Mr. C. Thompson writes us two letters, in the first
of which he calls our recent paper on the Taunton election "rubbish," and in the second denies specifically that he received £1,000 for his expenses from any lady, alleges that the teetotallers of Bath were bullied by the roughs, denies that he went to Taunton at all, and asserts that the Spectator " despises women." The first statement we took from a paper which, as it almost named the lady con- cerned, we thought had authority, and is of no importance what- ever ; the third- was telegraphed by some error to London imme- diately after the election, and was creditable, not discreditable, to Mr. Thompson ; and the second and last we do not understand. If Mr. Thompson means to say that the teetotallers of Bath were afraid to vote even under the Ballot, he makes a serious charge against teetotalism in which we entirely disbelieve. Teetotallers are fully as brave as moderate drinkers, or their cause is at an end. As to despising women, the Spectator, while doing them more than justice in literary criticism, has fought hard for every one of their rights except the suffrage. No journal has contended so strongly for their right to their own property, to enter all careers, and even to fight the battle against the C. D. Acts. The suffrage they will never get, for the simple reason that being in an enormous majority, 800,000, they would pass Acts which men would resist, and the majority being physically powerless to enforce the law, government would become a farce. Mr. Thomp- son adds that he refused pledges, and consequently none were broken. The Alliance says directly the contrary, but we believe him, and hold that in doing so he was a very bad, albeit a thoroughly honest, candidate.
Previous page
