The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1911-06-25
Mrs. Henson
and Sufffr age
BY GRACE VERNON.

i i. . +. i, Z
The announcement in Sundays
Times Dispatch Of June Is shat Mrs.
Nellie Parker Henson purposes writ
Ing series of articles against equal
suffrage" is cause for surprise among
the readers Of her denunciations OF
women who neglect their homes and
families long enough 10 cast a vote.
One is constrained TO wonder how she
can reconcile her protested sentiments
OH that subject to such consumption
prepare lion of articles with which she
intends. single handed TO crush the
suffrage movement in Virginia. She
promises 10 give statistics. showing
that no good. and. indeed. harm, has
been done where women are allowed
10 vote" Just what she means by
statistics" the future will show. Al
least. let us hope they Will be more
reliable than are some of the authori-
eies she quotes; for instance, James
81 Buckley. Senator Hoar, Herbert
Spencer, Mirabcau and others, a few
months ago, Robert Vending. in his
livered in this city, voiced the opinion
OF modern advanced thought when he
denominated the philosophy of Buckley
and of Spencer as being. in many
points. discredited and out of date.
Against Buckley and his WORKOUT
theories, against Spencer and his mis-
taken ideas: against Mirabeau. TO
whom life of dissipation and debauch
had made woman being valued chief
~ for her power of contributing to the
pleasure of man-against these the
Euffragist can quote Plato, Aristotle.
Seneca, Voltaire. Huxley, Abraham
Lincoln John Stuart Mill. Charles
Sumner, Lord Brougham. Longfellow.
Charles Kingsley Henry Ward
Beecher, John Quincy Adams, Wendell
Phillips, Ralph Waldo Emerson. and
a host of others. a few of the present
day advocates of equal suffrage in
clide Theodore Roosevelt William
II. Taft, John Mitchell, Jane Adams.
w. Dean iowells. LION g.. Tyler. John
Dewey. Lincoln Steffens. Luther Bur
bank. Judge Lindsey. of Denver; Rabbi
Wise. OF New York; Thomas B: Reed.
Theodore Parker. Israel Zanswill, etc
II the ti-suffragists would not
modern scientific discovery and
achievement upon philosophic thought;
if they would not cling SO tenaciously
to the past. it would be less hope
What most of them really need is-to
devote the time they spend in
l"argufyins" to a study OF biology,
sociology, scientific history, and some
other things apparently unfamiliar to
them. That would be more difficult
than their usual method OF rehashing
bolstering them up with statements
quoted from some convenient hand
book of anti-suffra ge, such as DR..
Buckley's book. from which Mrs. Hen
sons quotations are taken. 1t would,
however. enlighten these "blind leaders
of the blind and would insure them
against making the measurements that
(perhaps innocently) distinguish their
OF last Sundays letter. She quotes
Senator Hoar as saying that suffrage
IS "a scheme to change relation that
has existed from the foundations of
n Snt in nm nd do
livered in Amherst, Mass. Septeinber
% 1891. Ar. Hoar enphaticaliy de-
clared for equal suffrage. He saio:
Elf the State is to use its forces TO
courts the horrors of war; If educa-
ton. justice. science. art. charity. the
promotion OF commerce and manufac-
ture, the healing of diseases, the pro-
cnce for the individual soul. he func-
lion TO which It's great forces are
10 be devoted in the future. then it IS
indispensable that woman should have
share" Again, he said; There is
not thoughtful opponent of woma
suffrage TO be found, who is not
obliged to deny the doctrines affirmed
So much for Mr.. Hoar as an anti
Suifragist.
Fl Mrs. Henson quotes NJ. ostrogorski
to show that the French women dur
ing tne ltGlSn OIL Il error OlSSrdceQ
themselves BY their excuses and
proved themselves unfit for share in
political affairs. The student OF
history knows that Ostrogorski's de-
scription applies only 10 the lowest
classes OF the French. TO those made
desperate and abnormally vicious by
misery and starvation: and that the
women of these classes were fully
by the men
stin quoting from her letter, when
the French women refused to pay
taxes, unless admitted to the franchise.
the consul de prefecture replied in
what the lady considers "a most con-
elusive argument AGAINST women cry
ing no taxation without representa-
Hion-' y. His assertions in brief We're
that. ta@pa!ing does not necessarily
give one political rights which can be
bestowed only through law; that no
law (French) confers political rights
upon women. and that without these
government; that the Constitution OF
iS4S excluded women from the right
OF suffrage TO get an argument out
of this, Mrs Honson should have told
us why taXpaying does not entitle one
10 political rights. all other qualihca-
lions (save that of SEX being salts
factory. She should have established
the justice of the French law in with
holding rights from women. But why
should the intolerance and narrownesS
of the past be binding on the pres
cnt? In this progressive age. we
should be able TO reason out things for
ourselves. The anti-suffragist makes
the mistake of trying to model the
present according to old fashions and
ideals.
AS to equal suffrage in England and
in other countries. Mrs. Henson is
aamentably misintormed Doubtless
that is because of the anti-sunrnge
1ife-preserver sort of tendency to bark
back to the past. rather than to keep
in step with the march Of progress.
When she cites the denial of the Eng
lsh courts in 1888 and in 1867 10 the
appeals OF the suffragists she should
also mention other things characteris-
tic Of the time when men thought
- woman. a spaniel. and a walnut
The more you beat EN-. the better
they be-: