WHERE WOMEN VOTE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLIV, Issue 13450, 29 May 1907, Page 9

WHERE WOMEN VOTE.

SOME' EXAMPLES FROM THE: BRITISH COLONIES.

It is perfectly just and proper that inquirers into the woman's suffrage movement should askhow does the system work in countries that have adopted it? writes Harold Spender -r in the 'London Daily Chronicle. How does the vote really affect the position of trie women where they already possess the right? The only pity is that sucii inquiries are so rarely made. They would> at any rate, lift the question out of the atmosphere "of prejudice and random statement in which, it now dwells. ;; women's suffrage is at present exercised ;in two English colonies—the Australian Commonwealth and New Zealand— in several Western States •' of America. . It is entirely natural that English opinion should be influenced rather by the : example of 'our own sister communities than by the United States, > Let us, therefore, see how it works :in Australasia, -especially, as we have 'very high and valuable evidence on those, experiments. . ... xext , Zealand's example.

New Zealand was the first British colony I to. adopt women's suffrage far. back as 1893. There had been for some years before a movement in favour of giving women the tvote, and -it-bad .-been rsupportedvby the' Labour party in the general , election' ~of 1890. But the agitation was making,little progress, and '.. the New Zealand: women, themselves -cared little for it. What suddenly precipitated it into ; legislative ■ form was the zeal, of ; the temperance people, who hoped v that the - women voters : would help them to , gain ; prohibition- But the fight was not won at once. 'A Suffrage Bill passed the ;:; Lower House: in 1891,' but was thrown out by. the Legislative Council. It was brought in again in 1892, and with the help - of i the temperance vote :■ passed the Council by a majority of two. '•■: There was' no excitement.' " Woman," says Mr. Pember Reeves, in his admirable, book on ; Australasia, "Hvas not repelled or alarmed by the proposal; she found it rather agreeable than otherwisehardly more than _ that." She was like a young lady who receives an unexpected offer. The New Zealand woman was given universal adult suffrage. Though she had not: sought.it," she immediately used it- Out of 140,000 women, 109,000 'had placed themselves on the register in a few months, and 90,000 voted in the general election of November, 1893. They voted peacefully and in order during the day, while the men were at work, and left the, booths to the men in the evening. They have voted with similar regularity arid orderliness ever since, 'X'ne example of New Zealand was followed by South Australia in 1894, Western Australia in 1899, the new Australian Commonwealth in 1900, and New South Wales in lyo2. Queensland and Tasmania, have shown no /interest in the matter; while in Victoria a Women's Suffrage Bill has been rejected half a dozen times by the Upper House.

woman's influence. , How do the women use their new powers in these far-off island states of our Empire? Very calmly, by all accounts. "It is fair to say,'','says Mr.-J Reeves, •' that roughly, women make very much the same- use of the franchise as do the men.'' The result has not, produced either v heaven or . a hall. Men 'have not been deprived of their ; rights. There has been no disorder or unseemly behaviour —no strange and sudden revolution in dress or manners. ; " Enfranchisement," Mr. Reeves' phase, "has led neither to divided household or divided skirts." Families, as a matter of fact, generally vote on the same side. But, on the other hand, there is a, general agreement that family life 7 has become brighter, that husbands and wives have more subjects in common to talk about, and that women are really setting themselves to study and watch public • affairs. , ;. ... /, :'...-; .

One or two results will come as a surprise to hasty prophets in this country. Women have not proved a prevailingly Conservative force- In New Zealand they have consistently supported the Progressive' party, a forward combination composed of what we '.. should call Liberal and Labour men, and have shown no sign of favouring reaction. They have not shown ; them- v selves the slaves of the priests. They have consistently supported; the broad educa- ' tional policy of . the Progressives, and have I resisted clerical pressure. They have I strengthened 1 - the temperance party, but i more at the local option polls than in elec- ! tions.' They have helped to pass a more \ reasonable divorce law, and have raised i the age of consent. They have not proI duced any revolution in the moral characi ter'of candidates or members of Parliament, I which is just about as good and as bad as in most Parliaments before and since. There is a story, indeed, of a politician who had offended, and was met with a great outcry. He ignored the men, but called a special, meeting of women in his town hall. He appeared on the platform with his hand on his heart. " Ladies, I have sinned," he said. And they forgave him. SOCIAL EFFECT. . The effects, in fact, have been rather social than, political. .Women seemed to be treated with more real respectand not merely at election times. There has arisen between the sexes that sense of equality which is. perhaps the only permanent and enduring social basis. "Speaking generally,.' says Mr. Peeves, " they .have simply, become citizens, whose part in public affairs is not sharply distinguished . from that of men." There is; the point—the " sharp distinction" has- disappeared. New Zealand' women have simply stepped into equality. Working side by side with man, woman still keeps her place—"Not like to like, .hut iikc in difference. "-