The Pulaskian., 1915-04-16

gives one mans view l know a great many men, and men of intelligence. who are heartily in favor of woman's suffrage.
 The arguments used against suffrage are the same used 50 years ago against college education for women. Every 4 objection raised has been refuted by the states that have suffrage, and the womanhood has not lost, but gained in that refinement which the antis lay so much stress upon. From has developed a practical, clear VI stoned woman, whose duties and in- stincts of womanhood are not shackled and limited by getting no further than the desire to do her part, but success. fully carried out for the good of Wo- men and children, and to the ultimate l hetterment of the human race.
 It is not that we think man does not care or want to give us the legislation that we need. but that he is too busy, and has not the time. He is so en- crossed with the commercial side O. l tllG JildJ llO idi1O bC SoOI ceAO IO IAiO woman's wants. Women are asking for the domestic part of legislation It is her particular sphere in life, and as you well know everything from the cradle to the grave is governed by politics--the home we live in, the food stutfs we eat. the water and milk we drink, the education of our children, their surroundings and environment.
 Voting has not always been pecu- liarity of the male sex. It has only been within the 100 years since all men were enfranchised. It was prop erty right in Colonial days, which both sexes exercised, that had the re- quired amount of taxable property.
 There is a story to the effect that certain man in Philadelphia had a small garden patch from which he 1 sold vegetables to the residents Of that city. Later he bought donkey, this bringing him into the tax class, enabling him to vote. Now, this little donkey was not like the proverbiaI 1 long-Iiyed one, and soon died and dis enfranchised the man. It has been the subject for discussion ever since as to which really voted-the man or the donkey.
 Women with taxable property could vote-until they married. The law then endowed the husband with all of 1 Ter property, and thus disenfranchis- ed the woman. In a number of states the law endowing the man at marriage with the womans property is still .tourishing, but not in a suffrage state.
 In speaking of the working woman, it is an undoubted fact that suffrage has helped them. They have learned what the laboring man found before they were enfranchised-tha no class can impartially or successfully legis- late for another, and man has done whatever the ruling class has done, discriminated against the one who has no voice in the making of the laws. Woman needs the ballot to regulate the sanitary conditions under which she works, for working hours and wages she earns. She needs the vote, l power it gives her in seeing that these laws are enforced. What do you think of the justice of the law that permits the man to collect his wife's wages, and to spend them as he pleases? Yet. such a law is written on the statute books of some of our most progressive states-New York for an example. Wo- men are doing the same work as mar, for less, but are aoing it better, or else she would not occupy the positions that she now holds.
 You recite one case in Washington, D. C., non-suffrage state, of a man, who, earning $7 per week, was impris- aned for not giving $2 per week to his wealthy wife. 1 can tell you Of thousands of cases of deserted wives who are struggling on less than S7 week, supporting themselves and theil husbands children. As to the six men of a suffrage state who sued and obtained divorces on the grounds of non-sup- port, 1 rejoice that there are six work l ing women who refuse to support six | oOiO-OOdtCo l1tCll, cilto SllCSSQ u lSCi II l that there are six such absolutely worthless men in the United States. never would have believed it. Yet, this case may be used as a suffrage argu- nent for those men who would rest
 Every woman is entitled to her opinion, as much as a man to his There have been cases of dissension and divorce because husband and wife could not agree as to religion, dress etc, but there is no record of case ] Of divorce in any suffrage state be- cause the husband and wife could net agree as to party candidate In fact, statistics show that the rate of divorce is less in suffrage states than in non- suffrage.