Woman and the Republic | Page 6

still unites its church and state, and in which feudal
customs still prevail to some extent. Widows and spinsters who are
property-owners can vote for all offices except the one charged under
the Constitution with the framing and execution of the laws of the land.
Aristocracy decrees that in the House of Lords the Bishops shall have a
voice; but in the House of Commons no clergyman can hold a seat, and
for members of Parliament no woman votes. Would any Suffragist hold
that a clergyman was the inferior of men who do sit in the House of
Commons? They are excluded for the same reason that woman has not
the parliamentary vote--they are looked upon as non-combatants.
The Greek and Roman republics appear to have followed an instinct
that was unerring in the condition of society when they removed
women from the seats of power as the commonwealth gathered strength.
Gibbon, in the sentences quoted, attributes the fact that queens as well
as kings have occupied the thrones of modern Europe to the chivalry of
men toward those who would yet be incapable of exercising actual
power except for the backing of a standing army, or an hereditary
nobility sworn to their support, both of which are composed solely of

men. If this be true, it should be visible in the workings of the
constitutional restrictions upon monarchies that have developed in the
past fifty years, during which the principle of democratic government
has advanced with enormous strides over a great portion of the globe.
In the Austro-Hungarian monarchy there is restricted woman suffrage.
The kingdom of Italy has restricted municipal woman suffrage. The
little republic that separates those countries, the land of Tell and the
Vaudois, has direct manhood suffrage only.
Sweden and Norway are apparently parting company. Sweden chooses
to keep its king and its aristocracy, and it has restricted woman suffrage;
but Norway, which is working toward free institutions, and last year
voted to remove the insignia of union from the Norwegian flag, has no
woman suffrage. [Footnote: In the city of Berne, Switzerland, in 1852,
a proxy vote was given to independent women who paid a commercial
tax, but they made no effort to use it until 1885, when contending
political factions compelled them to do so in a measure. Norway's
women have a local school vote. Both these cases of exception serve to
prove the rule that I am trying to set forth.]
Autocratic Russia and its Asiatic colonies have more woman suffrage
than England. Finland, a constitutional monarchy, was ceded to the
Emperor of Russia in 1809. Women there have all except the
parliamentary suffrage. The Governor-General of the Senate is
nominated by the Emperor, and is chief of the military force. The
National Assembly is convoked by the Emperor whenever he sees fit.
The duties of that Assembly are to consider laws proposed by the
Emperor and elaborated by the Committee of Affairs and four members
nominated by the Emperor, who sit in St. Petersburg. The Emperor has
the veto power over any act of theirs. That National Assembly consists
of representatives of the nobility, the clergy, the burghers, and the
peasantry, the consent of all of whom must be obtained to any measure
that makes a change in the constitution or imposes taxes. But the royal
veto can set aside any decision.
Iceland, a dependency of Denmark, has municipal woman suffrage, and
women are eligible to municipal office. It has its own legislature, which

governs jointly with the King, the executive power being in the hands
of the King alone.
In the great extensions of suffrage in England in 1848, an amendment
for the extension of suffrage to women was introduced in Parliament by
Mr. Disraeli. Lord Northcote, Lord John Manners, and other
conservatives, upheld it; but the liberal leaders opposed it, Gladstone
and John Bright among them. John Blight's family were strenuous for
the movement, and he had fancied himself its friend until the issue
came; then the old champion of freedom, proved true to the instinct that
guards it in the nation. In the constantly increasing liberty of the lower
classes of England, an essential principle which excludes women from
the parliamentary vote has been maintained. Lady Spencer Churchill
and other Suffrage leaders look to Viscount Templeton and Lord
Salisbury for support to-day.
A woman-suffrage bill of many years' standing and absurd provisions,
has just passed to a second reading in the House of Commons.
Although it was treated as a joke by all parties, it served to emphasize
the fact that Sir Vernon Harcourt and the Liberals are opposed to any
advance in this direction.
In the late extension of suffrage in Canada, the movement for woman
suffrage had conservative support, while every liberal leader opposed it.
No South American