Just why the House Judiciary Committee should bring in an unfavorable report on the proposal to let women serve on juries, we don’t understand. Women have been given equal political rights with men. They are assuming the responsibility of the franchise and The Free Press believes that they ought to be made eligible for jury service.
The Free Press does not anticipate that the average woman will clamor for the privilege of doing jury service. Certainly, if she does, it will be in marked contrast with he attitude in evidence on the part of her brother-man. Women are unquestionably going to be increasingly active in various public ways. They are going to participate more generally in the making of laws, in the selection of office-holders, and why shouldn’t they be permitted to round out the jury in order that this important agency may function from a more comprehensive viewpoint than is possible when only man sifts the evidence?
As a matter of fact, isn’t it time to throw down the bars and remove all the legal disabilities that prevent women from taking active parts int his or that branch of public affairs? Is there any reason for not doing so? Can it be argued that half a loaf is enough? Certainly, if the half is all right, the whole will be better. Why not accept the inevitable and go ahead?
From the editorial page of The Daily Free Press, Kinston, N.C., Saturday, February 3, 1923, H. Galt Braston, editor and manager.
No comments:
Post a Comment