Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1915-02-03
a Mistaken Friend.


We had received and put in type
long letter from an esteemed friend OF
the Journal, in opposition to equal
suffrage. 1t was ready for this issue
and in answer to it we had written
the following reply, to be run in con-
rection with the letter. Late Tues
an urgent request from the writer
that her letter should not be pup
ushed. We have withdrawn the let
ter but here Is what we said about
it:
In another column we publish a
letter from a Gardiner lady setting
forth her reasons for opposing woman
suffrage We welcome the opportun-
ity to take up with such intelligent
ANTS" as is our friend some II
the most important points of this
great question. We are prompt to
concede the weight of her logic. and
we count confidently upon the same
fairness from her.
We understand we'll the dangers OF
enfranchising the thousands Of char
acterless and ignorant women of this
country: phase Of political posi-
bilities so forcefully impressed upon
any thinking person who has ever
visited the red light section Of any
large city. We admit at the star.
that woman is human, that she is
burdened by the same passions, and
falls before the same temptations a.
her brother. We grant the writer
or any other opponent Of equal
suffrage that the devil in politics IS
liable to make trouble By invoking
the aid Of the worst element Of the
female vote, if women are granted
full suffrage.
But, as an offset. we submit a few
facts. This letter writer will not deny
the accepted verdict that the per-
centage of intelligent and honorab:y
Of the opposite sex. She cannot dis
pute that the first and foremost. the
most persevering, unfinching ana
loyal in all moral uplift, Christian
service. works Of love, in His foot
steps, are the representatives of her
sex. Some of the greatest of these do
not wish to vote, but they do not
deny the justice Of the claim that wo
man should have as much right to a
voice in the laws which dominate the
fortunes Of themselves and their chill
dren as has the man.
Let us consider it from this wo-
mans visit to the North End OF
Boston. What did she or her infor-
mant see there? If she saw one dis
solute woman she saw three disso-
lutte men. If she saw one ignorant
female representative who coula
never vote intelligentiy, she saw
about five representatives of the gut
ter who not only do not know but
will never, SO long as the booze traf-
flc lasts, have any desire to know, o.
to do better than to SELL then
franchise to the highest bidder.
Would this writer prefer to have
the fortunes of herself and her
posterity under the rule Of such as
these men, or that Of her own prac-
teal grasp of affairs. her God given
intuition for high purpose, and her
love of Christian justice?
We claim, and with every basis for
our premise, that the proportion OF
good and intelligent women is vastly
greater than that Of good and intell.-
gent men. We claim that the gen.
Grafton Of young men and young wo-
men just coming upon the stage o.
active social, industrial and political
life contains a balance of superiority
on its feminine side. We very muca
doubt if our friend will attempt to-
refute that claim.
And right here lies the chief point
for consideration-We believe that
more of these young women demand
the justice Of the ballot than is
represented among the young men
who can and will use it wisely and
honestly. Admitting that, can she
consistently claim that granting the
ballot to that class of women who
wish to exercise the right of intelli-
gent citizenship is not a step forward
in moral and political affairs?
Our friend asserts that "once
the step is taken" we cannot go back;
yet in the next sentence she demands
a reduction of present franchise. That
is a far greater problem. AS she
says. it cannot be done. We can in a
measure counteract the evil Of the