March 8, 19331

253

The Nation

Issues an
And a Woman-Frances
EALLY, thenews

that Frances Perkins is to be appointed to the Cabinet of the United States is one of
the most inspiring and encouraging
events of recent
years. M y mind is running far back as I write. I am thinking of the pioneers who first declared that woman was mans
equal in all respects and as such entitled not only to vote but
to holdany office within the gift of theAmerican people.
How they were derided, how they were laughed at, how they
were subjected to vile abuse, and even physical assault! N o
one can realize what suchsensitive and lovely women as Lucy
Stone and Elizabeth Cady Stanton,
Angelina GrimkC, Lucretia Mott, and many others had to suffer when first they
daredtotakepartinthe
anti-slavery and woman-suffrage
agitation nearly one hundred years ago. Indeed, the famous
broadclothmob which dragged William Lloyd Garrison
through the streets of Boston with a rope around his waist
was roused to violence as much by the fact that a group of
Boston women had so unsexed themselves as to organize an
anti-slavery society and hold a public meeting as by the-fact
that the society was to be addressed by an English agitator
forhumanrights,GeorgeThompson.Indeed,
in 1840 the
first Worlds Anti-Slavery Convention in London refused to
seat the American female delegates on the ground that for
any woman totake part in a public meetingwas improper and
degrading to -thesex !
I remember, too, inlater years, the first paradefor
womans suffrage held in New York City in which men took
part. I was one of the eighty-five members of the sterner
sex who were booed and hissed and asked: Did your wife
make you do it? all the way down Fifth Avenue to Washington Square. Not one of us was sure then that we would
live to see the enfranchisement of women, much less be present to rejoice when a woman took her seat -in the Cabinet
room of the White House. Here isalost cause no longer
lost, but come to triumphant success, and if the pioneers of
that cause are looking down upon this scene, there will be rejoicing in heaven on thefourthday
of March.Andthis
rejoicing should be doubly vociferous because of the character
and achieyements of Frances Perkins herself. These the editors of T h e Nation are treating elsewhere. I canonly add
my me, too. But I amparticularly pleased thatFrances
Perkins is a Lucy Stoner-in other words, she has kept her
maiden name although happily marriedandthemother,
of a mostpromisingdaughter.
I n thishour of depression
when the pernicious doctrine is being preached that married
womenshould be debarredfrom employment by the local,
gtate, and federal governments if there happens to be a husband oranother malemember of the family who- is also
working, it is wonderful, indeed, to have Franklin Roosevelt
pick not only an extraordinarily able woman of proved ability
in public office, but one whose husband is also a wage-earner.
T h a t ought to stop a great deal of the mischievous propaganda which could only work infinite harm if it should lead
to the adoption of this proposal as a nation-wide policy. No
State has the right to deny a woman a job, not even in times

Perkins

of unemployment, if she wants it, has earnedit, and is capable

of doing i t well. Here we haveanother one of those r e d
issues of personal liberty that ought never to be abridged by
sex, or race, or color.
I am so bold as to believe also that the new President has
set an example which will be followed in the years to come rep
a matter of course, as it has been the custom ever since the
coming of suffrage to give women their place on the nationnag
party committees. N o one thinksthatthat
unsexes them;
no one now thinks that the women orators in the national
conventions areout of place, or the women delegates on
the floor. No onemaintainsthatthe
womengovernom
who have been chosen have suffered thereby-Ma Ferguson, I fancy, is just about thesame woman that she waswhen
she first became Governor. I admit that we have had everal unfortunate cases, notably one in New York State, ia
which women office-holders have played us false. But we
have no right to expect women in office to be more upright
than men similarly placed; we can only hope that they will
do better than the men. But whether they do or not, a share
in theactual management of ourStateandnational
lbub
nesses is their inalienableright.
So I should not be surprised if every succeeding Cabinet hereafter had one or mom
women in it. Certainly, if Republican
a
Administratiart
should succeed Mr. Roosevelts, it would be hard for it not
to recognize the women voters inthis way,
.
But after all, I come back to the fact that we need not
worrytheleast
bit aboutthis firstwoman Cabinet mem
ber. Her attractive personality, herstrength of charactex,
her devotion tothetruth
whichmade herleaptothe
e+
posure of the misleading statistics of unemployment given (FW.
by Mr. Hoovers Administration, all give no room for que+
tion as to what her record will be. Also she isa forwardlooking person, in touch with all reform movements, sympatheticto
social control and social responsibility. It will
be wonderful to have her in the place of the incredible & k
Doak, and of the money-grabbing former Secretary of Lahara
the present Senator from Pennsylvania, James J. Davis, who
is nowawaitingtrial upon an indictment f o r misusing &a
mails. Thosewere professional labor men. They served
the cause of labor and their country just about
as badly a
possible. They stood forhatred, bitterness, bigoted intderance, and narrow-mindedandcruelinterpretation
oi &e
labor andimmigration
laws. When I think of Frances
Perkinss point of view and attitude, her humanity, wlsdmv
and statesmanship, it seems to me that she will he izba
angel attheCabinet
tablein contrastwiththe
sordidam
and theinhumanity of her predecessors. I, for one, pledge
myself here and now never to cease to be grateful to FraeaMisr
Roosevelt for this brave and just and wise action-no mattwhat fate may have in store for him and his Administratiax