The Washington herald., 1915-01-10
ANTS laugh At
POLITICAL right
DR.. Shaw Said Shed Be for
Suffrage If the Women
! Wrong.
u. S. GOVERNS RIGHTS
Mrs. White Contends Women Should
! Not Vote Because They Are
/ Home-Makers.
u. S. GOVERNS RIGHTS
ny MRS. GEORGE p. WHITE.

Association OHUScl 10 Woman suffrage.
I would bc for suffrage for my sex il
every woman voted wrong" This. Of
course. is the attitude Of your average
votes for women enthusiast. but more
over. it is the latest announced belief
Of pr. Anna Howard Shaw, the president
Of the National American Woman Suf-
fracc Association. or course, il is quite
likely that last week was not the first
time DIR. Shaw made this candid declara-
tion-but it is the first time the writer
has gotten il.
Dr. Shaw believes that women have an
''unalIenable right" to vote, no matter
what happens, and consequently, she Is
for the exercise of the sO-called right,
even If every woman voted wrong" or
in other words. against the principles Of
good government and morality.
"What Is a Right"
Dr. Shaw. however. seems to be hope
leSsly wrong about her rights OF women
, to vOte-Tight or wrong. Her epigram.
. considered superfCially, is such daring
assertion that at first sight We are apt
to overlook the fact that when analyZed,
her plea is most cOnvincingly answered
by itself. First. what is a right This
dictionary is Illuminating on this point.
! That which is true, just, straight, MOI
erroneous or wrong, in accordance with
duty. equitable. In social and political
, affairs, that is right which is consonant
with the laws and customs of u country.
\ right in any valuable sense can only
be that which the law secures to its
I poSsessor by requiring others to respect
| it and abstain from its violation"
An 'unalienable right" then, must not
only he all these in reference to being
! just, equita Bile. etc, but it must, in addi-
| ton. be right that cannot be con
| veycd, sold or made over to another"
! Unhappily, this ''uualienablc right claim
cannot he applied to the exercise Of the
franchise by the widest flights of femin-
ISt imagination. Our rights in social
and political affairs must he 'cOnso-
/ nant with the laws and customs OF
/ country" In the Constitution, various
. rights are thus conferred on the people
/ free speech. the exercise Of religion, the
right to petition. to bear arms, security
from unreasonable search and seizure,
/ trial rights and civil rights are all well
defined in articles / to y Of our Federal
Constitution. In article Nv of the COnsti-
4 tutiOnal Z. -Ieudments, the right of cit
/ zens to vote. originally defined in article
/ l Of the Constitution, as depending on
/ the qualifications requisite for electors
! of the H.,. ..uInerOus branch of the State
/ legislature was made undcniabIe by
J
account of race, color, or previous cOndI-
/ ton of serviture'
All Political Rights AIienabIe.
Thus, We see both according to the
dictionary and the Constitution, the laws
of the land determine in the prescribed
manner the qualifications for voting.
There is no such thing as an "unalien-
able political right Practically every
right in the category is ''aIienable" for
just cause, even those elemental human
rights to life, liberty and the pursuit
of happiness" go no further than to the
point where they conflict with the rights
Of others, or of society. How women
can have an 'unalienable" political right
that has never been given TO men. we
cannot understand. but how DR.. Shaw
can believe they have the right be
sides to vote wrong eclipses anything we
have ever heard on suffrage,
1t is almost as darinEly defiant Of com
mon sense as the assertion by another
suffragist last week that an anti pamph-
let to Congress contained arguments
but no reasOns-in opposition to woman
suffrage" This beautiful distinction was
drawn. it seems. also without the assist
anCe Of the dictionary, as the latter de-
fines an argument as "a reason offered
for or against a proposition" and how
the anti writer managed to fill her
pamphlet with arguments and still gave
no reasons VIC cannot guess.
Reckless, Sensational Campaigns.
Yes, | thoroughly agree with the reader
that all this is an academic discussion
Of nonscnse-but it is the kind of non
sense that some persons will pass as
hrillanCe unless its true nature Is point |
ed out T." suftragists win most of their |
recruits by just such nOnsenscal cpl !
grams and slogans
The sober student. whether man or |
woman. cannot be carried away with |
statements he or she realizes conflict |
with common sense. hut a certain num- |
bcr of followers always can he found |
guIIibIe enough to believe and repeat |
these suffrage sophistries.
Your suffragist advances no reasons" |
why women should vOte-instead she de- |
pends on sensationalism and repetition to |
convince you of her ''unalienable rights |
which the Constitution and the Supreme |
Court both deny she has.
Why Women shouldn't Vote.
Why. then, shouldn't women vote? |
Well, first of all. because they are women |
no. they never did argue against man.
hood suffrage just the same" nOtwith-
standing wfat the suffragist orator tells
you. This is the greatest of all reasons ]
why women shouldn't vote-because they |
are women. OF course they are people"
and human beings and citizens just |
as much as the men are, but first of all, |
thcv are women.
Well. what has that got to do with It
lie. the sUffragists tell you. Miss Anna
Martin, president of the Nevada Equal
Suffrage Association, told President Will
son after the last election: The ref
srendum campaigns are killing our work
ers.' In other words, strenuous political
campaigns at the polls are acknowledged
by the suffragists-the most advanced |
type OF the new woman'-as simply be-
yond their physical strength. They want
vote-getting made easy for them. on the
grounds that as women. il is too hard
for them to go out into active political
competition with men. But when the
antis say this, then, is one of the best
rea sors in the world why women should
not re thrown into such strenuous cam
paigns at every election, the suffragists
reply: "Oh, no; because we wouldn't
have to vote IL We didn't want to-we'd
have the same right as a man to shirk
the duties of citizenship" One of them
was told at the last Senate hearing that
such a principle was "subversive of
Democratic government" but 1t goes on
Just the same. Suffragists want their
"unalienable right"-which logically can
not be conveyed to them by its own
terms and Iimitstions-whether they use
it or not, right OF wrong. This Is exactly
the sort of electorate We do not want L
added to an already too Indifferent class 4