time.  It is true that the Constitution provides that the President and Vice-President shall not be of the same State, but residence can be acquired to get over this as easily as to obtain a divorce; and a Constitution that insists upon speaking of the President as “he” is too antiquated to be respected.  When the President is a woman, it can matter little whether her husband or some other woman presides in the Senate.  Even the reformers will hardly insist upon two Presidents in order to carry out the equality idea, so that we are probably anticipating difficulties that will not occur in practice.

The Drawer has only one more practical suggestion.  As the right of voting carries with it the right to hold any elective office, a great change must take place in Washington life.  Now for some years the divergence of society and politics has been increasing at the capital.  With women in both Houses, and on the Supreme Bench, and at the heads of the departments, social and political life will become one and the same thing; receptions and afternoon teas will be held in the Senate and House, and political caucuses in all the drawing-rooms.  And then life will begin to be interesting.

SHALL WOMEN PROPOSE?

The shyness of man—­meaning the “other sex” referred to in the woman’s journals—­has often been noticed in novels, and sometimes in real life.  This shyness is, however, so exceptional as to be suspicious.  The shy young man may provoke curiosity, but he does not always inspire respect.  Roughly estimated, shyness is not considered a manly quality, while it is one of the most pleasing and attractive of the feminine traits, and there is something pathetic in the expression “He is as shy as a girl;” it may appeal for sympathy and the exercise of the protective instinct in women.  Unfortunately it is a little discredited, so many of the old plays turning upon its assumption by young blades who are no better than they should be.

What would be the effect upon the masculine character and comfort if this shyness should become general, as it may in a contingency that is already on the horizon?  We refer, of course, to the suggestion, coming from various quarters, that women should propose.  The reasonableness of this suggestion may not lie on the surface; it may not be deduced from the uniform practice, beginning with the primitive men and women; it may not be inferred from the open nature of the two sexes (for the sake of argument two sexes must still be insisted on); but it is found in the advanced civilization with which we are struggling.  Why should not women propose?  Why should they be at a disadvantage in an affair which concerns the happiness of the whole life?  They have as much right to a choice as men, and to an opportunity to exercise it.  Why should they occupy a negative position, and be restricted, in making the most important part of their career, wholly to the choice implied