University of Virginia Library

MUNICIPAL SUFFRAGE FOR WOMEN—WHY?

Frank Foxcroft.

I put the question in this form, because it is clear that, when so
revolutionary a change is proposed as that of doubling the electorate
in municipal affairs by giving the ballot to women, the burden of
proof rests with those who advocate the change. They must be
prepared to show that great advantages would accrue, either to
women or to the cummunity at large, from the change proposed. I
am inclined to think that either would be sufficient. If they can
show that women derive great benefit from the use of the municipal
ballot, the community would be willing to take some risk to bring
about that result. If they can show that the community at large
would gain greatly, the great mass of women, who now shrink from
the responsibilities of the suffrage, would overcome their reluctance.
But I submit that one or the other of these propositions must be
clearly proved, before any legislature can be justified in enacting a
law giving municipal suffrage to women.

Touching the first proposition, what evidence is forthcoming?
There is declamation in plenty; vague generalizations about the rights
of women; a tedious reiteration of the misapplied principle that "taxation
without representation is tyranny;" even, now and then, a
faint echo of the generally abandoned claim that the suffrage is a
natural right. But when it is asked precisely what are some of the
wrongs under which women suffer in town and city government as
at present conducted, at precisely what points the by-laws or the
ordinances of cities bear unjustly upon women as women, and in
precisely what ways women are to gain from being permitted to
vote at town and city elections, there is silence all along the line.
No one yet, to my knowledge, has ever formulated a definite, concrete,
reasonable statement of this kind. Until such a statement is
made, and adequately supported by argument, the question why
municipal suffrage should be extended to women—so far as the interests
of women themselves are concerned—remains unanswered.

But how about the interests of the community? In what particulars
would cities and towns be benefited by the bestowal of the ballot
on women? The question cannot be answered by contrasting the
best and most intelligent women with the worst or least intelligent
men. The ballot, if it is given to women, will be used by all sorts
of women, just as it is now by all sorts of men; and if, as must be
confessed with shame it is usually more difficult to bring out and
concentrate the votes of the best sort of men than those of the
baser sort, somewhat the same difficulty may be anticipated with
regard to women. The practical question is: Will the average
woman vote more steadily, more intelligently, with a clearer knowledge
of men and affairs, and with a wiser adaptation of means to
ends than the average man? It will not serve to say that she will
vote almost as steadily, intelligently, and wisely as the average man;
or that, in course of time, after she has freed herself from the handicap
of inexperience, and has so readjusted her other duties as to
give herself ample time for this, she will vote as steadily, intelligently,
and wisely. If the community is to gain from her use of
the ballot, the average women must vote more steadily, intelligently,
and wisely than the average man. Otherwise, at the best, the general
average will be only what it was before.

Here again what is needed is a definite and a concrete statement.
In precisely what particulars—with reference to precisely what problems
of municipal government—are women likely to act more wisely
than men? Here, for example, is a list of the standing committees
of the Boston Board of Aldermen:

Armories and military affairs, county accounts, electric wires.
Faneuil Hall and county buildings, lamps, licenses, markets, railroads.

Public improvements, with subcommittees upon paving, sewers,
bridges, ferries, sanitary regulations, street cleaning, and street watering.

The list might be extended to include the special committee and
joint standing committees, but, as given, it fairly represents the practical
matters which engage the attention of city governments. Will
any advocate of municipal suffrage for women run his finger down
the list and place it on those items regarding which the votes of
women aldermen would be likely to be more intelligently and wisely
given than those of men! If this cannot be done, then the question
as to the second proposition goes unanswered, just as the question
relating to the first proposition did.