MAINLY ABOUT WOMEN.

Dominion, Volume 7, Issue 1972, 31 January 1914, Page 9

MAINLY ABOUT WOMEN.

THE' FUTURE OF THE WOMEN'B MOVEMENT. The literature dealing with feminism in its various phases is already of considerable bulk, but Mrs. H. M. Swanwick's "Future of the Women's Movement" (6. Bell and Sons; per Whitcbmbe and Tombs) deserves a cordial .welcome, , so ..clearly, "and ably and moderately', does.tho author" formulate and press her. contentious.:; Mrs.'Swanwick is a leading? member /of' the • National Union of,/ Women's Suffrago Societies, tho chief of the ; non-militant suffrage organisations, and-is therefore among thoso who, are.opposed to the militants of the Women's. Sooial and. . Political TJnion/ 'In a brief ,but helpful iritro, duction, Mrs. Millicent Garrett Faweett, one of the oldest and most justlyfnespected advocates of the women's oause, commends the book as providing "a masterly sketch of the sources and aims of: tho woman's'movement," and as a work which contains much "wisdom, knowledge, and understanding." The most .interesting chapters are, of course, those which deal with tho more rebent phases of the struggle for equality of opportunity of women with men, for greater liberty of personal action, end: especially for the right to vote.

Mrs, SwanwickV does not deny the militants the quality of courage, even , heroism, but she' is unsparing m her exposure of the folly and futility of many of the methods adopted by them. She points • out' that the excuse that that "all possible peaceable methods had been tried and failed" is a great and fundamental untruth," for at the time tho militants ' commenced their peculiar tactics the work for women's suffrage had hot, says the author, "anything like the popular appeal of recent years.". She thinks, too, that the sriormous majority of women hare kept out of the militant movement "from ethical considerations," and sees in militancy a veritable degradation of the women's cause. The only merit Mrs. Swanwick can see in it is "that men

who have so long.loved to exercise all the virtues vicariously in .their women, are being a, little shocked to see how ugly violence can be, and from seeing it,ugly .in a 'woman, may, by and by, turn to see it ugly in themselves." At the same,time, the 'author hits out at what she'calls the "hypocrisy" of men who '.'refuse women's-claims became some wdmeh have been violent," pointing out. that ''they refused just the same, : before women became violent"; secondly, "that orily a few women have been violent"; and thirdly, that ''the vote was not given to men as a reward for their abstinence.from violence." 'According to Mrs. Swauwick, men have not given women, the vote "partly because they are very slow to move and indifferent ajßout women's questions; partly because they-are still somewhat fearful; of what women may do; but chiefly because no political party ias yet seen a clear party "gain to bema'do of it." In this last sentence, I think—and many readers will agree with author has gone very near tho'actual truth as to the present position. In tho actual working out of tW militant, programme,' 'Mrs; < Swanwick / detects' some curious contradictions. "Defiance, , alternating with injured; • innocence. The . smashing 6i;,a'window bv_.i w.j>man, who a'man arrests her: 'You mustn't touch, me! I'm a woman!' The . frequent inexcusable untruth that women are, being imprisoned for daring to ask for the vote,", and thatfthe-Homo'Secretary'is .stair-' , ing '.;women-in;prison. ' _.; '•..'■■'.. But-such contradictions;are,',contends, the author; -'to-be excused)'.to.' some exten£;.'as ■ faults. natural:' to subjected persons.,,- ■. ' '■■ .. '' ■•'.-.■'; .' ■•:-.. •;■, ». i. .' . ■ .. Aβ for the Asquith,Government, Mrs. Swanwick ] argues that whatever have been the 'mistakes, follies, and "faults of the suffragists, those of the Government have been far greater. ' They belittled the women's movement, and treated it with the sort of sneering contempt which is more provocative, than anything in the world. : They magnified the fireb importunities into crimes. The early militants were ■ treated with monstrous and_ disproportionate severity, and this contributed largely to. their early popularity. They were, treated like the worst criminals, for-, mero impropriety, or for the technical offence of obstruction. They were subjected to the most abominable brutalities when thev ; asked questions, at meetings. .(It was a'most unhappy thought which struck them, when they found out how'every _raan's nerves and women s passions make it for a woman, to break, up a meeting. . . ' Everybody with the slightest political insight knows that thp reform must come . . •. and come soon. .. . .' it is: quite plain that it is""" not statesmanship, still less is it Liberal statesmanship, by delay and coercion, to-make the sense of grievance more deeply seated and more widely diffused." , ■ ■.•■•■•' Mrs. Swanwick deals in detail with many other . phasei of tho • woman's movement, besides the question, of the "K ni j to the Parliamentary franchise, Un _, bex Antagonism," on the "Economic Problem," on the necessity for the value of. "comradeship" between man and_woman, she writes sensibly and well. .She', dofts not even ignore -that ugly. s|do_; of the... economic problem which is involved in prostitution, her views upon which social canker of modern civilisation are worth comparing with- tnoso set forth in Mrs. Gallichan's book, recently, reviewed in these columns. By all who are interested in the question of woman's physical and intellectual, advancement, this" book of Mrs. Swanwick should certainly bo road Specially is.it to be commended to those who may have read Sir Almroth Wright's book, "Tho ■ Unoxpurgated Oaso Against Tlfoman .Snffrapo,"..- reviewed in , TnE Dominion.' a fortnight or so ago. (The New Zealand price of Mrs. Swanwick's book is. 35.).