Part 171 (2/2)

The absurdity of this first ”basic proposition” is in its innocent a.s.sumption of flatly opposing interests between men and women, whereas most of their interests are identical. In following out her grisly fears of valiant man forcibly preventing womankind from voting, our auth.o.r.ess again forgets existing facts and again surrenders herself to gloomy prediction.

”A dozen ruffians at a single polling place could prevent a hundred women from depositing a single ballot,” she says.

Yes. But do they?

A dozen ruffians could do alarming damage to a hundred women almost anywhere if the women had no guns. Has Mrs. Seawell ever had the pleasure of observing the absence of ”ruffians” at the polling places in Woman Suffrage states? She seems to imagine that women, in acquiring the ballot, instantly thereby lose, not only all their male relatives, but the protection of the law, and become a species of ”enemy,” with men, terrified and enraged, banded together against them--which is a childish absurdity.

The errors of fact in this article are gross and unpardonable. If Mrs.

Seawell had ever examined ”The Woman's Bible” she would have noticed that it was not ”Miss Anthony's,” but was undertaken by Mrs. Elizabeth Cady Stanton with collaboration of some others, and that it was not an attempt to make the Bible a ”suffrage doc.u.ment” but to show how it discriminated against women.

She alleges that the divorce rate is ”practically higher” in the four suffrage states than in any others in the Union whereas Wyoming is the one state where divorce has decreased rather than increased. She speaks of Colorado as having had ”more than thirty years of suffrage” whereas it was only introduced in 1893.

Any person capable of real interest in this question of practical politics and world improvement are urged to concentrate their study, not on the most fiercely sentimental presentation of what woman suffrage will do or will not do, but on the numerous and easily accessible facts as to what it really does, information concerning which can be readily obtained at the National Woman Suffrage Headquarters, 505 Fifth avenue, New York city.

In the preliminary announcement of this magazine, twelve short articles were promised by name.

As the months came round, other matters arose for attention, other articles were urgent, and this arbitrary set was much in the way.

One, The Nun in the Kitchen, was seized upon by another magazine. They wanted the t.i.tle particularly, so it was given them--and the price thereof goeth to feed the Forerunner. But, being a much larger magazine, they benevolently allowed the same name and a similar article to appear in these modest pages.

The others, ”Our Overworked Instincts” and ”How We Waste Three-Fourths of Our Money” being promised, are now printed, altogether and with most gratifying brevity, their length never having been specified. The New Year is not going to be hampered with any such too previous announcements.

We mean to carry lists of books useful to our readers. We wish to prove that it will pay publishers to advertise with us. If you order any book reviewed here, please send your order to THE FORERUNNER.

”Pure Sociology,” by Lester F. Ward, Macmillan, Pub.

”Hygiene and Morality,” by Lavina L. Dock, R.N., G. P. Putnam's Sons, Pub.

”Marriage as a Trade,” by Cicely Hamilton, Moffat, Yard & Co., Pub.

”To-day's Problems.” Trade Union Book Concern. Chicago, Ill.

”The Century of the Child,” by Ellen Key; G. P. Putnam's Sons., Pub.

<script>