The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1880-01-22

-AGh E3OCS 800 . 49,
really does seem that soma OF the
men of Utah agree with that ides;
yes, and actually go to the extent oil
saving that they do not want the
least bit of such very good thing IN
office, There seems to be a strong |
feeling on this subject, both 10 and
out OF the Legislature. Some men |
appear to be possessed with the idea
that the removal of the statutory dis
ability of woman TO hold Office Won d |
forebode some dreadful imminent
Now I can hardly think
that there would be. any awful inn
pending danger that the heavens
would fall as natural and inevitable
or as probable oon-
sequence, Of the passage OF the
bill now in the House. II
such catastrophe were imminent,
should not the Legislature be just and
even generous to woman all the
game? WHAT ye SOW, that ye shell
also reap, and l Go not understand
how the men Wonld lose any good
thing, or reap. any bad harvest,
through being equitable and liberal
and magnanimous toward the
women.
l can easily understand that If a
man has a shrew at home, who hen
pecks him badly. he may not want to
have ttat woman in Office, nor any
woman in Office, thinking that all
women may be alike to an unpleas-
ant degree in temper and disposition,
and that every woman is shrew ct
heart He may say Of bis thorny
chermer. II do not want her in
Office, I bavs enough of her st home.
Il is az much as l can do to get along
with her there" But, Gven in that
case. ofice-holding for woman might
not be without it, advantages. For 1t
might be a positive advantage to such
a man TO have his shrGw in Office, II
the people chose to put her there, for
the very good reason thst her Official
duties would engage her attention
and occupy part of her time, and so
far draw her fire from him, which
might be an important consideration
for him and would prove TO him
hat nature has her corporations,
sven in the matter of feminine Office
>,
Suppose a man hal net the kind Of
ability to fit him for Office, yet be
might have wife or daughter more
literally endowed in that respect, and
whom the PEOPLE would delight TO
honor with official position if the law
flowed. A man might be pardon
ably proud of having such 8 bright
and capable wife ordaughter. 1 Go
not think Lady Gay Spanker o tar
rible type of Womanhood. Such a
woman would be far better fitted for
some official positions than her
Dolly would, and il she were placed
in Office she would Eobly redeem the
family from the stigma of inability to
serve the country officially. So ysu
see there are several sides to the
question.
A go5d deal of sharp talk is in
duIged in about strong-minded |
women. Now, which is best q strong
minded wife OF a wesk-minded wife !?
Many a wife, Weak-minded and
weak bodied too, nevertheless, IS
strong enough, both in mind and
body, to worry her husband and
wear him out by the sheer force OF
her Astounding peevishness and her
everlasting fretting and repining, |
which are as efsctually wearing on
the patience and good temper OF a
man IS the constant dropping OF
water is upon inanimate nature.
In regard to the Romsn's dis
abilities bill in the House, the orlgi- !
nal bill made woman eligible to any
office. The bill as amended by the
judiciary committee makes her
eligible to optional Office, leaving her
siill ineligible to compulsory Office,
such as sitting on juriee. l bsiieye 1
am rather in favor Of the policy OF
giving people large liberty to do all
taey can, in Office or out, rather than
to set so many rigid staSes, and run
so many inhexible boundary lines,
and make unnecessary statutory pre-
visions in the dictatorial spirit of tue |
Hitherto shalt thou &c, |
out no further"
The present statute ssys, Thou
halt not put woman into any Office"
ana not quoting from The Decalague.
find no such commandment there.
The bill in the House 6oss not ssy,
Thou shalt elect or appoint woman
0 office" No such thing. It merely
aye, eff thou Rsntest woman in GER
ain Offices, thou canst put her there"
at present women have the suffrage.
They are allowed to vote, but they
must vote for men. They are not
flowed to vote for women, This
GEMS hardly equitable, and certainly
sther upgenerous. Many a woman
Sould not desire to hold public Office
# any kind, would not accept 1t if
hlust upon her, hut she might Ike
o have the privilege of voting for
ONE other woman to Office, who
would 70. decline the honor nor
buk the responsibility. Some
Vomen have 8 liking for public life
nd are well qualified to shine in it.
they have a perfect genius for it.
The other day one OF the gentlemen
q the House read a beautiful extrac,
rom DR.. Holland. Now that extract
It Holland was very good, and most
nen would agree with it The DR..
aid If woman wanted to sing bass,
le was willing she should, but be did
lot want 10 hear her. | cannot say
hat l should be anxious to hear a
foman sing bass. But I certainly
o not concede the propriety
1 statutory provision forbidding
woman to sing base. If she was /
ualifed to sing bass, and wished to
ing bass, why should she not be
lloEed TO sing bass! Why should :
be be forbidden By law to sing bass7
Ter bass might be softer and mel
over and sWeeter than q mans bass.
not so deep and powerful. II I did :
ot wish to hear her sing bass, other )
ersons might wish to hear her, and
be might wish to hear herself.
therefore, why should vote for law s
prevent anybody from having the
v,y,,-ff,,,ifxy IF boari,ry bo- cirrr h.rs .