Judge, 1913-02-01 · page 16 of 24
Judge — February 1, 1913 — page 16: what you’re looking at
What you’re looking at
This is anti-suffrage satire disguised as pro-suffrage advocacy. Written by Ida Husted Harper (a real suffragist), the article documents electoral fraud and corruption opposing women's voting rights while mocking opponents' arguments. The central cartoon shows "The Old Order" (a crowned male figure) yielding to "The New" (a woman with children), illustrating the suffrage debate. The "snapshots" detail real incidents: Kansas officials marking ballots *against* suffrage, Louisiana officials indicting themselves to prevent women from voting, and Oregon's governor denying women a voice on capital punishment—all presented as absurd examples of male resistance to women's political participation. The final section sardonically suggests women jurors would eliminate corruption through moral superiority and prayer—a rhetorical strategy turning anti-suffragists' own arguments (women's "purity") into reasons *for* enfranchisement. The page advocates women's suffrage by exposing the desperation and dishonesty of those fighting it.
📄 Transcribed text from this page (OCR, searchable)
Machine-transcribed from the original scan — historical spelling and the odd misread are preserved.
Suffragette Snapshots. By IDA HUSTED nanreR. SEVEN men in one precinct in a Kan- sas town had to get the election offi- cers to mark their ballots, and all voted against the woman-suffrage amend- ment. Those officials were still more obliging in some of the Michigan towns, it is said, for they gathered up all the ballots that were left over and voted them against this amendment. a A nurse employed by the board of health in a city in Governor Blease’s State of South Carolina had to take the oath re- quired of all public offi- cials that she had not en- gaged in a duel since 1881 and would not take part in one; but of course no pledges were required as to lynching. o At the recent election in Louisiana, the men voted down a constitu- tional, amendment to al- low women to serve on school and charity boards, and the election officers in New Orleans were so afraid it might slip through that seventeen have been in- dicted for ‘‘padding’’ the returns against it. Doubtless they intended it simply as an act of chivalry. The timorous souls who fear that women would not have the strength to walk up to the polls and deposit a ballot are referred to those representatives of the sex who walked 140 miles, from New York-to Albany, to remind Gov- ernor Sulzer of the suffrage bill. President David Starr Jordan, of Stanford University, as a study in eu- genics, has traced the ancestry of half the English-speaking people of the United States back to the Duchess of Warren, a remarkably virile woman of the twelfth century. There may have been some fathers scattered along the way, but Dr. Jordan does not mention them. a The Governor of Oregon delayed the execution of five men convicted of mur- der until the ‘‘people’’ could vote on abolishing capital punishment. The masculine half said no, and he ordered the law to take its course. Then mass meetings were held todemand that there should be another referendum, as only “THE OLD ORDER CHANGETH, GIVING PLACE TO THE NEW." half tho people had been allowed to vote and now women were enfranchised. It has taken the country 135 years to dis- cover that only half of the people have ever passed upon any question, and less than one-fourth of the States are yet awake to the fact. This will seem a ridiculous travesty on representative government to future generations. The new home to accommodate one hundred working girls, which is being built in New York, is providing parlor accommodations for only thirty beaus at a time. If the rule is to be, ‘‘First come, first served,’’ it will be something besides poverty that will cause a couple of hundred working men and women to do without their dinners, at least until those thirty matrimonial agencies are pre-empted. New York has advanced the proposed amendment allowing women to vote. Women! (Reprinted by request from Leslie's Weekly, January 13, 1913.) A jury of women ina Kansas city was drawn. It was their first experience. They didn’t know what to do. Some one suggested that the best thing was to seek Divine guidance. So they be- gan their jury duty with prayer. Their verdict was unanimous and satis- factory. How much of the all- prevailing bribery of jurymen would go on in our great cites if such women as these were drawnon the panel? How much of graft would there be in the letting of pub- lic contracts, in the pur- chase of supplies, in the granting of franch and in all the functions of our municipal sdmin- istrations, if praying women had something to say? How long would white slavery endure, under po- lice protection, if decent women had a voice in the management of the police departments of our cities? Would we find on the police force ex-con- victs, wife beaters and drunken men such as we have in New York City, ac- cording to recent disclosures? How long would plug uglies, repeaters and bullies surround the ballot boxes and intimidate law-abiding citizens if women were among the inspectors of election and the watchers at the polls? How long would the civil service stat- utes be boldly overridden by spoilsmen? How long would the saloons continue to be the recruiting headquarters of the politicians? How long would grafters be aldermen in cities and legislators in State capitals if vomen had something to say? Let the people rule! women a chance! But give the comicbooks.com