No one needs all the powers of the fullest citizenship more urgently than the wage-earning woman, and from two different points of view—that of actual money wages and that of her wider needs as a human being and a member of the community.

The wages paid any body of working people are determined by many influences, chief among which is the position of the particular body of workers in question. Thus the printers, by their intelligence, their powerful organization, their solidarity and united action, keep up their wages in spite of the invasion of their domain by new and improved machinery. On the other hand, the garment-workers, the sweaters' victims, poor, unorganized, unintelligent, despised, remain forever on the verge of pauperism, irrespective of their endless toil. If, now, by some untoward fate the printers should suddenly find themselves disfranchised, placed in a position in which their members were politically inferior to the members of other trades, no effort of their own short of complete enfranchisement could restore to them that prestige, that good standing in the esteem of their fellow-craftsmen and the public at large which they now enjoy, and which contributes materially in support of their demand for high wages.

In the garment trades, on the other hand, the presence of a body of the disfranchised, of the weak and young, undoubtedly contributes to the economic weakness of these trades. Custom, habit, tradition, the regard of the public, both employing and employed, for the people who do certain kinds of labor, contribute to determine the price of that labor, and no disfranchised class of workers can permanently hold its own in competition with enfranchised rivals. But this works both ways. It is fatal for any body of workers to have forever hanging from the fringes of its skirts other bodies on a level just below its own; for that means continual pressure downward, additional difficulty to be overcome in the struggle to maintain reasonable rates of wages. Hence, within the space of two generations there has been a complete revolution in the attitude of the trades-unions toward the women working in their trades. Whereas forty years ago women might have knocked in vain at the doors of the most enlightened trade-union, to-day the Federation of Labor keeps in the field paid organizers whose duty it is to enlist in the unions as many women as possible. The workingmen have perceived that women are in the field of industry to stay; and they see, too, that there can not be two standards of work and wages for any trade without constant menace to the higher standard. Hence their effort to place the women upon the same industrial level with themselves in order that all may pull together in the effort to maintain reasonable conditions of life.

But this same menace holds with regard to the vote. The lack of the ballot places the wage-earning woman upon a level of irresponsibility compared with her enfranchised fellow workingman. By impairing her standing in the community the general rating of her value as a human being, and consequently as a worker, is lowered. In order to be rated as good as a good man in the field of her earnings, she must show herself better than he. She must be more steady, or more trustworthy, or more skilled, or more cheap in order to have the same chance of employment. Thus, while women are accused of lowering wages, might they not justly reply that it is only by conceding something from the pay which they would gladly claim, that they can hold their own in the market, so long as they labor under the disadvantage of disfranchisement?...

Finally, the very fact that women now form about one-fifth of the employes in manufacture and commerce in this country has opened a vast field of industrial legislation directly affecting women as wage-earners. The courts in some of the States, notably in Illinois, are taking the position that women can not be treated as a class apart and legislated for by themselves, as has been done in the factory laws of England and on the continent of Europe, but must abide by that universal freedom of contract which characterizes labor in the United States. This renders the situation of the working woman absolutely anomalous. On the one hand, she is cut off from the protection awarded to her sisters abroad; on the other, she has no such power to defend her interests at the polls, as is the heritage of her brothers at home. This position is untenable, and there can be no pause in the agitation for full political power and responsibility until these are granted to all the women of the nation.

Mrs. Mariana W. Chapman (N. Y.) spoke from the standpoint of Women as Capitalists and Taxpayers.

The first impulse toward the organization of women to protect their own rights came from the injustice of laws toward married women, and in 1848 it manifested itself in the first Woman's Rights Convention in Seneca Falls. Slowly the leaven spread. There was agitation in one State after the other about the property rights of women.... Now in many States married as well as single women are proprietors of business enterprises upon the same basis as men, and are interested as capitalists and tax-payers in every law which affects the country industrially or financially.

In 1894 a careful copy was made of the women taxpayers of Brooklyn. Names with initials were not placed on the list, so that the total was probably under rather than over estimated. This showed 22.03 or nearly one-fourth of all the assessable realty in the names of women, amounting to $110,000,000, besides many large estates in which they were interested. In 1896 the assessed value of real estate in the State of New York was $4,506,985,694, which, if estimated in the same ratio, would give taxable property owned by women to the extent of $1,124,221,423.

They are agriculturally interested, inasmuch as they are frequently owners of large tracts of land in the West as well as of smaller farms in our Eastern States. What shall we say to a Government that gives land in severalty to the Indian, supplies him with tools and rations, puts a ballot in his hand, and then says to the American woman who purchases the same right to land, "You shall not have the political privileges of American citizenship?" Under the laws of our country every stock company is obliged to give men and women shareholders a vote upon the same basis, and one fails to see why a government, which professedly exists to maintain the rights of the people, should practice in its own dealing such flaunting injustice....

Women help to support every public institution in the State and should have representation upon every board, and in the laws which control them. They help to pay the army pensions and should be allowed to help in deciding how much shall be paid. They help to pay for standing armies and for navies and they have the larger part in the nurture and training of every man who is in army or navy, and this is not the smaller part of the tax, since it is at times the matter of a life for a life. Women pay their part of the taxes to support our public schools and have intense interests in their well-doing. Twenty-six States have recognized this fact and have given to women some kind of School Suffrage, one has granted Municipal Suffrage and four Full Political Equality; but this is only a fraction of the justice which belongs to a government founded by statesmen whose watchword was, "No taxation without representation."

Miss Elizabeth Burrill Curtis (N. Y.) answered the question, Are Women Represented in our Government?

"Taxation without representation is tyranny" was one of the slogans of liberty in this country one hundred and twenty years ago. Have we outlived this principle? If not, why is it supposed to have no application to women?

That a century ago the latter were not thought of as having any rights under this motto is not surprising. So few women then held property in their own name that the injustice done them was not so apparent. But the situation is changed now, and the right of women to be considered as individuals is everywhere acknowledged save in this one particular. Even those who feel that the granting of universal male suffrage was a mistake, and that the right to self-government should be proved by some test, educational or otherwise—even those do not assert that it would be anything but gross injustice to tax men without allowing them a voice in the disposal of their money....

But there is still another side to the question. It is not only that the disfranchised women are unfairly treated, but the public good inevitably suffers from the political nonexistence of half the citizens of the republic. Either women are interested in politics or they are not. If the former, the country is distinctly injured, for nothing is more fatal to good government than the intermeddling of a large body of people who have never studied the questions at issue and whose only interest is a personal one. If, on the other hand, women are not interested in politics, what is the condition of that country, half of whose citizens do not care whether it be well or ill governed? That women influence men is never denied, even by the most strenuous opponents of woman suffrage. It is, on the contrary, most violently asserted by those very people; but of what value is that interest if woman is utterly ignorant of one of the most important duties of a man's life?...

On one hand the public good demands that no class of citizens be arbitrarily prevented from serving the commonweal; and on the other hand thinking and patriotic women are crying against the injustice which forbids them to prove their fitness for self-government. What shall be the result of this double demand?

Woman Suffrage and the Home was the topic of Henry B. Blackwell (Mass.).

One of the objections to extending suffrage to women is a fear that its exercise will divert their attention from domestic pursuits, and diminish their devotion to husband, children and home. We believe, on the contrary, that it will increase domestic happiness by giving women greater self-respect and greater respect and consideration from men.

People who make this objection seem to regard the conjugal and maternal instincts as artificial, as the result of education and circumstances, losing sight of the fact that these qualities are innate in the feminine soul. Mental cultivation and larger views of life do not tend to make women less womanly any more than they tend to make men less manly. No one imagines that business or politics diminishes or destroys the conjugal and paternal instinct in men. We do not look for dull or idle or indolent men as husbands for our daughters. Ignorant, narrow-minded men do not make the best husbands and fathers. Ignorant, narrow-minded women do not make the best wives and mothers. Mental discipline and intelligent responsibility add strength to the conjugal and parental sentiment alike in men and women....

But fortunately this is no longer a question of theory. We appeal to the experience of the four States which have extended equal suffrage to women. Wyoming has had complete woman suffrage since 1869. For twenty-nine years, as a Territory and a State, women have voted there in larger ratio than men. Supreme Judge J. W. Kingman many years ago testified that the actual proportion of men voting had increased to 80 per cent., but that 90 per cent. of the women went to the polls. And now, after a generation of continuous voting, the percentage of divorces in Wyoming is smaller than in the surrounding States where women do not vote, and while the percentage in the latter is rapidly increasing, in Wyoming it is steadily diminishing. Where women have once voted the right has never been taken away by the people. In Utah women voted for seventeen years while it was a Territory, until Congress abolished it for political reasons. But when Utah was about to be admitted to statehood the men in framing their constitution restored the suffrage to women. Would they have done so if it had proved injurious to their homes? Impossible! You have eight Senators and seven Representatives in Congress from the four States where women have the full franchise. Ask them if it has demoralized their homes or the homes of their fellow-citizens, and your fears, if you have any, will be forever set at rest....

Believe me, gentlemen, it is not patriotism, it is not a passion for justice, it is not loyalty to sister women, it is not a desire to better her country, which will make a woman neglect her husband. Society women, superficial, selfish, silly women, the butterflies of the ballroom, the seekers for every new sensation, the worldly-minded aspirants for social position, these are the women who neglect their homes; and not the brave, earnest, serious-minded, generous, unselfish women who ask for the ballot in order by its use to make the world better. In the twentieth century, already dawning, we shall have a republican family in a republican nation, a true democracy, a government of the people, by the people and for the people, men and women co-operating harmoniously on terms of absolute equality in the home and in the State.

The Senate Hearing closed with the paper of Mrs. Elizabeth Cady Stanton on the Significance and History of the Ballot, which was in part as follows:

The recent bills on Immigration, by Senators Lodge of Massachusetts and Kyle of South Dakota, indirectly affect the interests of woman. Their proposition to demand a reading and writing qualification on landing strikes me as arbitrary and equally detrimental to our mutual interests. The danger is not in their landing and living in this country, but in their speedy appearance at the ballot-box and there becoming an impoverished and ignorant balance of power in the hands of wily politicians. While we should not allow our country to be a dumping ground for the refuse population of the Old World, still we should welcome all hardy, common-sense laborers here, as we have plenty of room and work for them. Here they can improve their own condition and our surroundings, developing our immense resources and the commerce of the country. The one demand I would make in regard to this class is that they should not become a part of our ruling power until they can read and write the English language intelligently and understand the principles of republican government. This is the only restrictive legislation we need to protect ourselves against foreign domination. To this end the Congress should enact a law for "educated suffrage" for our native-born as well as foreign rulers.

With free schools and compulsory education, no one has an excuse for not understanding the language of the country. As women are governed by a "male aristocracy," they are doubly interested in having their rulers able at least to read and write. See with what care in the Old World the prospective heirs to the throne are educated. There was a time when the members of the British Parliament could neither read nor write, but these accomplishments are now required of the Lords and Commons, and even of the King and Queen, while we have rulers, native and foreign, who do not understand the letters of the alphabet; and this in a republic supposed to be based on intelligence of the people!

Much as we need this measure for the stability of our Government, we need it still more for the best interests of women. This ignorant vote is solid against woman's emancipation. In States where amendments to their constitutions are proposed for the enfranchisement of women, this vote has been in every case against them. We should ask for national protection against this hostile force playing football with the most sacred rights of one-half of the people.... In all national conflicts it is ever deemed the most grievous accident of war for the conquered people to find themselves under a foreign yoke, yet this is the position of the women of this republic to-day. Foreigners are our judges and jurors, our legislators and municipal officials, and decide all questions of interest to us, even to the discipline in our schools, charitable institutions and prisons. Woman has no voice as to the education of her children or the environments of the unhappy wards of the State. The love and sympathy of the mother-soul have but an evanescent influence in all departments of human interest until coined into law by the hand that holds the ballot. Then only do they become a direct and effective power in the Government....

The popular objection to woman suffrage is that it would "double the ignorant vote." The patent answer to this is, "Abolish the ignorant vote." Our legislators have this power in their own hands. There have been serious restrictions in the past for men. We are willing to abide by the same for women, provided the insurmountable qualification of sex be forever removed. Some of the opponents talk as if educated suffrage would be invidious to the best interests of the laboring masses, whereas it would be most beneficial in its ultimate influence.... Surely when we compel all classes to learn to read and write and thus open to themselves the door to knowledge, not by force, but by the promise of a privilege which all intelligent citizens enjoy, we are benefactors and not tyrants. To stimulate them to climb the first rounds of the ladder that they may reach the divine heights where they shall be as gods, knowing good and evil, by withholding the citizen's right to vote for a few years is a blessing to them as well as to the State.

We must inspire our people with a new sense of their sacred duties as citizens of a republic, and place new guards around our ballot-box. Walking in Paris one day I was greatly impressed with an emblematic statue in the square Chateau d'Eau, placed there in 1883 in honor of the republic. On one side is a magnificent bronze lion with his fore paw on the electoral urn, which answers to our ballot-box, as if to guard it from all unholy uses.... As I turned away I thought of the American republic and our ballot-box with no guardian or sacred reverence for its contents. Ignorance, poverty and vice have full access; thousands from every incoming steamer go practically from the steerage to the polls, while educated women, representing the virtue and intelligence of the nation, are driven away. I would like to see a monument to "educated suffrage" in front of our national Capitol, guarded by the goddess Minerva, her right hand resting on the ballot-box, her left hand on the spelling book, the Declaration of Rights and the Federal Constitution. It would be well for us to ponder the Frenchman's idea, but instead of the royal lion, representing force to guard the sacred urn, let us substitute wisdom and virtue in the form of Woman.

The Washington Star said of the hearing before the House Judiciary Committee: