Judge — October 25, 1919

# Prince Albert Tobacco Advertisement This page is primarily a **commercial advertisement**, not political satire. It promotes Prince Albert brand pipe and cigarette tobacco, manufactured by R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company (Winston-Salem, N.C.). The ad features a man smoking a pipe, emphasizing the product's appeal to casual smokers. The tagline "the national joy smoke" and text like "kicks the 'pip' right out of a pipe" use colloquial, friendly language to market the tobacco. Notably, the ad makes health claims typical of early 20th-century tobacco marketing—asserting the product "can't bite your tongue or parch your throat" due to a "patented process." This reflects pre-regulation advertising standards, before tobacco health risks were widely acknowledged or regulated.

# "The Big Issue At The Polls" This cartoon from Judge magazine (October 25, 1919) depicts a voting scene titled "The Big Issue At The Polls," drawn by W.E. Hill. It shows a crowd of citizens at a voter registration booth, with a registry clerk requesting "Name and address please!" The cartoon appears to satirize voter registration procedures or voting participation during this period. The heavy, dark illustration style emphasizes the serious nature of voting. Given the 1919 date, this likely references post-WWI voting concerns, possibly related to women's suffrage (ratified that year) or debates about voter eligibility and registration processes. The exact political "issue" being satirized remains somewhat unclear from the image alone, though the crowded, somewhat chaotic scene suggests commentary on the voting process itself.

# "The Lobbyist: Securing Unanimous Endorsement" This political cartoon by Orson Lowell satirizes lobbying practices. A woman in fashionable dress and a large hat stands at a table signing what appears to be a petition or endorsement document, surrounded by a crowd of men in suits who watch her intently. The title's irony is key: the "lobbyist" (the woman) appears to be securing signatures through her personal charm and social status rather than through legitimate political argument. The gathered men seem eager to endorse whatever she supports, suggesting that lobbyists manipulated public opinion through influence and persuasion rather than reasoned debate. The cartoon critiques how special interests used social pressure and influential figures to manufacture political consensus.

# Analysis of Judge Magazine Page **The Cartoon "The Woman Prays":** A woman requests new clothes, claiming she feels out of place at social events among "1920-model limousines." The joke satirizes women's materialism and social climbing during the prosperous 1920s. **The Article "Were You Ever An Anti?":** Written by Clara Wold, this piece addresses former opponents of women's suffrage. It sarcastically asks whether these "Antis" (anti-suffragists) are now embarrassed by their past positions opposing voting rights. The article references Congressional Record speeches and regional resistance, particularly from the South, which opposed women's voting on grounds of tradition and states' rights. The satire mocks the futility of their opposition, given that women's suffrage was achieved (the 19th Amendment passed in 1920).

# Political Satire on Women's Suffrage This Judge magazine page attacks suffragists through two cartoons and accompanying editorial text. The top cartoon by Crawford Young shows a woman concerned her skirt will be "too long for the street," with a man wishing sidewalks were higher—mocking suffragists as vain and frivolous. The lower cartoon by C.D. Small depicts an absent-minded father losing track of a baby while purchasing cigars, satirizing male negligence as worse than female activism. The dense text criticizes a Republican senator from Colorado for opposing women's suffrage despite his state's support for it. The piece uses sarcasm to condemn anti-suffrage hypocrisy, suggesting opponents' arguments about women's "nature" are merely pretexts. The satire defends the suffrage movement against dismissive stereotypes.

# Political Context Explanation This Judge magazine page satirizes **women's suffrage ratification**, likely from around 1920 when the 19th Amendment was being debated state-by-state. The main text mocks politicians—specifically referencing a Massachusetts Senator and Senator Penrose—who publicly opposed women's voting rights but are now scrambling to support ratification to save their political careers. The satire's point: these hypocrites who argued *against* suffrage for years now pretend they championed it all along, coaching constituents to vote for them based on false support for women's rights. The "handwriting is on the wall" phrase suggests ratification is inevitable, forcing cynical politicians to perform sudden conversion. The three comic vignettes below are unrelated domestic humor about wedding gifts, labor demands, and romantic rejection—typical Judge filler material. The satire targets political opportunism and hypocrisy rather than endorsing or opposing suffrage itself.

# Analysis for Modern Readers **Top Cartoon - "Sonnet to the Coming Silhouette":** This satirizes changing fashion standards for women's bodies. The sonnet mocks the shift from Victorian corseted thinness to acceptance of fuller figures and curves. It references Shakespeare to emphasize how "obsolete" the old ideal has become. The three figures illustrate the transformation: the old constrained silhouette versus the new "modish woman" with a larger belt and hips. The joke targets both the rigidity of past fashion demands and the equally rigid new standards replacing them—women must now "strain your nerves" to achieve the opposite body type. **Bottom - "The Seven Ages of Woman":** This Gilman piece (the author was a prominent feminist) traces female evolution from single-celled organisms through human history. Eras I-IV emphasize women's biological reproductive superiority. Era VI-VII critique male dominance: women historically denied education and freedom while advancing civilization, now finally achieving equality in all human functions. The closing joke about living "at the edge of a cliff" appears sarcastic commentary on marriage dynamics.

# "The Woman's Side of It" - Judge Magazine This illustration satirizes early 20th-century debates about women's professional ambitions versus marriage expectations. Blanche Wing, an ambitious law student, initially rejects marriage to pursue a legal career—rejecting a suitor's offer of an office partnership. However, she falls for Luke Densmore, a charming law lecturer and aspiring District Attorney candidate. The satire lies in the ironic outcome: despite her passionate arguments for women's intellectual equality and independence, Blanche ultimately abandons her career ambitions for matrimony. The story suggests that even career-minded women succumb to romantic persuasion and domesticity. The caption "I Wonder, Dear, if You Would Like Me to Have an Office with You?" shows Densmore diplomatically offering the office partnership—suggesting he'll gradually persuade her away from professional ambitions through charm rather than argument. The satire critiques both women's inconsistency and men's manipulative tactics.

# Analysis for Modern Readers This page depicts a **feminist satire from the early 20th century** about a woman lawyer navigating professional ambition against marital expectations. **The cartoon** (titled "Dispossessed") shows a woman with children and a dog outside a modest dwelling—illustrating the domestic life Blanche is expected to maintain. **The plot:** Blanche, a qualified lawyer, wants to practice law alongside her new husband, District Attorney Densmore. He asks her to postpone this ambition until after his election. When a sensational case of grand larceny involving a young woman (Grace Bellair) emerges, Densmore insists on prosecuting personally. Blanche secretly meets with the accused, sees "a remarkable possibility," and decides to defend her in court—secretly—creating obvious dramatic irony: the prosecutor's wife will oppose him. **The satire's point:** The tension between women's professional capability and societal pressure to prioritize homemaking and spousal support. The "remarkable possibility" Blanche sees likely involves exonerating evidence, positioning her as morally superior to her husband's rigid duty-bound approach.

# "Our Daily Grief" Cartoon Analysis This is a humorous essay-illustration about human nature's need for complaint and hardship. The cartoon shows four figures gathered around what appears to be a dying fire in winter—the visual reference to the text's opening: "I prance and neigh and swear and refresh the dying fire." The piece satirizes the human condition by arguing that people *require* discomfort to feel alive. Mason's narrator claims he enjoys complaining about summer heat, winter cold, and various ailments—and that neighbors actually gather to watch his theatrical displays of grief and frustration. The satire is that perfect contentment would be insufferable; we need problems to gripe about to feel purposeful. The illustration by Ralph Barton depicts ordinary men in winter clothes—recognizable types rather than specific political figures—embodying this universal human tendency toward discontent. The satire targets no particular group but rather human nature itself: we're happier being unhappy.

# "Chawlie" Fishing Comic Strip This is a humorous one-panel comic strip (or series) featuring a character named "Chawlie" going fishing. The humor relies on wordplay and pratfalls rather than political satire. The joke centers on a mathematical riddle: if one worm is eaten by a fish, leaving five worms, the answer to "one from six leaves—?" should be five. However, Chawlie misinterprets this as a statement about the actual worms remaining, leading to physical comedy and confusion. The strip shows escalating mishaps—failed fishing attempts, miscalculations, and Chawlie's frustration—culminating in him being hired for a job despite (or because of) his incompetence. This appears to be character-driven comedy typical of early 20th-century Judge magazine, emphasizing slapstick humor and dialectical speech patterns rather than contemporary events or political commentary.