Chapter 382: , Laws of 1889, to read as follows (7)

"Michigan adopted direct primaries in 1903 for use in Grand
Rapids, Kent County. The result was the defeat for
re-nomination of the Mayor under whose administration the
so-called water scandal had developed. Two years later,
candidates in Kent County were requested to go on record as to
whether they favored a general direct primary law for the
state. All who recorded their positions declared for such a
law, and it was commonly reported in the newspapers that
opposition to direct primaries would mean defeat for any
candidate who took so unpopular a stand.

"Thereafter direct nominations spread rapidly through the
middle western states. Mandatory laws were substituted for
optional laws, and state-wide laws for laws applying to
certain localities or offices."

The movement for direct primary voting, to supersede delegated
conventions in the nomination of candidates for office, was
inspired and invigorated powerfully in New York by Governor
Hughes (see, in this Volume, NEW YORK STATE: A. D. 1906-1910),
soon after his second term in the executive administration
began. He saw that nothing else could emancipate the political
parties of the State from their "boss"-ridden servitude, and
make them real organs of expression for the mind and will of
the people. The whole force of his great influence then went
to the help of the advocates of this reform, and it produced a
public wakening on the subject which years of ordinary
agitation might have failed to bring about. He brought,
moreover, to the movement an inborn statesmanship of judgment
and an intellectual training which gave it the wisest
direction it had yet received. The Bill which he assisted to
frame, embodying his official recommendations, was designed
more carefully than the legislation in other States had been,
not only to avoid any weakening of the organization of
political parties, but to give them the strength of a
leadership conferred truly and freely by its followers. The
measure was opposed desperately by the existing "organization"
of the party in power, and that combination was represented in
the Legislature so much more effectively than the people were
that it compassed the defeat of the Bill, in the session of
1909.

Four times the people of Illinois have extorted acts from
their Legislature providing for direct nominations, and thrice
the enactments, badly framed, have been pronounced
unconstitutional by the Supreme Court of the State. The fourth
of these pieces of legislation, produced in February, 1910, is
not yet tested.

ELECTIVE FRANCHISE:
Disfranchising Amendment to the Maryland Constitution defeated.

A disfranchising amendment to the Constitution of Maryland,
designed not only to exclude many colored people from the
suffrage, but to give the now dominant political party a
complete mastery of the ballot box, was rejected by the people
when submitted to them at the election of November, 1909.

ELECTIVE FRANCHISE:
Short Ballot Reform.

A movement that will gain force if the grave reasons for it
can be duly impressed on the popular mind has been assuming
organized form of late. The prime mover in it is Mr. Richard
S. Childs, of New York, who began missionary work for it in a
convincing magazine article on "The Doctrine of the Short
Ballot," published in 1908. Printed afterwards in a small
pamphlet, this impressive argument has had wide circulation
and has drawn many men of influence into league with the
author for urging the subject on public attention. The aim is
to reduce elective offices in State, county and town to such a
limited number that the average voter can acquaint himself
with the comparative merits of candidates and make a fairly
intelligent choice, which he cannot do when the number is
large. "We must shorten the ballot," wrote Mr. Childs, "to a
point where the average man will vote intelligently without
giving to politics more attention than he does at present."
"Voting a straight ticket is not a matter of party loyalty so
much as of not knowing what else to do, and split tickets will
become common as soon as the list is reduced to a point where
each candidate becomes in the mind of the voter a definite
personality instead of a mere name on a long list. To make
public office conspicuous can only be accomplished by making
it stand out in solitude before the gaze of the voter. Let all
the encumbrances in the shape of minor offices disappear from
the ballot and be made appointive. Or at the very least
prevent the few offices from overshadowing the many. Make all
the candidates conspicuous by letting no one be more
conspicuous than another."

A digest of the "short ballot" doctrine is offered in the
following propositions:

"To the average American voter most of the long ballot is a
mere list of names. He registers a genuine personal opinion
only on certain conspicuous offices—the rest he necessarily
delegates by default to organizations of ‘political
specialists.’

"These political organizations, if victorious, sink into the
control of their worst members, since these members having
most to gain and being least scrupulous can generally win
within the organization. Then these men run public
administrations as badly as they dare.

"But we get good men for any conspicuous office where there is
adequate public scrutiny of the candidate, and even Tammany
offers us satisfactory public servants in such places.

"_Therefore_, if we make most offices appointive so as to
_shorten the ballot_, till the voter can master his whole
task, and every elected officer becomes conspicuous before his
constituents, political machines will become impotent and
merit will become the most important asset for a candidate.

"The result will be uniform clean government as in England,
Canada, etc., where they have 'The Short Ballot’ already."

{223}

ELECTIVE FRANCHISE:
Suffrage Amendment to the Georgia Constitution adopted
by popular vote.

A suffrage amendment to the Constitution of the State of
Georgia, adopted by an overwhelming popular vote in October,
1908, provides that, in order to register and vote according
to the provisions of this amendment, a man must, besides
meeting certain requirements as to residence and the payment
of his taxes, have one of the following qualifications: Either

(1) he must have served in the land or naval forces of the
United States or the Confederate States or the State of
Georgia in time of war, or be lawfully descended from one who
has done so; _or_

(2) he must be a person of good character, satisfying the
registrars of election that he understands the duties and
obligations of citizenship; _or_

(3) he must correctly read in the English language any
paragraph of the United States Constitution or the State
Constitution, and, unless physically incapacitated from doing
so, correctly write the same when read to him; _or_

(4) he must be the owner of at least forty acres of land in
the State in which he resides, or the owner of five hundred
dollars’ worth of property in the State assessed for taxation.

ELECTIVE FRANCHISE: Woman Suffrage:
At Large: Present extent of the movement.

"We rejoice in the immense progress made by women in the last
60 years. In 1848 women had votes nowhere in the world except
the school vote in Kentucky by widows with children of school
age, and a very limited franchise in some parts of Europe.
Today women vote for all elected officers in Finland, Norway,
Federated Australia, New Zealand, Wyoming, Colorado, Utah and
Idaho: they have municipal suffrage in England, Scotland,
Ireland and Wales, in Canada, Kansas, Sweden, Denmark and
Iceland; tax suffrage in Louisiana, Montana, Iowa and New
York, and school suffrage in one-half the States of the Union.
When that first convention met, only one College in the United
States admitted women; now hundreds of colleges do so. Then
there was not a single woman physician, or ordained minister,
or lawyer; now there are 7000 women physicians and surgeons,
3000 ordained ministers, and one thousand lawyers. Then only a
few poorly paid employments were open to women; now women are
in more than 300 occupations, and comprise 80 per cent. of our
teachers. Then there were scarcely any organizations of women;
now such organizations are numbered by thousands. Then the few
women who dared to speak in public, even on philanthropic
questions, were overwhelmingly condemned by public opinion;
now the women most opposed to equal suffrage travel about the
country making public speeches to prove that a woman’s only
place is at home. Then a married woman in most of our States
could not control her own person, property or earnings; now in
most of the States these laws have been largely amended, and
it is only in regard to the ballot that the fiction of women’s
perpetual minority is still kept up. Most of the demands made
by the convention of 1848, which then seemed so revolutionary,
have been already granted, and are now looked upon as matters
of course. … We rejoice in the increasingly rapid progress of
the woman suffrage cause. Every year shows some gain. Since
our last annual meeting Parliamentary suffrage has been
extended to the women of Norway; municipal suffrage to the
women of Denmark; Sweden has made women eligible to municipal
office; Russia has given women of property a proxy vote for
members of the Douma; and Great Britain, with only 15
dissenting votes, has made women eligible as Mayors, Aldermen
and County and Town Councillors. We congratulate the women of
Great Britain upon their gallant fight for the franchise."

_Resolutions of the 40th Annual Convention of the
National American Woman Suffrage Association,
at Buffalo, New York, October, 1908._

In Europe "there is the curious anomaly that in its two
so-called republics the cause of woman suffrage is more
backward than in almost any of the other countries. In
Switzerland every man over twenty may vote. A National Woman
Suffrage Association has lately been organized which is
supported by many public men. …

"In France, all men twenty-one years old have the franchise.
The National Council of Women, composed of 55 associations
with about 70,000 members, has recently joined forces with the
National Suffrage Union, thus assuring strong and systematic
effort for the enfranchisement of women. In 1906, a Committee
for the Defence of the Rights of Women was formed in the
Chamber of Deputies, to secure the social, civil and political
rights of women."

_Ida H. Harper
North American Review,
September. 1907._

ELECTIVE FRANCHISE: Australia.

The Constitution of the Commonwealth of Australia, in its 41st
clause provides as follows:

See (in Volume VI. of this work)
CONSTITUTION OF AUSTRALIA.

"No adult person who has or acquires the right to vote at
elections for the more numerous House of the Parliament of a
State, shall, while the right continues, be prevented by any
law of the Commonwealth from voting at elections for either
House of the Commonwealth."

Inasmuch as two of the Australian States, South Australia and
Western Australia, had already extended the suffrage to women
when this federal constitution was adopted, they gained at
once, by its terms, the right of voting at federal elections
in those States. An account of their first appearance in
Australian Federal politics was given subsequently by one of
the women who participated,—in part as follows:

"The political incentive is now the possession of the women of
Australia, and its influence was a potent factor in the recent
Federal elections. The women of South Australia and West
Australia have had the suffrage for some years, so that they
are accustomed to voting, but to the women of the other States
the whole business was new; nevertheless, they voted in as
large numbers proportionally as the men in a majority of the
constituencies, while in some they cast a heavier vote than
the men. The total vote was only 52 per cent. of the voting
strength, the low percentage being due to the fact that the
people as a body have not yet grasped the Federal idea.
Federation has not completely scotched provincialism in
politics, though it is fast doing so, if for no other reason
than the enormous cost of government in this country. The
people are beginning to realize that we are paying the
political piper heavily—fourteen Houses of Parliament and
seven viceroyalties for four millions of people! It is too big
an order, and common sense, as well as the state of our
finances, demands that we should simplify our legislative
machinery. It is right here, as the Americans say, that the
women’s influence will tell.
{224}
During the election campaign, it was most evident that a very
large section of the women favoured those candidates who urged
economy in public expenditure. Individual women, with no idea
of the value of money, may be extravagant, but most women are
compelled by circumstances to be economical, and have a horror
of wasteful expenditure. Therefore the growing demand for less
expensive legislative machinery will find devoted adherents
amongst the women voters. …

"The elections had an added interest in the appearance of four
women candidates in the field—Mrs. Martell, Mrs. Moore (New
South Wales), myself (Victoria), standing for the Senate; and
Miss Selina Anderson (New South Wales) for the House of
Representatives. All were defeated, but the defeat was not
unexpected, as we were well aware that it would be altogether
phenomenal if women were to succeed in their first attempt to
enter a National Parliament. …

"There were eighteen candidates in the field, and, while
unsuccessful, my record of 51,497 votes, when 85,387 were
sufficient to secure election, is most gratifying. I polled
more heavily than one candidate who has been Premier of
Victoria, and than another who had been for twenty-six years a
member of the State legislature, defeating the one by 24,327,
the other by 32,436 votes—51,000 odd votes, in spite of the
opposition of the powerful daily papers, and the prejudice
that a pioneer always has to encounter, is nothing less than a
triumph for the cause that I represent, the cause of women and
children."

_Vida Goldstein,
The Political Woman in Australia
(Nineteenth Century, July, 1904)._

"The argument that women will not vote is completely disproved
by Australian experience. They not only vote, but they vote in
continually increasing numbers as time goes on, and they
become educated up to a sense of their political
responsibilities and all that these imply. Not all the states
discriminate in their returns between men and women voters,
but those that do show something like the following: In South
Australia, at the last general election, 59 per cent. of the
men on the rolls voted, and 42 per cent. of the women; in
Western Australia, 49 per cent. of the men and 47 per cent. of
the women voted; at the last Federal election, 56 per cent. of
the men voted, and 40 per cent. of the women. None of the
Australian states has yet reached the extraordinary record of
New Zealand, where, in 1902, nearly 75 per cent. of the women
electors recorded their votes, as against 76 per cent. of
their brothers.

"It is unnecessary to add that the conservative woman votes.
Her husband or father and their newspaper take good care that
the duty of doing so is well impressed upon her, even though
abstractly they may all three disapprove of woman in politics,
and have striven to avert her appearing in that arena as long
as they possibly could. …

"Among the measures that can be traced to woman suffrage
within the last ten years are prematernity acts, acts raising
the age of consent, family maintenance acts, and many acts
improving children’s conditions by extending juvenile courts,
limiting hours of work, providing better inspection,
forbidding sale to children of drink, drugs and doubtful
literature."

_Alice Henry,
The Australian Woman and the Ballot
(North American Review, December 21, 1906)._

Writing in the New York _Evening Post_ of February 10,
1909, Mrs. Ida Husted Harper makes the following statements:
"The recent announcement that the upper house of Parliament in
Victoria, Australia, had passed a woman suffrage bill by a
vote of 23 to 5, marked the gaining of complete suffrage for
women in all of Australasia. Since 1902 women have had a vote
in Australia for members of the national Parliament, and for a
number of years the vote for State officials in all the States
except Victoria. There the lower house, or Assembly, has
fifteen times passed a bill giving this vote to women only to
have it rejected by the upper house, or Council. The Assembly
is elected by popular vote; the Council is not. … With their
municipal and national franchise the women were able to make
things decidedly uncomfortable for the opponents, in which
they were encouraged and aided by the labor unions. At last
the council surrendered unconditionally, and the vote of
twenty-three to five showed that most of them tried to get
into the band wagon. The five who voted ‘no’ were probably ‘in
for life,’ and not afraid of the consequences. … Australia has
thoroughly tested woman suffrage, first in municipal affairs,
and then in those of State and nation. There is not one
objection made against it which is not refuted by the actual
experience of that country. All the talk about who will take
care of the baby and what will become of the home, its men
would brush aside as so much chaff."

ELECTIVE FRANCHISE: Denmark:
Its first exercise in Municipal Elections.

Danish municipal elections in March, 1909, were conducted
under a new law which gives every woman who either pays direct
taxes or whose husband does so the right to vote. The law also
provides for a system of proportional representation. "There
was naturally much discussion beforehand," wrote a newspaper
correspondent from Copenhagen, "as to what would be the result
of this first experiment in woman suffrage in Denmark. The
Conservatives, indeed, protested for a long time before they
yielded to its claims. As far as can now be ascertained the
relative strength of the parties in the councils will be
practically unchanged, that is to say, the Conservatives will
still have a slight majority. This is at all events the case
in and around Copenhagen, where the women took a very active
part in the voting, nearly 75 per cent. of those who were
entitled to vote having done so."

ELECTIVE FRANCHISE: England:
Qualification for County and Borough Councils.

The following are the provisions of an Act of Parliament
approved in August, 1907:

"A woman shall not be disqualified by sex or marriage for
being elected or being a councillor or alderman of the council
of any county or borough (including a metropolitan borough):
Provided that a woman if elected as chairman of a county
council or mayor of a borough shall not by virtue of holding
or having held that office be a justice of the peace."

{225}

ELECTIVE FRANCHISE:
The Campaign of the Militant Suffragists or "Suffragettes."

The cause of the women who desire and demand equal political
rights with men seemed to be advancing fast toward complete
victory in Great Britain, in 1906-1907, when the impatient among
them began resorting to militant methods of agitation. It is
probably safe to say that no other movement by any part of any
people in any country, for obtaining an extension of political
rights, had ever been carried by rational discussion and
appeal to a point of more encouragement than the woman
suffrage movement in the United Kingdom had then attained. For
everything elective in local government the vote had been won
for women, and the opening of county and borough offices to
them was on the eve of being written into law. Representation
in Parliament, only, had not been secured, but the disposition
to concede it was growing from day to day. It was at this
stage of promising progress in the movement that an impatient
section of its promoters became persuaded that some
disturbance of the public peace and some troubling of the
Government would hasten the final triumph of their cause. Why
they were led to that conclusion was explained to an American
audience in New York by their leader, Mrs. Pankhurst, in
October, 1909, as follows:

"The Liberals failed to put woman suffrage in their Newcastle
programme. We waited on Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman, leader
of that party, and who would be prime minister, but he said he
was too busy seeing voters to attend to women. The other
parties acted in the same way, so we were forced to other
action. A. J. Balfour, the Tory leader, upon whom we called,
declared that he was in favor of equal suffrage, but was
honest enough to add that no statesman would propose a bill to
give it unless it were made a practical question of politics.

"You have heard much of our methods. You have condemned them,
but whether they were right or wrong, objectionable or not,
they have certainly accomplished our object of bringing the
question before the British public as a practical political
question. … My grandmother was a Chartist, and so I determined
to follow in her footsteps.

"It was at Manchester, almost on the site of the Peterloo
franchise riots, when the yeomen, with their bayonets, cut
down the men seeking votes, that our agitation began. Sir
Edward Grey was closing the great Liberal revival in
Lancashire by a great meeting. Women were admitted to meetings
in England in those days; it is not so now. We decided to be
there with a banner on which we would inscribe the motto ‘Will
the Liberal government give working women the vote?’ Annie
Kenny, an officer of the Cotton Workers’ Trade Union, was
chosen to put the question to Sir Edward Grey. She accepted on
condition that my daughter, Christobel Pankhurst, would
accompany her and hold her hand. We tried to get them seats in
the front of the balcony, where they could unfurl the banner.
We failed in this, so we got seats in the area, and had to
change the banner. The new one was made on my dining-room
table with a piece of calico and some black paint and
contained the now world-wide motto: ‘Votes for Women.’

"Sir Edward Grey delivered a great speech, but there was
nothing in it about giving women votes. Several questions were
put to him, and he answered as all public speakers should, and
as they always do in England. When he was done, more questions
were in order. Annie Kenny rose and unfurled her banner,
holding it up in a hand from which she had lost a finger while
at work in the mills at an age when girls should not be
allowed to work—especially when they are intended for
motherhood. Holding her companion’s hand, she put her
question: ‘Will the Liberal government give working women
votes?’ Instantly the stewards pounced upon her; hands were
pressed over her mouth, and she was forced to sit down. She
was told to write her question, and it would be answered. A
vote of thanks was proposed, and Sir Edward Grey answered.

"When he failed to answer her question, Annie Kenny rose and
insisted on an answer. She was pounced upon; six men dragged
her hat off and pulled her to the door, but her last words as
she was thrown out were: ‘Sir Edward Grey, answer my
question.’ My daughter took up the task, and repeated the
question. She, too, was set upon and dragged past the stage,
upon which sat men who had known her from childhood, who had
voted for her father; but so strong is party spirit that they
allowed her to be thrown out without protest.

"They held a meeting outside and were arrested for obstructing
the police. They were fined, and went to jail. But we had
gained what we wanted. The press, which had ignored us,
heralded our cause. We were giving them good copy."

In the early period of the campaign of public disturbance
which the militant suffragists had thus planned, their
operations were directed mainly to the interruption of
speakers at political meetings, not only by questions, but by
bell-ringing and the like, provoking forcible ejection, arrest
and fine, or commitment to jail. Presently some resorted to
the device of chaining themselves to seats, prolonging the
disturbance and heightening its sensational character. The
crowning sensation of this description was achieved on the 8th
of November, 1908, when two daring suffragettes who had gained
admission to the women’s gallery in the House of Commons
chained themselves to the metal lattice work in front of it
and opened a fire of questions and demands on the dismayed law
makers below. In the previous month the House had been
besieged by a great mob of women who attempted to force their
way into its well-guarded chambers, under Mrs. Pankhurst’s
lead. She and others of the leaders, arrested on this
occasion, refused to give bonds to keep the peace, and were
sentenced to imprisonment for three months.

From this time on, the devices of public disturbance and of
annoyance to Parliament and Ministers became more and more
ingeniously sensational. One performance, on the 27th of
April, 1909, was thus described by a London newspaper of the
morning after:

"St. Stephen’s Hall is built upon the site of the old
Parliament, its dimensions in length and width are the same,
its memories embalm the great Parliamentary tradition, it is
the place where the liberties of the people have been won.
This is the place which was chosen yesterday by woman
suffragists for a degrading exhibition of disorder. On either
side of the hall are two rows of wonderful statues, like white
ghosts of the old Parliament. To the legs of four of these
statues as many women yesterday afternoon fastened themselves,
after their practice, with chains, and remained there, a
centre of disturbance, until an end was put to their mimic
slavery by the police. The statues were those of Selden,
Walpole, Somers, and Falkland; and it is matter for great
regret that Falkland’s statue, in its pathetic grace the most
charming of them all, has been wantonly injured by this rough
usage."

{226}

On the 24th of June the lobby of the House of Commons became
the scene of another performance in the same spirit by a
single dauntless actor,—thus related: "Miss Wallace Dunlop,
who was intercepted the other day in an attempt to deface with
indelible ink the walls of the lobby of the House of Commons
with an appeal on behalf of ‘Votes for Women,’ succeeded
yesterday in accomplishing her object. Disguised as an elderly
lady and carrying a brown handbag, she eluded the vigilance of
the police till well within the lobby of the House. Drawing
from her handbag a small wooden stencil, or board, with felt
attached and saturated with indelible purple ink, she
succeeded in placing it against the wall of the lobby at a
conspicuous spot. The ink was at once absorbed into the
surface of the wall. The words written were:--‘Women’s
Deputation, June 29th. Bill of Rights. It is the right of the
subjects to petition the King, and all commitments and
prosecutions for such petitioning are illegal.’ Miss Wallace
Dunlop was taken to Cannon-row Police-station, and after being
detained two hours was charged with doing wilful damage. She
will be brought before the magistrates at Bow Street this
morning."

Miss Dunlop received a sentence of imprisonment, and
inaugurated in prison a more heroic protest against and
defiance of the tyranny of which she believed herself to be a
victim. It is described in the following manifesto, published
by the National Women’s Social and Political Union (the
principal organization of the militant suffragists) on the
14th of July:

"The women who have been sent to prison in connexion with
woman suffrage disturbances have, from the beginning, demanded
treatment as political prisoners, and have appealed to the
Home Secretary to accord them the rights and privileges to
which political prisoners are entitled in every part of the
world. As this appeal has been disregarded, women have now
decided to take the law into their own hands, and, by carrying
on a revolt in prison, to force the hands of the authorities
to concede them what they have refused to give as a matter of
justice.

"The first action taken in the matter was that of Miss Wallace
Dunlop, sent to prison on Friday, July 2, for imprinting an
extract from the Bill of Rights upon one of the walls in the
House of Commons. Political treatment being refused to her,
and being ordered to wear prison clothes and eat prison food,
Miss Wallace Dunlop determined to strike a blow for her rights
by refusing absolutely to eat the food offered to her. After
91 hours of starvation—during which time communications were
constantly passing between the Governor of the prison and the
Home Office—the authorities decided to give in, and Miss
Wallace Dunlop was released.

"The 14 members of the Women’s Social and Political Union who
were sent to prison on Monday, July 12, in connexion with the
stone throwing at the Government buildings on June 29, have
determined to carry out a further revolt. Before leaving for
prison they informed the officers of the union that it was
their intention, if denied the rights of political prisoners,
to carry out an effective protest in prison. When ordered to
take off their own clothes and to put on prison clothes they
intended to refuse to do so, and standing all together they
would refuse to be put into cells of the second division. If
put into their cells by force and undressed, they would refuse
in the morning to get up and dress excepting into their own
clothes. They also informed members of the union that they
would refuse to obey the rule of silence, but would talk to
one another whenever they liked and would sing aloud during
retention.

"In making this protest the women claim that they are fighting
for the preservation of the rights of political prisoners,
which were not denied even in the Bastille."

Miss Dunlop’s heroic protest, by refusing prison food, was
taken up at once and repeated by numbers of her imprisoned
sisters; until the prison authorities met it by forcibly
administering food, in the manner of treatment applied
sometimes to desperate convicts or to the insane; and this, of
course, is more than repugnant and distressing to the feeling
of everybody. The whole unexampled situation is repugnant and
distressing, however it may be viewed. The cause involved is
so pitifully stripped of its dignity, simply for the reason
that the sex whose cause it is has nothing in body or mind to
qualify it for effectual rioting. A mob of men can invest its
mischievous doings with the impressiveness of terror, which
crushes laughter and contempt. A mob of such women as the
champion suffragists are cannot do so, and the riot they
attempt is but a travesty, which challenges jeers, and sadly
smirches the after heroism of the self-starved rioters in
their prison cells. The difference between a political
insurrection of men and the insurgency of Mrs. Pankhurst and
her followers is the difference between a menace that alarms
and a nuisance that annoys and provokes. With what effect the
cause of woman suffrage has been made a public nuisance in
England remains to be seen. The advantage to it is dubious, to
say the least. On this point Mr. Winston Churchill, President
of the Board of Trade, spoke his mind plainly to a deputation
of suffragettes who called on him at Dundee on the 18th of
last October. He said:

"I saw the beginning of what you call the militant tactics.
They broke out in my late constituency, North-West Manchester,
and during the four years that have passed I have fought three
by-elections, and have made a great many speeches about the
country. So, I suppose, I have come very nearly as much in
contact with them as any other Cabinet Minister. … You have
come to me in a deputation, and I am bound to give you my
candid and truthful opinion that your cause is in a worse
position now than it was four years ago. I do not mean by that
that anything has been done which will prevent the ultimate
success of the movement. I do not think that is so, but I am
quite sure that, while these tactics of silly disorder and
petty violence continue, there is not the slightest chance of
any Government that will be called into power, or of any House
of Commons which is likely to be elected, giving you the
reform which you seek. That is my honest, unprejudiced view."

{227}

The National Union of Women Suffrage Societies, of which Mrs.
Henry Fawcett is President, represents a large body of women
claimants of the suffrage who distinctly disapprove of and
disclaim responsibility for the proceedings of their militant
allies. In a statement which this National Union communicated
to the Prime Minister on the 2d of October, 1909, they set
forth the following facts in evidence of the strength of the
popular support given to their claims: Since the beginning of
1908 the National Union had taken part in 31 by-elections in
Great Britain. "These have been contested by 69 candidates, of
whom 26 were Liberals, 32 Unionists, and 11 Labour, Socialist,
or Independent. Of these 69 candidates, only nine declared
themselves opponents of woman suffrage. The rest in varying
degrees accepted the principle of the enfranchisement of
women. A few merely stated that they were not hostile, but the
overwhelming majority frankly accepted it, some even pledging
themselves to oppose any further extension of the franchise to
men so long as it was withheld from women."

ELECTIVE FRANCHISE: Finland:
The great victory of 1906.

"The great victory for woman suffrage in 1906 was won in
Finland, where women were enfranchised on exactly the same
terms as men, and made eligible to all offices, including
seats in Parliament. This gives the vote at once to about
300,000 women. Preceding and during the revolution, in the
attempt to throw off the Russian yoke, the women shared with
the men the work, the hardships and the dangers; and, when the
triumph came, there was not a thought on the part of men of
excluding women from any portion of the rewards, the most
important of which was the suffrage. But they themselves had
long been preparing the ground. The Finnish Women’s
Association to work for equal rights was founded in 1884 by
Baroness Alexandra Gripenberg and never ceased its efforts. In
1892 the Woman’s Alliance Union was organized, more democratic
and aggressive in its character. … After the vast national
strike in the autumn of 1905, while a body of leading men were
drawing up a Declaration of Rights to be presented to the
Tsar, Dr. (Miss) Tekla Hulsin, a member of the National Bureau
of Statistics, made an eloquent plea in behalf of the women,
and they were included in its demand for universal suffrage. …
The Tsar signed it in November, giving his consent to the
proposed reforms. Immediately the women set to work,
lecturing, organizing, getting up petitions, and finally held
another huge mass-meeting in Helsingfors, demanding that the
Diet carry out this measure. All of the political parties put
it in their platforms. On May 28th, 1906, the Diet with only
one dissenting vote passed the bill giving the suffrage to all
men and women twenty-four years old. This was signed by the
Tsar on July 20th."

_Ida H. Harper,
Woman Suffrage Throughout The World
(North American Review, September, 1907)._

Dr. Tekla Hulsin, referred to above, now a woman member of the
Finnish Diet, speaking at a suffragist meeting in London, in
September, 1909, gave the following account of the action of
the women members of that body:

"The granting of woman suffrage had caused no change in the
strength of the respective political parties. Every citizen in
Finland who was entitled to vote was also eligible for
membership of the Diet. There had been no rivalry between the
men and women candidates; they recognized that they were there
for common ends. The women members of the Diet had followed
their parties on party questions, but had joined on women’s
questions for humanitarian ends. They had presented petitions
for the raising of the marriageable age from 15 to 17, the
exemption of women from their husband’s guardianship, the
reception of Government employment on the same grounds as men,
and on the subject of the prevention of cruelty to children
and animals. These had all been accepted by the Diet."

ELECTIVE FRANCHISE:
International Council of Women.

See (in this Volume)
WOMEN, INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL.

ELECTIVE FRANCHISE:
International Woman Suffrage Alliance.

"Since the Conference held at Copenhagen in August of 1906,
which closed with thirteen countries in membership, the
Alliance has been growing till its influence is felt as far as
South Africa. On the first day of the Conference, held in
Amsterdam June 15, 1907, there was presented an application
from the Woman Suffrage Associations of Natal and Cape Colony
for auxiliaryship in the Alliance. … The second request for
auxiliaryship was presented by Switzerland, which had formed a
National committee of seven Cantonal Associations. … The third
new member, and the last one to enter the Alliance, was the
National Bulgarian Alliance for Women’s Rights. This body is
composed of thirty local societies working in different lines,
and is somewhat like our Federation of Women’s Clubs here, or
a National Council of Women. … The full membership roll of the
Alliance now includes Australia, Bulgaria, Canada, Denmark,
Finland, Germany, Great Britain, Hungary, Italy, the
Netherlands, Norway, Russia, Sweden, United States, South
Africa and Switzerland. Perhaps the most important new
departure at Amsterdam was the fact that official
representatives were sent to that meeting by the Australian
Federation, Norway and the State of Utah. Those coming from
Australia and Norway were not only delegated by the Government
but their expenses were borne by the National Treasury, and
they were sent as students of the whole question as
represented internationally by the Alliance, and expected to
report upon it to their respective governments. … Fraternal
delegates came to the Alliance from the International Council
of Women, and from the National Councils of Belgium, Denmark,
France, Germany, Great Britain, the Netherlands, New Zealand,
Norway and Sweden; and in addition to these fraternal
delegates were sent by seventeen associations from the
countries already mentioned and Scotland in addition; making
in all twenty-one countries represented either by regular
delegates or by fraternal delegates at the Amsterdam
conference."

_Proceedings of the 40th Annual Convention of the
National American Woman Suffrage Association, at Buffalo,
New York, October, 1908._

ELECTIVE FRANCHISE: New Zealand:
Its working in that country.

Sir Joseph George Ward, Prime Minister of New Zealand,
returning home from England in August, 1908, passed through
the United States, and was questioned in New York about the
working of woman suffrage in his country, where women have
been voters for the last sixteen years. He declared his
conviction that New Zealand had found it to be one of the most
far-sighted policies ever put into effect, for the ballot in
the hands of women had exercised a great influence for the
general good. "A stranger coming to New Zealand," he said,
"would not recognize any difference between our institutions
and those here, so far as the right of women to vote is
concerned. He would see no women politicians, no campaign
orators of the other sex, no disturbances such as are so often
pictured as one of the attendant ills of woman’s suffrage.

{228}

"Under our laws women cannot stand for Parliament, nor hold
any other office. They do not mix it up in a campaign. You
never hear of them in this way during an election. They attend
public meetings, they are present at all of the public
ceremonies, and are unusually well-informed upon all public
questions. When they vote they vote intelligently, and any
woman over twenty-one years of age and a citizen of the
country can vote. Her right to vote does not, as many imagine,
cause family dissensions, nor family wrangles such as
cartoonists picture. There are no more differences over
politics in New Zealand families than there are over domestic
problems in the United States. The ballot in the hands of the
women, so far as I have observed, means only the healthy
influence of the home injected into politics. Our law
prohibits the solicitation of votes on election day; the
placarding of streets and houses, the use of vehicles to carry
voters, the exerting of any influence to obtain a vote. A wife
may accompany her husband to the polls, to the door of the
booth, but no further. The laws absolutely protect the privacy
of the ballot.

"In New Zealand the granting of the privilege of voting to
women did not result in the levelling of the wage scale, or
the competition between men and women in labor. In comparison
with other countries the proportion of wage-earning women in
New Zealand is small. She has her place to fill in the home,
and there are no truer and more devoted mothers of families in
the world. I believe that her influence upon man is all the
greater and better by reason of her suffrage. She recognizes
the position of man as the head of the household, and he is,
generally speaking, always the wage-earner, and I firmly
believe that if women could under our laws be elected to
office and have a part in the making of laws, they would not
seek legislation that would tend to further advance themselves
and limit the activity of the men.

"Women’s suffrage has surely resulted in the raising of the
standard of education in our country. The class of ignorant
people is very small, and growing smaller and smaller with
each succeeding generation. … The country has not been without
its political and labor demagogues, but the conservative
judgment of the voters has always prevailed in the end. Graft
is something unknown in New Zealand."

ELECTIVE FRANCHISE:
The Increasing Vote of Women at local option polls and
in general elections.

See (in this Volume)
ALCOHOL PROBLEM: NEW ZEALAND.

----------ELECTIVE FRANCHISE: End--------

ELECTIVE FRANCHISE.

See, (in this Volume)
MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT.

ELECTRICITY.

See (in this Volume and in Volume VI.)
SCIENCE AND INVENTION, RECENT.

ELECTRO-CHEMISTRY.

See (in this Volume)
SCIENCE AND INVENTION: ELECTRO-CHEMISTRY.

ELECTRONS.

See (in this Volume)
SCIENCE AND INVENTION, RECENT: PHYSICAL.

ELEVATOR COMBINATION, Dissolution of the.

See (in this Volume)
COMBINATIONS, INDUSTRIAL: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1901-1906.

ELGIN, The Earl of:
Secretary of State for the Colonies (British).

See (in this Volume)
ENGLAND: A. D. 1905-1906.

ELGIN, The Earl of:
Presiding at Imperial Conference.

See (in this Volume)
BRITISH EMPIRE: A. D. 1907.

ELIOT, Charles W.:
Retirement from Presidency of Harvard University.

See (in this Volume)
EDUCATION: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1901-1909.

ELKINS, Anti-Rebate Law.

See (in this Volume)
RAILWAYS: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1903 (February).

ELKINS CLAUSE, The.

See (in this Volume)
RAILWAYS: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1906-1909.

EMERGENCY CURRENCY ACT.

See (in this Volume)
FINANCE AND TRADE: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1908.

EMERY CLAIM, The.

See (in this Volume)
CENTRAL AMERICA: A. D. 1909: NICARAGUA.

EMIGRATION.

See (in this Volume)
IMMIGRATION; also
RACE PROBLEMS.

EMPIRE DAY.

See (in this Volume)
ENGLAND: A. D. 1903 (MAY).

EMPLOYERS’ LIABILITY.

See (in this Volume)
LABOR PROTECTION.

ENCYCLICALS.

See Papacy.

ENDJUMEN FUTUVAT, The:
An anti-parliamentary party.

See (in this Volume)
PERSIA: A. D. 1906-1907.

----------ENGLAND: Start--------

[Footnote: For convenience of use in the many references to
this heading throughout the Volume, the name of England is
made to stand for The United Kingdom of Great Britain and
Ireland,—a stretch of meaning which seems often permissible.]

ENGLAND: A. D. 1870-1905.
Increase of Population compared with other European Countries.

See (in this Volume)
EUROPE: A. D. 1870-1905.

ENGLAND: A. D. 1900.
Comparative Statement of the Consumption of Alcoholic Drink.

See (in this Volume)
ALCOHOL PROBLEM.

ENGLAND: A. D. 1901.
Census of the British Empire compiled.

See (in this Volume)
BRITISH EMPIRE.

{229}

ENGLAND: A. D. 1901.
Census of England and Wales, and of the United Kingdom.
Population.
Relative numbers of males and females.
Agricultural industry.
Extent of various uses of the soil.
The different kinds of areas.

The eleventh Census of the population of England and Wales was
taken April 1st, 1901, "ascertaining the required information
relating to the persons returned as living at midnight on
Sunday, March 31st." The number enumerated in England and
Wales, as finally revised at the Census Office, was
35,527,843; showing an increase of 3,525,318, or a decennial
rate of increase of 12.17 percent, upon the number returned at
the preceding enumeration in April, 1891. Of the persons
enumerated in England and Wales in 1901, 15,728,613 were males
and 16,799,230 were females, the latter exceeding the former
by 1,070,617. This, however, does not represent the relative
numbers of the two sexes that _belong_ to the population
of the country; "for there are always men temporarily absent
abroad as soldiers or seamen or for business purposes"; while,
on the other hand, "the enumerated population temporarily
includes some soldiers and sailors who were born in Scotland
and Ireland, as well as foreign sailors and business
representatives." Making reckonings for these, "the population
_belonging_ to England and Wales at the date of the
Census may be estimated at 32,805,040 persons, of whom
16,005,810 were males, and 16,799,230 were females." During
the ten years prior to 1901 the recorded male births in
England exceeded the female births by 160,987, while the
recorded deaths of males exceeded the deaths of females by
155,363. This would have about evened their numbers in the
population of 1901; hence the existing excess of females is
due, in the main, to the more extensive emigration or
temporary absence of males.

Of the population of England and Wales less than 4 per cent.
was born outside of those two divisions of the United Kingdom;
not quite 1 per cent. was born in Scotland; a little more than
1.3 per cent. was born in Ireland; a trifle more than 1 per
cent. in foreign countries, and an insignificant fraction in
British colonies and dependencies. England, it will be seen,
is troubled very slightly with problems arising from a mixed
population.

The Census of Scotland and Ireland, taken simultaneously with
that of England and Wales, gave the former a population of
4,472,103, and the latter 4,458,775. Scotland had gained
46,456 since 1891; Ireland had lost in the same period
245,975. In the sixty years since 1841 Ireland had lost more
than 3,700,000. The total of population in the United Kingdom,
at midnight, March 31, 1901, was found to be 41,458,721; and
the females exceeded the males in number by 1,253,905. The
excess was least in Ireland.

Judged by the numbers engaged therein, the Agricultural
Industry is still the most important in the United Kingdom;
but, since 1881, it had been reduced from 2,362,331 males to
2,109,812 in 1901. The decline was far less in Ireland than in
England, Scotland, or Wales. In England and Wales, the whole
area of land, amounting to 37,129,162 acres, or 58,014 square
miles, is divided by the census report into areas as follows:

Acres.
Corn Crops 5,886,052

Green Crops 2,511,744

Clover and grasses under rotation 3,262,926

Flax, Hops, Small Fruit 120,683

Bare Fallow 336,884

Permanent Pasture or Grass 15,399,025

Mountain and Heath Land used for Grazing 3,556,636

Woods, Plantations, Nursery Grounds,
Houses, Streets, Roads, Railways,
Waste Grounds, &c. 6,055,212

Total Land Area of England and Wales. 37,129,162

The enumeration of "different kinds of areas," in England and
Wales, as set forth in the Census report, is interesting in
some particulars—such as these:
54 Ancient Counties;
62 Administrative Counties;
468 Parliamentary Areas;
2 Ecclesiastical Provinces;
35 Ecclesiastical Dioceses;
14,080 Ecclesiastical Parishes;
14,900 Civil Parishes;
67 County Boroughs;
28 Metropolitan Boroughs with their Wards;
54 County Court Circuits;
500 County Court Districts;
1122 Urban Districts
(including 316 County or Municipal Boroughs) with the
Wards of those which are so subdivided;
664 Rural Districts.

_Census of England and Wales, 1901.
General Report.
(Parliamentary Papers, 1904, Cd. 2174.)_

ENGLAND: A. D. 1901 (NOVEMBER).
An addition to the Titles of the King.

The following is part of the proclamation of an addition to
the titles of the King which was made on the 4th of November,
1901:

"Whereas an act was passed in the last session of Parliament,
entitled ‘An act to enable His Most Gracious Majesty to make
an addition to the royal style and titles in recognition of
His Majesty’s dominions beyond the seas,’ which act enacts
that it shall be lawful for us, with a view to such
recognition as aforesaid of our dominions beyond the seas, by
our royal proclamation under the great seal of the United
Kingdom issued within six months after the passing of the said
act, to make such addition to the style and titles at present
appertaining to the Imperial Crown of the United Kingdom and
its dependencies as to us may seem fit; and

"Whereas our present style and titles are, in the Latin
tongue, ‘Edwardus VII Dei Gratia Britanniarum Rex, Fidei
Defensor, Indiæ Imperator,’ and in the English tongue, ‘Edward
VII, by the Grace of God of the United Kingdom of Great
Britain and Ireland King, Defender of the Faith, Emperor of
India,’ we have thought fit, by and with the advice of our
privy council, to appoint and declare, and we do hereby, by
and with the said advice, appoint and declare that henceforth,
so far as conveniently may be, on all occasions and in all
instruments wherein our style and titles are used, the
following addition shall be made to the style and titles at
present appertaining to the Imperial Crown of the United
Kingdom and its dependencies—that is to say, in the Latin
tongue, after the word ‘Britanniarum,’ these words, ‘et
terrarum transmarinarum quœ inditione sunt Britannicâ’; and in
the English tongue, after the words ‘of the United Kingdom of
Great Britain and Ireland,’ these words, 'and of the British
Dominions beyond the Seas.’"

ENGLAND: A. D. 1901-1902.
The last year of the Boer-British War.
Peace preliminaries.
Text of the Treaty concluded.

See (in this Volume)
SOUTH AFRICA: A. D. 1901-1902.

ENGLAND: A. D. 1901-1902 (NOVEMBER-FEBRUARY).
Treaty with the United States to facilitate the construction
of a Ship Canal between the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans.

See PANAMA CANAL: A. D. 1901-1902.

ENGLAND: A. D. 1902.
Arbitration and mediation between the Argentine Republic and
Chile.

See (in this Volume)
ARGENTINE REPUBLIC.

ENGLAND: A. D. 1902 (JANUARY).
Agreement in the nature of a Defensive Alliance with Japan.

See (in this Volume)
JAPAN: A. D. 1902.

{230}

ENGLAND: A. D. 1902 (FEBRUARY).
Wei-hai-wei found valueless.
Fortification abandoned.

The British public was unpleasantly surprised on the 11th of
February, 1902, by an official announcement in Parliament that
the fortifying of the port of Wei-hai-wei, on the Chinese
coast (extorted from China in 1898 as an offset to the cession
of Port Arthur to Russia, had been abandoned, for the reason
that military and naval opinion agreed in concluding that the
place had no strategic value.

See, in Volume VI. of this work,
CHINA: A. D. 1898, MARCH-JULY).

It would not be returned to China, however, having usefulness
for experiments in naval gunnery, and as a sanitarium. The
announcement drew much sarcasm on the Government.

ENGLAND: A. D. 1902 (February).
Opposed deliverances of Lord Rosebery and
Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman on Irish Home Rule.

See (in this Volume)
IRELAND: A. D. 1902 (FEBRUARY).

ENGLAND: A. D. 1902 (MARCH-NOVEMBER).
Passage of the Education Act, in the interest of voluntary or
church schools.
"Passive Resistance" of Nonconformists.

See (in this Volume)
EDUCATION: ENGLAND: A. D. 1902.

ENGLAND: A. D. 1902 (MAY).
Treaty with Abyssinia.

See ABYSSINIA: A. D. 1902.

ENGLAND: A. D. 1902 (JUNE-AUGUST).
Illness and deferred Coronation of King Edward VII.

While England was preparing, in the last half of June, 1902,
for the great ceremony of the Coronation of King Edward VII.,
appointed to take place on the 26th, disquieting accounts of
his Majesty’s health began to appear. Some exposure at
Aldershot, during military reviews, had brought on a chill, it
was said; and though it was made light of in the reports,
there was anxiety abroad. The King and Queen came to London
from Windsor on the 23d, and all seemed to promise well. That
evening he attended a State banquet; but a little before noon
the next morning the nation received a dreadful shock from the
announcement: "The King is suffering from perityphlitis [more
familiarly known as appendicitis]. The condition on Saturday
was so satisfactory that it was hoped that, with care, his
Majesty would be able to go through the Coronation ceremonies.
On Monday evening a recrudescence became manifest, rendering a
surgical operation necessary to-day." A serious disappointment
as well as a grave anxiety was produced. Preparations for the
pageant and the solemnities of the Coronation had been made on
a splendid scale. London was crowded with visitors from all
parts of the world, and specially decorated as never before.
The sudden descent of grief and fear and gloom on the gayeties
of the scene was a transformation which London and England can
never forget.