Algebra 4: Lie Algebras, Chevalley

Groups, And Their Representations

This book, the fourth book in the four-volume series in algebra,
discusses Lie algebra and representation theory in detail. It covers
topics such as semisimple Lie algebras, root systems, representation
theory of Lie algebra, Chevalley groups and

Author: Ramji Lal

ISBN: 9789811604751
Category: Algebra
File Fomat: PDF, EPUB, DOC...
File Details: 9.2 MB
Language: English
Publisher: Springer
Website: https://www.kobo.com
Access the following link to download the entire book
https://click.linksynergy.com/link?id=*C/UgjGtUZ8&offerid=15
62891.3721710580632447497225290&type=15&murl=https%3A%2F%2F2.zoppoz.workers.dev%3A443%2Fhttps%2Fw
ww.kobo.com%2Fus%2Fen%2Febook%2Falgebra-4-1

Get promotional offers when downloading the document

Download Now
Algebra 4: Lie Algebras, Chevalley Groups,
And Their Representations

Order now at https://www.kobo.com

( 4.7/5.0 Evaluate | 299 Downloads )
-- Click the link to download --

https://click.linksynergy.com/link?id=*C/UgjGtUZ8&offerid=1562891.37
21710580632447497225290&type=15&murl=https%3A%2F%2F2.zoppoz.workers.dev%3A443%2Fhttps%2Fwww.kobo.com%2Fus
%2Fen%2Febook%2Falgebra-4-1
.
the payment of alimony even though they are kept in prison and
can’t earn a dollar. Another crowd who are out of jail are rending the
air because they have to pay alimony just the same after their
former spouses have wedded again. The fair divorcees answer that
since only men are considered competent to make the laws or even
to elect the lawmakers, they have no right to kick against the
results. Its awful the little respect women show nowadays for the
superior wisdom of men!

It is rather late in the day to warn women against being “jostled at

the polls.” That is about the only place where they would not get
jostled.

Paris is tired of the tango. Public opinion caused it to be danced too

respectably. It may hold on awhile in the United States, we can
stand a considerable amount of respectability, but not too much
when it becomes unfashionable.

No, Ethelyn, Lu Lu Temple is not the name of a woman suffrage

headquarters. It is the rendezvous of an ancient and honorable body
of men in Philadelphia, where they think women are too frivolous to
vote.

Arkansas has now been added to the list of “dry” States by action of
its Legislature and Wisconsin requires a health certificate from
would-be bridegrooms. No woman suffrage in either State. Really
the men are getting so good nowadays there will be nobody for
women to reform when they obtain the ballot.

The superintendent of public schools in Cincinnati will start “a six

months’ course of study for prospective brides,” and besides all the
usual housekeeping stunts they will be taught to calk a water pipe,
put up shelves, mend door knobs, etc. If he isn’t careful he will
create a prospect that will scare all the girls away from matrimony.
Women can be so many things nowadays besides carpenters and
plumbers.

The New York Tribune says, “Another ten years and the clinging vine
will be only a moist and tender memory.” What a fortunate thing for
the oak!

The sphygmograph is the invention of a woman doctor and the

person who wears it cannot tell a lie, even to his wife. Something of
this sort was bound to happen when women were permitted to enter
the medical profession.

“Feminism is the process of putting father out of business,” is a

specimen anti-suffrage epigram. If feminism means that able-bodied
young women shall earn their own living, perhaps father will have a
chance to get something ahead for his old age.

The Reno Gazette in its fight against the suffrage amendment said
that when a straw vote of the women was taken in 1895 in
Massachusetts, they declared against enfranchisement 38 to 1.
Suppose they did—what has that to do with the women of Nevada in
1914? The fact is, however, that the women voted in favor of it 25 to
1. Next!

And so the anti-suffrage ladies are going into the thick of the
congressional fray to help elect the men who will promise not to give
them a vote! It is now in order for them to get up a street parade
and then the suffragists won’t have a thing on them—they will have
done everything they were afraid they might have to do if
enfranchised and they haven’t got the ballot as a compensation for
doing it. The joke is on them.
The ancient question, “Could women voters work out their road
tax?” has been answered by two in Iowa. They did worse, for they
won two out of three prizes offered by the county for work on
highways. It was all right for them to do the work but very wrong for
them to win the prizes.

“Women never could serve on the police force,” an anti-suffragist

rushes into print to declare. “Could frail woman withstand, year in
and year out, the severe climatic changes constantly occurring?”
Well, several million of her do, as they start out each morning to
earn their daily bread.

The “antis” are dreadfully vexed at the suffragists because of their

reported attempts to convert the women public-school teachers, the
women in the government departments, the women wage-earners
and women in divers other capacities. Putting it mildly they are like
the schoolboy who wrote, “To sum up Daniel Webster’s character—it
is one which I do not approve!”

Some awful things are promised in the season’s styles for man. They
are to be more expensive, which will require him to owe his tailor
more than ever. Evening trousers are to be very loose so that he can
perpetrate the tango and turkey trot without accident. For the rest of
the day the clothes are to be very tight so as to show the natural
form, and this is where the public will start a suffragette movement.

Do not criticise Mr. Bryan because he said nothing new in regard to

woman suffrage. Everything that could be said was said long ago but
until recently the political ears were very deaf and very long.

In Chicago, before the women took a hand, the disposal of the

garbage cost the city $4,000 a month; now it nets a profit of $2,000
a month, and yet people wonder why the grafters are so dead set
against votes for women.

The various parties seem to be having a hard time with the “political
uplift.” Some day it will occur to them that until women lend a hand
they will be trying to lift themselves by their bootstraps.

They opened a big hotel in Los Angeles a few months ago for men
only, and already they announce that henceforth women also will be
welcomed as patrons. Funny, isn’t it, when hotels for women only
are flourishing all over the country, that the men couldn’t flock alone
in a single one?

Before the last committee hearing on woman suffrage in

Washington, Mrs. Dodge, national president of the “antis,”
announced that the members of Congress had been sufficiently
bored, so to speak, and her forces would not appear. The love of the
limelight was too strong, however, and there they were in the center
of the stage, singing the old, sweet song, “Woman’s place is at home
in the bosom of her family.”

The turkey trot and bunny hug have been replaced by the goose
waddle, which is really much more indicative of those who dance it.

“Love is a disease,” says a Chicago doctor, “called anaphylaxis—lack

of resistance.” This is merely a trick of the profession to increase the
number of their patients, but the Chicago girls dare them to try to
cure it.

A booth was built in New York City in a district where only three men
voted, yet members of the Legislature object to giving suffrage to
women because it would require more voting booths. Who helps to
pay for those the men use?
The anti-suffragists have been so busy during the campaign running
political headquarters and making speeches for the candidates they
haven’t had a minute to tell the suffragists that a woman’s place is
at home and that women are wholly unfitted for politics. It will be
somewhat embarrassing for them to resume business at the old
stand and hear the suffragists jeer.

When United States Senator Burton, of Ohio, landed from a trip to

Europe not long ago and was asked the inevitable question about
woman suffrage, he said, “I do not care even to express an opinion
on such a subordinate issue.” Now he says that of course he is going
to vote for it in his State. It is taking a mean advantage for reporters
to corral a great statesman on the dock before he finds out what has
happened in his absence.

The Rothchilds are said to have given $15,000 to the British Anti-
Suffrage Association. The vote in the hands of women would prove a
strong factor in preventing the wars of the future.

Colonel Henry Watterson declares that he has “written more times

and at greater length against woman suffrage than any other editor.”
Maybe he has and maybe that is the reason it is making such rapid
progress in his own State.

California University girls eat ten tons of candy a year, according to

reports; but the boys of that institution can’t prove that they are the
sweetest things on earth until candy statistics from the other
colleges come in.

Women’s place is at home. Wives must make the home so attractive

that husbands will never want to go out evenings. Children must be
kept off the street. All very good; but how is the whole family to stay
at home at the same time in a city flat of the average size?

The moving-picture shows are making a specialty of films depicting

the newly enfranchised women of the Western States in the act of
going to the polls and voting, but strange to say there is not a single
illustration of the awful things that were going to happen when this
catastrophe took place. It seems odd that after the terrible
predictions of fifty years the scene should look much like a
procession going to church—except that there are more men in it.

“How To Be ‘Smart’ Though Middle-aged” is the title of an article

that is going the rounds. The smartest thing the middle-aged can do
is to recognize that they are middle-aged and act accordingly, and
this applies to men as well as women.

No woman nowadays makes the promise to obey in the marriage

service with the slightest intention of keeping it, so why compel her
to prevaricate to the minister? Let her reserve that privilege to use
with her husband.

The courts of Missouri have decided that a husband cannot be

arrested for burning up his wife’s clothes, as they are his, not hers;
but after his wife learned of this decision the man soon found
himself in jail for disturbing the peace.

“Man is the natural protector of woman,” shouted several thousand

of the species as they attacked the suffrage parade in Washington.
“Man is the natural protector of woman,” echoed the policemen as
they turned their backs.

The “antis” ask why the suffragists are not afraid to trust men with
the musket in time of war, but are afraid to trust them with the
ballot? Bless you, nobody wants to take the ballot away from them;
but the suffragists can’t see how a man can represent more than
one person with one ballot, and, besides, some of them haven’t got
any man, and they think it isn’t fair to be deprived of both the man
and the vote.

Recently, at an anti-suffrage meeting in one of those wonderfully

progressive towns for which Connecticut is noted, forty ladies signed
a remonstrance against giving other women something which this
immortal forty did not want for themselves. Where was Ali Baba with
his oil can?

When the women watched that crowd of men in Madison Square

Garden cheer and howl and whoop and yell an hour and a half for
one candidate, and the next night a similar crowd go through the
same performance the same length of time for another candidate,
they fully realized that women are too emotional for political life.

A great editor criticises the Washington suffragists severely because

they reserved so many rooms for the out-of-town paraders that the
inaugural committee couldn’t find enough for its marchers. “They
lost a great opportunity to win the new administration by
unselfishness and sacrifice,” he said, and the women haven’t quit
laughing yet.

The president of the Woman’s Club at Boise, Idaho, where they have
had equal suffrage for nearly twenty years, says that “nothing puts
the fear of God into the hearts of men like the ballot in the hands of
women.” Yes, a certain class of men feel much more comfortable to
know that women are using the beautiful, indirect influence of
prayers and tears.
Sir Almoth Wright says the advocates of equal pay for women do not
know the commercial value of having the employe work shoulder to
shoulder with the employer. Yes? No? What about the good-looking
stenographer?

The President of France is considering the proposal to decorate with

the Cross of the Legion of Honor the mother of twenty-two children.
Something that could be exchanged for twenty-two pairs of shoes
would be more appropriate.

Seven girl students of Leland Stanford University have just been

elected to Phi Beta Kappa and not one of the boys, although they
outnumber the girls two to one. Comment would be impolite, not to
say unfeeling.

New York women have announced that the day for women’s
“auxiliaries” is past, and Chicago women have given notice to the
men of that city that they will not serve on any more “sub”
committees. Really, that Declaration of Independence of 1776 begins
to seem like rather a weak document.

Perish the thought that a minister of the Gospel—and especially a

woman—should contest with a horse race! But when the Rev. Anna
Shaw, president of the National Suffrage Association, began
speaking from an automobile behind the grand-stand at the
Wisconsin State Fair, the whole crowd climbed down to hear her and
forgot all about the races.

First fruits of woman suffrage! A San Francisco wife has just been
granted a divorce because her husband talked too much!

Dr. Mary Walker advises girls to put on trousers. They might not be
so pretty but they would certainly be more modest than those things
women are now wearing.

The scientific world is highly excited over the report of the birth of
an atom. Its chief interest to women is the effect it will have on their
getting the suffrage, as the public insists on connecting this in some
way with the birth rate.

The Buffalo Express, commenting on the public schools teaching

boys to sew, says: “Quite necessary! For how will the women of the
future get their gowns, if men do not learn to sew?” They can get
them just as they do now—from the male dressmakers who got onto
the woman’s job as soon as there was any money in it.

Women have a good deal to learn about politics. There was the
woman candidate for mayor of San Diego, who announced that her
first act if elected would be to put through an ordinance taxing
bachelors. Naturally the bachelors all voted against her; the
benedicts did the same because they didn’t want the bachelors to
feel that there was such an easy escape from marriage, and the
women turned her down because they thought she was quite
capable of levying a tax on spinsters.

The public has borne with some fortitude the close-fitting garb of
women—it has had its compensations; but now that the National
Association of Clothing Designers has decreed that men’s clothes
also must be tight fitting—well, if the police fail to do their duty the
common people must rise up.

The Supreme Court of Illinois has decided that the women of that
State may vote for President but not for county commissioners. If
they had a choice, they would much prefer to vote for the
commissioners, whose work comes a great deal nearer home to
them; but the party “bosses” would rather trust them to vote for
President as there is no local graft in that office.

The national anti-suffrage president says, “The extent to which

suffrage agitation detracts from charitable enterprises is appalling.”
How can this be when that lady herself assures us that the
suffragists represent less than ten per cent. of the women? Ninety
per cent. surely ought to be sufficient to do the charitable work, if
they can spare the time from chasing after the suffragists.

Some men are organizing a pneumatic-tube system through which

from a central kitchen hot meals can be shot to any part of the city
day or night. Women sometimes wonder whether men intend to
leave them any domestic duties. About the only thing untouched is
the nursery, but a man has invented an electric cradle that rocks
itself, so woman will have to find some other way to move the world.

A Kansas City judge has ruled that under certain circumstances

wives may lie to their husbands. The latter never waited for any
judicial decision.

From the fuss made about Dr. Anna Shaw’s shaking her fist during a
suffrage speech one would think it was the size of a sledgehammer,
while really it is about as big as a little red apple.

A record has been unearthed in London, showing that women used

to be plumbers in 1500. Very likely; but that was before the business
became so profitable that only men were competent to engage in it.

The manager of the largest vaudeville circuit in the country has

issued orders that there must be no more jokes at the expense of
the woman-suffrage movement. Lovers of humor need not be
discouraged, however, for the literary bureau of the Anti-Suffrage
Association will still continue to issue its bulletins.

Dr. Geisel, president of Shorter College, Georgia, says that

institutions of higher education interfere with women’s natural
destiny. Chancellor Day, of Syracuse University, says if college
women don’t marry it is because their marriage standard is higher
and they are not finding men fitted for fatherhood. As all the
colleges can’t be abolished in order to lower women’s ideal of
marriage, it looks as if something will have to be done to bring men
up to the new standard.

Husband applied for a divorce because his wife was “absolutely

independent.” Judge granted it and he started off to find a dear little
dependent who would give him a sort of manly feeling.

King Alfonso is said to have become an advocate of woman’s rights

under the influence of his British Queen. Can’t she be spared long
enough to go home and try her hand on Cousin George?

Young and impecunious members of the nobility may now be rented

out for afternoon tea in London. This is not a bad use to make of
them, but they could command a higher price in New York and
Washington.

Is one reason why so many men oppose woman suffrage because

they are afraid their wives would obey St. Paul’s injunction to ask of
their husbands at home when they wanted information and
questions on political issues might prove embarrassing?

At the suffrage hearing before the Massachusetts Legislature the

“antis” evidently got their Irish up, as Molly Maguire called equal
suffrage “the most deadly menace that ever faced the State,” and
Joseph Murphy said, “I am one of a family of fourteen children and
my mother didn’t need any vote to do it.” Perhaps it wouldn’t have
been safe, as she was such a “repeater;” but Pa Murphy’s chest
must have swelled with pride when he went to the polls on election
morning and represented sixteen people with one ballot.

“The Silent Woman,” an ancient play, has been resurrected, perhaps

as a reminder of something gone forever. The anti-suffragists used
to claim that title, but if they are not making as much noise as the
suffragists nowadays it is only because there are not nearly so many
of them.

At the recent election in Louisiana the men voted down a

constitutional amendment to allow women to serve on school and
charity boards, and the election officers in New Orleans were so
afraid it might slip through that seventeen were indicted for
“padding” the returns against it. Doubtless they intended this simply
as an act of chivalry.

Governor Marshall, of Indiana, said recently to the Council of Women

in Indianapolis, “There is not a working woman in this city doing an
honest work who is not more important to this State than the
Governor.” Funny he should talk like that when the women there
can’t vote; but he only confirmed the suspicions they had had for
some time.

The Anti-Suffrage Association sends out a press bulletin saying, “We

object to being called away from uplifting the world through the old
channels of education and religion to assist in uplifting it by the
doubtful channels of the ballot box.” They need not leave their job
for it is such a big one that if derricks are erected in both channels it
will still be necessary to call for outside help.
Prime Minister Asquith is caricatured by Punch as Mona Lisa with the
smile that won’t come off. To the suffragists he looks more like the
cat that swallowed the canary.

“The clinging-vine type of women will continue to multiply,” we are

assured by those who claim to know. Well, that is a very good
business, since they don’t seem to be able to do anything else.

In all the New York public-school gymnasiums the number of girls

exceeds the number of boys. This does not indicate that the girls are
preparing to be militant suffragists but only that the boys would
rather smoke cigarettes and shoot craps.

Secretary of State Bryan says he wouldn’t feel sure of the support of

women as they did not vote for him when he was a candidate; but
he must remember that he hadn’t discovered then that he was in
favor of woman suffrage.

Admiral Chadwick’s recent assertion that “women teachers develop

in boys a feminized, emotional, illogical manhood” is receiving some
support from great editors. It is very peculiar that mothers have
always been taught that their finest work is to train their boys for
the highest duties of citizenship, and yet if these same boys spend a
few hours each day in school with women teachers they are ruined
for life. Is it only when there is a salary attached that a woman’s
teaching becomes dangerous?

That ancient skull found in England proves conclusively, so the

anthropologists say, that man had reason before he spoke. Well,
well! What a revolution has taken place since those prehistoric days!

A Paris jeweler has invented a ring to be worn by the divorced—two

marriage rings intertwined in the form of a cross. Very inappropriate,
when the wearers have just laid down their cross.

A Russian woman has just started to explore an Arabian desert of

thousands of miles, which no European has ever entered. How
thankful she should be that the heavy burden of casting a ballot has
not been imposed on her!

The first thing the women of Oregon did with their brand-new
ballots was to cast them against letting foreigners vote on their “first
papers,” which they had always done. Did somebody remark that
women are too radical to be trusted with the suffrage?

A Baptist minister in Chicago has opened in his church a school of

home training to make women more desirable for wives. That school
had better be closed by the authorities for women are so “desirable”
already that school boards, theater managers, telegraph and
telephone heads, even the government, are requiring those they
employ to guarantee that they will not marry within a specified time.
A school to make women less desirable—that is the need of the
hour.

A Cincinnati legislator has introduced a bill for a commission to

“prescribe the fashions to be worn by women in the State of Ohio.”
One good thing about it would be that when it came to appointing
officials to enforce the rules not an office-seeker in the State would
be left without a job.

New York’s commissioner of corrections suggests that the one

hundred and seventy-five wife beaters on Blackwell’s Island be put
to making creosoted paving blocks. Good idea! The perfume will
remind them of what awaits them after their exit from this world of
inadequate punishment.
That Englishman who was put into jail because he had no money to
pay the taxes on his wife’s property must have a poor opinion of the
law-making ability of his sex. Women couldn’t do any worse, unless
they condemned the poor husband to death.

The Norwegian Parliament first gave municipal suffrage to women

taxpayers; then gave them the Parliamentary franchise; then it
removed the taxpaying qualification for the municipal vote. Its next
step was to make them eligible for all political offices. Then it
granted them the right to speak in the State church, but would not
allow them to preach; now it proposes to let them hold the Church
offices. Lastly it gave the complete franchise to all women. There are
only a few more inches to cut off and the State is bearing up as well
as could be expected.

The young men of Cairo who have returned from European

universities have begun a crusade to “emancipate” the Moslem
women from the veil. Let us believe they are wholly disinterested.

A woman who kept a grocery wanted to decorate her show windows

in the anti-suffrage colors but she had no American Beauty roses, so
she put in a lot of red lobsters. To make it still more appropriate she
should have added some clams.

The English government has just raised the pay of the men clerks in
the post-offices and reduced the pay of the women clerks to half
that received by the men. To be sure hatchets are no argument but
sometimes they express people’s feelings better than logic.

“Since the Prince of Wales left his mother,” say the press dispatches,
“he has become a ‘man’ in the best sense of the word. He drives his
car beyond the speed limit and is rarely seen without a pipe in his
mouth.” How fine! It shows that he is rapidly developing the qualities
necessary for a great ruler.

Seven men in one precinct in a Kansas town had to get the election
officers to mark their ballots, and all voted against the woman-
suffrage amendment. Those officials were still more obliging in some
of the Michigan towns, it is said, for they gathered up all the ballots
that were left over and voted them against this amendment.

The anti-suffragists opened their campaign at Sherry’s, in New York,

the other day; but this does not necessarily imply that they used a
corkscrew.

In many places the liquor sellers are complaining that the moving-
picture shows, where a man can take his wife and children for five or
ten cents, are ruining their business. Anything that keeps a man with
his family is an enemy to the saloon.

The latest census report shows that there are about thirty thousand
more divorced women than men in the United States. This seems to
indicate that the men get back into the married state as quickly as
possible but the women know when they have had enough.

The wild outcry of the anti-suffragists against “feminism” indicates

that they prefer masculinism for women. Let them have it, for luckily
they are not of enough importance for all womankind to be judged
by what they do and say, as is the case with the suffragists.

The California papers congratulate the State that, “whereas it was in

a ferment of suffrage meetings two years ago, now there is not the
slightest turmoil but all is peace.” This should be a lesson to other
States where the turmoil is getting worse every day and there is just
about as much peace in sight as there is in Europe.
Help, help! The pastor of the First Spiritual Church in Worcester,
Mass., has to appeal to the police for protection from “lovesick
maidens and scheming mothers.” He’d better go West, where there
is not such a scarcity of men and women can be more particular.

People used to object to letting women vote because of the publicity

it would give them; but nowadays when one sees the public stunts
of the suffragists trying to get the ballot and of the “antis” trying to
prevent it, he devoutly wishes that they might all be made voters at
once so they could retire to the privacy of their homes and families.

That big New York hotel that had to change its dainty, esthetic liquor
buffet for women into a common bar for men, because the women
would not patronize it, seems to prove two things; first, that the
stories of the drink habit among women are greatly exaggerated;
and, second, that it’s always safe to start another bar for men.

The Anti-Suffrage Society of Washington passed at vote of censure

on the Young Women’s Christian Association of that city because it
allowed the delegation of working women who called on the
President to have a paid-for luncheon in its headquarters. The
members of the association felt so badly about it that they
immediately proceeded to give a circus.

South Carolina has employed three policewomen. Well, if the men

insist on electing an individual like Cole Blease for Governor, it’s up
to the women to protect the State.

The new Socialist member of Congress says he will try to have a law
passed that no workingman shall marry a wage-earning woman who
has not a union card. Wouldn’t a marriage certificate be a union
card?
“For six thousand years men have been trying to run the world,” said
Speaker Clark, “and some people think they have made a bad mess
of it.” If it had been for only that brief space of time women might
be willing to let them keep on trying awhile longer.

The favorite newspaper paragraph now in referring to the cheap

suffrage-parade hats assures women that if they will wear forty-
eight-cent hats all the year round they can have anything they want.
Well, the first thing they want is for men to set the example by
wearing hats at the same price.

The Denver police records show that married men are far more law-
abiding than unmarried, and the New York City superintendent of
schools says the married women teachers are much more amenable
to discipline than the spinsters. There seems to be no doubt that
marriage is the best known means of saving grace for the
unregenerate.

They say that gymnasium statistics show a steady increase in the

size of women’s waists. In that case something should be done to
bring about a steady increase in the length of men’s arms.

The anti-suffragists are having a good deal of fun because the

papers tell of a California mayor who does the family washing.
Maybe he runs a laundry. Men are doing most of the family washings
nowadays.

Andre de Fouquieres, who has come over from Paris to teach

American men how to dress by lecturing at afternoon teas, says,
“New York is the finishing touch of the world.” Glad it looks that way.
So many seem to come over for the purpose of making a finishing
touch.
An eminent London scientist asserts that the points which distinguish
the human race from the beasts are more marked in woman than in
man. “For instance,” he says, “her ear is more human than a man’s.”
Maybe so; certainly she doesn’t so often show the length of it.

The Fathers’ and Mothers’ Club of one of the Eastern cities farthest
along in the science of eugenics has issued instructions to young
men contemplating matrimony to study the mother, as the daughter
is likely to be an exact copy. Suppose a girl is advised to study the
father on the same principle—won’t that put an end to marriage?

Now the suffrage societies of Canada have united in a National

Franchise Association and Great Britain will soon have another lot of
daughters who can outvote their mother.

Congress is considering a bill to give the suffrage to the men of

Porto Rico. Can it be that there are any males under the jurisdiction
of the United States without a vote? Shelve all other measures
before Congress until this terrible wrong has been righted!

The women who have been running for office in those Western
States have drawn the line on kissing babies, saying that they are
too well versed in hygiene to commit that crime. As has been
remarked, women are entirely too much given to sentiment to be
allowed to vote.

Anti-suffrage literature declares that the enfranchisement of women

will “efface the natural differentiation of function between the two
sexes.” Oh, no, it won’t! Nature can’t be effaced and the
differentiation will go right on differentiating just the same.

What a queer way they have in Great Britain of encouraging

matrimony! There are about a million more women than men, but
when the Canadian government begged that some of the women
might be sent over as wives for the English immigrants, the
authorities in England vetoed it because the women were needed to
work in the cotton mills.

Perhaps in the U.S. women should not vote because they cannot
fight but the man in England who said this would have to run to
cover.

“We believe that political equality will deprive us of special privileges

hitherto accorded us by law,” cry the anti-suffragists. How very sad!
Will they please name one or two special privileges that the women
have lost in those States where they can vote?

The government is closing all the saloons on the reservations to

protect the Indians, and the Southern Legislatures are passing
drastic temperance laws to protect the negroes. It seems to be left
to the women to demand measures for the protection of the white
men.

A Missouri legislator has introduced a bill that the buttons on the

back of a woman’s dress shall be as large as a silver quarter. Some
time when those women legislators out West cannot find anything
else to do they will introduce a bill that men shall cease wearing any
buttons at all on the back and cuffs of their coat.

The Anti-Suffrage Association is to be congratulated on the latest

contribution to its literature by Abdul Hamid, the deposed Sultan of
Turkey. There is such a similarity between his opinions on woman
suffrage and Mrs. Humphry Ward’s that it certainly is either a case of
plagiarism or two souls with but a single thought.
Harvard University has taken off the ban and allowed a speech on
woman suffrage within its sacred walls. If the ban had remained on
a little longer it would not have been necessary to take it off.

Almost the last words of Baroness von Suttner before she sailed for
home were that there never would be peace here until the women
had a vote. The men could have told her that as soon as she landed
in the United States.

For many days before Easter, the dispatches said, the Cleveland
suffragists trimmed hats to be sold for the “cause.” Go to! It would
be utterly impossible for a woman to believe in suffrage and know
how to trim a hat.

Kansas women say that they have long been accustomed to

masculine chivalry, as they have had the municipal vote for a quarter
of a century; but since they got the full suffrage they are so
overwhelmed with attentions from the men that they can hardly
resist a political flirtation.

Strange, isn’t it, how Government offices, public schools and the rest
penalize matrimony, and then when women ask for the suffrage the
opponents shriek aloud that it will destroy the desire for marriage?
Doesn’t it ever occur to them that the loss of all these business
opportunities might have this effect? Husbands are nice, but oh, you
salary!

Beatrice Harraden learned at a recent legislative hearing in

Westminster that “the women impressed the statesmen but the
statesmen did not in the least impress the women.” We have always
seen this in our country but we never let the “statesmen” know it.
The belated action of the New York anti-suffragists, in opening their
little headquarters on Fifth Avenue a few days before the big
suffrage parade “to offset any impression it might make,” recalls the
careful housewife, who exclaimed when she saw Niagara Falls, “Oh,
that reminds me—I left the kitchen faucet running!”

It is perfectly proper for mothers of wealth and social position to

employ nurses and governesses for their children; but when a
business or professional woman does the same, society at large goes
into hysterics over her poor, neglected offspring. If the mother is off
playing bridge and attending “teas,” it is all right; but if she is away
earning a salary it is all wrong.

When women wanted to be customs inspectors the authorities said

they could never, never climb the ladder on the side of a ship.
Strange to say the two women who demonstrated that it could easily
be done were both daughters of Presidents. It is odd how many
obstacles can be placed in the way when a woman wants a job with
a salary attached!

Amherst College is to establish a chair of common sense. Great pity

that college isn’t co-educational!

“When women are elected to Congress, there will be no more secret

caucuses,” says a great daily. Since when have there been any of
that kind?

School inspectors in Russia have issued an order that no married

woman teacher can have more than two children. They have heard
about the New York board of education and gone them two better.

“Suffrage was begotten in Utah and Idaho by Mormonism,” says a

syndicate article sent forth by the Pennsylvania “anti” association.
Oh, no; it was “begotten” in Wyoming, when there wasn’t a Mormon
in the Territory.

His name is Abnel—a German doctor who has made a discovery.

“The world’s well-being is threatened by the adoration of suffragists
for dissolute men. The clinging, domestic women are naturally
attracted to strong men.” Of course—the men would have to be
strong to support their weight. “But the women politicians have lost
the selective instinct,” he says. “They flutter toward the Don Juans
like moths and are consumed before they realize their own folly.”
Yes, people notice this in those Western States—a perfect holocaust
as soon as women get the ballot. That is why the Don Juans always
vote against it—they would feel so dreadfully helpless with all the
women politicians fluttering toward them in order to be consumed.

Which is likely to do more damage to the sweetly feminine character

—to stand at the polls all day and hand out coffee to voters, or to
deposit a ballot and then go home and attend to woman’s legitimate
business?

A cardinal in Venice denounced the tight skirts women are wearing

and ordered them to do penance. They hastened to church the next
day for the purpose, but were obliged to perform their devotions
standing!

The New Thought devotees have thought out a new kind of

marriage—“a mating of harmonious vibrations.” But that has been
the trouble with marriage in late years—the parties have vibrated
among too many people.

A Chicago suffrage club has just been formed, to which only young,
unmarried women are eligible. It seems only yesterday that girls
were solemnly admonished that if they advocated woman suffrage
no man would marry them, but they can’t be scared that way now.

Richard Le Gallienne has gone Omar Khayyam’s “a loaf of bread, a

jug of wine and thou, singing in the wilderness underneath a
bough,” one better. He will be perfectly satisfied “if only she and I
can go, walking forever through the snow.” Maybe he would, but we
think the lady would want something warmer even than Richard’s
poetry.

There was an increase of fifteen per cent. in marriages in Chicago

the first six months after the Legislature granted woman suffrage.
That may not have been the cause but if the figures had gone the
other way there would have had to be a special session to repeal it.

The New York Times suggests that “the suffragists have the right of
petition and by exercising it in a proper manner they may advance
their cause.” They have been doing this for sixty-five years. If there
is any new style in petitions they will be very thankful for a diagram
and a paper pattern.

Anti-suffragists are protesting against having that vote for suffrage

at the biennial called unanimous. All right; say that twenty-one
hundred votes were cast, and seventy of them were negative—thirty
in favor to one opposed—and that is just about the way the woman’s
vote would stand throughout the country.

Pittsburgh is to have a saloon exclusively for women, as they have

been crowded out of the others by the men. Promoters of the new
idea should go to New York and inquire at the Hotel Vanderbilt,
which started out with a beautiful “bar” for women, but a month
later it was closed for lack of patronage and reopened as a much
needed annex to the large and flourishing bar for men.
Prof. Spencer Baldwin, of Boston University, is an anti-suffragist. He
doesn’t like the new woman—“androgynous hybrid,” that is what he
calls her. It’s up to the professor to find an anti-toxin.

In the United States the women say they won’t pay their taxes if
they can’t vote and in London they say they won’t pay their rent.
Our government can compromise with them by giving the suffrage
but what is their landlord to do?

The head of the “vocational bureau” in Boston thinks the time may
come when graduation certificates in fathercraft and mothercraft will
be issued by the public schools. But if the holders don’t get aboard
the matrimonial craft what good will these do?

Hampton Court has been closed to the public for a long time through
fear of the suffragettes; but the government has at last evolved a
scheme—it will open the palace and charge a shilling admission!
How clever! But suppose a suffragette should be able to borrow a
shilling?

Woman suffragists campaigning in Wisconsin came across a man

whose wife has supported the family for years by walking the tight
rope, and he announced that he should vote against the suffrage
amendment because a woman’s place is at home. There are a vast
number just like him there, judging from the election returns.

Under a woman school superintendent in Rowan County, Kentucky,

the number of illiterates in two years has been reduced from 1,152
to 23, and these are physically incompetent. One of the great
dangers of equal suffrage is that women might aspire to hold office!
The women of Nevada have been holding a “sacrifice week” to raise
money for their suffrage campaign, as also have women in the
neighboring States to help them. By the way, can anybody recall any
special sacrifice to earn the right that has been made by the men
who are now doing the voting in the United States?

A Johns Hopkins professor says that in twenty years’ experience with

over a thousand graduates of both sexes he has failed to discover
the inferior brains of women which he hears so much about. He
should apply to the anti-suffragists, who not only can tell him all
about them but can furnish him with plenty of specimens.

Secretary Daniels declares that “bachelors are encumberers of the

earth” and offers the use of the United States navy to scatter their
ranks. As the most of them are land animals the services of the War
Department would be more effective. Meanwhile it is safe to say that
few bachelors pass the age of fifty without the inner consciousness
that they ought to be blown up or sent to the bottom of the sea.

At the next election after California women were enfranchised, the

vote of the State increased 313,883. As has often been remarked,
women wouldn’t use the suffrage if they had it.

“The men are to put on their clothes with a shoe horn,” is the latest
fashion edict. We shall not believe it till we see it, and even then we
shall look the other way.

Some “bootleggers” who are to be tried before a jury of women in

Colorado are said to be feeling very anxious. Why so? The objection
to women as judges and jurors has always been that they are too
sentimental and emotional to mete out justice.
The illogical minds of women cannot comprehend why it is, when a
congressman’s constituents indicate that they don’t want him to
represent them in the government any longer, that same
government immediately puts him on the pay roll in another place.

The male editors of the two leading fashion magazines are using
columns of space in argument whether the women of this country
shall adopt American or French styles. The National Association of
Master Bakers, at their recent convention, adopted a resolution in
favor of woman suffrage, giving as a reason that if women go into
politics they won’t have time to stay at home and bake bread. It is
really outrageous the way women are crowding into the fields of
labor that belong to men!

“It is a wise child that knows its own father,” but in France they have
just passed a law which will permit the mother to make some
inquiries.

The new invention of making rubber tires out of a substance

extracted from whiskey suggests that it would be an excellent thing
on most of the “joy” rides if the whiskey was in the tires instead of
the automobile.

The public-school teachers who want the suffrage have raised the
cry, “Can disfranchised teachers train citizens?” Of course they can,
so long as they can be had for half the price that a man would
charge for the job.

A Democratic candidate for congressman-at-large in Illinois, who is

an anti-suffragist, is making his canvass on the platform: “A husband
and a home for every woman.” As over twenty-five hundred
husbands in Chicago alone last year abandoned their wives, he
should add another plank that if he is elected all husbands will stick
to home and family.

Just as the Anti-Suffrage Association issued its bulletin announcing

that there was no favorable movement in the South, the Georgia
Federation of Labor strongly indorsed the suffragists and the Atlanta
Constitution declared editorially, “Success seems about to crown
their efforts.” The antis are playing in hard luck; no sooner do they
get their type all nicely set up than the other side does something or
other that knocks it into “pi.”

One of those gifted male lecturers who know everything says, “We
have new models of automobiles every year; we should work out
new models of the antiquated family machine.” Go ahead; women
have no objection as long as they are permitted to sit at the steering
wheel.

“Marse Henry” Watterson says he has found only three classes of

women who want the suffrage: “Those who wish to exploit their own
interests, those who are soured on life and the brainless sheep who
think it is fashionable.” Maybe it is like that in Kentucky, but the men
in some States have found several other kinds.

The “bachelor tax” which the Montana legislators want to impose

varies from $2.50 to $100 per annum, but the majority think $5
would be about right. It seems like cruelty to animals to put on any
tax at all when there are more than twice as many men as women
over twenty-one years old in the State and those across the border
are in just as bad a fix.

Emile Deschamps tells us in his new book that the American woman
cannot keep her husband’s love because she does not return it. But
if she returned it of course she couldn’t keep it. Funny how many
things these foreigners find out about American women never
discovered by American men, who seem to be well enough satisfied
not to go wife hunting in any other country.

Almost every organization in the “campaign” States which stands for

anything that ought to be stood for has indorsed the suffrage
amendment. Will the antis name one which has declared against it—
that is, has declared publicly?

It’s funny how every woman who does anything nowadays, from
climbing a steeple to taking the prize at a beauty show, is described
as “a leading suffragist.” Don’t the “antis” ever get married or die or
have triplets or do anything worth notice?

One striking difference between the United States Senate and the
British House of Commons is that when a deputation of women
suffragists make a call the Senators receive them with open arms
and the Commoners shout for the police.

The nurses who cared for Mr. Roosevelt in the Chicago hospital have
been so deluged with offers of marriage they have had to go into
seclusion. It’s such a very funny way men have of showing their
appreciation of a woman by offering to marry her!

The women in China, it is said, have now advanced so far that they
are held accountable for their crimes instead of their male relatives.
Here, too. It used to be the law in many of our States that a wife
could not be punished for a crime committed in the presence of her
husband. Having a husband was considered sufficient punishment
for her—or at least that seemed to be just as good a reason as any
for the law.
Captain Amundson, the antarctic discoverer, who comes from
Norway where women vote, says of the English suffragettes: “They
are quite right, and I’d like to help them in their fight for freedom.”
The captain had better confine himself to easy jobs like finding the
South Pole.

The anti-suffrage headquarters in Trenton, N. J., have a big placard

in the window, asking, “Why the Increase in Juvenile Crime in
Denver?” Because, according to the chief of police, “juvenile crime in
Denver has decreased nearly two hundred per cent. in the last ten
years”—that’s why. It is amazing how the anti-suffragists manage to
acquire so much misinformation.

In Colonel Roosevelt’s latest pronunciamento on the question of

suffrage, he says that he “always believed it exactly as much the
right of women as men, but he only favored it ‘tepidly’ until his
association with such women as Jane Addams,” etc. Is the colonel
quite sure that he was not slightly influenced by those 2,000,000
women out West with the vote already in their hands?

At the recent suffrage debate in Congress a great deal was said

about women “trailing their skirts in the mire of politics” by some of
the befo’-the-wah members. Evidently the old gentlemen hadn’t
learned that trailing skirts went out of fashion years ago and now
the men can’t make the political mud deep enough to touch the hem
of the up-to-date dresses.

The “antis” appeal to the legislators to “listen to logic instead of the

dropping of ballots.” Impossible! Compared with the thud of those
ballots all other noises sound like utter silence.

Grand opera was sung to fourteen lions at the zoo in Berlin and they
didn’t do any violence to the singers. Audiences in many countries
have been just as forbearing.

A society has been organized in New York to arouse in fathers more

interest in their children. Perhaps they have already sufficient
interest but in many cases it has to be spread out over such a large
surface.

Miss Dora Keen, the Pennsylvania woman who recently climbed to

the top of Harvard Glacier in Alaska believes that she has the
physical strength to cast a ballot, but the men of her State insist that
she must stay at home and let them protect her from being jostled
at the polls.

All sorts of explanations have been made as to why those Kansas

women, when they found they had won the suffrage, built a bonfire
and threw their old hats in it. Perhaps they concluded that, now they
were voters, they must act as silly as men. Maybe they had such
swelled heads that the hats wouldn’t fit. Possibly they thought they
could get new ones on election bets. But most likely they only
wanted to show that now their hats are in the ring and they are
ready for the fray.

The Woman’s Journal says the devil and the anti-suffragists will be
busy all summer. Why both?

Now 12,000 bakers are going on a strike. It didn’t used to be that

way when the nation’s wives and mothers baked the bread.

A National Desertion Bureau has been incorporated to try to settle all

the domestic quarrels in the country. There won’t be enough of that
bureau left to kindle a fire on a marriage altar.
“Women must not have the suffrage,” says an authorized document
of the antis, “because Max Eastman’s wife goes by her maiden
name.” Where does she “go?” That is much more to the point, if she
is to decide the question.

“On one side,” says a Pennsylvania official in the Anti-Suffrage

Association, “are the mother and the home; on the other the woman
seeking the place man occupies as the framer of constitutions and
the administrator of civil-government.” Seems as if we know of
several men who don’t frame constitutions or administer any kind of
government, and a good many women who can’t stay on the side of
the home because they have to go out and earn the money to have
a home. Men and women can’t be divided like goats and sheep, and
if they could, there is no valid reason why the voting booths should
all be on one side of the line.

There is a great cry in Washington about retiring the superannuated

clerks for the good of the service. What is impairing the service is
the large number of inefficient chiefs of departments who are
drawing big salaries while their poorly paid women assistants do the
work.

For the second time a Radcliffe girl has won the $100 prize open to
students of all colleges for the best essay on municipal government.
Oh, yes, women may be very good on the theory, but only men have
the practical knowledge. Just observe what a shining success they
have made of city governments!

The way women will lose the respect of men when they get a vote
was illustrated in Arizona, where as soon as women were
enfranchised the men nominated the president of the Suffrage
Association for State senator, and she received six hundred more
votes than any other candidate on the ticket.