IV Some Practical Aspects of the Question
Ellen Mudge Burrill
Miss Ellen Mudge Burrill, educated in the Lynn public schools, graduated from the Lynn Classical High School; now in the employ of the Commonwealth as Cashier in the Sergeant-at-Arms Department; Supervisor in the First Universalist Sunday School of Lynn; a member of the Council of the Lynn Historical Society; author of the “State House Guide Book,” “Essex Trust Company of Lynn” (the successor of the Lynn Mechanics Bank,) “The Burrill Family of Lynn During the Colonial and Provincial Periods,” and of “Our Church and the People Who Made Her,” being a history of The First Universalist Parish, Lynn.
J. A. H.
If suffrage were a natural right, then women should have it, and at once, but it is not like the right to have person and property protected, which every man, woman and child already possesses. It is not a natural right, but a means of government, and therefore a matter of expediency. The question is, will government by the votes of men and women together produce better results than by men alone? Suffrage means more than casting a ballot; if it means anything effectual, it means entering the field of politics. Had the proposed amendment been ratified, it would have become the duty of all women to vote systematically in all primary and regular elections. Would they have done it in justifiable numbers?
Look at Public Document No. 43, giving the number of assessed polls and registered voters for the Massachusetts State election of 1914:
Assessed Polls
1,019,063
Registered Voters
610,667
Persons Voting
466,360
Also for the City and Town elections of 1914:
Assessed Polls, Male
1,229,641
Registered Voters, Male
740,871
Males Who Voted
532,241
It is evident from these figures that a larger proportion of men should fulfill their duty to the State. Government being one means to the end, of making better conditions, the indifference of so many thousand is beyond comprehension, and is a serious menace to the Commonwealth. It was Governor Curtis Guild who said: “I base my anti-suffrage position on the fact that our great failures in legislation are caused not so much by a vicious element among the voters, as by abstention from voting and emotional voting.”
That granting the ballot to women would greatly increase the proportion of those who neglect to vote, is clearly shown by the results of giving women the school vote. In 1879 the Massachusetts Legislature, assuming that women were peculiarly interested in school affairs, bestowed the school franchise upon them. See how they have accepted that charge! According to the United States Census of 1910, there were 1,074,485 women of voting age in this State. Of this number there are approximately 622,000 eligible to register and vote for School Committee. Here is the School vote for 1914:
Women Who Registered
101,439
Women Who Voted
45,820
Here is the school vote of the women for the city election in Lynn, 1914:
| Approximate number of women of voting age in Lynn | 18,000 |
| Total registration | 1,759 |
| Number of women who voted | 1,070 |
In a pamphlet entitled, “Women and the School Vote,” Miss Alice Stone Blackwell, trying to explain away the real meaning of the situation, says:
“A woman’s name, once placed on the register, is now kept there until she dies, moves or marries. When a town or city shows a large registration of women and a small vote, it means that on some occasion, perhaps ten years ago, there was an exciting contest at the school election, and many women registered and voted. When the contest was over, many of the women ceased to vote, but their names stayed on the register.”
Her conclusion is that this is “the simple explanation of the lessened proportion of women’s votes to registration.” But a more striking conclusion must be drawn, namely, that it isn’t enough to vote when there is an exciting contest; that it is only well as far as it goes, but it should be kept up. The State has a right to expect it. In view of their actual record in the use of the school vote, I see no reason to think that women would vote in sufficient numbers and with sufficient regularity to improve politics or government.
The effect of woman suffrage upon the tax rate must also be considered. If the good to be gained were to justify the expense, there would be nothing to say; but if not, then we ought to pause to give certain facts some thought. Take the expenses for the primary and state elections. The total cost to the Commonwealth in 1914, merely for the preparation, printing, and shipping of ballots, was $50,046.17 (Auditor’s Report, 1914, page 240). I am informed that if women were given the ballot, a conservative estimate would add 50% to this figure. If women become candidates for public office, there would be the further expense of handling the nomination papers. And these calculable expenses are only a fraction of the total economic loss.
The City of Lynn has the second largest voting list in the state, outside of Boston. The expense now, for the state and city election machinery and assistants, is $9,000 a year, in round numbers. The amendment would entail nearly double the expenditure. There are 53 cities and 320 towns in the state. Think it over before it is too late. The financial side must enter into the problem some time; isn’t the present a good time?
The milk question was referred to several times in the recent campaign, the suffragists implying that the Commonwealth was ignoring the need of legislation and inspection. Here are some of the milk laws on our statute books, that are administered by the State Department of Health:
The Revised Laws, Chapter 56, provide:
Penalties for the sale of adulterated, diseased, or skimmed milk.
Penalties for sale of milk not of good standard.
For the marking of skimmed milk.
For the marking of condensed milk.
Penalty for using counterfeit seal or tampering with sample.
Penalty for connivance or obstruction.
For the sending of results of analysis to dealer.
That inspectors must act on information and evidence.
The following acts are also in force:
To prohibit the misuse of vessels used in the sale of milk (Acts 1906, chapter 116).
To establish a standard for cream (Acts 1907, chapter 217).
To establish the standard of milk (Acts 1908, chapter 643).
To provide for the proper marking of heated milk (Acts 1908, chapter 570).
Relative to licensing dealers in milk (Acts 1909, chapter 443).
To provide for the appointment of inspectors and collectors of milk by Boards of Health (Acts 1909, chapter 405).
Relative to the liability of producers of milk (Acts 1910, chapter 641).
To provide for the inspection and regulation of places where neat cattle, their ruminants or swine are kept (Acts 1911, chapter 381).
To authorize the incorporation of medical milk commissions (Acts 1911, chapter 506).
Relative to the establishing of milk distributing stations in cities and certain towns (Acts 1911, chapter 278).
Relative to the labelling of evaporated, concentrated, or condensed milk (Acts 1911, chapter 610).
To regulate the use of utensils for testing the composition or value of milk and cream (Acts 1912, chapter 218).
To safeguard the public health against unclean milk containers and appliances used in the treatment and mixing of milk (Acts 1913, chapter 761). Relative to the production and sale of milk (Acts 1914, chapter 744).
To prohibit charges for the inspection of live stock, dairies, or farm buildings (Acts 1915, chapter 109).
The State is divided into eight health districts, with an inspector for each in the State employ. Each city has its board of health; each town administers the laws through its selectmen. The City of Lynn has a board of health; also health inspectors, who do much of their work before we are up—from 2 to 5 o’clock. They inspect all the milk stations; take samples from milk wagons; inspect dairies that sell milk in Lynn, wherever those dairies may be, even out of the State—as, for instance, the Turner Centre Creamery in Maine. All that doesn’t look as if the milk situation was being neglected.
Massachusetts is doing a great deal for the children. There are over 5,800 wards in the care of the State Minor Wards Department. I do not need to tell you what a great work is being done for the care and education of these little ones; it speaks for itself.
Our opponents do not say much about the work women are doing on State Boards. There are plenty of positions already held by women who are doing inconspicuous and unexciting work, yet, nevertheless, most useful to the Commonwealth. Here are some of them, with the number of women on each board:
The State Board of Health, Lunacy and Charity was organized in 1879, with 2 women on the board.
The work is now divided among different departments.
The State Board of Education had 1 woman member as far back as 1880; it now has 2.
The State Board of Charity has 2.
The Free Public Library Commission has 2.
The Commission for the Blind has 2.
The Homestead Commission has 1.
The Minimum Wage Commission has 1.
The Board of Registration of Nurses has 3.
The Prison Commission has 2, who also serve on the Board of Parole for the Reformatory for Women.
The Board of Trustees of the State Infirmary and State Farm has 2.
The Board of Trustees of the Hospitals for Consumptives has 1.
The State Hospitals at Worcester, Taunton, Northampton, Danvers, Westboro, Medfield, Monson, Boston, Foxboro, have 2 each.
The Gardner State Colony has 2.
The Wrentham State School has 2.
The Massachusetts Training School Trustees has 2.
The Massachusetts General Hospital has 1.
The Perkins Institution for the Blind has 1.
The Hospital Cottages for Children has 1.
Here are forty-five women doing voluntary work on these Boards, all appointed by the Governor and working under laws passed by the men in the Legislature.
Take another line. The manual of the labor laws enforced by the State Board of Labor and Industries, covers the enforcement of the laws relative to the education of minors, employment of minors, hours of labor, apprenticeship, hours of labor for women, health inspection, lighting, ventilation, cleanliness, guarding against dangerous machinery, work in tenement houses, etc.
The little book entitled “Woman Suffrage, History, Arguments, Results,” tells all about the suffrage states and gives the good laws that have been enacted since women voted. It gives the impression that none such are passed in male suffrage States. It has just two words about Massachusetts; under the heading of “School Suffrage,” it says, “Massachusetts—1879.” Under California, however, it gives a list of the following laws and institutions:
Mothers’ Pensions.
Minimum Wage.
Juvenile Court.
State Training School for Girls.
Teachers’ Pension.
Weights and Measures.
Civil Service.
State Housing Commission.
Milk Inspection.
Tuberculosis.
Workingmen’s Compensation.
Psychopathic Parole.
But it carefully omits to mention that Massachusetts has all of these, that some of them are much broader in scope, and that many are of longer years standing.
You go into the Western States, and you find that legislation is conducted on a different basis from what it is in Massachusetts. Altogether too frequently, bills are pigeon-holed; the bills can’t be reported out of committee unless the chairman consents; and the result is that many bills never see the light. Here in Massachusetts law-making is better managed. The number of bills presented is large; 3,459 were printed during the session of 1914, and 2,802 were printed during the last session. Some of these were offered by women. A woman, as well as a man, can petition the Legislature. Every bill is referred to a committee; it is given a public hearing, is reported upon and action taken, one way or another; not one bill is pigeon-holed. The Massachusetts system of legislative procedure is not surpassed anywhere in the United States, and there are competent boards and officers who carry out the various laws. Many of the things the suffragists agitate about and think they need the franchise to bring to pass, they would find are already being administered at the present time if they would only look into the facts.