Croker. Mr. Villard told of the
remarkable work done by the Women's Municipal League under direction
of the Citizen's Union for the election of Seth Low as Mayor and a
reform ticket. He paid a sarcastic tribute to the assistance of the
women anti-suffragists. "To have been really consistent," he said,
"they should have urged upon their more emancipated sisters that
woman's sphere is the home and any steps that lead beyond it tend in
the long run to the destruction both of the home and of the eternal
feminine." He closed by declaring that "the Titanic struggle between
right and wrong in the great cities can not be won without the
cooperation of that half of the nation's citizens in whose hearts are
ever found the truest ideals of family and society, of city life and
State life and of national existence." At its conclusion Mrs. Catt
said: "And yet after Mr. Low was elected Mayor of Greater New York a
large number of the women who had helped him win the victory urged him
to appoint some women on the school board and he refused. So we must
suppose that he is willing to have women pull the chestnuts out of the
fire for men but is not willing to give them a share of the
chestnuts."

A feature of the evening was the scholarly address of the Hon. William
Dudley Foulke (Ind.), president of the U. S. Civil Service Commission.
He objected to being classed as a "new man," since long ago he was for
several years president of the American Suffrage Association. "Men
would not be satisfied with indirect influence," he declared and
continued: "It is often said that woman suffrage is just but that
there is no need of it, because women have no interests separate from
those of men. That argument was used to me only lately by an eminent
political economist. I said: 'Suppose a railroad runs through a town
and a woman owns a large property in that town and yet cannot vote on
the question of raising a subsidy; are her interests necessarily the
same as those of every man in the town?' My friends, that case is
universal. Suppose a widow is trying to bring up her son in the
principles of morality and a saloon is opened on the corner opposite
her home. I do not speak as an advocate of prohibition but I do say
that the interest of the mother is different from that of the man who
sells liquor. Or suppose she is bringing up a daughter; she has a
sacred right to protect that daughter from a libertine. Her interest
is certainly different from that of