date

1818 Sept. 19. {§.4} ┴ E §.3 Parl
1818 Sept. 19. {§.4} ┴ E §.3

Parl. Reform Bill.

Postpone

Reasons ult o

§.3 Eligible Who

Question. Why exclude from the function of Representative of the people the whole female sex?

Answer 1. {Because,} though the election of a Majority of this sex is a result too improbable to be prevised[?] for, yet the election of some small number might not be altogether so. A person of the female sex, selected for beauty and accomplishment, might be to an incalculable degree of efficiency an instrument of fascination and seduction in the hands of the Executive, on the supposition that in here and there an instance, spite of all precautions to the contrary it might not be impossible for that branch of the sovereignty, to succeed in procuring the nomination of Member to officiate in the /serve in this/ other.

Answer 2. Because, independently of all such danger, by the presence of persons of that sex in an assembly composed chiefly of males, distraction and obstruction would in various ways be likely /sure/ to be produced. On all subjects on which the difference between sex and sex came in question regard for decorum would cramp the freedom of debate: merriment, excited by the most trivial causes, would be continually diverting the attention from rational argument, and so long as it lasted would be occupying the place of serious debate /discussion/.

Answer 3. To the interests of the female sex, considered in contradistinction and opposition to those of the male, no advantage could by any such mixture be produced. That, in a number approaching in any degree to a majority, persons of this sex should become the object of choice, is a result far too improbable to be supposed.
Similar Items
  • Title: [1819 Sept. 19 Parl. Reform Bill or]
    Description: 1819 Sept. 19

    Parl. Reform Bill or Defence ag Ed. Review

    §.2. Electors Who

    Females?

    Historical cause

    3

    But the power here in question is not that same vast integral power but this fraction of a controlling power. Whence it has happened that of this power no part has ever been in female hands – why the historical cause of the exclusion has had no exception is sufficiently obvious /obvious enough/

    In the feudal times in the times of the Henry and the Edwards here and there an instance may have been seen an instance in which in the absence of her husband, the castle of a Baron or a Knight has been defended by his wife But of a female clothed in iron armour and ranking[?] herself with the embattled Knights not so much as a single example it is believed would be to be found

    Accordingly neither in the days of Henry 3 d and his son Edward I when, for the purpose of agreeing to a tax the Knights of a County /Shire/ were summoned to meet the King, nor on any subsequent occasion could it have entered into the thoughts of any assembly of men to think of charging with any such commission a person of the female sex: to send into an Assembly which at any rate could not fail to be composed chiefly and almost exclusively of males, the timidity and bashfulness of the weaker sex in the person either of speaker, wife or widow.

    In the case of the representative of a town, though military service was not so prominently in view, still the business was of a sort for which it was not natural that a person of the female sex should be selected, where a supposed tolerably qualified agent of the male sex were to be had.
  • Title: [1818 Nov r 25 Parl Reform Bill]
    Description: 1818 Nov r 25

    Parl Reform Bill

    Reasons

    '.1. Seats and Districts

    '.2. Electors Who

    3

    Question 7. Between the interests of the whole male /female/ sex on the one part and the whole of the female sex on the other part is there that /does there exist a/ entire connection such, that by the male sex no injury could be done to the interest of the /aggregate of the/ female sex, without a real injury done to that of the male?

    Answer. Such, as it seems, is the /a/ supposition generally entertained. Such at least is the only supposition by which the exclusion in question can be justified, unless it be supposed, that though by the exclusion an injury to a certain amount is done /produced/, yet the amount is not such as that the exclusion /prevention/ of it should be a good sufficient to compensate for the additional evil which would be produced in the shape of expense, vexation and delay, as above.

    Upon experience and examination, should it ever appear /be established/ that an adequately strong conviction of interests has not place, and that for want of it, more evil is produced by injury done by the exclusion to the interests of the female sex than is [...?] for by the exclusion of the mass of Election evil abovementioned, the propensity of removing /abolishing/ this exclusion, and giving /according/ admission to the votes of females will have been established.

    If in any other shape than as above, inconvenience[?] be really by the nature of the case, attached to admission given to the votes of females, it rests with him in whose opinion such additional inconvenience has existence /place/ to [...?] it and bring it distinctly to view.
  • Title: [1818 Sept. 1. Parl. Reform Bill]
    Description: 1818 Sept. 1.

    Parl. Reform Bill

    + ' 2 A Exceptions

    Reasons ult o

    '.2. Electors Who

    Universality

    Exceptions

    1

    1

    Question 1. Why seek to communicate the right in question, with the power attached to the exercise of it, to a portion of the community so large as that in question, viz. among persons of the male sex and mature age, with the exception of persons holding situations amenable to that in question all those who possess the faculty of reading, and thence on condition of their having possessed themselves of that faculty all such persons without exception?

    Answer

    Answer 1. By the limitations in question {two} /four/ descriptions and two /four/ alone are excluded: 1. viz all persons of the female sex: 2 among males all persons whose age is short of maturity; 3. Persons not possessed of the faculty of reading. 4. persons holding political situations responsible /amenable/ to that in question. 4.

    For placing the matter in the clearest point of view the most advantageous course seems to be - to put aside to lay out of consideration altogether in the first instance both the /the two first of the four/ classes of persons thus proposed to be excluded: when the reasons which plead in favour of the admission proposed to be given to all others have been brought to view, there will come the time, for applying them to the still more populous /numerous/ classes here proposed to be excepted: in the instance of each one of these excluded classes it will then be to be seen in the first place how far the reasons in favour of admission apply to them respectively, in the next place, whether and how far the reasons which they plead in favour of admission are [...?] opposed /counteracted/ and outweighed by counter-reasons by reasons which plead in favour of exclusion.