A WOMEN'S FRANCHISE DEBATE.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 10761, 27 March 1897, Page 2

A WOMEN'S FRANCHISE DEBATE.

(Fjjom Our Oira Correspondent.; ! '.].''.' „ London, February 5. j For Beveral days before .list Wednesday the ' lobbiei of the House of Commons presented .a. somewh&t unusual experience, being literally , packed' with womankind—old, young, and middle-aged, and* of almost every conceivable variety of type. Their mission was the butfconhoung of legislators iv the hopa of securing ; vStes for th 4 second reading of the Womea's j I'ranchiae Bill, which had been fixed1 for last | Wednesday afternoon. I Mr v F'V fchfu" Sigjj, formerly of Dunediu { heK^inUnd, now a prominent man in London financial circle*, and H.P. for the St Rollox Division of Glasgow, hkd been particularly lucky in tha billot for precedence in obtaining such au early day in the session. There wai an unusually largo acttsndaace both of mem-bers-and-of listener*, all the galleries being packed- to their atacsi capacity, while- ths lermmua crush in the lobbies was denser than ever. ; Mr Faithfull Bsgg moved the'second ■ reading of the. bill in his maiden parlia-' [rnentary speech. Here, again he was fortunate, for it is not eve^y member who has the chance of securing so interesting a subject for his first entrance into the arena of parliamentary debate. He utilised his position with much ability and gresi; judgment. He neversoared out of his reach or got at all out of his depth, and, abore al>, he avoided the too common error of wearying the House by a long speech. He was brief, pithy, and to the point * I need not go over the well-trodden ground or" '■ his arguments in favour of female franchise '' All the arguments on this subject are thoroughly familiar aad especially to peonle in New ZeaUnd. He contended that there wasa strong public opinion in taw country in '' favour of the measure, and asserted that the ' j experience gained of tihe working 'of the ': I women's suffrage-in New Zgiland had been I } most hopeful aud encouraging. - \ \ Mr Faithfull Bcgg was not at all intimidated ! by the" rabt .that Mr tabouchere, the trenchaut ! exponent of Truth, had announced his intention i ot answering him and of pulverising both him ! and his measnre> Oa the bontrsry, Mr Faith- ' full Begg carried the war into the enemy's cjnip and attacked »L*bby" with the utmost pluck and with distinct effect. - H* remarked that Mr Labuucheres mission in life was sup- : posed to, be to break down privilege aud to i remedy injustice, yet here they found him an ' advocate of exclusiveness and a perpetuator of : inequality. The hit bh'cited great applause and much laughter. He twitted Mr Etboi."chere with being actuated in his opposition to the feminine franchise by a conviction that all the temale votes would be given to the Tory : side ■ Here Mr Laboaohere interrupted and | disclaimed that opinion. Mr Faithfull Be»e retorted thafpussibly Mr Libbuchere imagined j that all the feminine votes would be cast on his own side. This also was disclaimed by Mr Labouchere, on., which Mr Faithfulf Begg .rejoined that ifc was • evident' that Mr Labouehere had really no opinion on the subject at all. This again produced merriment ™-*£ e-!?J' e,T i ; ot themem*>er f«r Northamnton. Blr Faithtull Bigg concluded with a very earnest ' appeal to members to cast aside all mere pre- • judice in the matter and to do justice. j Mr Atherley-Jones, nicrabar for .Durham, who ■ secqnded the motion, feid a high compliment to the ex-New Zealander ou the excellence of , his maiden speech, which he very heartily sup- ! ported. He taunfced.the opponents of the fran- ' chise with being " only too glad to avail them- ; selves of the aasittance women could reuder at the time of elections." He declared that Me Radcliffe Cooke, membsr for Hereford, one well-knowiiv opponent, had induced ." haughty Primrose dames" to cAnvass for him. i n the '• slums of Hereford," fend asked, indignantly "Didn't Blr. Labouchere himself sometimes lean for support on Liberal vfo.men?"' Mr Libouchere's demonstrative protest against this : imputation was drowned in the roa*s of! laughter that followed. i From this point, it may be said that the whole question was treated by the Home geue- ' rally in the light.ota huge joke. The Government rook ho pirt one way or the other, and ; the Object of most of the membars seemed to bs to try* how many witticisms (good or bad) and chestnuts (of greater... or less stateness) they could scatter abroad in honour of the nubject. Iv fact, the Houss of Commons laid ita'lf out for a. "lark," and assuredly did not rise"to the dignity of the ocoasion, which, as some : indignant cbiamentators have since pointed out,, was one, of no his importance than a' virtual revolution in the British Constitution I ■whether for good or for ill. i Mr Radoliffid Cooke, who moved the rejection I of the bill, did so ou the grounds that, first ' there was no demand fof it, and, secondly," that; if.there were it would ba unjust. He denied ; with some show of warn-.th, what he understood i to be the assertion of Mr Atherley-Jones, that i he "had sent 40 Primrose (James about tb> ' Blums of Hereford to g«i votes for him " Hero : Mr Atherley-jones jumped np and denied in his turn that he had talked about 40 Primrose dames. .-What he said was " haughty " Mr Cooke declared there was no real demand ; for the suffrage among the women themselves ' The movement was fostered by a " stage army " of ladies, which went round the country speaking and canvassiDg. He again referred to Mrs Fawcett, Miss Backer, Miss Tddd, and .others • : whereupon Mr. W. J,.-bnstou, member for: Belfast, sprang up and fiercely objected to the ; names of these ladies bsing dragged into- the ; controversy The Speaker.said that was.not a-i point of order. Mr Johnston retorted that,.at i anyrate, it was a point or very bad taste which was much applauded. Mr Cooke denied that he - had been guilty oF bad.Ume, and asserted thsswhat his hon. friend called bad taste was not so" in reality, but good arguraeut. And then things became dull—very dull, Mr Cooke proceeded ! to argue out his case vith all seriousness, but ■- only succeeded in arguing nearly all the mem- i bers out of the Hoose. . > On Mr Cooke resuminghis seat, amid general !• thankfulness, Mr Laboueherejarose and began i by reminding the Scotch member, who backed '■ the bill, that John Knux had published a work ■ called "The Blast of the Trumpet Against the ! Monstrous Regimen of Women." He stated f that when John Stuart Mill brought the ques- : tior^forward 30 years ago, John Bright said to i him (Mr Labouchere) "I suppose we must give ' John Mill a vote, but I cannot say that I am ■ strongly in favour of giving votes to women," i and subsequently Bright -admitted1 that he -! regretted his having voted thus. Mr Labou- i chere confessed that be was one of tho3e 50 : members who then supported the bill, but he ' had voted as a mere joke, and to show hh ; i repentance he had ever since opposed the move- i | ment. He objected to petticoat government, and ! I didnotbelievethatwomenreatlywishedforvote3 : S He maintained that the only women who would be enfranchised by thia bill would be widows and spinsters, who lived alone and kept little' shops; He declared that ladies were incapable ' of argument, and never could understand a ' plain answer ta a question. When a woman ; was proved to be. .wrong she simply repeated in.! almost tbe same words her previous proposition ' He mentioned tbst a lady—a leading member of the Liberal Wonjon's Federation— wro!"e to ' him that morning B ayiu !:: " We need a id owl i votes; no >one ought to Le allowed to vote wS:oi(> I character does not bear the strictest investiga' tion " That was the awl of thing they would b. 3 exposed to when -women ruled the roast • and, then, if women hi.il votes they would tooa come to be elected munbers, and the Hou-e would be a sort of epicena club. Naturally Mr Lsbouehere devoted a little attention to New Zealahd, but he declined to admit that the "Mother of Parliaments" should be influenced by what the New Zealand Legislate.* did. He asked whether ths member who cited New Zealand would be in favour of ptograsnive j income tax and divers osUer schemes which had passed the New Zealand 3;egislature. Mr Labouchere gave s comic account of his j experiences at the hands of enthusiastic ! ieminine. canvassers. Sir Wilfrid Lawao'i I ano ] t. l'e l r °i to? " funny raec »of the Commons', replied effectively to "Labby," professor Jebb the member for Cambridge QuiverHity, and one ! of the greatest orators ir, the Houste, made a very powerful speech in favour of women's" suffrage, and Sir William Harcourtfollowed with a very weak one against it. He was answsre'l very tellingly by Mr Leonard Courtney, aud then Mr Faithfull Begg moved tho closure ; The closure was carried by a majority of 44, j and a vote was next taken on the main ques- ■■ j tion, when the second reading of the bill was ' j carried by a majority of 71. 228 being in favour : ; and 157 voting agaiast. Tlie"bill was then read ] a secopd time amid loud cheers. | Nearly all the leading papers, of whatever j phase of political opinion, agree in strongly \ denouncing the spirit of levity and frivolity in i which the House treated so important a j question. [The cable h*s ninca informed us I that the bill was thrown out in fcha House of ; Lords].