The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1913-03-07
A LETTER ON SUFFRAGE.
In the Line of Comment Rather Than
 Argument

speeches. and am, I think, familiar with all their principal arguments. and there is one remark which particular ly dwells in my mind, have heard it so often, especially from the lips of ene very active suffragist leader. The words are not always the same but, l give the exact sense-''I understand that some of you are not suffragists, and if that is so I feel sure it must be because you haven't really thought about it-again and again, not only In the speeches of this particular worker, though she insists on the point more than others have heard. but from them all, in one set of words or another, this is the gist sof the cry-sIf you are not sufragfst 1t is because you haven't considered the matter.H This seems to me an odd saying, for, from the point of view of
 middle-aged anti-suffragist one of the striking points about the average suffragist is the little thought given to and required for, a very import ant question, before becoming an ardent supporters of the suffrage cause. T say required because T. know
 that in many Instances a woman will say 'sI. have really never thought oIi the subject, am on the fence''-and,
 perhaps three months later she is en-1 rolled as a mem Der of the suffrage body, and is very likely, speaking in support of their propaganda.
 Whatever our opinions may be on the subject of granting the franchise to women, we must all admit that it is a very great question. Even those
 men and women who find it hard to meet it with patience, or to admit
 that there really is such a question, must agree that such revolutionary change as granting full suffrage to women will of necessity involve grave
 issues which must be faced, and yet.
 a very large number of suffra gists and any anti-suffragists also, on
 their own admission will be found never toz5have thought much about the matter,. previous to the agitation begun and fostered during the past two or three years.
 should suppose, judging by my self, that. any intelligent thinking
 woman would have been considering this question for years. Surely the anomalies and inconsisten cies, the compromises and seming unfairnesses
 of our complicated civilization must have made some impression on the
 mind of even the average woman @ The demand for suffrage is not a
 new thing and the claim of the i suffra gtsts, that matters are so ehang-l make woman suffIaFe a more burning
 issue thar ir was ireFerc i= many
 not thought to be t..Ff-
 should su 2f lr men
 With a C1Ie-:- az9 s'f7f s SDy11 she
 narrowe:t l.ersonS7 .restz cen those women who tte ahernseI 7es for the center Of al tl13'es. must haze
 given some thought to the question,
 whether or not 1t was well that in
 common phrase women should vote. should suppose that the self -centered
 woman would have faced the problem
 from the selfish point of view" is it.
 going to do me any good if I vote ?''--
 and I should suppose that the broad minded woman would have asked the question: "Is it best, not for me only or for women only. but is it best for
 the country, men, women and children that women should have the frafl-
 chise ?" It is surprising how few Wo- men have asked the question, pom dered over and decided on il independ- ently, and that seems to me one sound argument against the extension of the
 franchise.
 On both sides are to be seen women of mature age Hooking to hear the
 other women with no better means of
 deciding this question than are at their
 own command, lay down the law to
 them and give them argument for or
 against woman suffrage. Surely every
 woman knows how the United States
 is governed, knows or has every op-#
 portunity. to know the affairs of the
 day, knows her own household prob- lems and her relations toward her fel-s low men and women. What then
 prevents the intelligent, personal con-
 sideratfon of this question by every
 woman for herself I am afraid there is but one answer, that intelligence and by intelligence I do not mean
 good common sense" nor do mean
 exalted mental gifts, mean intel1f-
 gence which I take it is hard to de- fine but lies somewhere between these two thfngs-is a rarer gift than we may like to acknowledge. If I r had felt that the franchise for wo
 men was desirable I should have worked for it years ago, as I was glad to work against it when the question
 came so prominently forward as to seem to need the organization of those opposed to it. The second point that
 has impressed me in the work and speeches of the suffragist is their con Stant branching from the one question actually at issue, which is and is onlys
 eis it expedient ?"-or since the sufra- gists object to this word-t' is it best?' for the good of the country that wo- men should have the franchise.
 It cannot be too strongly insisted on
 that this is the whole question. It isn't what women want or what they think they will do with the vote or Q thousand side issues of social, moral and political reforms. It is solely: Is granting the suffrage to women f0l the best interests of the country. But the suffra gists continually branch aside, telling of the horrible state of things brought about by certain grave social conditions, of the need of the fairgrounds, of the problem of the tln- derpaid working girl, of the question of pure food 1aws-an questions of the very highest importance but en- tirely aside from the question: Is it best that women should have the franchise?
 I had the pleasure not long ago of hearing a speech by prominent suf- fragist It was a pleasure, for she was a woman of far more than aver age intelligence and she spoke agree ably, and I was amazed and delighted also to hear the way in which she