personal and less complex. We will grow to these larger problems, but they seem very remote now. Another mooted question seems settled by the California women's vote. Are women conservative or radical? They are neither. Women know that they owe nothing to the "stand pat" reactionary elements of society, and that the hope of the future is not with them. Extreme radicalism rather frightens them and they do not care to embrace anything so untried, although intellectually alluring. So, by overwhelming majorities, whenever given an opportunity, women have declared in favor of progressiveism, the safe middle ground. California has two women on the state board of charities and correc tion, and a woman as one of the state directors of Exposition Park. Women have been appointed as city clerks where vacancies had occurred, but were superseded by men at the next election. Three women were appointed on the charter revision committee of Los Angeles, but were not eligible as freeholders on account of the state law which requires that freeholders must have been qualified electors for five years previously. However, we were invited to continue our relations with the board in an advisory capacity. Many of the questions pertaining to housing, health, playgrounds, and parks were referred to us. We heard a great deal during the suffrage campaign about the "dirty pool of politics." We California women know nothing of such a place. Our California men, with real chivalry, cleaned up our state before we invited ourselves to participate in political life. We would never have had the ballot otherwise, for under the old political régime, woman suffrage would have been fraudulently counted out. It behooves all women fighting for suffrage to join hands with the men of their states and cities in fighting their common foe--special privilege—which is at the base of all misgovernment everywhere. Every courtesy has been shown women at the polls and in all public offices. One does not now seem to be a nuisance or an intruder, but public officials are now anxious to serve us. When the electorate was almost doubled by the addition of so many new voters, it necessitated doubling the voting places. A new departure was made in using churches and school houses, and in our last Los Angeles election, forty-four school houses were used and eight churches. This is where the subjective result joins with the practical objective result. It takes little imagination to see what a splendid lesson in citizenship it is for a child to see both father and mother going to his school house to cast their votes together for the up-building of the nation: Equal in the eyes of the state and, of course, absolutely changing the status of women in the eyes of the children of the country. There has been no confusion at the polls. No arrests have been made during election days at the polls. The women voted even more rapidly than the men, taking their places in line and voting in turn. Election officers reported fewer women's ballots returned that were spoiled and fewer thrown out because of errors. In recent elections they have served as election officers with ability and dignity. Los Angeles has two women police officers whose business is primarily the protection of young girls. They visit picture shows and dance halls and are a decided addition to our police force. Their business being not to arrest for crime but to prevent crime. Women have taken a large interest in the care of the insane, especially in those who are convalescent. They sit with the lunacy commission, and eighty persons have been placed in private care who would otherwise have been sent to a public insane asylum. Changes have been made in reformatories and asylums, not by scandalous disclosures but because intelligent, careful women had made thorough investigation and unfit heads of institutions knew enough to resign because there was power back of these investigations. You will no doubt say that the ballot brings grave responsibilities. How are the women fitting themselves for them? In Los Angeles, the Woman's City Club is one answer. It came into being in May, 1911, primarily to help suffrage and to prepare women for it. It was formed on the exact lines of the Men's City Club. It almost doubled its membership monthly until within six months it had a membership of one thousand women, meeting weekly at luncheon, discussing every civic, economic and political subject before the people of the city and the state. Men have learned that they cannot go to the Woman's City Club and talk platitudes, as "What a fine body of women I see before me." They always get a most disconcerting merry laugh that brings the poor unfortunate speaker to a realization that the women expect the real thing and not empty flattery. All of the women's clubs now have strong public affairs or civic sections, even in the smallest towns. Lecture courses have been given them on the technique of government. The Woman's Progressive League, which organized ninety-five precincts, with captains, lieutenants and a thorough working force in less than three weeks during the mayoralty campaign, has reorganized into a nonpartisan organization and is now busy educating women how to use their new power effectively; also how to perfect a precinct and assembly district organization to control legislation in the interest of women and children. Through the powerful State Federation of Women's Clubs, that has over 25,000 members and 318 individual clubs, legislation will be directed this coming session of the legislature to insure the passage of the following bills that have received the official endorsement of the state convention held last May: Equal guardianship of children; raising the age of consent to the age of legal majority, eighteen years in this state; some changes in the com munity property laws; a law to provide for a certificate of freedom from venereal diseases in their infective stages for all applicants for marriage licenses; a law to eradicate tuberculous cattle from the dairy herds of the state; an industrial home for women and a minimum wage commission. These are the most important measures that California women will instruct their legislators to make into the organic law of the state. In San Francisco the organized bodies of women have been of great help to the authorities in aiding the prosecution of offenders against the white slave traffic laws of the nation. Except in a very few instances, women have not served as jurors yet, as there is a difference of opinion among legal authorities as to their right to do so. It will require an act of the legislature, which will be passed at this coming session. Man's attitude towards woman is one of the utmost respect and consideration everywhere. They seem as proud of our political equality as we are ourselves. Many a doubting Thomas has become our enthusiastic supporter. The psychology of this part of the question is most interesting and is twofold: first, men do not really admire servile women. It is flattering for them to know that women, no matter how free, are just as devoted as ever. Second, women have found out that power brings no decrease in courtesy. It is a great joy for us to stand and look man full in the face, his co-worker and equal, and men like it as much as we do. Our dear friends, the anti-suffragists, prophesied all manner of evil to the home. Inharmony was to be the general rule. Fortunately this has not been realized. Woman suffrage has meant much in many households, especially where there are childrren. Husbands and wives now discuss political questions before the children. They absorb this knowledge and it creates an early interest in government and in politics. It is not unusual to find the most divergent opinions held by husband and wife. One mother of three sons told me that her husband and two sons voted one way, and she and the younger one another. All was done after thorough good natured discussion and with entire mutual respect. Women high school teachers say the change in the attitude of boys to them has been great. The following letter from Miss Putnamn, vice principal of Manual Arts High School, is typical of many I have received: Our teachers feel that the granting of suffrage has made a decided difference in the attitude of students. Strangely enough, the great change has Leen on the part of the boys. They listen far more to the opinion of the girls on civic and political questions, and feel that the woman teacher's opinion now has equal weight with that of the man teacher. This, I feel, is of great value, for now the woman's view point will be respected and the coming citizens will have the benefit of hearing and respecting all sorts of opinons. The girls are feeling that it is worth while to know the things about which they can later express an opinion with the ballot. Girls are taking a greater interest in their "civics" and are now debating political questions with the boys just as if it had always been the custom. The women of California will never be spectacular in their political work -we do not have to be. Our men see things here without our having to resort to clubs as seems to be necessary in other parts of the world. Probably more tolerance is being shown women's opinion than ever before. Even dinner parties are a pleasure. Conversation is real. Men take up politics as naturally with us as they would at the club with their friends. Our point of view means something. The anti-suffragists (who by the way, have registered and are among our best citizens) prophesied all manner of fatal things, the "biological change" being the worst. It is too soon for that to be apparent, but other great changes have taken place that have been glorious. Woman now regards herself as a real part of life. The whole world is hers! It is as if a part had been fenced off and she had never hoped to be allowed in it, but now the fence is gone and she finds a great joy in a new life, new duties, new studies and new power. She may meet with great discouragement. This new weapon may not bring all the good for mankind that she so eagerly hopes for, and for which she is working so hard. It is not being used by her for personal ambition or for private gain. Best of all, something has happened within herself a great self-respecta feeling of honor for herself and for her sex. No more treated as a person to be done for, but allowed to do for herself, to make her own mistakes and to grow strong and experienced through making them, to think her own thoughts, and to express these thoughts, right or wrong, in the policy of her state. When all is said and done, why should we try to justify the granting of the ballot to women by its results? It is a right in a country that claims to be a democracy. It makes no difference really whether we use the ballot rightly or wrongly. Many men said, "I would be in favor of woman suffrage if I were sure it would make things better." What impertinence! There are so many standards of what is "good" in government that women would have a difficult task in pleasing all. We vote to please ourselves— to express our convictions as to the men and measures by which we wish to be governed. We have found that we do not exist to be well governed, but that government exists solely to make living together possible. We are as interested in solving that problem well as anyone. We are mere amateurs in politics. We are hardly more than mere amateurs in life, but life is unfolding before us more fully and we are a part of the whole of it, and the women of California hope that their political life will be such that the women of America and the world will find their entrance into political equality made easier. STREET RAILWAY SETTLEMENTS BY DR. DELOS F. WILCOX New York2 HERE are many types of street railway franchises in operation in TH the United States, but the only two cities which have thus far worked out general street railway settlements of national importance and national interest are Chicago and Cleveland. Chicago has an area of about 190 square miles and a population of 2,185,000, according to the last census, or nearly seven times the population of Los Angeles. Cleveland is a much smaller city, having only a little over 40 square miles of area and a population of 560,000 in 1910. The two cities may be compared from a street railway standpoint by stating that the total number of passengers carried on the surface street car lines in Chicago is almost 600,000,000 a year, while in Cleveland the number is a little more than 200,000,000. The larger number of riders in Cleveland in proportion to population is accounted for partly by the fact that the elevated roads in Chicago handle a large part of the local passenger traffic, and partly by the fact that in Cleveland traffic has been stimulated by the lower fares. The relative magnitude of the two cities from the street railway standpoint may also be seen from the fact that the recognized capital value of the Chicago systems on February 1, 1912, was about $127,500,000, as against about $24,500,000 for the Cleveland property as of February 29, 1912. The Chicago settlement ordinances have been in operation for a little more than five years and the Cleveland ordinance for a little more than two years. The practical administration of the Chicago ordinances has been under the direct supervision of Bion J. Arnold, who, aside from the Hon. Walter L. Fisher, was the chief factor in the original negotiations. The administration of the Cleveland ordinance was for the first two years in the hands of a stranger. Both Tom L. Johnson and Judge Robert W. Tayler, the two men most responsible for the Cleveland settlement, died soon after the ordinance went into effect. Since January 1, 1912, however, 1 This paper and that of Mr. Peters, on "A Suggested Sliding Scale of Dividends for Street Railways, Determined by Quality of Service," were read at the Los Angeles meeting of the National Municipal League, together with two other papers on "State vs. Municipal Regulation of Public Utilities," by John M. Eshleman, president of the railroad commission of California, and Lewis R. Works, formerly chairman of the board of public utilities of Los Angeles, which will be published in the January issue of the NATIONAL MUNICIPAL REVIEW.-EDITOR. 2 Franchise expert of the public service commission No. 1 of New York. |