OCR Text |
Show WYS Sl'ITR.lKE. Tlir Origin aitil OI.J.ti of tlt F.ipial right II ovemoiit . Tlic fullowi.iv an ii'lo whs rond liy Mrv. i;.ni,i i S. IVin-e at ilie W. S. A. bdd. in Hm.-lt;iiii City, Miireli 10, 1N.M. In ISol, an article in the We-t-' minster Review attracted attention atten-tion to the novel subject of the enfranchisement en-franchisement of women. Since that time, the agitation for women's rights has in Kngland, and to a diill greater extent in this country, attained the dimensions of a political politi-cal movement. The subject has therefore become one of general interest. in-terest. In Kngland, the right to vote has been made to rest on the principles prin-ciples of English law. A petition of women to the House of Commons, presented on the 7th of June, IStiO, set forth that the possession of j property in this country carries with it the right to vote in the i w.th their household work. On 1 the other hand, it h:is largt ly contributed con-tributed to the success of the vol-1 vol-1 untary sy?lem, and to theslrength of the ehur. h. In the year 1S-I0, the world' anli-slavery convention was held 1 in London. Several of the Ameri-ican Ameri-ican delegates were women, among whom was Lucn lia Mott. There is no doubt but what she was the , most able of all who were sent, and much was expected from her eloquence. elo-quence. But the English abolitionists aboli-tionists had not reformed their old view of the sexes, (hey would not admit an American woman anymore any-more than their own on the platform. plat-form. This brought what is termed the woman question move into j view; that is, the inherent right of j the female to an equal participation 1 with the male sex in nil social, 1 political and religious ofticea. election of representatives in Parliament. Par-liament. From the earliest times, the principle of the English Constitution, Con-stitution, and the spirit of the English people, have required that no man's property should be taken for the purpose of government without with-out his consent. Therefore since the English law permits women to hold and manage property, it j seems inconsistent that it should j refuse them a vote to protect their property from inordinate taxation. Other persons who are allowed by the law to hold property, but are excluded from the suffrage, are minors, mi-nors, idiots. lunatics and criminals. But the principle of disqualification disqualifica-tion in those cases docs not apply, to women. Moreover, there is alleged to be historical evidence tu.t i, i,rttu i in ns issue ot.Apnl '23, the fall Mall Gazette qu-ites from the Northampton Mercury of August 11th, 1832, an account of an early movement of woman's rights, ft says that Mr. Hunt, in the House of Com mons, Aug. ord, 1S32, presented pre-sented a petition from a lady of fortune anil family, who was also a single lady, praying that she might be admitted to a share in the representation. Her name was Mary Smith of Stanmore in York. She said that females were only kept in thralldom among barbarians bar-barians and heathen nations, but iu this country , which had risen to such a high pitch of civilization, such res trie tit -ns should be abolished. She complained that females were amenable to the laws and liable to be punished for their crimes, while I they were tried by judges and juries j of the opposite sex; they should j therefoie be allowed to sit upon 'juries. In short, she prayed that unmarried folks of mature ago should be put on a footing of equality with the male sex. Mr. limit read the petition amid shouts of laughter from all sides of the house. The Pall Mall Gazette say.: "Surely, Mary Smith who stated her case so cogently and reasonably, reason-ably, should be regarded as the pioneer of the movement for the equality of the sexes." The plea of Mary Smith was received with shouts of laughter; but sixty years later, after full discussion, Parliament Parlia-ment itself only lacked 23 votes of passing a bill to give full suffrage to women. counties and boroughs. The disuse of the privilege is traced to historical his-torical causes. Such was the violence of the time, that women were often unable to administer their property, and it was therefore natural that they should take little part in elections. Besides, the right to vote was at first regarded, regard-ed, not as a privilege, but as a burden; for the power of tlie commons com-mons was law, and the expense of paying members of Parliament was considerable. The disfranchisement disfranchise-ment of women is therefore held to be an anomaly in the constitution, as it was iin accident in history. The object of this movement is to work for the enfranchisement of all women without regard to party-sect party-sect or creed, and to take such steps fiom time to time, fis shall be wise and expedient for the political advancement of women; also to devise de-vise plans of work suited to the development and progress of the association, and encournge young people to speak, write essays, and discuss questions upon political matters and civil government. One objection to the enfranchisement enfranchise-ment of women is, that women have no business with politics, and that politics would withdraw them from their proper duties. Is this apprehension well founded ? Granting that domestic life is the proper sphere of women, is it really impossible to unite an interest in-terest in politics with any alt'-n-tlor, to a family? Upon this subject, sub-ject, we arc not altogether without experience. In the great dissenting churches i in Scotland, women, though rx- eluded from oflice, vote equally ! with men in the appointment of j ruling elders, minister?, and in ! everything thiit is decided by a popular vote. But this privii has riot "hardened" them, or m .di them ''unleminine,'' or interf d |