The steady perseverance and unflagging courage of the devoted band

of men and women had achieved victories at many points along the

line of attack.[545] Every suffrage meeting was the means of

gaining converts. The agitation for the suffrage kept the memory of

women's wrongs and grievances fresh before the public mind. These

years saw the medical profession legally thrown open to women, and

facilities given them in school and hospital for obtaining that

education which had been hitherto sought abroad. Pharmacy no longer

excluded them. London University opened its gates. The Irish

Intermediate Education bill, in 1878, which was originally

introduced for boys only, was, after several energetic discussions,

widened, so as to include girls. Women began to be elected as

poor-law guardians. A Scotch Married Women's Property bill was

passed, which was a great improvement on the former law. A

Matrimonial Causes Amendment act was also carried, which enables

magistrates to grant a judicial separation to wives who are

brutally treated, along with a maintenance for their children. Some

of our friends regretted that these side issues should absorb the

time of those who might otherwise have been working exclusively for

suffrage; but this was a short-sighted fear. By broadening the

basis of work, by asking simultaneously for better laws, better

education, better employments and wider fields of usefulness, the

sympathies of more women were engaged; while underlying and

supporting all was the steady agitation for the suffrage with its

compact organization of committees, meetings, publications and

petitions which kept parliament awake to the fact that though still

disfranchised, women had claims which it could not afford to

ignore.

[Illustration: Priscilla Bright McLaren]

This was a time when the agitation for the suffrage had apparently

reached a stationary condition, neither advancing nor receding, in

which it was destined to remain for some years longer. Other

causes, as the abolition of West Indian slavery and the corn laws,

have had a similar period of apparent torpor succeeding the first

activity. Justin McCarthy in his "History of our own Times," says:

This is, from whatever cause, a very common phenomenon in our

political history. A movement which began with the promise of

sweeping all before it, seems to lose all its force, and is

supposed by many observers to be now only the care of a few

earnest and fanatical men. Suddenly it is taken up by a minister

of commanding influence, and the bore or the crotchet of one

parliament is the great party controversy of a second, and the

accomplished triumph of a third.

During the year of 1879, it was thought desirable to ascertain by

some practical test what were the various reasons which caused

thinking women to wish for the suffrage; and letters were addressed

to ladies who were eminent either in literature or art, or who were

following scientific or professional careers, or were engaged in

any form of philanthropic work. The answers that were returned were

collected into a pamphlet of exceeding interest, which was sent to

each member before the debate, and it was amazing to watch from the

gallery how the little green pamphlet was consulted and quoted

from, in the most opposite quarters of the House, by friends who

sought fresh arguments from it or by enemies who were looking for

some sentence on which to base a sarcasm.[546]

As a specimen of these letters Miss Frances Power Cobbe said:

So far from the truth is the reiterated statement of certain

honorable members of parliament that women do not desire the

franchise, that in my large experience I have scarcely ever known

a woman possessed of ordinary common sense, and who had lived

some years alone in the world, who did not earnestly wish for it.

The women who gratify these gentlemen by smilingly deprecating

any such responsibilities, are those who have dwelt since they

were born in well-feathered nests, and have never needed to do

anything but open their soft beaks for the choicest little grubs

to be dropped into them. It is utterly absurd (and I am afraid

the members of parliament in question are quite aware they are

talking nonsense) to argue from the contented squawks of a brood

of these callow creatures, that full grown swallows and larks

have no need of wings, and are always happiest when their pinions

are broken.

The production of this pamphlet marked an era in women's suffrage

literature. It was impossible after this to doubt that a large body

of thinking women, not the queens of society, but the women who

wrote, read, thought, or worked, were in favor of having full

admission to political rights and responsibilities.

The chief work of the society had now crystallized into five or six

great centres. Edinburgh, under the presidency of Mrs. McLaren,

assisted by Miss Wigham and Miss Kirkland, treasurer and secretary,

was the recognized centre of activity for Scotland. In Ireland

there was a committee in Dublin, of which Mrs. Haslam is the most

active member; and the North of Ireland Committee, led by Miss

Isabella Tod.[547] The three principal associations in England were

those of London,[548] including the east and north-east counties;

Manchester,[549] taking charge of the north of England and Wales,

and Bristol[550] looking after the West. The officers of the

several committees of the three kingdoms form a National Central

Committee which has its headquarters in London and superintends all

of the work bearing specially upon the action of parliament.

Petitions were still sent in, but no longer in such enormous

numbers. It had become evident that parliament cared little for a

long roll of names from the unrepresented classes; they were now

chiefly collected as a means of discovering how public opinion

stood in any particular district. For instance, in 1879, a petition

was sent from 1,447 women householders of Leicester. The total

number of women householders in this town was 2,610, of whom only

1,991 could be applied to, and there is no reason to suppose that

public opinion was more advanced in Leicester than in the majority

of large manufacturing towns.

The municipal elections occur in England every November, and our

custom in some towns was to call meetings of the women householders

in every ward in which there was a contest, to explain to them the

responsibilities resting upon the voters, and after an earnest

address from some one of the ladies, to invite the respective

candidates to speak. By these means not only was the interest of

the women awakened in local politics, but the candidates themselves

were reminded of the interests of an important section of their

constituencies.

With the beginning of 1880, came again the promise of a reform

bill. The majority of the Liberal members of the House of Commons

had pledged themselves to their constituents in its favor. But as

our enemies were still reiterating that women themselves did not

care for the franchise, some further proof of their sympathy was in

order. The first great demonstration in favor of women was held in

Free Trade Hall, Manchester, which seats about 5,000 people,

February 3, where women were admitted free, and seats reserved for

men in the gallery at 2s. 6d. each. This arrangement was adopted to

make it a meeting of women. One hundred gentlemen were present

besides the reporters.

The purpose of the demonstration had been explained at preliminary

ward meetings to which men and women came in crowds. On the night

in question the scene exceeded the most sanguine expectations.

Those who had witnessed the great free trade gatherings which

assembled to hear Charles Villiers, Richard Cobden and John Bright,

never saw a more enthusiastic audience. Mrs. Duncan McLaren of

Edinburgh, who had been invited to preside, took her seat followed

by an array of distinguished women, such as had never before graced

any platform in the history of the three kingdoms, while the vast

area and galleries were crowded with women of wealth and culture;

factory women, shop-keepers and hard toilers of every station were

also there. Some had walked twenty miles to attend that great

meeting. They sat on the steps of the platform, climbed on every

coigne of vantage, stood in dense masses in every aisle and corner.

A large over-flow meeting was also held in the neighboring Memorial

Hall over which Mrs. Lucas presided, but even this could not

accommodate all who came, and thousands went away disappointed. It

was truly a marvelous meeting, grand in its numbers, grand in the

enthusiasm which had brought so many thousands together unattracted

by the names of any distinguished speakers, to sympathize with

each other in a great national movement, and to proclaim unity of

action until it was gained; and it was grand also in the

impressiveness of the words that were uttered. The president in her

clear grave tones which were heard in the breathless stillness over

that large assembly, said:

It seems like a dream. But only a grave reality could have

brought so many women together. Need we wonder that the

beneficent designs of Providence have been so imperfectly carried

out when only one-half the intellect and heart of the nation have

hitherto been called into action, and the powers of the other

half have been almost wholly suppressed? Women are learning along

with good men that politics in the true sense has to do with

human interests at large.

When Mrs. McLaren had concluded, one speaker after another, gave

her special testimony in favor of the necessity of obtaining

representation. The number was so great that no one was allowed

more than ten minutes.[551]

This demonstration was quickly followed by others that were every

way as successful. In connection with one at St. James' Hall,

London, over which Viscountess Harberton presided, a procession of

working women marched through the streets with a banner on which

was inscribed "We're far too low to vote the tax; we're not too low

to pay." Here also an overflow meeting was held to accommodate the

numbers that could not be admitted into the hall. On November 4,

the same scene was repeated at the Colston Hall, Bristol, and Mrs.

Beddoe, the wife of a popular physician in that city presided, and

on November 11, the last demonstration of that year was convened in

the Albert Hall, Nottingham, where Mrs. Lucas took the chair. The

following year saw no relaxation in these efforts. The Birmingham

demonstration took place on February 22, 1881. It was a most

inclement night and great fears had been entertained that it would

prove a failure, but nothing had power to keep the crowds of women

away or to lessen their enthusiasm. Mrs. Crosskey, the wife of Dr.

Crosskey, one of the most respected of the Birmingham Liberal

leaders, presided. The next was in St. George's Hall, Bradford, on

November 22, and here again Mrs. McLaren took the chair, and said:

We are here to-night in the spirit of self-sacrifice. We have had

our sorrows in working on this question. We are here because we

know there are on our statute books unjust laws which subject

many women to sorrow and suffering, and the fact that we have

worked our way to such a platform proves that women are capable

of holding a political position, and ought to have a voice in our

national affairs. We cannot rest contented under the

consciousness of injustice because there are women who accept it

as their natural condition. We feel it our duty to arouse our sex

everywhere to a sense of their high destiny. The inspiration for

this work has come from a higher source than ourselves, and we

have had often to feel that God does not leave his children to

fight their battles alone.

In 1882 there were two more demonstrations. The first was in Albert

Hall, Sheffield, on February 27, Lady Harberton presiding, and it

was crowded to overflowing with women of all ranks and conditions

of society. The demonstration at Glasgow was on November 3, and no

way inferior to the other in brilliancy and interest.[552]

These demonstrations conclusively proved that the suffrage is

desired, not only by a few educated women, the leaders of the

movement, but by the great masses of the hard-working women. They

proved also woman's political capacity and organizing power. No

body of persons could possibly do more to manifest their desire for

political liberty than the women who have organized and attended

these demonstrations. So far as I am aware no such meetings

have been attempted by the agricultural laborers over whose

enfranchisement the House of Commons has been so deeply exercised,

and though the absence of interest which these classes of men have

as a whole shown in the question of the franchise is no argument

for depriving them of it, the political knowledge and aspirations

that women have shown for more than fifteen years ought to count

for something in establishing their claim.

The session of 1880 was broken, and the dissolution of parliament

in March, the general election which followed, the change in the

government and the consequent press of public affairs, made it

impossible to bring forward any measure for the suffrage, but the

principle was most splendidly and triumphantly vindicated in the

ancient kingdom of the Isle of Man which has an independent

government dating from the time of its first colonization under the

vikings. It has in modern times its elective house which is called

the House of Keys and is equivalent to the Commons. Its Upper House

consists of the attorney-general, the clerk of the rolls, the

bishop, two judges (or deemsters) and other officials. It enacts

its own laws and imposes its own taxes, but is subject to imperial

control by requiring the sanction of the queen before any law can

come into effect. Some few years ago the franchise was felt to be

too restricted, and a movement was set on foot which culminated in

1880 in a bill to extend the franchise to every male person who was

a householder. Mr. Richard Sherwood, who five years previously had

brought forward a similar motion, moved an amendment to omit the

word "male" for the purpose of extending the franchise to women who

possessed the requisite qualification, which was carried by 16 to

3, a vote of two-thirds of the whole body of the House of Keys. It

then went before the Council which refused the franchise to female

occupiers and lodgers, though agreeing to give it to all female

owners of real estate of L4 annual value. Thus modified the bill

was sent back to the House of Keys which gave up the lodger

franchise but adhered to that for occupiers. The bill thus altered

was again sent back to the Council and again returned with a

message that the Council refused to come to an agreement. The Keys

then proposed a compromise, limiting the qualification to woman

occupiers of L20 a year. This again was refused, and the Council

were prepared to reject the bill altogether. Sooner than lose the

whole, the Keys assented, signing, however, a protest in which they

stated that they had complied simply to secure a part of a just

principle rather than lose the whole. The act was signed by the

governor, the Keys and the Council on December 21, received the

royal assent on January 5, 1881, and was immediately afterwards,

according to ancient custom, proclaimed as law on the Tynwald Hill.

Fully to estimate this victory, it must be remembered that the vote

thus gained is the complete parliamentary franchise. Though the

total area of the island is so small and though only those women

who were absolutely owners of property were enfranchised, they

numbered about 700. The law came into operation immediately, and

the election began March 21. The women voted in considerable

numbers, and were, as an eye-witness states, without exception

quite intelligent and business like in this procedure. At the

polling stations, the first persons who recorded their votes were

women. We may mention in proof of their political gratitude that in

the district where Mr. Sherwood was one of the candidates, every

woman, whatever her party, voted for his reelection.

Just before the opening of parliament in 1881, Mr. Courtney

accepted a position in the administration, which rendered it

impossible for him to continue in charge of any independent

measure. By his advice, application was made to Mr. Hugh Mason,

member for Ashton under Lyme. But the state of public business

during the session never permitted the resolution to be discussed.

The same disappointment occurred in the session of 1882--the

difficulties in Ireland and Egypt occupying the attention of the

government and the country to an extent which almost precluded any

measure of domestic reform. Nevertheless, by constant and arduous

efforts, these two years witnessed the passing of the Municipal

Franchise bill for Scotland.

The Municipal Franchise act of 1869 applied to English women only.

Early in the session of 1881, Dr. Cameron, member for Glasgow,

introduced a bill to assimilate the position of Scottish women to

that which their English sisters had enjoyed for twelve years. The

bill passed the House of Commons before Easter, and was then

brought forward in the House of Lords by the Earl of Camperdown,

passed May 13, and received the royal assent June 3. This law

applied only to women rate-payers of the royal and parliamentary

burghs, and did not extend to the police burghs, the populous

places endowed with powers of local self-government under the

general Police and Improvement act of 1862. A request was sent to

Mr. Cameron to exert himself for a similar extension of the

franchise to the women of the police burghs, and he answered by

introducing in the following year, 1882, another act which gave to

all women rate-payers the right, not merely of voting at elections

of burgh commissioners, but also of voting with the other

inhabitants as to whether a populous place should be constituted a

police burgh.

The election under these new measures was in November, 1882, and

then Scottish women voted for the first time, excepting of course

in school-board elections. The result was entirely satisfactory,

though the number of women who voted varied greatly--in some places

where no special interest attached to the election none came to

vote, while in others they voted in equal proportion with the men,

and in a few towns nearly every woman whose name was on the

register voted. The passing of these two franchise bills was an

undoubted triumph of the women's suffrage party. As one of the

opponents in the debate of July, 1883, scornfully observed, "Had it

not been for the question of women's suffrage being agitated

throughout the country at the time, we should not have heard a

syllable of the Scottish women's franchise bill," a sneering

admission which we willingly construe into compliment.

The year 1882 also witnessed the passing of the Married Women's

Property act, whose immense benefits can hardly be estimated, and

we may confidently assert that but for the unceasing agitation of

the friends of women's suffrage, another quarter of a century would

have been suffered to pass without bringing in this tardy measure

of justice.[553]

We now come to the session of 1883, inoperative as far as actual

legislation was concerned, but rich in its augury for the future.

Already in April the improved temper of the House on questions in

which women were concerned, had been shown by the brilliant

majority that voted with the Rt. Hon. Mr. Stansfeld for the

suppression of the Contagious Diseases acts which have so long

stained the English statute book. Early in May a memorial to Mr.

Gladstone was signed by 110 Liberal members of parliament,

unconnected with the government, in which they stated:

That in the opinion of your memorialists no measure for the

assimilation of the county and borough franchise will be

satisfactory unless it contain provisions for extending the

suffrage without distinction of sex to all persons who possess

the statutory qualifications for the parliamentary franchise.

This memorial was a most remarkable manifestation of the support

which members on the Liberal side of the House are pledged to give

to the principle of justice to women. Nor are we wanting in

Conservative support. Sir Stafford Northcote, has always given his

friendly approval to the movement, and has very recently repeated

his assurances of cooeperation in answer to a deputation of ladies

who waited on him. After repeated balloting, Mr. Mason obtained a

day, July 6, on which to bring forward his resolution. It was thus

worded:

That in the opinion of this House the parliamentary franchise

should be extended to women who possess the qualifications which

entitle men to vote, and who, in all matters of local government

have the right of voting.

Mr. Edward Leatham, also a Liberal, gave notice to oppose the

resolution affirming with a curious liberalism, that "it is

undesirable to change the immemorial basis of the franchise, which

is that men only shall be qualified to elect members to serve in

this House." Thus after a silence of four years, years of apparent

inertia, but really fraught with progress, the debate once again

revived in parliament. Mr. Jacob Bright said:

They have told us women can get what they want without the

franchise. That used to be said of working men--but since they

have had a vote, members in every part of the House have had a

generosity and sympathy and courage in all matters affecting

working men which they never had before. Precisely the same

effect would follow if you gave women the franchise. I admit that

women have gained much without the franchise, and I will tell the

House when that gain began: It began with the introduction of the

question of women's suffrage to the House, and the gain has been

mainly due to the awakening intelligence of women on political

questions owing to the wide-spread agitation and the demand for

women's suffrage. They have gained without the franchise,

municipal votes, school-board votes, the right to sit on

school-boards, the magnificent act of last year--an act which

ought to confer lasting fame on the present lord chancellor--the

Married Women's Property act. And owing to the untiring energy of

the right honorable member for Halifax (Mr. Stansfeld), they have

succeeded in inflicting a blow on an act of parliament[554] more

unjust to women than anything which has ever been passed, a blow

from which that act will never recover. These things have been

gained without the franchise. But who will tell me they would not

have gained them sooner, with less heart-breaking labor, if they

had had the political franchise?

Mr. Courtney also addressed the House in stirring words. The result

was most encouraging. Four years had passed since a division had

been taken, and the enormous majority against us which in so many

divisions had maintained its strength had dwindled to only 16. A

total of 164, including tellers and pairs supported the resolution

against an opposition of only 180. If the Liberal side of the House

had only been canvassed on this occasion it would have been a

victory, as 119 Liberals voted for it and paired, and only 75

against it.

With the close of the session the question was transferred to the

country, and the events of the autumn made it amply evident that

the majority of Liberals were in favor of extending the

parliamentary suffrage to women. A great conference was held in

October at Leeds, where delegates from between 500 and 600 Liberal

organizations were present. Fully 2,000 delegates were present at

the first meeting. After a long discussion upon the coming Reform

bill, the Rev. T. Crosskey, of Birmingham, proposed a rider to the

resolution which would include women's suffrage, as follows:

_Resolved_, That, in order to meet the just expectations of the

country, and to fulfill the pledges given at the last general

election, this conference is of opinion that a measure for the

extension of the franchise should confer on householders in the

counties the same electoral rights as those enjoyed by

householders in parliamentary boroughs; _and that, in the opinion

of this meeting, any measure for the extension of the suffrage

should confer the franchise upon women, who, possessing the

qualifications which entitle men to vote, have now the right of

voting in all matters of local government_.

Mr. Walter McLaren seconded Dr. Crosskey in an able speech, and

Miss Jane Cobden (daughter of the late Richard Cobden) who was

sitting on the platform, and who had been appointed delegate from

the Liberal association of Midhurst, supported the resolution. She

begged them, representing as they did the Liberal principles of all

England, to give it their hearty support. This was a continuation

of the struggle in which Liberals had taken part during the last

fifty years, and she trusted they would be true to their

principles.

Mrs. Helen Bright Clark, the daughter of Mr. John Bright, M. P.,

who had been appointed delegate from one of the few Liberal

associations which comprise women among their members, said:

There was in this country a considerable and increasing number of

earnest women of strong liberal convictions, who felt keenly the

total exclusion of their sex from the parliamentary suffrage.

Their hope was, of course, in the Liberal party, though all of

its members were not yet converted to true liberalism. The

Liberal women would not rest satisfied until there was throughout

the United Kingdom a real and honest household suffrage. They

knew that they were weak in the cabinet, and they regretted to

know that some of the most eminent leaders of the Liberal party

were not in this matter wholly their friends. These leaders had

fears which she thought the future would show to have been

unfounded. But she could venture to say on behalf of the Liberal

women of England that they were not unmindful of the past, and

were not ungrateful for the services which these men rendered and

were prepared to render to their country. Women were grateful.

They sympathized with the efforts of Liberal statesmen in the

past, and they knew how faithfully and loyally to follow. But

they felt that they must sometimes originate for themselves, and

they dared not blindly and with absolute faith follow any man,

however great or however justly and deeply beloved. Further, she

could say that, with the result of the high political teaching

they had had in the past, they would endeavor faithfully,

intelligently and with what ability was given to them, to uphold

those great principles of justice, and trust in the people which

she believed had made the Liberal party what it was, and which

alone were capable of lifting it to the highest triumphs in the

future.

There were enthusiastic cheers when Mrs. Clark had finished

speaking. The historical interest, the self-evident justice of the

plea brought forward by the daughters of the great reform leaders

on behalf of the continuance of the grand cause of freedom for

which their fathers had so bravely battled, went to the hearts of

the crowded assembly. Delegates who had come determined to vote

against the resolution--the "monstrous political fad," as one of

our opponents in parliament had called it--said, almost with tears

in their eyes, "We can't vote against the daughters of Bright and

Cobden," and when the resolution with the rider was put, a forest

of hands went up in its support, and in that vast crowd there were

only about thirty dissentients. The following evening Miss Jane

Cobden and Mrs. Scatcherd addressed an open-air meeting of 30,000

men who could not gain access to Victoria Hall, where John Bright

was speaking on the franchise for men, and a unanimous cheer was

given in favor of women's suffrage.

This was only the beginning of the autumn campaign among the

Liberal associations. The general committee of the Edinburgh United

Liberal Association met on November 16, 1883, in the Oddfellows'

Hall (No. 2), Forrest road, Edinburgh, to consider the questions of

the Local Government Board (Scotland) bill, the equalization of the

burgh and county franchise, and the extension of the parliamentary

vote to women householders. After the two first subjects had been

considered, the following resolution, moved by ex-Bailie Lewis, was

adopted:

_Resolved_, That this meeting regards the extension of the

parliamentary franchise to female householders as just and

reasonable, and would hail with satisfaction the introduction of

a government measure which would confer the parliamentary

franchise upon all female householders, whether resident in

counties or burghs.

November 21, a meeting of the general council of the Manchester

Liberal Association was held in the Memorial Hall to consider the

resolutions passed at the Leeds conference. Mr. J. A. Beith

presided. Mr. J. W. Southern moved the following resolution:

_Resolved_, That in order to meet the just expectation of the

country and to fulfill the pledges given at the last general

election, this council is of opinion that a measure for the

extension of the franchise should confer on householders and

lodgers in the counties the same electoral rights as those

enjoyed by householders and lodgers in parliamentary boroughs,

and should extend to Ireland the franchise enjoyed by Great

Britain; and that, in the opinion of this meeting, any measure

for the extension of the suffrage should confer the franchise

upon women who, possessing the qualifications which should

entitle men to vote, have now the right of voting in all matters

of local government.

An amendment to strike out the portion relating to women having

been rejected, the resolution was carried unanimously. November 26,

the sixth annual meeting of the National Liberal Association was

held at Bristol. Here also one or two ladies were present as

delegates. After a resolution affirming the urgency of the question

of parliamentary reform had been passed, Mr. Lewis Fry, M. P.,

moved:

_Resolved_, That in the opinion of this meeting any measure for

the extension of the suffrage should confer the franchise upon

women who, possessing the qualifications which entitle men to

vote, have now the right of voting in all matters of local

government.

The resolution was seconded by Dr. Caldicott, supported in

excellent speeches by Mrs. Walter McLaren and Mrs. Ashworth

Hallett, and carried by a majority of five. Many other Liberal

associations of less importance, during the autumn, affirmed the

principle of women's suffrage. All the political associations in

Ulster, both Conservative and Liberal, either formally or

informally signified their acceptance of the principle. In the

progress of the movement it was very encouraging to see so many

brave women[555] of ability crowding our platform, conscientiously

devoting their time, talents and money to this sacred cause, ready

and able to fill the vacant places that time must make in our

ranks.

The year 1884 opened with good hopes. There was the immediate

prospect of a reform bill, intended so to widen the representation

of the people as to fix it on a satisfactory basis for another

generation at least. The time seemed opportune for the attainment

of women's suffrage. There had been repeated proof that the

majority of the Liberal party in the country admit the justice of

their claims; there were renewed promises of support on the part of

members of parliament of all shades of political opinion. Many

times the claims of women for the franchise have been set aside by

the assertion that so important a privilege could not be granted

till the time came for the general re-settlement of the question.

That time appeared to have come. A considerable extension of the

suffrage was to be granted, so as to include another 2,000,000 of

unenfranchised men; what better time to recognize the claims of

women who already possessed the qualifications of property or

residence which alone in England give the vote? A few persons

expected that the government Reform bill would contain a clause

relating to women, but this expectation was not generally shared.

It was well known that strong differences of opinion existed in the

cabinet which would render it well-nigh impossible for the

government to introduce the question as one of their own; and

though there may have been disappointment, there was no great

surprise when the Franchise bill, on its introduction, was found to

contain no reference to women.

Meanwhile there had been a change in the leadership of the

movement. Mr. Hugh Mason having intimated his intention to resign

the conduct of the measure, Mr. William Woodall, member of

parliament for Stoke-on-Trent, consented to take charge of it. A

conference of friendly members of parliament was held in the House

of Commons on February 7, and it was then agreed that should the

government Franchise bill not extend to women, an amendment with

the object of including them should be moved at some stage of the

discussion in the House of Commons. Mr. Woodall agreed to take

charge of this amendment.

On February 28, Mr. Gladstone moved in the House of Commons for

leave to bring in a bill to amend the representation of the people.

The forms of the House did not admit of Mr. Woodall's amendment

being placed on the notice-paper until after the second reading of

the bill, but during the adjourned debate on the second reading he

found an opportunity to announce that he would move his proposed

clause while the House was in committee on the bill. He remarked

that the fundamental principle of the bill as it was described by

the prime minister was to give a vote to every household, but as

there was no provision for giving the franchise to such

householders if they happened to be women, he intended to propose

the insertion of a clause to remedy this omission. The clause was:

For all purposes connected with and having reference to the right

of voting in the election of members of parliament, words in the

Representation of the People acts importing the masculine gender

include women.

A careful analysis of the opinions of members of the House of

Commons gave every promise that such an amendment might be

successful. The views of 485 out of the entire number were known,

while 155 had never expressed an opinion, about one-third of these

being new members. Of those whose opinions were known, 249, or a

majority, had expressed themselves in favor of women's suffrage,

236 had expressed themselves against it. The preponderance of

support had hitherto always been among the Liberal ranks, for

though the leaders of the Conservative party had given the

principle their hearty approval, their example had not been

followed by their partisans. It appeared probable therefore that,

if the government held itself neutral on the occasion and permitted

fair play, the amendment would be carried mainly by means of their

own friends.

During the spring, meetings of considerable importance were held in

the country. The first was at Edinburgh on March 22. It was a

demonstration of women inferior in no respect to those we have had

occasion to chronicle of former years. No more imposing assemblage

for a political object had ever been seen in Edinburgh. The largest

hall in the city--that of the United Presbyterian Synod--was

crowded to the doors, and an overflow meeting was held in the

Presbytery Hall. Banners were hung above the platform and a roll

inscribed with the names of the principal supporters of the

movement was conspicuously displayed.[556] Lady Harberton occupied

the chair and was accompanied by the delegates.[557] Letters[558]

of sympathy were read by Miss Wigham, the secretary.

LADY HARBERTON said: If our legislators say taxation and

representation should go together, it is right that they should

give expression to this opinion fairly and openly, and at all

times and seasons insist upon it that those women who are

ratepayers and who are in fact heads of households, ought not to

be excluded from the privilege of voting for a member to

represent them in the House of Commons. This is no question of

women usurping the place of men or any trivialities of that kind;

it is a much more serious matter. The exclusion of women from the

right to representation has already led to laws being passed

about them and their interests, that I do not hesitate to call a

disgrace to humanity. [Cheers.] That they are not more commonly

recognized as such is due, I think, to two causes. One thing is

that women of the upper classes, who are usually wealthy, are

able by the aid of money so to hedge themselves around with

barriers to oppose the inconveniences placed upon women by the

laws, that they very often do not feel them so much; while women

of the classes who are not wealthy are so crushed and oppressed

by the working of these laws that they are unable to take the

first step, which is agitation, towards getting them altered or

repealed. [Cheers.] It often seems to me that another reason why

women themselves are not more enthusiastic upon this question of

the franchise is, that from their earliest childhood they are

taught that the first duty of women is unselfishness, the putting

of their own interests and wishes behind those of others. Any

discussion of this great question only brings forth hysterical

clamor that "women should stay at Home"--with a very big "H."

[Laughter and cheers.] Well, I have been examining a little into

the conduct of those ladies who do stay at home so much, and what

do I find? Why, that they rush about and seem like the changing

colors of the kaleidoscope, now collecting at a bazaar, anon

singing at a concert, with no end of publicity [cheers], but as

long as no rational object is promoted by their action, it is all

counted as staying quietly home in the nursery, whether they have

children or not. That is their notion of being "thoroughly

domesticated." [Laughter.] Now, much as I could wish myself that

men had done their duty and agitated for us, in this case it is

an undeniable fact that they have not shown that readiness, I may

say eagerness, to begin that one could have wished; it therefore

changes at once into one of those duties men have not seen their

way to do, and so becomes of necessity women's work.

A series of meetings[559] after this was held in Bath, Newcastle

and London.

The audiences heartily concurred with the speakers that the time

when a reform bill was before parliament was the fittest and most

opportune moment in which to press forward the claim of women to

representation.

We may observe once again with pride, how hearty and cheering have

always been the sympathy and assistance that men have rendered to

women in this movement in England. At no time has there been a

possibility of a feeling of bitterness between the sexes or a

conviction that their interests were antagonistic, for the plain

reason that there have always been men working side by side with

women. Our suffrage meetings have been attended and supported by

political leaders, members of parliament, town councils or

prominent movers among the working-class associations. Except in

the great demonstrations, which for special reasons were confined

exclusively to women, our movement has formed part of the ordinary

political life of the country.

The _Suffrage Journal_ for May contains a very carefully drawn

calculation of the number of women in the United Kingdom who will

probably receive the franchise if the wider qualifications

contained in the present Franchise bill become law. It must be

remembered that there are now 3,330,720 more houses than electors

in the British Isles. In boroughs where household suffrage already

prevails for men, the unrepresented houses should guide us to a

tolerably correct estimate of the number of women householders. We

may say that practically there are 446,000 houses in the boroughs

of England and Wales, whose inhabitant in each case being a woman,

is unrepresented. The proportion varies much in different

localities; in the city of Bath one-fourth the householders are

women. If we calculate that one house in every six in the boroughs

is occupied by a woman, we find that 349,746 is the probable number

to be enfranchised there.

For the counties there are no means of arriving at so close a

result, but by estimating the proportion of women householders to

be the same as that of women land-owners, or one in seven, we reach

the fairly approximate calculation of 390,434, in the counties. The

same method of calculation applies to Scotland and to Ireland,

where, however, the proportion of woman land-owners is one in

eight.[560]

In order to show that the desire for the suffrage was not confined

to any one rank, class or profession of women, a circular was

signed by a large number of ladies and sent to every member of both

houses of parliament. It was as follows:

SIR: We desire to call your attention to the claim of women who

are heads of households to be included in the operation of the

government Franchise bill.

Women have continuously presented this claim before parliament

and the country since the Reform bill of 1867. The introduction

of a measure declared by the government to be intended to deal

with the franchise in an exhaustive manner, renders it especially

necessary now to urge it upon the attention of parliament.

We respectfully represent that the claim of duly qualified women

for admission within the pale of the constitution is fully as

pressing as that of the agricultural laborer, and that the body

of electors who would thereby be added to the constituencies,

would be at least equal in general and political intelligence to

the great body of agricultural and other laborers who are to be

enfranchised by the government bill.

Among this body would be found women land-owners, who form

one-seventh of the land proprietors of the country; women of

means and position living on their own property; schoolmistresses

and other teachers; women engaged in professional, literary and

artistic pursuits; women farmers, merchants, manufacturers and

shopkeepers; besides large numbers of self-supporting women

engaged in industrial occupations. The continued exclusion of so

large a proportion of the property, industry and intelligence of

the country from all representation in the legislature is

injurious to those excluded, and to the community at large.

Several bills having special reference to the interests and

_status_ of women have been introduced in parliament during the

present session. This affords a powerful reason for the immediate

enfranchisement of women, in order that members of parliament may

have the same sense of responsibility towards the class affected

by them whether dealing with questions relating to women or to

men.

For these and other reasons we earnestly beg that you will give

your support to the amendment to be introduced by Mr. Woodall in

committee on the Representation of the People bill for including

women householders in its operation. We are, sir, yours

faithfully,[561]

In this circular women of all opinions were represented, but a

special circular, signed only by ladies of Conservative views, was

sent to the conservative associations. These ladies pointed out

that justice to women themselves, and the welfare of the whole

community are involved in the admission of the women householders

who at this moment are possessed of the existing statutory

qualifications:

To bring in a new class, under new conditions, whilst continuing

to exclude those who fulfill the present conditions, would be

very injurious to those excluded and set a wrong example before

the community. Every enlargement of the electoral franchise for

men which can now take place necessarily includes many whose

interests in the country cannot equal those of the women who now

claim it. Their position is already recognized by their

possession of every local franchise whatsoever. Justice requires

that the principle should be fully carried out by extending to

women the right to vote for members of parliament, whose

legislation so strongly affects their welfare. Prudence also

requires that an important class of educated and philanthropic

persons should not be left out, or their claims postponed, when a

large addition is likely to be made to the less educated portion

of the electorate. We most seriously believe that few things

could happen more dangerous for the real happiness of the nation

than to permit the opportunity to pass without the admission of

legally qualified women within the circle of the constitution.

A correspondence also was conducted with Mr. Gladstone by the

Bristol Ladies' Liberal Association and others whom they invited to

join them, of known Liberal views, urging him to receive a

delegation and praying that

It may not in the future be said that women alone were unworthy

of any measure of confidence which you so rightly extended even

to the humblest and most ignorant men.

Mr. Gladstone declined to receive the deputation, partly on the

ground of illness, partly lest the admission of their views might

interfere with his plans for the bill. So the day of battle drew

on, when a rumor began to be circulated that the government

intended to oppose Mr. Woodall's clause, on the ground that its

admission might endanger the bill. Strenuous efforts were at the

same time made to induce him to withdraw the amendment, and the

government whips plainly intimated that the question would not be

considered an open one, on which members were to be free to vote

according to their convictions, but as one which the government had

made up their minds to oppose. With the hope of changing this

determination a memorial was signed by seventy-seven members of

parliament, and presented to Mr. Gladstone, asking him to leave the

introduction of the clause an open question. It represented--

That the Franchise bill being now in committee a favorable

opportunity is afforded for the discussion of the amendment for

extending its provisions to women, of which notice has been given

by Mr. Woodall.

That your memorialists have heard a rumor that her majesty's

government have declared against allowing the question to be

discussed and decided on its merits, on the ground that the

adoption of the proposal might endanger the bill.

That your memorialists are of the opinion that the claim of women

who are householders and ratepayers is just and reasonable, and

that the time when the House is engaged in amending the law

relating to the representation of the people is the proper time

for the consideration of this claim.

That during the discussion in committee on the Reform bill of

1867, an amendment for extending its provisions to women was

introduced by Mr. John Stuart Mill, and that on that occasion the

government of the day offered no opposition to the full and free

discussion of the question, and placed no restriction on the free

exercise of the judgment of members of their party as to the

manner in which they should vote. The tellers appointed against

Mr. Mill's motion were not even the government tellers.

That your memorialists earnestly pray that the precedent so

instituted may be followed on the present occasion, and that the

clause proposed by Mr. Woodall may be submitted to the free and

unbiased decision of the House on its own merits.

They desire earnestly to express their conviction that the course

of allowing the question to be an open one, on which the

government is prepared to accept the decision of the House,

cannot possibly endanger or prejudice the Franchise bill. In

connection with this your memorialists would press on your

attention the fact that Mr. Woodall's amendment is in the form of

a new clause, and would not therefore come under discussion until

the bill as it stands has passed through committee.

This request was refused. On June 9, such unexpected progress was

made by the committee of the House of Commons with the Franchise

bill that all the government clauses were carried. There were many

amendments on the paper which took precedence of Mr. Woodall's, but

these were hastily gone through or withdrawn, and in the middle of

the morning sitting of June 9, he rose and moved the introduction

of his clause. Mr. Woodall's speech was a masterpiece of earnest

but temperate reasoning. He was fortunate enough to present an old

and well-worn subject in new lights. He said that Mr. Gladstone had

affirmed the principle of the measure to be to give every

householder a vote, and it would now be his endeavor to pursuade

parliament that women were capable citizens, who would meet all the

conditions so clearly laid down by the prime minister. Against the

charge of inopportunity in bringing the subject forward at this

crisis, he reminded the House of Mr. Chamberlain's words on a

recent occasion, that it was always opportune to do right.

Mr. Gladstone said there were two questions to be considered. One

of these was the question whether women were to be enfranchised,

the other whether the enfranchisement should be effected by a

clause introduced in committee on the present bill. The second

question was that on which he was about to dwell. He deprecated

the introduction of new matter into the bill. The cargo which the

vessel carried was, in the opinion of the government, as large as

she could carry safely. The proposal was a very large one. It did

not seem unreasonable to believe that the number of persons in

the three kingdoms to be enfranchised by the amendment would be

little short of half a million. What was the position in which

Mr. Woodall placed the government when he requested them to

introduce a completely new subject on which men profoundly

differed, and which, it was clear, should receive a full and

dispassioned investigation? It was not now practicable to give

that investigation. This was one of those questions which it

would be intolerable to mix up with purely political and party

debates. If there was a subject in the whole compass of human

life and experience that was sacred beyond all other subjects it

was the character and position of woman. Did his honorable friend

ask him to admit that the question deserved the fullest

consideration? He gave him that admission freely. Did he ask

whether he (Mr. Gladstone) wished to bind the members of the

Government or his colleagues in the cabinet with respect to the

votes they would give on this question? Certainly not, provided

only that they took the subject from the vortex of political

contention. He was bound to say, whilst thus free and open on the

subject itself, that with regard to the proposal to introduce it

into this bill he offered it the strongest opposition in his

power, and must disclaim and renounce all responsibility for the

measure should Mr. Woodall succeed in inducing the committee to

adopt his amendment.

On motion of Lord John Manners the debate was adjourned till June

12.

On the intervening day a meeting was summoned of the general

committee of the society. Miss Cobbe first, and Mr. Woodall

subsequently, presided, and the following resolutions were passed:

_Resolved_, That the claim of duly qualified women to the

exercise of the suffrage having been continuously presented

before parliament and the country since the Reform bill of 1867,

this meeting is of opinion that the time when the legislature is

again engaged in amending the law relating to the representation

of the people is the proper time for the consideration of this

claim.

_Resolved_, That this meeting heartily approves of the amendment

which Mr. Woodall has moved in committee on the Franchise bill

for extending its provisions to duly qualified women, and pledge

themselves to support his action by every means in their power.

_Resolved_, That they have heard with astonishment that her

majesty's government refuse to allow this amendment to be

discussed on its merits and to be decided by the free exercise of

the judgment of members of the House of Commons, but that the

government require their supporters to refrain from such free

exercise of their judgment on the alleged ground that the

adoption of the proposal would endanger the Franchise bill.

_Resolved_, That in the opinion of this meeting the exercise of

such pressure appears to be an infringement of the privileges of

a free parliament and an aggression on the rights of the people.

They hold that all sections of the community, whether electors or

non-electors, have an indefeasible right to have matters

affecting their interests submitted to the unbiased judgment, and

decided by the unfettered discretion of the members sent to

represent them in parliament.

_Resolved_, That a declaration signed by 110 Liberal members of

the House of Commons was presented last session to Mr. Gladstone

which set forth that, in the opinion of the memorialists, no

measure for the assimilation of the borough and county franchise

could be satisfactory unless it contained provisions for

extending the suffrage, without distinction of sex, to all

persons who possess the statutory qualifications for the

parliamentary franchise.

_Resolved_, That this meeting calls upon those who signed this

declaration, and all other members who believe that the claim of

duly qualified women to the parliamentary franchise is reasonable

and just, to support the clause moved by Mr. Woodall, in

committee on the Franchise bill, for extending its provisions to

such women.

_Resolved_, That a copy of these resolutions be forwarded to Mr.

Gladstone and to every member of parliament.

_Resolved_, That petitions to both houses of parliament in

support of Mr. Woodall's clause be adopted and signed by the

chairman on behalf of this meeting.

Some members of parliament who attended this meeting explained that

though they were as firmly convinced as ever of the justice of the

claim, they could not vote for it after Mr. Gladstone's distinct

declaration that he would abandon the bill if the amendment were

passed. On June 12 Lord John Manners resumed the debate. He said:

That although this proposal had never been of a party character,

it had always been a political question. There was no question

connected with the franchise which had been more thoroughly

discussed, threshed and sifted. Guided by every consideration of

justice and fairness, of equity, of analogy and experience, he

should give it his cordial and unhesitating support.

The next speech of importance was Mr. Stansfeld's. He maintained

that the acceptance of the clause by the government would have

strengthened rather than weakened the bill, and that its insertion

certainly would not have rendered the bill less palatable to the

House of Lords:

The principle of this bill is household suffrage. Household

suffrage is one of two things--it is either put as a rough test

of capable citizenship, or else it means what I will call the

family vote. The women to be enfranchised under this clause would

be first of all women of property, intelligence and education,

having a status in the country; secondly a large class of women

of exceptional competency, because having lost the services and

support of men who should be the bread-winners and the heads of

families, they are obliged to step into their shoes and to take

upon themselves the burdens and responsibilities which had

previously devolved upon men, and because they have done this

with success. I decline either by word or deed to make the

admission that these women are less capable citizens than the

2,000,000 whom the right honorable gentleman proposes to

enfranchise by this bill. Well, then, let it be the family

vote--that is to say, exceptions apart, let the basis of our

constitution be that the family, represented by its head, should

be the unit of the State. Now that is the idea which recommends

and has always recommended itself to my mind. But on what

principle, or with what regard to the permanence and stability of

that principle, can you exclude the head of the family and give

that family no voice, because the head happens to be a woman? If

this clause be excluded from the measure, as it will be, this

will not be a bill of one principle, but of two principles. It

will not be a bill containing only the principle of household

suffrage interpreted as the family vote, but one founded on these

two principles--first, a male householding vote; and, secondly,

the exclusion of the head of the household when the head is a

woman. That is a permanent principle of exclusion, and therefore

the bill with this clause left out is a declaration for ever

against the political emancipation of women.

After some speeches against the motion Colonel King-Harman said:

In the old state of the franchise it was not so much a matter of

importance to women whether they possessed votes or not, but now

that this bill proposed to create two million new voters of a

much lower order than those now exercising the franchise, it

became of importance to secure some countervailing advantage.

They were told this was a matter which could wait. What were the

women to gain by waiting? They had waited for seventeen years

during which the subject had been discussed, and now they were

told to wait till two million of the common orders had been

admitted to a share in the parliamentary management of the

country. The honorable member for Huddersfield (Mr. Leatham) had

used an argument which he (Colonel King-Harman) thought a most

unworthy one, namely, that the franchise was not to be extended

to women, because, unhappily, there are women of a degraded and

debased class. Because there were 40,000 of them in this

metropolis alone, the remaining women who were pure and virtuous

were to be deprived of the power of voting. But would Mr. Leatham

guarantee that the 2,000,000 men he proposes to enfranchise shall

be perfectly pure and moral men? Would he propose a clause to

exclude from the franchise those men who lead and retain in vice

and degradation these unfortunate women? No--men may sin and be a

power in the State, but when a woman sins not only is she to have

no power, but her whole sisterhood are to be excluded from it. He

believed that every idea of common sense pointed to the

desirability of supporting the amendment, and he therefore had

great pleasure in doing so.

There were also excellent speeches from Mr. Cowen (Newcastle),

General Alexander, Sir Wilfred Lawson and Mr. Story, and finally

from Sir Stafford Northcote the leader of the Conservative

opposition. He observed:

That the prime minister had told them that they did not consider

this clause to be properly introduced now, because this was not

the time for the question. It seemed to him, on the contrary,

that it was the very best opportunity for dealing with it,

because they were going enormously to increase the electorate,

and would, therefore, make the inequality between men and women

much greater than it was before. It would be said they were going

to extend the property franchise if this amendment were carried.

On that issue they were prepared to join and to maintain that it

was a right thing, and it was the duty of that House to make

proper provision for those classes of property holders now

without a vote. Members who had canvassed boroughs would remember

that after going into two or three shops and asking for the votes

of those who were owners, they have come to one perhaps of the

most important shops and have been told, "Oh, it is of no use

going in, there is no vote there." Such women are probably of

education and gentle character, and perhaps live as widows and

take care of their families; they have every right to be

consulted as to who should be the man to represent the

constituency in which they lived and to take care of their

interests and the interests of those dependent on them. That was

the ground on which Lord Beaconsfield stood. They had adhered to

that ground for several years, and there they stood now.

The division took place at a late hour with the result that the

clause was defeated by 271 votes to 135, being a majority against

it of 136, or two to one. But though such a vote would have been a

sore discouragement if it had represented the real opinion of the

House, on the present occasion it meant little if anything. The

government had sent out a "five-line" whip for its supporters, and

so effective had this whip been, combined with Mr. Gladstone's

assertion that he would give up the responsibility of the bill if

the clause were carried, that 98 Liberals and 6 Home Rulers, known

to be supporters of our cause, voted with the government, even Mr.

Hugh Mason being among this number, while 34 Liberals and 7 Home

Rulers, also friends of ours, were absent from the division. We may

safely assume that had the government more wisely left it an open

question, upon which members were free to vote according to their

consciences, our defeat would have been turned into a victory. On

the other hand while our Liberal friends thus voted against the

amendment or abstained from voting, the bulk of our supporters in

this division were Conservatives, a circumstance unknown in the

previous history of the movement.

An important conference of friends and supporters was held the next

morning in the Westminster Palace Hotel at which Mr. Stansfeld

presided. To use Miss Tod's words:

Never had a defeated army met in a more victorious mood. There

was much indeed to encourage in the degree of importance to which

the question had attained. It had risen from a purely speculative

into a pressing political question; it had been debated during

two days, and it was heartily supported by the Conservative

leader.

The speeches at the conference were animated and full of hope for

the future. Mr. Stansfeld congratulated the meeting on having made

a new departure; their question had become one of practical

politics, and they had now to address themselves in all the

constituencies to the political organizations.

A magnificent meeting was held in St. James Hall the following

week. The hall was densely crowded in every part, and an overflow

meeting was arranged for those unable to gain admission. Some of

the speakers[562] proposed as the best measure for agitation, a

determined resistance against taxation.[563]

Repeated attempts to obtain a day for the debate and division were

followed by repeated disappointments. The session commenced in

November, 1884. Mr. Woodall at once gave notice of a bill. In

presenting it to the House, he concluded after consultation with

parliamentary friends, to add a clause defining the action of his

bill to be limited to unmarried women and widows.[564] The enacting

clause of the bill was as follows:

For all purposes of and incidental to the voting for members to

serve in parliament, women shall have the same rights as men, and

all enactments relating to or concerned in such elections shall

be construed accordingly, provided that nothing in this act shall

enable women under coverture to be registered or to vote at such

elections.

The addition of this clause excited much discussion. Those in favor

of it argued that this limitation would certainly be imposed in

committee of the House, which though it was in all probability

prepared to give the vote to women possessed of independence,

dreaded the extension of faggot votes which would have been the

almost inevitable consequence of admitting married women; while the

result would be the same whether the limitation clause was

introduced by the promoters of the bill or by a parliamentary

committee, and it would be more likely to obtain support at the

second reading if its intentions were made clear in the beginning.

On the other hand it was argued that the principle of giving the

vote to women in the same degree that it was given to men, was the

basis upon which the whole agitation rested; that marriage was no

disqualification to men, and therefore should not prove so to

women; and that, though it might be necessary to accept a

limitation by parliament, it was not right for the society to lower

its standard by proposing a compromise. This divergence in the

views of the supporters of the movement was the cause of much

discussion in the public press and elsewhere, and unfortunately

resulted in the abstention of some of the oldest friends of the

cause from working in support of this particular bill, although it

was admitted on all sides that if a day could be obtained its

chances in a division were very good.

The bill was introduced on November 19, 1884, and its opponents

took the unprecedented course of challenging a division at this

stage. Leave was however given to bring it in, and the second

reading was set down for November 25, and then for December 9; on

each occasion it was postponed owing to the adjournment of the

House. It was next set down for Wednesday, March 4, but its chance

was again destroyed by the appropriation by the government of all

Wednesdays for the Seats bill. Mr. Woodall then fixed on June 24,

but before that time the ministerial crisis occurred, and when that

day arrived the House had been adjourned for the reelections

consequent upon a change of government. He then obtained the first

place on Wednesday, July 22, but again ministers appropriated

Wednesdays, and all chances for the session being over, Mr. Woodall

gave order to discharge the bill.

This delay stands in sharp and painful contrast with the promptness

with which parliament passed the Medical Relief bill. A clause had

been inserted in the Franchise bill disfranchising any man who had

been in receipt of parish medical aid for himself or family. This

clause caused great dissatisfaction as it was stated it would

disqualify from voting a large number of laborers in the

agricultural counties; parliament therefore found time amidst all

the press of business and party divisions to pass the Medical

Relief bill removing this disfranchisement from _men_, though we

are repeatedly assured that nothing but the want of time prevents

their fair consideration of the enfranchisement of _women_. It is

another proof that there is always time for a representative

government to attend to the wants of its constituents.

Another effort was made in the House of Lords by Lord Denman who

introduced a bill for extending the parliamentary vote to women.

The committees[565] were unaware of his intention until they read

a notice of the bill in the newspapers. The enacting clause was as

follows:

All women, not legally disqualified, who have the same

qualifications as the present and future electors for counties

and divisions of counties and boroughs, shall be entitled to vote

for knights of the shire for counties and divisions of counties

and for boroughs, at every election.

A division was taken upon it on June 23, just after the Seats bill

had been passed and the peers were about to adjourn in consequence

of the change of government. Many protests were made that the time

was ill chosen, and some peers left the House to avoid recording

their votes while others voted against it without reference to its

merits as a question. The division showed 8 in favor and 36

against. There appears to be a strong impression that if a bill to

enfranchise women were passed by the Commons it would be accepted

by the Lords, while there is at the same time a feeling that any

measure dealing with the representation of the people should

originate with the Commons, and not in the upper House.

During the year 1885 we sustained the loss of many of the earliest

friends of the movement; chief among these Professor Fawcett, who

from the commencement of its history had given it his firm and

unflinching support. His conviction that justice and freedom must

gain the upper hand often caused him to take a more sanguine view

of the prospect than the event has justified. He was the firm

friend of women in all their recent efforts, and helped them to

obtain employment in the civil service, to enter the medical

profession, to open the universities, and in many other ways. Next

to be mentioned is the death of Mrs. Stansfeld. She was the

daughter of Mr. William H. Ashurst, who was a staunch advocate of

freedom and may be remembered as the first English friend of

William L. Garrison. She had been a member of the suffrage

committee in London for more than sixteen years, and gave unfailing

sympathy to all the efforts made by her noble husband, James

Stansfeld, in behalf of the rights of humanity. This year has also

been saddened by the death of Mrs. Ronald Shearer, formerly Helena

Downing, an able and true-hearted woman, who had devoted her

strength and talents to the furtherance of our cause at a time when

its advocates were still the objects of ridicule and attack.

The electorate of three millions of men is now increased to five

millions, and by this extension of the suffrage the difficulty of

waging an up-hill fight in the interests of the still excluded

class has also been increased. The interests of the newly

represented classes will imperatively claim precedence in the new

parliament. Like the emancipated blacks who received the vote after

the American civil war, while the women who had supported the cause

of the Union by their enthusiasm and their sacrifices were passed

over, the miners and laborers of English counties have received the

franchise for which they have never asked, in preference to the

women who have worked, petitioned and organized themselves for

years to secure it. Women have now to appeal to this new electorate

to grant that justice which the old electorate has denied them;

they have to begin again the weary round of educating their new

masters by appeals and arguments; they will once more see their

interests "unavoidably" deferred to the interests of the

represented classes; they will once again be bidden to stand aside

till it is time for another Reform bill to be considered!

In recounting the history of woman suffrage frequent allusion has

been made to the parallel movements which have been carried on

through the same course of years; the most important of these have

been: (1) The admission of women to fields of public usefulness;

(2) removal of legal disabilities and hardships; (3) admission to a

better education and greater freedom of employment. Much of the

progress that has been made has been the work of the active friends

of woman suffrage, and under the fostering care of the suffrage

societies.

Under the first division comes the work of women on the

school-boards. The education act of 1870 expressly guaranteed their

right of being elected, and even in the first year several were

elected. One, Miss Becker, in Manchester, has retained her seat

ever since. In London the number of lady members has greatly

varied. Beginning with two, Miss Jarrett and Miss Davis, in 1879 it

rose to nine, but now, 1885, has sunk again to three, Miss

Davenport Hill, Mrs. Westlake, and Mrs. Webster. Taken as a whole,

their influence has been very usefully exerted for the benefit of

the children and the young teachers. Under this head also comes

women's work as poor-law guardians. The first was elected in

Kensington in 1875. Six years afterwards a small society to promote

the election of women was founded by Miss Mueller, and the number

elected is steadily increasing. There are now in England and

Scotland in all forty-six. In Ireland women are still debarred from

this useful work. The election occurs every year, and it is one of

the local franchises that women as well as men exercise. Last year

three ladies were appointed members of the Metropolitan Board which

looks after London hospitals and asylums. In 1873 Mr. Stansford,

then president of the local government board, appointed Mrs. Hassan

Session assistant inspector of work-houses, and after an interval

of twelve years Miss Mason was appointed to the same position.

Women are also sometimes appointed as church wardens, overseers of

the roads, and registrars of births and deaths. These are the only

public offices they fill.

Under the second heading, the removal of legal disabilities, is

included the Married Woman's Property act, which was finally passed

in 1882, twenty-five years after it had been first brought forward

in parliament by Sir Erskine Perry. The ancient law of England

transferred all property held by a woman, except land, absolutely

to her husband. A step was gained in 1870 by which the money she

had actually earned became her own. This was followed by frequent

amendments, sometimes in Scotland, sometimes in England, and a

comprehensive bill met with frequent vicissitudes, now in the House

of Lords, now in the Commons. The honor of this long contest is

chiefly due to Mrs. Jacob Bright and Mrs. Wolstenholme Elmy, whose

unwearied efforts were finally crowned with success by the act of

1882, under which the property of a married woman is absolutely

secured to her as if she were single, and the power to contract and

of sueing and being sued, also secured to her. The right to the

custody of their own children is another point for which women are

struggling. In 1884, Mr. Bryce, M. P., brought in a bill to render

a mother the legal guardian of her children after the father's

death. This was read a second time by a vote of 207 for, and only

73 against. In 1885, however, though passing the House of Lords, it

was postponed till too late in the Commons. Another important

alteration in the legal condition of married women was made in

1878. In that year Mr. Herschell introduced the Matrimonial Causes

act to remedy a gross injustice in the divorce law, and Lord

Pensance inserted a clause which provided that if a woman were

brutally ill-treated by her husband, a magistrate might order a

separate maintenance for her and assign her the care of her

children. It is no secret that the original drafting of this clause

was due to Miss Frances Power Cobbe. The long struggle which is not

yet terminated against the infamous Contagious Diseases acts

belongs to this division of work. The acts were passed in 1866,

'69, and for many years were supported by an overpowering majority

of the House of Commons. Mr. Stansfeld, who has always been the

supporter of every movement advancing the influence of women, has

been the leader of this agitation. Mrs. Josephine Butler, Mrs.

Stewart of Ougar, and latterly Mrs. Ormiston Chant, have been the

most untiring speakers on this question. On April 26, 1883, Mr.

Stansfeld carried a resolution by a vote of 184 against 112 for the

abolition of the acts, since which time the acts have been

suspended, but we must look to the new parliament for their total

repeal. The Criminal-law Amendment act was the great triumph of

1885. It had been postponed session after session, but the bold

denunciation of Mr. Stead, editor of the _Pall Mall Gazette_,

finally roused the national conscience, and now a larger measure of

protection is afforded to young girls than has ever been known

before.

Of the successive steps by which colleges have been founded for

women, and the universities opened to them, it is impossible to

give any record. The London University and the Royal University of

Ireland, recognize fully the equality of women; nine ladies secured

the B. A. diploma from the latter university in 1884, and nine more

in 1885. Oxford and Cambridge extend their examinations to women.

The Victoria University acknowledges their claim to examination.

The London school of medicine gives a first rate education to women

(there are 48 this session), and the Royal College of Surgeons,

Dublin, admits them to its classes. There are now about 45 ladies

who are registered as medical practitioners. One of them, Miss

Edith Stone, was appointed by Mr. Fawcett medical superintendent of

the female staff at the general post-office, London. The success of

the movement for supplying women as physicians for the vast Indian

empire has attained remarkable success during the last two years.

FOOTNOTES:

[536] This was called out by the movement in America. A report of a

convention held in Worcester, Mass., published in the New York

_Tribune_, fell into the hands of Mrs. Taylor and aroused her to

active thought on the question. She comments on a very able series

of resolutions passed at this convention, in which such men

as Emerson, Parker, Channing, Garrison and Phillips took

part.--[EDITORS.

[537] _Council of the Association_--Mrs. S. Turner, Mrs. S.

Bartholomew, Mrs. E. Stephenson, Mrs. M. Whalley, Mrs. E. Rooke,

Mrs. E. Wade, Mrs. C. Ash, president _pro tem._, Mrs. E.

Cavill, treasurer, Mrs. M. Brook, financial-secretary, Mrs. A.

Higginbottom, corresponding secretary.

[538] Mrs. Biggs, Anna Knight, Mrs. Hugo Reid and many other

English women were roused to white heat on this question, by the

exclusion of women as delegates from the World's Anti-slavery

Convention held in London in 1840. That was the first pronounced

public discussion, lasting one entire day, on the whole question of

woman's rights that ever took place in England, and as the

arguments were reproduced in the leading journals and discussed at

every fireside, a grand educational work was inaugurated at

that time. The American delegates spent several months in

England--Lucretia Mott speaking at many points. She occupied the

Unitarian pulpit in London and elsewhere. As Mrs. Hugo Reid sat in

this convention throughout the proceedings and met Lucretia Mott

socially on several occasions, we may credit her outspoken

opinions, in 1843, in a measure to these influences.--[EDITORS.

[539] The committee as at first formed, consisted of the following

persons: The very Rev. the Dean of Canterbury, Dr. Alford, Miss

Jessie Boucherett, Professor Cairnes, Rev. W. L. Clay, Miss Davies,

the originator of Girton College, Lady Goldsmid, Mr. G. W.

Hastings, Mr. James Heywood, Mrs. Knox, Miss Manning, and Mrs.

Hensleigh Wedgwood. Mrs. Peter A. Taylor was treasurer, and Mrs. J.

W. Smith, _nee_ Miss Garrett, honorary secretary. A few months

later Mrs. Smith's death left this post vacant, and Mrs. P. A.

Taylor then assumed the office of secretary which she retained with

the aid of Miss Caroline Ashurst Biggs till 1871. No one else could

have rendered such services to our movement while it was in its

infancy as Mrs. Taylor gave. Her gentle and dignified presence, her

untiring energy, the experience of organization and public life

which she already possessed, her influence with an extended circle

of friends chosen from among the most liberal thinkers of the

nation, secured at once attention and respect for any cause she

took up. Many years before she had worked hard for the association

of the Friends of Italy, and on the breaking out of the American

civil war her sympathies and practical knowledge led her to found a

society for assisting the freedmen. In acknowledgment of the

invaluable assistance she rendered, her friends in America sent a

book containing a complete set of photographs of all the chief

anti-slavery workers. When she began her efforts for women's

suffrage, the English Abolitionists were among the first

correspondents to whom she applied, and they nearly all responded

cordially. For years her house, Aubrey House, Kensington, was the

centre of the London organization to which she gave her time,

strength, and money, well earning the title of "Mother of the

Movement," which loving friends have since bestowed.

[540] In 1869, 255 petitions, signed by 61,475 persons; in 1870,

663 petitions, signed by 134,561 persons; in 1871, 622 petitions,

signed by 186,976 persons (75 of these petitions were from public

meetings and signed only by the chairman, or from town councils and

sealed with the official seal); in 1872, 829 petitions with 350,093

signatures; in 1873, 919 petitions, with 329,206 signatures; in

1874, 1,494 petitions with 430,343 signatures; and in 1875, 1,273

petitions were sent in containing 415,622 signatures.

[541] This lady, sister of John and Jacob Bright, and wife of the

senior member for Edinburgh, Mr. Duncan McLaren, so much esteemed

that he was sometimes spoken of as the "Member for Scotland,"

unites in her own person all the requisites for a leader of the

movement. She has the charm and dignified grace so generally found

among Quaker ladies, and the pathetic eloquence which belong to her

family. She is clear-sighted in planning action, and enthusiastic

and warm-hearted in carrying it out, and for the past sixteen years

the movement in Scotland has centered around her.

[542] Mr. Thomas Hare, Mr. Boyd Kinnear, Mr. Mill, who was no

longer in parliament, the Rev. Charles Kingsley (this was the first

and only meeting at which he was present), Prof. Fawcett, M. P. and

Mrs. Fawcett, Lord Houghton, Mr. John Morley, Sir Charles W. Dilke,

Bt. M. P., Mr. P. A. Taylor, M. P., Professor Masson of Edinburgh,

and Mr. Stamfeld, M. P.

[543] Mrs. Penington, Mr. Hopwood, Q. C. and Professor Amos were

honorary secretaries the first year, and succeeding them Miss C. A.

Biggs and Miss Agnes Garrett. The principal committees united with

the central, including Bristol, Birmingham, Manchester, Edinburgh,

Dublin and the North of Ireland.

[544] Minutes of a meeting at the House of Commons, June 23, 1875.

Present: The Right Honorable E. P. Bouverie, in the chair; and the

following members of parliament: Right Hon. H. C. Childers, Marquis

of Hamilton, Lord Randolph Churchill, Hon. E. Stanhope, Mr.

Bentinck, Mr. Beresford Hope, Mr. Chaplin, Mr. Hayter, Sir Henry

Holland, Sir Henry James, Mr. Kay Shuttleworth, Mr. Edward Leatham,

Mr. Merewether, Mr. Newdegate, Mr. Raikes, Mr. de Rothschild, Mr.

Scousfield, Mr. Whitbread.

_Resolved_, That a committee of peers, members of parliament and

other influential men be organized for the purpose of maintaining

the integrity of the franchise, in opposition to the claims for the

extension of the parliamentary suffrage to women.

_Resolved_, That Mr. E. P. Bouverie be requested to act as

chairman, and Lord Claud John Hamilton and Mr. Kay Shuttleworth as

honorary secretaries.

The following members have since joined those named above: Lord

Elcho, Right Hon. E. Knatchbull-Hugessen, Right Hon. J. R. Mowbray,

Sir Thomas Bazley, Mr. Butt, Mr. Gibson and Colonel Kingscote.

[545] We must mention the names of the ladies who during the

previous two or three years had been most active in speaking and

organizing societies. So many meetings had been held that there was

hardly a town of any importance in England, Ireland or Scotland

where the principles of woman suffrage had not been explained and

canvassed. One of the foremost for her activity in this department

of work was Miss Mary Beedy, an American lady, resident for some

years in England. She had thoroughly mastered the legal and

political condition of the question in this country, and her

untiring energy, her clear common sense, and her ready logic made

her advocacy invaluable. The regret was general when she was

compelled to return to America. Miss Helena Downing, niece of Mr.

McCarthy Downing, member of parliament for Cork, arranged and gave

many lectures during 1873 and 1874. Miss. Lillias Ashworth,

honorary secretary of the Bristol committee, frequently spoke at

meetings about this time. In Scotland Miss Jane Taylour and others

still continued their indefatigable labors, in which they were

frequently assisted by Miss Isabella Stuart of Balgonie in

Fifeshire. In Ireland, in addition to the usual meetings in the

north, a series of meetings in the south was undertaken by Miss

Tod, Miss Beedy and Miss Downing. Other meetings were addressed by

Miss Fawcett, Miss Becker, Miss Caroline Biggs, Miss Eliza Sturge,

Miss Rhoda Garrett, Mrs. Fenwick-Miller and many others. During

1873 Mrs. Henry Kingsley, sister-in-law of one novelist and wife of

another, also spoke frequently. Space fails me to do justice to the

varied powers of the speakers who have carried our movement on

during these years of patient perseverance; to the clear logic and

convincing power of Mrs. Fawcett's speeches; to the thrilling

eloquence of her cousin, Rhoda Garrett, now, alas! no longer with

us; to Miss Becker's accurate legal knowledge and masterly

presentation of facts and arguments; to Miss Helena Downing's

eloquence marked by the humor, pathos and power which were hers by

national inheritance. During these years of trial, too, the cause

owed much to the strenuous advocacy of the Misses Ashworth, Anne

Frances and Lillias Sophia, nieces of Jacob Bright. Miss Ashworth

did not herself speak at meetings, but she comforted and helped

those who did, while Lillias possessed the family gift of eloquence

and charmed her audience by her witty, forcible and telling

speeches. So numerous and so well attended have been these meetings

during these and subsequent years, that it is impossible to

exonerate men and women from the charge of willful blindness if

they still misconstrue the plain facts of the question.

[546] First in the list came six ladies, members of school-boards:

Mrs. Buckton of Leeds, Miss Helena Richardson of Bristol, Mrs.

Surr, Mrs. Westlake, Mrs. Fenwick Miller and Miss Helen Taylor,

London; then followed the opinions of ladies who were guardians of

the poor. Forty ladies known as authoresses or painters came next

on the list; among these were Mrs. Allingham, Mrs. Cowden Clarke,

Mrs. Eiloart, Mary Howitt, Emily Pfeiffer, Augusta Webster. Women

doctors came next: Dr. Garrett Anderson, Dr. Annie Barker, Dr.

Elizabeth Blackwell, Dr. Sophia Jex-Blake, Dr. Eliza Dunbar, Dr.

Frances Hoggan, Dr. Edith Pechey; and next to the doctors came Miss

Eliza Orme, the only woman who was successfully practicing law. The

section of education included the names of Mrs. Wm. Gray, and her

sister. Miss Shirreff, Mrs. Nichol (Edinburgh), Miss Emily Davies,

founder of Girton College, Miss Byers, founder of the Ladies'

Collegiate School, Belfast, Mrs. Crawshay and Miss Mary Gurney.

Nineteen ladies, the heads of women's colleges and high-schools,

next gave their reasons why they desired the suffrage. After these

came ladies engaged in philanthropic work, which included the

sisters Rosamund and Florence Davenport Hill, Florence Nightingale,

Miss Ellice Hopkins, eminent for rescue work; Miss Irby, well-known

for her efforts among the starving Bosnian fugitives; Miss Manning,

secretary of the National Indian Association; Mrs. Southey,

secretary of the Women's Peace Association; Mrs. Lucas, and Mrs.

Edward Parker, president and secretary of the British Women's

Temperance Society. The opinions were various, both in kind and in

length, some being only a confession of faith in a couple of lines,

others a page of able reasoning.

[547] Miss Tod gives the spirit to each movement in Ulster, which

is the intellectual headquarters of Ireland. She is the pioneer in

all matters of reform; she is asked to speak in churches; she

instigated the efforts which led to girls participating in the

benefits of the Irish Intermediate Education act, which was being

restricted to boys; she has organized and has won friends and votes

not only over her own district of Ulster, but in many other

quarters of Ireland; and often when in England some indefinable

torpor has crept over a meeting--as will happen at times--a few

eloquent and heart-stirring words from her have been sufficient to

raise the courage and revive the interest.

[548] Mrs. Peter A. Taylor, Mrs. Fawcett, Mrs. Lucas, Miss Biggs,

Miss Rhoda Garrett, Miss Jessie Boucherett, Mrs. Arthur Arnold,

Miss Frances Power Cobbe, Lady Harberton, Mrs. Pennington, Miss

Helen Taylor, step-daughter of John Stuart Mill, Miss Henrietta

Mueller, member of the London school-board, and others.

[549] Mrs. Jacob Bright, Miss Becker, Mrs. Scatcherd, Miss Corbutt,

Mr. Steinthal, Mrs. Thomasson, and others.

[550] Led by Mrs. Lillias Ashworth Hallett, Mrs. Helen Bright

Clark, niece and daughter of John Bright, Mrs. Beddoe, Miss Snyder,

Miss Estlin, the Priestman sisters, Miss Blackburn and Miss Colby,

Eliza Sturge, Mrs. Ashford, Mrs. Matthews. Mrs. Ann Comen and Mrs.

Alfred Osler, niece of Mrs. Peter Taylor, are the chief Birmingham

and Nottingham workers.

[551] Lady Harberton, Mrs. Scatcherd, Mrs. Ashworth Hallet, Mrs.

Josephine Butler, Mrs. Ellis, Miss Eliza Sturge, Mrs. Wellstood

(Edinburgh), Mrs. Haslam (Dublin), Miss Becker, Mrs. Pearson, Miss

Jessie Craigen, Miss Helena Downing, Miss Lucy Wilson, Mrs. Nichols

(Edinburgh), Mrs. O'Brien, and in the overflow meeting Mrs. Lucas

and Miss Biggs. At the close of the meeting the enthusiastic and

prolonged cheering which rose from the crowd, the cordial

hand-shakes of utter strangers with words of encouragement and

sympathy brought tears to the eyes of many who had the privilege of

being present on that occasion.

[552] Mrs. McLaren occupied the chair and was accompanied by Mrs.

Nichol, Miss Wigham, Miss Tod, Mrs. Charles McLaren, Miss Craigen,

Miss Becker, Miss Beddoe, Mrs. Shearer (formerly Miss Helena

Downing), Miss Flora Stevenson, Mrs. Wellstood, Miss Annie

Stoddart, Mrs. Burton and a distinguished visitor from New York,

Mrs. Elizabeth Cady Stanton, who was able on this visit to England

to estimate the wide difference in the position of women since the

time--more than forty years before--she had been refused a seat as

a delegate in the World's Anti-Slavery Convention in London.

[553] MARRIED WOMEN'S PROPERTY COMMITTEE.--The committee, at the

time of the final meeting, November 18, 1882, consisted of the

following ladies and gentlemen: Mrs. Addey; Mr. Arthur Arnold, M.

P.; Mrs. Arthur Arnold; Mr. Jacob Bright, M. P.; Mrs. Josephine E.

Butler; Mr. Thomas Chorlton; Mr. L. H. Courtney, M. P.; Sir C. W.

Dilke, Bart., M. P.; Rev. Alfred Dewes, D.D., LL.D.; Mrs. Gell;

Lady Goldsmid; Rev. Septimus Hansard; Mr. Thomas Hare; Miss Ida

Hardcastle; Mrs. Hodgson; Mr. William Malleson; Mrs. Moore; Mr. H.

N. Mozley; Dr. Pankhurst; Mrs. Pankhurst; Mrs. Shearer; Mrs.

Sutcliffe; Mr. P. A. Taylor, M. P.; Mrs. P. A. Taylor; Mrs.

Venturi; Miss Alice Wilson; Miss Lucy Wilson; _Treasurer_, Mrs.

Jacob Bright. _Secretary_, Mrs. Wolstenholme Elmy.

The immediate passage of this bill was in a large measure due to

Mrs. Jacob Bright, who was unwearied in her efforts, in rolling up

petitions, scattering tracts, holding meetings, and in company with

her husband having private interviews with members of parliament.

For ten consecutive years she gave her special attention to this

bill. I had the pleasure of attending the meeting of congratulation

November 18, and heard a very charming address from Mrs. Bright on

the success of the measure. Mr. Jacob Bright and other members of

the committee spoke with equal effect.--[E. C. S.

[554] The Contagious Diseases acts.

[555] Miss Henrietta Mueller and her sister Mrs. Eva McLaren, Mrs.

Ormiston Chant, Mrs. Ashton Dilke, Mrs. Oliver Scatcherd, Mrs.

Charles McLaren, Miss Florence Balgarnie, Miss Laura Whittle,

Florence and Lillie Stacpoole, Miss Frances Lord, Mrs. Stanton

Blatch and Mrs. Helena Downing Shearer.

[556] The inscription was: "Women Claim Equal Justice with Men.

_The Friends of Women_: Henry Fawcett, John Stuart Mill, Chas.

Cameron, Jacob Bright, Leonard Courtney, Duncan McLaren, George

Anderson, James Stansfeld, Sir Wilfred Lawson, J.P. Thomasson."

[557] Mrs. Buchanan, Curriehill; Mrs. O. Scatcherd, Leeds; Mrs.

Nichol, Mrs. M'Laren, Miss Wigham, Dr. A. M'Laren, Miss Hunter,

Mrs. Paterson, Miss L. Stevenson, Miss F. Stevenson, Mrs. M'Queen,

Mrs. Hope, Mrs. M. Miller, Miss S.S. Mair, Miss R. Smith, Miss E.

Kirkland, Mrs. Raeburn and Miss A.G. Wyld, Edinburgh; Mrs. O.

Chant, Mrs. Hodgson, Bonaly; Miss Tod, Belfast; Mrs. Somerville,

Dalkeith; Mrs. Forbes, Loanhead; Mrs. D. Greig, Mrs. Erskine

Murray, Miss Greig, Mrs. Lindsay, Miss Barton and Mrs. A. Campbell,

Glasgow; Miss Simpson, Miss Caldwell, Portobello; Mrs. M'Kinnel,

Dumfries; Mrs. M'Cormick, Manchester; Miss Burton, Liberton; Miss

Balgarnie, Scarborough; Miss A.S. Smith, Gorebridge; Miss Drew,

Helensburgh; Miss Blair, Girvan; Mrs. Smith, Mrs. F. Smith,

Bothwell.

[558] Miss Helen Taylor, Mrs. Lucas, Mrs. Fawcett, London; Mrs.

Thomasson, Bolton; Miss Orme, Miss Jane Cobden, Miss C. A. Biggs,

Mrs. Fenwick-Miller, Mrs. Ashton Dilke, London; Mrs. Hallet, Bath;

Miss Becker, Manchester; Miss Priestman, Bristol; Mrs. Helen Bright

Clark, Street, Somersetshire; Miss Mueller, London; Mrs. Eva

M'Laren, Bradford; Mrs. Charles M'Laren, London; Mrs. Pochin,

Bodnant, Conway; Mrs. Campbell, Tilliechewan Castle; Mrs.

Charteris, Edinburgh; Mrs. Edward Caird, Mrs. Young, Mrs. Kinnear,

Mrs. A. B. M'Grigor, Glasgow; Mrs. Arthur, Barshaw, Paisley; Mrs.

Readdie, Perth; Miss Birrel, Cupar; Mrs. Dunn, Aberdeen; Miss

Duncan, Foxhall; Miss Chalmers, Slateford; Miss Smith, Linlithgow;

Miss Macrobie, Bridge of Allan; Mrs. Ritchie, Mrs. Greenlees,

Glasgow; Mrs. Ord, Nesbit, Kelso; Mrs. Gordon, Nairn; Mrs. Gerrard,

Aberdeen; Miss Stoddart, Kelso; Mrs. Robertson, Paisley; Miss

Maitland, Corstorphine.

[559] EDINBURGH.--The first resolution was moved by Miss Tod and

seconded by Mrs. Scatcherd:

_Resolved_, That this meeting, whilst thanking the 110 Liberal

members who signed the memorial to Mr. Gladstone to the effect

that no measure of reform would be satisfactory which did not

recognize the claims of women householders, trusts that since the

bill unjustly excludes them, these members will be faithful to

the convictions expressed in that memorial, and will support any

amendment to the bill which has for its object the

enfranchisement of duly qualified women.

The second resolution, a memorial to Mr. Gladstone, was moved by

Miss Flora Stevenson, member of the Edinburgh school-board,

seconded by Mrs. McLaren and supported by Miss Florence Balgarnie

and Mrs. Ormiston Chant. The third resolution, the adoption of

petitions, was moved by Miss S. S. Mair, a grand-niece of Mrs.

Siddons, and Mrs. Lindsay of Glasgow.

BATH, GUILD HALL.--Presided over by the mayor. Among other speakers

were Mrs. Beddoe, Miss Becker, Mrs. Jeffrey and Mrs. Ashworth

Hallet.

NEWCASTLE, TOWN HALL.--Followed on April 21, under the presidency

of the mayor. The crowd was so great that an overflow meeting had

to be arranged. The speakers were Mrs. Ashton Dilke, Miss Tod, Mrs.

Eva McLaren and Mrs. Scatcherd. The audience was largely composed

of miners and working people, and the enthusiasm manifested was

striking. A Newcastle paper reports that this was the first

occasion on which Mrs. Ashton Dilke had appeared in public since

her husband's death, and tears glistened in many eyes as the men

who were his constituents welcomed her among them once more. Some

miners walked twelve miles to hear her and twelve miles back after

the meeting, who had to go down the pit at 3 o'clock next morning.

Some could not get in, and pleaded piteously for an overflow

meeting. "We have come a long way to hear Mistress Dilke; do bring

her." Some women after hearing Miss Tod said: "She's worth hearing

twice, is that," and insisted on following her to the overflow

meeting.

LONDON, ST. JAMES HALL.--Three days later there was a great meeting

presided over by Sir Richard Temple G. C. S. I., and addressed by

Mr. W. Summers, M. P., Mrs. Fawcett, the Rt. Hon. Jas. Stansfeld,

M. P., Mrs. Charles McLaren, Mr. Woodall, M. P., Mr. J. Rankin, M.

P., Miss Tod, Mr. J. R. Hollond, M. P., Viscountess Harberton and

Miss Jane Cobden.

[560] The result is as follows:

No. of Inhabited Estimated No. of

Houses. Women Householders.

ENGLAND AND WALES.

Boroughs, 2,098,476 340,746

Counties, 2,733,043 390,434

----------4,831,519 --------740,180

SCOTLAND.

Boroughs, 329,328 54,888

Counties, 409,677 58,525

--------739,005 -------113,413

IRELAND.

Boroughs, 129,837 21,339

Counties, 784,571 98,034

--------914,108 -------119,373

-------

972,966

[561] Signed by Eveline Portsmouth (Countess of Portsmouth), E. P.

Verney (Lady Verney), Florence Nightingale, Anne J. Clough (Newham

College), Clara E. L. Rayleigh (Lady Rayleigh), Selina Hogg (Lady

Hogg), Anna Swanwick, Julia Camperdown (Countess of Camperdown),

Mina E. Holland, (Mrs. John Holland), (Lady) Dorothy Nevill,

Millicent Garrett Fawcett, Helen P. Bright Clark, Jane E. Cobden,

Elizabeth Adelaide Manning, M. Power (Lady Power), Louisa Colthurst

(Dowager Lady Colthurst), Frances E. Hoggan, M. D., Florence

Davenport Hill (Poor-law Guardian), Louisa Twining (Poor-law

Guardian), Maryanne Donkin (Poor-law Guardian), Rosamond Davenport

Hill (M. L. S. B.), Mary Howitt, Maria G. Grey, Emily A. E.

Shireff, Deborah Bowring (Lady Bowring), Emily Pfeiffer, Barbara L.

S. Bodichon, Augusta Webster, Catherine M. Buckton, Frances M. Buss

(North London Collegiate School), Sophia Bryant, B. Sc., Malvira

Borchardt (Head Mistress of Devonport High School), Louisa

Boucherett, Jessie Boucherett, Margaret Byers (Ladies' Collegiate

School, Belfast), Ellice Hopkins.

[562] Mrs. Lucas presiding, Dr. Garrett Anderson, Miss Becker, Miss

Orme, Mrs. Beddoe, Mrs. Scatcherd, Mrs. Eva M'Laren, Mrs. Simcok,

Mrs. Stanton Blatch, Mrs. Louisa Stevenson, Miss Balgarnie, Miss

Mueller, Miss Wilkinson, Mrs. Ashworth Hallett, Miss Tod.

[563] Miss Mueller's spirited protest against taxation without

representation, owing to her official reputation as a member of the

London school-board, attracted unusual attention. For some time she

kept her doors barred against the coarse minions of the law, but

ultimately they entered the house, seized her goods and carried

them off to be sold at public auction, but they were bought in by

friends next day. Miss Charlotte E. Hall and Miss Babb have

protested and resisted taxation for many years.

It is probable that Miss Mueller's example will be followed by many

others next year. This quiet form of protest used to be very

generally followed by members of the society of Friends, and must

command the sympathy of our co-workers in the United States, who

date their national existence from their refusal to submit to

taxation without representation.--[E. C. S.

[564] The bill was prepared and brought in by Mr. Woodall, Mr.

Illingworth, Mr. Coleridge Kennard, Mr. Stansfeld, Mr. Yorke and

Baron Henry de Worms.

[565] _Central Committee of the National Society for Women's

Suffrage_--Mrs. Ashford (Birmingham), Miss Lydia E. Becker

(Manchester), Alfred W. Bennett, esq., M. A., Miss Caroline Ashurst

Biggs, Miss Helen Blackburn, Miss Jessie Boucherett, Hon. Emmeline

Canning, Miss Frances Power Cobbe, Miss Jane Cobden, Miss

Courtenay, Leonard Courteny, esq., M. P., Mrs. Cowen (Nottingham),

Miss Mabel Sharman Crawford, Mrs. Ashton Dilke, Hon. Mrs. Maurice

Drummond (Hampstead), Mrs. Millicent G. Fawcett, Miss Agnes

Garrett, Rev. C. Green (Bromley), Mrs. Ashworth Hallett (Bristol),

Viscountess Harberton, Thomas Hare, esq., Mrs. Ann Maria Haslam

(Dublin), Frederick Hill, esq., Mrs. John Hollond, Mrs. Frank

Morrison, C. H. Hopwood, esq., Q. C., M. P., Mrs. John Hullah,

Coleridge Kennard, esq., M. P., Mrs. Margaret Bright Lucas, Mrs. E.

M. Lynch, Robert Main, esq., Mrs. Laura Pochin McLaren, Mrs. Eva

Mueller McLaren (Bradford), Mrs. Priscilla Bright McLaren

(Edinburgh), Miss Henrietta Mueller, Frederick Pennington, esq., M.

P., Mrs. F. Pennington, Miss Reeves, Mrs. Saville, Miss Lillie

Stacpole, Rev. S. A. Steinthal (Manchester), J. S. Symon, esq.,

Miss Helen Taylor, Sir Richard Temple, G. C. S. I.; J. P.

Thomasson, esq., M. P., Mrs. Katherine Lucas Thomasson (Bolton),

Miss Isabella M. Tod (Belfast), Miss Williams, William Woodall,

esq. M. P. _Secretary_, Miss Florence Balgarnie. _Assistant

Secretary_, Miss Torrance. _Organizing Agent_, Miss Moore.

_Treasurer_, Mrs. Laura Pochin McLaren. _Office_, 29 Parliament

street, London S. W.

CHAPTER LVII.

CONTINENTAL EUROPE.[566]

BY THEODORE STANTON.

If you would know the political and moral status of a

people, demand what place its women occupy.--[L. AIME

MARTIN.

There is nothing, I think, which marks more decidedly the

character of men or of nations, than the manner in which

they treat women.--[HERDER.

The Woman Question in the Back-ground--In France the Agitation

Dates from the Upheaval of 1789--International Women's Rights

Convention in Paris, 1878--Mlle. Hubertine Auclert Leads the

Demand for Suffrage--Agitation began in Italy with the

Kingdom--Concepcion Arenal in Spain--Coeducation in

Portugal--Germany: Leipsic and Berlin--Austria in Advance of

Germany--Caroline Svetla of Bohemia--Austria Unsurpassed in

contradictions--Marriage Emancipates from Tutelage in

Hungary--Dr. Henrietta Jacobs of Holland--Dr. Isala van Diest of

Belgium--In Switzerland the Catholic Cantons Lag Behind--Marie

Goegg, the Leader--Sweden Stands First--Universities Open to

Women in Norway--Associations in Denmark--Liberality of Russia

toward Women--Poland--The Orient--Turkey--Jewish Wives--The Greek

Woman in Turkey--The Greek Woman in Greece--An Unique

Episode--Woman's Rights in the American Sense not known.

The reader of the preceding pages will be sorely disappointed if he

expects to find in this brief chapter a similar record of progress

and reform. If, however, he looks simply for an earnest of the

future, for a humble beginning of that wonderful revolution in

favor of women which has occurred in the United States, and to a

less degree in England, during the past quarter of a century, his

expectations will be fully realized. More than this; he will close

this long account of woman's emancipation in the new world

convinced that in due season a similar blessing is to be enjoyed by

the women of the old world.

For the moment, the woman question in Europe is pushed into the

background by the all-absorbing struggle still going on in various

forms between the republican and monarchical principle, between the

vital present and the moribund past; but the most superficial

observer must perceive, that the amelioration of the lamentable

situation of European womanhood is sure to be one of the first

problems to come to the front for resolution, as soon as liberty

gains undisputed control on this continent,--a victory assured in

the not-distant future. When men shall have secured their rights,

the battle will be half won; women's rights will follow as a

natural sequence.

The most logical beginning for a sketch of the woman movement on

the continent, and indeed of any step in advance, is of course

France, where ideas, not facts, stand out the more prominently;

for, in questions of reform, the abstract must always precede the

concrete,--public opinion must be convinced before it will accept

an innovation. This has been the _role_ of France in Europe ever

since the great revolution; it is her _role_ to-day. She is the

agitator of the old world, and agitation is the lever of reform.

[Illustration: George Sand]

The woman movement in France dates from the upheaval of 1789.

Though the demands for the rights of man threw all other claims

into the shade, a few women did not fail to perceive that they also

had interests at stake. Marie Olympe de Gouges, for example, in her

"Declaration of the Rights of Woman," vindicated for her sex all

the liberties proclaimed in the famous "Declaration of the Rights

of Man." During the empire and the restoration the reform slept;

under the July monarchy there was an occasional murmur, which burst

forth into a vigorous protest when the revolution of 1848 awakened

the aspirations of 1789, and George Sand consecrated her talent to

the cause of progress. During the second empire, in spite of the

oppressive nature of the government, the movement took on a more

definite form; its advocates became more numerous; and men and

women who held high places in literature, politics and journalism,

spoke out plainly in favor of ameliorating the condition of French

women. Then came the third republic, with more freedom than France

had enjoyed since the beginning of the century. The woman movement

felt the change, and, during the past ten years, its friends have

been more active than ever before.

The most tangible event in the history of the question in France is

the International Woman's Rights Congress, the first international

gathering of the kind, which assembled in Paris in the months of

July and August during the exposition season of 1878. The committee

which called the congress contained representatives from six

different countries, viz.: France, Switzerland, Italy, Holland,

Russia and America. Among the eighteen members from France were two

senators, five deputies and three Paris municipal councilors. Italy

was represented by a deputy and the Countess of Travers, an

indefatigable friend of the undertaking, who died just before the

opening of the congress. The American members of the committee were

Julia Ward Howe, Mary A. Livermore and Theodore Stanton. Among the

members[567] of the congress, besides those just mentioned, were

deputies, senators, publicists, journalists, and men and women of

letters from all parts of Europe. Sixteen different organizations

in Europe and America sent delegates. The National Woman Suffrage

Association was represented by Jane Graham Jones and Theodore

Stanton, and the American Woman Suffrage Association by Julia Ward

Howe.

The work of the congress was divided into five sections, as

follows: the historical, the educational, the economic, the moral,

and the legislative. The congress was opened on July 25, by Leon

Richer, its promoter and originator, and one of the most

indefatigable friends of women's rights in France. He invited Maria

Deraismes, an able speaker well known among Paris reformers, to act

as temporary chairman. The next thing in order was the election of

two permanent presidents, a man and a woman. The late M. Antide

Martin, then an influential member of the Paris municipal council,

and Julia Ward Howe were chosen. Mrs. Howe, on taking the chair,

made a short speech which was very well received; Anna Maria

Mozzoni, of Milan, a most eloquent orator, followed; and then

Genevieve Graham Jones advanced to the platform, and in the name of

her mother, Jane Graham Jones, delegate of the National Woman

Suffrage Association, she conveyed to the congress messages of

good-will from the United States. This address, delivered with much

feeling, and appealing to French patriotism, was enthusiastically

received. When Miss Jones had taken her seat, M. Martin arose,

thanked the foreign ladies for their admirable words, and concluded

in these terms: "In the name of my compatriots, I particularly

return gratitude to Miss Graham Jones for the eloquent and cordial

manner in which she has just referred to France, and in turn, I

salute republican America, which so often offers Europe examples of

good sense, wisdom and liberty."

At the second session was read a long and eloquent letter from

Salvatore Morelli,[568] the Italian deputy. Theodore Stanton read a

paper entitled, "The Woman Movement in the United States." The

third session was devoted to the educational phase of the woman

question. Tony Revillon, who has since become one of the radical

deputies of Paris, spoke, and Miss Hotchkiss presented an able

report on "The Education of Women in America." After Miss Hotchkiss

had finished, Auguste Desmoulins, now a member of the Paris

municipal council, offered, as president of the section, a

resolution advocating the principal reforms--the same studies for

boys and girls, and coeducation--demanded by Miss Hotchkiss. The

resolution was carried without debate. Aurelia Cimino Folliero de

Luna, of Florence, followed in a few remarks on the "Mission of

Woman." Eugenie Pierre, of Paris, spoke on the "Vices of Education

in Different Classes of Society," and in closing complimented

America in the highest terms for its progressive position on the

woman question. In fact, the example of the United States was

frequently cited throughout the proceedings of this congress, and

the reformers of America may find some joy in feeling that their

labors are producing fruit even in the old world.

At the last session of the congress, August 9, 1878, a permanent

international committee was announced. France, England, Italy,

Alsace-Lorraine, Switzerland, Germany, Holland, Sweden, Poland,

Russia, Roumania and the United States are all represented on this

committee.[569] The chief duties of this committee were to be the

advancement of the reforms demanded by the congress and to issue

the call for the next international gathering. The congress ended

with a grand banquet on the evening of the last day's session, in

which about two hundred guests participated.

The present situation in France is full of interest and

encouragement. There are societies, journals, and different groups

of reformers all striving independently but earnestly to better the

situation of French women politically, civilly, morally and

intellectually. At the head of the agitation in favor of women's

political rights stand Hubertine Auclert and her vigorous monthly,

_La Citoyenne_[570]; the reformers of the code are lead by Leon

Richer and his outspoken monthly, _Le Droit des Femmes_[571]; the

movement in favor of divorce, which was crowned with success in the

summer of 1884, is headed by Alfred Naquet in the senate, and finds

one of its earliest and ablest supporters in Olympe Audouard; the

emancipation of women from priestly domination--and herein lies the

greatest and most dangerous obstacle that the reformers

encounter--counts among its many advocates Maria Deraismes; woman's

moral improvement, to be mainly accomplished by the abolition of

legalized prostitution, is demanded by Dr. and Mrs. Chapman and

Emilie de Morsier; while the great uprising in favor of woman's

education has such a host of friends and has already produced such

grand results, that the brief limits of this sketch will permit

neither an enumeration of the one nor the other.

* * * * *

The transition from France to Italy is easy and natural, for it is

on the Cisalpine peninsula that Gallic ideas have always taken

deeper root than elsewhere on the Continent, and, as might be

expected, the Italian woman movement resembles in many respects

that of which we have just spoken.

With the formation of the kingdom of Italy in 1870 began a

well-defined agitation in favor of Italian women. The educational

question was first taken up. Prominent among the women who

participated in this movement were Laura Mantegazza, the

Marchioness Brigida Tanari, and Alessandrina Ravizza. Aurelia

Cimino Folliero de Luna, who has devoted her whole life to

improving the condition of her countrywomen, writes me from

Florence on this subject. "Here it was," she says, "that the

example of American and English women, who in this respect were

our superiors, was useful to us. While we were still under foreign

domination and ignorant of solidarity of sex, they were free and

united." The new political life produced a number of able women

orators and writers, such as Anna Mozzoni, Malvina Frank, Gualberta

Beccari, and many others. The last named founded at Venice _La

Donna_, and in 1872 Aurelia Cimino Folliero de Luna established in

Florence _La Cornelia_, which has since ceased to exist, while in

1882 Ernesta Napollon began at Naples the publication of the

short-lived _L'Umanitario_, the youngest of a goodly list of

journals which have done much to excite an interest in the woman

question. The Italian government has generously seconded the

efforts of the reformers. The code has been modified, schools have

been established, the universities thrown open and courses in

agriculture proposed.

But the most significant sign of progress in Italy was afforded by

the great universal suffrage convention, held at Rome on February

11, 12, 1881. Anna Mozzoni, delegate to the convention from the

Milan Society for the Promotion of Woman's Interests, of which she

is the able president, made an eloquent appeal for woman suffrage

and introduced a resolution to this effect which was carried by a

good majority.[572] In 1876 a committee of the Chamber, of which

the deputy Peruzzi was chairman, reported a bill in favor of

conferring on women the right to vote on municipal and provincial

questions (_voto amministrativo_), a privilege which they had

formerly enjoyed in Lombardy and Venice under Austrian rule. This

bill was reintroduced in 1882 by the Depretis ministry and was

reported upon favorably by the proper committee in June, 1884. It

is believed that the proposition will soon become a law. If such is

the case, Italian women will enjoy the same rights as Italian men

in municipal and provincial affairs, with this exception, that they

will not be eligible to office in the bodies of which they are

electors.[573] Aurelia Cimino Folliero de Luna, says:

I make no doubt that in a few years the question of the

emancipation of women in Italy will be better understood; will be

regarded from a more elevated standpoint and will receive a more

general and greater support; for if we turn to the past, we shall

be astonished at what has already been accomplished in this

direction.

* * * * *

Concepcion Arenal, the distinguished Spanish authoress, signals

several signs of progress in her country. This lady writes:

In the schools founded by the Madrid Association for the

Education of Women, nearly five hundred girls pursue courses in

pedagogics, commercial studies, modern languages, painting, etc.

This instruction, for the most part gratis, is given by

professors who devote their time and strength to this noble

object without receiving any remuneration,--worthy continuators

of the grand work of the founder of the Madrid high-school for

women, Fernando de Castro, of blessed memory, one of the most

philanthropic men I ever met, who so loved mankind that his name

should be known in every land. Nine hundred and eighteen girls

attended the session of 1880-1881 of the school of music and

declamation at Madrid, and the number has since increased.

A few years ago a school of arts and trades was founded at the

capital, and women were admitted to the classes in drawing. In

1881, one hundred and thirty availed themselves of this

privilege. In 1882, one hundred and fifty-four female students

were present at the institutions (_institutos_) for intermediate

education in Spain. The coeducation of the sexes, therefore, is

not unknown to us. In that year Valencia, Barcelona, Gerona and

Seville each counted sixteen, while the single girl at Mahon

discontinued her studies on the ground that she preferred not to

mingle with boys. At Malaga, the only female aspirant for the

bachelor's degree took seven prizes, and was "excellent" in all

her studies. During the academic year, 1881-1882, twelve women

attended lectures in the Spanish universities. The three at

Madrid were all working for the doctorate, and one had passed the

necessary examinations; the two at Valladolid were occupied with

medicine, while at Barcelona five were studying medicine, one

law, and one pharmacy. Three of the medical students have passed

their examinations, but instead of the degrees, which are refused

them, they are granted certificates which do not allow them to

practice.

Our public opinion is progressing, as is evidenced by the laws,

and especially by the educational reforms, which are the

exclusive work of men. The council of public instruction, a

consulting body holding by no means advanced ideas, was called

upon a short time ago, to decide whether the university

certificates conferred upon women could be converted into regular

degrees, which would entitle the recipients to the enjoyment of

the privileges attached to these titles. The learned council

discussed, hesitated, tried to decide the question, but finally

left it in a situation which was neither clear nor conclusive.

This hesitancy and vagueness are very significant; a few years

ago a negative decision would have been given promptly and in the

plainest terms.

* * * * *

Portugal is following closely upon the steps of Spain, and, in the

former as in the latter country, it is in the department of

education that the most marked signs of an awakening are to be

found. Rodrigues de Freitas, the well-known publicist and

republican statesman of Porto, says:

There is not a single intermediate school for girls in all

Portugal. In 1883, the Portugese parliament took up the subject

of intermediate instruction, and discussed the question in its

relation to women, and the progress in this direction realized in

France during the last few years. A deputy who opposed the

reform, recalled the words of Jules Simon, pronounced in a recent

sitting of the council of public instruction at Paris. The

philosopher remarked:

We are here a few old men, very fortunate gentlemen, in

being excused from having to marry the girls you propose to

bring up.

Our minister of the interior, who has charge of public

instruction, followed, and declared that he was in favor of the

establishment of girls' colleges. He said:

It is true that M. Jules Simon considers himself fortunate

in not having to marry a girl educated in a French college;

but I think I have discovered the reason for this aversion.

He is getting in his dotage, otherwise he would experience

no repugnance in proposing to such a girl, provided, of

course, that, along with an education, she was at the same

time pretty and virtuous.

The chamber laughed. And such is the situation to-day: the

minister favorable to the better instruction of women, while

neither minister nor deputies make an earnest effort to bring it

about.

This dark picture is relieved, however, by one or two bright

touches. There are many private boarding schools where families

in easy circumstances send their daughters, who learn to speak

several languages, are taught a little elementary mathematics and

geography, and acquire a few accomplishments. Some of the pupils

of these institutions pass with credit the examinations of the

boys' lyceums or colleges. Article 72, of the law of June 14,

1880, on intermediate instruction, reads as follows: "Students of

the female sex, who wish to enter the State schools, or pass the

examinations of said schools, come within the provisions of this

law, except as regards the regulations concerning boarding

scholars." That is to say, girls enjoy in the State intermediate

schools the same privileges as male day scholars. Many girls have

availed themselves of this opportunity and have passed the lyceum

examinations.

* * * * *

Crossing the Rhine into the Teutonic countries, we find less

progress on the whole, than among the Latin races. Germany,

however, if behind France and Italy, is far ahead of Spain and

Portugal. The agitation is divided into two currents: the Leipsic

and the Berlin movements. The former is the older, the General

Association of German Women having been founded in Leipsic in

October, 1865. Louise Otto-Peters, the prime mover in the

organization of this association, may be considered the originator

of the German movement. A novelist of much power, whose stories all

teach a lesson in socialism, she established in 1848, the year of

the great revolutionary fermentation throughout Europe, the first

paper which advocated the interests of women in Germany. The aims

of the Leipsic and Berlin reformers were of an economic and

educational nature. It was felt that the time had come when woman

must have wider and better paid fields of work, and when she must

be more thoroughly educated in order to be able the easier to gain

her livelihood. A paper, _New Paths_ (_Neue Bahnen_), was

established as the organ of the association. It still exists. The

plan of holding annual conventions--much like those which have been

in progress in America for so many years--in the chief cities of

Germany was settled upon, and numerous meetings of this kind have

already occurred. At these gatherings all questions pertaining to

woman's advancement are discussed, and auxiliary associations

organized. The General Association of German Women has sent several

petitions to the Reichstag, or imperial parliament, demanding

various reforms and innovations. The principal members of the

association are Louise Otto-Peters, the president and editor of the

_Neue Bahnen_; Henriette Goldschmidt, the most effective speaker of

the group; and Mrs. Winter, the treasurer, all of whom live in

Leipsic; Miss Menzzer of Dresden; Lina Morgenstern, the well-known

Berlin philanthropist; and Marie Calm of Cassel, perhaps the most

radical of the body, whose ideas on woman suffrage are much the

same as those entertained in England and the United States. In

fact, an American is frequently struck by the similarity between

many of the features of the General Association of German Women,

and the Woman's Rights Association in the United States.

* * * * *

The Berlin movement, which resembles that of Leipsic in everything

except that it is rather more conservative, owes its origin to that

distinguished philanthropist, Dr. Adolf Lette. The Lette Verein, or

Lette Society, so called in honor of its founder, was organized in

December, 1865, but a few months after the establishment of the

Leipsic association. The object of the society is, as has already

been said, to improve the material condition of women, especially

poor women, by giving them a better education, by teaching them

manual employments, by helping to establish them in business--in a

word, by affording them the means to support themselves. The Lette

Society has become the nucleus of similar organizations scattered

all over the German empire. Its organ, the _German Woman's

Advocate_ (_Deutcher Frauenanwalt_), is a well-conducted little

monthly, edited by the secretary of the society, Jenny Hirsch. Anna

Schepeler-Lette, daughter of the founder, has been for many years

and is still at the head of this admirable society. She writes me:

If we are asked whether we would have women enter public life,

whether we would wish them to become professors in the

university, clergymen in the church, and lawyers at the bar, as

is the case in America, we should make no response, for they are

but idle questions. These demands have not yet been made in

Germany, nor will they be made for a long time to come, if ever.

But why peer into the future? We have to-day many institutions,

many customs, which past centuries would have looked upon as

contrary to Divine and human law. In this connection we would say

with Sancho Panza: "What is, is able to be."

The German philosopher, Herr von Kirchmann, is more decided in his

views concerning the future of his countrywomen. In one of his last

works, entitled "Questions and Dangers of the Hour" (_Zeitfragen

und Abenteuer_) is a chapter on "Women in the Past and Future,"

where it is shown that the female sex has been gradually gaining

its freedom, and the prediction is made that the day is near at

hand when women will obtain their complete independence and will

compete with men in every department of life, not excepting

politics.

* * * * *

Turning to the other great Germanic nation, Austria, we find still

less progress than in the north. In fact, the movement in the south

is little more than a question of woman's self-support. The

important problem of woman's education is not yet resolved in

Germany, and in Austria still less has been done. "In two

particulars," writes a Berlin correspondent, "Austria may be said

to be in advance of Germany. The admission of women to the

university does not present such insurmountable difficulties, and

her employment in railroad, post, and telegraph offices does not

encounter such strong opposition." But it must not be supposed from

this statement that the Austrian universities are open to women.

"Our universities are shut against women," Professor Wendt, of

Troppau, informs me; "but they may pass the same examinations as

boys who have finished their preparatory studies, though it is

distinctly stated in the women's diplomas that they may not

continue their studies in the university." The professors, however,

sometimes allow foreign girls to attend lectures. Professor Bruhl,

of Vienna, for example, has lectured to men and women on anatomy.

The Academy of Fine Arts at Vienna is not open to women, though the

Conservatory of Music is much frequented by them. In 1880, in fact,

three women received prizes for musical compositions. Johanna

Leitenberger, of Salzburg, writes:

Several newspapers are devoted to the different phases of the

woman's movement in Austria. Some years ago an ex-officer,

Captain A. D. Korn, who, if I am not mistaken, had passed some

time in England and America, founded the _Women's Universal

Journal_ (_Allgemeine Frauen Zeitung_). This newspaper was wholly

devoted to women's interest, but it soon died. The same thing is

true of the _Women's Journal_ (_Frauenblaetter_) of Gratz, which

appeared for a short time under my editorship. * * * * On October

9, 10, 11, 1872, the third German women's convention (_Deutsche

Frauenkonferenz_) was held at Vienna, under the auspices of the

general society for popular education and the amelioration of

women's condition. The other two sittings of this society had

been held at Leipsic and Stuttgart. The soul of this new movement

was Captain Korn, whom I have already mentioned. His study of the

woman question in the United States may have prompted him to

awaken a similar agitation among the women of the Austrian

empire. Addresses were delivered at this convention by ladies

from Vienna, Hungary, Bohemia and Styria and all the various

interests of women were discussed. * * * * The proceedings of the

convention attracted considerable attention, and produced

favorable impressions on the audience, which was recruited from

the better classes of the population. But the newspapers of

Vienna ridiculed the young movement, its friends grew lukewarm,

and every trace was soon lost of this first and last Austrian

women's rights convention.

In one important particular the Austro-Hungarian empire treats

women more fairly than is the case in other European countries.

Elise Krasnohorska, the Bohemian author, writes me:

Women have a voice in the municipal, provincial and national

elections, though male citizens duly authorized by them cast

their vote. With this single reserve--a very important one, it

must be confessed--our women are politically the equals of men.

At Prague, however, this is not the case. The Bohemian capital

preserves an ancient privilege which is in contradiction to the

Austrian electoral law, and which excludes us from the elective

franchise. Universal suffrage does not exist in the empire, but

the payment of a certain amount of taxes confers the right to

vote. I do not enter into the details of the electoral law, which

is somewhat complicated, which has its exceptions and

contradictions, and is in fact an apple of discord in Austria in

more than one respect; but, speaking generally, it may be said

that a woman who owns property, who is in business, or who pays

taxes, may designate a citizen possessing her confidence to

represent her at the polls. Our women are satisfied with this

system, and prefer it to casting their ballot in person.

It may be said, also, that women are eligible to office, or at

least that there is no law against their accepting it, while

there are instances of their having done so. In southern

Bohemia, a short time ago, a countess was chosen member of a

provincial assembly (_okresni zastupitestvo_) with the approval

of the body, on the condition that she should not participate

personally in its deliberations, but should be represented by a

man having full power to act for her. At Agram in Croatia, a

woman was elected, a few years ago, member of the municipal

council, and no objection was made. Of course such cases are very

rare, but they have their significance.