Puck, vol. 65, July 14, 1909. Hathi Trust, original from the University of Minnesota.]]> Colonel Higginson is reported to have said the late Convention for equal suffrage in Worcester that the failure of women to vote at the school elections showed that they did not care to vote, and that when they showed the wish, the right of suffrage would be granted. As a statement of the fact of the indisposition to vote, this remark is undoubtedly true. The number of women who wish to vote is very small, and, so far as our own observation extends, the diligent efforts of those who insist that they ought to wish to vote do not produce much effect. Yet it is unquestionably true that laws made by men exclusively have often been very unjust to women. A quarter of a century ago Mr. Gladstone denounced some such laws as a reproach to England and to civilization. But there is a constant amelioration of harsh laws, and despite the injustice it remains true that women at large are not greatly interested in the movement for their enfranchisement.

But because women who do not feel disfranchisement to be unjust are different, shall those who do feel the injustice be denied the right? The question is much like that of all emancipation. It is not whether the individual slaves or any considerable number of them wish to be free, but whether slavery is not necessarily hurtful to the whole community. The principle of popular government is the participation of all intelligent adult citizens under equal considerations. How can a political community wisely contemn its fundamental principle even although the disregard does not threaten it with immediate disaster? Is not permanent disregard of conceded rights dangerous demoralizing? And what reason is there in the argument that a hundred persons who are qualified to do something, and desire to do it, should not be allowed to until a thousand who are equally qualified, but have no desire, shall change their minds?

The extension to women of the right of voting at school meetings in New York was evidently not the result of an overwhelming wish of the women in New York to vote at school meetings, as the elections of the 12th of October proved. The law was passed because there was no good reason against it. The Legislature said that if Mrs. A., whose children went to the school, and who was taxed to maintain it, wished to have a voice in the disposition of the money and the management of the school, she should not be debarred because Mrs. B. thought it would be a great nuisance. We understand the difficulties. But the principle is sound that in a popular government the whole adult intelligence should take part. If women are competent to vote at school meetings, they can not, on other questions involving the common interests of the sexes, be classed fairly with criminals and lunatics. This was the conviction of the people of New Jersey many years ago, and women were enfranchised and voted. The charming picture drawn for the Weekly by Mr. Howard Pyle, which appears in this number, is a glimpse of the quaint and old times, and is in itself a pleasant argument. There is nothing disagreeable or unwomanly in the expression of interest and preference which is indicated by casting the ballot in this drawing, and there is an intimation of the humanizing and refining influence which would result from the voting of women upon subjects which they have a common concern with men—an influence which is felt in every fair association of men and women.

]]>
Published in Harper's Weekly, Vol. 24, November 13, 1880, 723.]]>
Nov. 15, 1909

Worked on Miss Bugbee and think I have another good one started. Dolly did not arrive home ‘till after 9 P. M. She sent me a telegram so that I was not worried. Waited for dinner ‘till she came and then we went to Mouquins where we had a nice dinner. Then we walked to Henri’s. Glackenses and Prestons were there. Mrs. G. is for woman’s suffrage, which is growing nearer and nearer each year. I’ll just put down my belief in the woman’s vote here in black and white. I know it’s bound to be a good thing for the race and for that reason it will be in line with Socialism. Home about 1 A. M.

]]>
here to read transcriptions of John Sloan's diaries]]>

Dolly went to Miss Pope’s studio on 24th St. to pose for her again. She says that Miss P. is having the usual difficulty in painting her and is not satisfied with her work as yet.

Walked as far as 42nd and Broadway. Came back and dropped in at Ullman’s and had a discussion on the votes for women question, which at present is being agitated in England by the “Suffragettes,” and has started in this country. I feel that it would be well to give them votes.

In the evening to Mrs. Preston’s on 9th St. Wandered in the rain all through 10th St. in search of the house. Dolly had gone earlier as I was working on a puzzle. They have the basement and first floor of an old house — very fine — hard wood floors, high ceilings, mirrors, etc. Jim has been painting landscapes and they are surprisingly good. He should stick at it. Henri and Mrs. H, Glack and Mrs., Shinn and Mrs., Mrs. Morgan (Grace Dwight) and Mr. Morgan, Fuhr. Johnston of the World had left before I arrived. Glack insisted on staying late and was very amusing.]]>
here to read transcriptions of John Sloan's diaries]]>

Wrote Golz that I could not officially accept Inv.[itation] to show the Independent Ex. in Columbus, Ohio, but that Henri would (privately) make a selection of the exhibits in that show, or that I would be glad to make suggestions — but that Columbus must write individually as there is no organization.

Went to Petitpas’ for dinner. All of the clan except Mr. Yeats, and I left shortly after dinner. Four ladies came over and sat at the table later. One or two Mr. Yeats had known before, one a Mrs. Coffin, the other’s names I didn’t catch.

Mrs. Ray Brown wrote from Bellport, L. I. asking me to make a banner for the Women’s suffrage parade in Oct. Says that Mrs. Glackens referred her to me as a pro-suffragist. I replied yes, if the W. S. P. showed no antagonism to real Social Democracy.]]>
here to read transcriptions of John Sloan's diaries]]>

Today is quite the clearest, hottest Sunday so far this year. We did not leave our bed ‘till nearly noon and we both are tired from our trip of yesterday. I walked as far as 29th St to get the Phila. Press and came back by way of Broadway and Madison Square. There I joined for a few minutes the people sitting on the benches and watched the throbbing fountain and the “Sunday dressed” children. The trees are fat, full green, and the grass brightly glared in the sun on the hot gray paths. A dappling of shade tied lawn to lawn.

Mr. Yeats called later in the afternoon and, at his persuasion, we went to Miss Petitpas’ for dinner. There we met Miss Keegan, an English Suffragette, the real article, who served six weeks in prison for the cause. She was companied by a well-known character actress, Miss Mary Shaw, who proved a really intelligent, splendidly interesting, thinking woman. She expounded her theory of Hamlet — not insane, not weirdly psychological but a young man who’s ideals of woman have been shattered by his mother’s disloyalty. Who has been intimate with Ophelia, the latter in fact probably “enciente” by him. I am inclined to agree]]>
here to read transcriptions of John Sloan's diaries]]>