The Portland daily press., 1885-09-25
WOMAN SUFFRAGE CONVENTION.
Interesting Sessions Held at Chest
nut Street Church Yesterday.
Paper Prepared by Hon. Thomas 3.
Reed on His Views.

Reed on His Views.
The morning session yesterday was opened
with prayer by Rev. J. S. Gledhill of Au-
gusta, and remarks by Mrs. C. A. Quimby,
who presided.
The members of the association spent most
of the morning in an informal conference
upon the best methods of promoting the in
terests of the cause of woman suffrage.
A committee on nominations was chosen,
consisting of Rev. DR.. Bashford and Miss
Charlotte Thomas, of Portland
A committee on the constitution and by
laws was also appointed, consisting of Rev.
NJ. Crosley of Portland Dr. H. P. Black
well of Massachusetts,, and Mrs j. +. Bash
ford of Portland.
DR.. Blackwell spoke of the necessity of
securing active corresponding members in
the different counties, and of working
through the municipal bodies in the towns
and cities to bring the State Legislature into
sympathy with this reform
Rev. Mr.. Collins of Chebeague made a
brief and characteristic address, urging to
renewed interest in working for a cause so
vital to the public welfare.
Mrs. Anna Cora Pond spoke of the finan-
cial aspect of the reform, and suggested the
best methods of raising the funds needed to
carry on the work of the association.
Rev. Mr. Munson spoke of the prospects
of the reform through the State. 1t was his
conviction that the presence of women at the
voting places would tend greatly to the good
order Of those places, and to the election of
worthy candidates for public office.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
The afternoon session was opened with
prayer by Rev. Mr.. Crosser of Portland
Rev. DR.. Bashford then read paper pre-
pared some time ago by Hon. 7. B. Reed,
containing his views upon this question
Mr. Reed, through pressure of private bust
ness, was unable to be present at the meet
ing; but the paper read shows his emphatic
approval of the objects of the association.
and Is as f0llowS
EXTENDING THE RIGHT OF SUFFRAGE TO
WOMEN.
No one who listens to the reasons given by the
superior glass for the continuance of any system
OF subsection can fail to be impressed with the
noble disinterestedness of mankind. When the
subsection of persons of African descent was to
be maintained, the good Of those persons was al
ways the main object. When it was the fashion
to beat children, to regard them as little animals
who had no rights, it was always for their good
tliUN were iItdItu Will SeNeTlIy, ana never
on account of the bad temper of their parents
Hence, when it is proposed to give to the women
OF tins country an opportunity to present their
of the people of the country equality of political
rights, it Is not surprising to find that the reasons
on which the continuance of the nferiority of wo-
men is urged, are drawn almost entirely from a
tender consideration for their own good. The
anxiety felt lest they should thereby deteriorate
would be an honor to human nature were it not an
historical TACT that the same sweet S0lictude has
been put up as barrier against every progress
which women have made ever since civilization
began. There is no doubt today that if in Turkey
or Alglers countries where womens sphere is
most thoroughly confined to the home circle it
was proposed to admit them to social life to re-
converse in open day with the friends of their
husbands and brothers, the conservative and iu-
dlcous Turk or Algerine of the period, if he could
be brought TO even consider such horrible pro-
position, would point out that the sphere of wo-
men was to make home happy by those gentle in
sipidities which education Would destroy: that nv
participation in conservation with men they would
learn c0arseness debase their natures, and men
would thereby lose that ameliorating influence
Which still leaves them unfit to associate with wo-
men. He would point out that mature" had de-
termined that women should be secluded; that
their sphere was to raise and educate the man
cllld, ana tnat any change would be violation of
the divine law which in the opinion of all conser
yative men, always ordains the present but never
the futurS.
SO in civilized countries when it was proposed
that women should own their own property that
they should have the earnings of their own labor
There were not wanting tn0Se Who were sure that
such proposition could work only evil to women
and that continually. 1t would destroy the
family discordant interests would provoke dis
pute, and the only real safety for woman was in
the leadership of man. not that man wanted SUI
periOrity for any selfish reason. but to preserve
intact the family relation for woman's good. To-
day W0lnan's property belongs to herself; her
earnings are her own; she has been emancipated
beyond the widest hopes OF any reformer Of 25
She is proving her usefulness in spheres which
the mature" worshipped by the conservative of
twenty-five years ago absolutely forbade her to en-
ter. Notwithstanding all these changes the
family circle remains unbroken, the man child
gets as well educated as before, and the anchor
atlng influence OF woman has become only the
more marked. Thirty years ago hardly any poll
teal assembage of the people was graced by the
presence of women. Had it needed law to en-
have been made against it! How easily it could
have been shown that the cosrseness, the dubious
expressions, the general yulgarity Of the scene,
could have had no other effect than to break down
that purity of word and thought which women
have, and which conservative and radical, are
alike sedulous to preserve. And yet the actual
debaSed them, but has raised the other sex.
Coarseness has not become diffused through both
matter i'll short phrase: The association of the
sexes in the family circle in society, and in bust
ness, having proved improving to both, there is
neither history reason nor sense to justify the as
sertion that association in politics will lower the
one or demoralize the other,
Hence we would do better to approach the
leave the sphere" OF women to the future than
conine it in the chains of the past. Words change
hhodnlng. Pre1udices are none the less .preiudces
about what nature has forbidden when we only
mean that the thing we are opposing has not been
cross the Atlantic the very moment it was cross
ing, and yet it arrived just the same. What the
majority call mature" has stood in the way of ev
stand in the way Of all future progress. II has
also stood In the way of many unwise things. 1t
IS only another name for conservatism. With
conservatism the minority have no quarrel. 1t is
essential to the stability of mankind, of govern
ment, and of social life To every new proposal it
whether it be friend or foe. The acknowledgements
OF women must pass the ordeal like anything else
1t must give good reason for its demand to be or
take its place among the halfforgotten fantasies
which have challedged the support of mankind
and have not stood the test of argument and dis
cusSiun.
The committee claim that suffrage is not a right,
but a privilege to be guarded by those who have
it, and to be by them doed out to those who shall
has been granted in some form or other by those
already holding it is probably true. In some
countries, however, it has been extended upon the
obedience to claim of right. If suffrage be
right, if it be true that man has right to gov
eFh any other man except to the extent that the
can be no discussion of the question of woman
suffrage. No reason on earth can be given by
which does not make it a right of womanhood
also, If the suffrage is to be given man to pro-
tect him IN his life liberty, and property, the same
reasons urge that it be given to woman, for she
has the same life, liberty, and property to protect
II It be urged that her interests are so bound up
in those of man that they sure to be protected
the answer is that the same argument was urged
as to the merger in the husband of the wfe's
right OF property, and was pronounced by the
Judgment of mankind fallacious in practice and in
principle: If the natures of men and women are
so alike that for that reason no harm is done by
snppressing.women, what harm can be done by
eievating them to equality? If the natures be
different, what right can there be in refusing
representation to those who might take juster
views about many social and political questions
Our government is founded, not on the rule of
the Wisest and best, but upon the rule of ALL The
ignorant, the learned the wise and the unwse,
the judicious and the. injudicious are all invited
to assist in governing, and upon the broad princ-
PIE that the best government for mankind is not
the government which the wisest would select
but that the average of mankind would select.
Laws are daily enacted, not because they seem
the wisest even to these legislators who
pass them, but because. the represent
what the whole people wish And, in the
long run, 1t may be just as bad to enact laws in
advance of public sentiment as to hold on 10 laws
behind it. Upon what principle in government
like ours can one3half the minds be denied ex-