Of What Benefit to Woman? 
 
 The First Question 
 
 The question of woman suffrage cannot be treated with indiffer- 
 ence — it is a practical question. If women are to assume the duty 
 of suffrage, they must either add it to their other duties or lay aside 
 other duties to take up this new duty. Would either be a good thing 
 for women or for the community at large ? 
 
 “ Rights ” is a word of much sound, but little meaning — since each 
 one’s rights stop where another’s begin, if there be a conflict between 
 them. We are to consider a question of rights, woman’s rights, the 
 suffragists call it, but let us look into it and we see a three-fold as- 
 pect : The rights demanded by the women who advocate suffrage ; the 
 rights of those women who oppose the movement ; the rights of the 
 community at large, the Commonwealth, the nation. 
 
 What the Suffragists Claim 
 
 The suffragists claim the franchise for women on the following 
 grounds : — 
 
 That the right to vote is a natural and inherent one, of which 
 they are deprived. 
 
 Second^ That women are taxed but not represented, contrary to the 
 principles of free government. 
 
 Third, That society would gain by the participation of women in 
 government, in that they would purify politics ; the cause of temper- 
 ance would be promoted by their vote ; woman’s voice would abolish 
 war; the franchise would be to woman an educational factor. • 
 
 Fourth, That women are physically and intellectually as capable of 
 the duties of the franchise as are men. 
 
 Fifth, That the fact that a majority of women do not wish the fran- 
 chise is no reason for depriving a minority of an inborn right. 
 
 Suffrage not a Natural Right 
 
 The first two proposals come under one head — justice; the rest 
 under a second — expediency ; and so we will consider them. As to the 
 justice of their claim to an inherent, natural right of which they are 
 deprived, we answer that the right of suffrage is not inherent or in- 
 alienable. 
 
 Suffrage cannot be the right of the individual, because it does not 
 exist for the benefit of the individual, but for the benefit of the state 
 itself. A gift from nature must be absolute and not contingent upon 
 

 <S>32. 
 
 3osroP 
 
 the state to prescribe qualifications, the possession of which shall be 
 the test of right of enjoyment ; and no restrictions of age or education 
 could be put upon it, such as now exist. In prescribing limitations, 
 the framers of the Constitution showed that they did not consider 
 suffrage an inherent right. • The article of the bill of rights which 
 refers to inalienable rights has nothing whatever to say about suffrage. 
 
 The Ballot Needs Force Behind It 
 
 The suffragists claim that women are taxed without representation. 
 Those advancing this argument exhibit their entire lack of understand- 
 ing of the theories of taxation and suffrage. We have founded our 
 government on manhood suffrage, not because our male citizens own 
 more or less property, or any property at all, but because they are 
 men ; because behind the law must be the power of enforcing it. The 
 insuperable objection to woman suffrage is fundamental and func' 
 tional, and nature alone is responsible for it, since she has created 
 man combatant and woman non-combatant. 
 
 The reason we have adopted as the basis of our political system 
 the principle that the will of the majority must prevail over that of 
 the minority is that we recognize the fact that the majority can, if the 
 minority rebel, compel them to acquiescence. Therefore, suffrage has 
 been given to men, because they can back laws by force enough to 
 compel respect and observance. 
 
 Voting Has Nothing To Do With Taxation 
 
 The possession of the ballot is in no sense dependent upon the 
 fact that the voter pays taxes or owns property. A man who has no 
 property has the same voice in voting as a millionaire. Property of 
 a town, city, or state is justly liable for the current expenses of the 
 government which protects such property. Woman’s property receives 
 exactly the same protection as man’s, and she benefits as much there- 
 by ; there is therefore no injustice to her. A vote would not protect 
 her property, since two women with no property interests could more 
 than annul her vote by theirs. There is not a single interest of woman 
 which is not shared by men. What is good for men — what protects 
 their interests also protects woman’s interests. 
 
 The Question of Expediency 
 
 Since women have not — for men have not — any natural right to 
 vote, and cannot claim it on the ground of taxation without represen- 
 tation, it remains to be seen whether they can demand it on the ground 
 of expediency. Will the franchise extended to women — first, benefit 
 the whole community ? second, gain definite benefits for women, which 
 cannot be obtained in the existing order of things? 
 
 The remonstrants to woman’s suffrage cannot find stated in all the 
 suffragists’ arguments one definite, certain benefit to result to either 
 state or women. On what grounds of expediency do the suffragists 
 
3 
 
 demand the ballot? First, that society would gain because woman 
 would reform politics. The cause of temperance would be promoted 
 by their vote. Woman’s voice would abolish war. Second, that 
 women would gain, since the ballot would be to them an educational 
 factor, and that' through the ballot the problem of woman’s wages 
 would be solved. 
 
 Would Women Reform Politics? 
 
 Would women reform politics ? Let us see ! In our country where 
 manhood suffrage exists it follows that, if suffrage belongs to women 
 at all, it belongs to all; suffrage must be given to all women or none, 
 and such is the final proposition of the suffragists. If the franchise 
 were granted to women in the United States, all women of legal age, 
 sound mind, and not disfranchised for special causes (now applying 
 to men) could vote ; not only the intelligent and those unburdened 
 by home and business duties, but all women without respect to char- 
 acter or intelligence. 
 
 What Would Women Gain? 
 
 We come to the question of the gain to woman personally. Is there 
 anything to be gained which cannot be brought about with the exist- 
 ing franchise? The suffragists say : First, Women will be educated by 
 the ballot. Second, The problem of woman’s wages will be solved. In 
 regard to their first claim we need only ask. Has the ballot proved of 
 much educational value to men ; then what are the probabilities as 
 regards women ? 
 
 As To Woman’s Wages 
 
 The problem of woman’s wages ! The ballot could not help the 
 working girl in the way the suffragists claim, since legislation affects 
 the business of the country only in a general way, helping or hurting 
 all the workers alike in any special industry. The question of wages 
 is one of supply and demand simply ! So the general wages of wo- 
 men will always depend greatly on the amount of skill acquired by 
 the mass of them. What especially affects woman’s wages is the tem- 
 porary character of her work! 4.gj% per cent, of female workers are 
 under 25 years of age ; 32y% per cent, of female workers are under 21 
 years of age, as determined by government investigation. You see 
 what this means, that the ranks are constantly being filled up with 
 raw, untrained girls, while those who have attained to some degree of 
 skill are constantly dropping out. The natural expectation of every 
 normal girl should be that sooner or later she will marry and leave 
 her work ; therefore, there is not that incentive that men have to 
 become highly skillful. 
 
 The problem, therefore, resolves itself into this^ — how to regulate 
 justly the distribution of wages between a sex which works through- 
 out life and a sex which works with only temporary expectations, 
 
4 
 
 looking toward withdrawal in a few years from the labor market, and 
 withdrawing to take with it its acquired skill, leaving only inexperi- 
 ence in its stead. The wiser of the suffragists acknowledge that the 
 suffrage will not of itself solve the problem of wages, dependent as it 
 is on other than political considerations. 
 
 The Majority or the Minority 
 
 There remains one argument for granting woman the suffrage, 
 namely, that the fact that a majority of women do not wish to vote 
 is no sufficient reason for depriving a minority of an inborn right. 
 This argument contains the gist of the whole question, that is, 
 wherein the demands of the suffragists and the anti-suffragists clash. 
 We have shown their error in claiming the franchise as an inherent 
 right, but even were we to grant that such a right existed, it would 
 still be perfectly within the power of the State to deprive women of 
 this right, if by granting it the general good would be imperiled. The 
 State holds authority to deprive citizens of the right of property, of 
 liberty, of life itself, if the common weal demand it. The family is the 
 safeguard of the State, and the granting of the suffrage to women 
 tends to weaken this mainstay of the nation by bringing into it ele- 
 ments of discord and disunion ; therefore, the State would be more 
 than justified in denying women even an inherent right which might 
 prove thus disastrous. 
 
 Why the Majority of Women do not Want the Ballot 
 
 We contend that a majority of women believe that their inherent 
 rights and privileges would suffer if the duty of voting were imposed 
 upon them, for the following reasons : Because suffrage involves office- 
 holding, which is inconsistent with the duties of most women ; because 
 they feel that their obvious duties and trusts — as sacred as any on 
 earth — already demand their best efforts; because the duties cannot 
 be relegated to others ; because political equality will deprive woman 
 of special privileges hitherto accorded to her by law ; because they 
 hold that the suffrage would lessen rather than increase their influence 
 for good. 
 
 Suffrage involves office-holding. If women vote, they ought also 
 to hold office, and assume the working duties incident to office. A 
 system which tends to the dissolution of the home is more perilous to 
 the general good than any other form of danger, and office-holding is, 
 on the face of it, incompatible with woman’s proper discharge of her 
 duties as wife and mother. 
 
 Many women there are, it is true, who are not wives and mothers ; 
 and, if women vote, there will be more of them, but laws are made for 
 the average individual, and the average woman is occupied in her house 
 with the cares of a wife, a mother, and a home-maker. 
 
 The trusts of woman now are as sacred as any on earth, and man 
 cannot relieve her of them. If, therefore, he demands of her partici- 
 pation in such duties, political or general, as his natural constitu- 
 
5 
 
 tion fits him for, while he cannot relieve her of those most necessary 
 duties which nature demands of her, he commits toward her a mon- 
 strous injustice. This is what imposing the suffrage on women would 
 amount to; for 'if woman may vote she must vote. It is a mere 
 sophism to say that the simple dropping of a ballot is all that is re- 
 quired ot her. If the suffrage is extended to women, they must accept 
 it as a duty, bringing to bear on it the conscientious spirit which they 
 bring to bear on their present life problems. 
 
 Rights and Exemptions Given by Massachusetts Law to 
 Women and not to Men (1909). 
 
 Under the Common Law and the Laws of the United States and of 
 Massachusetts many rights and exemptions are given to women which 
 are not given to men. 
 
 Citizenship is acquired more easily by women than by men, as “All 
 persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the 
 jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State 
 wherein they reside ” (U. S. Const. 14th Am.), and “Any woman who 
 is now or may hereafter be married to a citizen of the United States 
 and who might herself be lawfully naturalized shall be deemed a citi- 
 zen.” — U. S. Compiled Statutes, sec. 1994. 
 
 Women are not obliged to do jury duty. — R. L. ch. 176, sec. i. 
 
 Women are not allowed to do military duty. — Acts 1905, ch. 465, 
 sec. 2. 
 
 Women are not obliged to pay a poll tax. — R. L. ch. 12, sec. i. 
 
 The property of a widow or of an unmarried woman above the age 
 of twenty-one years to the amount of $500 is exempt from taxation 
 provided her whole taxable estate does not exceed $1000. — R. L. ch. 
 12, sec. 5, cl. 9. 
 
 Women, by residing in a city or town for five consecutive years, and 
 married women if their husbands hav^ settlements, will gain settle- 
 ments, entitling them to support in case of need in such city or town, 
 although they have paid no taxes. Men, on the other hand, must pay 
 taxes three out of five consecutive years of residence in order to gain 
 such settlement. — R. L. ch. 80, sec. i, els. i & 6. 
 
 Women who are employees are exceptionally provided for and pro- 
 tected by the statutes regulating labor. — R. L. ch. 106, secs. 36-41 ; 
 Acts 1904, ch. 397 ; Acts 1907, ch. 413 ; Acts 1908, ch. 645. 
 
 In general the welfare of women and children has been increasingly 
 regarded. — Acts 1905, ch. 251 ; Acts 1905, ch. 269 ; Acts 1904, ch. 
 397 ; Acts 1907, ch. 413 ; Acts 1907, ch. 367. 
 
 Women are exempt from arrest in civil actions except for tort, but 
 after judgment has been obtained against them they may be committed 
 for contempt of court upon failure to pay. — R. L. ch. 168, sec. 3. 
 
 Married women are exempted from punishment for many criminal 
 and tortious acts committed by them in the presence of their husbands, 
 there being “ a presumption of law that acts done by the wife in the 
 immediate presence of her husband are done by her under coercion 
 
6 
 
 from him.” In the absence of evidence to rebut this presumption the 
 husband is held and the wife excused. — 145 Mass. 307. 
 
 A husband is bound to support his wife and children, and is liable 
 for debts incurred by his wife in the purchase of necessaries. — loi 
 Mass. 78 ; 114 Mass. 424. See also R. L. ch. 212, sec. 45 as amended 
 by Acts 1905, ch.. 307. 
 
 During the pendency of a libel for divorce, the court may require 
 the husband to pay into court an amount which will enable the wife 
 to defend or maintain the libel, and may require him to pay the wife 
 alimony during the pendency of the libel. — R. L. ch. 152, sec. 14. 
 
 A justice of the Superior Court may, if he deems it advisable, ap- 
 point an attorney to investigate and report to the Court in relation to 
 any suit for divorce or any suit to have a marriage declared void, and 
 may direct such attorney or any other attorney to defend the suit. — 
 Acts 1907, ch. 390. 
 
 The rights of the husband and wife in relation to the control of their 
 minor children have been made substantially equal, and now in any 
 controversy between the parents relative to the final possession of the 
 children, the welfare and happiness of the children shall determine 
 their custody or possession. — R. L. ch. 152, sec. 28. 
 
 A married woman may now hold both real and personal property 
 free from the control and debts of her husband. — R. L. ch. 153, secs. 
 I & 7. 
 
 A married woman may now make contracts and sue and be sued, 
 except that husband and wife cannot make contracts between them- 
 selves or sue each other. — R. L. ch. 154, secs. 2-6. 
 
 A married woman may now carry on business on her own account. 
 — R. L. ch. 153, sec. 10. 
 
 The wife upon the decease of her husband may remain in his house 
 for six months without being chargeable for rent. — R. L. ch. 140, 
 sec. I. 
 
 The wife upon the decease of her husband may be given an allow- 
 ance for necessaries out of his,property. The amount of this allow- 
 ance is fixed by the Probate Court according to her circumstances and 
 condition in life, and is paid to her in preference to the payment of his 
 debts. — R. L. ch. 140, sec. 2. 
 
 Aside from these advantages to the wife, the rights of the surviving 
 husband or wife in the property of the one who has deceased are now 
 practically the same. If there is no will, or if the provisions of the 
 will have been waived, the husband or wife, if there are issue sur- 
 viving, will take one third of the personalty and realty ; if there are no 
 issue surviving, then the husband or wife will take $5000 and one half 
 of the residue of the personalty and one half of the realty. — R. L. 
 ch. 140, sec. 3. See 201 Mass. 59. 
 
 Woman’s Influence Without the Ballot 
 
 From this summary it will be seen that without the ballot women 
 have obtained more than mere justice. 
 
 We oppose the suffrage for women, because we feel that we have 
 more influence without it. There is not a single subject in which 
 
7 
 
 woman takes an intelligent interest in which she cannot exert an influ- 
 ence in the community proportionate to her character and ability. 
 
 If the suffrage movement were to disband to-day and no woman ever 
 vote, not a single great interest would suffer. None of woman’s wide 
 philanthropies would be harmed ; women’s colleges would be unaffected ; 
 the professions would continue to give diplomas to qualified women ; 
 tradesmen would still employ women ; good laws would not be re- 
 pealed, and bad laws would be no more likely to be framed ; literature 
 would not suffer ; homes would be no less secure ; woman’s civic work 
 would not cease. 
 
 The influence of woman standing apart from the ballot is immea- 
 surable. Men look to her then (knowing that she has no selfish, polit- 
 ical interests to further) as the embodiment of all that is truest and 
 noblest. She has influence with all parties alike ; if a voter, she would 
 have only the influence of her own party, even the women’s vote being 
 divided against itself. We believe that it is of vital importance that 
 our sex should have no political ends to serve. 
 
 In whatever tends to protect and elevate woman, to secure her 
 rights in the true sense of the word, to open up to her new paths of 
 usefulness, all true-hearted men will join with women. - In such work 
 there is no difference of purpose. 
 
 Childhood is hers to influence and mold; and what greater power 
 for good could there be given her ? Let all true women, loyal citizens 
 of our republic, look to the best performance of the private and public 
 trusts which are naturally theirs, striving for no false “equality,” since 
 there is no question of comparison between men and their duties and 
 women and theirs. They are not “like in like” but “like in differ- 
 ence,” each supplementing the other, rising or falling, but always 
 together. 
 
 Issued by the Massachusetts Association Opposed to the Further Exten- 
 sion of Suffrage to Wo?nen. 
 
 Pamphlets and leaflets may be obtained from the Secretary, 
 
 Room 615, 
 
 Kensington Building, 
 
 687 Boylston Street, Boston, Mass. 
 
AunA I