The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1867-06-05


so far as they referred to general PRINCIPLES.
could they be at all striking to those in this
country who are familiar with our long-stand-
ing discussion on the ponderous question Of
"Woman's rights" A number of his points
were of exclusive application to Great Britain
to its laws and customs as respects the rela-
tions of women; and they have no bearing
whatever upon this country, or upon the laws
on the same subject which prevail, with varia-
tons, in all the States of the Union. As re-
CARDS the regulation of the civil rights and
property rights ofwomen, we are far in adj
vance of England, and all Americans will
agree that the English laws need correction on
these points.
His argument on the main question of female
suffrage was in support of position which we
may state thus:-That the present condition of
English legislation, the practical working of
English institutions and the general expert
ence of the English people, show that while
women are excluded from all voice in public
affairs these affairs will not be so MANAGED as
to maintain the highest interests of women in
her relation to the State, to society, and to the
welfare of the human race. His illustrations
all bear upon this position. We must confess
we cannot see the applicability Of the greater
part OF them, as reasons for establishing female
suffrage. 1t is certain that the most of the
measures he advocates can be effected without
permitting women to take any part in politics
ample the education of one sex is as well pro-
vided for by the State as the education of the
other sex. We know that the rights of pro-
perty of women are quite as well protected as
those of men.
We know that in the administration of ius-
tice the crimes committed by males against
females are, to say the least quite as severely
punished as those committed by females
against males; and if in England women may
be clicked or trodden to death" by men
with impunity, we assure him that his sex
enjoys no such privileges in America. In re-
gard, then, to the great matters of education
property, and the administration of justice
we have secured in this country all that can
possibly be demanded for or by women with
out comforting on them the franchise. In so
far, therefore, as his argument in favor of
female suffrage is based on these points, it is
fallacious and inconclusive. And really, there
is but little more to his argument. We are
astonished at the narrowness and shalloWness
of the whole thing, when we consider the
ability and intellectual power of its author.
The speeches against Mr.. Mills amendment
and in reply to his arguments were of such a
meagre kind as to be quite unworthy of notice.
1t is evident that the question is one which
members of Parliament have not considered as
we have been compelled to consider it in this
country. They probably do not regard it of
any practical consequence in English politics,
and therefore think that something in the way
of cha6'is all that is necessary in dealing with
it. We judge that their view is not far from
correct-even though seventy-three members
voted in favor of Mr.. Mills scheme.
The morning after the debate, the London
Times treated the question editorially. 1t
spoke, as we have done, of the ineffective
character of Mr.. Mills speech, but reasoned
against it on grounds which woul1 be laughed
at by the advocates of 'women's rights IN
this country. After doing so at length, it came
to the broad conclusion that sever since the
world has existed the great mass of women
and with an instructive tendency to submit
themselves to the control of the stronger sex.
Their destiny is marriage, their chief function
is maternity, their sphere is domestic and
social life. This is their condition now, and
political rights may well be settled in accord
ance with it."