The Montgomery advertiser., 1909-01-26
master nor abolitionist would have listened to such suggestion.

master nor 4Uotitlount Wouiu naNc listened to such suggestion. Z We have called MT. Tafts' position on this question. sidestepping 1t; 1t Is. in fact, somethinsa more; 1t Is a straddle. To say he will favor suf- frage for women as soon as major ity of them express a desire for it, Is equivalent to denying them some- thing he thinks they ought to have. The point overlooked by him is this: persons rights ought not to be sub ject to tyrannical majority. If 1t is right that women should vote, then, if only one woman desires the ballot she should have it."F
 Plainly the question of woman suf- frage is loaded. so far as public men and politicians are concerned. and they handle 1t as gingerly as they would a can of dynamite. Whatever opinions any one may have on the that it is growig both in this and foreign countries. The demonstrations made in London not many weeks ago when the streets were blocked, the houses of Lords and Commons virtual. Iy stopped, shows what it means in Great Britain. and though the result may not be all that the suffragettei want and demand. the effect has been to put this among the live questions oi the day.
 It woul be wide mistake to be- lieve that this English demonstration was confined to what we may call the lower classes of English society. fol that was not the case. Some of tn, most prominent women of the nation among them many of the nobility were equally prominent in this move. ment. The Britishers are usually looked on as phlegmatic people, not given to excitement and public dis. plays. but this does not apply to the female portion of the population, oi else the subject was one that appealed to them with irresistible force t
 In America we have had many evi. dences in late years of the strength and growth of this sentiment W, may speak of It's prominent and az. gressive advocates as strong minded women" if we like, but that does not change the fact that they bid fair ts become a power in the land, and that Is why the politicians are so gingerl, in dealing with their demands. Ts take up their cause openly and boldly may be dangerous and to squarely op pose it might be equally so; henc, the disposition to stradde, or "spli the difference" as we might say.
 The truth seems to be, as The Glob, further remarks, that mans frs ideaK was that of a large-limbed, TO bust matron. necessary as his agricul tural helpmeet. The physique wal everything. even the face being re- garded as of secondary importance | 1DtD A1OhCIAC WOAHdH .WdS III bthIic QG posed to make room for the indolen sylph of perpetual tutelage. The chiv alric or romantic ideal was tender 1T feelings. delicate of limb and slight o figure. her waist attentuated to a de gree which suggested quick transi ton into a phantom. Homeric woner meant Homeric men; lackadalsica ladies meant masculine mollycoddles
 To-day a great change is coming over the spirit of mans ideal of tn, feminine. It is gradually approximat ing a woman suited to his presen l needs, one in which companionship not servility nor adoration, predomi mates. This ideal may soon be- devel oped far enough to admit within iti outlines the woman who would hell carry on the great work of govern ment."
 Will the ideal woman of the futur, be one who will bear with man al equal share in the burdens and re responsibilities of government, instead of being "the queen of the home, as was once considered her prope place? And if the former, will 1t, O will 1t not. have a deterioratIng eff feet on humanity at large? These arr questions that both publiclsts and hu manitarians are asking themselves and which astute public men are try ing to dodge. When a man like Taf straddles a question it is plain tha sr