The Washington herald. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1906-1939, 1914-08-30

per cent Of which has never voted &C
cording to election returns, is 1895, l6s-
or 1l5,S45 fewer than the number of WON.
en- over twenty-one in the single State
of Pennsylvania. Also. the $4,000 suf'
fragists represents only little more thar
one-third of the 10000 American club
women whom they claim as would be
women voters"
Now il woman suffrage appealed tc
club women, business women, industrial
workers. or even to negroes. its total
figures would not be represented by such
pitiable fractions. II only half the num-
Der Of women enfranchised in the nine
suffrage States would indorse the move
ment it would be represented by almost
double the present figure. And yet wom'
an suffrage has been agitated for sixty
five years.
Tried and Found Wanting"
Why don't women want the vote? Why.
after half century OF ''woman's rights
talk, is the Acknowledgement Of women
more vigorously opposed by the women
themselves than il has ever been?
It is mainly because it has been tried
and found wanting. Experience in suf-
frage States has checkmated the senti-
mental appeals and academic theories
that used to be chief arguments OF SUI
frage orators. .
The present surfragists continue to
speak Of when women get the vote" and
still repeat some of the old promises.
trying to convince politicians that it will
pay to help the "woman's party"
Before 1910 woman suffrage was mere
~ a national curiosity. exhibited in the
four Western States of Colorado. Utah.
Idaho and Wyoming each Of which is
twice as large in area as Pennsylvania,
and all Of which have fewer inhabitants
than Philadelphia alone
Women were enfranchised in these
sparsely settled States on waves" Of
political intrigue in order to exalt Nor
monism and populism ny adding an emo
tional and easily controlled element to
the electorate.
From 1910 to 1912 woman suffrage was
slipped through the five States OF
California. Oregon. Arizona. Washing
ton. and Kansas on waves Of insurgency
in the old political parties. the suf-
fragist writer's admit. In 1912. the Col
onel htched his Progressive wagon to
the star Of suffragism, which gave It a
new impetus.
But since then ii has been losing
movement. as any candid examination
of the facts will prove
Threaten Wilson with Defeat.
Just before the last Presidential cleo
ton. the suffragists became so elated at
their seeming success that they prac-
tically ordered the Democratic candidate,
President Wilson. to indorse their move
ment under pain OF being defeated.
Though the then governor OF New Jer-
sey was asked in several letters to ap-
prove the votes for women propa-
Eanda, he paid no attention whatever
TO the demands or threats.
The woman's party was going to de-
feat him-just as 1t plans to defeat can
didates now who are manly enough to
resist sufTragist threats.
The newspapers in October, 1912. were
full of what the suffragists intended to
do for Roosevelt and against Wilson,
just as they are now running suffrage
threats of reprisals against lesser can
didates
But Wilson became President. and Col
Roosevelt is rather farther away from
the White House than when he Endorsed
woman suffrage. The colonel carried
only one suffrage State in 1912, just be-
cause the ''woman's party utterly failed
Ito deliver its promised held or hurt.
The women could not be prevailed upon
TO cast the ballot after they got it, and
the few who did vote were entirely I'M
der control Of the dominant male voters.
A similar thing took place last spring
in Chicago. where. with all the encour-
agement. automobiles. money and politi-
cal backing that could be brought to
bear. only one woman in four could be
persuaded 10 cast a ballot. and the
women candidates who expected the ben
eft OF the feminine vote lost in every
instance. while men like "Bathhouse
John" used votes for women and
women bosses" 70 assure their return
to power more easily than ever.
Experience of Candidates.
1t is experiences such as these that
make the present political candidate Of
wide knowledge unwilling to take suf-
fragists seriously when they offer their
help or threaten defeat. The history Of
politics reveals that the candidates who
were most vigorously threatened by the
''woman's party got elected, while
those who have espoused the suffrage
cause" as well as the parties that have
put II in their platforms have generally
gone into oblivion.
Only the weak candidate and the third
or fourth rate party will grasp at the
~ud"S tndt the SuHTaElStS hOl0 out.
Those who are acquainted with the de-
tails Of the suffrage movement are not
nisled by the promises or threats of the
professional agitators whose only pow
er" is to draw the attention and passing
interest Of the average crowd for a
laugh.
The ''woman's party" has never been
able to help anybody, and the mere fact
that II is supposed to. makes the male in !
he States where women vote Indifferent
10 his duties toward women. No man is |
going to bother about trying to protect"
/ woman who claims from the housetops
hat the only protection she needs is the |
ballot Consequently. after women get |
he vote, they can ask for nothing in |
he name Of humanity and womanhood, |
tut must fight for what they get" at
he polls.
And comparative legislation and the /
census figures in the States where women
10 and do not vote, show how effective :