female suffrage-第3节

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


influences　already　at　their　command；　and　all　really　needed　changes
may　be　effected　by　means　both　sure　and　safemeans　already
thoroughly　tried。　Let　them　use　all　the　good　sense；　all　the
information；　all　the　eloquence；　and；　if　they　please；　all　the　wit；　at
their　command　when　talking　over　these　abuses　in　society。　Let　them
state　their　views；　their　needs；　their　demands；　in　conscientiously
written　papers。　Let　them　appeal　for　aid　to　the　best；　the　wisest；　the
most　respected　men　of　the　country；　and　the　result　is　certain。　Choose
any　one　real；　existing　abuse　as　a　test　of　the　honesty　and　the
liberality　of　American　men　toward　the　women　of　the　country；　and　we
all　know　before…hand　what　shall　be　the　result。*

｛FOOTNOTE　by　SFC｝　*　There　is　an　injustice　in　the　present　law　of
guardianship　in　the　State　of　New　York；　which　may　be　named　as　one
of　those　abuses　which　need　reformation。　A　woman　can　not　now；　in
the　State　of　New　York；　appoint　a　guardian　for　her　child；　even　though
its　father　be　dead。　The　authority　for　appointing　a　guardian　otherwise
than　by　the　courts　is　derived　from　the　Revised　statutes；　p。　1；　title　3；
chapter　8；　part　2；　and　that　passage　gives　the　power　to　the　father
only。　The　mother　is　not　named。　It　has　been　decided　in　the　courts
that　a　mother　can　not　make　this　appointment12　Howard's　Practical
Reports；　532。　This　is　certainly　very　unjust　and　very　unwise。　But　let
any　dozen　women　of　respectability　take　the　matter　in　hand；　and；　by
the　means　already　at　their　command；　from　their　own　chimney…
corners；　they　can　readily　procure　the　insertion　of　the　needful　clause。
And　so　with　any　other　real　abuse。　Men　are　now　ready　to　listen；　and
ready　to　act；　when　additional　legislation　is　prudently　and　sensibly
asked　for　by　their　wives　and　mothers。　How　they　may　act　when
women　stand　before　them；　armed　CAP…A…PIE；　and　prepared　to
demand　legislation　at　the　point　of　the　bayonet；　can　not　yet　be
known。　｛END　FOOTNOTE｝

If　husbands；　fathers；　brothers；　are　ready　any　day　to　shed　their
heart's　blood　for　our　personal　defense　in

442
the　hour　of　peril；　we　may　feel　perfectly　assured　that　they　will　also
protect　us；　when　appealed　to；　by　legislation。　When　they　lay　down
their　arms　and　refuse　to　fight　for　us；　it　will　then　be　time　to　ask　them
to　give　up　legislation　also。　But　until　that　evil　hour　arrives　let　men
make　the　laws；　and　let　women　be　content　to　fill　worthily；　to　the　very
best　of　their　abilities；　the　noble　position　which　the　Heavenly　Father
has　already　marked　out　for　them。　There　is　work　to　be　done　in　that
position　reaching　much　higher；　going　much　farther；　and　penetrating
far　deeper；　than　any　mere　temporary　legislation　can　do。　Of　that　work
we　shall　speak　more　fully　a　moment　later。

SECONDLY。　THE　INALIENABLE　NATURAL　RIGHT　OF　WOMAN　TO　VOTE；
AND　IMPERATIVELY　SO　IN　A　COUNTRY　WHERE　UNIVERSAL　SUFFRAGE
IS　A　GREAT　POLITICAL　PRINCIPLE。

This　second　proposition　of　the　advocates　of　female　suffrage　is　of　a
general　character。　It　does　not　point　to　particular　abuses；　it　claims
the　right　of　woman　to　vote　as　one　which　she　should　demand；
whether　practically　needed　or　not。　It　is　asserted　that　to　disqualify
half　the　race　from　voting　is　an　abuse　entirely　inconsistent　with　the
first　principles　of　American　politics。　The　answer　to　this　is　plain。　The
elective　franchise　is　not　an　end；　it　is　only　a　means。　A　good
government　is　indeed　an　inalienable　right。　Just　so　far　as　the　elective
franchise　will　conduce　to　this　great　end；　to　that　point　it　becomes
also　a　right；　but　no　farther。　A　male　suffrage　wisely　free；　including　all
capable　of　justly　appreciating　its　importance；　and　honestly
discharging　its　responsibilities；　becomes　a　great　advantage　to　a
nation。　But　universal　suffrage；　pushed　to　its　extreme　limits；　including
all　men；　all　women；　all　minors　beyond　the　years　of　childhood；　would
inevitably　be　fraught　with　evil。　There　have　been　limits　to　the
suffrage　of　the　freest　nations。　Such　limits　have　been　found　necessary
by　all　past　political　experience。　In　this　country；　at　the　present　hour；
there　are　restrictions　upon　the　suffrage　in　every　State。　Those
restrictions　vary　in　character。　They　are　either　national；　relating　to
color；　political；　mental；　educational；　connected　with　a　property
qualification；　connected　with　sex；　connected　with　minority　of　years；
or　they　are　moral　in　their　nature。*

＇FOOTNOTE　by　SFC｝　*In　connection　with　this　point　of　moral
qualification　we　venture　to　ask　a　question。　Why　not　enlarge　the
criminal　classes　from　whom　the　suffrage　is　now　withheld？　Why　not
exclude　every　man　convicted　of　any　degrading　legal　crime；　even　petty
larceny？　And　why　not　exclude　from　the　suffrage　all　habitual
drunkards　judicially　so　declared？　These　are　changes　which　would　do
vastly　more　of　good　than　admitting　women　to　vote。　｛END
FOOTNOTE｝

This　restriction　connected　with　sex　is；　in　fact；　but　one　of　many　other
restrictions；　considered　more　or　less　necessary　even　in　a　democracy。
Manhood　suffrage　is　a　very　favorite　term　of　the　day。　But；　taken　in
the　plain　meaning　of　those　words；　such　fullness　of　suffrage　has　at
the　present　hour　no　actual　existence　in　any　independent　nation；　or　in
any　extensive　province。　It　does　not　exist；　as　we　have　just　seen；
even　among　the　men　of　America。　And；　owing　to　the　conditions　of
human　life；　we　may　well　believe　that　unrestricted　fullness　of
manhood　suffrage　never　can　exist　in　any　great　nation　for　any　length
of　time。　In　those　States　of　the　American　Union　which　approach
nearest　to　a　practical　manhood　suffrage；　unnaturalized　foreigners；
minors；　and　certain　classes　of　criminals；　are　excluded　from　voting。
And　why　so？　What　is　the　cause　of　this　exclusion？　Here　are　men　by
tens　of　thousandsmen　of　widely　different　classes　and　conditions
peremptorily　deprived　of　a　privilege　asserted　to　be　a　positive
inalienable　right　universal　in　its　application。　There　is　manifestly
some　reason　for　this　apparently　contradictory　state　of　things。　We
know　that　reason　to　be　the　good　of　society。　It　is　for　the　good　of
society　that　the　suffrage　is　withheld　from　those　classes　of　men。　A
certain　fitness　for　the　right　use　of　the　suffrage　is　therefore　deemed
necessary　before　granting　it。　A　criminal；　an　unnaturalized　foreigner；　a
minor；　have　not　that　fitness；　consequently　the　suffrage　is　withheld
from　them。　The　worthy　use　of　the　vote　is；　then；　a　qualification　not
yet　entirely　overlooked　by　our　legislators。　The　State　has　had；　thus
far；　no　scruples　in　withholding　the　suffrage　even　from　men；　whenever
it　has　believed　that　the　grant　would　prove　injurious　to　the　nation。

Here　we　have　the　whole　question　clearly　defined。　The　good　of　society
is　the　true　object　of　all　human　government。　To　this　principle　suffrage
itself　is　subordinate。　It　can　never　be　more　than　a　means　looking　to
the　attainment　of　good　government；　and　not　necessarily　its　corner…
stone。　Just　so　far　is　it　wise　and　right。　Move　one　step　beyond　that
point；　and　instead　of　a　benefit　the　suffrage　may　become　a　cruel
injury。　The　governing　power　of　our　own　countrythe　most　free　of　all
great　nationspractically　proclaims　that　it　has　no　right　to　bestow　the
suffrage　wherever　its　effects　are　likely　to　become　injurious　to　the
whole　nation；　by　allotting　different　restrictions　to　the　suffrage　in
every　State　of　the　Union。　The　right　of　suffrage　is；　therefore；　most
clearly　not　an　absolutely　inalienable　right　universal　in　its　application。
It　has　its　limits。　These　limits　are　marked　out　by　plain　justice　and
common…sense。　Women　have　thus　far　been　excluded　from　the
suffrage　precisely　on　the　same　principlesfrom　the　conviction　that　to
grant　them　this　particular　privilege　would；　in　different　ways；　and
especially　by　withdrawing　them　from　higher　and　more　urgent　duties；
and　allotting　to　them　other　duties　for　which　they　are　not　so　well
fitted；　become　injurious　to　the　nation；　and；　we　add；　ultimately
injurious　to　themselves；　also；　as　part　of　the　nation。　If　it　can　be
proved　that　this　conviction　is　sound　and　just；　founded　on　truth；　the
assumed　inalienable　right　of　suffrage；　of　which　we　have　been　hearing
so　much　lately；　vanishes　into　the　〃baseless　fabric　of　a　vision。〃　If　the
right　were　indeed　inalienable；　it　should　be　granted；　without　regard　to
consequences；　as　an　act　of　abstract　justice。　But；　happily　for　us；
none　but　the　very　wildest　theorists　are　prepared　to　take　this　view　of
the　question　of　suffrage。　The　advocates　of　female　suffrage　must；
therefore；　abandon　the　claim　of　inalienable　right。　Such　a　claim　can
not　logically　be　maintained　for　one　moment　in　the　face　of　existing
facts。　We　proceed　to　the　third　point。

THIRDLY。　THE　ELEVATION　OF　THE　ENTIRE　SEX；　THE　GENERAL
PURIFICATION　OF　POLITICS　THROUGH　THE　INFLUENCE　OF　WOMEN；
AND　THE　CONSEQUENT　ADVANCE　OF　THE　WHOLE　RACE。　Such；　we　are
told；　must　be　the　inevitable　results　of　what　is　called　the
emancipation　of　woman；　the　entire　independence　of　woman　through
the　suffrage。

Here　we　find　ourselves　in　a　peculiar　position。　While　considering　the
previous　points　of　this　question　we　have　been　guided　by　positive
facts；　clearly　indisputable　in　their　character。　Actual；　practical
experience；　with　the　manifold　teachings　at　her　command；　has　come
to　our　aid。　But　we　are　now　called　upon；　by　the　advocates　of　this
novel　doctrine；　to　change　our　course　entirely。　We　ar