In the June of 1884 he made one of his common-sense speeches on the
subject of the enfranchisement of women. It occurred during the
debate on the Representation of the People Bill. "It may be that we
should enfranchise women," he said, "but because we have enfranchised
men is no reason that we should do so. We may discuss the subject
eloquently, we may refer to Joan of Arc and Boadicea, but, in point
of fact, from the time of Eve till now there has been a distinct
difference between men and women. There are a great many things
which I am ready to admit women can do better than men, and there are
other things which I think men can do better than women. Each have
their separate functions, and the question is whether the function of
electoral power is a function which women would adequately discharge.
I do not think it is. As yet I understand that no country has really
given women the vote; and were it not that honourable gentlemen
opposite, who are generally averse to giving the franchise to any
large body of men, think, and think justly, that a very large
majority of women would vote for Conservatives, I should be surprised
at their making this desperate leap in the dark. Some honourable
{245} members on this side of the House have told us that women are
better than men. That is the language of poetry. But when we come
to facts I am not at all disposed to admit that women are better than
men. It is not a question of whether women are angels or not, but
whether they will make good electors ... the honourable member has
told us that he was convinced of this because Queen Anne was a great
queen; and he told us also that Elizabeth was a great queen. But
Anne was not a great queen, and Elizabeth had the intellect of a man
with the weaknesses of a woman. The honourable member also spoke of
Queen Christina of Sweden, but every one knows that she was one of
the most execrable queens that ever lived, for, after being deposed
by her subjects, she went to Paris and murdered her secretary. We
learn that, by the operation of nature, more women are born into the
world than men, that women live longer than men, and that a
considerable number of men leave the kingdom as soldiers and sailors,
while women remain at home. In consequence of this there are, at any
given moment, a greater number of women than men in the country. I
am told that in every county, with the exception of Hampshire, more
women would be put on the register than men if we had woman suffrage.
And what would be the consequence? They would look to the interests
of women; they would band themselves together, and we should have
them, of course, asking to be admitted to this House; and then, if
they were admitted, instead of being on an equality with them, we
should put ourselves under petticoat government; we should have women
opposite, women on these benches, and a woman perhaps in the chair.
They would, of course, like women everywhere, have their own way.
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account