The Mitchell capital. (Mitchell, Dakota [S.D.]) 1879-1918, 1898-10-14

in Mitchell on next Thurs
day Evening.
SPOKE AGAINST SUFFRAGE.
Mrs. Winslow Crannell Speaks For Those
Who Don't Want Suffrage.
1t is something out of the usual order
of events to listen to q lady deliver an
address upon the question OF denying
women the right to the ballot, but Mrs.
Crannell, with an earnestness of pur-
pose and sincerity of heart, spoke her
mind in relation to woman being provi-
ded with the right of franchise. The
address was delivered at the court
house Thursday evening, and the court
room was crowded with ladies and
gentlemen. Mayor Fullerton presided
at the meeting and introduced Mrs.
Crannell to the audience.
In her opening remarks Mrs. Crannell
stated why she was here, and said that
in Iowa, Illinois and states east Of them
an organization bad been perfected
known as the woman association op-
posed to the extension of further suff-
rage to women" The associations have
no political affiliations, nor class dis
tinction, and have enrolled upon their
mem bership women, who, by birth or
marriage, belong to all different politi-
cal parties, and women who earn their
daily bread in all the avocations of life,
as we'll as the wealthy women.
Mrs. iCrannell took up several of the
propositions advocated by suffragists
and answered them. 1t is claimed 'sthat
suffrage is right due women; and that
it is wrongfully and tyrannically with
held them by men," She denied that
suffrage was right or even privi-
lege. 1t is duty imposed upon the in
dividual citizen, because it is believed
that its exercise by man will make for
the best interests of the whole COM
munity. Women have these rights
now just as completely as possible, and
no amount of legislation could give
them more. What possible good will
it do them to vote? When South Da-
kota says that no alien who has not
been naturalized shall vote; that no
soldier or seaman shall vote; that no
person, resident in one town or ward,
shall vote in another, it acts on the
natural principle of self defense,
which contravenes the dogma of nat
ural right to suffrage. If suffrage were
natural right it would have been i'm
possible for congress to forbid, as it did,
those who had been in rebellion from
voting; or to deny suffrage to minor,
or to any human being.
Another claim OIL the suffragist is
taxation without representation is
tyranny, . but taxes were not conditioned
upon the right to vote, and the proper
| ty of women is protected by the laws
just as much as that of men. There is
money tax and service tax, the
former being levied upon the property
of men and women alike. In order to
make it secure the state lays, upon
men alone, the service tax and with
it goes the ballot. This service tax
does not fall upon women and it can
not be demanded Of her. At every
| town election the minority is unheeded,
so far as the vote goes, and women with
property interests would be no better
off if they secured votes in the only
way they can be secured-one voice
one vote. They would be out voted by
women who do not own property, Al
least 16 to 1. And after all it narrowt
itself down to this: the women who
have property interests are not the
ones, in the great majority of cases
who are asking for suffrage.
| Probably the most important ques
ton OF the suffragists is the assertion
that there would be a great gain mad'
in temperance laws and reforms /
women had the ballot. While Mrs
Crannell admired the women who wer,
working for temperance she could no
feel that the ballot would bring an,
relief in that direction. She referred
to this situation in Colorado, where tn
women have full and free use of th,
bsllot. In 1892, in Colorado out of
presidential vote of 3,843 the men cas-
1853 votes for the prohibition candi
date. In 1896, when the womsn tirs
voted, 189, al votes were cast for tn
J president, and only 17l7 votes wer