Outlines of the Woman Suffrage Movement in New Zealand.

White Ribbon, Volume 6, Issue 66, 1 November 1900, Page 4

Outlines of the Woman Suffrage Movement in New Zealand.

The Parliamentary programme for the session 1888 included a new Electoral Act. It was evident that the discussion of a Bill of this nature would afford an excellent opportunity to introduce the question of the enfranchisement of women.

Mrs Sheppard, therefore, drew up a petition to the House of Representatives, asking that when the Electoral Bill came before the House, the interpretation clauses should he so worded as to include women. The petition was signed by the President, Secretary, and Treasurer of the New Zealand W . C. T. L., and entrusted to Sir John Hall, who had agreed to present it.

Sir John also undertook to move the required amendments in the interpretation clauses when the Electoral Bill came before the House. So much time, however, was spent over the revision of the Customs Tariff, and other matters, that the Government found itself unable to proceed with the Bill, and the expected opportunity never came. On the reassembling of Parliament in the following year, Sir John Hall lost no time in throwing down the gauntlet to the opponents of W oman Suffrage. He gave notice that when the Electoral Bill was to l>e considered in Committee, he would move “ that it be an instruction to the Committee to provide for the admission of women to the Franchise.” He also arranged with the Premier for the setting apart of a definite day for the discussion of the motion. The date fixed proved to he an unfortunate one, urgent business, de-

manding immediate attention, being before the House. There was nothing to he done but to iry to make the best of the postponement, and this Sir John did by obtaining from Sir Harry Atkinson a promise that the debate should be held later on. The course of public business, however, prevented that promise bom being kept during the session of 1889. ' But although these two years had apparently borne little Parliamentary fruit, good work had been done. In all reform wnntbV. gisatest difficulty lies not in ove eon 114 active opposition, but in arising tin .pathetic. I he W oman Suffrage ira v-'inent was no exception to this rule. In her report for the year Mrs Sheppard referred to the tact that a large number of the Unions had failed to appoint Franchise Superintendents. .She pointed out that as the special aim of the Franchise Department was to secure to women the right to vote on all questions of social and moral reform, the appointment of local uperintendents was an imperative necessity. Strenuous effort was made, necessitating an immense amount of correspondence, to enlist active sympathy for the movement, and not without success. During the session of 18*9, Sir John Hall paid a short visit to Christchurch and discussed the situation with Mrs Sheppard. A comparison of the information possessed by each, elicited the fact that of the members of the House, thirty-three were in favour of womanhood suffrage, twenty-seven w'ere in favour of enfranchising only such women as were ratepayers or householders, and the remainder were either doubtful, or were decidedly opposed to woman suffrage in any form. It was evident that if the support of the twenty-seven who were in favour ol a property qualification could be secuied, success would be almost certain. Sir John ID 11 therefore asked Mrs Sheppai d, “ W ould your Union be content to accept the Franchise for women who are latepayers and property-holders, at first, and if tliey succeed in obtaining that, try for the general franchise afterwards.” The question was a difficult one. In establishing manhood suffrage, the colonv had declared that the claims of human beings were paramount to those of property. To make the right of women to vote dependent on the amount of property they possessed, would be not only maxing an unjust distinction between the sexes, but also to again exalt property above humanity. On the other hand it seemed impolitic

to refuse what might be the first step towards justice. It was a conflict between principle and expediency. Mrs Sheppard, therefore, took counsel with the principal Unions, and asked for telegraphic replies. The result was that the Auckland, Christchurch, Ashburton. Wellington, Rangiora, Lyttelton, Dunedin, West Taieri, Roslyn, and Invercargill Unions voted for womanhoou suffrage, the Nap er Union voted for the property qualification, and the Port Chalmers Union agreed to accept this later, if womanhood suffrage was unattainable The Wellington Union added a recoin mendation that the qualification age should be raised from twenty one years to twenty-five, presumably for both sexes. By an overwhelming majority, the members of the Women’s Christian Temperance Union based the claims of women for enfranchisement on the ground that they were human beings, and therefore worthy of self-government in a self-governing colony. As the heirs and successors of those praying women who counted the interests of property as nothing, compared with the claims of humanity, they could have done no other. W.S.S.