schools in 42 of the United States; but it is not true in the four states where women vote."

Another bane of the schools, and especially of the women teachers, is the influence of partisan politics. Mrs. Helen L. Grenfell, who served three terms as State Superintendent of public instruction for Colorado, and is highly esteemed by educators there, says:

"After twenty years' experience, I can say that our school boards are absolutely non-political and party affiliation is never considered in the appointment of teachers. I have never heard of a member of a school board being elected because he belonged to this or that party. Generally both parties are represented on the same board. Sometimes a board principally Democratic is found in a Republican community, and vice versa. Our teachers are free to vote according to their own consciences. I have seen or heard of more party politics in school matters in one block in Albany, Buffalo or Philadelphia than on the 103,925 square miles of Colorado soil."

Westminster Review. 174: 386-91. October, 1910.

Division of Labour and the Ballot. Raymond V. Phelan,

That the old-fashioned woman needs political power may be a startling idea, but it is just as true as that the newfashioned woman demands such power as a final step in her gradual emancipation. Those who are able to see the full and true relation of woman to modern economical conditions, and the relation of such conditions to political power and action, very sensibly demand political equality. This demand the old-fashioned woman and the old-fashioned man meet with the dictum "woman cannot be a soldier," or "I believe in a division of labour between the sexes." The fact is, however, that the conservative cannot logically insist upon such a division of labour without insisting also upon suffrage for women. This may seem strange and contradictory, but it is nevertheless true.

That politics and law affect every department of woman's activity is fully apparent. That they affect the industrial and business conditions under which she works as factory hand, clerk, teacher, lawyer, physician, or business woman, is plainly evident. They affect also her business of housekeeper and home-maker. The girls in the New York shirtwaist makers' strike of 1910-II were very vitally and seriously affected by the kind of police-officers and magistrates New York politics had put into or allowed to get into the police administration of the city. They were affected by the attitude taken towards them because they were not men strikers with votes. These girls were affected also by the lack of sufficiently enforced sanitary regulations in the shirtwaist factories. They are vitally concerned besides with the effect of a tariff on hides or of combinations in the manufacture of leather, either of which may affect the quality of the shoes that they can buy for a certain price. The school teachers of Chicago were formerly affected in a decidedly adverse way by a political condition in their city which emphasized the Chicago school system as a means of selling books, whether good or poor, and of making contracts favourable to business or to politics, instead of emphasizing it as a system of developing the best efficiency, character, and future citizenship in the children of Chicago. These teachers managed, however, to change that lamentable condition, when, led by brave and energetic Margaret Haley, they secured the support of men's labour unions, unions with votes to lend, compelling emphasis to their protests and to their demands for a school administration that emphasizes the welfare of the child, and furthers that welfare by making his teacher's tenure safe, and by allowing her to use the books with which she can best fulfil her obligation to her pupils. Higher wages, too, and just wages, such as the women teachers of New York, under the leadership of District Superintendent Grace Strachan, have been contending for in their well-supported and just struggle of four years for equal pay for equal service, often means more contentment, less worry, and better teaching. Can it be possible

he placed the musket in her hand, for he realized that he must give her every means at his command, that she might assist him in defending and preserving the home. And when he gave her the musket it was not with any fear that she would not know how to use it. He knew that she would handle it efficiently and heroically, and we know how fully she justified his faith in her.

Now, again, are we come upon pioneer days. We are standing to-day upon the frontier of a new social world, a new democracy, faced with new and menacing problems, with tasks and duties untried and unprecedented, and upon the proper performance of which depends the fate of our Republic. We are not threatened with external enemies-the savage Indian and the wild beast of the forest-but with enemies just as dangerous and far more to be dreaded-the internal foes of the social body, vice, corruption, disease, poverty. And would we succeed in any warfare against these evils we must have the full help and co-operation of the woman, even as our forefathers had the help of the woman in their troublous days. And even as they gave her the musket, the final and most efficient weapon at their command, so today must we give her the best within our gift, in order that she may be fully equipped to stand with us in our mutual struggle in behalf of the nation and the home. If, therefore, it be our wish that we shall endure and prosper we must, of necessity, give her the ballot.

Summing Up the Case for Woman Suffrage.

Justice David J. Brewer, of the U. S. Supreme Court.

The real question is a practical one. How does woman's suffrage work when tried? In this nation, six States-Colorado, Utah, Wyoming, Idaho, Washington and Californiahave granted full suffrage, and in at least the first four of them it has been in existence long enough for substantial results.

One thing is true of all; there has been no organized effort to repeal the grant. Whatever may be isolated opinions, the general mass of the voters are satisfied. Indeed, few have expressed antagonistic views. If the citizens of these states find nothing objectionable in woman's suffrage, a natural conclusion is that no injury has resulted. Especially is this true when the declarations of its friends in its favor are many and strong.

Doubtless some opposition may come from personal ambition defeated by the woman voters. Thus Judge Lindsey, of the Juvenile Court in Denver, who has attracted much attention by his good work in that court, after having been denied a renomination by each of the great political parties, came out as an independent candidate, and was elected mainly, it is said, by the votes of women who appreciated his labors and determined that the young culprits of that city should not be deprived of the benefit of his judgment and experience. It would be strange if the defeated candidates did not feel and express themselves against woman's suffrage. But their complaint is really testimony to its value. The change in the position of woman in the past fifty years must be noticed. Then the only vocations open to her were teaching and sewing. But within the last half century she has entered into active outdoor life and is no longer a necessary home-body. Not that home has lost its charms, or that it will ever cease to be the place which she most loves and where she reigns supreme, but choice or necessity has driven her into varied pursuits, many of them calling for familiarity with public affairs and executive ability.

You see them not only doing clerical work in offices, but acting as shopgirls in stores, or laborers in a factory. Many who have charge of large administrations, are presidents of colleges, heads of corporations, and indeed engaging in almost every avocation of their brothers, and doing so with success. There is a host of female doctors. Women have invaded the pulpit and are pastors of churches. They are found in the court room, and not a few are efficient and successful practitioners. Indeed, it may truly be affirmed that they have fully entered into the active life of the world.

Women and Public Housekeeping.

Jane Addams.

A city is in many respects a great business corporation, but in other respects it is enlarged housekeeping. If American cities have failed in the first, partly because officeholders have carried with them the predatory instinct learned in competitive business, and cannot help "working a good thing" when they have an opportunity, may we not say that city housekeeping has failed partly because women, the traditional housekeepers, have not been consulted as to its multiform activities? The men of the city have been carelessly indifferent to much of its civic housekeeping, as they have always been indifferent to the details of the household. They have totally disregarded a candidate's capacity to keep the streets clean, preferring to consider him in relation to the national tariff or to the necessity for increasing the national navy, in a pure spirit of reversion to the traditional type of government, which had to do only with enemies and outsiders.

It is difficult to see what military prowess has to do with the multiform duties which, in a modern city, include the care of parks and libraries, superintendence of markets, sewers and bridges, the inspection of provisions and boilers, and the proper disposal of garbage. It has nothing to do with the building department, which the city maintains that it may see to it that the basements are dry, that the bedrooms are large enough to afford the required cubic feet of air, that the plumbing is sanitary, that the gas pipes do not leak, that the tenement house court is large enough to afford light and ventilation, that the stairways are fireproof. The ability to carry arms has nothing to do with the health department maintained by the city, which provides that children are vaccinated, that contagious diseases are isolated and placarded, that the spread of tuberculosis is curbed, that the water is free from typhoid infection. Certainly the military conception of society is remote from the functions of the