites with her husband in party associations, 
 and votes with him on all occasions, so as not to disturb the harmony and happiness 
 of the family, then the ballot is of no service, as it simply duplicates the vote of the 
 male on each side of the question, and leaves the result the same. 
 
 Again, if the family is the uuit of society, and the state is composed of an aggrega- 
 tion of faujilies, then it is important to rsociety that there be as many happy families 
 as possible, and it becomes the duty of man and woman alike to unite in the holy re- 
 lation of nuitrimony. 
 
 As this is the only legal and proper mode of rendering obe<lience to the early com- 
 mand to multiply and replenish the earth, whatever tends to discourage the holy re- 
 lation of matrimony, is in disobedience of this command, and any change which en- 
 courages such disobedience is violative of the Divine law, and can not result in ad- 
 vantage to the state. Before forming this relation it is the diity of young men who 
 have to take ujion themselves the responsibilities of providing for and protecting the 
 family to select some profession or i>ursuit that is most conge?iial to their tastes, and 
 in which they will be most likely to be successful ; but this is not i)ermitt»'d to the 
 yojing ladies, or if permitted, it can not be practically carried out aft«'r matrimony. 
 As it might fri'(iuently happen that the young man had selected one profession or i>ur- 
 suit ami the young lady another, the result woiild be that aft»'r marriage she must 
 drop the profession or pursuit of her choice and employ herself in the sacred duties of 
 wile and mother at home, and in rearing, educating, and elevating the family, while 
 the husband pursues the profession of his choice. 
 
 It may be said, however, that there is a class of young ladies who do not choose to 
 marry, and who select professions or avocations and follow them for a livelihood. 
 This is true, but this class compared with the number who unite in matrimony with 
 the husbands of their choice is comparatively very small ; and it iit the duty of society to 
 encourage the increase of marriages rather than of celibacy. If the larger number of 
 females select pursuits or professions which require them to decline marriage, society 
 
10 
 
 WOMAN SUFFRAGE. 
 
 to that extent is deprived of the advantages resulting from the increase of population 
 hy marriage. 
 
 It is said by those who have examined the question closely that the largest number 
 of divorces is now found in the communities where the advocates of female suffrage 
 are most numerous, and where the individuality of woman as related to her husband, 
 which such a doctrine inculcates, is increased to the greatest extent. If this be true, 
 and it seems to be well autheuticated, it is a strong plea in the interest of the family 
 and of society against granting the petition of the advocates of woman suffrage. 
 Aft^r all, this a local questiou, which properly belongs to the different States of the 
 Union, each acting for itself, and to the Territories of the Union, when not acting in . 
 conflict with the Constitution and laws of the United States. 
 
 The fact that a State adopts the rule of female suffrage neither increases nor di- 
 minishes its power in the Union, as the number of Kepresentatives in Cbngress to 
 which each State is entitled, and the number of members of the electoral college ap- 
 pointed by each, is determined by its aggregate population, and not by the propor- 
 tion of its voting population, so long as no race or class i§ excluded from the exercise 
 of the right of suffrage. 
 
 While the undersigned would vote against female suffrage if the question were to 
 arise in their respective States, they admit the power of the States over the subject- 
 matter. Entertaining these views, they protest against a constitutional amendment 
 which would confer the right of female suffrage in all parts of the Union, without re- 
 gard to the wishes of the different Statt^s at any time after the adoption of the said 
 amendment. They believe that the noble, true, good womeu of the country should 
 be heard, and as an expression of their views there is hereto appended Woman's 
 Protest against Woman Suffrage," known as the Lorain Memorial against Woman 
 Suffrage, presented to the Ohio legislature and signed by a large number of the most 
 thoughtful aud intelligent women of the cities of Obedin and Elyria, Ohio, includ- 
 ing lady teachers and wives of professors in Oberlin College. 
 
 Joseph E. Brown, 
 f. m. cockrkll. 
 
 woman's protest against woman suffrage. 
 
 We acknowledge no inferiority to men. We claim to have no less ability to perform 
 the dnties which God has imposed upon us than they have to perform those imposed 
 upon them. 
 
 We believe that God has wisely and well adapted each sex to the proper perform- 
 ance of the duties of each. 
 
 We believe our trusts to be as important and sacred as any that exist on earth. 
 
 We believe woman suffrage would relatively lessen the influence of the intelligent 
 and true, and increase the influence of the ignorant aud vicious. 
 
 We feel that our present duties fill up the whole measure of our time and ability, 
 and are such as none but ourselves can perform. Our appreciation of their importance 
 requires us to protest against all efforts to infringe upon our rights by imposing upon 
 us those obligations which can not be separated from suffrage, but which, as we think, 
 can not be performed by us without the sacrifice of the highest interests of our families 
 and of society. 
 
 It is our fathers, brothers, husbands, and sons who represent us at the ballot-box. 
 Our fathers aud our brothers love us; our husbands are our choice and one with us; 
 our sons are what tve make them. We are content that they represent us in the corn- 
 field, on the battle-field, and at the ballot-box, and we them in the school-room, at the 
 fireside, and at the cradle, believing our representation even at the ballot-box to be 
 thus more full and impartial than it would be were the views of the few who wish 
 suffrage adopted, contrary to the judgment of the many. 
 
 We do therefore respectfully protest against any legislation to establish " woman 
 suffrage" in our land, or in any part of it. 
 
 The following letter from the able and distinguished authoress of 
 " Letters from a Chimney Corner," speaks eloquently and logically for 
 itself: 
 
 Hon. Henry W. Blair, 
 
 United States Senator from New Hampshire : 
 Dear Sir : During the last week of the last session of Congress I received, under 
 cover of your own frank, a copy of your report of the Select Committee on Woman 
 Suffrage, delivered to tke Senate of the United States, December 8, 1886. In it you 
 make a lengthy quotation from a pamphlet of mine, entitled Letters from a Chim- 
 ney Corner." It appears to me that in the argument drawn &om this quotation you 
 
WOMAN SUFFRAGE. 
 
 11 
 
 mistake utterly the point at issue, and it is my purpose in this letter to direct your 
 attention to this miHtake, and to put the ar;;unient upon its i)r()per basis. I shall 
 also comment upon certain other considerations put forth therein. 
 
 The quotation referred to is too lon<; for the limits of a h tter liko this. The ar;;u- 
 nient brielly is, that neitlier the man nor t lie woman is individually the repreH(;ntative 
 of the genus homo, but that, accordinj^ to uature an<l nivelalion, the two united niake 
 one, and that to each constituent of that union cert;iin distinct jiowi^rs and jnoper- 
 ties belonjj^, each dependent upon the other, in a nuuor way, for ]>roi»er fullillment. 
 You say, If upon this account woman is to to be denied sullra<;e, Wn-u man e(|ually 
 should be denied the ballot, if his highest and linal estate is to be something else tbau 
 a mere individual." 
 
 Now, iuarria<;o is that partnership upon which the ri<ifht order of societj' and the 
 ri<jht perpetuation of the si)ecies depends. The (luesrion is, whether each partner 
 shall keep to that line of labor which nature has marked out, or wiieth«?rof woman 
 shall be demanded, not only her own share of the labor, but also ;i lar;;e |)art of that 
 which belouf^s to man. For, let us notice, that while it may be <;riint<;d that woman 
 has the physical capacity to cast a ballot, man has not tlu; physical cajjacity to bear 
 and nourish children. Nature has made it forever impossible that he shouhl perform 
 that oflice. If, therefore, he demands of her that she shall participate in those exter- 
 nal and «;eneral duties, such as labor for the support of the home and for the <lirectiou 
 of the state, which his luitural constitution, ])hysical and intellectual, fit him for, 
 while he can not by any ])ossibility relieve her of those necessary oflices and duties 
 which nature demands of her, he commits a palpable and monstrous in justice. 
 
 Nor does it help the matter to say, as you do, that, because woman's nature is purer 
 and nobler than man's the state would be benefited by her particijjation in political 
 affairs. If men are not capable of mannsing the affairs of the state aecoidiii<; to the 
 highest and best ideas of the race, that is, of both men and women, will you j^ermit 
 Die resi>ectfully to inquire what proper and adequate share of this world's w()rk tln-y 
 can perform ? What is their natural place in the order of society? Are tln'y mere 
 hewers of wood and drawers of water ? They can not bear citizens ; tln^y can not care 
 for them in infancy and rear them to manhood. If they can not govern them with 
 wisdom and justice when they are produced ready made to their hands, what is their 
 reason for being? When a man stands up in the United States S«'nate, and makes 
 such a statement as that, in regard to the men of this Republic, it ii[q)eai sto nu* that 
 he comjnoniises his own self-respect and the re8j)ect due to the dignified and honorable 
 body to which he has been elevated. 
 
 You say that you have only proposed the measure because women have asked you 
 to do it. The same plea was made by your great progenitor in the Garden of Eden; 
 but it did not avail him. Moreover, in the case of Adam, it was true. In the pre- 
 sent instance the plea contains but the minimum of truth. There are ir),O00,lH»0 of 
 women in this country (I quote your own statistics) of voting age. -Will you kindly 
 inform us what proportion of that 15,000,000 you have heard from ? You say that 
 these women are being governed without their consent. Is it poKsibh; that you can 
 8inc<'rely believe that fifteen millions of American women^o/</^i be governed without 
 their consent f Do you not rather feel assured that if a baie majority of that number 
 did not consent, for what appear to them to be good and sntlicient r«;asous to be gov- 
 erned 1)^ indirect rather than direct n^presentation, there would be a revolution 
 within twenty-four hours? With every right of agitation at their command which 
 man possesses — free speech, free assend)ly, tlie right of i>etition, a jiress ever ready to 
 disseminate their views, and many privileges of courtesy besides that men lay no 
 claim to — what i)ower could withstand the moral force of any demand which these 
 fifteen millions should unitedly make ? 
 
 VVith what show of reason do you compare free-born American women to the ile- 
 graded and ignorant slaves on Southern plantations, and s])eak of men as their nuis- 
 ters? As a matter of fact the power of men over women is not greater than that 
 of \yomen over men. Nature lays the infant man a helpless creatun^ in the lap 
 of his mother. He is in her power for life or for death, an<l for the lirstten (»r lift»'»'n 
 years of his <'xistence, and that . luring the forming and determining ])eriod «>f his 
 career, a ])eriod too, in which he is answerable to no other law than that of his home, 
 her pow«;r over him, ])hysical, intellectual, and moral, is so nearly supreme that no 
 power which he can arrogate over her in later years can overbabinco it. Under or- 
 dinary ciKtumstances the faithful, intelligent mother may make of her son, in all the 
 e.ssentials of manners and morals, whats()ever she will. If American men wereto day 
 the narrow-minded, tyrannii al, vicious cn'atun'S they are charged w ith ln'ing by the 
 woman suffragists, unfitted to l)e legislators for the whole nation, it could only be be- 
 cause their mothers ha<l misunderstood or neglected the o]q)ortunities which Nature 
 puts int(» their hamls. Such a charge is a tremendous indictuwut against the mother- 
 hoo<l of the nation, and, if it could be sustained, ought of itself to bar women from 
 all legislative functions until they can better fulfil that which Natur.s demands of 
 them in child-bearing and rearing. Moreover, it is the function of slaves to labor ; 
 
12 
 
 WOMAN SUFFRAGE. 
 
 but it is this nation's pride and boast that in no other country that the sun shines on 
 are there so many homes supported by the loyal and untiring industry of men, where 
 women are kept in ease and comfort, in order that they may give their time to the 
 higher duties of rearing children and planning and carrying on enterprises of charity, 
 philanthropy, and reform; and the influence of these homes upon public sentiment is 
 the one irresistible power in American social and political life. Plainly, if any por- 
 tion of the American people are slaves it is not the women. 
 
 But let us return to the questionof the physical adaptability of women to the duties 
 of A'oters. If women vote, they must also hold office and assume the working duties 
 incident to political campaigns. It appears from the published record of your life 
 that you commenced your political career at about the age of thirty. For the next 
 ten or fifteen years you were actively in politics. Now, will you tell me if you think 
 it would have been convenient or agreeable during those years, when you were laying 
 the foundations of your political success, to have been also engaged in bearing and 
 rearing a family ? Could you have done what you found it necessary to do politically, 
 and at the same time have attended properly to your duties as wife and mother? 
 You will say that the very suggestion is indelicate, and I agree with you, but the 
 fault is in the situation as proposed by you. The duties and offices of motherhood 
 are all sweet, and pure, and holy, when kept within the sacred precincts of the 
 home. Brought out into the garish light of publicity what do they become ? 
 
 Nor will it avail you to say that some part of these offices maybe delegated to 
 servants. There are too many mothers of -that sort in the country now ; no political 
 measure can be a wise one which tends to increase their number. 
 
 You say in your report that there are many women who are not wives and mothers. 
 Very true, and when women vote and hold office there will be more of them. A true 
 regard for the best interests of society demands that their number shall be reduced 
 by all natural and reasonable means ; but when political rewards are offered as the 
 price of services in public life, do you not believe that many — and those not of the 
 weak and ignorant, but of the more gifted and intellectual — will be tempted to forego 
 marriage and motherhood for the sake of winning them ? Woe betide the land which 
 thus offers its political trusts as premiums for childless women! The morals of so- 
 ciety are corrupt enough now. What do you suppose they will become when not to 
 be married, not to be a mother, is the prerequisite for a woman's success in a chosen 
 and ten)pting career ? History gives abundant evidence that women are not natu- 
 rally of purer instincts or more capable of self-control than men. It is only as they 
 are subject to men, as in heathen countries, or yield themselves to the elevating and 
 purifying influences of Christian teaching concerning marriage and the home, that 
 they rise to a higher moral level. Emancipated from these restraints, the intensity 
 of their nature often betrays them into surpassing depths of depravity. I speak ad- 
 visely, therefore, and in the light of thirty years' profound and prayerful study of 
 social problems, when I say that the direct tendency of woman suffrage would be to 
 form a class of women such as held high court in Greece in the days preceding its 
 downfall: Women brilliant and intellectual, but wholly wanting in tliat steadfast 
 faith and abiding virtue Avhich characterizes the Anglo-Saxon ideal of womanhood, 
 I may say the Christian ideal as well— the wife and mother. Are American men pre- 
 pared to relegate the wives and mothers of this Republic to a secondary and subser- 
 vient place, and share the political leadership of this great and free country with an 
 oligarchy of Aspasias? 
 
 You say that the passage of the proposed resolution would not commit any person 
 to the 8U}3port of w^oman suft'rage in tlie end. But what does it do if passed by both " 
 Houses? It sends the discussion of this question, backed by the authority of Con- 
 gress, into every State of this Union. A score or two of the professional advocates of 
 woman suffrage will beat up the entire Territory, and by their noisy persistence will 
 necessitate either that women shall take the field upon the other side or else let the 
 question go by default. Home-loving w^omen — the women who stay in their homes 
 and fulfill the duties of their vocation, and these women are in the great majority in 
 all our States and Territories — have little taste for public strife, and few gifts with 
 which to win battles in the public arena. Still, if needs must, they can and will 
 defend their homes ; but, believe me, they will not exonerate from blame those legis- 
 lators who, by the advocacy of measures like this which you propose, have thrust the 
 hard necessity upon them. 
 
 Do you ask me, then, what shall men do, in regard to this cry, which is coming up 
 all over the land, for purer politics, a worthier conduct of affairs? Men know v»^ry 
 well what they ought to do about it. They ought to live daily and hourly in 
 the fear of God and for the honor of good women. They ought steadfastly to prac- 
 tice those principles of purity, honor, uprightness, and i>atriotism, which it is the 
 duty of every Christian home to inculcate. It is very true that the duty is now too 
 often imperfectly performed in our homes; but, believe me, the remedy for this evil 
 does not lie in the direction of woman suffrage. It is by inciting and helping 
 woman to the more faithful discharge of her own duties that legislators will honor 
 
WOMAN SUl'TUAGE. 
 
 13 
 
 her far more than by dragging her out of tlio quiet of her own domain, and setting 
 her to perforin their neglected and uiifiillilliMl t;i.skn. 
 
 Instead of fifteen milliona of women voters vsiiiily trying to do the work which 
 God demands of men, there should bo fifteen million of li;ipj>y honuis in tliis broad, 
 fair land ; homes supported by the lather's labor, made to glow with heaven's own 
 light by the mothers' tender love and care ; homes where children are being reared 
 who shall become just and upright men, and faithful, consci(!ntious women; where 
 those virtues are being taught which are the only enduring bulwarks of a free rei)ub- 
 lican government. It is to build up such homos, not to break down their walls and 
 quench the light upon their hearthstones, that legislation ought to bo directod. 
 
 There are other and weightier arguments against woman suirnige, hut those are 
 such as are suggested by the text of your report. I commend them to your earnest 
 consideration before you again address the United States Senate as the champion of 
 woman. 
 
 Very respectfully, yours, 
 
 The Author op Letters from a Chimney Corner. 
 
 The autboress of "Letters from a Chimney Corner" is not the only 
 lady whose views are opposed to the Woman Suffragists, as will appear 
 by the following: 
 
 WOMAN SUFFRAGE. 
 
 LETTER FROM MRS. CLARA T. LEONARD. 
 
 The following letter was read by Thornton K. Lothrop, esq., at the hearing before 
 the Legislative Committee on Woman Suifrage, January 29, 1884 : 
 
 The principal reasons assigned for giving suffrage to women are these: 
 
 That the right to vote is a natural and inherent right of which women are deprived 
 by the tyranny of men. 
 
 That the fact that the majority of women do not wish for the right or privilege to 
 vote is not a reason for depriving the minority of an inborn right. 
 
 That women are taxed but not represented, contrary to the principles of free gov- 
 ernment. 
 
 That society would gain by the participation of women in government, because 
 women are purer and more conscientious than men, and especially that the cause of 
 temperance would be promoted by women's votes. 
 
 Those women who are averse to female suffrage hold differing opinions on all these 
 points, and are entitled to be heard fairly and without unjust reproach and contempt 
 on the part of "suffragists," so called. 
 
 The right to vote is not an inherent right, but, like the right to hold land, is con- 
 ferred u})on individuals by general consent, with certain limitations, and for the gen- 
 eral good of all. 
 
 It is as true to say that the earth was made for all its inliabitants, and that no man 
 has a right to ajjpropriate a portion of its surface, as to say that all persons have a 
 right to jiart icipate in gov^erument. Many persons can be found to hold both these 
 opinions. Experience has proved that the general good is promoted by ownership of 
 the soil, with the resultant inducement to its improvement. 
 
 Voting is simply a mathematical test of strength. Uncivilized nations strive for 
 mastery hy physical combat, thus wasting life and resources. Enlightened societies 
 agree to (lotermine the relative strength of opposing parties by actual count. (Jod 
 has made women weaker than men, incapable of taking part in battles, indisposeil to 
 nnike riot and political disturbance. 
 
 The vote which, in the hand of a man, is a " possible bayonet," wouhl not, when 
 thrown by a woman, represent any physical power to enforce her will. If all tlio 
 women in the State voted in one way, and all the men in the opposite one, the 
 wonien, even if in the majority, would not carry the day, because the vote would not 
 be au estimate of material strength and the power to enforce the will of the majority. 
 When one consnlers the strong passions and eonllicis excited in eU'ctions, it is vain 
 to sup{)ose that the really stronger would yield to the wt^aker party. 
 
 It is no more unjust to deprive women of the ballot than to deiuive miimrs, who 
 outnumber those above the age of majority, and who might well claim, many of them, 
 to be as well able to decide political (juestions as their ehlers. 
 
 If the majority ot women an; <Mther not desirous to vote or are strongly o]>posed to 
 voting, the minority should yield in this, as they art> obliged to <lo in all other public 
 matters. In fact, they will be obligtMl to yield, so long as t lu^ present state of o|iiMion 
 exists among wonuui in general, lor le«;islators will naturally <-onsult the wisiu's of 
 tlie wouji n of their own families and iiei^hhorhood, and h»^gov» riied by tiM iii. I'hero 
 can be no doubt that in this State, where woiih m are highly i. siM ri, ,! umI h ive great 
 
14 
 
 WOMAN SUFFRAGE. 
 
 ijafluence, the ballot would be readily granted to them by men, if they desired it, or 
 generally approved of woman suffrage. Women are taxed, it is true; so are minors, 
 without the ballot; it is untrue to say that either class is not represented. The thou- 
 sand ties of relationship and friendship cause the identity of interest between the 
 sexes. What is good in a community for men is good also for their wives and sisters, 
 daughters and friends. The laws of Massachusetts discriminate much in favor of wo- 
 men, by exempting unmarried women of small estate from taxation ; by allowing wo- 
 men, and not men, to acquire a settlement without paying a tax ; by compelling hus- 
 bands to support their wives, but exempting the wife, even when rich, from support- 
 ing an indigent husband ; by making men liable for debts of wives, and not vice versa. 
 In the days of the American Revolution tbe first cause of complaint was, that a whole 
 people were taxed but not represented. To-day there is not a single interest of woman 
 which is not shared and defended by men, not a subject in which she takes an intelli- 
 gent interest in which she can not exert an influence in the community proportional 
 to her character and ability. It is because the men who govern live not in a remote 
 country with sejjarate interests, but in the closest relations of family and neighbor- 
 hood, and bound by the tenderest ties to the other sex, who are fully and well repre- 
 sented by relations, friends, and neighbors in every locality. That women are purer 
 and more conscientious than men, as a sex, is exceedingly doubtful when applied to 
 politics. The faults of the sexes are different, according to their constitution and 
 habits of life. Men are more violent and open in their misdeeds ; but any person who 
 knows human nature well, and has examined it in its various phases, knows that each 
 sex is open to its peculiar temptation and sin ; that the human heart is weak and 
 prone to evil without distinction of sex. It seems certain that, were women admitted 
 to vote and to hold political office, all the intrigue, corruption, and selfishness dis- 
 played by men in political life would also be found among women. In the temper- 
 ance cause we should gain little or nothing by admitting women to vote, for two 
 reasons: first, that experience has proved that the strictest laws can not be enforced 
 if a great number of people determine to drink liquor ; secondly, because among women 
 voters we should find in our cities thousands of foreign birth who habitually drink beer 
 and spirits daily without intoxication, and who regard license or prohibitory laws as 
 an infringement of their liberty. It has been said that nmuicii)al suffrage for Avomen 
 in England has proved a political success. Even if this is true, it offers no parallel to 
 the condition of things in our own cities ; first, because there is in England a property 
 qualification required to vote, which excludes the more ignorant and irresponsible 
 classes, and makes women voters few and generally intelligent; secondly, because 
 England is an old, conservative country, with much emigration and but little inmii- 
 gration. Here is a constant influx of foreigners— illiterate, without love of our country 
 or interest in, or knowledge of, the history of our liberties — to whom, after a short resi- 
 dence, we give a fi\ll share in Our Government. The result begins to be alarming — 
 enormous taxation, purchasable votes, demagogism — all these alarm the more thought- 
 ful, and we are not yetsure of the end. It is a wise thought thatthe possible- bayonet 
 or ruder weapou in the hands of our citizens would be oven worse than the ballot, and 
 our safer course is to give the immigrants a stake and interest in the Government. But 
 when we learn that on an average 1,000 immigrants per week landed at the port of 
 Boston in the past calendar year, is it not well to consider carefully how we double 
 and more than double the popular vote, with all its dangers and its ingredients of 
 ignorance and irresponsibility ? Last of all, it must be considered that the lives of 
 men and women are essentially difiereut. One sex lives in public, in constant con- 
 flict with the world ; the other sex nmst live chiefly in private and domestic life, or 
 the race will be without homes and gradually die out. If nearly one-half of the 
 male voters of our State forego their duty or privilege, as is the fact, what pro- 
 portion of women would exercise the sufirage ? Probably a very small one. The 
 heaviest vote would be in the cities, as now, and the ignoi ant and unfit women 
 would be the ready prey of the unscrupulous demagogue. Women ilo not hold a po- 
 sition inferior to men. In this land they have the softer side, of life, the best of 
 everything. There are, of course, excei)tions, individuals, whose struggle in life is 
 hard, whose husbands and fathers are tyrants instead of protectors ; so there are bad 
 wives and men ruined and disheartened by selfish, idle women. 
 
 The best work that a woman can do for the purifying of politics is by her influence 
 over men, by the wise training of her children, by her intelligent unselfish counsel to 
 husband, brother, or friend, by a thorough know^ledge and discussion of the needs of 
 her community. Many laws on the statute books of our own and other States have 
 been the work of women. More might be added. 
 
 It is the opinion of many of us, that woman's power is greater without the ballot 
 or possibility of office-holding for gain. When standing outside of politics, she dis- 
 cusses great questions upon their merit. Much has been achieved by women in the 
 anti-slavery cause, the temperance cause, the improvement of public atid private 
 charities, the reformation of criminals, all by intelligent discussion and influence 
 upon men. Our legislators have been ready to listen to women, and carry out their 
 
WOMAN SUFFRAGE. 
 
 15 
 
 plane when well framed. Women can <lo much uHofnl pnl)lic sorvico npon boards of 
 education, school committecH, and public cbarit i<'H, and arc b('<riiiniii;x (o (b>KU('h work, 
 It is of vital importance to the inte^^rity of our charital)l<i and educational admin- 
 istration that it bo kept out of politics. Is it not well 1 hat we should have one sex 
 who have no political ends to servo, who can till ^espoIlNibl(^ positions of public 
 trust? Voting alone can easily bo exercised by women without rudo contact, but to 
 attain any political power women must alliliato tlxMUHclvcs with men; brcausti 
 wonien will dilfer on public questions, must atteud ])riuiary mcctinf^s ami ( jmumimch, 
 will inevitably hold public ofiico and strive for it; iu short, wouicn must cuter the 
 political arena. This result will bo repulsive to a laigj'. portion of t ho sex, aud wouhl 
 tend to make women unfeminino and combative, which would bo a detriment to 
 society. 
 
 It is well that men after the burden aud heat of the day should return to homes 
 where the quiet side of life is presented to them. In these jx'accful New England 
 homes of ours, great and noble men have been raised by wis<^ an<l pious mothers, who 
 instructed them, not in i)olitics, but iu those general principles of Just ice, integrity, 
 and nuseltishness, which belong to and will insure statesmanship in the men who are 
 true to them. Hero is the stronghold of the sex, weakest iu body, ])owerful for good 
 or evil over the stronger one, whom women sway and govern, not by the l)allot aud 
 by greater numbers, but by those gentle iuHueuces designed by the Creator to soften 
 aud subdue mau's ruder uature. 
 
 Ci.ARA T. Leonauo. 
 
 THE LAW OF WOMAN LIFE. 
 
 The external arguments on both sides the modern woman question have been pretty 
 thoroughly presented and well argued. It seems needless to lept^at or recombing 
 them ; but in one relation they have scarcely been handled with any direct purpose 
 Justice and expediency have been the points insisted on or contested; these have 
 not gone back far enough ; they have not touched the central fact to set it forth in 
 its lorce and linality. The fact is original and inherent, behind and at the root of 
 tho entire matter, with all its complication and circumstance. We have to ask a 
 question to which it is the answer, and whose answer is that of the whole iloubtaud 
 dispute. 
 
 What is the law of woman life ? 
 
 What w^as she made woman for, and not man ? 
 
 Shall wc look back to that old third chapter of Genesis? 
 
 When mankind had taken tho knowledge and power of good and evil into their own 
 hands through the mere earthly wisdom of the serpent; when tho woman ha<l hart 
 her hasty outside way aud lead, according to the story, and woe had come of it, what 
 was th(; sentence? And was it a penance, or a setting right, or a i)romise, or all 
 three ? 
 
 The serpent was first dealt with. The narrow policy, the keen cunning, the little, 
 immediate outlook, the expedient motive ; all that was impersonated of temporary 
 shift and outward prudence iu mortal atlairs, regardless of or blind to the everlast- 
 ing issues ; all, in short, that re])rcsent.ed material and temporal interest as a rule 
 and order — aiul is not man's external administration upon tho earth largely forced to 
 be a legislation upon these principles and economies— was disposed of with the tew 
 words, " I will put enmity between thee and the woman.'' 
 
 Was this punishment, as reflected npon tho woman, or the power of a grand re- 
 trieval for her? Not to the man, who had been led, aud who would be led again, by 
 the woman, was the commission of holy revenge intrusted; but henceforth, ' I will 
 set the woman against thee:" Against the very principle ami live prompting of evil, 
 or of mere earthly purpose and motive. " lietween thy seed aud her seed : " Your 
 struggle with her shall be in and for tho very lil'eof the race. " It," her life brought 
 forth, "shall bruise thy head," thy whole power, and plan, ami insidious euuuing ; 
 "and thou slialt bruise," shalt sting, torment, hinder, and trouble in the way ami 
 daily going, "his heel," his footstej). Thou, the subtle and creeping thing of the 
 ground, shalt lurk after and threaten with crookedness and pois(U) the ways of the 
 men-children in their earth-toiling ; tho woman, the mother, shall turn upon thee for 
 and in them, and shall beat thee down! 
 
 Unto the woman hesaid, " I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception." 
 The burden and the glory are set in one. The pain of the world shall be in your 
 heart; the trouble, the contradiction of it, shall be against your lov»* and insight. 
 But your pain shall be your power; you shall be thc^ lile-bearer ; you shall hold the 
 motive; yours sliall bo the desire, and your husband's the dominion. Ther»>for<' shall 
 you bring your aspiration to him, that he may fuUill it for you. " Your desire shall 
 be unto him, and he shall rule." 
 
16 
 
 WOMAN SUFFRAGE. 
 
 And unto Adam he said, " Because thou has hearkened unto the voice of thy wife," 
 yes, and because thou wilt hearken, " thy sorrow shall be in the labor of the earth ; 
 the ground shall be cursed ; " in all material things shall be cross and trouble, not 
 agaiust you, but " for your »ake." "In your sorrow you shall eat of it all the days 
 of your life." Your need and struggle shall be with external things, and with tlie 
 ruling of them. For your sake," that you may learn your mastery, inherit your 
 true power, carry out with ease and understanding the desire and need of the race, 
 which woman represents, discerns afar, and pleads to you. 
 
 And Adam bowed before the Lord's judgment ; we are not told that he answered any 
 thing to that ; but he turned to his wife, and in that moment " called her name Eve, 
 because she was the mother of all living." Then and there was the division made, 
 and to which can we say was the empire given ? Both were set in conditions, hemmed 
 in to divine and special work — man, by the stress and sorrow of the ground ; woman 
 by the stress and sorrow of her maternity and of her spiritual conception, making her 
 truly the *' mother of all living," 
 
 At the beginning of human histoiy or tradition, then, we get the answer to our 
 question: The law of woman life is central, interior, and from the heart of things ; 
 the law of the man's life is circumferential, enfolding, shaping, bearing on and 
 around outwardly; wheel within wheel is the constitution of human power. It will 
 be an evil day for the world when the nave shall leave its place and contend for that of 
 the felloe. Iron-rimmed for its basy revolution and outward contact is the life and 
 strength of man ; but the tempered steel is at the heart and within the soul of the 
 woman, that she may bear the silent pressure of the axle, and quietly and invisibly 
 originate and support the entire onward movement. " The spirit of the living crea- 
 ture is in the wheels," and they can move no otherwise. ''When the living creatures 
 went, the wheels went by them ; and when the living creatures were lifted up from 
 the earth, the wheels were lifted up." That was what Ezekiel saw in his vision. 
 There can be no going forward without a life and presence and impulse at the cen- 
 ter ; and in the organization of humanity there is where the place and power of 
 woman haA'^e been put. For good or for evil, for the serpent or for the redeeming 
 Christ, she must move, must influence, must achieve beforehand, and at the heart; 
 she must be the mother of the race; she must be the mother of the Messiah. Not 
 woman in her own person, but " one born of woman" is the Saviour. For everything 
 that is formed of the Creator from the unorganized stone to the thought of righteous- 
 ness in the heart of the race there must be a matrix. In the creation and in the re- 
 creation of his human child God makes woman and the soul of woman his blessed 
 organ and instrument. When woman clears herself of her own perversions, her self- 
 imposed limitations, returns to her spiritual power and place, and cries, Behold the 
 handmaid of the Lord ; be it unto me according to thy word," then shall the spirit 
 descend unto her ; then shall come the redemption. 
 
 Take this for the starting-point ; it is the key. 
 
 Within, behind, antecedent to all result in action, are the place and office of the 
 woman by the law of woman-life. And all question of her deed and duty should be 
 brought to this test. Is it of her own interior natural relation, putting her at her true 
 advantage, harmonious with the key to which her life is set? I think this suffrage 
 question must settle itself precisely upon this ground principle, and that all argu- 
 ment should range conclusively around it. Judging so, we should find, I think, thait 
 not at the polls, where the last .utterance of a people's voice is given — where the 
 results of character and conscience and intelligence are shown — is her best and 
 rightful work ; on the contrary, that it is useless here, unless first done elsewhere. 
 But where little children learn to think and speak — where men love and listen and 
 the word is forming — is the office she has to fill, the errand she has to do. The ques- 
 tion is, can she do both ? Is there need that she should do both ? Does not the former 
 and greater include the later and less? 
 
 Hers are indeed the primary meetings : in her nursery, her home, and social circles; 
 with other women, with young men, upon whose tone and character in her maturity 
 her womanhood and motherhood join their beautiful and mighty influence ; above all, 
 among young girls — the "little women," to whom the ensign and commission are 
 descending — is her undisputed power. Purify politics? Purify the sewers? But 
 what if, first, the springs, and reservoirs, and conduits could be watched, guarded, 
 filtered, and then the using be made clean and careful all through the homes ; a bet- 
 ter system devised and carried out for separating, neutralizing, destroying hurtful 
 refuse? Then the poisonous gases might not be creeping back upon us through our 
 enforced economies, our make-shifts and stop-gaps of outside legislation ; for legisla- 
 tion is, after all, but cut-off, curb, and patch; an external, troublesome, partial, un- 
 certain application of hindrance and remedy. Wha,t physician will work with lotion 
 and plaster when he can touch, and control, and heal at the very seat of the disease? 
 
 It is the beginning of the fulfillment that women have waked to the consciousness 
 that they have not as yet filled their full place in human life and affairs. Only has 
 not the 'mistake been made of contending with and grappling results when causes 
 
WOMAN SUPFRAOE. 
 
 17 
 
 ■wore in their hands T Have they not let go the niainsprinpR, to mn after and in- 
 effectually i)ii8h with pins the refractory co<;s upon tlio wIkm I riuisT 
 
 Woman ahvays deserts herself when she puts lior lifo aud motive and infliu'iico in 
 mere outsidos. Outside of fashiou aud place, outside of cluirm ami apparrl, out- 
 side of work and ambition — she nnist learn that tli(!s»i are iu)t her true sliowinj;s; she 
 must go back aud put herself where God has called her to ]hi with hiuiself, at the 
 ^ eileut, holy inmost; then we shall feci, if not at ouc(\ yet sur(dy soon or sonu'tiuie, a 
 new order beginning. He, the Father of all, gives it to us to be tlH> motherhood. 
 That is the great solving and upraising word; not limited to mere jmrenfage, but the 
 law of woman-life. For good or for evil she motluus the world. Not all are called t«> 
 motherhood in the literal sense, but all are called to tlu? great, true motherhood in 
 some of its manifold trusts aud obligations. ^^Nohlcssv oJilit/c you can not l.'iy it 
 down. " More are tlui children of the desolate than of her who hath a husband." 
 All the little children that are born must look to womanhood somewherj! for mother- 
 ing. Do they all get it f All the works aud ])olicies of men look back somewhere 
 for a true ''desire" toward and by which only they can rule. Is the desire of the 
 woman — of the home, the mother-motive of the world and human living — kept in the 
 integrity and beauty for which it was intrusted to her, that it might move the power 
 of man to noble ends ? 
 
 Do you ask the governing of the nation? You have the making of the nation. 
 Would you choose your statesmen? First make your statesmen. 
 
 Indeed the whole cause on trial may be summarily ended by the proving of an alibi, 
 an elsewhere of demand. Is woman needed at the caucuses, conventions, polls ? Sho 
 is neeiled, at the same time, elsewhere. Two years of time and strength, of thought 
 and love, from some woman, are essential for every little human being, that he nuiy 
 even begin "a life. When you remember that every man is once a little child, born of a 
 woman, trained — or needing training — at a woman's hands; that of the little men, 
 every one of whom takes and shapes his life so, come at length the hand for the helm, 
 the voice for the law, aud the arm to enforce the law — what do yon want more for a 
 woDian's opportunity and control? 
 
 Which would you choose as a force, an advantage, in settling any question of 
 public moment, or as touching your own private interest through the general man- 
 agement, the right to go upon election day aud cast one vote, or a hold before- 
 hand upon the individual ear and attention of each voter now qualilied ? The abil- 
 ity to present to him your argument, to show him the real point at issue, to convince 
 and persuade him of the right and lasting, instead of the weak and brielly politic 
 way f This initial privilege is in the hands of woman, assuming that she can be 
 brought to feel and act as a unit, which appears to be what is claimed for her in the 
 argument for her regeneration of the outer political w^orld. But already aud sei>a- 
 rately, if every intelligent, conscientious woman can but reach one man, and inlliienco 
 him from the principle involved — from her interior perception of it, kept pure on {)ur- 
 pose from bias aud temptation that assail him in the outsi<le mix and jostle — will 
 she not have done her work without the casting of a ballot ? Aud what becom«'s of 
 "taxation without representation," when, from Eden down. Eve can always plead 
 with Adam, can have the first word instead of the last — if she knows what that tiist 
 word is, in herself and thence in its ])ower with him — can beguile him to his good in- 
 stead of to his harm, as indeed she only meant to do in that liist ignorant <'xperiment ? 
 Would it be any less easy to qualify for aud accomi)lish this tliau to convince antl 
 outnumber in ])ublic gatherings not only bodies of men but the mass of women that 
 will also have to be confronted aud convinced or overborne? 
 
 Preconceived oi)inioi)s, minds made up, men not so easily beguiled to the puregoo<l, 
 you say ? Woman (|uit<> as ai)t to make mistak<'s out ot Paradise as in ? That 
 only returns us to the primal need and opportunity. Get the mau to listen to .vou 
 before his mind is made up, before his manhood is made up; whih^ it is in the uuik- 
 ing. That is just the pow<ir and i)lace that belong to you, and you must no'\/.f au«l 
 fill. It is your natural right; God gave it to yon. "The seed of the woman shall 
 bruise the serpent's head." 
 
 We can not do all in one day, and in such a day of the world as this. We plant 
 trees for posterity, where forests have been laid wastt*, aud the ln'aiititiil work of life 
 is to be done over again; we can not expect to see our fruit in souls ami in the 
 nation at less cost of faith aud time. Take care, then, of the little chihlreu— the 
 men-children — to niake men of them; the womeu-chihlren — oh, yes, even above 
 all — to make ready for future mothering; to snatch from the «>vil that works <>vor 
 against pure womanliness. Until you have done this let men feud for themH««lvea 
 in rough outsides a little longer; except, j)erhaps, as wis(\ able women whom the 
 trying transition time calls forth may lind tit way aiul ]>la( (^ for effort and ]tr«)test — 
 there is always room for that, and noble work has been and is being d(Mie ; but do 
 not rear Ji new generation of women to expect and desire charges and ri'spousibilities 
 reversive of their own life-law, through whoso perfect fullilluuMit alone uuiy the future 
 clean place be made for all to work in. 
 
 S. Rep. 2543, pt. 2 2 
 
18 
 
 WOMAN SUFFRAGE. 
 
 Is there excess of female population ? Can not all expect the direct rule of a home f 
 Is not this exactly, perhaps, just now, for the more universal remedial mothering 
 that in this age is the thing immediately needed? Let her who has no child seek 
 where she can help the burdened mother of many ; how she can best reach with influ- 
 ence, and wisdom, and cherishing, the greatest number — or most efficiently a few— 
 of these dear, helpless, terrible little souls, who are to make, in a few years, a new 
 social condition ; a better and higher, happier and safer, or a lower, worse, bitterer, 
 more desperately complicated and distressful one. 
 
 "Desire earnestly the best gifts," said St. Paul, after enumerating the gifts of 
 teaching, and prophecy and authority ; and I show you," he goes on, a yet more 
 excellent way." Chanty, not mere alms, or toleration, or general benignity, out of a 
 safe self-provision ; but caritas, nearness, and caring, and loving, the very essence of 
 mothering; the way to and hold of the heart of it all, the heart of the life of hu- 
 manity. " Keep thy heart with all diligence ; for out of it are the issues of life." 
 That is the first word; it charges womaniiood itself, which must be set utterly right 
 before it can take hold to right the world. Hero are at once task, and mission, and 
 rewarding sway. 
 
 Woman has got off the track ; she must see that first, and replace herself. We are 
 mothering the world still; but we are mothering it, in a fearfully wide measure, all 
 wrong. 
 
 Sacrifice isthe beginning of all redemption. We must give up. We must even give 
 up the wish and seeming to have a hand in things, that we may work unseen in the 
 elements, and make them fit and healthful ; that-daily bread and daily life may be 
 sweet again in dear, old, homely ways, and plentiful with all truly blessed opportu- 
 nities. We are not to organize the world, or to conquer it, or to queen it. We are 
 just to take it again and mother it. If woman would begin that, search out the cra- 
 dles of life and character, and take care of the whole world of fifty years hence, in 
 taking care of them calling upon men and the State when needful to authorize her 
 action and furnish outward means for it, I wonder what might come, as earnest of 
 good, even in this our day, in which we know not our visitation. . 
 
 And here again come allowance and exception for what women can always do when 
 this world-njothering forces an appeal to the strength and authority of man. Wojuen 
 have never been prevented from doing their real errands in the world, even outside 
 the domestic boundary. They have defended their husband's castles in the old chiv- 
 alrous times, when the male chivalry was away at the crusades. They have headed 
 .armies when Heaven called them ; only Heaven never called all the women at once; 
 but when the king was crowned, the mission done, they have turned back with de- 
 sire to their sheltered, gentle, unobtrusive life again. There has no business to be a 
 standing army of women ; not even a standing political arm3^ Women have navi- 
 gated and brought home ships when commanders have died or been stricken help- 
 less upon the ocean ; they have done true, intelligent, patient work for science, art, 
 religion; and those have done the most who have never stopped to contend first, 
 whether a woman, as such, may do it or not. Look at what Dorothea Dix has done, 
 single-liandcd, single-mouthed, in asylums and before legislatures. Women have 
 sat on thrones, and governed kingdoms well, when that w^as the station in life to 
 which God called them. If Victoria of England has been anything she has been 
 the mother other land ; flhe has been queen and protecting genius of its womanhood 
 and homes. And when a woman does these things, as called of God, not talks of them, 
 as to whether she may make claim to do them, she carries a weight from the very sanctity 
 out of whi(;h she steps as woman, that moves men unlike the moving of any other 
 power. Shall she resign the chance of doing really great things, of meeting gra;nd 
 ciises, by making herself common in ward-rooms and at street-corners, and abolishing 
 the perfect idea of home by no longer consecrating herself to it ? 
 
 If individual woman, as has been said, may gain and influence individual man and 
 so the man-power in affairs — a body of women, purely as such, with cause, and plea, 
 and reason, can always have the ear and attention of bodies of nuiu ; but, to do this, 
 they niust conje straight from their home sanctities, as representing them— as able to 
 represent them othei^vise than men, because of their heartli-priestesshood ; not as 
 politicians, bred and hardened in the public arenas. 
 
 That the family is the heart of the State, and that the State is but the widened 
 family, is the fact which the old vestal consecration, power, and honor set forth and 
 kept in mind. 
 
 The voice which has of late been so generally conceded to women in town decis- 
 ions as regarding public schools, is an instance of the fittingness of relegating to 
 them certain interests of which they should know more than men, because— ap- 
 plying the key-test with which we have started— it has direct relation to, and 
 springs from, their motherhood. But can one help suggesting that if the movement 
 had been to place women, merely and directly, upon the committees, by votes of men 
 who saw that this work might be in great part best done by them; if women had 
 asked and offered for the place without the jostle of the town-meeting, or putting 
 
WOMAN SUFFKAGE. 
 
 19 
 
 in that wedge for the ballot, the thing might hivve bwii readily done, aiul the 
 objection, or political precedent, avoided? 
 
 It is not the real opport nnity, when that arises or sliows itself in the line of her life- 
 law, that is to be retuse<l for woman. It is the taking from internal power to H<ld to 
 external complication of machinery and to the fricti<jn of strife. J^et ns jnst touch 
 upon someof the cnrnuit argnmcnts concerning these ('Xternal impositions which one 
 set is demanding and tln) other entreating against. 
 
 If voting is to be the chief })ower in woman's hands, or even a |>ower of half tho 
 moment that is contended for it, it will grow to be the motive and en<l, the all-ab- 
 sorbing object, with women that it is with men. 
 
 The gnbernatorial canvass, the Presiilential year — these will interrnpt and clog 
 all home bnsiness, snspend decisions, ])aralyze plans, as they do with mm, or elm? we 
 shall not be much, as thorough politicians, after all. And if we talk of mending all 
 that — of putting politics in their right place, and governing by pnro princ iplo in- 
 stead of party trick and stumping and electioneering — w<» go back in rllcci to tho 
 ackuowletlgment that only in the interior work, and behind politics, cau womou do 
 better things at all ; which, precisely, was to be demonstrated. 
 
 Think, simply, of election day for women. 
 
 Would it be so invariably easy a thing for a home-keeper to do, at the one oppor- 
 tunity of the year, or the four years, on a particular day, her duty in this matter? 
 It is easy to say that it takes no more time than a huiulred other things that some do ; 
 but setting apart all the argument that previous time and strength must have been 
 spent in pro])erly qualifying, how many of the hundred other tilings are done now 
 without interrui)tion, postpouement, hinderance, through domestic contingencies? or 
 are there a hundred other things done when the home contingencies are really vust by 
 a wonniu? A woman's life is not like a num's. That a man's life may be — th.it he 
 may transact his out-door bnsiness; keep his hours and appointments; may cast his 
 vote ou election day; may represent wife and children in all wherein the commnnity 
 cares for, or might injure him and them — the woman, some woman, must be at the 
 home post, that the home order may go on, from which he derives that command of 
 time and freedom from hindering necessities, which leave him to his work. And so, 
 as the old proverb says, while man's work is from sun to sun — made detinite, a mat- 
 ter to which he can go forth and from which he can come in — a woman's work, of 
 keeping the place of the forth-going and incoming, is never done, from the very nature 
 and ceaseless importance of it. 
 
 Must she go to the polls, sick or well, baby or no baby, servant or no servant, 
 strength or no strength, desire or no desire? If she have cook and housemaid they 
 are to go also, and nuniber her two to one, any way; probably on election day, which 
 they would make a holiday, they would — as at other crises, of birth, sickness, death, 
 house-cleaning, which should occur in no first-class families — come down upon her 
 with their appropriate coup d'etat, and ''leave;" making the state-stroke, in this in- 
 stance, of scoring three votes, two dropped and one lost, for the irrepressible side. 
 
 How will it be when Norah and Maggie and Katie have not only their mass and 
 confession, their Fourth-of-July and Christmas, their mission weeks, their social en- 
 gagements and family plans, and their appointments with their dress-makers, to cur- 
 tail your claims upon their bargained time and service, but their share in the primary 
 meetings and caucuses, committees and torch-light processions and mass meetings? 
 For what shall prevent the excitements, the pleasurings, the runnings hither and 
 thither that men delight in from following in the train of politics aiul parties with 
 the common Avoman ? Perhaps it nuiy even be discovered, to the still further detri- 
 ment of our already painfully-hampered and i)erplexed domestic system that the pur- 
 suit of fun, votes, oihces is more remunerative, as well as gentlewomanly — ;is 
 Micawber might express it— than the cleansing of i>ots and ])ans, the weekly wash, 
 or the watching of the roast. Perhai)s in that enfranchised day there will be no 
 Katies and Maggies, and the Norahs will know their place no more. 
 
 Then the enlighttMUid womanhood may have to begin at the foundation, and glorify 
 the kitchen again. And good enough for her, in tlie wide as well as primitivt* senso 
 of the phrase, and a grand turn in the history that re])eats itself towaril the old, for- 
 gotten, }>eaceful side of the cycle it may be! 
 
 Hut the argument does not rest upon any such points as these. It rests upon tlie 
 ins>ide nature of a woman's work ; upon the need there is to begin again to-day at 
 the heart of things and make that right ; upon the evident fact that this cau be »lone 
 none too soon or earnestly, if the community ami th(^ country iiiti not to keep on in 
 the broad way to a threatened destruction ; 'aml upon the e<utainty that it can neviT 
 bt< done unless it is done by woman, and with all of woman's might. Not l»y struggles 
 for new and diHeriMit i)lace. but by the l)etter, mom loving, mor«^ intelligent tlt'ep- 
 seeing and deep-feeling tilling of her own place, that luuw will disputt^ and none ran 
 take from her. We ar«^ not where woman was in the oUl brutal days that are 8<M»ft««n 
 quoted; and we shall not, need not, return to that. Christianity has diHp»)sed of that 
 sort of argument. We are on a vantage ground for the doing of our real essential 
 
20 
 
 WOMAN SUFFRAGE. 
 
 work better than it has been done ever before in the history of the world ; and we 
 are madly leaving our work and our vantage together. The great step made by wo- 
 man was in the generation preceding this one of restlessness — the restlessness that 
 has come through the first feeling of great power. It was made in the time when wo- 
 men learned physiology, that they might rear and nurse their families and help their 
 neighborhoods understandingly ; science, that they might teach and answer little 
 children, and share the joy of knowledge that was spreading swiftly in the earth ; 
 political history and economy, that they might listen and talk to their brothers and 
 husbands and sons, and leaven the life of the age as the bread in the mixing ; business, 
 figures, rules, and principles, that they might sympathize, counsel, help, andpruden- 
 tially work with and honestly strengthen the bread-winners. The good work was 
 begun in the schools where girls were first told, as George B. Emerson used to tell us 
 Boston girls, that we were learning everything he could teach us, in order to be women, 
 wives, mothers, friends, social influencers, in the best and largest way possible. Women 
 grew strong and capable under such instruction and motive. Are their daughters and 
 granddaughters about to leap the fence, leave their own realm little cared for — or 
 doomed to be — undertake the whole scheme of outside creation, or contest it with the 
 men ? Then God help the men ! God save the Commonwealth ! 
 
 We are past the point already where homes are suffering, or liable to suffer, neglect or 
 inj ury ; they are already left unmade. Shall this go on 1 Between frivolities aud ambi- 
 tious, between social vanities, and shows, and public meddlings and mixings — for 
 where one woman is needed and doing really brave, true work, there are a hundred 
 rushing forth for the mere sake of rushing — is the primitive home, the power of heaven 
 upon earth, to slip away from among us ? Let us not build outsides which have no 
 insides ; let us not put a face upon things which has no reality behind it. Beware 
 lest we make the confusion that we need the suffrage to help us unmake; lest we tear 
 to pieces that we may patch again. Crazy patchwork that would be, indeed ! 
 
 Are women's votes required because men will not legislate away evils that they do 
 not heartily wish away ? Is government corrupted because men desire shield and 
 opportunity for dishonest speculation, authority and countenance for nefarious com- 
 binations ? The more need to go to work at the beginning rather than to plunge into 
 the pitch and be defiled ; more need to make haste and educate a better generation of 
 m^n, if it be so we can not, except vi et armis, influence the generation that is. 
 
 But do you think that if women are in earnest — enough in earnest to give up, as 
 they seem to be to demand — they might not bring their real power to bear even upon 
 these evil things, in their root and inception, aud even now ? Suppose women would 
 not live in houses, or wear jewels and gowns, that are bought for them out of wicked 
 millions made upon the stock exchange? Suppose they would stop decorating their 
 dwellings to an agony, crowding them hurriedly with this and that of the last and 
 newest, just because it is last and new, making as how and rivalry of what is not a 
 true-grown beauty of a home at all, but a meremeretriciousness ; suppose they would 
 80 set to work and change society that displays and feastings, which use up at every 
 separate one a yeai-'s comfortable suj^port for a quiet, modest family, should be given 
 up as vulgarities ; that people should care for, and be ready for, a true interchange of 
 life and thought, and simple, uncrowded opportunities for these. Suppose womeji 
 would say, No ; I will not blaze at Newport, or run through Europe dropping Ameri- 
 can eagles on English sovereigns after me like the trail ol a comet, or the crumbs that 
 Hop-o'-niy thumb let fall from his pocket that the people at home might track the way 
 he had gone ; because, if I have money, there is better w ork to be done with it ; and I 
 will not have the money that is made by gambling manipulations aud cheats." Do you 
 think this would have no influence f More than that, and further back, aud lowlier 
 down, suppose they should say, every one, I will not have the new, convenient house, 
 the fresh carpetings, the pretty curtains, or even the least, most fitting freshness, until 
 I know the means are earned for me with honest service to the world, and by no lucky 
 turn of even a small speculation." Further back yet, suppose them to declare, I will 
 not have the home at all, nor my own happiness, unless it can be based and builded 
 on the kind of life-work that helps to make a real prosperity ; tliat really goes to.the 
 building and safe-keeping of a whole nation of such homes." Would there be no 
 power in that ? Would it not be a kind of woman-suffrage to settle the very initials 
 of all that ever bears upon the public question ? And to bring that sort of woman on 
 the stage, and to the front, is there not enough work to do, aud enough higher edu- 
 cation" to insist on and secure? 
 
 After all, men work for women; or, if they think they don't, it would leave them 
 but sorry satisfaction to abandon them to such existence as they could arrange with- 
 out us. In blessed homes, or in scattered dissipations of show, amusement, or the 
 worse which these shows and amusements are but terribly akin to, women give pur- 
 pose to and direct the results of all men's work. If the false staudards of living first 
 urge them, until at length the horrible intoxication ofthegame itself drives them on 
 further and deeper, are we less responsible for the last state of those men than for the 
 first! 
 
WOMAN SUFFKAGE. 
 
 21 
 
 Do you say, if good women refuse thoKe tbin^H and tried for a Himpler and truer 
 living, there are plenty of bad ones who wouhl take tlieni anyhow, and supply the 
 motive to deeper and more unmitigated evil f Ah, theni come hot li answer and er- 
 rand again. Raise the fallen — at least save the growing womanhood— Htop tin- de- 
 struction that rushes accelerating on, before you challenge n«'.w dilliculty ami danger 
 with an indiHcriminate franchise. Are not theHa bad wonuMi the v(My " plenty " that 
 would out-balance you at the polls, if you persist in trying the " patch-aiid-i'»la.st«?r " 
 renu^dy of sntVrage and legislation ? 
 
 Kecognize the fact, the law, that your power, your high commission, is inward — 
 vital— formative and causal. Bring all question of choice or duty to this ivht : Will 
 it work at the heart of things, among the realities and forces? 'J'ry your own lifr l)y 
 this; remember that mere external is falsehood and death. The letter killcih. (Jive 
 up all that is only of the appearance — or even chielly so, in conscious (hilight and 
 motive— in person, surrounding, pursuit. Let yourself-presentation, your liomr-niak- 
 ing and adorning, our social effort and interest, your occupation and use of talent, all 
 shape and issue for the things that are essentially and integrally good, and that the 
 world needs to have prevail. Until you can do this, and induce such doing, it is 
 of little use to clamor for mere outward right, or to contend that it would l}e rightly 
 applied. 
 
 Work as jwu will, and widely as you can, for schools, in associations, in everything 
 whoso end is to teach, enlighten, enlarge women, and so the world. Help and pro- 
 tect the industries of women ; but keep those industries within the guiding law of 
 woman-life. Do not throw down barriers that take down safeguards with 1 hem; 
 that make threatening breaches in the very social structure. If women must sim vc 
 in shops, demand and care for it that it shall be in a less mixed, a more shielded 
 way than now. The great caravanaries of trade are perilous by their throng, pub- 
 licity, and weariness. There used to be women's shops — choice places, wlnnc a wom- 
 an's care and taste had ruled before the counters were spread; where women could 
 (juietly purchase things that were sure to be beautiful or of good service ; th<'r(i were 
 not the tumult and ransacking that kill both shop-girl and 8hopj)er now. This is one 
 instance, and but one, of the rescuing that ought to be attempted. There ought 
 at least to be distinct women's departments, presided over by women of good, moth- 
 erly tone and character, in the places of business which women so frequent, and 
 where the thoughtful are aware of much that makes them tremble. And surely a 
 great many of the girls and women who choose shop work, because they like its ex- 
 citement, ought rather to be in homes, rendering womanly service, and i)rei)aring 
 to serve in homes of their own — leaving their present places to young men who might 
 perhaps begin so to earn the homes to offer them. Will not this apply all the way 
 up, into the arts and the professions even ? There must needs bo exceptional women 
 perhaps; there are, and will be, time and errand and place for them ; but Heaven 
 forbid that they should all become exceptional ! 
 
 Once more, work for these things that are behind, and underlie; believing that 
 woman's place is behind and within, not of repression, but of power; and that if she 
 do not lill this place it will be empty ; there will be no main-spring. Meanwhile she 
 will get her rights as she rises to them, and her defenses where she needs them; 
 everything that helps, defends, uplifts the woman uplifts man and the whole fabric, 
 and man has begun to find it out. If he will give the sutfrage if women want it," 
 as is said, why shall he not as well give them the things that they want sutlVag*' for. 
 and that they are cai)able of representing f Believe me, this work, and the rcprcMMi- 
 tation which grows out of it, can no longer be done if we attempt the handling 
 of political machinery — the making of i>latforms, the judging <d" candidates, the 
 measuring and disputation of party plans and issues, and all tlui tortuous follow- 
 ing uj) of public and ])ersonal political history. Do you say men have their in<li- 
 vidual work in the world, and all this beside and of it, and that therefore wr may ' 
 Exactly here comes in again the law of the interior. Their work is "of it' —falls in 
 the way. They rub against it as they go along. Men meet each other in the busi- 
 ness thoroughfares, at the offices, and the street corners; w<^ are in the dear <lepths 
 of home. W(5 are with the little ones, of whom is not tins king«huu, but tlu> king- 
 dom of heaven, which we, through them, nuiy helj) to come, 'i'his is just where we 
 nuist al)andon our work, if we attenq)t the doing of thi^rs. And here is where our 
 pnvstigo will desert us, whenever great cause calls us tospeak fi«un out our seclusi<Mis, 
 and show uumi, from our insights and our i)lace, the occasion and desin^ t hat look unto 
 th«ur rule. They will m)t listen then ; they will remand us to tlu5 l»allot-l»ox. 
 
 "Inside i)olitics" is a goo<l word. That is just, where woman ought tt> be, as she 
 ought to bo insidii everything; insisting upon and implanting the truth and right 
 that are to(!onriu«u\ And she cannot be inside and outsidts botli. She can not do the 
 mothering and the home-making, the watching and ministry, the earning an«l main- 
 taining hold and privilege and n>otive influence behind and through the acts of mm, 
 and all the world-wide execution of act liesidc. Therefore wt^ sa> , do not givt> u|> 
 the substance which you might seize, for the shadow which you could not hold fast 
 
22 
 
 WOMAN SUFFRAGE. 
 
 if you were to seem to grasp it. Work on at the foundations. Insist on truth and 
 right ; put them into all your own life, taking all the beam out of your own eye be- 
 fore demanding — well, we will say the mote, for generosity's sake, and for the holy 
 authority of the word — out of the brother's eyes. Establish pure, honest, lovely 
 things — things of good report — in the nurseries, the schools, the social circles where 
 you reign and the outside world, and issue will take form and heed for themselves. 
 The nation, of which the family is the root, will be made and built and saved accord- 
 ingly. Every seed hath its own body. The seed of the woman shall bruise the 
 serpent-head of evil, and shall rise triumphant to become the ennobled, recreated 
 commonwealth. Then shall pour forth the double pjBan that thrills through the 
 glorious final chorus of Schumann's Faust — men and women answering in antiphons — 
 
 The indescribable, 
 
 Here it is done ; 
 The ever-womanly 
 
 Beckons us on ! 
 
 Then shall Mary — the fulfilled, ennobled womanhood — sing her Magnificat; stand- 
 ing to receive from the Lord, and to give the living word to the nations — 
 
 My soul doth magnify the Lord, 
 
 And my spirit hath rejoiced in God, my Savior. 
 
 Tor He hath looked upon the low estate of His handmaiden : 
 
 For behold, from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed. 
 
 For He that is mighty hath done to me great things ; 
 
 And ho\y is His name. 
 
 And His mercy is unto generations and generations. 
 
 The coming new version of the Old Testament gives us, we are told, among other 
 more perfect renderings, this one, which fitly utters charge and jjromise : 
 
 The Lord gave the word ; 
 Great was the company 
 
 Of those 
 That published it. 
 
 The Lord giveth the word ; 
 And the women that bring 
 
 Glad tidings 
 Are a great host. 
 
 Adeline D. T. Whitney. 
 
 The minority of the committee ask special attention to " Some of the 
 Eeasons against Woman Suffrage, by Francis Parkraan, printed at the 
 request of an association of women," which are as follows: 
 
 SOME OF THE REASONS AGAINST WOMAN SUFFRAGE. 
 
 THE POWER OF SEX. 
 
 It has been said that the question of the rights and employment of women should 
 ho treated without regard to sex. It should rather be said that those who consider it 
 regardless of sex do not consider it at all. It will not do to exclude from the problem 
 the chief factor in it, and deal with women ouly as if they were smaller and weaker 
 men. Yet these have been the tactics of the agitators for female snft'rage, and to 
 them they mainly owe what success they have had. Hence their extreme sensitive- 
 ness whenever the subject is approached on its most essential side. !f it could be 
 treated like other subjects, and discussed fully and freely, the cause of the self-styled 
 reformers would have been hopeless from the first. It is happy for them that the re- 
 lations of women to society can not be so discussed without giving just olfense. 
 Their most important considerations can be touched but slightly; and even then 
 ofteuse \vill be taken. 
 
 Whatever liberty the best civilization may accord to women, they must always be 
 subject to restrictions unknown to the other sex, and they can never dispense with 
 the protecting influences which society throws about them. A man, in lonely places, 
 has nothing to lose but life and property' ; and he has nerve and nmscles to defend 
 them. He is free to go whither he i^leases, and run what risks he pleases. Without 
 a radical change in human nature, of which the world has never given the faintest 
 sign, women can not be equally emancipated. It is not a question of custom, habit, 
 or public opinion, but of an all-pervading force, always formidable in the vast num- 
 ber of men in whom it is not controlled by higher forces. A woman is subject, also, 
 to many other restrictions, more or less stringent, necessary to the maintenance of 
 self respect and the respect of others, and yet placing her at a disadvantaije, as com- 
 l)ared to men, in the active work of the world. All this is mere truism, but the 
 plainest truism may be ignored in the interest of a theory or a cause." 
 
 Again, everybody knows that the physical and mental constitution of woman is 
 more delicate than in the other sex ; and, we may add, the relations between mind 
 and body are more intimate and subtile. It is true that they are abundantly so in 
 
WOMAN 8LlFKA(jii:. 
 
 Dien ; but their harder orfjjanisin i.s neither 80 Heiisitivo to (liHtiirhiii;; inllnnicrh nor 
 subject to so many of them. 
 
 It is these and other inlierent eonditions, joined to the «!h;;roHHin;^ nature of a wo- 
 man's special functions, that have determined thn)u^h all time In-r rchitive jMrnition, 
 What we have j»ist said — and we niij^ht have said much more — is meant as a n tiiind- 
 er that her greatest limiiations are not of human ori;;in. M«'U did not make thrm, 
 and they can not unmake them. Through them God and Nature, liave ordained that 
 those subject to them shall not be forced to join in the harsh conflicts of the worhl 
 militant. Itis folly to ignore them, or try to counteract them by political and social 
 quackery. They set at naught legislatures and peoples. 
 
 SELF-COMPLACENCY OF THE AGITATORS. 
 
 Hero we may notice an idea which seems to prevail among the woman stiffragists, 
 that they have argued away the causes which have always determined the substan- 
 tial relations of the sexes. This notion arises mainly from the fact that they have 
 had the debate very much to themselves. Their case is that of tlu^ self-mad*^ philos- 
 opher who attacked the theory of gravitation, and, because nobody took the trouble 
 to answer him, boasted that he had demolished it, and called it au error of the past. 
 
 CRUELTY OF WOMAN SUFFRAGE. 
 
 The frequent low state of health among American women is a fact as undeniable as 
 it is deplorable. 
 
 In this condition of things, what do certain women demand for the good of their 
 sex? To add to the excitements that are wasting them other and greater excite- 
 ments, and to cares too much for their strength other and greater cares. Because 
 they can not do their own work, to require them to add to it the work of men, and 
 launch them into the turmoil where the most robust sometimes fail. It is much as if 
 a man in a state of nervous exhaustion were told by his physician to enter at ouco 
 for a foot-race or a boxing-match. 
 
 POWER SHOULD GO WITH RESPONSIBILITY. 
 
 To hold the man responsible and yet deprive him of power is neither just nor 
 rational. The man is the natural head of the family, and is responsible for its main- 
 tenance and order. Hence he ought to control the social and business agencies which 
 are essential to the successful (lischarge of the trust imposed upon him. If he is 
 deprived of any part of this control, he should be freed also in the same measure from 
 the responsibilities attached to it. 
 
 ALTERNATIVES OF WOMAN SUFFRAGE. 
 
 Woman suffrage must have one of tw^o effects. If, as many of its advocates com- 
 plain, women are subservient to men, and do nothing but what they desire, then woman 
 snlfrage will have no other result than to increase the power of the other sex ; if, on 
 the other hand, women vote as they see tit, without regarding their husbands, then 
 unhapi)y marriages will be multiplied and divorces redoubled. We can not allord to 
 add to the elements of domestic unhappiness. 
 
 POLITICAL DANGERS OF WOMAN SUFFRAGE. 
 
 One of the chief dangers of popular government is that of inconsiderate and rash 
 legislation. In impatience to l)e rid of one evil, ulterior conse«iuences are apt to bo 
 forgotten. In the haste to redress one wrong, a door may be opened to many. This 
 danger would be increased innuj'asurably if the most inipulsive ami »»\('iteai>le liall of 
 humanity had an e<iual voice in the making of laws, ami in the adnunistration oftlu in. 
 Abstract right would then be madi^ to i)revail after a fashion somewhat startling. A 
 lady of int«^lligence an<i admirabh' intentions, an ardent partisan on jtrinciples of pnre 
 hnii anitananism, confessed that, in the last Presidential election. Florida had given 
 a majority for the Democrats; but insisted that it was right to count it for Hayes, 
 because other States had been counted wrongfully for Tilden. It was impt».s.sible to 
 make her comprehend that government conducted on such principles would end in 
 anarchy. In politics, the virtues of women would sometimes be as dangerous as their 
 faults. 
 
 If the better class of women flatter themselves that they can control the of hen<, 
 tin y are doomed to disappointment. They will be outvotocl in their own kitchens, 
 without reckoning the agglomerations of poverty, ignorance, and vice, that form % 
 S. Rep. 1 at 
 
24 
 
 WOMAN SUFFRAGE. 
 
 startling proportion of our city populations. It is here that the male vote alone 
 threatens our system with its darkest perils. The female vote would enormously in- 
 crease the evil, for it is often more numerous, always more impulsive and less sub- 
 ject to reason, and almost devoid of the sense of responsibility. Here the bad politi- 
 cian would lind liis richest resources. He could not reach the better class of female 
 voters, but the rest would be ready to his hand. Three-fourths of them, wheu not 
 urged by some pressing need or contagious passion, would be moved, not by princi- 
 ples, but by personal predilections. 
 
 THE FEMALE POLITICIAN. 
 
 It is not woman's virtues that would be prominent or influential in the political arena. 
 They would shun it by an invincible repulsion ; and the opposite qualities would bo 
 drawn into it. The Washington lobby has given us some means of judgiug what wo 
 mny expect from the woman 'inside politics." If politics are to be purilied by art- 
 fulness, effrontery, insensibility, a pushing self-assertion, and a glib tongue, theu we 
 may look for regeneration; for the typical female politician will be richly endowed 
 with all these gifts. 
 
 Thus accoutered for the conflict, she may fairly hope to have the better of her mas- 
 culine antagonist. A woman has the inalienable right of attacking without being 
 attacked in turn. She may strike, but must not be struck, either literally or figura- 
 tively. Most women' refrain from abusing their privilege of non-combatants; but 
 there are those in whom the sense of impunity breeds the cowardly courage of the 
 virago. 
 
 In reckoning the resources of the female politicians there is one which can by no 
 means be left out. None know better than women the potency of feminine charms 
 aided by feminine arts. The woman "inside politics" will not fail to make use of an 
 influence so subtle and strong, and of which the management is peculiarly suited to 
 her talents. If — and the contingency is in the highest degree probable — she is not 
 gifted with charms of her own, she will have no difficulty in finding and using others 
 of her sex who are. If report is to be trusted, Delilah has already spread her snares 
 for the Congressional Samson ; and the power before which the wise fail and the 
 mighty fall has been invoked against the sages and heroes of the Capitol. When 
 "woman" is fairly "inside politics," the sensation iiress will reap a harvest of scandals 
 more lucrative to itself than profitable to public morals. And, as the zeal of one class 
 of female reformers has been, and no doubt will be, largely directed tp their griev- 
 ances in matters of sex, we shall have shrill-tongued discussions of subjects which 
 had far better be let alone. 
 
 It may be said that the advocates of female suffrage do not look to political women 
 for tbe purifying of politics, but to the votes of the sex at large. The two, however, 
 can not be separated. It should be remembered that the question is not of a limited 
 and select female suffrage, but of a universal one. To limit would be impossible. It 
 would seek the broadest areas and the lowest depths, and spread itself through the 
 marshes and malarious pools of society. 
 
 MEN WILL GIVE WOMEN THE SUFI RAGE IF THEY WANT IT. 
 
 Again, one of the chief arguments of the agitators is that government without the 
 consent of the governed is opposed to inalienable right. But most women, including 
 those of the best capacity and worth, fully consent that their fathers, husbands, 
 brothers, or friends shall be their political representatives; and no_ exhortation or 
 teasing has induced them to withhold their consent. Nor is this surprising; for a 
 woman is generally represented in a far truer and more intimate sense by her male 
 relative than is this relative by the candidate to whom he gives his vote, commonly 
 w^ithout knowing him, and often with disseut from many of his views. 
 
 Nothing is more certain than that women will have the suffrage if they ever want 
 it; for when they want it, men will give it to them, regardless of consequences. A 
 more than readines<4 on the part of men to conform to the wishes of the other sex is 
 a national trait in America, though whether it would survive the advent of the fe- 
 male politician is matter for reflection. We venture to remind those who demand 
 woman suflVage as a right that, even if it were so, the great majority of intelligent 
 women could judge for themselves whether to exercise it, better than the few who 
 assume to teach them their duty. 
 
 MOST WOMEN AVERSE TO IT. 
 
 The agitators know well that, in spite of their persistent importunity, the majority 
 of women are averse to the suftVagc. Hence, the ludicrous terror which the suffragists 
 showed at the governor's proposal to submit the question to a vote of the women of 
 the State. 
 
WOMAN SUFFKAGE. 
 
 25 
 
 THE WOMAN SUFFRAGISTS HAVE DONE NOTHING TO I'ltOVE THEIR FITNESS FOR A 
 
 SHARE IN (U)VERNMENT. 
 
 A jsiuall miniber of women Juive spent their time for Kcveral decadeH in ceuHolesH de- 
 mands I'or siilirajje, but t hey liavc lost tlieir best arj^iiment in failin;^ to hhow tliat 
 - they are prepared to use the Iraiichise when they hav<< ^ot it. A Hin;;le hoimhI and 
 useful contribution to one Hide or the other of any qiu'stion of < urrenl politicH— the 
 tarilV, specie i)aynient8, the silver bill, civil service reform, railroa<l mono[)oly, cai»ital 
 and labor, or a half score of other matters — would have done more for their cause 
 than years of empty agitation. 
 
 PERMANENCE OF THE RELATIONS OF THE SEXES. 
 
 The a<:;itators say that no reason can be given why women should not take a direct 
 part in i»oli^ic8, except that they have never done so. There are other reasons, and 
 strong ones, in abundiince. Jiut this particular one is nevertheless good. 
 
 All usages, laws, and institutions have risen and ])erished, and risen and perished 
 again. Their history is the history of mntability itself. But, from the earliest rec- 
 ords of mankind down to this moment, in every race and every form or degree of 
 civilization or barbarism, the relative position of the sexes has been essentially the 
 same, with exceptions so feeble, rare, and transient that they only prove the rule. 
 Such permanence in the foundation of society, while all that rests upon it has ]>assed 
 from change to change, is proof in itself that this foundation lies deep in the essen- 
 tial nature of things. It is idle to prate of the old time that has passed away and 
 the new time that is coming. The "new time" can no more stir the basis of hu- 
 man nature than it can stop the movement of the earth. 
 
 The cause of this i)ermaneuce is obvious. Women have great special tasks assigned 
 them in the work of life, and men have not. To these tasks their whole nature, moral 
 and physical, is adjusted. There is scarcely a distinctive quality of women that has 
 not a direct or indirect bearing upon them. Everythingelse in their existence is sub- 
 ordinated to the indispensable functions of continuing and rearing the human race ; 
 and, during the best years of life, this work, fully discharged, leaves little room for 
 any other. Rightly considered, it is a work no less dignified than essential. It is 
 the root and stem of national existence, whihi the occupations of men are but the 
 leaves and branches. On women of the intelligent and instructed classes depends the 
 future of the nation. If they are sound in body and mind, impart this soundness to a 
 numerous otispring, ami roar them to a sense of responsibility and duty, there are no 
 national evils that we can not overcome. If they fail to do this their part, then the nkos- 
 ses of ihe coarse and unintelligent, alwaysof rapid increase, will overwhelm us andour 
 institutions. When tlie«e iudisjiensable duties are fully discharged, then thesull'rage 
 agitators may ask with better grace, if not with more reason, that they may share 
 the political functions of men. 
 
 IS WOMAN SUFFRAGE A RIGHT OR A WRONG ? 
 
 It has been claimed as a right that woman should vote. It is no right, but a 
 wrong that a small number of women should impose on all the rest political duties 
 which there is no call for their assuming, which they do not want to assume, and 
 which, if duly discharged, would be a cruel and intolerable burden. This pretense 
 of the female sutiragists was reduced to an absurdity when some of them gravely 
 aflirmed that if a single woman wanted to vote all the others ought to l)e required 
 to do so. 
 
 (Jovernment by doctrines of abstract right, of which the French revolution set' 
 the exam|)le and bore tin; Iruits, involves enormous danger and injustie^^ No politi- 
 cal right is absolut*' and of universal ajtplicat ion. Each has its eonditions, qualili- 
 catioiis, and limitations. If these are disregarded, om; right collides with another, 
 or with many others. Even aman'sright toliberty is subject to the condit ion that ho 
 does not use it to infringe the rights of his neighbors. It is in the concrete, and not in 
 the abstract, that rights prevail in every sound ami wholesome society. They are ap- 
 plied where they are applicable. A government of glittering g«Mieralil i«'s (|uickly de- 
 stroys itself. Tlie object of government is the aee«)mplishment of a certain result, the 
 greatest good of the governed ; and the ways of n'aching it vary in <lifVerent conntries 
 and ditVerent social eomlitions. Neither liberty nor the suffrage an' tlie eml ; they are 
 nothing but means to reach it : and «'ach should hv used to the extent in which' it is 
 best adapted to its puri)ose. If the voting of women conduces to t he greatest good of 
 the eomiunnity then th«*y ought to vote, and <)therwisethey ought not. The question 
 of female sulVrage thus becomes a practical «|uestion, an<l not om« of deelamat ion. 
 
 What would be the results of the general application of t he s«) callrjl right \o vote, 
 a right which, if it exists at all, must be common to all niankiud ? Suppose that the 
 
26 
 
 WOMAN SUFFRAGE. 
 
 poi)nlations of Turkey, the Soudan, or Zululand, were to attempt to exercise it and 
 govern themselves by universal popular suffrage. 
 
 The consequence would be anarchy and. a quick return to despotism as a relief. 
 The same would be the case, in less degree, among peoples more civilized, yet not 
 trained to self-governu ent by the habits and experience of generations. In fact, 
 there are but a few of the most advanced nations in whom the universal exercise of 
 the pretended "inalienable right" to vote would not produce political and social 
 convulsions. The truth is this : If the exercise of the suffrage by any individual or 
 body of individuals involves detriment to the whole people, then the right to exer- 
 cise it does not exist. 
 
 It is the right and the duty of the people to provide itself with good government, 
 and this great practical right and duty is imperative and paramount; whatever con- 
 fficts with it must give way. The air-blown theory of inalienable right is unworthy 
 the good sense of the American people. 
 
 The most rational even of the suffragists themselves liave ceased to rely on it. 
 
 WOMAN SUFFRAGE NOT PROGRESS. 
 
 Many women of sense and intelligence are influenced by the fact that the woman- 
 suffrage movement boasts itself a movement of progress, and by a wish to be on the 
 liberal or progressive side. But the boast is unfounded. Progress, to be genuine, 
 must be in accord with natural law. If it is not it ends in failure and in retrogression. 
 To give women a thorough and wholesome training both of body and mind ; to pre- 
 ])are such of them as have strength and opportunity for various occupatious different 
 from what they usually exercise, and above all for the practice of medicine, iu which 
 wo believe that they may render valuable service ; to rear them in more serious views 
 of life and its responsibilities are all in the way of normal and healthy development; 
 but to plunge them into politics, where they are not needed and for which they are 
 unlit, would be scarcely more a movement of progress than to force them to bear arms 
 and light. 
 
 WOMAN IN POLITICS AN ANTIQUATED IDEA. 
 
 The social power of women has grown with the growth of civilization^ but their 
 political power has diminished. In former times and under low social conditions, 
 women have occasionally had a degree of power in public affairs unknown iu the 
 loiemost nations of the modern world. The most savage tribes on this continent, the 
 Six Nations of New York, listened in solemn assembly to the counsels of its ma+roua 
 wiih a deference that has no parallel among its civilized successors. The people of 
 iiiicient Lycia, at a time when they were semi-barbarians, gave such power to their 
 women that they were reported to live under a gynecocracy, or female government. 
 The word gynecocracy, by the way, belongs to anti([uity. It has no ai)plicatiou iu 
 modein life; and, in the past, its applications were found, not in the higher develop- 
 ments of ancient society, but in the lower. Four hundred years before Christ the 
 question of giving political power to women was agitated among the most civilized 
 of ancient people, the Atheniaus, and they would not follow the examjile of their bar- 
 barian neighbors. 
 
 THE CONNECTION BETWEEN VOTING AND FIGHTING. 
 
 The advocates of woman suff rage have ridiculed the idea of any connection between 
 voting and the capacity to fight. Their attitude in this matter shows the absence of 
 reflection on questions of government, or the inability to form rational judgment upon 
 them. In fact, it is with nearly all of them a matter, not of reason, but of sentiment. 
 
 The hnman race consists of two equal parts, the combatant and the non-combatant, 
 and 1 hese parts are separated by the line of sex. It is true that some men are perma- 
 nently disabled from fighting, and others may be disabled iu one year or one month, 
 and lit to bear arms in the next, but the general fact remains that men are the fighting 
 li:ilf of humanity, and women are not. Fundamental laws are made in reference to 
 aujgregates of persons, and not to individual exceptions ; and it would be absurd to 
 exact a surgeon's certificate of military competency from every voter at the polls. It 
 is enongh that he belongs to a body which, as a whole, can and will fight. The ques- 
 tion remains, wljat has this to do with voting ? It has a great deal to do with it, and 
 above all iu a government purely popular. 
 
 THE VOTING OF A LARGE NON-COMBATANT CLASS DANGEROUS TO CIVIL HARMONY. 
 
 Since histoiy began, no government ever sustained itself long unless it could com- 
 mand the physical force of the natiou ; and this, whether the form of governmeut was 
 despotism, constitutional monarchy, or democracy. The despot controls the army 
 
WOMAN SUFrRAOE. 
 
 27 
 
 which compels ihe people to ohey ; the kin^ an<l parliament control the forc j of tho 
 kin<5(l()in, ami malcontonts dare not rise in iiiMnneei ion t ill they think they have 
 drawn away an eqnal or greater share of it. Finally, the majority in u democratic 
 lepublic feels secure that its enactments will take effect, because the <lereate<l mi- 
 nority, even if it does not respect law, will respect a force greater than its own. 
 But suppose tho majority to consist chietiy of women. Then legality wcmhl !»<• on 
 one side and power on the other. The majority would have tin; l.iv/, ami the mi- 
 nority the courage and strength. Hence, in times of political cxcitcmctit, when 
 passions were roused and great interests were at stake, the majority, that is, the 
 legal authority, would need the help of a standing army. Without such support tho 
 possession of the sutfrago by tho non-coml)atant half of the nation wouhl gnatly 
 increase the chances of civil discord. Once in our history a minority rose against 
 the majority, in the belief that it could out-light it. This would happen often if 
 the minority, as in tho supposed case of woman snlfrage, had not only the belief, 
 but the certainty, that it could master the majority. It may not bo creditable to 
 human nature that if we would have a stable government it is nec(!SN.ny to Ucep the 
 balance of power on the side of law ; but tho busint^ss of government is to shape itself 
 to the actual, and not tho ideal or millennial, condition of mankind. 
 
 Suppose, again, a foreiirn war in which tho sympathies of our women were enlisted 
 on one side or tho other. Suppose them to vote against the judgment of Vhe men that 
 we should take part in it, or, in other words, that their male lellow-citizeus should 
 light whether they liked it or not. Would the men be likely to obey ? 
 
 ANOTHER SOURCE OF DISCORD. 
 
 There is another reason why the giving of the suffrage to wouien would tend to 
 civil discord. In the jioliticsof the future th<i predomiuant, if not the engrossing, 
 questions will be to all appearance those of tinance and the relat ions of labor and 
 capital. From the nature of their occupations, a>» well as other causes, women in gen- 
 eral are ignorant of these matters, and not well lilted to deal with them. They re- 
 quire an experience, a careful attention, a deliberation and coolness of judgment, 
 and a freedom from passion, so rare that at the best their political treatment is 
 full of tlitticulty and danger. If these qualities are rare in men, they are still more 
 so in women, and feminine instinct will not in the present case supply their place. 
 The peculiar danger of these questions is that they raise class animosities, and tend 
 to set tho poor against the rich and tho rich against the poor. They become ques- 
 tions of social antagonism. Now, most of us have had occasion to observe how strong 
 the social rivalries an<l animosities of women are. They far exceed those of men. If, 
 in the strife between labor and capital, which, without great self-restraint on both 
 sides, is likely to be a fierce one, women should be called to an active ]»;ut, the etUct 
 would be lik*' throwing pitch an<l resin into the tire. Tho wives and daughters of 
 tho poor would bring into the contest a wrathful jealousy and hate against th«5 wives 
 and daughters of the rich far more vehement than the corresponding passions in their 
 husbands and brothers. 
 
 PRACTICAL VERSUS SENTIMENTAL GOVERNMENT. 
 
 The real issue is this: Is the object of government tho good of tho goveriUMl, or is it 
 not ? A late writer on woman sullVage says that it is not. Aeconliug to her, th«« ob- 
 ject of government is to give his or her rights to everybody. Others among the agi- 
 tators do not venture either on this Hat denial or this brave assertion, but only hover 
 about them with longing looks. Virtually they maintain that the object of govern- 
 ment is the realization of certain ideas or theories. They believe in principles, and 
 80 do we; they believe in rights, and so do we. lint as tho sublime may pass into 
 the ridiculous, so the best principles may be transported into regions of folly or iliab- 
 olism. There are minds so constituted that they can never st«>p till they have run 
 every virtue into its correlative weakness or vice. (Jovernmeut should be guided by 
 ])rinciples; but they should be sane and not crazy, sober and not drunk. They should 
 walk on solid ground, and not roam the clouds lianging to a bag of gas. 
 
 Rights may be real or unreal. Principles may be true or false ; but even i1h« ln-.st 
 and truest can not safely l)o pushed too far, or in tlu' wrong «lireetion. The principle 
 of truth itself may be carried into absurdity. The saying is old that truth should 
 not bespoken at all times; ami those whom a sick conscience worries into hal>itiial 
 violation of the maxim are imbeciles and nuisances. Keligion may jiass into mo: bid 
 enthusiasm or wild fanaticisuj, andtuin from a blessing to a curse. So the best of 
 political principles must be kejit within bounds of reason, or tln\v will work mis- 
 chief. That greatest and most diflicult of sciences, the science of government, deal- 
 ing with interests so delicate, complicated, and autagouietic, becomes a perilous 
 guide when it deserts the ways of temperance. 
 
28 
 
 WOMAN SUFFRAGE. 
 
 SHALL WE STAND BY AMERICAN PRINCIPLES? 
 
 The suffragists' idea of government is not practical, but utterly unpractical. It is 
 not American, but French. It is that government of abstractions and generalities 
 which found its realization in the French revolution, and its apostle in the depraved 
 and half-crazy man of genius, Jean Jacques Rousseau. The French had an excuse 
 for their frenzy in ihc crushing oppression they had just flung off and in their inex- 
 perience of freedom. We have no excuse. Since the nation began we have been free, 
 and our liberty is in danger from nothing but its own excesses. Since France learned 
 to subject the ideas of Rousseau to the principles of stable freedom embodied in Ihe 
 parliamentary government of England and in our own republicanism, she has emerged 
 from alternate tumult and despotism lo enter the paths of hope and progress. 
 
 The government of abstra(;tions has been called sonietimes the a priori, and sometimes 
 the sentimental, method. We object lo this last term, unless it is carefully defined. 
 Sentiments, like principles, enter into the life of nations as well as that of indivduals; 
 and lliey mo vital to both. But they should be healthy, and not morbid; rational, 
 and not extravagant. It is noL common sense alone that makes the greatness of states ; 
 neither is it sentiments and principles alone. It is these last joined with reason, re- 
 flection, and moderation. Through this union it is that one small island has become 
 the mighty mother of nations; and it is because we ourselves, her greatest offspring, 
 have chosen the paths of Hami)deii, Washington, and Franklin, and not those of 
 Rousseau, that we have passed safe through every danger, and become the wonder and 
 despair of despotism. 
 
 Out of the wholesome fruits of the earth, and the staff of life itself, the perverse 
 chemistry of man distills delirious vapors, which, condensed and bottled, exalt his 
 brain with gl(»rions fantasies, and then leave him inthemnd. So it is with the un- 
 happy sufFr.'igisis. From the sober words of our ancestors they extract the means of 
 mental inebriety. liecause the fathers of the Republic gave certain reasons to em- 
 phasize their crerd that America should not be taxed because America was not repre- 
 sented in the lii itish rarlianient, they cry out that we must fling open the flood gates 
 to vaster tides of ignorance and lolly, strengthen the evil of our system and weaken 
 the good, feed old abuses, hatch now ones, and expose all our large cities— we speak 
 with deliberate conviction — to the lisk of anarch5\ 
 
 Neither Congress, nor the States, nor the united voice of the whole people could 
 permanently change the essential relations of the sexes. Universal female suilrage, 
 even if deciced, would undo itself in time; but the attempt to establish it would work 
 deplorable mischief. 'J'ue (jnestion is, whether Ihe persistency of a few agitators 
 shiill plunge us blindfold into the most reckless of all experiments; whether we shall 
 adopt this supremo device. for developing the defects of women, and demolish their 
 ri ai power to build an uglj^ mockery instead. For the sake of womanhood, let us 
 hope not. In spite of the effect on the popular mind of the incessant repetition of a 
 few trite falacies, and in spite of the squeamishness that prevents the vast majority 
 averse to the movement from uttering a word against it, let us trust that the good 
 sense of the American people will vindicate itself against this most unnatural and pes- 
 tilent revolution. In the full and normal development of womanhood lie the best in- 
 terests of the world. Let us labor earnestly for it ; and, that we may not labor in 
 vain, let us save women from the barren perturbations of deliverance politics. Let 
 us respect them; and, that we may do so, let us pray for American from female suf- 
 frage. 
 
 The minority also desire to submit the report of the Judiciary Com- 
 mittee of the House iu the Forty-eighth Congress, as follows: 
 
 fHoiise Report No. 133). Forty-eightli Congress, first session.] 
 
 The right of suffrage is not and never has, under our system of government, been 
 one of the essential rights of citizenship. Like other rights, whether founded in nat- 
 ural law or not, the right to vote has always been treated in the practice of civilized 
 nations as a strictly civil right, purely derivative from and regulated by each society 
 according to its own circumstances and interests. Certain classes, which will readily 
 occur to the mind, have been almost universally excluded from the privilege. 
 
 The Constitution of our Federal Union did not assume to interfere with the established 
 rule of local rights and class cxcliisiou. By the original Constitution of 178;) the whole 
 organism of each body-politic participating in federation, and which, as a colony or 
 State, formed one of the constituents of the Union, was le: t to itself. What class or 
 portion of the whole people of any State should be admitted to suffrage, and should, by 
 virtue of such admission, exert the active and potential control iu the direction of its 
 affairs, was a question reserved exclusively for the determination of the State. There 
 was no limitation placed upon the power of the State except what may bo inferred from 
 
WOMAN SUFFRAGE. 
 
 29 
 
 the constitutional reqniremont that ih^^ United States shonhl gnaranty to eao]> State a 
 republican form of Government. 11 hH.s never been Herionwly insiNtcd ui)on tliat thlH 
 guaranty involved the power to refjjnhitii sntrrajje. It fonneil States with a r« piihli- 
 can form of ji^overnmcnt whicli denied civil a« well aw political ri^^htH to a lar^c m;i.sn 
 of its population. It formed States wherein the mass of its people were held in bond- 
 age as ♦slaves. The guaranty of a rei)ublican form of Government to each Sfcat»5 did 
 not require the United States to elevate slaves to a condition of freedom, or conf«5r 
 upon them the condition of suffrage. This principle of indei)endence prevailed not 
 alone as to State governments, but oven as to sutTrage when exercised in the election 
 of Kepresewtatives in Congress. 
 
 It is claimed that there is a very close analogy existing between thejjresent condi- 
 tion of women denied the political privilege of sntfrage and that of the former slaves, 
 and that the same reasons w^hich operated to induce the adoption of the aujendments 
 placing a limit on the originally exclusive right of each State to regulate sullrage, 
 should be made to apply to what is commonly known and called wonuin sullrage. 
 Indeed, the expressed object of the proposed amendment is to further limit the ])ow('rH 
 of the State in the premises by forbidding that sex should be a bar to the exercise of 
 su lit rage. 
 
 That the analogy claimed exists, and that like reasons suppoit the proposed amend- 
 ment as were successfully urged in the case of the slave, your committee deny. 
 When the thirteenth amendment ^aa adopted by the States, declaring slavery at an 
 end, an act, not of the United States, but of the several States ratifying the same, 
 under the terms of the Constitution, a new condition of things arose, for which the 
 States provided new amendments. The civil rights of the newly-emancipated race 
 were secured by the fourteenth amendment, prescribing limits to State power, and 
 the two races, which had hitherto stood on unequal grounds under and before the 
 law, were placed upon a plane of civil equality. All civil rights and privileges ac- 
 corded to one were thus guarantied to both races. 
 
 Under the inlluence of a just fear that without suffrage as a protective power to 
 the newly-acquired rights and privileges guarantied to the former slave he might 
 sufier detriment, and with this dominant motive in view, originated the fifteenth 
 amendment. It will be noted that by this latter amendment the privilege of suffrage 
 is not sought to be conferred on any class ; but an inhibition is placed upon the States 
 from excluding from the privilege of suffrage any class on account of race, color, or 
 previous condition of servitude. Other limitations not trespassing upon these inhibi- 
 tions might and do continue to exist in all the States. The dangers apprehended and 
 guarded against by constitutional enactments at the time of the adoption of the 
 amendments cited are embraced in the history of our day, and are beyond the pale 
 of doubt or dispute. Two heterogeneous races, wholly separated in social jiosition by 
 previous historic relations, and without kindred sympathies, \vould naturally ho so 
 antagonized in interest that power committed exclusively to the hands of one might 
 be abused to the Injury of the other. In order, therefore, that each might be self-pro- 
 tected, power was given to both. 
 
 Such, in brief, is the history of the later constitutional amendments, the motives 
 and circumstances which compassed their origin, and the theory upon which they 
 rest. The condition of slavery, alleged as existing in the case of woman, is wholly 
 without foundation in fact, unless the condition which nature assigns her is to be so 
 construed and considered. Her functions in civil society are co-ordinate with those 
 of man, differing in their sphere of action, but not antagonistic. Woman is not the 
 slave, but the companion, of man. Her duties are as noble as his, though widely 
 differing. Her true sphere is not restricted, but is boundless in resources and con- 
 sequences. In it she may emi)loy every energy of the mind and every affection of 
 the heart, while within its limitless compass, under Providence, she exercises a jxiwer 
 and influence beyond all other agencies for good. She trains and guides the life that 
 is, and forms it for the eternity and immortality that are to be. From the rude con- 
 tact of life, man is her shield. He is her guardian from itsconllicts. He is the defendt^r 
 of her rights in his home, and the avenger of her wrongs everywhere. In the shadow 
 of this defense not only is she shielded and protected, but in it man himself is per- 
 mitted to play his most exalted i)art in the social economy. 
 
 The Christian system conserves the peace and harmony of their home and invests 
 with sacred solemnity their njlations of man and wife. To the husband, by natural 
 allotment in such a home, fall the duties which i)rotect and ])rovidi^ for tlu' house- 
 hold, and to the wife the more quiet awdsecluded but no less exalted duties of M»otln>r 
 to their children and mistress of the domicile. To permit the entrance of juditical 
 contention into such a home would be either useless or pernicious — useh'ss if man and 
 wife agree, and pernicious if they diller. In the foruu>r event the volunu^ of ballots 
 alone would be increased without changing results. In the latter the ]>eace and con- 
 tentnu'ut of home would bc^ exchanged for the bedlam of political debate and liecome 
 the scene of base and demoralizing intrigue. The »ixceptional cases of unmarrie<l 
 females are too rare to change the general policy, while expectancy and Uoi»e, con- 
 
30 
 
 WOMAN SUFFRAQE. 
 
 stantly being realized in marriage, are Lappily extiDgnishiDg the exceptions saxA 
 
 bringing all within the rule which governs wife and matron. 
 
 In respect to married women, it may well be doubted whether the influences which 
 result from the laws of property between man and wife would not make it improba- 
 ble that the woman should exercise her suffrage with freedom and independence. 
 This, too, in despite of the fact that the dependence of woman under the common law 
 has been almost entirely obliterated by statutory enactments. At all events, the 
 power proposed to pass laws to carry woman suffrage into effect would be held to give 
 Congress the power to intrude upon the marital relations in the States and the rights 
 of property incident thereto, and as to which your committee see great objection. In 
 answer to the question often suggested as to what proportion and what class of women 
 would avail themselves of the privilege of suffrage if extended to women, your com- 
 mittee are of the opinion that while a few intelligent women, such as appeared be- 
 fore the committee in advocacy of the pending measure, would defy all obstacles in 
 the way of their casting the ballot, yet the great mass of the intelligent, refined, and 
 judicious, with the becoming modesty of their sex, would shrink from the rude con- 
 tact of the crowd, and, with the exceptions mentioned, leaving the ignorant and vile 
 the exclusive rig lit to speak for the gentler sex in public affairs. 
 
 Your committee are of the opinion that the general policy of female suffrage should 
 remain in abeyance, in so far as the General Government is concerned, until the States 
 and communities directly chargeable under our system of government with the ex- 
 ercise and regulation of this privilege shall put the seal of affirmation upon it ; and 
 there certainly can be no reason for the amendment of the Constitution to settle a 
 question within the jurisdiction of the States, and which they should first settle for 
 themselves. Your committee are not unmindful of the fact that on a submission of 
 the question of extended suffrage in several of the States, a negative answer has been 
 returned by the people thereof. In the opinion of your committee, and in view of the 
 difficulties in repairing an error once fixed upon the fundamental law, great caution 
 is the highest wisdom in amending the Constitution. Such amendment should par- 
 take of the character imparted to the instrument itself, which is a thing of growth, 
 not the origin of rights and principles, but sanctifying and confirming great and ac- 
 cepted principles of government of prior existence to itself. 
 
 Your committee do not find the principle of female suffrage so universally accepted 
 as that an amendment to the Constitution is demanded to declare and confirm its ex- 
 istence. We therefore recommend that the joint resolution for the submission of a 
 sixteenth amendment to the Constitution, as proposed, be not adopted. 
 
 VIEWS OF MR. POLAND. 
 
 The undersigned concurs with the majority of the Committee on the Judiciary in 
 recommending that it is inexpedient to submit to the States a consrtitutioual amend- 
 ment for the establishment of woman sufiYage. I concur generally in the argument 
 of the report by which that conclusion is sujiported, but the report does not state my 
 individual views of the question fully and exactly, and I therefore desire to add a 
 short statement of them. No Government founded upon the principle that sover- 
 eignty resides in the people has ever allowed all the people to vote, or to directly 
 participate in the making or administering the laws. Suffrage has never been re- 
 garded as the natural right of all the peop'e, or of any particular class or portion of 
 the people. Suffrage is representation, and it has been given in free governments to 
 such class of persons as in their judgment would fairly and safely represent the rights 
 and iuterests of the whole. 
 
 The right has generally, if not universally, been conferred on.men above twenty -one 
 years of age, and often this has been restricted by requiring the ownership of prop- 
 erty or the payment of taxes. 
 
 The great majority of women are either under the age of twenty-one or are married, 
 and therefore under such influence and control as that relation implies and confers. 
 
 Is there any necessity for the protection and preservation of the rights of women 
 that they be allowed to vote, and, of course, to hold office and directly to participate 
 in legislation and in the administration of the laws? 
 
 Nearly every man who votes has a wife, or mother, or sisters, or daughters ; some 
 sustain all these relations, or more than one. 
 
 Now, I think it certain that the great majority of men, when voting or when en- 
 gaged as legislators, or in administering the laws in some official character, or as 
 fully mindful of the interests of all that class with whom they are so closely connected, 
 and whose interests are so bound up with their own, and that, therefore, they fairly 
 represent all the rights and interests of women as well as their own. 
 
 Persons who have been accustomed to see legal proceedings in the courts, and oc- 
 casionally to see a fetnale litigant in court, know very well whether they are apt to 
 sufter wrong because their rights are determined wholly by men. There is just as 
 
WOMAN SUFFRAGE. 
 
 31 
 
 littlo reason for snspicion that their rights are not carefully guarded in legiHlatinn, 
 and in every way where legislation can operate. 
 
 There is another reason why I think this proposal to enlist the women of the coun- 
 try as a part of its active political force, and cast upon them an efiual duty in th(i po- 
 litical meetings, campaigns, and elections— to make them legislators, jinors, judges, 
 and executive otlicers, is all wroug. I holieve it, to ho utterly inconnistont with the 
 very nature aud coustifut ion of woman, and wholly subversive ofilic sphere aud 
 fuuction she was designed to till in the homo and in society. 
 
 The othce and duty which nature has devolv(id upon woman during all the active 
 aud vigorous portion of her life would often rentier it impossible, aud still more often 
 indelicate, for her to iippear and act in caucuses, conventions, or elections, or to act 
 as a member of a legislature, or as ajuror or judge. 
 
 I can not bring myself to believe that any largo portion of the intelligent wouirn 
 of this country desire any such thing granted them, or would i)erform any such du- 
 ties if the chance were oifered them. 
 
 LuKi; r. Poland. 
 
 In the Forty-fifth Congress, second session, Mr. TVadleigb, from the 
 Senate Committee on Privileges and Elections, made the following re- 
 port lor that committee on June 14, 1878, to wit: 
 
 [Senate Report Xo. 523, Forty-flfth Congress, second session.] 
 
 This proposed amendment forbids the United States or any State to deny or abridge 
 the right to vote on account of sex. 
 
 If adopted, it will make several millions of female voters, totally inexperienced in 
 political aiiairs, quite generally dependent upon the other sex, all incapable of per- 
 forming military duty, and without ihe power to enforce the laws which their nu- 
 merical strength may enable them to make, and comparatively very few of whom wish 
 to assume the irksome and responsible political duties which this measure thrusts 
 upon them. 
 
 An experiment so novel, a change so great, should only be made slowly and in re- 
 sponse to a general public demand, of the existence of which there is no evidence be- 
 fore your committee. 
 
 Petitions from various parts of the country, containing by estimate about 30,000 
 names, have been presented to Congress asking for this legihlatiou. 
 
 They were procured through the efforts of woman-snlfrage societies, thoroughly or- 
 ganized, with active and zealous managers. Tho ease with which signatures n ay 
 bo procured to any i>etilion is well known. The small number of petitioners, when 
 compared with that of tho iutelligeut women in the country, is striking evidence 
 that there exists among them no general desire to take up the heavy burden of gov- 
 eruing, which so luauy men seek to evade. 
 
 It would ho unjust, unwise, and impolitic to impose that burden on the great mass 
 of women throughout the country who do not wish for it, to gratify tho compara- 
 tively few who do. 
 
 It has been strongly urged that without the right of sutFrage women are and will 
 be subjected to great, oppression and injustice. 
 
 But every oun who h.is examined tho subject at all knows that without female suf- 
 frage legislation for years has iujpiovedaud is still iuiproving the eomlition of woman. 
 Tho disabilities imposed upon her by tho common law have, one by one, been swept 
 away, until in most of the States she has the full right to her ])roperty and all, or 
 nearly all, the rights which can be granted without impairing or <lestroying tho mar- 
 riage relation. These changes have been wrought by the spirit of the age, and are 
 not, generally at least, tho result of any agitation by women in their own behalf. 
 
 Nor can women justly complain of any i)artiality in the a<lministrat i»)n of justice. 
 They bave the sympathy of judges and particularly of juries to an extent which 
 would warrant loud complaint on th<' ])art of their adversaries of the stei-ner sex. 
 Their ai)peals to U'gislatures against injustice are never unheeded, an<l t here is no 
 doubt that when any considerable jiart of the women of any State really wish f«>r the 
 right to vote it will be granted without the intervention of Congress. 
 
 Any St.'ile may grant the right of sullVago to wouumi. Some of them have done s») 
 to a limited t^xti iif, and perhaps wit'u goo<l results. It is evident that in some States 
 public opinion is much nuue strongly in favor of it than it is in others. Your com- 
 mittee regard it as unwise and inexpe<lient to enable thn'e-fourths in number «)f the 
 States, through an aniendment to tho National ('onstitntion, to forn^ woman snllV.ig«' 
 upon the other lourih in whi(;h the public opinion of both sexes may l»e strongly ad- 
 vei-se to such a change. 
 
 For these reasons your committee report back said resolution, with a recoiumenda- 
 tion that it bo indetiuitely postponed. 
 
32 
 
 WOMAN SUFFRAGE. 
 
 The minority of the committee also submit the decision of the Su- 
 preme Court of the United States in the case of Mrs. Virginia Minor 
 against Happersett, delivered by tbe chief -justice and concurred in 
 by all the justices of that great court, in October, 1874, and reported in 
 21 Wallace, pages 165 to 178, and respectfully submit that these presenta- 
 tions show conclusively that the claims or pretensions of the woman 
 suflragists are without foundation, and that they have the same remedy 
 for the redress of wrongs that any residents or citizens of their respect- 
 ive States hav^e, and that the respective States have the perfect right 
 and power to grant the right to vote to them or any other class of citi- 
 zens, and there can be ro reason for any appeal to Congress or any 
 action by Congress. The decision of the Supreme Court above referred 
 to is hereto appended. 
 
 f. m. cockerill. 
 Joseph E. Brown. 
 Samuel Pasco. 
 
 OPINION. 
 
 Tbo chief-justice delivered the opiuion of the court. 
 
 The question is presented in this case whether, since the adoption of the fourteenth 
 amendment, a woman, who is a citizen of the United States and of the State of Mis- 
 souri, is a voter in that^?tate, notwithstanding the provision of the constitution and 
 laws of the State which confine the right of suffrage to men alone. Wo might, per- 
 haps, decide the case upon other grounds, but this question is fairly made. From the 
 opiuion wo find that it was the only one decided in the court below, aud it is the only 
 one which has been argued here. The case was undoubtedly brought to this court 
 for the sole purpose of having that question decided by us, and in view of the evident 
 propriety there is of having it settled, so far as it can be by such a decision, we have 
 concluded to waive all other considerations and proceed at once to its determination. 
 
 It is contended that the provisions of the constitution aud laws of tho State of 
 Missouri which confine the right of suffrage and registration therefor to men are in 
 violation of the Coustitution of tho United States, and therefore void. The argu- 
 ment is, that as a woman, born or naturalized in the United Slates and subject to 
 the jurisdiction thereof, is a citizen of the United States and of tho State in which 
 she resides, she has the right of suffrage as one of the privileges and immunities of 
 her citizenship, which the State can not by its laws or constitution abridge. 
 
 There is no doubt that w^onien may be citizens. They are persons, and by the 
 fourteenth ameudnjent ''all persons born or naturalized in the United States aud 
 subject to the jurTsdiction thereof "are expressly, declared to be ''citizens of the 
 United States and of the State wherein they reside." But, in our opinion, it did not 
 need this amendment to give them that position. Before its adoption the Constitu- 
 tion of the Uurted States did not in terms prescribe who should be citizens of the 
 United States, or of tbe several States, yet there were necessarily such citizens with- 
 out such provision. There can not be a nation without a people. Tho very idea of 
 apolitical community, such as a nation, implies an association of persons for their 
 general welfare. Each one of the persons associated becomes a member of the na- 
 tions formed by the association. He owes it allegiance and is entitled to its protec- 
 tion. Allegiance and protection are, in this connection, reciprocal obligations. The 
 one is a compensation for the other; allegiance for protection and protection for 
 allegiance. 
 
 For convenience it has been found necessary to give a name to this membership. 
 The object is to designate by a title the person and the relation he bears to the nation. 
 For this purpose the words " subject," " inhabitant," and "citizen " have been used, 
 and the choice between them is sometinies made to depend upon the form of the gov- 
 ernment. Citizen is now more commonly employed, however, and as it has been con- 
 sidered better suited to the description of one living under a republican government, 
 it was adopted by nearly all of the States upon their separation from Great Britain, 
 aud was afterwards adopted in the Articles of Confederation and in the Constitution 
 of the United States. When used in this sense it is understood as conveying the idea 
 of membership of a nation, and nothing more. 
 
 To determine, then, who were citizens of the United States before the adoption of 
 the amendment it is necessary to ascertain what persons originally associated them- 
 selves together to form the nation, and what were afterwards admitted to member- 
 ship, u 
 
AVOMAN SUFFliAGK. 
 
 Lookiiifi; at tho Constitution itself we find that it was ordninoil :in<"l OMtaMislicd by 
 *'tbo poopli' of tlic Tiiitrd States," :ni<l tlit ii «;(»in;i fnil lirr Imck, \\v liiiil lliat llusn 
 were the }>('oj)le of the several Stales tliat ha«l helbm dissol ve<l the ]M>lit:cal 1i;um1h 
 which connected them with Great Britain, and assuiiied a separate and e<inal sfalion 
 among tho ])owcrs of the cartli, and that had by Artiehsof ConftMb raf ion ami Ter- 
 petual Union, in wliirh they took tho nam(^ of " Ihe I'Mihd Slates dl" America," «'n- 
 tered into a lirm lea;;ne of friendship w.tli each other f(ir tlu'ir common <b fense, tlio 
 secnrity of their hfc'rtie sand tlx'ir mntnal and j^eneral w«'lfaie, bindiiifr themselv«iH 
 to assist eaeli other against all force ollt rfd to or attack ma(b; njuin them, ot any of 
 them, on account of reli<::ion, soverei^^nty, trade, or any other pretense \vhatev<^r. 
 
 Whoever, then, was oiieof the ople of either of these Slates wIumi the Constitti- 
 tion of tho United States was adopted, became yj.so Jaclo a i itizen— a member of tho 
 naHon created by its adoption. Ho was one of the jx'isons associating; together to 
 form the nation, and was, consequently, one of its orii;irial citi/ens. As to this there 
 has never be«Mi a doubt. Disputes have arisen as to wliether or not certain ])e:sonH or 
 certain classes of persons were part of the ^leople at the time, but never as to th< ir 
 citizenship if they were. 
 
 Additions might always be made to the citizenship of tho United States in two 
 ■ways: First, by birth, and second by naturalization. This is api)arent from the Con- 
 stitution itself, for it provides that *'no peisfui exeept a natuial-born citizc n, or a 
 citizen of the Unit(!d States at the the time of the ado[)t ion of tlu; Coiistitut ion, shall b<5 
 elii;ible to the olhce of President," and that Congress shall have ]M)wer " to estal)l:.«>h 
 a iinilbrm rule of naturalization." Thus new citizens may bo born or they iiiay bo 
 created by nat uralization. 
 
 The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natnral-born citizens. Resort 
 mnst be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common law, with the nomenelaturo 
 of which the franiers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted t hat 
 all children born in a country of i)arents who were its citizens became themselves, 
 upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as dis- 
 tin<;uished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and im^ludti as citi- 
 zens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to t hi; citizenship of their 
 j»arents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the lirst. For the 
 purposes of this case it is not necessary to solve these doubts. It is suflicient for 
 everything we have now to consider that all children born of citizen parents within 
 the Jurisdiction are themselves citizens. The words "all childn'ii " are certainly as 
 comprehensive, when used in this connection, as " all persons," and if fcMuales are in- 
 cluded in the last they must be in the first; that they are included in the last is not 
 denied. In fact the whole argument of the i)laintill's proceeds upon that idea. 
 
 Under the power to adopt a uniform system of natmalization Congress, as early as 
 1790, provided '* that any alien, being a free white person," might be admitted as a 
 citizen of the United States, and that the children r)f such persons so nat urali/jMl, 
 dwelling within the United States, being under twenty-one years of age at the time 
 of such naturalization, should also be consideied ciiiziMisof the United Stales, and 
 that the children of citizens of the United States tliat might be born bey(»nd the sea, 
 or out of the limits of the United States, should be consulered as natural-lM)rn citi- 
 zens. These provisions thus enactetl have, in substance, been retained in all the 
 naturalization laws adopted since. In IHaf), however, the last provision was some- 
 what extended, and all persons theretofore born or theieafter to bo born out of the 
 limits of the jurisdiction of the United States, whose fathers were, or should beat 
 the time of their birth, citizens of tho United States, wore declared to bo citizens 
 also. 
 
 As early as 1804 it was enacted by Congress that when any alien who ha«l deelar<'d 
 his int»Mition to become a citizen in the manner piovided by law died Itefoie he 
 was actually naturalized, his wi<low and chiMien slionld be consideri'<l as citizens «»f 
 the United States, and entitled to all rights and privileges as such. upon taking lln> 
 necessary oath; and in 18.');') it was fiirt her provided t hat any woman \>h<» might law- 
 fully be naturalized under the existing lawH, married, or who slum Id lu' manied to a 
 citizen of the IJnitefl States, shouhl b»> d< emed ami taken to ho a citiz»'n. 
 
 From this it is appaiant tliatfiom tho commencement of the legislation upon thi-4 
 subject alien women and alien minors could be made citizens by nat ui a li/.at ion, and 
 wo think it will not be contended that this would have ln-en <bme if it had m»t beeei 
 supposed that native women and native minors were altcady ciir/.ens by Itirtli. 
 
 But if more is necessary to show that wonu'u have al\va\s bem considered as citi- 
 zens the same as men, abundant ])io()f is to be Ibiind in tlie le^i.slai i v«' and judicial 
 history of the country. Thus, by the (Constitution, t he juili< iai power of the United 
 States is made to ext«»nd to controversies lu^t ween nt i/ens of dillen-nt States, Under 
 this it has been uniformly held that tlu' citizenship iiei «'Nsary to give the courts of Iho 
 United States jurisdiction of a cause must be atUrmatively shown on the rtM'ord. Iim 
 existence as a fact may be i)ut in issue and tried. Il luuiid not toexi-^t the ca.-(^ must 
 be dismissed. Notw ithstanding this tho recoitls of the courts are full of cases iu 
 
 B. Bep. 2543, pt. 2 3 
 
• 
 
 34 WOMAN SUFFRAGE. 
 
 which the jurisdiction depends upon the citizenship of women, and not one can be 
 found, we think, in which objection was made on that account. Certainly uouo can 
 be found in which it has been held that women can not sue or be sued in the courts 
 of the United States. Again, at the time of the adoption of the Constitution, in 
 many of the States (and in some probably now) aliens could not inherit or transmit 
 inheritance. There are a multitude of cases to be found in which the question has 
 been presented whether a woman was or was not an alien, and as such capable or 
 incapable of inheritance, but in no one has it been insisted thatiiiie was not a citizen 
 because she was a woman. On the contrary, her right to citizenship has been in all 
 cases assumed. The only question has been whether, in the particular case under 
 consideration, she had availed herself of the right. 
 
 In the legislative department of the Government similar proof will be found. Thus, 
 in the pre-emption laws, a widow, "being a citizen of the United States," is allowed 
 to make settlement on the public lands and purchase upon the terms specified, and 
 women, " being citizens of the United States," are permitted to avail themselves of 
 the benefit of the homestead law. 
 
 Other proof of like character might be found, but certainly more can not be neces- 
 sary to establish the fact that sex has never been made one of the elements of citizen- 
 ship in the United States. In this respect men have never had an advantage over 
 women. The same laws precisely apply to both. The fourteenth amendment did not 
 affect the citizenship of women any more than it did of men. In this particular, 
 therefore, the rights of Mrs. Minor do not depend upon the amendment. She has al- 
 ways been a citizen from her birth, and entitled to all the privileges and immunities 
 of citizenship. The amendment prohibited the State, of which she is a citizen, from 
 abridging any of her privileges and immunities as a citizen of the United States;' 
 but it did not confer citizenship on her. That she had before its adoption. 
 
 If the tight of suffrage is one of the necessary privileges of a citizen of the United 
 States, then the constitution and laws of Missouri conlining it to men are in viola- 
 tion of the Constitution of the United States, as amended, and consequently void. 
 The direct question is therefore presented whether all citizens are necessarily voters. 
 
 The Constitution does not define the privileges and immunities of citizens. For 
 that definition we must look elsewhere. In this case we need not determine what 
 they are, but only whether suffrage is necessarily one of them. 
 
 It certainly is nowhere made so in express terms. The United States has no voters 
 in the States of its own creation. The elective officers of the United States are all 
 elected directly or indirectly by State voters. The members of the House of Repre- 
 sentatives are chosen by the people of the States, and the electors in each State must 
 have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State 
 legislature. Senators are to be chosen by the legislatures of the States, and neces- 
 sarily the members of the legislature required to make the choice are elected by the 
 voters of the State. Each State must appoint, in such manner as the legislature 
 thereof may direct, the electors to elect the President and Vice-President. The times, 
 places, and manner of holding elections for Senators and Representatives are to be 
 prescribed in each State by the legislature thereof; but Congress may at any time, 
 by law, make or alter such regulations, except as to the place of choosing Senators. 
 It is not necessary to inquire whether this power of supervision thus given to Con- 
 gress is sufficient to authorize any interference with tli ■ State laws prescribing the 
 qualifications of voters, for no such interference has ever been atteaupted. The power 
 of the State in this particular is certainly supreme until Congress acts. 
 
 The amendment did not add lo the privileges and immunities of a citizen. It sim- 
 ply furnished an additional guaranty for the protection of such as ho already had. 
 No new voters were necessarily made by it. Indirectly it may have had that effect 
 because it may have increased the number of citizens entitled to suffrage under the 
 constitutions and laws of the States, but it operates for this purpose, if at all, through 
 the States and the State laws, and not directly upon the citizen. 
 
 It is clear, therefore, we think, that the Constitution has not added the right of suff- 
 rage to the privileges and immunities of citizenship as they existed at the time it was 
 adopted. This makes it proper to inquire whether sufi'rage was co-extensive with 
 the citizenship of the States at the time of its adoption. If it was, then it may with 
 force be argued that suffrage was one of the rights which belongs to citizenship, and 
 in the enjoyment of which every citizen must be protected; but if it was not, the 
 contrary may with propriety be assumed. 
 
 When the Federal Constitution was adopted all the States, with the exception of 
 Rhode Island and Connecticut, had constitutions of their own. These two continued 
 to act under their charters from the Crown. Upon an examination of those constitu- 
 tions we find that in no State were all citizens permitted to vote. Each State de- 
 termined for itself who should have that power; thus, in New Hampshire, "every 
 male inhabitant of each town and parish with town privileges and places unincor- 
 porated in the State, of twenty-one years of a.ge and upwards, excepting paupers and 
 persons excused from paying taxes at their own request," were its voters; in Massa- 
 
WOMAN SUFl'KAGE. 
 
 35 
 
 chnsetts, "every male inhabitant of twiMU^'-oiui years of a^o and upwards liaviuj; a 
 freehold estate within the Coninion wealth ot tlu'- annual income of jC:J, or any estate 
 of the value of £G0;" in Rhode Island, -'such as are admitted free of the company 
 and society" of the colony; in Connecticut, such persons as had *' maturity in years, 
 quiet and ])eaceahle bi'havior, a civil conversation, and 40 shillinj;s fniehold, or £10 
 personal estate," if so certified hy the selcctMicn; in New Voik, "every male inhab- 
 itant of full ago, and Avho shall have personally n'sidcd within one of the counties 
 of the State for six months immediately preceding the day of eh;ctiou, * * * if 
 during the time aforesaid he shall have been a freehohler, possessing a freehold 
 of the value of £'20 within the county, or have rented a tenement therein of the 
 yearly value of 40 shillings. ;nid been rated and actually paid taxes to the State;" 
 iu New Jersey, "all inhabitants * * * of full age who are worth £50, procla- 
 inatiou money, clear estate in the same, and have resided in the county iu which 
 they claim a vote for twelve months immediately preceding the election ; " in Penn- 
 sylvania, "every freeman of the age of twenty-one years, having resided in the State 
 two years next before the election, and within that time ])aid a State or county tax 
 which shall have been assessed at least six months before the election;" in Dela- 
 ware and Virginia, "as exercised by law at i)re8ent;" in Maryland, " all freemen 
 above twenty-one years of age having a freehold of 50 acres of land in the county in 
 which they otfer to vote and residing therein, and all freemen having property in the 
 State above the value of £:50 current money, and having resided iu the county in which 
 they offer to vote one whole year next preceding the election ; " in North Carolina, for 
 senators, "all freemen of the age of twenty-ou« years who have been inhabitants 
 of any one county within the State twelve months immediately preceding the day 
 of election, and i)()ssessed ot a freehold within the same county of 50 acres of lanilfor 
 six months next before and at the day of election," and for the members of the house 
 of comujons "all freemen of the age of twenty-one years who have been inhabitants 
 in any one county within the State twelve months innnediately preceding the day of 
 any election, and shall have paid public taxes ; " in South Carolina, "every free white 
 man of the age of twenty-one years, being a citizen of the State and having resided 
 therein two years previous to the day of election, and who hath a freehold of 50 acres of 
 hind, or a town lot of which ho hath been legally seized and possessed at least six 
 months before such election, or (not having such freeholder town lot) hath been a res- 
 ident within the election district in which he offers to give his vote six months btifore 
 suid tdection, and hath paid a tax the preceding year of 3 shillings sterling towards the 
 sui)port of tile government;" and in Georgia, such "citizens and inhabitants of the 
 Stale as shall have attained the age of twenty-one years, and shall have ])aid tax for 
 the year next preceding the election, and shall have resided six months within the 
 county." 
 
 In this condition of the law in respect to sntyrage in the several States it can not for 
 a moment be doubted that if it had been intended to make all citizens of the United 
 States voters, the frainers of the Constitution would not have left it to implication. 
 So important a change in the condition of citizenship as it actually existed, if in- 
 tended, would have been expressly declared. 
 
 liut if further proof is necessary to show that no such change was intended, it can 
 easily be found both in and out of the Constitution. By article 4, section 2, it is 
 I)rovided that "citizens of each State shall be entitled to all the privileges ami im- 
 munities of citizens in the several States." If snllrage is necessarily a part of citizen- 
 ship, then the citiz<Mis of each State must bo entitled to vote in the several States 
 precisely as their (;itizens are. This is more than asserting that they may change 
 their residenci! and become citizens of the State and thus be voters. It goes to the 
 extent of insisting that while retaining their original citizenship they may vote in 
 any State. This, we think, has never been claimed. And again, by the very terms 
 of the amendment we have been considering (the fourteenth), " IvejuestMitati ves shall 
 be apportioned among the several States according to their respective nnmb»'rs, 
 eotmling the whole number of persons in each State, (ixclnding Indians n<)t taxed. 
 Hilt when the right to vote at any election for the ehoiets of electors for rresident 
 and Vice-l'iesideiit of the United States, Representatives in C«)ngress, the executive 
 and judicial ollic<'rs of a State, or the members of the legislature ther<'of is <lenied to 
 any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age and citizens 
 of the United States, or in any way abridgei, except for participation in tht^ rebellion, 
 or other crimes, the basis of re[>rcsentati()n therein shall be re<lueed in the proportion 
 which the number of such male cit izens shall bear tothii whole number of male citizens 
 twtMity-one years of age in such State." Why this, if it was not in the power of the 
 legislature to deny the right of suffrage to some male inhabitants f Ami if siitlrago 
 was necessarily one of the absolute rights of citizenship, why conline the operatitui 
 of the limitation to male inhabitants f Women and children are, as wo have seen, 
 " persons." They are eountetl in the enumeration upon which the apportionment is 
 to be made, but if tlu\v were ncci'ssarily vott'is Ix'eause of their citizenship, unles.i 
 clearly excluded, why inllict the penalty for the exclusitui of males alone f Clearly no 
 
36 
 
 WOMAN SUFFRAGE. 
 
 such form of words would have beeu selected to express the idea here Indicated if suf- 
 frajje was the absolute right of all citizens. 
 
 And still again, after the adoption of the fourteenth amendment, it was deemed 
 necessary to adopt a fifteenth, as follows : The right of citizens of the United States 
 to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United Stat.;-s, or by any State, on ac- 
 count of race, color, or previous condition of servitude." The fourteenth amendment 
 had already provided that no State should make or enforce any law which should 
 abridge the privileges or immunities of the citizens of the United States. If suffrage 
 was one of these privileges or immunities, why amend the Constitution to prevent its 
 being denied on account of race, etc. ? Nothing is more evident than that the greater 
 must include the less, and if all were already protected why go through with the form 
 of amending the Constitution to protect a part? 
 
 It IS true that the United States guaranties to every State a republican form of 
 government. It is also true that no State can pass a bill of attainder, and that no 
 person can be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law. All 
 these several provisions of the Constitution must be construed in connection with the 
 other parts of the instrument, and in the light of the surrounding circumstances. 
 
 The guaranty is of a republican form of government. No particular government 
 is designated as republican ; neither is the exact form to be guarantied in any man- 
 ner especially designated. Here, as in other parts of the instrument, we are com- 
 pelled to resort elsewhere to ascertain what was intended. 
 
 The guaranty necessarily implies a duty on the part of the States themselves to 
 provide such a government. All the States had governments when the Constitution 
 was adopted. In all the people participated to some extent, through their repre- 
 sentatives elected in the DJanner specially provided. These governments the Con- 
 st ilution did not change. They were accepted precisely as they were, and it is, 
 1 licrcfore, to be presumed that they were such as it was the duty of the States to pro- 
 vide. Thus we have unmistakable evidence of what was republican in form, within 
 the meaning of that term as employed in the Constitution. 
 
 As has been seen, all the citizens'of the States were not invested with the right of 
 suffrage. In all, save perhaps New Jersey, this right w^as only bestowed upon men 
 and not upon all of them. Under these circumstances it is certainly now too late to 
 contend that a government is not republican, within the meaning of this guaranty 
 in the Constitution, because women are not made voters. 
 
 The same may be said of the other provisions just quoted. Women were excluded 
 from suffrage in nearly all the States by the express provision of their constitutions 
 and laws. If that had been equivalent to a bill of attainder, certainly its abrogation 
 would not have been left to implication. Nothing less than express language would 
 have been employed to effect so radical a change. So also of the amendment which 
 declares that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due 
 process of law, adopted as it was as early as 1791. If suffrage was intended to be in- 
 cluded within its obligations, language better adapted to express that intent would 
 most certainly have been employed. The right of suftiage, when granted, will be pro- 
 tected. He who has it can only be deprived of it by due process of law, but in order 
 to claim protection he must first show that he has the right. 
 
 But we have already sufficiently considered the proof found upon the inside of the 
 Constitution. That upon the outside is equally etfective. 
 
 The Constitution was submitted to the States for adoption in 1787, and was ratified 
 by nine States in 1788, and finally by the thirteen original States in 1790. Vermont 
 was the first new State admitted to the Union, and it came in under a constitution 
 which conferred the right of suffrage only upon men of the full age of twenty-one 
 years, having resided in the State for the space of one whole year next before the 
 election, and who were of quiet and peaceable behavior. This was in 1791. The next 
 vear, 1792, Kentucky followed with a constitution confining the right of sufirage to 
 free male citizens of the age of twenty-one years w^ho had resided in the State two 
 years or in the county in which they offered to vote one year next before the election. 
 Then followed Tennessee, in 1796, with voters of freemen of the age of twenty-one 
 years and upwards, possessing a freehold in the county wherein they may vote, and 
 being inhabitants of the State or freemen being inhabitants of any one county in the 
 State six months immediately preceding the day of election. 
 
 But we need not particularize further. No new State has ever been admitted to 
 the Union which has conferred the right of suffrage upon women, and this has never 
 been considered a valid objection to her admission. On the contrary, as is claimed 
 in ihe argument, the right of suffrage was withdrawn from women as early as 1807 in 
 the State of New Jersey, without any attempt to obtain the interference of the United 
 States to prevent it. Since then the governments of the insurgent States have been 
 reorganized under a requirement that before their Representatives could be admitted 
 to seats in Congress they must have adopted new constitutions, republican inform. 
 In no one of these constitutions was siUfrage conferred upon womea, and yet the 
 States Irave all beeu restored to their original positions as States in the Union, 
 
WOMAN SUFFRAGE. 
 
 37 
 
 Besides this, citizeiiHliip has not in all cases Lcen made a condition iMct cdcnt to tlio 
 enjoynjent of the li^lit of Hiillra'^e. TIiuh, in MisHouri, pt'iKons of f()it i;;ii birth who 
 liave declared their intention to become citiz»'ns of the United Stat»'H may imhUt vat- 
 tain circnnis(anc(^8 vot«*. The samo provision is to l)e found in t he < oii.si i t nt ion of 
 Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Geor;;ia, Indiana, Kansas, MinncHota, and I'cxas. 
 
 Certainly, if the conrts can consider any (juestion KctlU'd, this is one. For nearly 
 ninety years the people have acted npon tiie idea that tho Constitution, when it con- 
 ferred citizenship, did not necessarily confer the right of siillra;;o. If uniform prac- 
 tice, lon<^ continued, can settle the construction of so imjioi tant an instrument as tho 
 Constitution of tho United States confessedly is, niost certainly it has been done here. 
 Our province is to decide what the law is, and not to declare what it should be. 
 
 We have given this case tho careful consideration its inii)ortance <lemands. If tho 
 law is wrong, it ought to be changed, but tho power for that is not with us. Tho 
 arguments addressed to us bearing npon such a view of tln^ Hiibjecl may perhaps bo 
 sutlicient to induce those having the power to make the alteration; but they ought 
 not to be permitted to influence our judgment in determining the present rights of 
 the parties now litigating before us. No argument as to woman's ne»-d of sutlrage 
 can be considered. We can only act upon her rights as they exist. Jt is not for us 
 to look at the hardship of withholding. Our duty is at an end if we find it is within 
 the power of a State to withhold. 
 
 Being unanimously of the opinion that the Constitution of the Unitcul States does 
 not confer tho right of suftrago upon any one, and that the constitution and laws of 
 the several States which commit that important trust tu men alone are not necessarily 
 void, we atiirm the judgment. 
 
 o 
 
I 
 
 \ 
 
 \ 
 
 ]