The Republican journal. [volume] (Belfast, Me.) 1829-current, 1875-09-30
Household Suffrage.
From the st. Louis Republican.

also, that, threatening as universal sui
frage may become, it is impossible to re
call it, it would be an expression Of an
other general conviction. Universal sut-
frage is the logical product of free govern
ment, and when once conceded, cannot
be Withdrawn, no matter what irightiul
mischieis it may yield in the negro com
munities of the South OF in the dense NUM-
cipal communities ofthe North. No propo-
siton has ever been made to limit suffrage,
and none ever will be made; the subject
comes up in committees, in state constitu-
tional conventions, and is privately discuss
ed; but no one ever rises in a constitutions
al convention and openly proposes to dis
franchise any class Of persons now enjoy
ing the right of voting. 1t is universally
admitted that such a thing is not to be
entertaned-not even in New England,
where an alien Eruption is usurping the
authority of the old Puritan stock-not
even in South Carolina and Mississippi,
W ltlC Ilt All ICtll 2N4r'ip, tllC
power and the plantation of his former
master-not even in New \ orll city, where
so much wealth is at the mercy of classes
who own nothing but the almighty ballot.
| If the excuses Of universal suffrage are to
| have q remedy it must be sought lor out
side Of universal suffrage; it must bo found
| II.
| This is the argument OF Mr. Doolittie in
| his address at the Winnebago county fair,
and it is curious to note that in his search
for such a conservative agency, he comes
back to that primitive, patriarchal institute
ton which others before him have pointed
ont as the first originator and the last
conservator of human society-the family,
Mr.. Doolttle proposes TO let manhood
suffrage stand as it is, but to erect house
would allow men to vote still, in right of
their manhood but he would allow the
family a vote also, in right Of its being the
integcr OF society. Every householder,
whether married or single, should have
two votes, one for himself and another for
his household, the latter being intended
| to protect the interests of morality, virtue
and property represented by the family,
against the unstable, revolutionary ten
denotes and excuses Of the class who
have no family ties to restrain them. 1t
is argued that the man Of family should
| have two votes because he represents al
ways two persons, and generally more ;
| because he has double the stake in good
government that the single man possesses ;
| because he is better educated in the needs
Of society, and because he possesses an
experience in the art CT government that
the single man does not. Besides this,
household suffrage would give an indirect
representation TO one moiety of the popu
lation now unreprcsented in government
all the women and children in the cOun-
| try; it would reduce the redundant inllu-
ence which party politics now cNeus in
public affairs, for, as there is no politics
| in the household, there would be, theoreti-
cally, no partyism in its vote, it would
| give increased dignity and authority to
the family and thereby encourage mar
riages-a consideration Of no small i'm
portance, for, as the Wisconsin orator
SAYS : "A republic does not consist OF
| houses and furniture, portlcoes and public
places but of men and women in happy
independent homes" In the Roman re-
public husbands and fathers had extensive
privileges; the consul who had the most
children was first to receive the badge Of
office, and had the choice Of the armies
and the provinces; the senator who had
the head OF the catalogue Of senators, and
was the first to give his opinion; if 4 Cit
zen had three children he was entitled to
many small exemptions; u married man
could stand sooner for Office, and every
child gave him a years dspensation from
disqualiiications All these things men,
toned by MI Doolittle are worthy of at
tention; but there is one very important
fact in favor of the ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Of the
| household which he does not mention; the
most formidable foe to society all over the
world is communism, and the institution
whose overthrow communism ultimately
aims at is the family. 1t openly declares
that marriage which gives to the husband
exclusive possession OF one woman. andto
4 wife exclusive possession Of one man,
and to man and wife exclusive possession
Of their children, is monopoly which
must be abolished with all other forms Of
personal proprietorship; that the sacred
character of his wife is to be unknown in
the coming commune; all women, as we'll
as all goods, shall be held in common, and
the children, now under allegiance to the
family shall be the property OF the state.
The existence OF a growing power which
boldly avows these shocking doctrines and
designs against both the family and society
is strong incentive to the acceptance
OF any reasonable measures that promise
protection. Whether household suffrage
would afford such protection or not is a
question that may not be answered with
out mature consideration there is some
thing to be said against it as we'll as lor
it; but, at least. its apparent reasonable
ness entities it to reelection at 4 time Wher
all minds are looking for a remedy lol
evils which all minds recognize.
We have fallen upon terrible evil times
in the matter of temperance, Here were
the radical papers Of Maine haunting u
their heads the awful charge against Gen
eral Roberts Of not being reliable on Tho
temperance quostion-and yet he made ;
| loroo IN, IN ,,c,r1or N,