The Emporia news. [volume] (Emporia, Kan.) 1859-1881, 1867-06-14
FEMALE SUFFRAGE.
Rogers versus Eskrige.

the signiture Of Eskridge. has so excited
my merriment and disgust, that feel
constrained, from the standing of the wri-
ter, not to allow it to go uunou ced.
Ia the FIRST place. he sets out by calling
ths last legislature "sbystering." q quail
ifcatiou of which will admit him TO be
a competent judge. though the term comes
with bad grace from one who has always
had the reputation of out-sbystering any
thing that ever sat in Kansas legislature,
even when Sam Wood was pitted against
him.
In the next place, be either ignoranty
or Intentionally states what is untrue. tba:
the proposition to strike out the word
Male was carried by q minority vote, to
ride down and defeat the proposition to
strike out the word White. The truth is.
each of these propositions was made by
itself. and passed each body by itself,
separate and distinct proposition. Thev
both originated 10 the House, and each
passed there By large majorities. The
proposition to strike out the word Male.
being the first in order, was called I'D bv
myself in The Senate, and passed without
debate. several members voting against
it because of the discourteous manner in
which the House had treated similar
Senate proposition. The proposition TO
strike out The word White was then call,
ed up by myself, which came we'll nigh
being defeated By its enemies trying TO
load it with amendments, all of which
amendments the friends OF female suf,
frage opposed. In short, the advocates
of female suffrage were without exception
the warmest friends of negro suffrage.
But Mr.. E. pretends to be all in love
with negro sufage, and casts a slur at
Wood for opposing negro suffrage in the
Legislature. Now, Mr.. E, while you OPP
posed Wood 10 everything else, why did
you then not offer one word in behalf of
your "dear negrO?" You were there.
You heard Woods speech, and not until
after three years, aud after Wood had
been converted, had you one word to say
in reply. The question was discussed in
committee of the whole, and made the
special order of a day by Wood s motion.
Now, it is currently reported that Esk-
ridge, while in the legislature, traded his
Influence on one side of each question
and his vote on the other. But on the
negro suffrage question he said nothing.
He did not dodge" as that would be
equivalent to voting against it. He did
not ask TO be excused, as that would be
the came thing. But what then? Why,
be voted on both sides of the question.
See House Journal, 1864. page go. on
the agreeing to the report of the Commit
tee of the whole, which report was against
negro suffrage. There his name stands
with Woods in favo: of agreeing to the
report and also with mine against it.
Again, Mr.. E., why, in an article of
two columns, could you not find room,
with your superior intellect, to answer
some of the arguments in favor of female
suffrage, or to advance one argument
against ii? You predict, and p,opbesy
and assert, but why not give US some
reason for the positive opinion of yours,
that we may think as you do? Your
whole letter is slurs and flings, unworthy
man of your standing. Your elur at
the last legislature is a slur flung at your
superiors. You cowardly attack the char
acter of a woman who has left the State,
because you are unable to cope with her
sound logic. If she is weak, silly wo-
man1' why did you not meet and expose
her soPhistry. and not attack her private
character? Your ''seed warL'' may be
big thing" to you, but men who know
H. B. Blackwell, and have known him
for the last twenty years, as a philanthro-
phist, a scholar and a gentleman, will
form low estimate of your personal
worth.
No, Mr.. Eskridgs, be man; meet the
great question fairly and squarely. If
women have not the right to vote, show
as why they have not. The people are too
intelligent to be put off with such billings
gate and assaults upon private character.
Such Wishy Washy articles are degrading
to the author, and an insult 10 the intelii.
gence of the people who read the News
Ii you hung that article out as a speci
men of what you have in store, fear
you will soon be driving dull busine SIS.
If you desire to discuss this question
fairly and candidiy, TO advance arguments
and reply to arguments, will meet you
at any time and place. But "Sally Ann
Wood. )" "sbystering Legislatures, :" "Po-
litieal TIickslers," "Mormouism, % ''Frse
Loveism," "Petticoat Government. %
''PetIicoated old Ewes, - ''seed warts. :"
"bad Characters" vulgar pimps.
'drled>uP old elm peelers, - etc ETC., are
no arguments to me, Why my wife
my mother, my sisters and my daughters
should not have 8 voice in making those |
laws which they are bound to obey.