futile. And yet mere drifting will not do. What are the proper moorings of the human mind? Are there such moorings? We need some thinking done that will give answer to those questions.

And scholars seem to me to shirk, or—shall we say?—to feel unequal to this last responsibility. They find it easy to give men thoughts by which to make machines; they give us formulas by which our bodies and words may rush through space; they make ideas by which disease may be controlled; in all external special interests they give directions which will serve our passing purposes. But if we ask them, "What is man himself; what should men do in this, their world?" they say: "Who knows? How can one tell? We have no way of answering questions such as this."

Here is, I take it, the one essential and urgent intellectual undertaking of our time. Can what we know about ourselves and about our world be gathered up into some sort of intellectual order that a man may have in mind? Our knowledge of the world has fallen into separate parts which in

their separateness have no meaning. Can they be put together again? It is no wonder that men hesitate before the task. And yet this is the thing which scholarship must do. To study parts as separate parts is not enough. Minds must be trained to try to understand the whole. Men need an understanding of the world by which to live. And scholars, as quickly as they can, must give the instruments of such an understanding. This is the task for which primarily they are responsible. And nothing else which they may do can take the place of doing this.

87

As for the devil, I am sure we need, and have a right to, the truth which was expressed in terms of him. Whatever form he takes, he is denial of the wisdom of our scheme of life. He is the doubt of what we do, of what we will, of what we think. To lose that doubt will surely bring its own revenge. The only way to free oneself from doubt is by the simple process of having no beliefs which can be doubted. I think that, with our scholars, we are having a try at just that process.

G

o back four years and if anywhere a group of old-line politicians of a certain familiar type was so gathered that they could speak as they thought, they would be speaking ill of the ballot for women.

It was then newly come upon the land. The last of the required number of States had not approved the amendment, but all wise men knew well enough it was inevitable, and all wise politicians knew its effects would be merely evil, especially upon vested political interests. Of the many doleful conferences held on this subject the gist had best be much condensed, and freely translated. The American woman was well known to be independent in mind, fearless in character, masterful in temperament. To rule was her fixed habit. In general she was the household boss, the pantata, the autocrat of the hearthstone. the world knew well enough that the American husband was his wife's obedient servitor, in this way reversing the better practices of older and more enlightened nations. Now, this strange, idealistic, and uncontrolled power was about to be loosed upon the political world. What must be the result? Nothing but trouble, confusion, wreck; and the stoutest-hearted captain of wards looked with gloom upon the future.

All

For example, women would now

claim half the delegations to all conventions, half the places on all the committees, half the picking of candidates-half and perhaps more. Instantly, the whole delightful artistry of politics dissolved. How could one manage convention or committee with such persons (the translation here is quite free) sitting as members? There were certain delicate negotiations with candidates necessary before States were made up, and how could women understand such things? Then they would want a share of the jobs. They certainly would, and everybody knew that, what with the civic service and all, there was at best not nearly enough to go around. There would be women as governors, women as mayors, women in the legislature, women in the city councils, women would be members of Congress, senators, members of the cabinet. Women would be candidates for everything going. Then women would never be regular; they would never care about the party and go along and be good Indians and take orders. Imagine American women taking orders! They would be voting seven ways for Sunday. They might even start a party of their own.

At the same time, many idealists were giving fervent thanks for the same new force that caused the politicians' woe. They saw the dream of years come true, "everywhere, two

heads in council, two beside the hearth, two in the tangled business of the world, two in the liberal offices of life," and all that. Looking impartially upon the sorry hash that man alone had made of government, the waste and lunacy of war, corruption in the cities, futility in Congress, they felt that the long night of ineptitude had passed, a new day was actually at hand.

They were sure, for example, that women would never repeat one ineffable stupidity in politics to which men were notoriously and disastrously habituated. They thought of woman's mind as more acute, more direct, and better equipped with common sense. They thought that as a rule women bore somewhat the less resemblance to that necessary, but unimaginative, domestic animal, the sheep. They did not believe that great numbers of women would go to the polls year after year and vote a certain ticket merely because it was called Republican or Democratic. If they would not, behold the improvement at hand for which all reformers had prayed! At last we should have a large body of voters that would disregard the absurd fetish of party allegiance and vote for causes, not labels.

But suppose to-day a gathering of the ancient and perspicuous order of politicians. Suppose woman-suffrage to be mentioned among them. All the comment would be derisory. Not

one of the disasters has come to pass that four years ago glowered so fearsomely upon the politician's trade. Not a boss has been unseated, not a reactionary committee wrested from the old-time control, not a convention has broken away from its familiar towage. Nothing has been changed,

except that the number of docile ballot-droppers has approximately been doubled.

The dream of two heads in council has gone glimmering. There is just the same old one head, and as dull as ever. There are no women governors of States, and not the least promise that there will be. No woman has place in the nation's cabinet, or within miles of it. After four years of woman-suffrage the Congress of the United States contains one woman member, and she was elected as a tribute of respect to her late husband, a representative who had been suddenly stricken with death after years of public service. Nothing in the other returns affords on this account the least cheer to drooping spirits. In the congressional election of 1922, only twenty-eight women were candidates for seats. didates for seats. Of the twenty-two that sought places in the House of Representatives, one was elected to fill out her late father's unexpired term of a few weeks, but defeated for the long term. Mrs. Knowland, as before noted, was chosen to fill out her late husband's term. All the rest, and the six candidates for the Senate, missed election by astonishing margins.

One thing was demonstrated, and enough to fill the politician's cup of joy: women would not vote for women.

For the state offices to be filled at this election, totaling many thousands, there were nominated all told 225 women, of whom 153 were candidates of the two major parties that alone had a chance to win. The only conspicuous achievement from this was the election in Ohio of an eminent and capable woman lawyer to a place on the Supreme Court bench of the State. But she had been for years a judge in a

lower court, and had so clearly shown there her extraordinary endowment that her elevation seems tardy and almost grudgingly bestowed. In the forty-eight States nearly five thousand members of legislatures were chosen, and of these only sixty-three were women. Two of the States reported no women elected to anything; two others reported that there were no women candidates for any office. Pennsylvania elected eight women, Connecticut seven, Washington, Vermont, and California five each, Ohio two, and New York not one. In twenty-six state legislatures not a woman sits after four years of womansuffrage.

Even the most ardent womansuffragist, like the humble presenter of these facts, is forced to admit that so far in public affairs the ennobling influence of womanhood is still a matter of faith. In truth he cannot discover the least sign of woman's presence outside of the augmented election totals. Even these are not exhilarating. Instead of forming half of the effective electorate in the Presidential election of 1920, it is to be doubted if women composed anything like their normal share of it. Only forty-nine per cent. of the qualified electors went to the polls that year, anyway, and by common report the greater number of absentees were women. Apparently, these did not care enough about any public duty to vote.

82

No wonder the politicians are happy. I recall poignantly a certain informal conference of them I attended on the eve of one of the national conventions in 1920. Jeremiah had nothing on those dark-visioned souls. Only one

thing seemed sure in the storm that lowered upon their house. "We shall have to be mighty careful," said one, "to nominate only men that have records of support of woman-suffrage.” All instantly agreed as to this. Many a time the same thought was repeated to me that year as the campaign developed. But now even this has passed as a ship in the night. When the election returns were analyzed, they seemed to show that the heaviest balloting by women was for men who had most vigorously opposed their political emancipation. In the conventions of this year we shall see larger delegations of women, but much less attention paid to the ideas that women were once supposed to represent. The last illusion about them has gone from the politician mind.

Speaking of good Indians, it appears that these are as good as the best. What makes this situation the more remarkable is that the few women that have been allowed to hold office or take part in public affairs have acquitted themselves well therein. The woman member of the Supreme Court of Ohio is generally respected and applauded. Men say of her that with her gifts, her character, her mind, and her legal lore she is worthy to sit on the Supreme Court of the nation. Of course she never will sit there; she is a woman. Yet there is no other reason why she should not. Of the women members of state legislatures come only good reports. They are said to be more punctual in attendance than men, more diligent in the discharge of their duties, to take their work more seriously, to give better heed to the measures they vote on. No complaint about them is heard from any source. Yet there are in

these facts, we might gain something almost as good as we of the other side of the fight thought woman-suffrage was going to be. Nothing is as bad as it is painted in a campaign, and nothing is as good. Very little disaster actually comes to pass in this world; most of it is on the hot lips of the propagandist. Looking carefully at the story of the woman-suffrage fight, it seems as if Dismal Jemmy another time might well be left to draw to his lonesome self his picturings of gloom. In the real world such things do not happen.

§ 3

On the other side, too, no one that had any part in the great and wonderful struggle to win this reform will be ready yet to proclaim that it was all

Certainly not in any way such as its open adversaries foretold when the fight was on. Not one of the dark and shuddering prophecies then heard in superfluity has come true. Woman has not been dragged from her lofty pedestal by contact with the low, degraded ballot-box. Grace and charm have not departed from the American home. Family life has not been destroyed. Households have suffered the invasion of the horrid specter of politics and have remained quite serene. Domestic arts have not been neglected while mother bawled on the hustings. Children have not gone (in greater numbers than before) breakfastless to school. There is no recorded increase in the burning of soups. The eternal feminine has not changed or been side-tracked. Possibly, if we were to dwell considerately upon the philosophical revelations of

story of those seventy years of splendid struggle fills too big a space in the chronicles of democracy. To be a woman-suffragist fifty years ago took more courage than to charge a battery. No cause has had more unselfish devotion inspired from pure faith in its righteousness. We are too close to it now to do it justice. Another generation will put it for heroism and persistence alongside the revolt against chattel slavery. Nevertheless, the fact remains that the fruits of so much devotion look exceedingly meager. One national and sixty-three state legislators do not betoken enough of a purifying and uplifting influence to be ponderable in a nation of 110,000,000 persons. A group of timid and over-awed women in a state convention affords no hope that a holier aureole is about to shine about the somewhat disfigured head of the goddess of political wisdom, and taking