The Woman's Journal, vol. 43, no. 5, February 3, 1912, p. 40

Boxes

SAID LOVE TO THE YOUNG KNIGHT By Theodore Roberts Said Love to the youns knight: “I am the spur and the prize. I am the hand of thy squire and the light in thy lady's eyes. I am the force of thy arm that is more than of sinew and bone. I am the favor of Arthur smiling down from his throne.

“I am the spirit of Christ, white and high as a star. 1 am the crown of Mary, outlasting the helmets of war. I am courage, and peace—valor and gentleness. 1 am the master of pride and the servant of distress." Said Love to the young knight: “I am the humble task. 1 am the high adventure behind the visored mask. 1 am the fire of youth that fails not with the years. 1 am the master of passion and comforter of tears." —Scribner's Magazine.

GINA KROG HONORED

Twenty-fifth Anniversary of Her Paper Brings Greetings to Norwegian Suffrage Editor From All Over the World

A reception was held in Christiania on Jan. 25 to celebrate the 25th anniversary of the Norwegian women's paper, “Nylaende." Mrs. Elizabeth Lange Aus writes: "During all these years Miss Gina Krog has been its faithful and untiring editer, and Nylaende' has been a sreat factor in gaining so many victories for the Norwegian women. The reception in her honor was to express the gratitude of Norwegian women to Miss Krog for having devoted her life to our cause."

Many organizations affiliated with the Weman's National Council of Norway took part in the celebration, and letters and telegrams of congratulation were received from all parts of the world. It is not too late for good wishes to be sent by women in America, where Miss Krog left a very pleasant impression. Letters may be addressed to her in care of Norsk Kvindesaksforening, 19 Wergelands-veien, Christiania, Norway.

Miss Krog has lived to see municipal suffrage granted to all the women of Norway, and full Parliamentary suffrage to three-fifths of them, with the prospect that Parliamentary suffrage also will soon be made universal. The legal and educational position of women has likewise been revclutionized. She has lent a strong hand to help bring all this to pass. The Woman's Journal extends its heartiest congratulations.

THE CHILDREN'S BUREAU

The Children's Bureau is again under discussion in Congress. It would gather and publish data Vearing on the welfare of children. For seven years women and sociologists have been trying to secure the establishment of a Children's Bureau, The long delay in getting it, and the efforts to cripple the bill by amendments, are a striking commentary on the need of votes for women. Senators Werks and Pomerene moved amendments to limit the circulation of the bureau's reports.

Senator Bailey attacked the bill on constitutional grounds, and criticised Senator Borah's “efforts to put children on a level with pigs." “The effort is to raise them to the level of pigs," responded Mr. Borah. Mr. Borah has contended that the government expenditure of millions for information concerning the condition of hogs and cattle justifies the much smaller appropriation asked for the children's bureau.

Mr. Bailey said it was “mere faddism," and that there was even too much legislation in the interest of livestock, adding that, at the present rate, “we will soon be sending a schoolmaster into every district." “According to Col. Watterson, that is just what you are about to do," Mr. Borah rejoined. Mr. Bailey replied that “his part of the party" had no such intention.

Senator Overman of North Carolina criticised reports of child labor inves tigators. Some of these reports, he said, were obscene. “They told of children chewing tobacco," said he

THE WOMAN'S JOURNAL, EEBRUARY 3, 1912 “Wasn't there a strons opposition reputable father, because, in the eyes to that investigation from the cotton of the law, you are not a person. mill owners of the State?" demanded “Mrs. T. A. Coleman sang the suffra- All 0ld Senator Dixon. gist sons, Happy Day, written by Mr. Overman said he had not heard Charlotte Perkins Gilman, to the tune of it. of Dixie. The women joined in the

The Journal of Education, commenting upon a previous unsuccessful effort to get a Children's Bureau, quoted a statement by Secretary Wilson of the department of agriculture that he had at his command 3,000 of the best experts, always ready to be sent out in answer to any need. The ourne of Education added:

“A Nebraska woman says that her husband is raising hoss, and she is trying to raise a boy. If one of her husband's hogs gives him trouble all he has to do is to write to the government, and it will send him many publicaticns on the welfare of hoss. The government will write him personal letters about his hos, and if the trouble with the porker is persistent the gsovernment will send a highpriced expert there to study the hog's welfare. This comes perilously near encroaching upon the State's right to look after the welfare of that hog, but the danger of encroachment on State rights dces not interfere with an appropriation of $13,000,000 for the welfare of weevils, weeds, etc. This Nebraska woman says that when her boy causes her trouble, as he often does, and she does not know what to do with him any more than her husband knew what to do with his hog, and his welfare needs attenticn, the government has not a single book or pamphlet to send her, has no specialist to write her about her boy's needs, no expert to send out there to study his welfare. She says it may be as serious a matter for her boy to become a bad man as for her husband to lose his hog."

ANTIS ARE SHY GAME EVEN IN TEXAS

an Antonio Lady Seeks in Vain to Get Any Man to Speak Against Votes for Women

The South has been looked upon as the stronghold of conservatism on woman suffrage, but the movement is making rapid progress there. The San Antonio (Tex.) Express says: “If the men of San Antonio doubt that the cause cf woman's suffrage is knocking loudly at their doors clamoring for admission, they need but have peeped into the windows of the Woman's Clubhouse yesterday afternmoon, where Miss Anna Maxwell Jones gave a comprehensive talk on that subject to the Woman's Club.

“The speaker was listened to with close attention and accorded hearty applause at nearly all of her periods. That she made a profound impression no one could doubt.

“Mrs. M. J. Bliem, president of the club, made a brief appeal to the women to think seriously on the question. “Miss Marin B. Fenwick, in a short humorous talk, told cf her attempt to obtain an anti-suffragist speaker for the afternoon, as had been requested by Miss Jones. She said she thought the speaker should be a man and there would be little difficulty in securing one. She first rang up Marshall Hicks, and was told that all the Hicks family were suffragists, but that Dr. T. T. Jackson was an able orator and would undoubtedly be glad to talk on that subject. 'Why, said Dr. Jackson, when lccated, 'I am an ardent suffragist; you had better try Judge T. D. Cobbs. Judge Cobbs pleaded guilty of being an anti, but said his court duties would prevent his coming. He suggested Judge S. J. Brooks. Judge Brooks replied: Now, 1 am on the fence and three-fourths over; so if I went to that meeting would be all over. Better try John Boyle. Mr. Boyle indignantly denied being an anti, but mentioned S. G. Tayloe, whom he knew to be one. Mr. Tayloe was called up, and while he openly proclaimed himself an anti, bessed to be excused because of sick ness in his family.

““At that I gave up, said Miss Fenwick, and decided that anti-suffragists were too scarce or too timid to be caught in San Antonio. “Mrs. Lewis Krams-Beck said she had been on the fence until she read in a paper of an Enslish judge. who refused to give a worthy mother the custody of her children from a dis-

reputable father, because, in the eyes of the law, you are not a person. “Mrs. T. A. Coleman sang the suffrasist sons, Happy Day, written by Charlotte Perkins Gilman, to the tune of Dixie. The women jomed in the chorus, at first feebly, but by the time the second verse was concluded a hearty, full chorus save feeling voice to the words."

HOLDS FIRST PLACE

o Other Public Question in Wisconsin Calls Out Such interest as Votes For Women

Woman Suffrage is the most widely discussed subject in Wisconsin at present. This is shown, says the University of Wisconsin Press Bulletin, by statistics of the package libraries of the department of debating and public discussion of the university extension division. During December there were four times as many calls for information regarding woman suffrage from this department as there were regarding any other subject. Thirty package libraries on votes for women were in circulation in the State during the month. The initiative and referendum was the second in demand, commission form of city government, third; immigration, fourth; the parcels post, fifth; and the income tax, sixth.

On Jan. 15, forty package libraries on equal suffrage were in circulation, and on the following day ten more calls came, making a total of fifty libraries circulating at that date.

“WOMEN ARE WOMEN"

New Answer to an Old Argument

The New York Evening Post comments thus upon Ida Tarbell's statement that what is good for man is not likely to be good for women, because she is different, subtly, wonderfully, bafflingly different."

“Well, if we admit that the ence is bamiins, why not admit that we are baffled? Why not acknowledge that a difference so elusive is not a thing from which we can draw inferences for the guidance of our conduct? After all, even the most faithful believer in the mystical feminine will draw the line somewhere, will grant that there are some activities which are unaffected by sex. It was long ago observed that we eat our breakfasts as human beings, not as men and women. Men are men, and wemen are women, is Mr. Asquith's eloquent refrain. True; but breakfasts are breakfasts, and is not politics politics?"

HUMOROUS

“Miss Fanny, is that a langwidse that man's talking?" “Yes, Rose; he is a German, and he is studying Enslish. “Why, Miss Fanny, ye don't have to study English; ye jes' opens your mouth and talks!"

Lincoln once told a distinguished New Yorker that he was thinking of taking Seward, Chase and Cameron, all of whom had opposed him, into his Cabinet. The New Yorker said, “They will eat you up." The President-elect replied, with great solemnity, “No, 1 think they will eat each other up."

A weman missionary in China was taking tea with a mandarin's eight wives. The Chinese ladies examined her clothing, her hair, her teeth, and so on, but her feet especially amazed them. “Why," cried one, "you can walk and run as well as a man!" “Yes, to be sure," said the missionary. “Can you ride a horse and swim, too?" “Yes." “Then you must be almost as stroeng as a man!" “I1 am." “And you wouldn't let a man beat you—not even if he was your husband —would you?" “Indeed I wouldn't," the missionary said. The mandarin's eight wives looked at one another, nodding their heads. Then the oldest said, softly: “Now I understand why the foreisn devil never has more than one wife. He is afraid!”

An 0ld Man's Vengeance

A Home Woman's Partmership of Fifty Years with a Noted Public Man Shows That She Was His Partner in Work Only, Having No Income of Her Own and at His Death Cut Off with a Pittance Because She Would Not Give Place to His Mistress

college, founder scholarship, philanthropist" are some of the words used by “Who's Who in America"in describing a man who even in death was determined to “get even with" his wife of fifty years who was unwilling to yield her position to his mistress.

His friends knew him as a noble man, handsome, pleasant, gallant, kindly, charitable. She was recognized as gracious, fine-looking, a superior woman “who carried herself like a duchess.". For nearly fifty years she had kept house for him, had administered his household economically, waited on him and planned for his every comfort. From the beginning he had earned a good salary and had spent lavishly wherever he went. She never had had the services of a maid even in her old age and had never had even “carriage money."

She had helped him uphold the dignity of his position for nearly fifty years, yet in his will he cuts her off with a pittance, leaving her only the smallest possible amount of money that would keep her from contesting his will, and giving her a life tenure in her home, but providing no means for maintaining it.

At the time of his funeral she had no bank account of her own, and was actually obliged to borrow for her funeral black. Until his estate was finally settled, she was obliged to borrow money to live on. When she received a copy of the will she was shocked and horrified to find that all the property he had accumulated during their married life was willed to his parents, and she was left in humiliation and ignominy to live out the rest of her old age as best she might.

Why did this respected public man cut off his wife, willing his property to those who did not need it, and leaving her in virtual poverty? First, because she had refused to grant him a divorce in his bld age, when he wanted to get rid of her and take to himself a young woman. He had no grounds for getting a divorce from her. She had ample grounds for getting a divorce from him, but refused to ask for it, for the simple reasons that in her old age she had no means of livelihood, that she could not face the disgrace of divorce, and that she clung to the lover of her youth who had promised to protect and cherish her.

Second, because the laws of the State were made in the interests of men and not in the interests of women; because, according to the laws of his State, his wifs, did not have an equal interest in their property; because what should have been their joint property was his property, and he could do practically as he pleased with it. In other words, this woman found herself in her old age in practical poverty and humiliation for the simple reason that Votes for Women are not in operation in that State, but a double standard of morals is in operation, and laws making for the inferiority and helplessness of women are in operation.

Everybody who has worked for Votes for Women knows that the hardest kind of woman to reach with the significance of woman suffrage is the woman in the home, the woman who has a husband to represent her in politics, to vote for her, to protect her, to look after her interests. She is the one who usually says she is not interested.

Everybody knows, too, that the most helpless woman is the woman in the home when she loses her husband. No type of woman is so indifferent to Votes for Women, and doubtless no type of woman is in more need of Votes for Women. Also, no type of woman is more numerous. Her need, her indifference and her numbers, therefore, make it imperative that, if we take Votes for Women to no other class of women in the country, we should take it to the home woman. How to do it? That is the question. Can we not bring the subject home to her by showing her. through such cases as the foregoing, that, if she does not meet with a similar fate, she and her mother, her sisters and her daughters, it is not because the laws protect her. and not because she does not need a vote?

Is there any wrong being done to women and girls which you would like dealt with? Send us the facts. We shall not use your name. But sign your name and address. We may want to write to you.

OLLEGE graduate, admitted to bar, practiced, member of common council, commissioner on revision of city charter, corporation counsel of city, member of rapid transit commission, associate justice superior court, trustee savings bank, trustee

Agnes E. Ryan