At the commencement of the agitation for Woman Suffrage, the
agitators offered as their main complaint that women who owned property
were taxed without representation.
It is claimed by the advocates of Universal Suffrage that our
forefathers established the doctrine in opposition to taxation without
representation by declaring the Colonies independent of Great Britain
because they were subjected to taxation without representation. This, it
is claimed by suffragettes was set forth in the Declaration of
Independence, but upon examination, we find that our forefathers made no
such complaint in the Declaration of Independence, which sets out all
the reasons why they declared themselves independent of the Crown and
established an independent nation of their own. They could not make any
such claim, because the inhabitants of the Colonies did have
The Colonies elected their representatives for the purpose making
laws for their home government and those representative who made the
laws, represented the colonies to the Crown, there fore they had
representation through men of their own selection However, Great Britain
appointed a Governor who had the power to veto and no law went into
effect until the governor passed it b affixing his signature.
The taxation referred to in the Declaration of Independence was
not taxation levied by a government on its individual citizens, but was
a business matter transacted between the government of the colonies in
America and Great Britain proper and not between a individual and a
government, and for that reason, the taxation o property owned by women
in the United States cannot be compared to taxes levied by one
government on another.
The representatives of the Colonies offered complaint Crown for
the imposing of taxes without their consent. However, they did not ask
that the citizens of the Colonies be made electors in Great Britain
proper because they paid taxes.
The right of suffrage and taxation of property are two different
and distinct propositions and cannot be linked together as if the were
The principle of taxation of property is not in any way connected
with the qualifications for suffrage.
Suffrage was bequeathed to the male sex by their forefather among
whom were the signers of the Declaration of Independence which shows
that the signers of the Declaration of Independence did not believe that
taxation and the suffrage was one and the same proposition.
The bequests or wills of great statesmen made in favor of future
generations are embodied in the laws they place upon the statute books,
and had the signers of the Declaration of Independence believed that the
payment of taxes was a qualification for suffrage, THEY WOULD NOT HAVE
COMPELLED aliens to pay taxes until they were given the right of
suffrage, but this they did. They also compelled those aliens who were
paying taxes to obligate themselves in their primary applications for
naturalization, to become LIABLE FOR DUTY IN THE MAINTAINENCE OF SOCIAL
ORDER, and later to take the oath of allegiance to the government of the
United States, part of which reads as follows: "THAT I WILL SUPPORT AND
DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION AND LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES AGAINST ALL
ENEMIES, FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC, AND BEAR TRUE FAITH AND ALLEGIANCE
SAME." This obligation grants him the right of suffrage at once and he
can cast his vote on the same day on which he takes the oath; and there
is not one word mentioned in the obligations required of a foreigner
about the payment of taxes. This shows that suffrage and the payment of
taxes are not in any way connected.
Any foreigner twenty-one years of age who has been honorably
discharged from the army of the United States, does not, in order to
vote, have to become naturalized the same as a foreigner who has not
served in the army is required to do. He is granted the right of
suffrage at once because he served in the army as a soldier for the
United States, which positively proves that the qualification for
suffrage is ability and willingness to bear the burdens of the
government by going to war if necessary.
We have no law for the naturalization of women who immigrate to
this country such as we have for men, this because they could not comply
With the obligations required of men to become electors. They could not
go to battle in defense of our Constitution and laws. However, if they
have property, our government taxes that property without asking their
consent, the same as it does that of male aliens, also that of all
These unnaturalized women are awarded all the privileges of an
elector and they are protected by our laws, just as certainly as they
would be if they had the suffrage. They are not granted the suffrage
because they cannot comply with the duties of an elector; therefore,
they remain subjects of the foreign countries in which they were born,
but are entitled to all the privileges of this government which our
American born women enjoy. However, should a woman immigrant marry an
American citizen, she would become an American at once and her
allegiance to her native country would cease, thus our laws sustain the
teachings of the Bible, the principle of the "family unit."
These are the laws left to us by the signers of the Declaration of
Independence which do not give to any one the right of suffrage because
they pay taxes.
The Woman Suffrage Agitators of the United States asking for
suffrage claiming that they purchase it through the payment of taxes,
which makes the two complaints, one by the representatives of the
Colonies and the other by individual women altogether different
propositions. There is so much difference between them that there can be
no comparison whatever.
The taxation complained of by the colonies was first, a stamp tax
similar to the stamp tax we had in the United States during and long
after our Civil War. In order to make an official transaction legal, the
United States Stamp Law made it imperative that the papers be stamped.
If one person gave another his note, it would have to be stamped or the
amount of the note could not be collected. If a check was given on a
bank it had to be stamped or it would not be paid by the bank, and so on
with all private and official papers. The cost of the stamps varied in
amount in proportion to the number of dollars involved in the
transaction. The second complaint was an export duty charged by Great
Britain, which is the same in effect as a tariff and which advanced the
price of material used by the Colonies. The complaint of taxation
through tariff is not unheard of in this country today, but it is not
regarded as a sufficient cause for revolution.
I quote below the important complaints made in the Declaration of
Independence against the King of England, which complaints were given to
show that the Colonies had good cause to de themselves a free and
independent nation. It sets out twenty complaints showing ALL the
reasons why they should do so, at I give eleven of those complaints,
including all that is said in about taxation. As the Colonies had
representation, nothing said about it.
The reader will readily understand when he reads the char made
against the King of England that there would have been rebellion by our
forefathers had they not been oppressed in any other way except by
excessive taxation, and that taxation without representation is not
mentioned in the Declaration of Independence and that taxation without
representation was not the cause of our Revolutionary War as claimed by
Excerpts From the Declaration of Independence.
"The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of
repeated injuries and usurpations, all having, in direct object, the
establishment of an absolute tyranny over these States. To prove this,
let facts be submitted to a candid world:
"He has obstructed the administration of justice by REFUSING HIS
ASSENT to laws for establishing judiciary powers.
"He has made judges dependent on his will alone, for the tenure of
their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
"He has kept among us, in times of peace, standing armies, without
the consent of our legislatures.
"He has affected to render the military independent of, and
superior to, the civil power.
"For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
"For protecting them, by a mock trial, from punishment, for any
murders which they should commit on the inhabitants of these States:
"For cutting off our trade with all parts of the world:
"For depriving us, in many cases, of the benefits of trial by
"For taking away our charters, abolishing our most valuable laws,
and altering, fundamentally, the powers of our governments:
"HE HAS ABDICATED GOVERNMENT HERE, by declaring us out of his
protection, and WAGING WAR AGAINST US.
"For imposing taxes on us without our consent."
I would gladly publish the full text of the Declaration of
Independence, but want of space forbids.
There is no such doctrine as taxation of its people by a
government without giving them representation, referred to in the
Declaration of Independence and the fact of the people of the United
States listening with patience to such hollow arguments, when positively
disproven by the Declaration of Independence, goes to show that the busy
men of this country have paid but little attention to the proposition of
The claim that the Declaration of Independence states that
taxation without representation was the cause of our Revolutionary War,
is so absurd and unwarranted that I deem it unnecessary to write at
length upon the subject. However will call the reader's attention to the
fact that the laws of the United States and the plan of the construction
of its government is very much like that of England, especially that
part which takes into the Union a territory and makes it one of the
For illustration, in an early day the territory which is now known
as the State of Nebraska, was a wild, unsettled country. A few trappers
and hunters located there; others followed, but the Indians harassed the
settlers and the United States sent it's soldiers into that territory,
built forts and protected the white people. As soon as the whites were
assured of protection by the presence of the Army, they migrated and the
territory was rapidly settled. After there were a certain number of
white people in the territory, the government of the United States
appointed a Governor for it and the people of that district elected a
territorial legislature which made laws for the government of the
territory of Nebraska.
At that time the territory which is now known as the State of
Nebraska, stood in relation to the government of the United States
practically the same as the Colonies of the United States stood in
relation to Great Britain. The government of the United States did not
admit senators into the Senate from Nebraska territory. Great Britain
did not accredit a member to Parliament from the Colonies but the
territory of Nebraska was represented to the government of the United
States through its legislature, and the appointed governor.
The Colonies were represented through their legislatures and the
appointed governor to the Crown of Great Britain the same as Nebraska
was represented in the United States and no one would deny the tact that
the territory of Nebraska was represented although the territory was not
accredited with members of The Congress. Any one who studies this matter
will not deny the fact that the Colonies were represented to Great
Britain by their legislators and governors, this after reading the
Declaration of Independence which shows that many requests were
presented to the King through the legislatures for the Colonies. Some
were granted and many refused. And the fact of the King refusing to
grant them does not show that the Colonies were not represented, but, on
the other hand, shows that the Crown did consider the requests made by
the representatives of the Colonies, which act acknowledges them as the
representatives of the Colonies.
To go further with this illustration, will say that a territory in
the United States cannot be admitted as a state until it has a certain
number of inhabitants, and states only are accredited with members of
The Congress. When the proper number of inhabitants are obtained, the
legislature of the territory submits to the people a Constitution for
their consideration. After it has been voted upon and ratified, that
constitution is then presented through their territorial legislature to
the government of the United States, and if approved by it, the
territory is then admitted into the Union as a state, after which time
it is accredited with United States Senators and Congressmen which the
state elects and sends to The Congress.
This plan was followed by Great Britain and as the Colonies had
not formed a Union, they were independent of each other. Not one of them
had a sufficient number of inhabitants to be entitled to, a member in
Parliament, but that fact does not show that they were not represented.
The people of a territory in the United States are represented, and so
were the Colonies of America represented to Great Britain.
Fifty-six of the wisest and most noted men of America,
representatives of the Colonies, signed the Declaration of Independence
in which all the grievances and complaints against Great Britain were
set out and made public for the purpose of showing the world they had
good cause for declaring the Colonies independent of Great Britain. If
taxation without representation had been a cause for complaint, it would
have been mentioned in-the Declaration of Independence, and I am proud
to associate my thoughts with those of these wise men in opposition to
the claim made by those who believe in Woman Suffrage.
Should we say Great Britain did not give the Colonies of the
United States representation because it did not accredit them with a
member of Parliament, then we must say that the United States does not
give our territories representation because they are not accredited with
Should we say that the Colonies did not have representation, then
we must say that our territories in the United States do not have
representation. If we say the people of the Colonies were oppressed by
export duty imposed by Great Britain, we must say that the people of our
territories are oppressed by the tariff levied by the United States. If
we say the people of the Colonies were oppressed by the Stamp Tax Law,
we must say that the people in our territories were oppressed by the
Stamp Tax Law enforced in the United States.
The signers of the Declaration of Independence understood this
proposition thoroughly. They did not make mention of taxation without
representation in the Declaration of Independence, because that
statement would have been untruthful.
Referring to the complaints made by American women of taxation of
their property, which they call "taxation without representation," will
say that one government has a right to demand that another government
shall not tax it without it's consent, but individuals have no right to
demand that the government under which they live shall not tax their
property without their consent. Still the women claim that their
property should not be taxed without their consent and that they are
upheld in that claim by the Declaration of Independence.
All governments, including that of the United States, tax the
property of the inhabitants without their consent, and should they
change that plan of taxation by only taxing the property of those who
gave their personal consent, that would be the end of taxation, also the
end of government.
Many of our citizens own property in foreign countries, and many
foreigners who do not reside in this country own property in the United
States, but those foreigners are not subjects of taxation without
representation. In neither case do such persons pay any more taxes than
those who have the right to vote. Nor have they ever complained that
they were being taxed without representation.
All men who own property in a state in which they do not reside,
know that property cannot be taxed for more in proportion to its value
than the property of residents who have the suffrage. And to prevent
such a possibility, the law has in some states created a Board of Review
whither all those who are dissatisfied with the amount of their taxes
may go and compare their assessments with those on other properties in
the same locality. This gives them a chance to ascertain whether one
property has been assessed at a higher rate than another. If such proves
the case, the Board equalizes the assessments. From this it will be seen
that it is impossible to compel a woman, an alien or non-resident, even
if she does not have the right of suffrage, to pay any more taxes than a
man resident. The Board of Review can be called upon either by a
property owner or his representative.
The hue and cry of suffragettes, "Taxation without
Representation," is a deception. There is no such thing carried on in
the United States.
No woman who has taxable property is denied representation. She
can send her representative to the COUNTY RECORDS to examine them and if
her property has been assessed at a higher rate than other property in
the same locality, she can, through her representative, demand a rebate
equal to the excess taxation, and if the rebate is refused, she has all
the rights of an elector in the matter of taxation and can go in person
or send her representative before a court and compel the government to
pay the refund. There is also the Board of Equalization before which she
can, under the laws, appear in person or through her representative.
It should be remembered that the Colonies in this country as a
body did not, through their representatives, ask Great Britain for
suffrage as it is now asked for in the United States by the women. Every
individual in the United States today, including the women, even those
who are criminals and idiots have representation through our
legislatures in all matters including that of taxation.
About one-half of the electors in the United States do not have
their chosen representatives to hold office in this government, and
where several different candidates are running for the same office,
there is not more than one-third of the electors who have their chosen
representatives in office, because where there are more than two
candidates, one of them is elected by a plurality and the woman who pays
taxes has no more cause for complaint of oppression because she pays
taxes without being able to vote for her choice of the representatives
than half of all the electors in the United States.
The President represents all the people of the United States. If
he is a Democrat, he represents the Republicans the same as he does the
Democrats and The Congress of the United States a so represents all the
people. The Governor and the State Legislature represent all the people
in a state.
Our legislators cannot pass laws for the benefit of the special
ones who voted for them, without committing the crime of violating their
oath of office. They could not select a few out of the many for whom
they would make laws. The laws are made for the government of all the
people, not specially for those who vote for the legislators.
There is only one way in which the voter whose choice of
representative is elected, can be benefited more than the voter who
voted for the unsuccessful one or the one who did not vote, that is,
through friendship with the representative, he might obtain an
appointive office in the government.
When all the reasons given by the women agitators for suffrage are
sifted down, that one reason is the only one which prompts them to fight
for Woman Suffrage. They WANT OFFICE but they are adroit enough not to
admit it, still they must know that they are represented by our
legislatures and the administration whether it be Republican or
Democratic, and that all the laws must be obeyed by those whose choice
of representatives are elected to the legislatures as well as by those
who do not vote for those legislators.
I was personally acquainted and connected in business with two
foreigners who immigrated to this country, both of whom refused to
qualify for the suffrage by becoming naturalized. Those men were in fair
financial circumstances and resided permanently in America.
They believed that they were represented by our legislators quite
as well as those who voted and knew that they did not pay any more taxes
than those who bad the suffrage, yet they had the advantage over the
electors in that they could not be compelled to bear the burdens of this
government by serving as soldiers in the army. They occupied the same
position in relation to this government that the female portion of this
country occupies and they preferred it to that of the elector.
If there was a war in progress today, I suspect that many of our
young men would wish they had been born in foreign countries that they
might, through the same process, attain to the desirable positions
females now occupy.
I understand that Hetty Green, the wealthiest woman in the world,
owning large properties in nearly every state in the Union, has never
taken the trouble to vote. If she had thought it necessary in order to
protect herself against fraud by excess taxation, certainly she would
have exercised her right. She has a representative in each state who
attends to taxation matters for her.
Claims made by the agitators of Woman Suffrage of oppression from
taxation without representation have been proven to be mythical and
farcical. They are also disproven by the fact that wherever the
agitators have asked the legislatures, as has been the case in many
states, for the right to vote on tax questions, laws have been passed
without a murmur giving all women who owned taxable property, and
desired it, that right. In every one of these states where suffrage has
been granted those women who own property, I believe in fourteen of
them, outside of Woman Suffrage States, the experiment has shown that
the women cared little, if anything, about the right to vote on taxation
matters. Indeed very few of them ever took the trouble to vote, thus
proving that the argument about taxation without representation has no
The agitators for Woman Suffrage care nothing whatever about
"Taxation without Representation," as they call it. They refuse to go
before the legislatures and ask that the women of this country who have
taxable property shall have the right to vote upon all questions
relating to taxation of property, this because it would be granted them,
and would prevent them from using "Taxation without Representation," as
an argument for Universal Woman Suffrage.
When the suffragette agitators found that by simply presenting to
the legislatures petitions for suffrage for those women who were
subjects of taxation, that their requests were granted, they
discontinued going before those bodies in the interests of only those
women who own property. Nevertheless they still continue picking on the
same deceptive claim of TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION for the purpose
of misleading persons who do not understand the situation as it is. They
ask for Universal Suffrage, which would give fifty thousand women of all
classes the right to the elective franchise, to vote on all matters,
BECAUSE ONE WOMAN OUT OF THAT FIFTY THOUSAND OWNS PROPERTY. The fact
not one woman out of every fifty thousand owns taxable property; the
disproportion is even greater than that, and more than one-half of those
who own property oppose Universal Suffrage.
When a young lady and gentleman are married, the bride has voted
for and elected the bridegroom her chosen representative; therefore, the
wife is not deprived of representation. However, should she join the
Woman Suffrage Movement she would then become a mugwump - a bolter.
APStudent.com | www.apstudent.com