Enfranchisement of women : $b Reprinted from the Westminster and Foreign Quarterly Review, for July 1851Mill, Harriet Hardy Taylor
Philosophy
Enfranchisement of women : $b Reprinted from the Westminster and Foreign Quarterly Review, for July 1851
Mill, Harriet Hardy Taylor
Equality; Women -- Suffrage; Women's rights
Even those who do not look upon a voice in the government as a matter
of personal right, nor profess principles which require that it should
be extended to all, have usually traditional maxims of political
justice, with which it is impossible to reconcile the exclusion of all
women from the common rights of citizenship. It is an axiom of English
freedom, that taxation and representation should be coëxtensive. Even
under the laws which give the wife's property to the husband, there
are many unmarried women who pay taxes. It is one of the fundamental
doctrines of the British constitution, that all persons should be tried
by their peers; yet women, whenever tried, are tried by male judges and
a male jury. To foreigners, the law accords the privilege of claiming
that half the jury should be composed of themselves; not so to women.
Apart from maxims of detail, which represent local and national, rather
than universal ideas, it is an acknowledged dictate of justice, to
make no degrading distinctions without necessity. In all things, the
presumption ought to be on the side of equality. A reason must be given
why anything should be permitted to one person, and interdicted to
another. But when that which is interdicted includes nearly everything
which those to whom it is permitted most prize, and to be deprived of
which they feel to be most insulting; when not only political liberty,
but personal freedom of action, is the prerogative of a caste; when
even, in the exercise of industry, almost all employments which task
the higher faculties in an important field, which lead to distinction,
riches, or even pecuniary independence, are fenced round as the
exclusive domain of the predominant section, scarcely any doors being
left open to the dependent class, except such as all who can enter
elsewhere disdainfully pass by; the miserable expediencies which are
advanced as excuses for so grossly partial a dispensation would not be
sufficient, even if they were real, to render it other than a flagrant
injustice. While, far from being expedient, we are firmly convinced
that the division of mankind into two castes, one born to rule over
the other, is, in this case, as in all cases, an unqualified mischief;
a source of perversion and demoralization, both to the favored class
and to those at whose expense they are favored; producing none of the
good which it is the custom to ascribe to it, and forming a bar, almost
insuperable, while it lasts, to any really vital improvement, either in
the character or in the social condition of the human race.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account