Evening star., 1918-03-24
Woman Voters and Prohibition.
To the Editor OF The Star:

To the Editor OF The Star:
have sufficient confidence in the
fairness of The Evening Star to believe
that when it asks an editorial question
such as that propounded last evening
it will print straight answer, even
II 1t should not happen to agree with
preconceived theories.
The Star asks where women, when
given the vote. have failed to register
their opposition to the saloon.
1t is a fair question, and 1 trust that
you will print a fair answer.
First. In Wyoming, where women
have voted for forty-nine years, which
section of the country.
Second. In California, where women
have voted twice on the question of
prohibition. in 1914 and 1916; where the
official organ of the greatest womens
organization in this country published
iiquor advertisements and pleas for the
defeat of prohibition, and where pro-
Aibition has been defeated by larger
majorities than in any other state
Third. In Chicago, where the wet"
and dry issue caused over 100000
women to register several weeks ago
but where the Chicago Dry Federation
could not even get 150, 900 names, neces-
sary to place the question on the ballot
men qualified to vote in the city of
Chicago. Less than half this number
of women have registered, and the Dry
Federation has not been able to get
even one-quarter as many names as
there are women eligible to vote Did
the majority of the women register to
vote "wetg' 1 have lived in Chica go
for seven years. before and since the
adoption of suffrage for women, and
have seen parade in that city where
$4,000 women marched for the VETS
which is 5000 more women than even
the sunragists have ever been able to
The fact is that suffrage for women.
except in rural communities, actually
strengthens the "wets." There is hard
H(a saloonkeeper or brewery worker
other feminine relative who will vote
wet" while the good ladies of the
w C. T. U neglect to vote. Here is
the concrete proof that this is the case
in large cities.
In 1915 three large cities voted on
prohibition at about the same time,
Boston. Detoit and San Francisco.
Bosson has $4,000 population. Detroit
4s5.0o8 and San Francisco, $4,000 pop
ulation. according to the last census
Boston. with men only voting, defeated
prohibition by $1,000 majority. Detroit.
with men only voting, defeated pro-
hibition by 5000 majority-while San
Francisco. with men and women vot-
ing. defeated prohibition by a majority
of 16,S42 out of total vote of 1886
giving the vets" 1920 and the
''drys only 36.05S votes in city where
there are 14o.s7o women eligible to
vote.
Michigan and California voted on pro-
hibition on the same day. Michigan. a
larger state than California, with a
larger city, adopted prohibition, be-
cause the people of the rural districts
were able to overcome the small wet"
majority in Detroit; but California,
with women voting-with all the aunts,
cousins, sisters and daughters of the
saioonkeepers at the polls. while half
the other women remained at home
defeated prohibition because the rural
districts could not overcome San Fran
ciseo's great majority of $4,000 for the
"wetsr =
In 1917 the city, of Cincinnati. with
men alone voting. polled $4,000 wet
votes and $4,000 dry" votes That ia
1T came within 10000 of the dry" vote
of double suffrage San Francisco, which
has 200, 600 more eligible voters CIeve-
land. a city of 560.o00 population, but
than San Francisco. and 10000 fewer
persons eligible to vote, IL we count
San Francisco's women. polIed 77,555
wet votes and 1885 dry" votes.
That is, Cleveland's total wet" vote,
with men only voting, was 1886 less
than San Francisco's and did not even
equal San Franciscos wet" majority,
while Cleveland's dry" vote exceeded
San Francisco's by over 1900.
The "drys" do not know or consider
these facts and figures, but before the
fight is over they will realize that
their greatest opposition is in the cities
where women vote. where the ..wets''
rdry" women stay home.
q EECS5REBKE21$3E$S.