ciple (apparently to his great sorrow), but he flies from its realization. And how illogical the conclusions with which he tries to cover his retreat! That the suffrage, exercised by women, will lead to disaster has, as I have observed once before, not yet been put to the test. On the contrary, women aiways, and in sufficient numbers, considering their education, have taken the part of liberty in every struggle, although it held out no promise to them. But men have undergone the test of suffrage, and have come out of it as discreditably as possible. They have, as Mr. Ruge tells us (by their vote in France) set us back fifty years. To what conclusion ought this to lead him? That the first thing necessary would be to fix a term for the education of men, in order to instruct them in voting. His conclusion, however, is "now we cannot abolish universal suffrage any more." Why? Why, because we are men and not women. Man must demand also the application of the correct principle, but women must bury the principle to avoid the application. For men Mr. Ruge wants to apply the old rule: whoever would learn to swim must not be afraid of the water. But his chivalry wishes to spare us women this discomfort. We learn to swim in the kitchen, or by merely looking on. That is indeed quite complimentary to our intelligence, but not exactly "practical."
That universal suffrage has set us back fifty years, seems to me to be entirely the fault of those who be-
