It devolves upon the college woman more than upon any other one

type to face and conquer a retarding tendency which is becoming

marked in this country. I refer to the anti-feminization

movement. Dr. Stanley Hall has given voice to it in education;

Dr. Lyman Abbott quavers about it in religion; the committee on

tariff revision is an example of it in politics. When women sent

a petition to the committee against raising the duties on certain

necessities of life of which they were the chief consumers, the

chairman said: "It doesn't make any difference whether these

women send in a petition signed by 500 or 5,000 names, they will

receive no consideration. Let them talk things over in their

clubs and other organizations; this will occupy them and do no

one any harm; but it will not affect the tariff." On the same day

the committee accorded a deferential hearing to a deputation of

lumbermen.... This discrimination against woman, the vague

feeling that she has been allowed to get on too fast, to get out

of control, that she has slipped into too large activities while

the good man slept, has come upon us at the very time when

Scandinavia and Germany and England are getting rid of their

simian chivalry. It is notorious that America, which once was the

progressive nation, has been for a generation in a comatose state

in the matter of social ideas. It is high time that our college

women should stand solid against the blind superstition, whose

mother is fear and whose father is egoism, that women can not be

trusted in public affairs....

The report of Mr. Blackwell on Presidential suffrage was accepted by a

rising vote and his report as chairman of the Committee on Resolutions

was adopted, as usual, without change.[61] For many years he had

served as chairman of these committees. His constitutional argument

for the right of Legislatures to grant women a vote for presidential

electors always stood unchallenged and his faith that they would do

this was eventually justified. One of the founders of the American

Suffrage Association in 1869, he had not during forty years missed

attending a national suffrage convention, first with his wife, Lucy

Stone, and later with his daughter, Alice Stone Blackwell. He had

never seemed in better health and spirits than at this one in Seattle

but two months later, on September 7, he died at the age of 84, a

great loss to the cause of woman suffrage. (Memorials in next

chapter.)

The Legislative Evening was in charge of the State suffrage

association, Mrs. De Voe in the chair, and it was the intention to

have those members of the Legislature who were principally responsible

for submitting the amendment address the convention but an extra

session at that time spoiled this program. The Hon. Alonzo Wardell

spoke for Charles R. Case, president of the State Federation of Labor,

which was strongly in favor of the amendment, he said, and had votes

enough to carry it if the members would go to the polls. Mrs. Lord

represented the Grange, which she said could be depended on for an

affirmative vote. Miss Parker gave a graphic description of the

"illegal and dishonorable methods" by which the vote was taken away

from the women while Washington was a Territory.[62] Mrs. John Moore

of Tacoma read a powerful scene from The Spanish Gypsy by George

Eliot. After a lively collection speech by Mrs. Upton, Dr. Shaw closed

the evening with a mirth-provoking "question box."

At an afternoon session Mrs. Rachel Foster Avery read the report of

the National Committee on the Petition to Congress. It had been the

plan of Mrs. Catt, as presented and adopted at the convention of 1908,

to have one final petition to Congress for the submission of the

Federal Amendment and she had consented to take the chairmanship

temporarily. Headquarters had been opened in the Martha Washington,

the woman's hotel in New York City, where the headquarters of the

Interurban Woman Suffrage Council, of which Mrs. Catt was chairman,

were located. Here she and Miss Mary Garrett Hay spent many months

from 9 a. m. to 5 p. m., assisted by Miss Minnie J. Reynolds, who did

press work and correspondence with the States. Mrs. Priscilla D.

Hackstaff of Brooklyn, a former Missourian, took charge of the work in

that State from these headquarters and there was an energetic

volunteer sub-committee of New York suffragists. The report continued:

"The Governors of the four enfranchised States served on an

honorary Advisory Committee, as did the following men and women:

Anna Howard Shaw, Clara Barton, Julia Ward Howe, William Lloyd

Garrison, William Dudley Foulke, Jane Addams, Mary E. Garrett,

Sarah Platt Decker, the Hon. John D. Long, Samuel Gompers,

Colonel George Harvey, Rabbi Charles Fleischer (Mass.), Dr.

Josiah Strong, Edward T. Devine, John Mitchell, Judge Ben

Lindsey, Mrs. Clarence Mackay, Lillian M. Hollister, Mary Lowe

Dickinson, Mrs. Bourke Cockran and Cynthia Westover Alden.

When Mrs. Catt left for London in March, 1909, in the interests

of the International Woman Suffrage Alliance, the work came to

me. At that time upwards of 10,000 letters had been written and

100,000 petitions distributed and twenty-three State

organizations were collecting, counting, pasting and classifying

the lists. Since then five other States have gone to work.

Letters were written to all the newspapers in the four equal

suffrage States asking the insertion of a coupon petition and

these coupons brought in the names of many friends who could not

otherwise be reached and who were enthusiastic workers for the

petition. Others to the _Age of Reason_ and _Wilshire's Magazine_

brought hundreds of willing workers. Letters were sent in every

direction, friends stirred up, reminded of their task and

requested to send names of others who would work. Every sheet

that came in was searched for names of possible friends who might

circulate the petitions. Between March 1 and July 1, 1909, nearly

2,000 letters were written and 45,000 blanks distributed....

Later the work was removed to Washington and headquarters established

there to finish the petition by 1910.

The report of Mrs. Lucretia L. Blankenburg (Penn.), chairman of the

Committee on Civil Rights, showed the usual painstaking year's work.

Her letters to all the State presidents for information had brought

answers from twenty-two and eleven of these showed advanced

legislation for women and children. In some of them it was amended

labor laws or new ones; in others for a Juvenile Court, for improving

the position of teachers, for the advantage of children in the public

schools, for property rights of wives. Maine reported nearly a dozen

such new laws. Minnesota was in the lead with thirty Acts of the

Legislature.

Mrs. Mary E. Craigie (N. Y.), chairman of the Committee on Church

Work, introduced her excellent report by saying: "President Taft

recently said in a public address: 'Christianity and the spirit of

Christianity are the only basis for the hope of modern civilization

and the growth of popular self-government.' ... Women are to-day and

always have been the mainstay and chief support of the churches and

the leaders in all great moral reforms; yet as a disfranchised class

they are powerless to aid in bringing about any reforms that depend

upon legislative or governmental action and the church is thereby

deprived of more than two-thirds of its power to help extend civic

righteousness throughout the land. Now that there is a world-wide

movement among women to demand the political power to do their part in

the world's work, they have a right to ask and to receive from

ministers and from all Christian people support and help in working

for this greatest of all reforms." ... Mrs. Craigie told of addressing

the ministerial association of Canada at Toronto, where fifteen

minutes had been allotted to her but by unanimous insistence she was

obliged to keep on for an hour. An interesting discussion followed,

after which an endorsement of the principle of woman suffrage was

unanimously voted. She spoke at a meeting of the Dominion Temperance

Alliance, where there were 600 delegates, many of them clergymen, and

a resolution by the chairman endorsing the woman suffrage bill then

before the Provincial Legislature was carried without a dissenting

vote. Reports were included of the good work accomplished by the

members of her committee in the various States.

The usual Sunday afternoon convention meeting was held in the

auditorium on the Exposition grounds, under the auspices of this

church committee, with a large audience who listened to an able

presentation of The Sacred Duties and Obligations of Citizenship. Dr.

Shaw presided and the speakers were the Rev. C. Lyng Hansen, Mrs.

Craigie, Professor Potter and Miss Janet Richards. Mrs. Kelley spoke

in the First Christian Church, Mrs. Eva Emery Dye in the Second Avenue

Congregational Church and the Rev. Mary G. Andrews preached for the

Universalists on The Freedom of Truth. At the First Methodist

Protestant Church, Miss Laura Clay talked on Christian Citizenship in

the morning and Dr. Shaw preached in the evening. Mrs. Charlotte

Perkins Gilman spoke at the Boylston Avenue Unitarian Church in the

morning and Mrs. Gilman and Mrs. Pauline Steinem at a patriotic

service in Plymouth Church in the evening. Mr. Blackwell and Mrs.

Steinem spoke in the Jewish synagogue.[63] In the evening the officers

of the association were "at home" to the members of the convention and

friends at the Lincoln Hotel.

The election of officers took place Monday morning. At Miss

Blackwell's request she was permitted to retire from the office of

recording secretary, which she had filled for twenty years, and the

convention gave her a rising vote of thanks for her most efficient

service. Her complete and satisfactory reports of the national

conventions in her paper, the _Woman's Journal_, had formed a standard

record that nowhere else could be found. She exchanged places with

Mrs. Ella S. Stewart, second auditor, and was thus retained on the

board. The remainder of the officers were re-elected but Miss Gordon,

the corresponding secretary, stated that with the removal of the

headquarters to New York and the increased work which would follow,

this officer should be there all the time, which was impossible for

her. Professor Potter was the unanimous choice of the convention, and,

after communicating with the university and securing a leave of

absense for two years, she accepted the office. Her assistant and

friend, Professor Mary Gray Peck, accepted the office of headquarters

secretary. Both were prominent in the College Suffrage League in that

State. The convention by a rising vote expressed its appreciation of

the excellent work Miss Gordon had done, "and for the still greater

work that she will yet do," added Dr. Shaw.

It was voted to change the name of the Business Committee to the

Official Board and to add Mrs. Catt, the only ex-president, to this

board. Urgent invitations were received from Governor Robert S. Vessey

of South Dakota and the Mayor and Chamber of Commerce of Sioux Falls

to hold the convention of 1910 there, as an amendment was to be voted

on in the autumn. Dr. Shaw commented: "Governor Vessey is a man who

has convictions and is not afraid to stand by them. I am grateful that

he dares to do this while he is in office." A delegate spoke of the

appointment of a woman for the first time to an office in her State

and immediately delegates from other States gave the same announcement

until it was necessary to stop the flood. Miss Penfield, one of a

number of national organizers who were kept constantly in the field,

told of having worked in six States in the past six months. In

Pennsylvania she visited thirty-five small towns, holding parlor

meetings, which she advocated as leading to the formation of suffrage

clubs. In Kentucky she addressed fifteen colleges and schools. Mrs.

Ida Porter Boyer (Penn.), Miss Mary N. Chase (N. H.) and Miss Laura

Gregg (Kans.) gave experiences in field work.

Mrs. Villard presided Monday evening and in introducing Mr. Blackwell,

whom the audience rose to greet, she said: "It is a pleasure for me to

pay also a tribute to the loveliness of his wife, Lucy Stone. To my

childish vision she was a type of perpetual sunshine." Mr. Blackwell

gave the opinion of a man of long observation and experience on How to

Get Votes for Women. Mrs. Craigie spoke on Citizenship--What Is It?

Mrs. Stewart relieved Mrs. Upton of her usual task of taking a

collection and among her witty remarks was one on Bartholdi's statue

of Liberty. "The real goddesses of Liberty in this country do not

spend a large amount of time standing on pedestals in public places;

they use their torches to startle the bats in political cellars."

Referring to the ignoring of women's work in the histories she said:

"When I was a child and studied about the Pilgrim Fathers I supposed

they were all bachelors, as I never found a word about their wives."

Mrs. Charlotte Perkins Gilman's topic was Masculine, Feminine and

Human, discussed with her usual keen analysis and illuminated with her

pungent epigrams.

A spirited symposium took place on Pre-Election Methods, led by Mrs.

Stewart, who outlined the work done in Illinois, where it had been

reduced to a system. "We find candidates much less tractable after

election than before," she said, "although we always send literature

and letters to the members-elect and subscribe for the _Woman's

Journal_ for them. We are now strong enough in some districts for

pre-election work to elect our friends and defeat our enemies. Mrs.

Catharine Waugh McCulloch sent a circular letter to every member of

the last Legislature, with questions as to his attitude on woman

suffrage and from the answers she compiled a leaflet recommending the

election of the men who promised to vote for our measures. She sent

this to every paper in Illinois and distributed it as widely as

possible among the women's clubs and women at large. She did the same

with our Congressmen. Not one of the legislators who promised to vote

for our bill voted against it. Our most important measure was lost in

the Senate by a majority of only one vote. Eight of the Senators who

voted against it are up for re-election and we shall do our best to

keep them from going back. Illinois has printed for several years a

Roll of Honor of the legislators who have voted right on our bills."

The discussion showed a general opinion that it was high time for

action of this kind. Mrs. Kelley asked: "Why not do prenomination

work?" and Dr. Shaw said: "I do not know a political method when I see

it and I haven't an ounce of political sense but I do believe heartily

in this sort of work." Led by Mrs. Ella Hawley Crossett, president of

the New York association, "Should there be concentration on one bill

or work for several"? was discussed. Miss Gordon said: "Ask for

everything in sight and you will get a little." Mrs. Cornelia Telford

Jewett, editor of the _Union Signal_, brought a fraternal greeting

from the National Woman's Christian Temperance Union and when she said

that most of the criticism she received was that she gave the readers

too much suffrage, Dr. Shaw remarked in her jovial way: "They would

get more if I could write, as Mrs. Jewett has often asked me for

articles."

Among the symposiums and round table conferences in the morning and

afternoon sessions were those on "How to make existing suffrage

sentiment politically effective," Miss Clay presiding; "The tariff in

its relation to women," and "Taxation without representation is

tyranny in 1909 as much as in 1776," Mrs. Villard presiding in place

of Mrs. DeVoe, who was ill; "Parents' organizations, their value in

creating public sentiment," and "The self-government plan in our

public schools as an aid in preparing the coming generations for woman

suffrage," Mrs. B. W. Dawley (Ohio), presiding. The report of the

Committee on Education, presented by its chairman, Mrs. Steinem, said

that the principal work of the half-year had been to carry out the

resolutions adopted at the Buffalo convention to investigate the text

books on History and Civics used in the public schools and she had

secured a valuable expression of opinion through letters sent to 400

superintendents of schools and twenty-six school book publishing

houses. Some of them quoted the names of Betsy Ross, Molly Pitcher,

Martha Washington and Dolly Madison to show that women were not

neglected in the text books. Many declared they had given the subject

no thought but were open to conviction. In summing up Mrs. Steinem

expressed the belief that this lack of recognition of woman's

influence in history was not so much the result of intention as of the

masculine point of view which has dominated civilization. "The

impression conveyed by our text books," she said, "is that this world

has been made by men and for men and the ideals they are putting forth

are colored by masculine thought.... Our text books on Civics do not

show the slightest appreciation of the significance of the 'woman's

movement.' ...

On the closing night Miss Richards, the noted lecturer of Washington,

D. C., made a delightfully clever and sparkling speech on Sex

Antagonism, Why and What is the Cure? Professor Potter gave a second

splendid address and Dr. Shaw's eloquent farewell sent the audience

home in an exalted mood.

The excellent arrangements for the convention and the entertainment of

the officers and delegates had been made with much care and judgment

by the State association and the Seattle society, which appropriated

$1,000 for the purpose.[64] The surpassing beauty of the city and the

Exposition was an unceasing delight. Miss Blackwell said in her

description in the _Woman's Journal_: "The splendid setting of the

convention was a constant pleasure--the tall firs, the beautiful water

and picturesque mountains. Large bunches of sweet peas and of the

enormous roses never seen but on the Pacific coast were constantly

being handed up to the president and speakers in the course of the

convention by the pretty little pages. All the delegates agreed that

the display of flowers on the grounds was more beautiful than they had

seen at any previous Exposition. Some of the delegates from the

Atlantic coast said it was worth coming across the continent just to

see this flower garden."

The always-to-be-remembered feature of the week was Suffrage Day at

the Exposition, arranged by its officials for the day following the

convention. To quote again from Miss Blackwell:

In the morning on arriving at the Exposition we found above the

gate a big banner with the inscription, "Woman Suffrage Day."

Every person entering the grounds was presented with a special

button and a green-ribbon badge representing the Equal Suffrage

Association of Washington, the Evergreen State. High in the air

over the grounds floated a large "Votes for Women" kite. All the

toy balloons sold on the grounds that day were stamped with the

words "Votes for Women" and many of the delegates bought them and

went around with them hovering over their heads like Japanese

lanterns--yellow, red, white or green but predominantly green. At

the morning meeting in the great auditorium there was fine music

by the Exposition band, with addresses of welcome from J. E.

Chilberg, president; Louis W. Buckley, director of ceremonies and

special events, and R. W. Raymond, assistant director, and brief

speeches by Dr. Shaw, Miss Gordon, Mrs. Upton, Miss Blackwell,

Mrs. Stewart, Miss Clay, Mrs. Kelley, Mrs. Gilman and Professor

Potter.... After the morning exercises, the national officers

were taken to the Education building and treated to an excellent

lunch cooked and served by the domestic science class of the high

school.

In the afternoon there was a reception in the magnificent room

occupying the ground floor of the Washington State building with

more addresses of welcome by prominent men connected with the

Exposition and more short speeches by the visitors. Later in the

afternoon there was another reception at the Idaho building by

the Idaho and Utah women with more refreshments served by

motherly matrons and pretty girls. The day closed with a

"daylight dinner" given by the Washington Equal Suffrage

Association at The Firs, the headquarters of the Young Women's

Christian Association. Hundreds of suffragists sat down to the

table within the building and on the large veranda looking off

over a delightful prospect and there were many appreciative

speeches. It was long after nightfall when the happy gathering

broke up and the visitors then had a chance to see the fairy-like

spectacle of the Exposition by night, with every building

outlined in electric lights, the pools shimmering, the fountain

gleaming and a series of cascades coming down in foam, with

electric lights of different colors glowing through each

waterfall.

FOOTNOTES:

[60] Part of Call: In entering upon the fifth decade of its work for

the enfranchisement of women in the United States, the National

American Woman Suffrage Association invites all those to share in its

councils who believe that the help of women is needed by the

Government. It is a grave mistake of statesmanship to continue to

ignore the wisdom of the thousands of our women citizens, who, fitted

by education and home interests, are anxious to help solve the many

and vital problems upon which our country's future safety and

prosperity depend....

During the year 1908 our cause won four solid victories. Michigan gave

taxpaying women a vote on questions of local taxation and the granting

of franchises; Denmark gave women who are taxpayers or wives of

taxpayers a vote for all officers but members of Parliament; Belgium

gave women engaged in trade a vote for the Conseils des Prudhommes;

and Victoria in Australia gave full State suffrage to all women. The

legislative hearings in New York, Massachusetts and Nebraska have

called out unprecedented crowds showing the growth of popular

interest.... The Legislatures of Oregon, Washington and South Dakota

have voted to submit the question of woman suffrage to the electors in

1910. The workers for woman's political freedom have great cause for

rejoicing.

ANNA HOWARD SHAW, President.

RACHEL FOSTER AVERY, First Vice-President.

FLORENCE KELLEY, Second Vice-President.

KATE M. GORDON, Corresponding Secretary.

ALICE STONE BLACKWELL, Recording Secretary.

HARRIET TAYLOR UPTON, Treasurer.

LAURA CLAY, } Auditors.

ELLA S. STEWART, }

The Call ended with the touching poem of the young Southern poet, Mrs.

Olive Tilford Dargan, "The Lord of little children to the sleeping

mothers spoke."

[61] The resolutions declared the movement for woman suffrage to be

but a part of the great struggle for human liberty; called for the

enactment of initiative and referendum laws; equal pay for women and

men in public and private employment; uniform State laws against child

labor and for compulsory education; more industrial training for boys

and girls in the public schools; more strenuous effort against the

white slave traffic. They demanded that the United States should take

the lead in an international movement for the limitation of armaments.

A cordial vote of thanks was given for the hospitality and courtesies

of the city and the people of Seattle.

[62] See History of Woman Suffrage, Volume IV, page 1096.

[63] The ministers of Seattle who opened the various sessions with

prayer were: Doctors A. Norman Ward, Protestant Methodist; Thomas E.

Elliott, Queen Anne Methodist; George Robert Cairns, Temple Baptist;

Edward Lincoln Smith, Pilgrim Congregational; Sydney Strong, Queen

Anne Congregational; the Reverends J. D. O. Powers, Unitarian; W. H.

W. Rees, First Methodist Episcopal; W. A. Major, Bethany Presbyterian;

Joseph L. Garvin, First Christian; C. Lyng Hanson, Scandinavian

Methodist; F. O. Iverson, Norwegian Lutheran; P. Nelson, Norwegian

Congregational Missionary.

[64] Committee: Mrs. DeVoe, Dr. Cora Smith Eaton, Mrs. Bessie J.

Savage, Miss Adella M. Parker, Dr. Sarah A. Kendall, Mrs. Ellen S.

Lockenby and a small army of assistants.

CHAPTER X.

NATIONAL AMERICAN CONVENTION OF 1910.

As a national convention had not been held in Washington since 1904

the suffragists were pleased to return to that city with the

Forty-second in the long list, which was held April 14-19, 1910.[65]

Three special cars were filled by delegates from New York City alone.

It had become very difficult to get a suitable place for conventions

in the national capital and the experiment was made of holding this

one in the large ball room of the Arlington Hotel, which proved

entirely inadequate for the audiences. The convention was called to

order on the first afternoon by the national president, Dr. Anna

Howard Shaw, and welcomed by the president of the District of Columbia

suffrage association, Miss Harriette J. Hifton, and the president of

the District branch of the College Equal Suffrage League, Miss Mabel

Foster. The response for the National Association was made by Miss

Laura Clay of Kentucky, one of its officers.

The report of the Committee on Church Work was read by its chairman,

Mrs. Mary E. Craigie, who gave a record of the accomplishments of her

committees in the various States and said: "The moral awakening of the

churches to a need for more united efforts along lines of social and

moral reform carries with it a great responsibility for women, who,

representing two-thirds of the numerical power of the churches, are in

their present disfranchised condition negative factors in those

broader fields of activity which now constitute church work. Women are

beginning to realize that they are wasting their efforts and energies

in trying to effect moral and social reforms dependent upon

legislative action or law enforcement and they are asking: 'Shall we

go on with the farce of attacking the constantly growing evils of

intemperance, immorality and crime which menace our homes, our

children and society at large, knowing that our efforts are useless

and futile, or shall we take a stand which will show that we are in

earnest and demand the weapon of the ballot which is necessary before

we can do our part as Christian citizens in advancing the kingdom of

God on earth?'"

The excellent report of the new headquarters secretary, Professor Mary

Gray Peck, filled ten pages of the printed Minutes and in addition to

the large collection of statistics contained many useful suggestions.

Like all of the reports from the headquarters it showed the great

advantage of having them in a large center. Referring to the

literature department she said: "Local chairmen should see that tables

with suffrage literature are placed in all church and charitable

bazaars as far as possible and that our papers may be subscribed for

at all subscription agencies; also that our publications are on the

shelves and on file in the public libraries throughout the State. One

of the things Mrs. Pankhurst said when she was looking over our

work-room was: 'Don't give away your publications. We found we got rid

of much more when we sold and now we give away nothing.' We have

always given away ours with considerable freedom and been glad to have

them read at our expense but at the low figure we put on them we could

draw the gratis line closer without impairing our popularity.... The

average daily output of literature since the opening of headquarters

in New York--and this does not include the orders which continued to

be filled in Warren--has been 2,742 pieces, or a growth of more than

25 per cent. over the average of last year. Our cash sales from

January 1 to April 1 have amounted to $938, or an average of $312 per

month as against the average of $89 per month for 1908-9. That is, our

cash sales for the past three months are three and a half times

greater than they were at the same time last year."

"The propagandist part of the correspondence," said Miss Peck, "soon

makes a wise woman of the headquarters secretary. The time for general

argument and abstract appeal has largely gone by. The call now is for

statistics, laws, definite citations, instances of industrial

conditions, legal status of women and children, etc.... The State

organizations could do no more valuable service in aiding our

efficiency as an information agency than by each getting out a

condensed and reliable bulletin of State laws relating to women and

children; and also by collecting data as to the property held

and taxes paid by women, with illustrative instances where

disfranchisement has forced these taxpayers to submit to injustice and

unfair discrimination." She told of the increasing call for woman

suffrage literature from public libraries to meet the demand and urged

the encouragement of debates, saying: "If the State organizations

would make a persistent effort to have suffrage debated in the schools

and if they advertised the national headquarters as prepared to

furnish a volume of debate material for thirty cents, suffrage would

receive continuous advertising at no financial expense to us, nor

would the good to the movement cease with the debate. Get the young

people interested and you catch the mothers. Also by keeping a card

register of the young debaters, the State organization would have the

names and addresses of an ever-growing list of oncoming citizens

interested in the subject. Debaters are a good deal cheaper than

organizers. The State University of Wisconsin is sending out through

its university extension department our suffrage literature in

travelling libraries to meet the demand in the public schools for

debate material. I believe most State universities would be glad to do

the same for us. Many universities and colleges have discussed

suffrage the past winter, notably Dartmouth, Williams and Brown in

their annual intercollegiate debate, Yale in the inter-class debate,

the University of Texas against Tulane University of Louisiana, and

Stanford will debate with Berkeley, April 16." Miss Peck made many

other valuable suggestions from the trained viewpoint of a university

woman.

Representative A. W. Rucker was introduced as a proxy for the Colorado

association and gave its report with a warm personal endorsement of

equal suffrage as it had existed in his State for seventeen years. The

convention greeted with enthusiasm the mother of U. S. Senator Robert

L. Owen of Oklahoma, who said she could not make a speech but would

send her son to do so that evening.

Although national suffrage conventions had been held in Washington

since 1869 no official recognition ever had been asked for or given by

the President of the United States. The leaders thought that now the

movement was of sufficient size and importance to justify them in

inviting President Taft to give simply an address of welcome. The

invitation was sent with the statement that its acceptance would not

be regarded as committing him to an advocacy of woman suffrage and it

was accepted with this understanding, although Mrs. Elihu Root

presented a request from the Anti-Suffrage Association that he would

not accept it. The entire country was interested and on the opening

evening, when he was to speak, the auditorium was crowded and lines of

people reached to the street. President Taft came in with his escort

while Dr. Shaw was in the midst of her annual address but she stopped

instantly and welcomed him to the platform. The audience arose and

with applause and waving of handkerchiefs remained standing until he

was seated. At one point in his brief address there was apparently a

slight hissing in the back part of the room. The President paused; Dr.

Shaw sprang to her feet exclaiming, "Oh, my children!" and the

audience, which was excited and amazed, instantly became quiet and

listened respectfully to the rest of his speech, but as he left the

room, after shaking hands with Dr. Shaw, a few remained seated. As

this incident attracted nation-wide comment and much criticism it

seems advisable to publish the proceedings in full. The address was as

follows:

I am not entirely certain that I ought to have come tonight, but

your committee who invited me assured me that I should be welcome

even if I did not support all the views which were here advanced.

I considered that this movement represented a sufficient part of

the intelligence of the community to justify my coming here and

welcoming you to Washington. The difficulty I expect to encounter

is this--at least it is a difficulty that occurs to me as I judge

my own feelings in causes in which I have an intense interest--to

wit: that I am always a good deal more impatient with those who

only go half-way with me than with those who actually oppose me.

Now when I was sixteen years old and was graduated from the

Woodward High School in Cincinnati, I took for my subject "Woman

Suffrage" and I was as strong an advocate of it as any member of

this convention. I had read Mills's "Subjection of Women"; my

father was a woman suffragist and so at that time I was orthodox

but in the actual political experience which I have had I have

modified my views somewhat.

In the first place popular representative government we approve

and support because on the whole every class, that is, every set

of individuals who are similarly situated in the community, who

are intelligent enough to know what their own interests are, are

better qualified to determine how those interests shall be cared

for and preserved than any other class, however altruistic that

class may be; but I call your attention to two qualifications in

that statement. One is that the class should be intelligent

enough to know its own interests. The theory that Hottentots or

any other uneducated, altogether unintelligent class is fitted

for self-government at once or to take part in government is a

theory that I wholly dissent from--but this qualification is not

applicable here. The other qualification to which I call your

attention is that the class should as a whole care enough to look

after its interests, to take part as a whole in the exercise of

political power if it is conferred. Now if it does not care

enough for this, then it seems to me that the danger is, if the

power is conferred, that it may be exercised by that part of the

class least desirable as political constituents and be neglected

by many of those who are intelligent and patriotic and would be

most desirable as members of the electorate.

It was at this point the supposed hissing occurred and the President

continued:

Now, my dear ladies, you must show yourselves equal to

self-government by exercising, in listening to opposing

arguments, that degree of restraint without which self-government

is impossible. If I could be sure that women as a class in the

community, including all the intelligent women most desirable as

political constituents, would exercise the franchise, I should

be in favor of it. At present there is considerable doubt upon

that point. In certain of the States which have tried it woman

suffrage has not been a failure. It has not made, I think, any

substantial difference in politics. I think it is perhaps

possible to say that its adoption has shown an improvement in the

body politic, but it has been tested only in those States where

population is sparse and where the problem of entrusting such

power to women in the concentrated population of large cities is

not presented. For this reason, if you will permit me to say so,

my impression is that the task before you in securing what you

think ought to be granted in respect to the political rights of

women is not in convincing men but it is in convincing the

majority of your own class of the wisdom of extending the

suffrage to them and of their duty to exercise it.

Now that is my confession of faith. I am glad to welcome you

here. I am glad to welcome an intelligent body of women, earnest

in the discussion of politics, earnest in the question of good

government and earnest and high-minded in the cause they are

pursuing, even if I disagree with them, not in principle but in

the application of it to the present situation. More than this I

ought not to say and I hope you will not deem me ungracious in

saying as much as I have said, but I came here at the invitation

of your committee with the understanding as to what I might say

and that I should not subscribe to all the principles that you

are here to advocate. I congratulate you on coming to Washington,

this most beautiful of cities, to hold your convention. I trust

that it may result in everything that you hope for and I am sure

that the coming together of honest, intelligent and earnest women

like these cannot but be productive of good.

Some persons thought that the hissing was done by one or more

delegates from the equal suffrage States because of the aspersion cast

on the class of women who were likely to vote. Others believed there

was no hissing but that it was merely an exclamation of "hush" because

of the noise caused by the moving of loose chairs, many in the back

part of the room standing up on them to get a better view. It was,

however, a matter of great concern and regret on the part of the

national officers, who met early the next morning and framed the

following resolution:

WHEREAS the President of the United States in welcoming the

Forty-second Annual Convention of the National American Woman

Suffrage Association has taken the historic position of being the

first incumbent of his office to recognize officially our

determination to secure a complete democracy, thereby testifying

his conviction as to its power and growth, and WHEREAS his

seriousness, honesty and friendliness converted what might have

been an empty form into an official courtesy, historic alike for

him and for us,

THEREFORE be it resolved that we convey to President William H.

Taft the thanks and appreciation of this convention for his

welcome, assuring him at the same time that the patriotism and

public spirit of the women of America intend to make themselves

directly felt in the government of which he is the honored head

and that at no distant date.

This was adopted at the morning's session of the convention by a

unanimous rising vote. At the opening of the afternoon session Dr.

Shaw said: "I think one of the saddest hours that I have ever spent in

connection with one of our national conventions I spent last night

after the occurrence of an incident here for which none of the

officers of this association bears the least responsibility and we

trust none of the delegates needs to bear any of it, when there was a

dissent made to an utterance of President Taft. It seemed to us a most

unwise and ungracious act and we feel the keenest possible regret over

it. Because of this the Official Board has prepared a letter to the

President expressing our regret that the occurrence should have taken

place, whether by a member of this body or by a visitor. It is

impossible to control a great public audience individually and an

organization is not responsible for everything which takes place in

its public meetings. While I do not think our organization as a body

is at all responsible for what took place last night I feel that,

since the President was our guest, it is our duty to express our very

deep regret for the incident. I ask, therefore, that, without

discussion and without further speech, there shall be concurrence on

the part of the convention with the Official Board in sending a letter

of regret to the President."

The convention agreed to this instantly with but one dissenting and it

was ascertained that she was not only not a delegate but not a member

of the association. This justified the general opinion that if there

had been any hissing the night before it was done by some of the large

number of outsiders in the audience. The letter signed by Professor

Frances Squire Potter, as corresponding secretary, read as follows:

To President William Howard Taft,

My dear Mr. President:

The enclosed resolution, introduced by the Committee on

Convention Resolutions, was passed unanimously by the National

American Woman Suffrage Association today at the opening of its

morning session. I am instructed by the unanimous vote of the

Official Board and of the delegates now assembled to send you

with the resolution this official communication.

The official board and delegates were but a small part of the

very large gathering to hear your greeting last evening but as

the representatives of the association these delegates feel great

sorrow that any one present, either a member or an outsider,

should have interrupted your address by an expression of personal

feeling, and they herewith disclaim responsibility for such

interruption and ask your acceptance of this expression of regret

in the spirit in which it is given.

The letter was sent in the afternoon by messenger across Lafayette

Square, which separated the Arlington from the White House, and the

next morning the following answer was received:

The White House,

Washington, April 16, 1910.

My dear Mrs. Potter:

I beg to acknowledge your favor of April 15. I unite with you in

regretting the incident occurring during my address to which your

letter refers. I regret it not because of any personal feeling,

for I have none on the subject at all, but only because much more

significance has been given to it than it deserves and because it

may be used in an unfair way to embarrass the leaders of your

movement.

I thank the association for the kindly and cordial tone of the

resolutions transmitted and hope that the feature of Thursday

night's meeting, which you describe as having given your

association much sorrow, may soon be entirely forgotten.

Sincerely yours,

William H. Taft.

This closed the incident as far as it could be closed but there was a

great deal of sympathy with the sentiment expressed by Miss Alice

Stone Blackwell in the _Woman's Journal_: "It was known that while the

President was not an anti-suffragist he was not a strong suffragist

and might not even be wholly with us. It was, therefore, not expected

that he would at the convention 'come out for suffrage.' Indeed, he

was not invited to make an address but simply to extend to the

convention the welcome of the national capital, not because he was a

suffragist but because the convention thought that it was

representative enough and of sufficient size and standing in the

country to warrant asking the President to do this one thing. He could

have declined the invitation and no one would have been offended. He

could have said he was an anti-suffragist. He could have tactfully

omitted his opinion and confined his time to greetings and welcome as

Chief Executive to the convention as a large organization of the women

of the nation. At the point where the supposed hissing occurred, it

was as if the speaker had struck those women in the face with a whip.

Even those who most resented the President's remarks regretted the

expression of open disapproval in such a manner, but, to a person,

the audience felt that he had been untactful, and, however

unintentionally, had implied an odious comparison; that he had not

sufficiently considered this great body of the picked women of the

land to choose his language in addressing them."

The President's address was preceded by one given by Professor Potter

on The Making of Democracy, which had seldom been equalled in its

statesmanlike qualities. This was followed by a powerful argument on

Why Women Should Have the Suffrage, by Senator Robert L. Owen (Okla.),

one of the ablest speakers in the U. S. Senate and always an

uncompromising supporter of the political rights of women.

At an afternoon session Mrs. Rachel Foster Avery (Penn.), who had

succeeded Mrs. Carrie Chapman Catt as chairman of the Committee on

Petition to Congress, took up the report where it had ended at the

last convention. She said that, in addition to the 100,000 petitions

and 5,000 individual letters sent from New York under Mrs. Catt's

supervision, there had gone out from the headquarters after they had

been removed to Washington and placed in charge of Mrs. Rachel Brill

Ezekiel, 60,000 more petitions, 11,000 more letters and 1,185 postals

with appeals. "The petition," she said, "has been a means of

introducing suffrage into thousands of households and hundreds of

meetings of all kinds in which the subject had not before been

mentioned. Even women's clubs have had to listen to suffrage when

brought to them by eager seekers after signatures. It has given to

many people who have never before done anything for suffrage an

opportunity. In some cases whole neighborhoods have been reached

through the work of a single energetic woman willing to go from house

to house circulating the petition and leaving literature with families

where she found little or no sympathy for our movement. All letters

sent out from petition headquarters enclosed suffrage leaflets and

carried to thousands of men and women the first suffrage literature

they had seen." All this vast work had cost only $4,555, of which Mrs.

Catt had contributed $1,000. The most strenuous effort had not

succeeded in getting the return of all the petitions in time for the

convention but those at hand contained 404,825 names.[66]

The arrangements for the parade which was to carry the petitions to

Congress were in the hands of Miss Mary Garrett Hay. Mrs. Helen H.

Gardener obtained the use of fifty cars from interested residents of

Washington and these were handsomely adorned with the flag of the

United States and suffrage banners. The official report said: "The

most picturesque incident of the convention was the long line of fifty

decorated automobiles which bore the petitions and delegates of each

State from the Hotel Arlington to the Capitol, where the petitions

were personally delivered to the various Senators and Representatives

who were to present them to Congress. The large piles of rolled

petitions, the respect of the people who lined the streets, the

courtesy of the Congressmen and the crowds which watched the

presentation in Senate and House were all impressive. Senator

LaFollette brought instant silence when, presenting his share of the

petitions, he said, "I hope the time will come when this great body of

intelligent people will not find it necessary to petition for that

which ought to be accorded as a right in a country of equal

opportunities."

At the afternoon session a vote of thanks was given to Senator

LaFollette and all the Senators and Representatives who presented the

petitions. Deep appreciation was expressed of the labor of Mrs. Catt

in connection with the petitions and regret that she was not able to

be present at the Capitol. This was the last of the hundreds of

thousands of petitions to Congress for the submission of a National

Amendment to enfranchise women which began in 1866.[67]

Mrs. Harriet Taylor Upton in her treasurer's report said the past year

had been an unusually hard one financially not because of adversity

but because of prosperity. Formerly the States had sent their money to

the national treasury to be used as the Official Board thought best,

but now there were so many campaigns and new lines of work in various

States that they wanted to disburse their own money. This was

encouraging but hard on the national work. Few were the years between

1899 and 1908 when some legacy was not received, as Miss Anthony never

missed an opportunity to urge women to make such bequests. After her

death Miss Mary Anthony followed her example but since both had passed

away little had been done in this direction. The total receipts for

1909 were $21,466, and the general disbursements $19,814. With the

headquarters in New York more money had been received but more also

had to be spent. Mrs. Oliver H. P. Belmont furnished the offices of

the Press Committee, paid their rent, the salaries of three workers

and all other expenses connected with it. Mrs. William M. Ivins of New

York City and Mrs. Mary Ely Parsons of Rye, N. Y., furnished Dr.

Shaw's office.

In closing Mrs. Upton said that the duties of the headquarters and of

the treasurer's office had been so closely connected that up to this

time it had been difficult to separate them. In fact from the time she

was elected to date she had always done some work properly belonging

to headquarters. From the first a clerk was supplied to her and she

was so situated that she could do this and was more than willing to.

She had edited twelve reports of annual conventions and was editor and

manager of _Progress_ for seven years. She told how letters and

requests continued to come to her after the headquarters went to New

York and she was obliged to employ another clerk, whose salary she

herself paid. In closing she said: "Since 1893 your treasurer has

received and disbursed more than $275,000 and she wishes the

treasurer for the coming year could have that full amount for the next

twelve months' work." The convention accepted the report with a rising

vote of thanks for her many years of continuous service.

The general subscriptions at the convention, including those for the

South Dakota campaign, were $4,363. Mrs. Belmont continued her pledge

of $600 a month. The association had various funds to draw from, which

were supplied by contributions. It was voted to appropriate $150 a

month for six and a half months' work in Oklahoma if the amendment was

to go to the voters in November.

Memorial services were held on the morning of April 15 for two

distinguished members of the association, Henry B. Blackwell, who had

died Sept. 7, 1909, and William Lloyd Garrison, five days later. On

the program was an extract from a speech made by Mr. Blackwell at a

national Woman's Rights Convention in Cleveland, O., in 1853: "The

interests of the sexes are inseparably connected and in the elevation

of the one lies the salvation of the other. Therefore, I claim a part

in this last and grandest movement of the ages, for whatever concerns

woman concerns the race." Affectionate and beautiful tributes to Mr.

Blackwell's nearly fifty years' devotion to the cause of woman

suffrage were paid by those who had known him long and intimately,

which are partially quoted here.

Mrs. Fanny Garrison Villard: I have ever regarded Mr. Blackwell

as a many-sided reformer, one whose most distinguished claim to

remembrance consists in the fact that no other man has devoted so

much of his life to the task of securing the enfranchisement of

women. Only those who have read the _Woman's Journal_ regularly

and depended on it for an accurate record of the slow but steady

march of progress of this great movement can fully realize the

enormous amount of editorial work contributed to it by him during

the past forty years. The combination of superior intellectual

powers with tenderest sympathies formed a rare equipment for

success in his chosen field of usefulness. In truth his advocacy

of the woman's cause was marked by such zeal and enthusiasm that

one not knowing the initials "H. B. B." stood for a man might

quite naturally have believed that only a woman could own them.

Fortunately he was possessed of the sunniest possible temperament

and blessed with an unusual sense of humor which enabled him to

see things in their true proportions and make light of obstacles

in his path. The many and varied tributes that have been paid to

his memory all dwell upon his intense love of justice which led

him to wage war against oppression wherever he found it.... It

was my good fortune to be present at the celebration of Mr.

Blackwell's eightieth birthday in Faneuil Hall in Boston. With

great clarity of vision he defined the duty of the hour and said:

"But we can not afford to be a mutual admiration society, there

is still work to do." ... With what patience, fortitude and true

courage he and Lucy Stone, his wife, played their part in the

face of ridicule and opprobrium is now a matter of history. Women

who today live a freer life because of their labors and those of

their coadjutors must offer to their memory the highest meed of

praise.

Mrs. Catharine Waugh McCulloch: Lives consecrated to great

reforms, particularly to the advancement of a reform to

emancipate women, teach us that the age of chivalry is not past.

These great men whom we honor to-day were not, like the knights

of old, inspired by the love of some one woman whom they desired

to possess, but they strove for justice for those they loved best

and for us too, who were their friends, and for millions of women

they never knew. Their far-reaching chivalry was one of the most

important elements in the characters of Mr. Blackwell and Mr.

Garrison. Both of them were unusually fortunate in the women who

were their nearest and dearest. Mr. Blackwell's sister Elizabeth

was the first woman physician in the United States; his

sister-in-law, Antoinette Brown Blackwell, the first ordained

minister; his wife, Lucy Stone, one of the sweetest and truest of

the pioneer suffrage lecturers.

Mr. Garrison was not old enough to be related to so many

pioneers, except through his illustrious father, but his wife's

devotion to the suffrage work, his sister's unfaltering activity

and his association from boyhood with Boston's brilliant coterie

of renowned women, might well have influenced him to have a

higher regard and deeper respect for all their sex.... Mr.

Blackwell and Mr. Garrison, in their beautiful family lives, are

particularly illustrious examples that woman suffrage will not

break up the home. Many long years did these pairs of married

friends work together for our cause....

To-day we sorrow for the loss of these men but not without hope,

for there are other men coming forward to take up the work they

have dropped. We women who are here to-day do not represent

merely ourselves and the tens of thousands of other suffrage

women but we are backed by the sympathy, the active encouragement

and the money of our husbands, our brothers, our fathers, and

many of us have chivalrous sons. More even than sympathy they now

give, as some are giving themselves for service. One of Mr.

Blackwell's last letters to me related to securing a large

membership among men, and our Men's Suffrage Leagues, now

springing up in all large cities, might well name themselves for

him.... Go forward, men, with the spirit of Blackwell and

Garrison!

Mrs. McCulloch paid a beautiful tribute to the human side of Mr.

Blackwell's character, his love of nature and his companionship with

children.

Miss Jane Campbell: I need not enter into the details of the

life, public or private, of Mr. Blackwell. They are written in

letters of gold in the annals of the suffrage movement from the

moment when in the beautiful, unselfish ardor of youth, with his

wife, the silver-tongued Lucy Stone, he entered upon a career of

patient, unflagging devotion to the cause of woman's rights....

It evinced a high and noble spirit, a great courage, for any man

to espouse an almost universally ridiculed cause, as did Mr.

Blackwell; possibly greater courage than even a woman,

conservative and timid if not by nature yet made so by education,

showed when she emerged from her awed subjection and ventured to

demand her equal share of privileges as well as of disabilities.

The woman had the burning sense of injustice to arouse her, the

indignation caused by her calm relegation to the position of an

inferior to inspire her with courage to fight for freedom, but a

man, a man like Mr. Blackwell, had no such bitter sense of

personal wrong to impel him. He entered the contest not for

himself, for he had no wrongs to redress, but his great soul saw

that woman had and he devoted life, means, energy, talents to

redress them. It is a rarely high, unselfish record of a noble

life that he has left for the admiration and example of other

men.... He was one of the most eloquent, forceful and logical

speakers we have ever had on our platform, with his fine,

resounding voice giving clear expression to his logical thinking,

and he was a ready and forceful writer....

Miss Anne Fitzhugh Miller: It was always a joy to meet Mr.

Blackwell for there was never any picking up of broken threads of

our spinning or knitting or weaving of good comradeship, which at

once continued as if no absence had intervened. I felt at home

with him always, he was a man after my own heart, direct,

decided, accurate, devoted to high ideals, and yet he possessed

an elasticity of nature which made him the most comfortable of

comrades. His sense of humor and his love of fun made the best of

good times for those who were fortunate enough to share his merry

moods.... It was always a delight to hear him speak. The sound of

his voice rested and refreshed and the soundness of his thought

inspired confidence and admiration. His half-century of

continuous and absolute devotion to the cause of woman suffrage

gives Mr. Blackwell a unique position in history. All women owe

him a debt of gratitude which they can best pay by renewed

devotion to the cause to which he dedicated his life. In the

truest and broadest sense he was and should be remembered as a

"Brother of Women."

Dr. Shaw added her own fine appreciation of the two men and speaking

from almost a lifetime of acquaintance with Mr. Garrison gave a

glowing eulogy of his noble character, lofty convictions and fearless

courage, a worthy son of a great father. Among other prominent friends

of woman suffrage who had passed away during the year, recorded in the

memorial resolutions, were Justice Brewer, of the U. S. Supreme Court;

Dr. Borden P. Bowne, head of the department of philosophy and dean of

the graduate school in Boston University; Judge Charles B. Waite and

Dr. Sarah Hackett Stevenson of Chicago; Charles Sprague Smith,

director of Cooper Institute, New York, and many devoted workers in

the various States.

At one interesting evening session Mrs. Kate Trimble Woolsey (Ky.)

spoke on Republics versus Women, the title of her book; Mrs. Meta L.

Stern on Woman Suffrage from a Socialist's Point of View; Miss Alice

Paul on The English Situation. Mrs. Catt's subject was Caught in a

Snare and the convention voted to have it printed for circulation. As

Miss Alice Stone Blackwell was ill at home, missing the annual

convention for the first time, the readers of the _Woman's Journal_

were deprived of her usual comprehensive reports and abstracts of the

speeches where the manuscript was not available. That of Miss Paul was

published in full. She had recently returned from London, where she

had been a member of Mrs. Pankhurst's organization, had been sent to

prison, had gone on a "hunger strike" and been forcibly fed, and she

felt the situation keenly. A part of her speech was as follows:

As we gather here as suffragists, our hearts naturally go out to

those women at the storm-center of our movement--to those women

in Great Britain who are having a struggle such as women have

never had in any other land. The violent criticism, the

suppression and distortion of facts from which they have suffered

at the hands of the politically-inspired press of their own

country have made it difficult for one on this side to gain any

true conception of their movement....

The essence of the campaign of the suffragettes is opposition to

the Government. The country seems willing that the vote be

extended to women. This last Parliament showed its willingness by

passing their franchise bill through its second reading by a

three-to-one majority, but the Government, that little group

which controls legislation, would not let it become law. It is

not a war of women against men, for the men are helping loyally,

but a war of men and women together against the politicians at

the head, who because of their own political interests seem

afraid to enfranchise women. The suffragettes have gone with

petitions to the head of the Government, as our representatives

will go in a few days to the authorities in Washington. Here they

will be received with courtesy, but Mr. Asquith has never since

he has been Prime Minister received a deputation of women on this

question of their suffrage. Each time he curtly refuses to see

them and orders the police to drive them away or arrest them.

Thirteen times the deputations of one society alone have been

arrested....

The Earl of Lytton said the other day that more violence had been

done by the men during the three weeks of the recent election

than by the women during their entire agitation. Such action on

the part of voters is wrong for they have a constitutional way,

through the ballot, of redressing their grievances, but on the

part of a disfranchised class, after half a century's trial has

proved all their methods to be of no avail, a protest such as

these women have made seems entirely right. We are so close at

hand that perhaps we hardly realize the full significance of

their movement. The greatest drama that is being enacted in the

world today, it seems to me, is the battle of the British women.

When historians can look back from the perspective of a century

or two I think they will say that this talk of dreadnaughts and

budgets and House of Lords was after all of but little moment and

that the great event of world significance in Great Britain early

in the century was the magnificent struggle for political freedom

on the part of her women.

The comprehensive report of the corresponding secretary, Professor

Potter, filled ten pages of the printed Minutes and was a complete

summary of the year's work and that which should be done. Names were

given of about forty associations which had passed resolutions for

woman suffrage during the year, preceded usually by discussion. These

included Federations of Labor, Granges, Temperance Societies,

Federations of Women's Clubs, religious bodies and labor

organizations. Among the last were the International Typographical

Union, International Chair Workers, Amalgamated Association of Street

and Electric Railway Employees, American Federation of Labor, National

Women's Trade Union League and many others. She called attention to

the fact that in many instances the endorsement was unanimous and that

the labor resolutions were stronger than ever before, using the phrase

"our intention to secure woman suffrage." The Pennsylvania Federation

said: "In selecting candidates for political office we will endeavor

to secure men who are committed to a belief in the right of women to

vote."

Professor Potter emphasized the need of research experts to bring the

statistics up to date, as it was now impossible to answer the requests

for information from the best type of those asking it, university

graduates working for higher degrees, men and women writing articles,

books, plays, etc. She reported the beginning of a card catalogue of

subjects and the progress made toward carrying out the instructions of

the Seattle convention that the national headquarters undertake a

handbook of Federal and State Laws for Women and a bibliography. She

described the character of the thousands of letters sent out, covering

work for prize essays, poster campaigns, mass meetings, "settlement"

work, appointments of women, newspaper and magazine publicity and

especially organization along political lines. As she had been asked

to act as field lecturer as well as corresponding secretary she

reported fifty-four lectures given, not only at State suffrage

conventions but before men's leagues, press clubs, labor meetings,

churches, universities, etc.

The convention showed by a rising vote its full appreciation of this

report, which was the first and last given by Professor Potter as

corresponding secretary. Differences in regard to administration had

arisen which proved to be irreconcilable and she had declined to stand

for re-election. The Official Board was divided in opinion and this

led to several changes in its personnel. Dr. Shaw was re-elected

president; Mrs. Avery, first vice-president; Mrs. Stewart, second

vice-president; Mrs. Upton, treasurer; Miss Clay and Miss Blackwell,

first and second auditors. Mrs. Florence Kelley declined re-nomination

as second vice-president and Mrs. Catharine Waugh McCulloch was

elected. Mrs. Mary Ware Dennett (Mass.) was chosen for corresponding

secretary. Later in the convention Mrs. Avery and Mrs. Upton gave in

their resignations, which the delegates refused to accept and then

both announced that their offices would be vacant in one month. Mrs.

Upton had been treasurer of the association since 1893 and the

delegates were most reluctant to let her go. By action of the

Executive Committee Mrs. McCulloch was advanced to the office of first

vice-president; Miss Kate M. Gordon (La.) was made second

vice-president and Miss Jessie Ashley (N. Y.), treasurer.

The National College Equal Suffrage League held business sessions

Saturday forenoon and afternoon with its president, Dr. M. Carey

Thomas of Bryn Mawr presiding, and a luncheon was given for its

delegates. Miss Caroline Lexow made the annual report. At the evening

meeting of the convention Mrs. Alice Duer Miller (N. Y.), representing

the Equal Franchise Society, of which Mrs. Clarence Mackay was

president, spoke on The Sisterhood of Women, saying in part: "We have

plenty of work to do but it is not that, it is not the organization,

the growth of membership and the spread of theories that make me

confident of success. It is the extraordinary spirit that animates the

women who are working for suffrage, the sense of comradeship and

community among them, rich and poor, educated and illiterate, old and

young, mothers and daughters. We have been taught to admire the 18th

century because it did so much to dissolve class distinctions. It

broke down some of the barriers, not between man and woman, but

between groups of men, for within groups men have always had this

spirit of comradeship, and oh, how they have valued it! They did not

get it in domestic relations, however happy; or in friendships,

however warm. They got it, or rather they found a field in which to

exercise it, in the impersonal activities of their lives, in their

crusades, guilds, colleges, labor unions and clubs. But between women

the barriers have been of a more serious type. They have been

segregated not only class by class but individual by individual and

house by house. Now these barriers too are dissolving. Women are

finding an expression for their sense of comradeship, for their

impersonal loyalty to their own sex; they are waking up to the fact

that a sense of equality is more thrilling to those who have the right

stuff in them than any sense of superiority could ever have been."

Miss Harriet E. Grim of Wisconsin University described The Call of the

New Age to College Women. Miss Juliet Stuart Poyntz, president of

Barnard chapter of the College League, discussed Education and Social

Progress. Mrs. Elizabeth M. Gilmer, "Dorothy Dix," in an address on

The Real Reason why Women cannot Vote, gave a delightful imitation of

the voice and words of a wise old negro, "Mirandy," from which the

following is quoted:

Yassum, dat's de trouble wid women down to dis very day. Dey

ain't got no backbone. Of a rib dey was made an' a rib dey has

stayed an' nobody ain't got no right to expect nothin' else from

'em. Hit's becaze woman was made out of man's rib--an' from de

way she acts hit looks lak she was made out of a floatin' rib at

dat--an' man was left wid all his backbone, dat he has got de

comeuppance over woman. Dat's de reason we women sets down an'

cries when we ought to git up an' heave brickbats. What's de

reason dat we women can't vote, an' ain't got no say-so 'bout

makin' de laws dat bosses us? Ain't we got de right on our side?

Yassir, but we'se got no backbone in us to just retch out an'

grab dat ballot.

Dere ain't nobody 'sputing dat we'se got to scrape up de money to

pay de tax collector, even if we does have to get down into a

skirt pocket for hit insted of pants' pocket, an' our belongin'

to de angel sect ain't gwine to keep us out of jail if we gits in

a fight wid anodder lady or we swipes a ruffled petticote off de

clothesline next do'. Fudermo', when de meat trust puts up de

price of po'k chops, hits de woman dat has to squeeze de eagle on

de dollar ontel hit holler a little louder an' pare de potato

peelin's a little thinner. An' dat makes us women jest a-achin'

to have a finger in dat government pie an' see if we can't put a

little mo' sweetnin' in hit, an' make hit a little lighter so dat

hit won't get so heavy an' ondigestible on de stomachs of dem

what ain't millionaires.

Yassir, we'se jest a-honin' for de franchise an' we might have

had hit any time dese last forty years ef we'd had enough

backbone to riz up an' fit one good fight for hit, but instead of

dat we set around a-holdin' our hands an' all we'se done is to

say in a meek voice: "Please, sir, I don't lak to trouble you but

ef you'd kindly pass me de ballot hit sho'ly would be agreeable

to me." An' instead of givin' hit to us, men has kinder winked

one eye at de odder an' said: "Lawd, she don't want hit or else

she's make a row about hit. Dat's de way we men did. We didn't go

after de right to vote wid our pink tea manners on."

Yassir, dat's de true word, an' you listen to me--de day dat

women spunks up an' rolls up dere sleeves an' says to dere

husband dat dey ain't a-gwine to do no' mo' cookin' in his house,

nor darnin' of socks, nor patchin' of britches untel dere is some

female votin', why dat day de ballot will be fetched home to

women on a silver platter. All dat stands between women an'

suffrage is de lack of a spinal colum.

An able address was given by Henry Wilbur, as representative of the

Friends' Equal Rights Association. Max Eastman, assistant professor

in Columbia University, representing the New York Men's League for

Woman Suffrage, of which he was secretary, taking the broad subject

Democracy and Women, said in the course of his speech:

The democratic hypothesis is that a State is good not when it

conforms to some abstract eternal ideal of what a State ought to

be, as the Greeks thought, but when it conforms to the interests

of particular concrete individuals, namely, its citizens, all of

them that are in mental and moral health; and that the way to

find out their interests is not to sit on a throne or a bench and

think about it but to go and ask them.... Barring this question

of democracy, I think the political arguments for woman suffrage

are not the main ones. The great thing to my mind is not that

women will improve politics but that politics will develop women.

The political act, the nature it demands and the recognition it

attracts, will alter the character and status of women in society

to the benefit of themselves, their husbands, their children and

their homes. Upon this ground we can stand and declare that it is

of high and immediate importance to all humanity not only that we

give those women the vote who want it but that we rouse those who

do not know enough to want it to a better appreciation of the

great age in which they have the good fortune to live. Whatever

else we may say for the industrial era we can say this, that it

has made possible and actual the physical, social, moral and

intellectual emancipation of women....

The other day I had a letter from a man who said he wouldn't join

my society because he feared I was "striking a blow at the

family, which is the cornerstone of society." Well, I am not much

of an authority on matrimony but that sort of language sounds to

me like a hysterical outcry from a person whose family is already

tottering. It is at least certain that a great many of these

cornerstones of society are tottering, and why? Because there

dwell in them triviality and vacuity, which prepare the way of

the devil. Who can think that intellectual divergence,

disagreement upon great public questions, would disrupt a family

worth holding together? On the contrary, nothing save a community

of great interests--whether in agreement or disagreement--can

revive a fading romance. A high and equal comradeship is the one

thing that can save those families which are the tottering

cornerstones of society. A greater service of the developed woman

to the State, however, will be her service in motherhood.... And

yet to hear the sacredness of motherhood advanced as a reason why

women should not become public-spirited and effectual, you would

think this nation had no greater hope than to rear in innocence a

generation of grown-up babies. Keep your mothers in a state of

invalid remoteness from life and who shall arm the young with

intelligent virtue? To educate a child is to lead him out into

the world of experience. It is not to bring him in virgin

innocence to the front door and say, "Now run on and be a good

child!" A million lives wrecked at the very off-go can bear

witness to the failure of this method.

Mrs. Harriot Stanton Blatch (N. Y.) presided at a symposium on Open

Air Meetings, which were then being much discussed, and they were

advocated by Miss Ray Costello of England; Mrs. Katherine Dexter

McCormick (Mass.), Mrs. Susan W. Fitzgerald (Mass.) and Mrs. Helen

LaReine Baker (Wash.). Mrs. Blatch announced a practical demonstration

that afternoon at the corner of Seventh Street and Pennsylvania

Avenue. Mrs. Catt presided over a conference on Political District

Organization as demonstrated in New York City. An afternoon meeting

was devoted to an Industrial Program arranged by Mrs. Myra Strawn

Hartshorne of Chicago. Conditions affecting Women as Workers and as

Wives and Mothers of Workers were graphically described by Miss Rose

Schneiderman (N. Y.), president of the Cap Makers' Union. The

Consequences to Motherhood and Womanhood, as demonstrated by the White

Slave Traffic, were strikingly pictured by Mrs. Raymond Robins

(Ills.), president of the National Women's Trade Union League. A

private conference, Mrs. Mary Hutcheson Page (Mass.) presiding,

discussed the necessity for defeating anti-suffrage candidates for

Congress and Legislatures. Mrs. Florence Kelley, executive secretary

of the National Consumers' League, brought greetings from the Southern

Conference on Woman and Child Labor, which she had just attended, with

a special one from Miss Jean Gordon (La.), and made a striking

address. Dr. Anna Mercy, president of the first suffrage club on the

East Side of New York, gave practical experiences. Miss Nettie A.

Podell and Miss Bertha Ryshpan, representing the Political Equality

League, of which Mrs. Belmont was president, told of its gratifying

experiments with Political Settlements in New York City. The session

closed with a stirring address by Charles Edward Russell on

Self-Defense or the Demand for Political Action.

Mrs. Pauline Steinem (Ohio) reported the usual active and efficient

work of her Committee on Education, urging among other valuable

methods the organization of Mothers' and Parents' Clubs in connection

with all public schools. Mrs. McCulloch gave her report as Legal

Adviser, which combined sound sense with sparkling humor. She showed

how much money had been lost to the association because those who

intended to leave bequests to it delayed making their wills. She urged

the women to study the statutes of their States relating to women and

said that, while she had been glad to contribute her services as legal

adviser and would not accept a salary, the association should employ a

competent lawyer who could stay at the national headquarters and give

her entire time to compiling the laws for women and giving legal

information. The convention Minutes say: "A rising vote of thanks was

given to Mrs. McCulloch for her magnificent work as legal adviser for

many years." Miss Gordon presented the plan for raising the Susan B.

Anthony Memorial Fund; Mrs. Alice C. Dewey (N. Y.), the report on

Bibliography; Dr. Mary D. Hussey (N. J.), on Enrollment. Miss

Elizabeth J. Hauser read the report of Mrs. Ida Husted Harper,

chairman of the National Press Committee, which said in part:

My strong belief that New York offered the greatest and most

promising field in the world for suffrage press work has been

abundantly sustained. The national press bureau was opened about

the middle of September, soon after the national headquarters

were moved to this city, with a private reception to the

representatives of every newspaper in the city, to whom its

objects and hopes were stated. From that day the most of the men

and women reporters have been its unfailing friends. A number of

the women have not missed coming a single day and most of them

are ardent suffragists and anxious to help the cause in every

possible way. Back of reporters have been the interest and

support of city and managing editors. In the nearly seven months

there have not been half-a-dozen really opposing editorials and

there have been many of a favorable and helpful character. Every

day sixteen papers of New York City have been examined by some

member of the bureau and the clippings carefully filed. These,

during the past five months, have comprised over 3,000 articles

on woman suffrage, ranging in length from a paragraph to a page.

During these five months there have been received from one news

service bureau 10,800 clippings on woman suffrage from papers

outside of New York City. Included in these are 2,311 editorials.

All of these were read, sorted and filed. (See exhibit.) The

number of magazine articles on woman suffrage as noted in

_Progress_ during this period has been about one hundred. It is

doubtful if there was such a record in all the preceding ten

years combined.

In years past there has been great rejoicing when one of the

large syndicates would accept an article on woman suffrage. From

the time the press bureau was established in New York,

practically every one of any consequence in the United States

has urgently requested articles and used all that could be

furnished. From one to a dozen articles each, with a great many

photographs, have been sent to the Associated Press, United

Press, Laffan Bureau and National News Syndicate of New York;

Western Newspaper Union, Chicago; Newspaper Enterprise

Association, Cleveland; North-American Press Syndicate, Grand

Rapids; over 100 short items to the American Press Association.

There has been scarcely a limit to the requests for suffrage

matter from influential papers in all parts of the country....

Once a month I have supplied an article on the work in the United

States for _Jus Suffragii_, the international paper published in

Rotterdam.... I have also edited _Progress_....

Before closing, I want to express my deep appreciation of the

generosity of Mrs. Oliver H. P. Belmont, through which the press

bureau has this splendid opportunity for work. Every comfort and

facility have been provided and every request cheerfully granted.

Mrs. Belmont never attempts, because of her financial assistance,

to exercise any supervision over the bureau. It is now well

established; it enjoys the confidence of the press and the public

and the opportunities that lie before it cannot be measured in

extent and importance.

During the convention many prominent visitors were introduced to the

audiences, among them Miss Mary Johnston, who had taken a leading part

in organizing the State Suffrage Association of Virginia, and its

president, Mrs. Lila Meade Valentine; Mrs. Elizabeth Upham Yates, the

new president of Rhode Island; J. H. Braly, president of the Men's

League of California; J. Luther Langston, secretary and treasurer of

the Oklahoma Federation of Labor, and Daniel R. Anthony, M. C., of

Kansas. Many greetings were received including one from the Finnish

Temperance organizations through Miss Maggie Walz of Michigan and

others from Mrs. Caroline M. Severance and Mrs. Elizabeth Boynton

Harbert, pioneer suffragists now living in California. Greetings were

sent to Miss Clara Barton of Washington, D. C.; Mrs. Julia Ward Howe

of Boston; Miss Blackwell; the Rev. Antoinette Brown Blackwell of

Elizabeth, N. J.; Mrs. George Howard Lewis of Buffalo; Mrs. Eliza

Wright Osborne of Auburn, N. Y.; Mrs. Elizabeth Smith Miller of

Geneva, N. Y., all pioneers in suffrage work, and to Mrs. Belmont in

New York. A vote of thanks was extended to Miss Belle Bennett (Ky.),

president of the Southern Home Mission, for her strong efforts to

secure the admission of women to the General Conference of the

Methodist Episcopal Church South.

Through the effort of the District Equal Suffrage Association the

spacious Belasco Theater had been secured for the Sunday afternoon

meeting. Dr. Shaw presided and Rabbi Abram Simon offered prayer.[68] A

large audience listened to forceful addresses by Miss Beatrice Forbes

Robertson, Miss Laura Clay, Miss Harriet May Mills, Mrs. Ella S.

Stewart and Mrs. Charlotte Perkins Gilman. In the evening the officers

of the association received the delegates, speakers and members of the

convention in the parlors of the Arlington.

One of the most valuable reports given at the convention was that of

Mrs. Lucia Ames Mead, chairman of the Standing Committee on Peace and

Arbitration. The events of a few years later caused the delegates to

remember with renewed interest the extended work and fervent appeals

of Mrs. Mead and her associates for settling the world's disputes by

peaceful methods. On this occasion she made a special plea to those

who were working for the enfranchisement of women.

Professor Potter, Mr. Blackwell's successor as chairman of the

committee, presented a set of strong resolutions, international as

well as national in character, which were adopted without discussion.

A subject which received much attention was the offer of Miss

Blackwell to make the _Woman's Journal_ the official organ of the

association. It needed the help of the paper and since the death of

her father she needed some one to share the responsibility of its

publication. Miss Clay, Mrs. McCulloch, Mrs. Dennett and Miss Mary

Garrett of Baltimore were appointed to plan the business details. An

agreement was made for one year, Miss Blackwell to continue as editor

without salary but the association to employ a business manager and

such other help as she required.

A noteworthy program marked the last evening of the convention, which

opened with a powerful address by Raymond Robins on The Worker, the

Law and the Courts. It was to be followed by a consideration of

Scientific Propaganda in Practical Politics, with the Literature

discussed by Mrs. Hartshorne but she was ill and Professor Potter

took her place. Plans for activity in behalf of changes of law and its

administration that will benefit women and children in particular and

society in general were presented by Miss Grace Strachan, president of

the New York Federation of Teachers. Special plans in behalf of woman

suffrage were submitted by Mrs. James Lees Laidlaw (N. Y.). Dr. Shaw,

who presided, called attention to the hearings before the committees

of Senate and House the next morning and closed the convention with

one of her characteristic speeches which sent the audience home happy

and ready for the battle.

The dominant note of the convention was the intention henceforth to

enter the field of politics. The New York _Evening Post_ said in its

account: "The audiences at all the meetings were too large for the

capacity of the room and at the Sunday night public gathering hundreds

had to be turned away. Without exception State delegations reported

that the work of the next year would consist of active effort along

political lines, the organization of woman suffrage 'parties' with

membership comprising men and women. Delegations would interview

candidates and voters in regard to their suffrage opinions; conduct

open-air meetings throughout the summer and be on duty at the polls

during elections."

The _Woman's Journal_ said in its summing up: "The personnel of the

delegates and speakers was such as to inspire the most hostile, the

most conservative and the most despondent student of human nature.

When an observer reflected that these delegates represented thousands

of women in each State who believe in equal suffrage, and that the

speakers and leaders of the convention voiced the thoughts, hopes and

aspirations of suffragists the world over, he could not help being

stirred profoundly with the conviction not only that equal rights are

inevitable in the near future but also with the compelling faith that

the world is truly marching on in the very best sense and that it can

never again be quite as dark a place to live in as it has been. A

notable feature was the absolute conviction with which these

representatives of the people speak and the unmistakable determination

to win a speedy victory."

The "hearings" before committees of Senate and House took place on the

historic date, April 19, when in 1776 "the shot was fired which was

heard around the world" proclaiming the birth of a republic founded on

the right of every individual to represent himself by his ballot!

Heretofore they had been held in the Marble Room of the Senate

Building and the room of the House Judiciary Committee, which could

accommodate only a very limited number of the delegates and none of

the public. The splendid new office buildings of the two Houses of

Congress were now finished and in the spacious rooms assigned for the

hearings all of the delegates found seats and many others, although a

long line of the disappointed extended down the corridor.

The members of the Senate Committee were Alexander S. Clay (Ga.),

chairman; Senators Joseph F. Johnston (Ala.), Elmer J. Burkett (Neb.),

George Peabody Wetmore (R. I.), Albert J. Beveridge (Ind.). All were

present except Senator Beveridge. Dr. Shaw presided and before

introducing the speakers gave a resume of the petitions which had just

been presented to the Congress, called attention to the names of many

eminent men and women who had signed them and said: "Believing that

the first republic in the world, founded upon the principle of

self-government with 'equal rights for all and special privileges for

none,' should be among the leaders and not the laggards in this great

world movement, your petitioners pray this honorable body to submit to

the Legislatures of the several States for ratification an amendment

to the Federal Constitution which will enable American women to vote."

She continued:

It is not revolutionary on our part to ask a share in our

Government. We are demanding it because it is in accord with

American ideals and absolutely essential to the establishment of

true democracy. A democratic form of government is right or it is

not right--it is either right that the people should be

self-governed or that they should not. If it is not right, then

we ought to know it; the whole people ought to know it. If it is

right, then the whole people ought to have equal opportunities in

self-government. It is not that we women wish to dictate in

regard to men or that we assume any superior ability for

government, any superior wisdom, but it is that we do assume that

whether we are wise or not, whether we have a grasp of all the

affairs of state or not, whether we are earning and producing

equally with men or not, we are human beings and as a part of

the Government we should have at least a chance to exercise

whatever powers we possess equally with all other citizens. It is

because we believe that this Government should be true to its

fundamental principles that we make these demands.

Some one asked Wendell Phillips if Christianity were not a

failure and he replied, "It has not yet been tried." So we can

say in regard to democracy. We hear the cry everywhere that

democracy is a failure. A speaker in New York said that our

democracy was the laughing stock of all the civilized nations of

the world. It is the laughing stock because of the failure of

this democracy to dare to be democratic. We have never tried

universal suffrage but if that which we have is a failure the

cure for it is not to restrict it but to extend it, because no

class of men is able to represent another class and it is much

truer that no class nor all classes of men are capable of

representing any class or all classes of women. Believing this,

we have come as citizens of the United States to this Mecca of

all the people for more than forty years and we are ready to come

for as many years more as may be necessary until our plea is

granted.

Dr. Shaw then said: "I desire to introduce speakers from the

professions and lines of work represented in our petitions: Mrs.

Catharine Waugh McCulloch of Chicago, who has been a practicing lawyer

for twenty-four years and was recently re-elected to the office of

justice of the peace."

Mrs. McCulloch. There may be a woman school-teacher somewhere who

does not want to vote that may be satisfied to receive only 75

per cent. as much as men teachers and to have no chance at highly

paid superintendencies. There may be a mother who does not want

equality at the ballot box nor in the guardianship of her

children. There may be some factory girl who so earnestly

believes it right to receive less wages than men do that she

never wants the ballot to help her get equal pay for equal work.

It may be that there is some woman paying heavy taxes--heavier

than the equally wealthy man next door--who is happy to be taxed

without being represented. It may be that some woman

civil-service employee at Washington or in the State has for a

long time been at the top of the list of those who are eligible

for promotion and has seen men below her on the list

requisitioned for places with large salaries and approves of this

and enjoys being discriminated against because she is not a

voter. There may be some woman physician who does not want to

vote and who observes uncomplainingly that all remunerative

political offices to which physicians are eligible on city or

State boards of health or in public hospitals are filled by men.

There may be a nurse so busy saving life that she has not

realized the foolishness of her disfranchisement on the ground

that she was never a soldier to destroy life. There may be some

young woman in railroad office, stenographer, bookkeeper or

clerk, who meekly approves an order for the discharge of all

women employees for the ostensible reason that they marry too

soon but for the real reason that they do not vote.

There may be a woman in any of these varied employments who is so

convinced of her own inferiority that she does not want the

ballot but to the credit of the women lawyers it may be said that

almost every one does want to vote and can tell several reasons

why. A woman may in this century go through a law college the

only woman in her class without discomfort. She opens those

sacred law books as easily and learns as readily as do the men

and passes as good an examination. She sees her young men

classmates rise to great distinction in the service of the State.

She may count among them, as I can, city attorneys, State

attorneys, civil-service commissioners, Judges of high degree,

Senators and Governors. It will be impossible to prove to her

that she, who in law school fed on the same mental diet as did

these now renowned political leaders, is too ignorant to vote for

them or against them or that the quality of her brain forbids her

understanding of the great problems her law classmates are now

solving....

Dr. Shaw: The next speaker will be Miss Eveline Gano, a teacher of

history in one of the high schools of New York City, who will speak on

behalf of the teachers of the country.

Miss Gano. If the woman teacher's need of the ballot is a

debatable question then another very natural question arises: Do

men teachers need the ballot?... I am asked to speak particularly

of women who have made teaching a profession. In 1870, 41 per

cent. of the teachers in the United States were men; 21 per cent.

to-day are men. In large cities the number of women teachers is

still greater in proportion. In New York only 12-1/2 per cent. of

the 17,000 teachers are men. According to the last census there

are 17,000,000 children in the United States who should be in

elementary schools. Approximately 90 per cent. are taught almost

entirely by women. In New York City only seven per cent. of the

600,000 children in the public schools ever enter grades higher

than the elementary; in western cities a few more. Practically

all of the schooling that 90 citizens out of 100 ever get they

receive from the hands and hearts and minds of women. Whatever

this great number of future citizens knows of citizenship and

correct standards of morals and industry they have learned from

the mothers and the women teachers. The very foundations of law

and equity and justice are in the hands of women who are in the

eyes of the law but wards and dependents. If these women teachers

and mothers had a keener sense of their responsibilities by

actual participation in civic life, what might be the results in

even one decade? Who is to blame if they do not have the keener

sense?

One of the greatest problems facing this republic has been

turned over to women teachers--that of coping with the foreign

born and their children. Who can estimate the value of this great

constructive work, the creation of American citizens out of the

varied materials that are landed on our shores? And who can

estimate the quickening force and the gain in appreciation and

respect for law and order, if the mothers and the teachers of

these children were considered worthy of the principles which

they are asked to inculcate? Thousands of these women teachers

are college graduates with fine training and all are women of

more than average intelligence. They are not only bread winners

but very often they are the heads of families which they have

inherited. They are caring for and educating younger brothers and

sisters, nieces and nephews, and providing for aged fathers and

mothers. It has been said that the men of each class will protect

the women of each class. Witness the men teachers of New York

City, who in 1900 secured a State law that gave to themselves

salaries from 30 per cent. to 100 per cent. higher than to women

doing the same grade of work. A woman teacher in the elementary

schools must work nine years in order to receive the salary that

the man teacher begins with. She may and often does supervise

men, because of having passed a difficult examination, and

receive $800 a year less than the men whom she supervises. A

woman principal receives $1,000 less than a man principal in the

same grade of work, having the very same qualifications. Governor

Hughes has characterized these discriminations against women as

"glaring and gross inequalities," but in spite of the efforts of

15,000 women teachers for the last four years the inequalities

still continue. It is rather easy to see the value of the ballot

to the men teachers of the city of New York....

As citizens under the 14th Amendment of the Constitution of the

United States, we claim the honored and inherited right to

petition our Government or either branch thereof for a redress of

grievances that very plainly exist because of the present legal

status of women in 41 States of the Union. We ask that our

petition, which is signed by hundreds of thousands of law-abiding

citizens, shall receive serious and courteous attention. We well

know that when a petition of such great consequence to millions

of citizens is not so considered the foundation of republican

government is attacked and weakened where it should be supported

and strengthened.

Dr. Shaw: I present now Dr. Anna E. Blount, a physician from Chicago,

who will speak in behalf of the medical practitioners.

Dr. Blount. In my city there are 500 women doctors; in my State

there are 750; in the United States in 1900 there were 7,399.

These women doctors know the womanhood of the country perhaps

more intimately than any other class of women know it. I have

talked with many of them and I have yet to find one who does not

believe in woman suffrage. The Woman's Medical Club in Chicago

has joined the suffrage association. Why do we want the ballot?

Partly our reasons are personal to our own profession and partly

they are the same that move the whole mass of mankind to ask for

suffrage today. Some of our personal reasons are these: As women

we are excluded from most of the well-paid positions for

physicians. We know that the dependent womanhood of the country

needs our care; from time to time we hear grewsome tales from the

insane asylums and the pauper institutions of wrongs done the

women because there is no woman doctor there to protect them.

Little children in my own State have gone through a life of

degradation owing to the fact that there was no woman doctor in

charge of them in the public institutions. The best paid

positions are political jobs and no woman can get one. Another

reason why, as physicians, we want the ballot is that at present

we need police protection. We need a city that is well lighted

and safe for women, as we are obliged to go out at all hours of

the night. A few years ago the hunters of women became unusually

active and several respectable women were in the early hours of

the evening hunted to their death and murdered. We were told at

that time by the commissioner of police that it would be well for

all the respectable women of the city to remain indoors after 8

o'clock in the evening unless they were escorted by a gentleman!

Imagine when the telephone rings for a woman doctor to attend

some critical case that she shall be required either to get a

male escort or remain at home! This is also true of nurses and

many others....

I do not think that men can grow to be the best men when they are

in constant association with a subject class. I ask you gentlemen

of the United States Senate, for the sake of womanhood, but most

of all for the sake of manhood, to report this resolution out of

the committee, and to ask the Senate of the United States to give

the women of this country, so far as in its power, the right of

suffrage.

Dr. Shaw: "I present a lawyer, Mrs. Ellen Spencer Mussey, but she will

speak in the capacity of a college woman." After giving her experience

in trying to secure better laws for women in the District of Columbia,

Mrs. Mussey told of her visits to Norway and Sweden, where as attorney

for a legation she had every opportunity to attend the Parliaments,

meet the statesmen and leading women and hear their universal

testimony in favor of the experiment in woman suffrage. In closing she

stated that as chairman of the legislative committee of the General

Federation of Women's Clubs she had received reports from hundreds of

them regretting their lack of power to obtain legislation and their

need of representation on boards of education and of public

institutions. Dr. Shaw then introduced Miss Minnie J. Reynolds of New

Jersey, formerly of Colorado, who had supervised the petition of the

writers.

Miss Reynolds. This attempt to canvass the writers of the United

States is absurdly inadequate and fragmentary. It was the unpaid

work of women, each of whom had her own occupation in life, in

such spare time as they could get during the year. These writers

represent only twenty-one States. Others, including such great

States as New York, Michigan and Wisconsin, sent in huge rolls of

names without a classification. I am speaking for 1,870 writers.

The first name is that of William Dean Howells, the "dean of

American letters," perhaps more truly representative of American

literature than any other living person. The second name is that

of John Bigelow, ex-ambassador to France, ex-secretary-of-state

of New York, and author of some twenty scholarly books. On this

list are the names of men and women known to every reader of

American literature and to every reader of the periodical press.

The petition blanks were sent to them by mail and if they did not

wish to sign they had only to drop them in the waste-basket. A

number of publicists have signed, among them Melville E. Stone,

head of the Associated Press, and six of his editors; S. S. and

T. C. McClure, publishers of the McClure's Magazine; the editors

of Everybody's, the Independent, the Public, Philistine,

Delineator, Designer, New Idea, Harper's Bazar, La Follette's

Magazine, the Springfield Republican: editors of Current

Literature, Philadelphia Record, Cincinnati Commercial Tribune,

New York Herald, New York Tribune, Baltimore Sun, Baltimore

American, Minneapolis News, Cincinnati Post and numerous other

newspapers over the country. These publications reach millions of

readers.

There are on this list the names of many persons who, although

authors or magazine writers, are still more distinguished in

other lines of work, as William James and George Herbert Palmer

of Harvard; Graham Taylor and Shailer Matthews of the University

of Chicago; Simon N. Patten of the University of Pennsylvania;

and other professors from the universities of Harvard, Chicago,

Pennsylvania, Minnesota, Cornell and Columbia, and from Oberlin,

Vassar and Wellesley. The great families of Hawthorne, Chanler

and Beecher are represented by living descendants who are

carrying on the literary traditions which must ever be associated

with those names. The late Richard Watson Gilder, editor of the

Century, published a tribute to Dr. Mary Putnam Jacobi after her

death. In this he said in substance that the American women who

had most conspicuously united rare intelligence with rare

goodness were Josephine Shaw Lowell, founder of the New York

Charity Organization; Alice Freeman Palmer, president of

Wellesley College, and Dr. Jacobi. Mr. Gilder was an

anti-suffragist. The three women whom he thus placed at the

pinnacle of American womanhood were all strong suffragists.

The women whose names are on this list represent brains and

character; they represent that element of American womanhood

which is winning its own way successfully in the great world of

competition and strenuous endeavor; influencing the minds and

molding the public opinion of the country through their books and

through the press. There may be those among you, gentlemen, who

are opposed to suffrage, but I am sure there is not one who would

not be glad to know that his daughter was a woman of this type if

it so happened that he was obliged to leave her unprovided for.

There is one girl, Jean Webster, who made $4,000 on one book the

year she left college. There is one woman, Mary Johnston, who was

paid $20,000 in advance royalties on one book before a word of it

was printed. A number of distinguished writers had signed the

general petition before the writers' blank had reached them,

among them Mark Twain, Booth Tarkington, Ernest Thompson Seton,

Julia Ward Howe, Frances Hodgson Burnett, Mary Wilkins Freeman

and Ellen Glasgow.

Mrs. Rachel Foster Avery, former corresponding secretary of the

National Suffrage Association, in speaking of the petition told of one

containing 10,000 names which had been gathered in Indiana years ago

and presented to the Legislature by Mrs. Zerelda G. Wallace, often

referred to as the mother pictured in "Ben Hur." It was treated with

the utmost contempt, one member saying, "These 10,000 women have about

as much influence as that many mice." This experience sent that

eloquent woman to the suffrage platform for the rest of her life. Mrs.

Avery urged the committee to give a favorable report on this great

petition as the first step toward making the influence of the

thousands of women who had signed it of more value than that of so

many mice. [For the address of Mrs. Carrie Chapman Catt, president of

the International Woman Suffrage Alliance, see Appendix for this

chapter.]

U. S. Senator John F. Shafroth of Colorado, a consistent supporter of

woman suffrage from the very beginning of the movement for it in his

State twenty years before, made an address to the committee which was

printed in a pamphlet of seven pages and made a part of the propaganda

of the National Association. Limited space permits only brief

extracts, which give little idea of its compelling arguments.

An eminent writer has said that all powers of government are

either delegated or assumed; that all not delegated are assumed

and all assumed powers are usurpations. The powers of government

by men over women are not delegated, because the women never

delegated such powers to men. They are assumed then and, as all

assumed powers are usurpations, the exercise of the powers of

government by men over women is usurpation. How can those who

refuse to give women the right to vote reconcile their opinion

with the form of government in which they believe? What right

have I to make all the laws which shall govern not only myself

but also my wife, sister and mother, without giving to them any

voice in determining the justice or wisdom of those laws? It can

only be on the assertion of an assumed or usurped right--that

which we have condemned as not the source of rightful power. We

all remember Lincoln's declaration that "when the white man

governs himself, that is self-government; but when he governs

himself and also governs another man, that is despotism." The

exercise of any power of government not emanating from the

consent of the governed, therefore, is despotism. After men by an

assumption of power have attached the elective franchise to

themselves, is it a just answer to the demand of women to say

that men have concluded that "suffrage is a privilege which

attaches neither to man nor to woman by nature?" Have we

forgotten the cry of our forefathers which stirred the blood of

every patriotic American, that "taxation without representation

is tyranny?" Why is it tyranny to men but not to women? Is it

sufficient to say that "they are not the only persons taxed as

property holders from whom the ballot is withheld," when the only

other persons from whom it is permanently withheld are lunatics,

idiots and criminals? How would men like such reasoning applied

to themselves?...

Deprive any class or nationality of men of the elective franchise

and the detrimental effect would be felt immediately. Their

petitions for legislation would no longer receive prompt and

careful consideration and if the proposed legislation conflicted

with conditions favorable to a class of voters it would be almost

impossible to get a legislator or Congressman even to introduce

such a measure. The equal suffrage advocates have appeared before

a committee of the House of Representatives at Washington every

session for a great many years, begging for a favorable report.

If persons representing one-tenth as many voters had made an

appeal for some important legislation affecting their rights,

don't we know that those same Congressmen would almost have

fought with each other for the privilege of writing a favorable

report?

Governor Shafroth quoted election statistics which showed conclusively

that women in Colorado voted in about the same proportion as men and

he gave a long list of progressive laws which had been enacted through

the support of women. He declared that in no respect had the ideals of

womanhood been lowered and closed by saying: "The highest

considerations of justice and good government demand equal suffrage

for all women."

Dr. Shaw in closing the hearing said in part:

I have in my hand a document which was today sent, I believe, to

every Senator and Representative, signed by the ladies

representing societies opposed to the further extension of the

suffrage to women. Of those which purport to be State societies,

three at least are merely local clubs in cities. These ladies

have petitioned this honorable body and the House of

Representatives not to grant the appeal of the women who have

come here with this very large petition on the ground that it

would be an interference on your part with the rights which the

States have reserved to themselves, if you were to submit an

amendment to the Federal Constitution giving full suffrage to

women.... I see by this document that the great danger with which

you are threatened if you do this unjust thing is that you admit

into the body politic a vast non-fighting horde of people, a most

dangerous class. Man suffrage is a method adopted, it says, for

the peaceful attainment of the will of the majority, to which the

minority must submit.

If there is anything which must appeal to every sense of justice,

it is the struggle of the industrial world to get out from under

the domineering, military power. The age in which we live is no

longer a militant age. Today it is not so much the question of

which nation can produce the greatest number of soldiers as of

which can produce the greatest number of things the world needs

to buy. It is a problem of industry and into this problem women,

either by force or by desire, have come.... In olden times women

could control the hours of their labor and the conditions

affecting their health and the health of their families; they

could regulate the price of the product which they themselves

produced in the home but since men have taken from it the

industries, the necessity for women to protect themselves in the

workshop, in the sweatshop, in the factory has come about.

Wherever man has taken woman's work the woman must follow it and

she must have the same method of protecting herself which man

must have and there is no other means save through the ballot....

We have been over forty years, a longer period than the children

of Israel wandered through the wilderness, coming to this Capitol

pleading for this recognition of the principle that the

Government derives its just powers from the consent of the

governed. Mr. Chairman, we ask that you report our resolution

favorably if you can but unfavorably if you must; that you report

one way or the other, so that the Senate may have the chance to

consider it.

The Chairman: "In behalf of the committee I desire to thank the ladies

for the splendid arguments they have made and to say that we

appreciate them most heartily. It is my intention to call the

committee together at a very early date and we will give a careful

and intelligent consideration to this measure, and, I hope, make a

report on it."

Notwithstanding this promise no further attention was paid to these

logical and eloquent appeals or to the immense petition, and no report

whatever was made by the committee.

* * * * *

All but four of the members of the House Judiciary Committee were

present, including the chairman, Richard Wayne Parker (N. J.), a

remarkable attendance, and they showed much interest.[69] Mrs.

Florence Kelley, second vice-president of the National Suffrage

Association, was in charge of the speakers and the hearing was opened

by Representative A. W. Rucker (Col.), who had introduced the

resolution for the Federal Amendment, as also had Representative F. W.

Mondell (Wyo.). Mrs. Kelley called attention to the petition of

404,823 names, saying: "Among those who have signed the petition are

sixteen Governors, a large number of Mayors and many State, county and

city officials; many of the best-known instructors and writers on

political economy and many presidents of colleges and universities. It

includes the names of many Judges of Supreme Courts and among them the

Chief Justice and Associate Justice of Hawaii. It contains a long list

of the names of persons engaged in various trades and from those in

the thirty-three States which are classified are 7,515 professional

people, lawyers, doctors, clergymen and others; also 52,603 listed as

home keepers."

Mrs. Susan W. Fitzgerald (Mass.) said in part: "I come here to speak

for those 52,000 home makers who signed the petition to Congress

asking for equal political rights in this democracy.... To ask woman

under our modern industrial conditions to care adequately for her home

and family without a right to share in the making of the laws and the

electing of all those officers who are to enforce the laws is like

asking people to make bricks without straw. It cannot be done. We must

remember that in the early days of this country a family was

practically self-supporting and independent of the rest of the

community; a man and a woman working together could provide for their

family all that was necessary for their sustenance; meats, vegetables,

grains, milk, eggs, butter, cheese, all were home products. They

provided their own lighting and controlled their own water supply. The

women spun the thread, wove the cloth, dyed it and made the garments.

In every way, if it was necessary, the family could maintain its

existence independent of the cooperation of society except in the one

matter of defense from violence. None of this is true today." Mrs.

Fitzgerald took up the questions of food, drink and clothing as

supplied at the present time and showed the great need that women

should have a voice in the legislation that controls their production.

It had been announced that all of the arguments would be made along

industrial lines. Arthur E. Holder, of the legislative committee of

the American Federation of Labor, presented for the record a series of

the very positive resolutions for woman suffrage which had been

adopted by that body at its annual conventions beginning with 1904 and

read the one passed at Toronto in 1909: "The best interests of labor

require the admission of women to full citizenship as a matter of

justice to them and as a necessary step toward insuring and raising

the scale of wages for all." He closed a strong speech by saying: "We

want the right of representation for all the people, women as well as

men. Women have been disfranchised in our country long enough and we

now ask for that measure which will constitutionally grant the right

to vote to the women of our land. We believe that women ought to be

free agents, free selectors, free voters. The law is no respecter of

persons. Women cannot shirk their responsibility because they are

women; neither should they be longer denied their normal citizenship

rights and privileges because they are women."

In a most convincing address Mrs. Elizabeth Schauss, factory inspector

of Ohio, said:

It seems almost superfluous that we should come here pleading for

the vote when we know it is the only thing which will give the

wage-earning woman the protection that she needs and should have,

as to-day she has absolutely no chance beside her brother.

Although she gives the same quality and the same amount of work

yet she can not command the same wage, and why? Simply because

she is not a recognized citizen by virtue of the ballot. If you

would go into the factories, the mills, the mercantile

establishments and meet these women and learn from them the

indignities to which they ofttimes are subjected in order that

they may retain their places you would not wait for any one to

come here and argue the question with you. You would see for

yourselves that the only remedy is to grant to them that same

protection that you give to every man over 21 years of age. The

girl so employed submits in a way to these things because she is

thinking of the time when her factory days will be over, when she

will make a home for husband and children, and God forbid that

the time shall ever come that our girls will lose sight of this,

their greatest vocation! But before they are competent to take

charge of the home in every sense of the word, before they can

give to their children all that these should have, they must

themselves be placed upon a basis of equality with their

husbands....

Why should I, a tax-paying woman, be denied the right by casting

my ballot to say how these taxes that I am paying shall be

expended? In the light of progress and of American civilization,

we know this cannot continue. We have great things at stake in

our children. We are trying to take away that shadow which rests

upon these United States, the shadow of child labor. It will not

be done until the mothers have the right to speak for their

children through the ballot. We are looking for the day when we

shall be able to stand shoulder to shoulder with our men and

share with them the burdens and responsibilities of this greatest

nation and be able to hold up our heads and say: "We are on an

equal footing because we have men in the United States who

recognize equality of rights."

Mrs. Raymond Robins, thoroughly qualified to speak on this question,

said in part: "I have the great honor and privilege of representing,

as president of the National Women's Trade Union League, something

like 75,000 organized working women, and I believe all through our

country as well as through all the world there is a growing

recognition of the cost of our modern industrial conditions to women.

These are such that in many thousands of instances the motherhood of

our girls has to be forfeited. No one knows except those who have made

a very intimate and careful study of the present cost of social and

industrial conditions how great that cost is. When we demanded in

Illinois the limiting of the working hours for women to ten a day,

many of our women physicians brought forward facts of great value

showing the tremendous physical danger to girls of overwork. At

present a very interesting and valuable investigation is going on,

led by some of our woman physicians, showing the evil result on the

second generation of these industrial conditions.... These facts are

of national importance and it is because right there is the crux of

the entire situation that we women are working for the ballot, for the

sake of protecting the womanhood and motherhood of our 6,000,000

working women, I think half of them under 21 years of age...."

Mrs. Robins gave a number of special instances and in answer to the

question how the ballot would remedy these evils, she said: "The

women, an unorganized group, get together and take collective action

and they find themselves not fighting their industrial battles in the

economic field but in the political field and the weapons that are

constantly used against them with the greatest success are political

weapons. The power of the police and of the courts is used against

them in many instances and whenever they try to meet that expression

of political power, they are handicapped because there is no force in

their hands to help change it...."

In the course of a speech punctuated with lively questions and answers

Mrs. Upton said: "I represent the industry of wifehood and

housekeeping. I spent many of my childhood days in the room of this

committee, my father having been a member of the Judiciary Committee

for thirteen years and chairman for several years. He was the only one

who ever reported a bill favorably for woman suffrage.... I want to

ask you to report against us if you will not report for us. Just tell

the world that we must not vote because we cannot fight, because it

will destroy the home, anything you please, but break your long years

of silence. Is it fair for you _not_ to tell us why you are opposed to

us? Women are not fools; on the contrary, they are very intelligent

people and sure to be enfranchised before long. If this committee does

not help some other will; it is going to be done and it is for you to

decide whether your daughters will be able to say years from now, 'My

father was one of the men who helped get woman suffrage!' While men of

this country have been running after dollars at a terrific rate in

recent years women have been studying and preparing themselves in

clubs and all sorts of organizations for this right, so that they will

be the most intelligent class--if you call them a class--that was

ever enfranchised in all history. Are you afraid of intelligence? All

we ask is to let the mother heart, the home element, be expressed in

the government.... I beg of you to let all the world know _why_ the

women of the United States, who by hundreds of thousands have

petitioned you to submit this amendment, ought not have at least this

request considered and a report on it made."

Miss Laura J. Graddick, representing a labor union in the District of

Columbia, said during an able and earnest address:

They say that politics is too corrupt for woman to enter the

field as a voter but does she not live under a Government

dominated by politics? Shame on the manhood of our country that

our government housekeeping is so administered that woman can not

come in contact with it and escape contamination.... If our

Government is built on moral law it should be clean enough for a

woman to have a voice in it. We assure you there are no better

house-cleaners than women and the above statement certainly

indicates the need of women in politics. There is no great cry on

the part of men because of the contaminating influences which

woman meets in the business and industrial world. They are not

keeping her out of the various vocations of life because of the

evil which she might encounter. Are not sweat-shop conditions and

overwork and underpaid work evils far more destructive to the

physical, mental and moral welfare of women than any condition in

which suffrage might place them? Because of the great economic

and political changes of the last century the working woman of

to-day is entitled to the same rights accorded the working man in

the political world. These changes have taken her from the home

and brought her into business and industrial life, where she has

become more and more man's equal and competitor, leaving behind

those conditions which so long made her dependent upon him. This

has not been of her choosing. Men, in their pursuit of wealth,

have taken the work formerly done in the home, from the spinning

and weaving even down to the baking and laundering, and massed it

in great factories and shops. Instead of woman taking man's work,

it is the reverse and he has appropriated to himself what was

long supposed to be hers. Woman finds that what was formerly with

her a work of love is now done under new conditions and strange

environments.

This experience in the outside world is educating her, for she is

studying conditions. She sees that she is forced to compete with

those who have full political rights while she herself is a

political nonentity. She finds that she must contend with and

protect herself against conditions which are more often political

than economic, thus forcing upon her the conviction that she too

is entitled to be a voter. She sees that politics, business and

industrial life generally are so united that one affects the

other and that since she is a factor in two she should be granted

the rights and privileges of the third. Think of the number of

women wage-earners in this country who are without political

representation, there being no men in the family, and at present

laws all made without a woman's point of view!... The working

woman does not ask for the ballot as a panacea for all her ills.

She knows that it carries with it responsibilities but all that

it is to man it will be and even more to woman. Let her remain

man's inferior politically and unjust discriminations against her

as a wage-earner will continue, but let her become his equal

politically and she will then be in a position to demand equal

pay for equal work.

In a speech of deep feeling Miss Laura Clay, president of the Kentucky

Suffrage Association, said in part: "Gentlemen, when I hear our women

making the pleas that they have made, brought up, as I have been, to

believe that the manhood of the United States is the grandest in the

world, I ask, 'Shall we not find any members of Congress except those

who say, 'Can you not get some one else to protect you? Go to your

States, go anywhere but do not come to us?' It has been said to me

when I have spoken for childhood, 'You have no child?' And I have

answered: 'No, I have no child, but just as surely as men in the order

of nature are the protectors of womanhood, so surely in the order of

nature women are the protectors of childhood. I would dishonor my

womanhood to say that I will not do what I can for a child because I

have none and I hope the time will never come when women must be

ashamed of men because they are not willing to sacrifice something to

take this action for women.' Think of it! Must we crawl on our knees

to ask you for that which we feel we have a right to demand? You

should see that every protection which every lifting hand that it is

possible for manhood to offer to womanhood should be extended and your

position gives you a great opportunity. I urge that, as far as your

official power extends, you will show that the manhood of the United

States responds to the pleas of the womanhood of the United States."

The closing address of Mrs. Kelley and the many questions it called

for from the committee with her answers filled nearly twelve pages of

the printed report of the hearing. A small part only can find space

here.

Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, it is sixty years last month since my

father, Judge William D. Kelley, became a member of the House of

Representatives and in those days it took a great deal of courage

for a man to do what he did year after year--introduce this

resolution which you are considering to-day. He did it partly, I

think, out of chivalrous regard for Miss Anthony, Mrs. Stanton

and the few brave women who fifty years ago patiently came before

your predecessors; but very much more he introduced that

resolution because he believed it was essentially just. He saw in

those days the beginnings of the industrial change in the midst

of which we now live and they appalled him. He saw how difficult

it had been for his widowed mother to get an education for

himself and his sisters, and how infinitely difficult life was

for the whole great class of women, not only widows but those who

by the circumstances of our changing industries had been forced

out into the industrial market. He believed they ought to have

the same power to protect their own interests as had been given

to the American workingman and which he helped give to the

negro....

Women now do not count in our communities at all in proportion to

the responsibilities which they carry. One of the gentlemen has

asked: "What is the relation of all this labor talk to the

ballot?" I will give you some examples: I was for four years the

head of the factory inspectors of Illinois. During that time we

had an eight-hour law enacted for the protection of women and

children employed in manufacturing industries. The Supreme Court

held that it was contrary to the constitutions of the State and

of the United States for women to be deprived of the right to

work twenty-four hours whenever it suited the convenience of the

employers. The court said--and it took 9,000 words to say

it--that women could not be deprived of working unlimited hours,

because they were citizens, although it said the term

"citizenship" was limited; the Court said they could not be

allowed to work underground in mines; they could not be allowed

to work out their taxes on the roads, as farmers do; they could

not be called to the militia; they could not vote except for

school committees and once in four years for the trustees of the

State University, but, with those minor deductions, they were

citizens and could not be deprived of the freedom of contract.

The Supreme Court of the United States has proclaimed that the

Judges of Illinois guessed wrong on that occasion, that it is not

contrary to the Constitution of the United States to limit the

working hours of women but that it is the obvious duty of every

Legislature to do this in the interest of public health and

morals. A year ago, largely through the efforts of Mrs. Robins,

the Legislature tried it again and passed this time a ten-hour

law for women. A Judge was found who held that it was a

legitimate object for an injunction and he enjoined my successor,

the present factory inspector, and the prosecuting attorney from

enforcing this law. To-day under that injunction the women are

again free to work twenty-four hours, as they do one day in the

week quite regularly in the laundries in Chicago, and to work

sixteen hours a day as they do in the stores during the Christmas

rush, and as they do in the box factories and candy factories.

Yet the women of Illinois have not had one word to say as to the

personnel of these courts which decide what is a matter of life

and death for every woman who is rushed into her grave by work in

the laundries and other sweat shops of that State.

Mrs. Kelley gave some tragic instances of occurrences during her eight

years in Hull House with Miss Jane Addams, where the working of women

overtime caused death and permanent invalidism, and continued:

During the fifteen years since that Illinois court so decided,

the miners who work underground in sixteen States, from Missouri

to Nevada and from Montana to Texas and Arizona, have been able

to change the constitutions of their States so that they work but

eight hours a day. They are voters, they have power, they have

intelligence and organization; they obtained from the Supreme

Court of the United States the famous decision of Holden vs.

Hardy, in which it held that it is not only the right but the

duty of the State to restrict the hours of those who work

underground. In Illinois the women must have unlimited hours

because they are not voting citizens....

For twelve years a body of influential women of New York City

appeared before the board of estimate and apportionment to ask

for the pitiable sum of $18,000 to be appropriated to pay the

salaries of eighteen inspectors to look after the welfare of

60,000 women and girls in retail stores but we never got it. One

candid friend, Mayor Van Wyck, in listening to our plea, told us

the whole trouble. Said he: "Ladies, why do you waste your time

year after year in coming before us and asking for this

appropriation? You have not a voter in your constituency and you

know it and we know it and you know we know it," and they never

did give it to us....