THE REMONSTRANCE.
rights " of which he declared himself an advocate Dr. Abbott described as " her right to an open door to every vocation; her right to a fair opportunity for the highest and broadest education; her right to what she can do and be, what she can become; her right to determine her own appropriate sphere, not to have it determined for her by a lord and master; her right to be left free to follow the bent of her own divinely endowed nature unchecked by vexatious restrictions, uncoerced by the presence of needless economic necessity, undiverted by the ill-judged appeals or the unfeminine sneers of her mistakenly ambitious sisters."
The so-called woman's movement in the nineteenth century, Dr. Abbott described as a necessary corollary to the awakeni    passion of liberty in France, England and America, and he said that under the inspiring leadership of " noble though possibly not lways wise men and women," it had achieved great things, not only for women, but for the human race, removing old and hampering legal restrictions, furnishing  much-needed protection  to the wife from   the cruelty of a sometimes brutal husband, opening the door of opportunity in all or nearly all fields of industry, and securing the right to the best education. " And above all," he added, "it has brought society, and pre-minently American society, to recognize the fundamental fact that woman is not a mere upper servant of man's household, not merely a cheaply-paid nursemaid to his children, not merely a vivacious parlor ornament for his home, not merely a minister to either his sensual pleasure or his spiritual repose, but a divinely endowed child of God, no more man's servant than man is her servant, no more created for him   than he is created for her - she created for herself as truly as he is created for himself; each created for the other; both for God."
"A few shrieking suffragettes are eager for the ballot," said Dr. Abbott, " because they have entered the fray and want a victory. Some ambitious women are eager for'it as an evidence that with the ballot they could accomplish moral and industrial reforms which now they can urge but cannot command.      Some    wage-earning
women wish for the ballot as a symbol which they believe would secure for them  in their vocation greater respect. These reformers have made their voices heard in the halls of legislation. The great body of silent women have until recently been with-
out representation. The majority of these silent women pay as little attention to the advocates of woman suffrage as they would to the frantic appeals of a recruiting sergeant in time of war seeking to form a regiment of amazons. They are so averse to public life that they will not even publicly protest against an endeavor to force them into public life." Dr. Abbott's main argument, which he proceeded to develop at length, was that the question was one of function - there was once a Joan of Arc, but no one would affirm that women would make as good soldiers as men; he had known a widowed father to take care of motherless children, but they were still motherless. Further he argued that this agitation tended to set men against women and women against men as in some way opposing classes. " It is as true today as when the Song of Songs was written," he said, " that love is stronger than ambition, and the attempt to divert women from the work of the home to less noble vocations, when openly avowed, will be made in vain."
In conclusion, Dr. Abbott further quoted President Roosevelt, in a sentence from his address before the Mothers' Congress in Washington in I905: "The primary duty of the husband is to be the hoine maker, the breadwinner for his wife and children; the primary duty of the woman is to be the helpmeet, the housewife, and mother."   "In these words." said Dr. Abbott finally, " Mr. Roosevelt has gone to the heart of the woman question. The call to woman to leave her duty to take up man's duties is an impossible call. The call on man to impose on woman his duty in addition to hers is an unjust call. Fathers, husbands, brothers, speaking for the silent women, I claim for them the right to be exempt in the future from the burden from which they have been exempt in the past. Mothers, wives, sisters, I urge you not to allow yourselves to be enticed into assuming functions for which you have no inclination by appeals to your spirit and self-sacrifice.  Woman's instinct is the star that guides her in her divinely-appointed life, and it guides to the manger where an infant is laid."
Interruptions by "Suffragettes."
The New York Times report gives the following account of the interruptions to which Dr. Abbott was subjected by the English suffragette,
Mrs. Boorman Wells and her companions:
Dr. Abbott soon reached the divorce problem, and this proved too much for the patience of the suffragettes present.
"It isn't true!" shouted    Mrs. Loebinger, in reply to one of his statements.
Dr. Abbott did not falter for a second in the delivery of his address.
" It isn't that way in the suffrage states! " shrilled Mrs. Loebinger, and the audience became uneasy.
An usher opened a door and the police trooped in, two of them hurrying to the east aisle and standing within a few paces of the malcontent.
Dr. Abbott was not, seemingly, annoyed.
As the venerable editor of The Outlook began to argue against woman suffrage at this time and under the present conditions of society, Mrs. Boorman Wells broke in,
" You'll come to it, all right," she called.
The police moved on Mrs. Boorman Wells and her allies, and Mrs. Loebinger was told that if she did not stop interrupting she would be put out.
" Don't you dare put your hand on me! " hissed Mrs. Loebinger.
HOW ABOUT KANSAS?
IT is a familiar claim of the suffragists that wherever woman suffrage has been tried it has worked well.
But   how  about Kansas?    The women of Kansas have had full municipal suffrage for many years. If it has worked well, how does it happen that the state steadily refuses to extend the voting privileges of women to state and national questions?  In 1891, four years after municipal suffrage was granted to women, the Kansas legislature rejected a bill to confer full suffrage upon them, and also a proposition to give them the right by constitutional amendment. In 1894 a suffrage amendment was submitted to the people and was defeated at the polls by a majority of 34,827. Since that year, legislature after legislature has voted down presidential suffrage bills, constitutional amendments, and other propositions to give women a larger franchise.
Why do not the suffragists attempt any explanation of this interesting phenomenon?
_ : ;----