6 NATURE-STUDY REVIEW [12:1— Jan., 1916 



new and violent partisanship, and at the very time when partisan- 

 ship is supposed to be losing its force. We have the pros and the 

 antis, one set solidly over against the other. The merits of the 

 case are confused in the rivalries. Much of the literature of 

 these opposed camps is discouraging. The real problem here, 

 for the present voter to decide, is very simple in its statement. 

 It is only this: can we now assimilate this extra vote? It is not 

 a question as to whether persons inferior to women now have the 

 vote; it is not a question of sentiment or of desserts; the vote 

 is not a right to be demanded or a favor to be sought, but a privi- 

 lege to be granted. Whether we can now assimilate the extra 

 vote cannot be settled by petitions, by the use of "influence," 

 by "literature," by banners, or by parades. If a fair proportion 

 of the women would vote, as good a proportion as of the men, 

 the extra vote would undoubtedly be safe. Under male suffrage 

 it is only when a large vote is cast that we can hope to offset the 

 forces of danger. The problem before the women is clearly to 

 convince the women rather than the men. When the women are 

 convinced, so that the vote will be safe, the movement is won. 

 If the vote should be granted before the women are convinced, 

 the result would not be a real success for the movement. I wish 

 that this suffrage movement might express a new and a better 

 process in politics, in the form of a widespread and quiet campaign 

 of education with the women of the country, and not divide the 

 woman's influence into hostile partisan camps. 



Let me bring another illustration. In New York a new consti- 

 tution was recently defeated at the polls. It was said to be the 

 best state constitution ever proposed. Some persons say it was 

 defeated by machine politicians who were afraid of it; this I doubt. 

 The vote against it was widespread. To my knowledge, non- 

 partisans voted against it. It may not have been framed in parti- 

 sanship but the movement was born in partisanship, or least so 

 supposed by the people, and was handicapped before it was made. 

 The final draft was completed and published only a short time 

 before election, and it made a very long and technical document 

 that combined details of procedure with statements of principles. 

 Little, apparently, was left to the legislature to work out into 

 practice. There was strong objection to parts of it, and yet the 

 voters were asked to pass upon it nearly en bloc, accepting it all 

 or rejecting it all. Moreover, a company of supporters organized 



