Page:Life·of·Seddon•James·Drummond•1907.pdf/214

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been validated.
192
The Life and Work of Richard John Seddon

had voted against the movement, it was understood that the desire was to retract what had been done. Having got the Bill into committee, Mr. Pyke moved that “person” should be struck out and “man” inserted. He was successful; and the franchise, half measure though it was, was taken away from the women a few days after it had been given. The majority against the woman’s franchise on this occasion was nine.

In 1881, Dr. Wallis introduced the first Women’s Franchise Bill, but it got no further than its first reading. For nearly six years Parliament was troubled with the question no longer, and it seemed to have disappeared from practical politics. Even on the platform it was seldom referred to by either supporters or opponents. Then Sir Julius Vogel came upon the scene. He had returned from England, had re-entered political life, and had placed before the people many schemes for bringing themselves out of the groove into which they had fallen. On being asked to contest an electorate, he spoke strongly in favour of the movement, saying that the franchise should be granted to women without delay. He came into power. Mindful of what he had said on the platform when the people asked him to come and help them out of their difficulties, he introduced the Women’s Suffrage Bill. He was assisted, and, probably, largely instigated, by Sir Robert Stout, another friend of the cause. The proposal was received with ridicule, as usual, some members having provided themselves with books of anecdote and facetiousness in order to have a good supply of banter. The Bill came as a surprise from Sir Julius Vogel, who was well known to be opposed to exceptional reforms. His address was strictly logical. It was a calm array of solid arguments with very little appeal to sentiment, and it may be said to be one of the best attempts made in the colony to place the case for the women clearly and forcibly before the people.

The case against the women, also, it must be admitted, was put with much vigour and force. The brief speech made in Maori by Wi Pere, the member for the Eastern Maori district, and translated to the House by an interpreter, is of more than ordinary interest. He said:—

“My opinion of this measure is that if it becomes law it will be a source of trouble to this House. I think we have only to look back to the trouble that