"with these examples in two widely-separated parts of the country, the old and the new, representing not only crystallized prejudice in the one but inborn opposition in both to any step toward enfranchising women, and with this depending absolutely on the will of the voters, is it a matter of wonder that its progress has been so slow? if the question were submitted in any state to-day whether, for instance, all who did not pay taxes should be disfranchised, and only taxpayers were allowed to vote upon it, it would be carried by a large majority. if it were submitted whether all owning property above a certain amount should be disfranchised, and only those who owned less than this, or nothing, were allowed to vote, it would be carried unanimously. no class of men could get any electoral right whatever if it depended wholly on the consent of another class whose interests supposedly lay in withholding it."—from the history of woman suffrage, vol. iv, edited by susan b. anthony and ida husted harper the focus on issues described in anthony's text led to alliances between groups sharing similar goals, most notably those seeking enfranchisement for former slaves advocating for rights for domestic migrants enacting the tenets of social gospel working to advance the cause of radical anarchists Get the answer
Category: geography | Author: Valko Tomer