The Strand Magazine, Vol. 01, Issue 02, February 1891: An Illustrated MonthlyVarious
General
The Strand Magazine, Vol. 01, Issue 02, February 1891: An Illustrated Monthly
Various
English literature -- Periodicals; Short stories, English -- Periodicals
describe women as a class. They were not like the class of agricultural
labourers or factory workers. Who were so near the hearts of the
legislators of this country as the members of their own families?
(Cheers.) It was a scandalous and odious libel to say women were a
class, and were therefore excluded from our sympathy, and Parliament
could do no justice in regard to them. (Cheers.) ... Unfortunately for
those who argued about political wrongs, the measure excluded by far the
greatest proportion of women--viz., those who, if there were any special
qualification required for an elector, might be said to be specially
qualified. It excluded married women, though they were generally older,
more informed, and had greater interests at stake. Then it was said that
the Bill was an instalment, that it was one step in the emancipation of
women.
[Illustration]
[Illustration]
If that were so, it was very odd that those most concerned in the Bill
did not appear to be aware of it, because last year there was a great
dispute on that matter.... Last year he saw a letter, signed "A Married
Claimant of the Franchise," in a newspaper, who said that a married
woman could not claim to vote as a householder, but why should she not
pay her husband a sum for her lodgings, so as to entitle her to claim
the lodger franchise? (Laughter.) ... If that Bill passed, how would
they contend against further claims? (Hear, hear.) ... And what were
they to say to those women who were to have votes until they married?
The moment the woman householder came out of church or chapel as a wife
her vote would vanish, and her husband would become the elector. (A
laugh.) It seemed to him that if they passed that Bill and went no
further, what Mr. Mill called "the subjection of women" was decreed by
the very measure intended to enfranchise them, and by the very women,
and the very party in that House, who were in favour of that Bill.
(Hear, hear.) Then again, if all men being householders had a right to
be elected, on what principle were women not also to have a right to be
elected? (Hear, hear.) Those who opposed that Bill had a right to ask
these questions, and to have an answer to them. If they were to travel
that path, let them know how far they were going, and to what it led....
If they granted that every woman, married or unmarried, was to have a
vote, the hon. member for Lincolnshire had referred to what would happen
in every house where there was a double vote. If the husband and wife
agreed, it would make no difference in the result of the election; but
if they disagreed, it would possibly introduce discord into every
family; and if there were discord between man and wife, there would
certainly be discord between the children.... In that House they had one
peculiar kind of knowledge--namely, of the penalties they paid for their
constitutional freedom.... Was it desirable to introduce their mothers,
wives, sisters, and daughters to the excitement, the turmoil, and, it
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