The sun., 1909-11-27
MRS. BELMONT DISDAINFUL
DIR PARKHURST IN DOTAGE OR
AFTER NOTORIETY. SEE SAYS.

4. tng II had-WOInen Make Comment
When Mrs. o. H. p. Belmont was asked
yesterday afternoon to answer in detail
some of the arguments advanced by
DR.. Parkhurst against woman suffrage
IN his Thanksgiving sermon she replied
that II really wasn't worth the trouble.
Il am giving all my time to the work
for woman suffrage she said. -and more
especially just now to the cause OF the
wage earning woman. and have no time
10 waste on a man who shows by bis
remarks that either he is In his dotage
or else is making another of his bids
Tor notoriety.'
DIR. Frank II. Giddings. professor of
sociology In Columbia University. who
admits that he doesn't believe in votes
for women, at least not now. had some
thing to say. however. about DIR. Park
hurct's knowledge OF science.
women are not at their present sta ge
a development fitted for the ballot. >
aald DR.. Giddings. Under no Giro UNI
stances would il be physically possible
for them to vote in New York city at this
stage of the game There isn't space
enough. 1t would take years to teach
our feminine population to stand properly
In line at the polls
81 want right here. however, he con-
/, tnned. -to express my sympathy for that
great crowd of silent women in whose
interest the clergyman scathing denun-
citation Of the suffragists was professedy
uttered. Ii would be well. l think. for
the antis to pray TO be delivered from
their friend.
II the arguments that he puts forth
are the only ones that can he urged against
giving the ballot to women ii is certainly
hall up with tho silent sisterhood. There
-ts really nothing for them to do but To-
continue to remain silent while the mill
(, tAnt and would lie masculine members
OF their sex march unmolested TO their
goal
Ss-In the first place. DR.. Parkhurst
deduces from his knowledge OF biology.
which I do not OF course wish to call
in question. that the finer the type Of
p human civilization the more widely apart
imam and woman will become in all that
frelates to the ingredients of their per-
fnonAlity and therefore to their interests
fand to their respective spheres OF service
It might perhaps be urged by an ultra
{ hyperortical person that il is a long leap
from his premise to his conclusion. but
waving any such trifiing consideration
should really like to have DR.. Psrkhurst
! explain just why. in the event OF man
Z and woman continuing to differentiate
until they get as far apart as heat and
= GOLD or black and white. there is any
basis for the assumption that because
Z a this excessive difference the prerogative
or the privilege or the duty Of voting will
beiong exclusively to the male sex.
\ AT present we have not evoluted to
the stage of differentiation suggested
> by DR.. Parkhurst Men and women still
possess many customs. habits. weak
nesses. faults and even virtues in COM
. mon.
we may never reach the point to which
Ne 10 fondly looks forward. There is
always q limit to evolution of any kind
except in the realm OF pure theory
Admitting. however, the possibility OF
- much more advanced stage of differ
entiatiOn between the sexes than has
s yet been conceived ex cept by Dr. Park
hurst. might not some ardent believer
IN woman suffrage argue that the more
W omen differed from men the less would
men be able to understand the needs Of
woman and the less able would they lie
70 legislate adequately for them7
some OF the fanatics might even go so
fnr as to say that any such difference as
Dr.. Parkhurst imagines would logically
nocessitate a full and free expression
10 politics OF the ideas OF both types.
When men were all pretty much alike in
their aims and pursuits. as they were
In the stone age, 1t never occurred to any
OF them to vote.
1T is really because OF the dinerentia-
+, ton OF classes among men that republics
have prospered. The farmer would hate
70 have the artisan vote for him and the
factory worker wouldn't want to be rep
resented by the physician or the lawyer.
III men were all OF the same type il would
be necessary only for Dr. PaIkhurst
10 vote. No. the true method OF argu-
| ,nent for the friend OF the antis to have
4 followed on this occasion would have
been 10 play up the points OF similarity
between the sexes and to minimize the
differences.
Further along in the sermon there il a
somewhat violent attack upon what the
lpreacher denominates successfully as
q movement, an eruption and a rsvolu-
tion. because of the alleged fact that at
least two Of the women who sat on the
platform At O recent mass meeting held
In the interest OF suffrage had been di-
voroed and remarked. ] do not of course
wiAh to go into any discussion OF the
for each individual TO decide for himself
st might be remarke cd, however, that
n DR.. Parkhurst believes that any move
nont or revolution should be discredited
shifted their matrimonial partners in
accordance with the laws Of the country
In which they live, the Official leader
OF Professionalism in England was married
six times Two OF his wives he divorced
and two he beheaded In order to 60 through
the marriage ceremony with ladies VINO
chAnced 20 appeal more potently at the
moment to his ficlkle fancy.
Whether divorce il personally pleas
ing to DIR. Parkhurst or odious. IL is per-
mifted under certain conditions accord
ing TO the law of New York State. This
law was made and is interpreted and
executed by men. who DIR. Parkhurst
says are the natural rulers and protec-
tors OF woman. Is il logical then for
DIR. Parkhplrst to discredit a concerted
effort on the part OF women to gain a
voice in politics because some OF the
leaders Of the movement have chosen
TO avail themselves OF this law?
SIS 1t in accordance with the chivalry
OF which he bosts to make direct attack
upon a woman because she. az he ex-
presses it. belongs to the migratory sis
terhood?
DIR. Parkhurst says he knows what
masculine gallantry means. L thought