Women’s votes down state get full credit from both the politicians and the newspapers, not to say the liquor dealers, for having put out of business 946 saloons in 114 incorporated cities and villages. In 29 more the vote to remain dry rolled up a majority of 8,888, aggregating a total dry vote in these districts of 35,462. While the liquor forces carried 60 cities and villages and thus kept them “wet,” they failed to win a single township which was dry prior to the election. In some places, as at Springfield, women’s votes helped swell the majority for the saloons. But in a total vote estimated at 200,000 cast on the saloon issue outside Chicago, where the issue was not raised, the _Chicago Tribune_ figures that 100,000 were cast by women and that 65 per cent. of these were against the saloon. Clearly in anticipation of women’s voting in Chicago, an ordinance was passed by the Chicago City Council abolishing the “family entrance” and “ladies’ entrance” signs from saloons. This action was not opposed by the liquor interests represented by the vigilant and aggressive United Societies. To the representative women who promoted this action, one of the most notorious of Chicago’s aldermen, who for many years has led the forces for evil in the city council, once a majority and now a hopeless minority, declared: “You are doing a noble work, ladies; you should now clean-up the dance halls.” The handwriting seems to be on the walls, the enemies of the good themselves being judges. Lest Graham Taylor may be considered a partial witness, we submit the two following extracts from the _New York Times_ on the Chicago women voters, for no one accuses that paper of being a feminist advocate: Chicago’s first election since women could vote there will doubtless receive much study and doubtless excite much comment. Doubtless, also, the comment will vary as widely as do opinions regarding the propriety and the expediency of woman suffrage. Some people, of course, will lay much stress on the fact that, of the 217,000 women who registered, only 100,000 were sufficiently interested in the election, in spite of all the talk there has been about it, to go to the polls. The fact, however, that slightly less than 50 per cent. of the women voters failed to do their duty—or to exercise their privilege, if one chooses to look at it that way—must be interpreted in the light of the other fact, that only slightly more than 50 per cent. of the registered men took the trouble to vote. This, in ordinary circumstances, would be taken as showing that popular concern about the result of the election was not keen; but the circumstances were not ordinary, and the suffragists will find it difficult to explain, and still more difficult to excuse, the conduct of their stay-at-homes.