Year: 1875

| The claim of woman to- the ballot is
based on the ground of natural and in
alienable right. We are fully aware, in
making this statement, how difficult it
is to argue an abstract principle; but n o
reform can be established, until at least
the abstract principle which covers it is
seen and admitted. The discussion of
this question, from woman's side, has of
late been allowed to run into several il
logical side-issues; and the force of the
movement seems to have declined in
consequence. The argumentfo Woman
Suffrage would not be weakened one
iota if it could be shown that every
woman to be enfraHchised belonged to
the class defined by the elegant term of
"Bridget;n it would not be one whit
stronger if it appeared that universal
suffrage would give the ballot to no
woman but a Julia Ward Howe. For
the establishment of natural right has
nothing to do with the character and
attainments of the person who is to be
benefited by it.


When our fathers struck for national
independence, they were moved by a
prophetic impulse to base their claim to
it on a principle so comprehensive that
it held the germ of all personal liberty
and social progress. "All men are Gre
ated equal" This was the most revo-
lutionaTy statement ever thrown into
society, and the invisible force of that
principle is the source of all the agita-
ton that stirs our politics or social af-
fairs to this day. AS a people, we first
accepted that principle in its abstract
form, without adopting it in all of its
applications. 1t made chattel slavery
impossible; but because we denied its
self-evident application, avenging ma
ture exposed to US the horrors of a san
culinary conflict, the wounds of which
it will take long years to heal. Early in
the century came the claim that it be
applied to suffrage: if all men are equal,
all men have an equal voice in deter
mining the character, and shaping the
administration of the political institu-
tiens of society. The claim was resisted,
of course; but Jefferson added to it the
force of his immortal epigram-fIt is
said that man cannot be trusted to gov
ern himself; can he then be trusted to
govern another ?n-and the battle was
won, at least for white male humanity.
Woman's right to vote has exactly the
same basis. Men have no more right
to vote than women.


| All this is very trite. But it is not so
trite that it does not need to be repeated.
1t was only last summer, by newspaper
report, that sentiments averse to uni
versal suffrage were uttered in the most
! scholarly ssemblage in the land, by
venerable ex-President, aud received
with applause. When such gross ignor-
ance is shown in such quarters, is it
not time to recur to the sources of
knowledge? If not, we may soon be-
come swamped in common illiteracy.
1t is only few years since President
FaiTchild, of Oberlin, arguing against
! Woman Suffrage, found it necessary to
assert that our fathers, when they said
''all men are created equal" only meant
one nations independence of another
and did not mean personal rights at all.
! But he was not the first man who re-
produced the image of Mrs. Partington
with her broom at the sea-shore. We
had then hardly ceased laughing at him
who undertook to sweep back the same
ocean of truth with his little broom of
"glittering generalities." But General
Fairchild deserves credit for the logical
perception which compelled him to see
that unless the principle of the declara-
tiOn could be explained away, the right
of woman to the ballot must be admitted
We may discuss as much as we please
the probable consequences and results
| Vi ALB Vic b1llOb W WOUldly UuD dll
this has no connection whatever with
the question: Has woman a right to
vote? Whether it would add more of
intelligence and virtue, or more of fignor-
ance and vice to the volume of the
electoral voice, is not logically to be con-
sidered at all, unless it is settled what
her right is. This may possibly appear
more clear in comparison with another
right. The natural right to life is not as
well understood as it ought to be; but
it is better understood than any other
We recognize the right of a human be-
ing to life; a right which we hold that
he forfeits only for few crimes; but
short of these, his right is by no means
impaired by any density of ignorance,
or any enormity in vice. The right of a
human being to the ballot is co-equal
and co-extensive with his right to life;
and yet, such is the destitutlon of ordi-
nary intelligence on this point, that
when Massachusetts, a few years since,
with exquisite despotism, imposed a
reading and writing qualification on her
voters, no one was startled by this clear
evasion of natural right. If "intelli-
gence" is to be the test, where can a
single qualified voter be found ? He
can not be found in North street, of
] OGh hC OC lOuhu IL AApA
College, that applauds the disparage-
ment of a natural right?


Whether or not women wish to vote,
it entirely irrelevant to this argument.
Some men do not wish to pay their
debts, but we do not therefore say that
a man has not natural right to pay
his debts.


We think of but one reason, not log
ically part of this argument, that has
a direct force in connection with it. A
man should forbear all opposition to the
enfranchisement of woman in the i'm
pulse Of pure manliness alone. 1t is
one of our comforts that, owing to the
imperfections of knowledge, human be-
ings do not always know how mean
they are; and we never need this COM
fort more than when we see a man vo-
ciferously denying to another the enjoy
ment of a natural, inalienable right,
which is his own pride and boast.-NeW
Age.


Will Gabrie's trumpet be loud
enough to reach the ears of GuiboTd in