I think our friend touched the very kernel of the whole subject when he reminded you that suffrage was not alone woman's right, but woman's duty.
I believe that to confer the ballot will add but little to the influence of woman.
I am interested in this question, because I wish to put recognized power where there already exists unrecognized influence.
I think unrecognized influence is always dangerous.
It acts under no adequate sense of responsibility.
Society does not attempt to check it. It is unheeded and unwatched.
Consequently it is always doubly liable to corruption.
I believe that to-day it may be said, more truly than of any other cause in our social philosophy, that woman rules the State
What made the Southern
Woman did not make it; but without the enthusiasm and the frenzy of women on its side, it never could have been made.
What was the potent influence that almost tore the Republic
Woman's. Yet that wide-spread, deep-anchored force had swayed the Southern
mind for years,--under no sense of civil responsibility, neither watched nor educated, never in the eye of day, never feeling that it was doing anything which needed to be summoned before the tribunal of conscience.
Our friend said that if woman could vote, she would shut up the groggeries of this city.
She could shut them up to-day.
is nothing compared with fashion.
What is the legislature compared with the ton
that permeates society,--the throne that woman first founded, and has ever since filled?
More than college, stronger than church, weightier than trade, more controlling than all put together, woman is its recognized queen.
If she issued her edict to-day, unfaltering, unmixed, undoubting, there could nought but submission follow.
A vote is a great thing; legislation is a large power,--but money is a larger power.
Why do not women make