The Jackson standard. [volume] (Jackson C.H., Ohio) 1847-1888, 1875-05-27
[From Harper's Weekly.l
Taxation Without Representation.

A member of Parliament recently OBJ
| jected to Mr.. Fawcetts motion for ex
tending the suffrage, under specified
conditions, to certain women, that the
agitation of the whole subject began with
ill-regulated women in America, and il
| successful would enfranchise Immoral
women" We have no doubt the Canal
Ring in New York and the liquor inter
est everywhere would gravely urge the
same objection. But we should like to
see the honorable member answering
ought not to be allowed to tax them
selves, immoral men should be
allowed to tax them Indeed, the
only ground for supposing that there is
even any plausible ground whatever for
disfranchising adult orderly, and intelli
gent taxpayers because of their sex, is
the fact that no good reason has ever
been offered, and that therefore some
kind of hostile instinct must be assumed:
an argument which will probably be suf-
fcient with that class of political senti-
mentalists who have national antipa-
thy to colored people.
The discussion of the question of equal
suffrage among tax-paying adults has re.
Gently received very valuable contribu-
ton in the form of a pamphlet upon the
taxation of women in Massachusetts,, by
William l. Bowditch-a little work full
of the results of interesting research and
of very trenchent logic. As the centen-
nial year arrives, and the long and glori-
Gus series of celebrations begins COM
memorating the war that was fought in
vindication of the principle of no taxa
ton without representation, Mr. Bow
ditch takes occasion to ask the pertinen 1T
question, Upon what ground does the
State of Lexington, Concord, and Bunker
Hill deny representation to more than
half of its adult citizens, who pay one
tenth or one eleventh of the taxes 2 The
Massachusetts Declaration of Rights de-
clares that no tax shall be levied with
out the consent of the people or their
representatives and are not women peo-
pie? If it be replied that the word is
used to define certain political class,
the answer is that in the same Declara-
ton the words "all men are born free
and equal have been held by the highest
courts in the State to include women,
and by force of that clause slave women
were freed. So the word "his" in the
clause guaranteeing religious liberty has
always been applied to women as well as
to men. But if, in defining rights, "his"
in the one case has been always constru-
ed as meaning also "her," and if the
courts have always held in the other that
"all men" means also all women, shall
the more comprehensive word people"
in the same definition of rights be sup
posed to exclude half the population
1t is not disposition of the matter to
say that of course the men who framed
the Declaration did not mean women,
because the meaning of such an instru-
ment is to be sought in the words used,
not in subsequent theory as to what it
must be supposed to have been.
But, again, the power of the State to
tax unrepresented property holders and
citizens needs to be demonstrated. The
Constitution of Massachusetts,, indeed.
authorizes the Legislature to impose
taxes upon all the inhabitants and per-
sons resident and all estates situate
within the Commonwealth. But is not
Rights And if so, is it not confined, SO
far as persons are concerned, to the resi-
dents who personally or by representa-
ton consent to the taxation All Massa-
chusetts women are citizens, and this
fact, if there were any question of it, is
established by the qualifying word
male" prefxed to the word citizens in
an amendment the qualifications show
ing that there may be female citizens as
well as male. Then all the tax-paying
women of Massachusetts are citizens
taxed without their consent But is this
lawful2 Can citizens be constitutionally
taxed in that State without their con-
sent2 The lawful way for citizens to ex-
press their consent is by voting. But if
they are deprived of the power of voting
for representatives, they are prevented
from giving their consent only through
their own representatives, not through
those of other people. A hundred years
ago the few people who voted in England
may have chosen to tax other people
who live in America and had not voted.
But those other people insisted that tax
alton without representation was tyranny,
and that submission to it was slavery.
Are those acts any less tyranny and
slavery than they were hundred years
ago2 b.
The Supreme Court of Massachusetts,
has decided that male citizen who is
not represented cannot be taxed. Upon
what ground can female citizen be tax
ed who is not represented? Virtual
representation" was decided by our faith
ers to be no representation at all; and
the reply that the interests of the empire
were one, and that what affected the
mother country affected the colonies,
and Vice verSd, was an argument finally
answered at Yorktown. Is the argu-
ment more forcible now? 1t may be
said that the right of suffrage is based
| upon the supposed power of the voters
10 haor orroS anA 6olnt R,if ~, Mosso