them by with averted eyes, becoming literally Pharisees after the law was repealed.
The life-line thrown out by the court was, however, justified, as the legislature a few months later re-enacted the suffrage law, with the judicially declared objectionable provision eliminated. In an act "prescribing the qualification of voters in the Territory of Washington," approved January 18, 1888, appears the exact phraseology of the act amending section 3050 of the code, with this proviso, that "nothing in this act shall be so construed as to make it lawful for women to serve as jurors."
The act was not, however, allowed long to remain on the statute book by its implacable foes, acting through the Supreme Court. August 14, 1888. in the agreed case of Nevada M. Bloomer against the election board of a ward in Spokane, backed by the liquor interest, the law was finally blotted out of existence. It was carried up for that special purpose, and Judges Jones, Langford and Allyn lent themselves to the conspiracy, and they declared the term "male inhabitant," which fixed the qualification of the first voters of the territory to apply to the term "citizen," as subsequently used in the same act, who, it declared, should be accorded the elective franchise at all other or subsequent elections—a forced construction to say the least. But it was important to have the matter settled before the territory became a state, and so the courts were worked "overtime" to secure that result. It is hardly probable that this use of the higher court to accomplish what could not have been done by the people through their legislative representatives would have been possible had it not been for the influence of a strong trade combination which through some means swayed the court of final resort.
While the vote of the women on such local option cases as came before them was judicious, as it. was predicted it would be, favoring license of law-abiding applicants, the women did insist upon compliance with laws for protection of minors and preservation of order; and it was probably the inordinate zeal of Judge Greene, of the Seattle court, to force women to the front for these objects that led to organization for repeal of the suffrage act. Mrs. Duniway predicted this result, and urged moderation, until, at least, such time as the right might be engrafted into a state constitution, saying: "Be careful of the bridge that has carried you over; it is frail as yet and cannot bear excessive burdens till strengthened by a stronger foundation." But her advice was unheeded, and by a class of people, too, who had afforded very little aid in the passage of the law, but wished to use it as a force to regulate the morals of the people. Men who considered it a religious duty to institute crusades and compel acquiescence, instead of appealing to reason, became most persistent in urging the use of the ballot for this purpose by women.
In conclusion, I would say that the great body of women made intelligent voters and honest and conscientious officeholders, so far as their service had extended in that line of duty, and capable jurors specially fitted for protection of family and fireside. Although at first more radical in that line
