The Washington herald., 1915-08-23
WHEN WE'RE CHALLENGED.

against woman's suffrage
will you kindly enumerate," con-
tinues the reader, clearly and dis
tinctly any or all of the very good
arguments against woman's suffrage.
Your editorials usually seem to de-
fend the suffrage position though
you have denied being one of US.
"If there are anti-suffrage argu-
ments at all that will hold water
u l, for one, would like to
know what they are. Theories alone
will not do"
1t would be cowardly, indeed, to
refuse this challenge, but first we
beg to digress.
In almost every question of politi-
cal, social or economic interest there
are two sides to the argument. If
there were not, the question would
mo longer be a question. 1t would
be one of those things that we do
not take time to talk about. No one
discusses the advisability for human
beings of walking on two feet and
there are no organizations establish
ed to dissuade folk from going on all
fours, simply because there are no
two sides to the question. 1t is one
of those things that we take for
granted.
If you are a believer in evolution,
you may conceive of time, however,
when men were parting company
with their lower relatives of the
primate class, when the question was
open to discussion; and, if there had
been organizations in those days, no
doubt, there would have been long
winded arguments on the question Of
walking on four limbs or two. There
would have been some individuals, as
there are today, who would naturally
cling to the old order, and some who
would advise the two-legged mode of
progress, even before one could be
sure of attempting it without losing
ones balance. OF course, when we
all became so highly evolved that
every one naturally took to the one
time, new-fangled erect posture, the
organizations just naturally went out
of business. And, of cource, if wom-
an suffrage does become universal in
the United States-if it is really one
step forward in the evolution of the
race-thcn there will be day when
there are no longer any suffrage or
CARNATIONS, and when the suffragist
is something that we can but dim
ly remember. And, of course, there
will be some of us who won't be
sorry about that either.
To admit arguments opposed to
any question docs not in any way
admit that the opposed view is in the
right. To admit that there are ten
good arguments against woman suf-
frage-all very good and practical
does not deny the fact that there
may be a hundred reasons why wom-
en- should have the vote If the hun
bred and ten reasons were all in
favor of the suffrage, there would
obviously be no suffrage question,
no anti-suffrage organizations, and |
the question would not be one of
the most momentous that the coun
try has faced since the civil war.
The most enthusiastic abolitionist
if he were fair-minded and of the
logical mode of thought-admittcd
that there were advantages in the
system which he opposed. There
were many. good arguments in its
favor. He insisted, however, that
these advantages were diminishing all
the time: that they were for minor
ity and were far outweighed by the
Any fair-mindcd observer of this
exceedingly interesting question of
woman's suffrage must admit that in
certain places, in certain localities,
the immediate results of the grant
ing of the ballot have not shown
good results. 1t has met
with the natural obstacles that would
meet any new. institution, no matter
how good. Those who oppose the
suffrage grasp these instances. They
are arguments, and taken alone they
are good arguments. The suffragist
of logical frame of mind will not
spend her time in denying them, but
in meeting them with sufficient argu-
ments on the other side of the ques-
lion to outweigh them.
But we must not evade the cha1-
|enge: What are the very good ar
yuments against woman suffrage?"
First-and we believe this is back
ed by Judge Observation-Disclosures
is twenty years ahead Of Colorado
in regard to remedial legislation and
statutes for women and children.
Colorado also has the most savage
hefu,eeo rao;ta1 aud tahorI