Women -- Suffrage -- History; Women -- Suffrage -- United States -- History; Women's rights -- History; Women's rights -- United States -- History
There is not an interest in this District that is not as vital to
me as to any man in Washington--that is not more vital to me than
it can be to any member of this honorable body. As a citizen,
seeking the welfare of this community, as a wife and mother
desiring the safety of my children, which of you can claim a
deeper interest than I in questions of markets, taxes, finance,
banks, railroads, highways, the public debt and interest thereon,
boards of health, sanitary and police regulations, station-houses
(wherein I find many a wreck of womanhood, ruined in her youth
and beauty), schools, asylums, and charities? Why deny me a voice
in any or all of these? Do you doubt that I would use the ballot
in the interests of order, retrenchment, and reform? Do you deny
a right of mine, which you will admit I know how to prize,
because there are women who do not appreciate its value, do not
demand it, possibly might not (any better than men) know how to
use it? What a mockery of justice! What a flagrant violation of
individual rights! I would cry out against it if no other woman
in the land felt the wrong. But among the 10,000,000 of mothers
of 14,000,000 of children in this country, vast numbers of
thoughtful, philanthropic, and pure women have come to see this
truth, and desire to express their mother love and home love at
the ballot-box!
Frederick Douglass once said: "Whole nations have been bathed in
blood to establish the simplest possible propositions. For
instance, that a man's head is _his_ head; his body is _his_
body; his feet are _his_ feet, and if he chooses to run away with
them it is nobody's business"; and all honor to him, he added,
"Now, these propositions have been established for the colored
man. Why does not man establish them for woman, his wife, his
mother?"
Determined to surround the colored man with every possible
guarantee of protection in the possession of his freedom,
congress stopped the wheels of legislation, and made the whole
country wait, while day after day and night after night his
friends fought inch by inch the ground for the civil rights bill.
During that debate Senator Frelinghuysen said:
When I took the oath as senator, I took the oath to support
the Constitution of the United States, which declares
equality for all: and in advocating this bill I am doing my
sworn duty in endeavoring to secure equal rights for every
citizen of the United States.
But where slept his "sworn duty" when he recorded his vote in the
Senate against woman suffrage? With marvelous inconsistency, as a
reason for opposing woman suffrage, during the Pembina debate,
May 27, 1874, Senator Merrimon said of the relation of women to
the Constitution of the United States:
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