The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1901-03-10
FOR FEMININE READERS
\ PLACE WHERE WOMEN sUFFRA-
eIsTs HAVE BEST OF ARGUMENT.
The Folly of serviie Following of
-InbusfnessIike Women.

There Is Just one point Of law on which
women who p~assionately demand suffrage
and women who ~vehemently oppose it and
women who take no interest whatever In
the dispute come very nearly into agree
ment. and that is that the taxpaying
woman should have a voice in the matter
of taxation, says a writer In the Chicago
Evening Post. Man and woman ~stockhold-
ers are equally consulted by the manage
ment OF the business in which their money
Is invested. There appears no good reason
why both should not be consulted on the
expenditure Of taxes levied equally on all
property holders.
Some time ago, when the new tax law
went into operation, two women-Mrs Mary
Sturges and Mrs. Emmons Blaine-fled the
largest schedules Of personal property in
this city. The remarkable fact was blazoned
all over the United States that these two
we're either the wealthiest or the most
scrupulously honest OF all Chicago citizens.
Whichever supposition was correct. it
would be an argument in favor of giving
them some voice in fnancia matters. Be-
fore and after this incident both were
known as generous, intelligent, public-spir-
tied women; both gave large sums for
charitable and educational purposes. But
the men who cleaned the ashes from their
fgr1aces had more to say than they about
their contribution TO city government. In
New York-nay, all over the country
Helen Gould has an enviable reputation
for executive ability and benevolence in
using her vast fortune. But any beggar
10 whom she gives aims has more power
10 decide some questions concerning that
fortune than the owner OF IL. As has been
said Of another woman, "She pays taxes TO
have her street kept clean and is obliged
also to pay a private individual the year
around for the same purpose, because or
the neglect OF the street-cleaning depart
ment. She pays taxes to have the liquor
laws enforced, and she can look out of her
'front.' door and see them violated daily
These may be exceptional ~taXpaying
women Take more ordinary ones. Many
Chicagoans must remember some
years ago was Known as the South Park
steal" 1t baItkrupted a large number OF
women who owned lots at that end of the
city. They were all women OF small means
teachers and others who had saved their
slender earnings so that in their old age
they should not come upon the county
widows and orphans whose male protectors
believed IN the citys future and had made
as good provision for their dear ones as
possible in b~equeathing them quarter Sec
tions in the new subdivision. What hap
psned? AT a meeting Of the man property
holders II was decided that a park would
increase the value OF adjoining property in
TIE tuus dlluOlSu 1OI SOue years the ILL.,
provements would necessitate extremely
high taxation. The plan spelled riches to
the large but destruction TO the small land
holders, the latter being chiefly women who
had no vote on the question. Taxes were
raised enormously. Only the wealthy could
afford TO pay them. Lot after lot was sold
for taxes. 1t was virtual confiscation.
The question OF letting all women vote
or all questions may be debatable, but the
question of letting all taxpayers vote for
all officers concerned with taxation hardly
seems to have two sides. In Illinois these
are what are called township oficers-as-
SCISSOR, collector, supervisor, town clerk and
highway cOmmissioner-and a bill for CIV
ing women township suffrage has once
passed the State Senate. Women have this
suffrage in many of our States. Last year
a similar bill in New York passed the AS
sembly by unanimous vote, and failed in
the Senate for lack of the constitutional
majority OF twenty-six, tw~enty-three vot-
ing for and nineteen against. Perhaps ILL.,
nois will pass her measure this year, and
for once get ahead of the East in reform
legislation.