The new Northwest. [volume] (Portland, Or.) 1871-1887, 1872-03-15
Mr.. Summers Unsnual Ennalitr.

o. We nave read with hearty approval
senator Summers powerful argument
IN Dehalt OF the civil rights of colored
men. But, by an inevitable fatality,
every weighty sentence applies equally
70 woman, whose wrongs are studiously
/ ignored.
This silence can no longer be regarded
as accidental. Senator Wilson's bill to
eniranchise woman in the Territories
has brought the subject before the Sem
ate in practical form, upon which no
doubtful questions of constitutional law
can eomplicate the issue. In the House,
Mr. HoaPs proposition to forbid the dis
franchisement of any class of citizens
who now vote in the Territories is
designed to guard the political rights OF
the women of Wyoming and Utah,
while Mr.. Buffers speech in support OF
the women's petition for a declaratory
act places him squarely upon record in
favor of suffrage for women.
! But while we rejoice at the honorable
prominence which Massachusetts has
achieved this winter in Congress upon
the greatest political question, the equal
| rights of woman, we listen anXiously 10
hear the sonorous voice of our senior
Senator Must we listen i'm vain? The
following appeal from Mr.. TiltOn, adj
mirable alike in matter and manner,
expresses the general feeling of Mr..
Summers constituents. We shall await
/ his reply with the deepest interest. For
the time has come when no political
| leader, worthy of the name of a states
man, can any longer stand neutral upon
the question of Woman Suffrage
IVomaIfs Journal.
To Charles Sumner, Senator OF the
/ ff1ff7rY Nfrrfou Cir. In xrrffla
many of your friends, / have been
somewhat bewildered by your recent
speech, entitled, Equality before the
/ Law.n
You therein uttered doctrines which,
| If applicable to negroes, are equally ap-
plicable to women. And yet (unless
/ your habitual and infelicitous silence on
the woman question has misinterpreted
your viewsl you still deny to women
those very rights which for years you
have eloquently demanded for negroes.
But tell me by what process of reason,
by what instinct of justice, by what
high statute of ethics, can you withhold
from one class of American citizens that
same equality before the law" whose
very essence is, that il belongs alike to
all classes?
There is no ground i'm reason or equity
for such discrimination. -.
Have you weighed your words? Un-
doubtedly you have, for you are a grave
minded man. But | beg you to weigh
once again the following words, which
you uttered last week in the Senate.
'The precise rule" you say, "is
equality before the law; nor more nor
less; that is, that condition before the
law in which all are alike-being enti-
tied, without any discrimination, to the
equal enjoyment of all institutions,
privileges, advantages and conveniences
created or regulated by law, among
which are the right to testify and the
right to vote"
In uttering the above noble words
worthy to be craven in adamant over
the entrance to the CapitOl-you have
apparently yet perhaps unwittingly)
confessed that all citizens, and there
fore women, are entitled to Equality
before the law;n that all citizens and
therefore women, ought to stand in ga
condition before the law i'm which all are
alike;" that all citizens, and therefore
women, must be accorded an "equal en-
joyment of all institutions, privileges,
advantages and conveniences created or
regulated by law" that all citizens, and
therefore women, must possess "the
right to testify" and, finally, that all
citizens, and therefore women, should
enjoy the fright to vote"
WOman's right of suffrage follows,
Therefore, as necessary conclusion from
your own logic. Why, then, do you not
accept this conclusion and acknowledge
that, as all these rights justly belong to
negroes, so also they justly belong to
women?
My interest in your public career is
disturbed at remembering las I must
that John Stuart Mill of England, for
his advocacy of Woman Suffrage, is
wearing the laurel that ought to crown
the brow of Charles Sumner of America.
| grieve to hear reformers say (as they
do) that the chief of American Senators,
after having been lifelong champion
of negroes, at last fails in chivalry of
craftsmanship toward women. Having
spent thirty years of elOquenee on the
rights of the one class, how can you now
sit dumb concerning the rights of the
other?
For the sake, therefore, of your own
fame as a consistent statesman, as well
as for the sake of the good cause of
Woman Suffrage, / respectfully urge
you to make clear answer to each of
the following questions, all of which are
suggested by your last speech:
First, You hold that all citizens should
stand in that condition of the law i'm
which all are alike" In saying this do
YOU mean to exclude women?
Second, You hold that all citizens are
justly 'entitled, without any discrimi-
nation, to the equal enjoyment of all
institutions, privileges, advantages and
conveniences created or regulated by
law" Do you deny these to women?
Third, you hold that all citizens must
have "the right to testify" Do you
refuse this TO women?
Finally, You hold that all citizens
should enjoy "the right to vote" Do
you accord this to women?
/ beg you to answer these questions,
il be as the friend or foe of
Woman Suffrage; for, on this subject, !
your nOn-committal silence-s0 unlike
your accustomed frankness on public |
questions-is leading many of your old |
and best friends Including some who |
have been your lifelong comrades i'm
the anti-slavery struggled to feel an !
noyed at your inconsistency, to accuse /
you of vacillatiOn, and to suspect you Of
Meanwhile L remain, as ever, your |
admirer,
THEODORE TILToN.