The new Northwest. [volume] (Portland, Or.) 1871-1887, 1876-01-28
The Laws Injustice.

The Laws Injustice.
Looking over the tax rolls of this
county and city, for 1875, 1 fiud the fol-
lowing figures:
Total assessed value Of all property
IN this county. ................ ,1Ul 936
Total amount assessed to women in
this county lSSl,l5O
Total assessed value Of all property
IN Inls city 1881 Dol
Total amount assessed to women in
this 9iS,SOI
No. Of men in this county who pay
only poll taxi. ........... I,lI5
The above amounts assessed to women
are only approximate, since a great deal
Of property owned by women is taxed in
the name of various male persons, such
as husbands, guardians, executors, etc.
Moreover, in many Instances, it is not
indicated on the tax roll whether prop
erty holders are male or female, since
their names are given in initials only.
The real amount OF property assessed To
women in this city is probably nearer
two million dollars than one. Taking
these figures, it is evident that in this
county women are assessed about one
fifteenth of the whole; in this city, about
One-tenth of the whole.
These official statements are full of
. suggestion.
The claim of suffrage for women is
viewed with distrust and aversion by
some people, and with Indifference by
many more. They do not understand
why the question should be raised;
they do not see the good of it. What
practical and adequate principle is at
stake? To them, the matter seems at
war with the TepOse of domestic life,
with the ideal home and society. To
them, the agitation seems to he merely
the restlessness of class of unattractive
women who want to pull the skies down
upon US and precipitate dOOmsday at
once. From such standpoint, resist
ance and distrust are natural. But this
is really a wrong view of thu matter.
Most excellent women are identified
with the mOvement-wOmen who love
their homes and keep them inviOlate;
women who shrink from publicity and
brave it, if at all, for a dear principle;
women to whom the fine proprieties of
personal and social life are as dear as to
any in the world; women who, let me
say, are fighting a moral battle for
which they may be stigmatized now,
but for which future generations of
women will bless their memory as
90 NAAC BiCoCut kCllGldllpll blGSS
the brave stand made by Luther of old,
or Garrison of late. Here, too, is being
represented the historical experience of
stoning the prophets and then building
their sepulchers.
From many tangible points, which
may be made in favor of Woman Suf-
frage, let us take this one involved in
the relations of property to government
"a point indicated by the above figures
in the tax rolls of San Jose. As stated
above, the total assessment of this city
is, in round numbers, ten million dol
lars. Of this amount women are as
sessed for about one-tenth of the whole,
Now, the practical question is this
Why are the nine millions politically
represented while the one million is not?
Why have the nine-tenths an active
participation in making the laws and
electinR the officers who assess it, while
the one-tenth is wholly ignored?
Let as suppose that the owners of the
nine millions were approached with the
proposition to abandon their political
rights and let few men tax their prop.
erty as they should see tit. Would moi
1.-The proposal be rejected with indigna,
tion? They would emphasize the un.
reasonableness and strangeness of tht
idea. Now, what perplexes me is to un
derstand why the reasoning of the nine
millions is not precisely as good for th'
one million why the rights aud du
ties Of the latter are not just as urgent
as those OF the former. / should like Il
have some one give me a reason for tn,
discrimination, a reason which does no
dodge the moral law, common sense
and Republican principle. The usua
reply is that woman has proxy In he
husband. But this is an awkward ex
PLANTATION. When she violates q law
she, not her husband, is held RESPONSE
bic. And what shall be said of WomeI
who have no husbands? What Just rea
son for Withholding the guardianship O
her own property from q woman VIII
pays her own taxes? Has she no
equally with man every right, and b,
the principle of our government ever
political right to a franchise which elect
officers and makes laws affecting he
property?
Why arbitrarily levy upon her pos
sessions, despising her commones
rights of ownership and interest? If
man is grossly wrOnged by such
course, why not a woman? AS Shak
speare well puts it, "Hath not a JeI
senses, affections? fed with the sam
lOOui uuIg VIII Tue same weapons ~
It Is plain that the property rights G
women are as sacred as those uf meu
As quoted above, in the county of SAINT
Clara are some fifteen hundred me
voters who pay no tax save poll tax
and yet these, with no properly inter
ests at stake, are INDUCED with priv
lege denied to women who are assesse
on three million dollars. How an
man with spark of justice in his breat
can look upoR this complacenTly,
not understand. 1t is piece Of inju,
.tice no terms can describe.
What deepens the injustice Is the a
legged republican character of our goE
ernment. Were that government dei
potic or even monarchial, no one coul
justly complain, because then the arb
trary will Of one person, or of privi
eyed few, is the law. But our politics