Women as Vote Catchers.

New Zealand Graphic, Volume XLIV, Issue 9, 2 March 1910, Page 9

Women as Vote Catchers.

TERRORS OF THE CANVASSING SMILE. LONDON, January 14. It is at election time that one sees at once the usefulness and uselessness of women. The few stand out in great prominence; the multitude are altogether ignored, in spite of Suffragette outcry. The candidate's wife, his mother’ and hie sister, are valuable assistant® in his political fight, but the average woman comes into tire keu of the election and its great issues—this time involving the whole future of the Empire—not at all! This is the time when a candidate reflects pensively as to how much use his •wife is likely to be to him as an election asset. Has she a good voice? Can she canvass? Is she affable enough? Can she make speeches? Many M.P.’s wives do. Will she address circulars and receive visitors? Thus it will be seen that the lot of women who can help materially just now is no means a bed of roses. Mrs. Lloyd-George is practically eon ducting the Chancellor's election campaign in Carnarvon, as her husband is so busily engaged in fighting for thu cause all over the country, that he won't be able even to appear in his own constituency until three days before the polling day. His wife, however, makes

a capital substitute and holds herself always ready to carry out any suggestions made by Mr. Lloyd George’s committee.

The assistance of the lady canvasser is of more importance and more practical value at this election than has been the case hitherto, because—tsince the Primrose League held classes for the instruction of canvassers—the work has been taken u>p in a thoroughly busineas-Hke sturdy manner. Women have been drilled in what to avoid and how to appeal—two important considerations in enlist, ire? the sympathy of the electors. MACHINE-MADE SMILES. One amusing account of the visit of a canvasser is that in a weekly, entitled “The Election Smile.” It is too long to quote in full, but since its author is, undoubtedy, a woman, her account wiH be of interest to others. “An epidemic—medically known as Electio-Smilitis—is supposed to be spreading rapidly and getting decidedly worse as the Election approaches. It is a national scourge, and attack® women in serious numbers. The symp toms of the mania are unmistakable.

"The sufferers rush past the frightened maid and demand to see you, in loud accents. You find them standing quivering with energy in the middle of the drawing-room without a fire, clutching desperately at stacks and stacks of printed papers, and diving into little crocodile leather bags. Over their almost fiercely pleasant faces the dread smile is not only spread and won't come off, but has the really awful appearance of being fixed on by means of some deadly machinery. “They push it forward at you, talking hard, and crushing quantities of printed matter into your unwilling hands. They are haggard and strenuous, and flushed and feverish, and their hair is ‘endy.’ Having overwhelmed you into rigidity, they forcibly extract from you a promise of your vote for the wrong man as the price of their departure, fix you with the terrorism of that machinery smile, and depart as frantically as they came.’’ The Hon. Mrs. Alfred Lyttelton in the Paris “Figaro” has been writing of the important position taken by women in giving assistance at elections, and the intimate knowledge of politics th-at women possess. Here as a New Zealander and a voter I must fall foul of the latter statement.

THE FAMILY CANDIDATE. Many English women—relatives and near friends of politicians—take a keen and thoroughly intelligent interest in everything to do with politics, but I venture to say that if, outside that littls select circle in some way connected with Westminster, one asked a woman whose every window is posted over with the name of the candidate, why she wanted him to win, she could give you no better reason than that “the family” always supported Conservatives, for instance. Here again for the thousandth time one tumble* against the backbone of England— one's people have always done a thing, then it is the only thing to do! Seeing that women have no votes, perhaps it is the wisest state of affairs that this ignorance should be the ease. But that it is so after the speeehings and teachings of the militant Suffragettes is deplorable from their point of view. “Do you support Tariff Reform?” you may ask ninety out of a hundred women who profess great interest in the Election. “Certainly not!” she might make answer. "Why?” “Oh, well, I really don’t know anything about it except that it is something about food, isn’t it, and not getting one’s things made in Germany? Toni (aged twenty) says its all nonsense and will be the ruin of the country, and I think he’s right.” Here the New Zealand woman scores triumphantly over her English cousin, as much in possessing a Colonial spirit as in possessing a vote. I think it would be safe to say that because “Tom” voted against Norah’s views, it could be no sign, in Norah’s eyes, that his ideas were any sounder than hers; and they'd manage to be excellent friends in spite of all. Decidedly, there is something in votes for women!