[... back to menu for this book]
[-92-]
CHAPTER XI.
A WOMAN'S RIGHTS DEBATE
THERE never was a time when, on all sorts of subjects,
from Mesmerism to Woman's Rights, the ladies had
so much to say for themselves. There is an ancient
heresy which tells us that, on most occasions, ladies
are prone to have the last word ; but certain it is that
they are making themselves heard now. On the special
subject of her so-called "Rights" the abstract Woman
was, I knew, prodigiously emphatic - how emphatic,
though, I was not quite aware, until having seen from
the top of a City-bound omnibus that a lady whom I
will describe by the Aristophanic name of Praxagora
would lecture at the Castle Street Co-operative Institute.
I went and co-operated so far as to form one
of that lady's audience. Her subject - the "Political
Status of Women" - was evidently attractive, not
only to what we used in our innocence to call the
weaker sex, but also to those who are soon to have
proved to them the fallacy of calling themselves the
stronger. A goodly assemblage had gathered in the
fine hall of the Co-operators to join in demolishing
that ancient myth as to the superiority of the male
sex. My first intention was to have reported verbatim
[-93-]
or nearly so the oration of Praxagora on the subject ;
and if I changed my scheme it was not because that
lady did not deserve to be reported. She said all that
was to be said on the matter, and said it exceedingly
well too; but when the lecture, which lasted fifty
minutes, was over, I found it was to be succeeded by a
debate ; and I thought more might be gained by chronicling
the collision of opinion thence ensuing than
by simply quoting the words of any one speaker, however
eloquent or exhaustive.
I own with fear and trembling - for it is a delicate,
dangerous avowal - that, as a rule, I do not sympathize
with the ladies who declaim on the subject of
Woman's Rights. I do not mean to say I lack sympathy
with the subject - I should like everybody to
have their rights, and especially women - but they
are sometimes asserted in such a sledge-hammer
fashion, and the ladies who give them utterance are
so prone to run large and be shrill-voiced that their
very physique proves their claim either unnecessary
or undesirable. I feel certain that in whatever station of domestic life those ladies may be placed, they
would have their full rights, if not something more ;
and as for Parliamentary rights, I tremble for the unprotected
males should such viragos ever compass the
franchise; or, worse still, realize the ambition of the
Ecclesiazusae of Aristophanes, and sit on the benches
of St. Stephen's clad in the nether garments of the
hirsute sex. There was nothing of that kind on
[-94-]
Tuesday night. In manner and appearance our present Praxagora was thoroughly feminine, and, by her
very quietude of manner, impressed me with a consciousness
of power, and determination to use it.
Her voice was soft and delivery almost as that of Miss
Faithfull herself; and when, at the outset of her lecture,
she claimed indulgence on the score of never
having spoken in a public hall before, we had to press
forward to the front benches to catch the modulated
tones, and men who came clumping in with heavy
boots in the course of the lecture were severely hushed
down by stern-visaged females among the audience.
Disclaiming connexion with any society, Praxagora
still adopted the first person plural in speaking of the
doctrines and intentions of the down-trodden females.
"We", felt so and so; "we" intended to do this or
that ; and certainly her cause gained by the element
of mystery thus introduced, as well as by her own
undoubted power of dealing with the subject. When
the "we" is seen to refer to the brazen-voiced ladies
aforesaid, and a few of the opposite sex who appear
to have changed natures with the gentle ones they
champion, that plural pronoun is the reverse of imposing,
but the "we" of Praxagora introduced an element
of awe, if only on the omne ignotum pro magnifico
principle. In the most forcible way she went through
the stock objections against giving women the franchise,
and knocked them down one by one like so
many ninepins. That coveted boon of a vote she
[-95-]
proved to be at the basis of all the regeneration of
women. She claimed that woman should have her
share in making the laws by which she was governed,
and denied the popular assertion that in so doing she
would quit her proper sphere. In fact, we all went
with her up to a certain point, and most of the
audience beyond that point. For myself I confess I
felt disheartened when, having dealt in the most consummate
way with other aspects of the subject, she
came to the religious phase, and begging the question
that the Bible and religion discountenanced woman's
rights, commenced what sounded to me like a furious
attack on each.
Now I happen to know - what perhaps those who
look from another standpoint do not know - that this
aggressive attitude assumed so unnecessarily by the
advocates of woman's rights is calculated to keep back
the cause more than anything else ; and matter and
manner had been so much the reverse of hostile up to
the moment she plunged incontinently into the
religious question, that it quite took me by surprise.
I have known scores of people who, when they came
under vigorous protest to hear Miss Emily Faithfull
on the same fertile subject, went away converted
because they found no iconoclasm of this kind in her
teaching. They came to scoff and stopped, not indeed
to pray, but to listen very attentively to a theme
which has so much to be said in its favour that
it is a pity to complicate its advocacy by the introduc-[-96-]tion of an
extraneous and most difficult question. So
it was, however; with pale, earnest face, and accents
more incisive than before, Praxagora said if Bible and
religion stood in the way of Woman's Rights,
then Bible and religion must go. That was the gist
of her remarks. I need not follow her in detail,
because the supplementary matter sounded more
bitterly still ; and, had she not been reading from MS.
I should have thought the lecturer was carried away
by her subject ; but no, she was reading quite calmly
what were clearly enough her natural and deliberate
opinions. I said I was surprised at the line she took.
Perhaps I ought scarcely to have been so, for she was
flanked on one side by Mr. Bradlaugh, on the other by
Mr. Holyoake ! but I never remember being so struck
with a contrast as when at one moment Praxagora
pictured the beauty of a well-regulated home, and the
tender offices of woman towards the little children,
and then shot off at a tangent to fierce invectives
against the Bible and religion, which seemed so
utterly uncalled-for that no adversary who wanted to
damage the cause could possibly have invented a more
complete method of doing so.
The lecture over, the chairman invited discussion,
and a fierce little working man immediately mounted the
platform and took Praxagora to task for her injudicious
onslaught. But, as usual, this gentleman was wildly
irrelevant and carried away by his commendable zeal.
Over and over again he had to be recalled to the ques-[-97-]tion, until finally he set his whole audience against him, and had to sit down abruptly in the
middle of a
sort of apotheosis of Moses - as far as I could hear,
for his zeal outran his eloquence as well as his discretion,
and rendered him barely audible. A second
speaker followed, and, though cordially sympathizing
with the address, and tracing woman's incapacity to her
state of subjugation, regretted that such a disturbing
element as religion had been mixed up with a social
claim. He considered that such a subject must inevitably
prove an apple of discord. For this he was
at once severely handled by Mr. Bradlaugh, who, consistently
enough, defended the line Praxagora adopted
towards the religious question, and justified the introduction
of the subject from the charge of irrelevance.
He also deprecated the surprise which the last speaker
had expressed at the excellent address of Praxagora by
pointing out that in America about one-third of the
press were females, a fact which he attributed to the
plan of Mixed Education. Then a new line was opened
up by a speaker - it was as impossible to catch
their names as to hear the stations announced by
porters on the Underground Railway. He predicted
that if women did get the franchise, Mr. Bradlaugh's
"Temple" would be shut up in six months, as well as
those of Messrs. Voysey and Conway and Dr. Perfitt.
The ladies, he said, were swayed by Conventionalism
and Priestcraft, and until you educated them, you
could not safely give them the franchise.
[-98-]
A youthful Good Templar mounted the rostrum,
for the purpose of patting Praxagora metaphorically on
the back, and also ventilating his own opinions on the
apathy of the working man in claiming his vote.
Then somebody got up and denied that ladies were
by nature theological. Their virtues were superior
to those of men just as their voices were an octave
higher. He was for having a Moral Department of
the State presided over by ladies. Only one lady
spoke ; a jaunty young woman in a sailor's hat, who
said that in religions persecutions men, not women,
had been the persecutors ; and then Praxagora rose to
reply. She first of all explained her position with
regard to the Bible, which she denied having unnecessarily
attacked. The Bible forbade a woman to
speak; and, that being so, the Bible must stand on
one side, for "we" were going to speak. That the
highest intellects had been formed on Bible models
she denied by instancing Shelley. If she thought
that this movement was going to destroy the womanhood
of her sex she would not move a finger for its
furtherance. She only thought it would give a
higher style of womanhood. As to women requiring
to be educated before they would know how to use
the franchise, she pointed triumphantly to the Government
which men had placed in power. It was
significant, she said, that the first exercise of the
working men's franchise had been to place a Conservative
Government in office.
[-99-] I daresay I am wrong, but the impression left on
my mind by the discussion was that the liberty of
thought and action claimed was the liberty of thinking
as " we" think and doing what "we" want to have
done - a process which has been before now mistaken
for absolute freedom. Stripped of its aggressive adjuncts,
Praxagora's advocacy of her main subject would
be telling in the extreme from the fact of her blending
such thorough womanliness of person, character, and
sentiment with such vigorous championship of a
doctrine against which I do not believe any prejudice
exists. Drag in the religious difficulty, however, and
you immediately array against it a host of prejudices,
whether reasonable ones or the reverse is not now the
question. I am only concerned with the unwisdom
of having called them into existence. I own I
thought that Christianity had been the means of
raising woman from her state of Oriental degradation
to the position she occupies in civilized countries.
But I was only there to listen, not to speak ; and I
confess I came away in a divided frame of mind. I
was pleased with the paper, but irritated to think
that a lady, holding such excellent cards, should risk
playing a losing game.