The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1915-09-16
AN ANTS POINT OF VIEW"
Answering the Question: Why Are
There Woman S%uffragists?

To II EDITOR Of THE SuN-Sir: or
all the replies of woman s~uffragists to
the objections OF their opponents. the
assertion that women who do not wish
to vote need not do SO evinces the
most pitiful failure to grasp the argu-
ments OF anti-suTragists.
Persons who offer this gem OF irrele-
want retort succeed only In recording
themselves as wholly incapable of rising
above purely personal questions of in
divldual preference to a perception OF
principles. They declare themselves
unable to comprehend the true nature of
the problem at issue. Their gaze Is
fixed so exclusively on the vote itself
that they are likely to go down to their
graves without having glimpsed even
vaguely the stern reality of which the
vote is merely the symbol.
To anti-suffragists the personal pref
erences of individual men or women
for or against voting have nothing
whatever to do with the question OF a
claim to the franchise. They are con-
WINGED hat eve IL 90 per cent. OF the
women desired to vote 1t would be
still unwise to extend to them the privi-
lege. They have arrived at an intell!-
gent understanding of the fact. proved
repeatedly during tie sa%nguinary course
- AioNoi , . tHdl pitt Dul u bONtIl iit
by those competent to back up their
decisions by force whenever necessary
can remain safe, responsible and capa-
Bile of maintaining the nation inviolate
against either internal disruption or
foreign conquest.
In asking why there are women anti
suffragists. In expressing a bowlldcred
puzzlement over the motives of women
who are unwilling to grant the franchise
to those of their number who desire It,
your correspondent who commits that
naivete in THE Sun proclaims n child
Ike ignorance of the entire point Of
view of wiser members Of her sex. The
purpose of the vote. borne constantly
in mind by anti-suffragists, lies hope
lessly beyond the range OF her vision.
She evidently perceives In the suffrage
nothing more important than a toy to
be tossed carclessly to those who cry
for It. n the use to which they may
put II seems to her not ut all a mat
ter for inquiry or concern.
Women OF this intellectual calihre.
above all others, are the most COM
pletely unfit for participation in the
conduct Of government. To permit
them a voice In the affairs of the nation
most certainly would place 1t In the
grave peril through their sheer in
hbiihN " NpIlHTtHflu lildl TIC supreme
responsibility OF maintaining govern
mental security reduces all questions of
personal inclination TO an utter insig-
nincanCe.
AS its proponents assert. woman SUI
frage would confer the franchise on
those women only who wish to vote. And
In this very fact lies one OF the most con-
rincing arguments against IT.. for those
women VINO want the vote are pre-
eminently the ones whose attitude
demonstrates the least understanding
of Its bclligerent responsibility. II IL
were possible to grant the franchise to
the women wTo ms a matter OF inteili-
gent comprehension do not want II
II II were possible 10 Include only
those who realize that tile suffrage
carries with II an obligation with the
q pacity to enforce law and order and
TO defend the nation by force OF arms
In every case Of need II. IN short.
the franchise could he extended solely
TO women Of tho degree OF enlichten-
ment and breadth OF view Of nationally
convinced anti-surraEists, the expert
ment co~nccivably might he undertaken
with some hope Of escape from ma
tional disaster; but assurcdly not
otherwise. FRED
ILAiSFIEID, y. J, September Is.