WORK FOR THE ENFRANCHISED.

White Ribbon, Volume 18, Issue 208, 18 October 1912, Page 1

WORK FOR THE ENFRANCHISED.

(A Paper read at a meeting of tlu* Auckland Union bv Mrs. Bendelv.) I am afraid that in our Franchise Dav celebrations we are somewhat apt to recount too much the legislative reforms that have been achieved since or as the result of Woman’s Franchise. While I would be loth to disparage the good practice of renumbering our blessings, vet 1 think there is a sound philoso ph y ot social and moral, as well as of spiritual progress, in the injunction of the apostle to forget those tilings th.it arc behind and to reach forward to those that are before, and thus to press forward to heights of progress not vet aihie ed. And so to-dav 1 want to ask vnu to briellv consider with me whether our nineteen Years of enfranchisement have swept aw a v so fully as they might have, the unjust handicaps and discriminations which our man-made laws make, and always have made, against our sex. It has been truly said ln.it the statesman legislates for posterity, and the political! for votes ; and if we cannot find statesmen, nor induce our legislators to rise to those heights, then we must endeavour to force them to recognise the power of our votes, and for the sake of these to give us the reforms which thev would otherwise withhold. For we still are deemed unqualified to take a personal share in the making of the laws which we have to obev, or to sit in the Houses of Legislature except as silent spectators, and our sex are gallantly classed with

infants, lunatics, and felons, as unfit to sit and make the laws which the drunkard both make and administer. And but recently we saw tile spectacle of a so-called Liberal Government appointing men only, on two commissions regarding subjects in which women are most vitally interested, the Cost of Living Commission and the Kducation Commission. There are three principal directions ill which our laws operate with unfair burden towards women in offences against her person as woman, against her status as wife, and as mother, and even in th.s nominallv enlightened country the laws still retain the impress of the old idea ol woman as man’s chattel, a piece of property, often of less value than other property. Consider first the law as regards offences against woman's person. We notice at once the need for raising the age of consent to at least IN years, though if a girl cannot marry under 21 wars without the consent of her parents or guardians, it would have appeared natural to raise th»* age of consent to the same limit. The provision that it is a sufficient defence if the accused had reason to believe that the girl was of or o.ver the uge of lb Years should Ik* abolished. Considering th age of consent is so low, there should l>e no excuse for the commission of the offence in cases where the age limit is not obviously passed, and the retention of this protection f«*r Ilian’s sensual instincts is crossly unfair. In cases of rape, the utmost peiialtv, hard labour for life is onlv inflicted where the victim is under lo years of age, and it falls bv rauid degrees to only * years as the age of lt> is reached. For taking advantage of ihe defenceless condition of an idiot or

imbecile girl, the penalty is only 2 years’ hard labour, and the same penalty is all that attends the crime of procuring girls under 2i years for immoral purposes. On the other hand, ,i woman who attempts to procure miscarriage on herself is liable to 7 years’ hard labour, while, as we have just seen, the man who is directly responsible for her fault may get ofi with a much lighter punishment. These are not pleasant subjects, but I have indicated them- however briefly—in order to contrast them with the law' in regard to offences against property. For robbery, which is defined as theft accompanied b\ violence, the penalty is 14 years’ hard labour, and the same penalty attaches to the theft of various kinds of property, including a horse, cow, sh e \ or pig ; but indecent assault, which is robbery of a woman’s purity by violence, is liable to a penalty of only 7 vears, while the robberv —bv abduction—of a girl under 16 Years of age is only deemed to merit 2 years’ imprisonment. For obtaining propertx by misrepresentation, a man is liable to hard labour for life, but 2 years will expiate the offence of procuring girls by misrepresentation for immoral purposes. For killing, maiming, or wounding a horse, cow, sheep, or nig, the penalty is 14 years’ hard labour, and even to send a letter threatening to do so may result in i<* years- imprisonment, while a human being max be wounded and maimed, bodily and spiritually, and the offender may get off w'ith anything between 10 and 2 years. Bv comparison, wc may get an idea of the law’s views of the value of a woman’s person and purity, for the offence of damaging a hopbind in a plantation of hops mav earn 7 years’ hard labour, while

for damaging a tree, shrub, or underwood exceeding in value the penalty is 3 years. For counterieiting or defacing a stamp, the image of an earthly sovereign, the penalty is 7 years’ hard labour, but the image and likeness of God in a girl's purity may be defaced for a trifle of 2 years.

Nor do the offences against womans person end there. In wedlock, a man may indulge in habitual drunkenness, an 1 may be habitually cruel to lur, for 4 years before she can obtain legal release by divorce, while if he attempts to take the life of herself or her chifd, she will not obtain release unless he is convicted and sentenced to upwards of 7 years’ nn risonment. Tvven for summary .reparation, persistent crueltv or wilful neglect are necessary 1 efore she can obtain relief, and 11 t until her husband’s 1 has lasted long enough and kept lur in daily, perhaps hourly, dread for herself and her child, will the law step in and free her from a relationship revolting to every instinct of her nature. Two more inji st c s of the divorce laws may bt noted. There is no provision for divorce wlure the husband has Veen sentenced to imprisonment for a term of years or even for life, excel) in the case 1 have noted already, resulting from an attempt upon the life of a wife or child. Moreover, in cas s of lunacy, there must h ive been confinement for 10 years out of 12 years before a divorce can be obtained. (Since this was written it is announced that a Bill has been introduced into Parliament to reduce the period to 7 years.) Of course, in the last-men turned cases, the law appl es e [Ually as between husbands and wives, but the number of c ses in which hardshin is inflicted on a husband is infinitesimal compared with th< s_* in which the wife is the sufferer.

It is not surprising that, as woman's voice cannot be directly heard in the Legislature, there are some extraord'n irv injustices and hardships where children are concerned. On the question <>f parental guardian'diin, we note that on the death of the father the mother shall be the sole guardian only if no appointment has been made bv the father ; but if such an appointment h s been made, then the mother can onlv act iointly with th* father’s nominee. On the other hand, a mother can only make an appointment to take efiect after

the death of both herself and the father ; w hile, if the mother has made an appointment before her death, it can only be provisional, and the father will still be the sole guardian unless it can be shown taut he is unfit to act alone. "

Where the general welfare of children is concerned, we find that a guardian is only liable to a I enalty for willul neglect or illtreat irent of a boy under 14 or a girl under ib years, in a manner iikelv to cause imnecess irv suffering or injury to health. LTiltr such a provision, with .tv necessity for proving wilfulne s, and probable 1 -.nnece.'S »rv suffering or injury, there are plenty of loopholes for escape from penalty. Again, a girl of ib or a boy of 14 may be in tho streets for singing, playing, or per forming for profit or offering anything for sale, up to 9 p.m., which is at least two hours too late. A curious anomaly is noticeable in the case of minors—or infants, as the law calls them —who marry. They may, and according to statistics do, marry at ages ranging from 14 years upwards, but cannot make a will until the age of iq i< r the boy and 18 for the g»rl is reached. Surely, if the law admits th.it they are competent to marry it should als 1 admit competency to make a will.

Closely allied to the point just mentioned is the question whether the law should n t impose more limitations on the open door to matrimony. At pres nt the only bars are blood relationship and infancy (without the guardian’s consent). Beyond this, the diseased, the criminal, the degenerate, are free to marry and burden society ” ’ h their descendants, whose heredity mav carry the taint of the sins of the fathers unto the third nnd fourth generations. A trmr, s iner view of marriage and parenthood must be developed if humanity is to irognss in anv way except towards self-destruction, but in the me mwliile legislation is needed to st m the prolific production of those unfortunate victims of h reditarv ills whose existence is a burden to themselves and to the community.

The last point which I shall mention now is scarcely a question of atmn ’ed legislation, but rather of administration, which, however, can o dv le secured by the pressure which intelligent voters may exercise «>n our legislators. I refer to our id nation svstem. 1 have

already remarked on the astonishing spectacle of a Government, representing women equally with men voters, appointing a commission of enquiry to deal with a question of such vital interest to women as the education of their childre 1 without a single representative of the mothers. No wonder that such a commission has concerned itself with matters of machin rv and form rather than of ess nee, and has ignored questions of the quality, nature, and scope ot ed. • ation itself. Perhaps it is hopeless to expect a more intelligent handling of such questions vntil we have direct representation uj on controlling bodies, but meanwhile we must consider and seek such means as are possible, through indirect action, of securing improvement in a question which so intimately affects the welfare of the rising and future generations.

I have not referred to the matters in which women might already cxervise d red administrative inllumce, in Hospital and Kducation Boards and other 1< cal governing bodies. 111 regard to these, it 's unfortunately the case fat we liiiVe \erv limited use of the* opportunities open to us, nor I fear do we often accord th • support that we might to th se who are willing to shoulder such responsibilities. Perhaps it may be* that not until we have show'll our ability and willingness to serve in the ways that are open to us shall we Ik* found worthy of furth.r opportunities.

At the close of the* meeting the fo lowing resolution was passed

“ That this Convention desires to draw attention to the fact that whi’e the masculine ideal of woman demands purity, the laws which have been placed bv men on the Statute-Book of ihe Dominion preserve for offences aga 11st the | ers >n, and purity of girls and women, a scale of punishments which are not only very much lighter than those 1 rcscribed for offences against property, but which are in main cases quite in idequate to the protection of th it which men profess to prize so highly in women. This Convention therefore urges that such amendments of the Crimes Act be made by Parliament at the earliest ooportunitv as will raise the age of consent to at least 18 years, and provide adequate punishment for offences against the person and purity of girls and women,

men’s sisters and daughters, and ours. That copies of this n solution he forwarded to the Right Hon. the Prime Minister and the Minister for Justice."