The new Northwest. [volume] (Portland, Or.) 1871-1887, 1877-07-13
THE BRUTE FORCE ARGUMENT.

are galvanized again into brief exist
ence, on purpose, as it would seem, to be
again entombed by plain facts, so plain
that their frequent presentation grows
monotonous. If we believed for a mo-
ment that he had never heard this ar
gument presented and answered, we
should be forced to inquire, with the
chronicler of "Jim Bludsoe's" deed of
bravery, "Whar have you been for the
last ten year?" Superfiuous, however,
as it seems to attempt to reach the un-
derstanding of those who, "having eyes
see not, and having ears hear not" we
will give a brief review of the article,
hoping that repetition hammered OH
the ear" may at last produce the desired
result.
The argument opens with the discus
sion of the question of Woman Suffrage
in England, starting out with the dec
larstion that suffragists there, under the
banner Of Jacob Bright, have again met
defeat in Parliament. The London
Spectator is quoted at some length as in
opposition to the measure, the argu-
ment advanced being based upon the
declaration that ga mans vote is the
index of force lying behind the vote; a
woman's vote would have 10 corre-
spending force behind it."
This argument would doubtless have
weight if it was expected the enlight-
ened nations of the world should be
ruled by the bludgeon, as, in the carry
ing out of such government, brain
would be obliged to succumb to Drawn;
but we hardly think that at this era it
is necessary to produce argument to
show that muscle is a secondary power,
controlled, except in transient and occa-
sional outbreaks of mob violence, en-
tirely by intelligence. This article,
called by courtesy argument" from
the Spectator, supposes a case in which
the women of Great Britain would vote
war upon a nation of unwilling men,
and then asks who would compel the
men who are in favor of maintaining a
strict neutrality to man the war ships
and fill the armies? Now, we would
like to ask if the very idea of women
becoming ferocious and voting war upon
unwilling men is not too far-fetched and
altogether too absurd to talk about
One argument heretofore advanced and
strongly argued by opponents has been
that women as a mass would always
vote in favor of peace, hence their votes
would have an enervating effect upon the
nation and cause it to become too docile
for dignity. Thus do extremes meet,
and thus do men who hold tenaciously
to the old barbarian idea that "might
makes right" and brute force should
govern the world become entangled in
the meshes of their own sophistries.
Speaking of its position upon this
question few years ago, the Tribune
says:
At that time We contended that it was only
the sex from which soldiers and police are
taken-or, in other words, the class of force OF
the governing element-that should be admit
ted to the franchise. The reply was made by
the agitators that there were many men in
capable of martial force and were practically
non-combatants, such as old men, sickly men
cripples, and others. This is admitted; bu
they belong to the sex of force, and their views
are IN harmony with that class which furnishe!
this governing power Of force, and they would
use that force if they were young, healthy, anC
robust. Their heads and hearts are in favor o
force, although their legs may be incapable o
bearing them into battle.
Might not this concluding "if' bt
brought in and argued with equal forct
in favor of woman, if it were worth th'
time spent? Arguing any question
however, making "sex" the basis of ar
gument, is as unjust as indelieate, anC
we argue no political question from 1
sexual basis, preferring always the NOR,
conclusive, just, and enlightened basi
of intelligence.
In answer to the military argument
we again quote the following paragraph
A good deal of time is also wasted in reply
ing to the absurd pretext that men alone mus
vote, because men alone can defend the gov
ernment in time of war. Where did this nc
ton come from 1 don't believe agis possibl
to find, in any constitution, law, treatise Of
government, or anything else, a paragraph
from any respectable source which connect
the rights of suffrage with the duty of bearin
arms; if there is any, 1 have never seen it. 1
proof of fact, during the late war, our Mass
chusetts) soldiers in camp, the men who Dor
the brunt of the war, were not allowed to vote
while the stay-at-homes were, and the peopl
refused TO alter the Constitution so that thei
votes could be taken as the votes of soldiers {
other States were taken.
The defeat of the "Woman's Disabili
ties Removal Bill" introduced int
Parliament by Jacob Bright, is charac
terized by the Tribune as differing fror
former defeats only in being more com
plete."
The manner of this defeat is hinted a
by the London Times. During the ad
vocacy of the measure by its friend
+ this journal says that "the argument
were not continually audible, on az
count of loud cries for division, whic
were kept up until the hour of adjourn
, ment."