FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   214   215   216   217   218   219   220   221   222   223   224   225   226   227   228   229   230   231   232   233   234   235   236   237   238  
239   240   241   242   243   244   245   246   247   248   249   250   251   252   253   254   255   256   257   258   259   260   261   262   263   >>   >|  
neral_ expression of opinion, we are opposed to their being saddled with it on grounds of theoretical fitness, etc." Surely, it is difficult to explain such a sentence in a professedly far-seeing and deep-thinking journal! That argument will serve as well for the lately enfranchised blacks as for women, for no one will pretend that of the millions set free, a bare majority would of themselves contend for the franchise. That argument might have refused them freedom itself, for a large majority of Southern slaves knew too little of it to desire it, however they may have longed to be rid of a taskmaster and the pangs which slavery brought. During the last four years women have been silent about their "rights" in the several States, because pressed by severe duties. Desirous to establish a reputation for discretion, we have refrained from complicating the perplexities of any Senator; but now that a constitutional amendment is pending we must be careful, even if we gain no franchise, to lose no _opportunity_. Hitherto the Constitution of the United States has contained no word that would shut women out from future suffrage. Mr. Schenck, of Ohio, and Mr. Jenckes, of Rhode Island, propose to limit a right to "male citizens" which should rest, as it now does, simply on "legal voters." This would oblige women to move to amend the Constitution of the United States after each separate State was carried. We have no inclination for this unnecessary work, and here, in Boston, we are preparing a petition basing the necessity of our present interference on this fact alone. How much women desire the suffrage, Mr. Editor, you ought to perceive from the conduct of the women of Australia. Carelessly enough, her male legislators omitted the significant adjective from their constitutional amendment, and, without a word of warning, on election day, every woman, properly qualified, was found at the polls. There was no just reason for refusing them the privilege, and _The London Times_ says the precedent is to stand. A very absurd article in _The Evening Post_ has lately given us an idea that New York contains some remarkable women. Women born to be looked at!--women who do their whole duty if they blossom like the roses, and like the roses die. Let us hope they fulfill the functions of this type by as short a sojourn on this earth as may be, lingering, as Malherbe would have it, only for "the space of a morning." It may be among them th
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   214   215   216   217   218   219   220   221   222   223   224   225   226   227   228   229   230   231   232   233   234   235   236   237   238  
239   240   241   242   243   244   245   246   247   248   249   250   251   252   253   254   255   256   257   258   259   260   261   262   263   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

States

 

majority

 
desire
 

franchise

 

amendment

 

suffrage

 

constitutional

 

Constitution

 

United

 

argument


significant

 
omitted
 
adjective
 

warning

 
legislators
 
conduct
 

Australia

 

Carelessly

 

election

 

separate


opposed

 

properly

 

qualified

 

perceive

 

preparing

 

Boston

 

petition

 

saddled

 

basing

 
inclination

carried

 

unnecessary

 
necessity
 

reason

 

Editor

 
present
 

interference

 
London
 

fulfill

 
functions

expression

 

blossom

 

morning

 
sojourn
 

lingering

 

Malherbe

 
looked
 

absurd

 

article

 
Evening