EDITOR'S TABLE. 



SS7 



letter, and that still others have been 

 enacted that favor women." We 

 must not, however, thank " man's 

 own sense of equity and right " for 

 these beneficial changes. Why ? 

 because they have all been subse- 

 quent to certain " writings and 

 arguments" of ''women agitators." 

 So that man does not exhibit any 

 "sense of equity and right" when 

 he is influenced by the pleadings of 

 " women agitators." Poor man! He 

 is judged very severely these days. 

 We should like to remark, however, 

 that post hoc pr^ojJter hoc is not a 

 very sound form of argument. Grant 

 that the " writings and arguments are 

 a matter of record," it does not fol- 

 low that these writings and argu- 

 ments Ideally determined the changes 

 in legislation referred to. What we 

 know is that the changes were made, 

 and that they were made by men un- 

 der no actual compulsion. 



At the outset of her article Miss 

 Tweedy states that, " if every man 

 considered it a matter of conscience 

 to give voice in his vote to the femi- 

 nine element in his household, it 

 would put another aspect ujion the 

 demand for woman suffrage." How 

 is it now, we feel like inquiring, in 

 this matter ? We imagine that the 

 great majority of men who put any 

 conscience into their voting at all do 

 consider, as far as it is possible to do 

 so, the interests of the feminine ele- 

 ment in their households. When a 

 man votes, he votes for a certain in- 

 dividual who is seeking a certain 

 office. The cases in which there can 

 be any division of interest in the 

 family as to which candidate should 

 be supported must be exceptional. 

 When, however, a man gives a vote 

 for one side or the other, there is 

 good reason to believe — corrupt mo- 

 tives apart — that he thinks, not solely 

 of his own interest as a male indi- 

 vidual, but of all the interests, do- 

 mestic and social, which he repre- 



sents. In that sense the average 

 elector's vote is meant to be, and is, 

 representative. Our contributor's 

 idea is that ''after a family con- 

 clave " the husband, father, or broth- 

 er should " quietly pocket his own 

 conflicting opinion and supx^ort the 

 measures favoi'ed by the home ma- 

 jority." The plan is beautifully 

 simple in appearance, but we fear 

 would present difficulties in practice. 

 The man who was earning a living 

 for his family could scarcely be ex- 

 pected to pocket his opinion upon a 

 question, such as protection or free 

 trade, which he believed had an im- 

 portant bearing on his business 

 prospects ; but at the same time we 

 are sure that most men would be 

 very glad to have any assistance 

 which the female members of their 

 households could give them in ar- 

 riving at right conclusions on ques- 

 tions of the day. 



If women are to be called upon to 

 vote, it should be for very broad and 

 sufficient reasons. The mere fact 

 that some are demanding it is not a 

 sufficient reason, inasmuch as others, 

 and probably the great majority, not 

 only do not join in the demand 

 but are prepared to oppose it. Let 

 us endeavor to indicate briefly how 

 the matter presents itself to our 

 mind. 



In the exercise of the suffrage the 

 individual asserts himself, claiming 

 his share of political power. The 

 vote is given to him for the protec- 

 tion of his political rights against 

 the encroachments of other men. On 

 voting day society is momentarily 

 resolved into its constituent units. 

 As long as men alone do the voting, 

 they are supposed to represent the 

 non-voting sex. Every man has or 

 has had a mother, most have one or 

 more sisters, and a very large propor- 

 tion have wives. Every man's vote, 

 therefore, we do not hesitate to say, 

 ought to express his consciousness of 



