Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1851-08-09
1873
ntistellaneolls.
EnfranchiScmCnt Of Woman.
From tho Wcstminstcr Review.

From the Westminster Review.
The Westminster Review for July contains
an able discussion of the question of Wo-
mems Rights. 1t is of importance for its in
trinsic excellence MS well for the fact that il
indicates that the bcnevolence and intellect
of Great Britain is awake to the importance
of the question and appreciates the justice
of its demand. The writer after referring to
the Ohio Convention whose detailed pro-
eeedngs he had never seen,-proceeds to
speak more particularly of the Worcester
Convention. After quoting its Resolutions
il proceeds to say of them:--
1t would be difficult TO put so much true,
Just, and reasonable meaning into stye SO
little calculated to recommend il as that of
some of the resolutions But whatever OBJ
lection may be made TO some of the express
sions, none, in our opinion, can be made to
the demands themselves. As n question OF
justice, the case seems to us too clear for dis
pute. As one of expediency, the more tho
roughly it is examined the stronger it will
appear.
JUSTICE OF THE CLAIM.
That women have as good claim as men
have, in point of personal right, to the suh-
ruge, or TO a place in the iury-box it would
be difficult for any one 10 deny. Ii can not
certainly be denied by the United States of
America, as a people or as a community
Their democratic institutions rest avowed-
ly on the inherent right of every one TO
voice in the government. Their Declara-
ton of Independence, framed by the men
who nrc still their great Constitutional au-
thorities-thnt document which has been
from the first, and is now, the acknowledged
basis OF their polity, commences with this
express statement:
"We hold these truths TO he sclfevident
that all men are created equal; that they
nre endowed by their Creator with certain
lnalienable rights; that among these are
life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness (;
that TO secure these rights, governments are
instituted among men, deriving their Just
powers from the consent of the governed"
We do not imagine that any American
democrat will evade the force of these ex-
pressions by the dishonest or ignorant sub
teriuge, that "men," in this memorable doc
ument, does not stand for human beings,
hut for one sex only; that "lile, liberty, aud
the pursuit of happiness" are "inaicnable
rights OF only one moiety of the human
species; and that "the governed" whose
consent is affirmed to be the only source of
Just power, are meant for that half of man.
Kind only, who, in relation 10 the other, have
hitherto assumed the character of Govern
ors. The contradiction between principle
and practice cannot be explained away A
like dereliction Of the fundamental maxims
OF their political creed has been committed
by the Americans in the hngrunt instance of
the negroes; of this they are learning to
recognise the turpitude. After struggle
which, by many of its incidents, deserves
the name of heroic, the Abolitonists are
now so strong in numbers and influence that
they hold the balance of parties in the Unit
ed States. 1t was fitting that the men whose
name will remain associated with the extr-
patton, from the democratic soil of Amer-
ca, OF the aristocracy of color, should be
among the originators, for America and for
the rest of the world, of the first collective
protest ngainst the aristocracy of sex;
distinction as accidental ns that of color,
ana fully as irrelevant to all questions OF
government.
Not only to the democracy of America,
the claim of women TO civil and political
equality makes an irresistible appeal, but al
so to those radicals and chartists in the Brit
ish islands, and democrats on the Continent,
who claim what is called universal suffrage
as an inherent right, unjustly aud oppress-
lively withheld from them. For with what
truth or nationality could the suffrage be
termed universal, while half the human
species remain excluded from it? 10 de-
clare that voice in the government is the
right of all, and demand il only for part
the part, namely, to which the claimant him
self belongs-is 10 renounce even the APP
pearance of principle. The Chartist who
denies the suffrage to women, is Charlist
only because he is not a lord he is one OF
those Jewelers. who would level only down TO
themselves.
ARGUMENT FROM ANALOGY.
Even those who do not look upon voice
IN the government as matter-of personal
right, nor profess principles which require
ihat it should be extended TO all, have usual
Iy traditional maxims of political Justice
with which il is impossible TO reconcile the
exclusionAof all women from the common
rights Of citizenship. II is an axiom of En-
glish freedom that taxation and represents
lion should be cO-eXtensive. Even under
the laws which gives the wiie's property to
the husband there are many unmarried wo-
men, who pny taxes. 1t is one of the iunda-
nental doctrines of the British Constitution,
that oil persons should be tried by their
peers; yet women whenever tried, are tried
by rnnle Judges and male jury. To foreign
crs the law accords tile privilege of claiming
Shnt half the jury should be composed OF
themselves; not so TO women. Apart from
Snaxns of detail, which represent local and
national rather than universal ideas il is an
acknowledged dictate of justice to make no
degrading distictions without necessity. In
all things the presumption ought TO be on
the side of equality. A reason must he Civ
en why anything should I've permitted to one
person and interdicted TO another. But
when that which is interdcted includes
nearly everything which those to whom it is
permitted most prize, and to be deprived of
which they feel TO be most insulting when
hinf only nnlilicnl lihnrtv Inn nnrsnnnl lrnn-