Morning journal and courier., 1884-09-01
WOMEN VOTING ON THE PACIFIC. COAST.
How They Were Divided on a Prohibt-
 tfon Tssue-Jury Duty Dfstasteful.

tfOn Hssue-Jury Duty Distasteful.
 From the Chicago Trbunel
 The female-suffrage experiment now on trial in Washington Territory presents some interesting phases. In the first place, it has fair field for working itself forward into permanency. Women have voted in Utah for several years past, but they were given the franchise by the Mormon church authorities in order that their ballots might prevent the possibility of Gentle ascendancy in elections Women have also voted in Wyoming for 8 long time, but in that sparsely settled region of cowboys and miners the female element is too small to play any important part in poli- tics Indeed the suffrage was bestowed up- on women in that Territory rather in spirit of gallantry than from any expectation that they would exert any noticeable influence up- on public affairs In Washington Territory the case is different. This is a stable com munity, largely engaged in agriculture, where society is based on the family as much as in the East, and where women occupy no pecu- liar position, either by reason of their scarcity or their religion. Civilization is compara- lively recent, but it's processes go on in the same orderly manner as in Nebraska or Da- kota. Female suffrage here may therefore be supposed to be no different in it's results from what it would be in Iowa or Illinois, and in this view of the matter the experi- ment becomes peculiarly instructive to people in older communities.
 The Female Suffrage act was passed by the Washington legislature last winter. It was not submitted to the people, but went into immediate effect. In Oregon a like act was passed soon afterward in the form of a constitutional amendment, but was condi- toned upon ratification at the polls. The women were not allowed to vote on it's adop- t1on or rejection, however, and the men de feated it by a heavy majority Here in Washington the first operation of the new law was at the municipal elections held a few weeks ago. All that the female suffragists had claimed for the influence of women at the polls, so far as producing good order is concerned, was borne out by these elections. The baloting proceeded everywhere in the most respectable and digniied fashion. The ladies were treated as considerably as though they had been at church. For their part they handed in their tickets quietly and went home. In some towns they voted very gener- ally; in others only small fraction of them appeared at the polls.
 The common notion that the married women would vote as their husbands wished proved erroneous, and most notably so in Seattle, the largest town in the Territory There the ministers, the temperance agitators and a few politicians started a movement to secure the election of officials who would more strictly enforce the laws against certain in Engagements of good morals and pretty voted the so-called law-and-order ticket against ticket protesting to represent busi- ness interests. The womens ticket was badly beaten, nevertheless. Numerous family jars grew out of the canvass, and not a few men made the discovery that they were possessed of stubborn wives, on whom argument was thrown away. The affair was instructive showing that the tendency of women to act together where they think questions of morals are involved will be shown in politics when ever they have the right to vote, just the same as ill religious or social matters In some towns in eastern Washington, where the feature of granting licenses to liquor sellers was at issue, the women were equally solid, but in Yokoma city they divided, forty-two voting free whislzey ticket and only thirty-six temperance ticket
 The voting of women at elections did not appear, however, to disturb the harmony of things as much as the summoning of women to sit upon juries Apparently the advocates Of female suffrage had not looked forward to this disagreeable accessory of the franchise. Voting was easy enough, but jury duty speedily became a terror to them. In most counties the Sherifs put the names of women into the jury box; in some where they neg leeted to do so, the judges had the error recti- fed. The women had voted; now they must
  shirk the burdens of citizenship. The con- spdcuous women advocates of the new suf- frage law urged heroism upon the victims ot the panel, but most of them pleaded to be ex- cused from serving. Two of the territorial |sjudges were quite lenient, and accepted any kind of an exeusr; but the third, Judge Green insisted on the women serving unless they had the strongest reasons for staying at home In one county, where by accident no names of women had been drawn, he set aside the entire panel, had the names of female citi zens put into a box by themselves, and re quired the Sheriff to draw every alternate name from that box
 The difficulties of mixed juries of the two sexes became painfully apparent when case came to be tried of certain classes not un common in courts where evidence is givel unfit for ladies' ears It was even worse il the grand. jury rooms. There the womel showed the usual feminine tendency to juml to conclusions and trust to intuition rathe than evidence. They wanted to indict peop1 \ on general principles. Especially was thi 1 the case where liquor selling or the social evi | was involved. If they could have had thei | way unhindered they would have hustle' 1 hundreds of people off to jail without law o l testimony. The lawyers became alarmed a l this new element in the jury room that sough | to reform society by the application of tn 1 higher moral law without regard to any par l of the statutes save the penalty clauses. The 1 don't want to argue cases before women, no
 because they are not intelligent and con scientious, but because they seem ineapabl l of weighing evidence without prejudice. Newspaper Readers.
 l - From the London Standard