CONGRESSIONAL HEARINGS--VISIT TO NEW ORLEANS.
1884-1885.
Most of the newspapers had a welcome for Miss Anthony. In a two-column
report in the Rochester Democrat and Chronicle she is quoted as saying:
"I can scarcely tell you of the hospitality extended, the dinners,
teas and receptions given in our honor. I had no idea we were so
well-known in Great Britain or that there was such cordial feeling
toward us. Of course, I met chiefly those known as Liberals and the
sympathizers with our cause. Public sentiment there is rapidly
growing in our favor. In the discussion I heard in Parliament not a
Conservative uttered a word against the suffrage already possessed
by women but relied upon the hackneyed argument that when married
women were included there would be trouble."
"You saw the Queen, I suppose?"
"No; I thought more of seeing the Bright family than the Queen and
I never happened to be near where she was. I really had very little
leisure to look around. I am ashamed to say I did not visit
Westminster until the morning before I came away, but it was simply
for lack of time. The social idea was of more importance to me."
The New York Evening Telegram said editorially: "The statement of Miss
Susan B. Anthony, in another column, illustrates the superb
determination of that champion of woman's political rights. In the
struggle which has constituted her life-work she has the rare advantage
of not being able to comprehend defeat. Battling under the inspiration
of an enthusiast--of a fanatic, some may be disposed to say--she knows
no such word as fail. The most disheartening reverses appear to her
inspired imagination but steps in an undeviating march of progress. It
was enthusiasm such as this that made the career of Joan of Arc.
Without it, not even the broad intellect and strong soul of Miss Anthony
could sustain the burden of the struggle which she is called upon to
lead." The Washington correspondent of the Cleveland Leader thus began a
long interview:
Susan B. Anthony is back from Europe, and is here for the winter's
fight in behalf of woman suffrage. She seems remarkably well, and
has gained fifteen pounds since she left last spring. She is
sixty-three, but looks just the same as twenty years ago. There is
perhaps an extra wrinkle in her face, a little more silver in her
hair, but her blue eyes are just as bright, her mouth as serious
and her step as active as when she was forty. She would attract
attention in any crowd. She is of medium height and medium form but
her face is wonderfully intellectual, and she moves about like the
woman of a purpose that she is. She says she experiences far
different treatment by public men now from what she did years ago.
The statesman of the past always came to her with a smirk on his
face as though he considered woman's rights nonsensical and thought
himself wonderfully condescending to take notice of her at all.
"Now," says she, "public men look upon our mission as a matter of
business, and we are considered from that standpoint."
The interview closed:
"One question more, Miss Anthony. Will you please tell me what is
your highest ideal of the woman of the future?"
"It is hard to say," was the reply. "The woman of the future will
far surpass the one of the present, even as the man of the future
will surpass the one of today. The ages are progressive, and I look
for a far higher manhood and womanhood than we now have. I think
this will come through making the sexes co-equal. When women
associate with men in serious matters, as they do now in frivolous,
both will grow stronger and the world's work will be better done. I
look for the day when the woman who has a political or judicial
brain will have as much right to sit in the Senate or on the
Supreme Bench as men have; when women will have equal property,
business and political rights with men; when the only criterion of
excellence or position shall be the ability and character of the
individual; and this time will come. All of the Western colleges
are now open to women, and send forth more than 2,000 women
graduates every year. Think of the effect upon the race to come!
The woman of the future will be a better wife, mother and citizen
than the woman of today."
There were, however, some discordant notes in the symphony of pleasant
things which by 1883 had become customary in the newspapers. For
instance, the Cincinnati Times-Star headed its interview: "Susan
Speaks--Miss Anthony Corralled by a Times-Star Correspondent--The Old
Lady Wears Good Clothes and Stops at First-class Hotels--Bubbling about
the Ballot." The smart reporter described the size of her foot, devoted
a paragraph to the question whether her teeth were natural or
artificial, and said: "There must be money in being a reformer, for Miss
Anthony lives at the Riggs House in good style, and expects to be there
all winter, and this, after a summer in Europe, would be a pretty severe
drain on any but a long purse." When one thinks of Miss Anthony's
uniform kindness and courtesy to reporters, always granting an interview
no matter how tired or how busy she might be, and assisting them in
every possible way with information and suggestions, it is astonishing
that any one of them could indulge in petty, personal criticism and
innuendoes.
Miss Anthony had now another friend at court, Col. Halbert S. Greenleaf,
of Rochester, having been elected to Congress. Both he and his wife were
strong and influential advocates of suffrage, and her warm personal
friends. The diary shows that every day of December she was conferring
with officials and their wives who were friendly to the cause, making
converts wherever possible and co-operating actively with the District
committee in all the drudgery of detail necessary to a successful
convention. It is only by reading her diary that one can understand what
a mental agony it was for Miss Anthony to press this matter upon
congressmen, year after year, to be repulsed by those who were opposed
and only tolerated by those in favor, who had many other matters on hand
which to them seemed of much greater importance. "Oh, if men only could
know how hard it is for women to be forever snubbed when they attempt to
plead for their rights! It is perfectly disheartening that no member
feels any especial interest or earnest determination in pushing this
question of woman suffrage, to all men only a side issue," she writes in
this little confidant; but not even in her letters is there ever a note
of discouragement. To the world at large and to those who were
associated with her, she was always brave, bright and hopeful. It causes
a keen heartache to reflect upon how she crucified herself for fifty
years, unfaltering and uncomplaining, in order to make conditions better
for womankind. To Hon. William D. Kelley, of Pennsylvania, who believed
in woman suffrage and voted for it, but did not feel enough interest to
push the matter in Congress, she wrote, January 6, 1884:
No one shrinks more from making herself obnoxious than I do, and
but for the sake of all women, your darling Florence included, I
should never again say a word to you on the subject of using your
influence to secure the passage of a Sixteenth Amendment
proposition. Last winter you put off my appeal for help with, "This
is the short session and the tariff question is of momentous
importance." Now, since this is the "long session," will you not
take hold of this work, and with the same earnestness that you do
other questions?
It is cruel for you to leave your daughter, so full of hope and
resolve, to suffer the humiliations of disfranchisement she already
feels so keenly, and which she will find more and more galling as
she grows into the stronger and grander woman she is sure to be. If
it were your son who for any cause was denied his right to have his
opinion counted, you would compass sea and land to lift the ban
from him. And yet the crime of denial in his case would be no
greater than in that of your daughter. It is only because men are
so accustomed to the ignoring of woman's opinions, that they do not
believe women suffer from the injustice as would men; precisely as
people used to scout the idea that negroes, whose parents before
them always had been enslaved, suffered from that cruel bondage as
white men would.
Now, will you not set about in good earnest to secure the
enfranchisement of woman? Why do not the Republicans push this
question? The vote on Keifer's resolution showed almost a party
line. Of the 124 nays, only 4 were Republicans; while of the 85
yeas, only 13 were Democrats. Even should you fail to get another
committee, the discussion and the vote would array the members and
set each man and party in their true places to be seen of all men,
and all women too.
The term of the select committee on woman suffrage having expired with
the close of the Forty-seventh Congress, a new one was appointed by the
Senate of the Forty-eighth. The House committee on rules refused to
report such a committee but placed the question in the hands of
Representative Warren Keifer, of Ohio, who made a gallant fight for it
on the floor, during which he said: "Is not the right of petition a
constitutional right? Has not woman, in this country at least, risen
above the rim and horizon of servitude, discredit and disgrace, and has
she not a right, representing as she does in many instances great
questions of property, to present her appeals to this national council
and have them wisely and judiciously considered? I think it is due to
our wives, daughters, mothers and sisters to afford them an avenue
through which they can legitimately and judicially reach the ear of this
great nation."
He was ably assisted by Mr. Belford, of Colorado. The measure to appoint
this committee was bitterly opposed by Mr. Reagan, of Texas, who said in
a long speech: "When woman so far misunderstands her duty as to want to
go to working on the roads and making rails and serving in the militia
and going into the army, I want to protect her against it." The vote
resulted--yeas, 85, nays, 124; absent or not voting, 112.
Immediately after the return of members from the holiday recess, Miss
Anthony wrote to each of the 112 asking how he would vote if the
question came up again. To these letters 52 replies were received, 26
from Republicans, all of whom would vote yes; 26 from Democrats, 10 of
whom would vote yes, 10, no; while 6 did not know how they would vote.
As these 36 affirmative votes added to the 85 yeas would so nearly have
overcome the adverse majority, John D. White, of Kentucky, at the
solicitation of Miss Anthony, made another earnest effort in February to
secure the desired committee, but the Democrats refused to allow the
question to come to a vote. She was greatly disappointed at the failure
to get the select committee, but afterwards became of the opinion that
it was more advantageous to return to the old plan of working through
the judiciary committee.
Miss Anthony had to be continually on the alert to head off zealous but
injudicious women who were determined to commit the suffrage movement to
the various ologies and isms of the day, and especially to personal
matters. Even a woman so intellectually great as Mrs. Stanton could not
be relied upon always to make her individual opinions subserve what was
demanded of her position as president of the National Association. In
January Miss Anthony received a document which Mrs. Stanton had prepared
as an "open letter," to be signed by both of them officially and given
to the press, congratulating Frederick Douglass upon his marriage to a
white woman and sympathizing with him because of the adverse criticism
it had called out! She especially urged that he be given a prominent
place on the program at the approaching convention. Miss Anthony replied
at once:
I do hope you won't put your foot into the question of
intermarriage of the races. It has no place on our platform, any
more than the question of no marriage at all, or of polygamy, and,
so far as I can prevent it, shall not be brought there. I beg you
therefore not to congratulate him publicly. Were there a
proposition to punish the woman and leave the man to go scot free,
then we should have a protest to make against the invidious
discrimination.
The question of the amalgamation of the different races is a
scientific one, affecting women and men alike. I do not propose to
have it discussed on our platform. Our intention at this convention
is to make every one who hears or reads believe in the grand
principle of equality of rights and chances for women, and if they
see on our program the name of Douglass every thought will be
turned toward the subject of amalgamation and away from that of
woman and her disfranchised. Neither you nor I have the right thus
to complicate or compromise our question, and if we take the bits
in our teeth in one direction we must expect our compeers to do the
same in others. You very well know that if you plunge in, as your
letter proposes, your endorsement will be charged upon me and the
whole association. Do not throw around that marriage the halo of a
pure and lofty duty to break down race lines. Your sympathy has run
away with your judgment. Lovingly and fearfully yours.
It is hardly necessary to say that the "open letter" was not published.
Everybody's burdens were laid upon Miss Anthony's shoulders. In looking
over the mass of correspondence it seems as if each writer wanted
something and looked to her to supply it. All expected her to take the
lead, to do the planning, to bear the responsibility, and usually she
was equal to the demand, but even her brave spirit could not resist an
occasional groan on the pages of the diary. When a new accession to the
ranks, from whom she expected great assistance, wrote, "I do not know
how to plan but tell me what to do and I will obey," she says, "My heart
sinks within me; so few seem to use their brain-power on ways and
means." And again: "This drain of helpless women, able and willing to
work but utterly ignorant of how to do it, wears me out body and soul."
She was greatly distressed because so many of the younger women were
frequently incapacitated by illness, and writes: "O, the weak-bodied
girls of the present generation, they make me heart-sick!"
But never did the women themselves know of these feelings. To the
younger ones she wrote: "Don't give up 'beat' at any of those places
till I have dropped my plummet into them.... Your young shoulders will
have to learn to bear the crotchets of all sorts of people and not bend
or break under them.... Put all the blame on me; they may abuse me but
not you.... It makes my heart ache every minute to see you so tired....
Vent all your ill-feelings on me but keep sweet as June roses to
everybody else. It does not pay to lose your temper.... You will have to
learn to let people pile injustice on you and then trust to time to
right it all." If on rare occasions she spoke a word of censure, it was
followed by a letter in the next mail, full of sorrow and repentance.
She always signed herself, even in the darkest hours, "Yours with love
and hope." Beautiful optimism, sublime courage!
Sunday, February 3, 1884, Miss Anthony read in the morning papers of the
sudden death of Wendell Phillips. He had been to her always the one
being without a peer, the purest, sweetest, best of men. The news
overwhelmed her with grief and she wrote at once to Robert Purvis:
How cut down I am at the telegram, "Wendell Phillips is dead," and
I know you are equally so. I hope you can go on to Boston to the
funeral, and help tenderly to lay away that most precious human
clay. Who shall say the fitting word for Wendell Phillips at this
last hour as lovingly and beautifully as he has done so many, many
times for the grand men and women who have gone before him? There
seem none left but you and Parker Pillsbury to pour out your souls'
dearest love in his memory. Would that I had the tongue of an angel
and could go and bear my testimony to the grandeur of that noblest
of God's works! I can think of no one who can rightly and fully
estimate that glorious character. What a sad hour for his beloved
wife! He said to me on my last visit: "My one wish has come to be
that I may live to bury Ann." He doubtless knew of his impending
disease of the heart. On whose shoulders will fall the mantle of
Wendell Phillips? When will the children of men ever listen to
such a matchless voice? How poor the world seems! In sorrow I am
with you.
She could not stay away and, inclement as was the weather, went to
Boston three days later to look for the last time upon the loved face.
At the request of many ladies in Washington the National Convention was
held in March, instead of earlier in the winter, to avoid the social
distractions which always precede the Lenten season. The ladies were
pleasantly received by President Arthur.[19] This was an exceptionally
brilliant convention, a noteworthy feature being the large number of
letters containing the greetings of the distinguished men and women of
Great Britain, whom Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton had met and interested
during their trip abroad. The following was read from Matthew Simpson,
senior bishop in the Methodist church, among his last public utterances,
as he died a few months later:
For more than thirty years I have been in favor of suffrage for
woman. I was led to this position, not by the consideration of the
question of natural rights or of alleged injustice or of inequality
before the law, but by what I believed would be her influence on
the great moral questions of the day. Were the ballot in the hands
of women, I am satisfied that the evils of intemperance would be
greatly lessened; and I fear, without that ballot, we shall not
succeed against the saloons and kindred evils in large cities. You
will doubtless have many obstacles placed in your way; there will
be many conflicts to sustain; but I have no doubt that the coming
years will see the triumph of your cause, and that our higher
civilization and morality will rejoice in the work which
enlightened women will accomplish.[20]
[Illustration: Autograph: "M. Simpson"]
Both Senate and House committees granted hearings, and eloquent
addresses were made by delegates from many States. Miss Anthony said in
part:
This is the fifteenth year we have appeared before Congress in
person, and the nineteenth by petitions, asking national protection
for women in the exercise of their right to vote. In the winter of
1865 and 1866 we sent your honorable body a ten-thousand prayer,
asking you not to put "male" in the second section of the proposed
Fourteenth Amendment; and again we appealed to you by thousands of
petitions that you would add "sex" after "race or color" in the
Fifteenth, but all to no avail. Then by an eighty-thousand petition
in 1871 we demanded the enactment of a declaratory law that women
had the right to vote under the first section of the Fourteenth
Amendment. This, too, was denied us, not only by Congress but by
the Supreme Court, which held that the framers of the amendment had
only "colored men" in their thought, therefore none others could
come within its purview. From 1876 to the present we have from year
to year poured into Congress hundreds of thousands of petitions
asking you to take the initiative step for another amendment which
shall specifically prohibit the disfranchisement of women.
But, you say, why do you not go to your several States to secure
this right? I answer, because we have neither the women nor the
money to make the canvasses of the thirty-eight States, school
district by school district, to educate each individual man out of
the old belief that woman was created to be his subject. Four State
legislatures submitted the question of striking "male" from their
constitutions--Kansas, Michigan, Colorado and Nebraska--and we made
the best canvass of each which was possible for a disfranchised
class outside of all political help. Negro suffrage was again and
again overwhelmingly voted down in various States; and you know,
gentlemen, that if the negro had never had the ballot until the
majority of white men, particularly the foreign born, had voted
"yes," he would have gone without it until the crack of doom. It
was because of this prejudice of the unthinking majority that
Congress submitted the question of the negro's enfranchisement to
the legislatures of the several States, to be adjudicated by the
educated, broadened representatives of the people. We now appeal to
you to lift the decision of _our_ question from the vote of the
populace to that of the legislatures, that thereby you may be as
considerate and just to the women of this nation as you were to the
freedmen.
Every new privilege granted to woman has been by the legislatures.
The liberal laws for married women, the right of the wife to own
and control her inherited property and separate earnings, the right
of women to vote at school elections in a dozen States, full
suffrage in two Territories, all have been gained through the
legislatures. Had any one of these beneficent propositions been
submitted to the vote of the rank and file do you believe a
majority would have placed their sanction upon it? I do not; and I
beg you, Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, that you will
at once recommend to the House the submission of the proposition
now before you, and thus place the decision of this great
constitutional question of the right of one-half the people of this
republic to a voice in the government, with the legislatures of the
several States. You need not fear that our enfranchisement will
come too suddenly or too soon by this method. After the proposition
shall have passed Congress by the requisite two-thirds vote, it may
require five, ten or twenty years to secure its ratification by the
necessary three-fourths of the State legislatures; but, _once
submitted by Congress, it always will stand until ratified by the
States_.
It takes all too many of us women from our homes and from the works
of charity and education in our respective localities, even to come
to Washington, session after session, until Congress shall have
submitted the proposition, and then to go from legislature to
legislature, urging its adoption. But when you insist that we shall
beg at the feet of each individual voter of every one of the
States, native and foreign, black and white, learned and ignorant,
you doom us to incalculable hardships and sacrifices, and to most
exasperating insults and humiliations. I pray you to save us from
the fate of waiting and working for our freedom until we shall have
educated the ignorant masses of men to consent to give their wives
and sisters equality of rights with themselves. You surely will not
compel us to await the enlightenment of all the freedmen of this
nation and the newly-made voters from the monarchial governments of
the old world!
Liberty for one's self is a natural instinct possessed alike by all
men, but to be willing to accord liberty to another is the result
of education, of self-discipline, of the practice of the golden
rule. Therefore we ask that the question of equality of rights to
women shall be decided by the picked men of the nation in Congress,
and the picked men of the several States in their respective
legislatures.
The Senate committee again submitted a majority report in favor of a
Sixteenth Amendment enfranchising women, signed by T. W. Palmer, Blair,
Lapham and Anthony. The minority report, by Joseph E. Brown, Cockrell
and Fair, began: "The undersigned believe that the Creator intended that
the sphere of the males and females of our race should be different,"
etc.
The House Judiciary Committee gave a majority report in the
negative.[21] The minority report in favor was signed by Thomas B. Reed,
Maine; Ezra B. Taylor, Ohio; Thomas M. Browne, Indiana; Moses A. McCoid,
Iowa. It is one of the keenest, clearest expositions of the absurdity of
the objections against woman suffrage that ever has been made, and ends
with this trenchant paragraph:
It is sometimes asserted that women now have a great influence in
politics through their husbands and brothers. That is undoubtedly
true. But this is just the kind of influence which is not wholesome
for the community, for it is influence unaccompanied by
responsibility. People are always ready to recommend to others
what they would not do themselves. If it be true that women can not
be prevented from exercising political influence, is not that only
another reason why they should be steadied in their political
action by that proper sense of responsibility which comes from
acting themselves? We conclude then, that every reason which in
this country bestows the ballot upon man is equally applicable to
the proposition to bestow the ballot upon woman, and in our
judgment there is no foundation for the fear that woman will
thereby become unfitted for all the duties she has hitherto
performed.
Miss Anthony mailed 500 packages of copies of this report to different
points for distribution. Upon the urgent invitation of the suffrage
association of Connecticut she went there for a few days to assist at
their State convention, but in a letter to Mrs. Spofford she said: "I
shall return tomorrow night, if possible. I keep thinking of those men
at the Capitol not doing what I want them to." She afterwards wrote to
May Wright Sewall:
My plan is to get away from here the minute I can do so without
letting our work suffer in Congress. A week ago the House Judiciary
Committee voted down a motion to print our "hearing" speeches.
Yesterday I went up and called out a Democrat who I knew had voted
"no," and hence could move to reconsider, and he promised to go
back and thus move, and did so, and Mr. Browne, of Indiana, asked
leave of the House to print them. I wish you would write to Mr.
Browne that he is splendid and our main help now in the committee.
Cockrell has been trying to prevent printing the Senate "hearing,"
but Blair, Lapham, Palmer and Anthony are bound it shall be
printed. Still, all would fall flat and dead if some one were not
here to keep them in mind of their duty to us.
[Illustration: Autograph: "Yours &c, Thomas M. Browne"]
Miss Anthony remained in Washington till April 14, managing her forces
like an experienced general until the last gun had been fired. When she
returned home ready to begin work on the History, she found to her
amazement that the officer who had been charged with preparing the
report of the Sixteenth National Suffrage Convention, a woman of great
literary ability, had given it up in despair, declaring that it would be
utterly impossible to make anything creditable out of such a mass of
unsatisfactory material, most of which would have to be entirely
re-written. Miss Anthony did not stop to sit down and weep, but wrote
her at once to send to Rochester every document she had in her
possession. Then, taking all of them to Mrs. Stanton, who had gone to
her old paternal home at Johnstown, they arranged, edited, re-wrote and
put into shape the conglomerate of letters, speeches, etc., and in less
than two weeks prepared and sent to the printer the most complete report
ever made of a National convention.[22]
The middle of May, after two years' interruption, Miss Anthony and Mrs.
Stanton set themselves diligently to finish the third volume of the
History of Woman Suffrage, all the boxes and trunks of material having
been shipped from Tenafly. Although submerged in the avalanche of old
documents, Miss Anthony's mind was full of current events. She writes in
her journal June 2: "I wait with bated breath the news from Oregon,
where today the men are voting on the question of woman's
enfranchisement. My heart almost stands stills. I hope against hope, but
still I hope." When the news of the defeat comes, she says: "Dear Mrs.
Duniway, with all that debt left on her shoulders, which she assumed to
carry on the campaign! I felt so agonized for her that on the very day
of election I rushed to the bank and sent her $100. We must not leave
her to carry it alone, after all her brave work. I have written a dozen
letters to friends asking them to give her assistance. I feel like a
lion champing the bars of his cage, shut up here digging and delving
among the records of the past when I long to be out doing the work of
the present." In a letter received from Senator Palmer at this time he
says:
I fully sympathize with your regret and chagrin over the reverse in
Oregon but hardly with your conclusion, viz., that "the women
should stop asking legislatures to submit this question to the
electors, to have it killed by the majority, made up of ignorance
and whiskey, native and foreign, and all go to Congress for
success," etc. It seems to me that nothing is to be lost and much
to be gained by local discussions and temporary defeats. You know
in 1850 Webster, in his unfortunate Revere House speech,
stigmatized the anti-slavery movement as "a rub-a-dub agitation,"
and Wendell Phillips closed his masterly philippic thereon with
what was accepted as a motto: Agitate! Agitate!! Agitate!!! Another
decade of that rub-a-dub agitation sufficed to divide the continent
in a political earthquake and from out the chasm the negro emerged
to citizenship. It may still require years to educate a majority of
our women to demand the franchise and a majority of our men or
their representatives in Congress and the legislatures, to proclaim
it, but that the way leads through constant agitation I make no
doubt. The still pool casts nothing to shore.
[Illustration: Autograph: "With high personal esteem I have the honor to
be, Very truly yours, T W Palmer"]
She watches events across the water and writes on July 7: "Well, the
House of Lords is today discussing whether 2,000,000 farm laborers shall
have the ballot placed in their hands, while the half-million, more or
less, women who employ them are left without it. What an outrage that
Mr. Gladstone refused to allow Mr. Woodall's amendment to his bill to be
at least voted upon! He applied the party whip and made voting for the
woman suffrage amendment disloyalty to the government, and over one
hundred Liberals, who had previously declared themselves in favor of
women's sharing in this new extension of the franchise, voted against
allowing them to do so. I do not believe a more humiliating abnegation
of principle at the behest of a party leader ever was witnessed in our
Congress."
The national political conventions in the summer of 1884 received the
usual appeal to recognize the claims of women. The Republican,
Democratic, Anti-Monopoly and Greenback parties equivocated, although
the last two nominated Benjamin F. Butler, an avowed advocate of woman
suffrage; the Prohibition convention relegated the question to the
States[23]. The American party put in a plank and nominated S. C.
Pomeroy, a champion of woman suffrage, but it had too small a following
to offer any hope of success. Blaine was not a friend, Logan was an
earnest one; Cleveland was not acceptable to many women, Hendricks had
never shown himself favorable. In the midst of such a conglomeration the
wise thing for all women would have been to remain non-partisan and take
no share in the campaign. Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton, however,
watching events from their secluded nook, issued a manifesto urging
women to stand by the Republican party. They were led to take this
action by the tendency of large numbers to rush to the support of the
Prohibitionists, because of their suffrage plank; and they believed that
if women were determined to work for some political party, the
Republican at that time held out most hope. This aroused the antagonism
of the Prohibitionists and Democrats, both men and women, and afforded
the strongest possible object lesson to Miss Anthony of the wisdom of
henceforth adhering to her policy of non-partisanship until one of the
_dominant_ parties should declare unmistakably for woman suffrage and
advocate it by means of press and platform.
In August occurred the death of Sarah Pugh, the gentle Quaker and
staunch Abolitionist, her old and faithful friend. It was followed by
that of Frances D. Gage a few months later; and in December passed away
the true and helpful ally, William Henry Channing. Each left a void in
her heart, and yet the memory of these great souls impelled to renewed
effort. There was no cessation of the work on the History, which was
slowly evolved through the heat of summer and the beautiful days of
early autumn, but by the end of October the funds were exhausted, the
money left by Mrs. Eddy was still in litigation, and Miss Anthony again
went on the lecture platform, speaking almost every night through
November and December.
She did not fail, however, to look carefully after the interests of the
Seventeenth National Convention which met as usual in Washington,
January 20, 1885. A letter from Clarina Howard Nichols was sent to be
read at this meeting, but the hand which penned it was stilled in death
before it was received. Of all the pioneer workers with whom Miss
Anthony had been associated in the early days so full of scorn, ridicule
and abuse, Mrs. Nichols was among the nearest and dearest, a forceful
speaker and writer, a tender, loving woman. It was in this convention
that the resolution denouncing dogmas and creeds was introduced by Mrs.
Stanton, and caused much commotion and heated argument. Miss Anthony
opposed it, saying:
I object to the words "derived from Judaism." It does not matter
where the dogma came from. I was on the old Garrison platform, and
found long ago that the settling of any question of human rights by
people's interpretation of the Bible is utterly impossible. I hope
we shall not go back to that war. We all know what we want, and
that is the recognition of woman's perfect equality. We all admit
that such recognition never has been granted in the centuries of
the past; but for us to begin a discussion here as to who
established this injustice would be anything but profitable. Let
those who wish go back into their history, but I beg it shall not
be done on our platform.[24]
The public, which always longed for a sensation at these suffrage
conventions and was disappointed if it did not come, seized upon this
resolution, and press and pulpit made it a text. The following Sunday W.
W. Patton, D. D., president of Howard University, preached in the
Congregational church of Washington a sermon entitled, "Woman and
Skepticism." He took the ground that as soon as women depart from their
natural sphere they become skeptical if not immoral. He gave as examples
Hypatia, Madame Roland, Harriet Martineau, Frances Power Cobbe and
George Eliot! Then turning his attention to America he said that "the
recent convention of woman suffragists gave evidence of atheism and
immorality," and that "Victoria Woodhull was the representative of the
movement in this country"[25]. And this when Mrs. Woodhull had not been
on the suffrage platform for thirteen years! Miss Anthony and Mrs.
Stanton occupied front seats and at the close of the sermon went
forward, shook hands with the preacher and Miss Anthony remarked
earnestly: "Doctor, your mother, if you have one, should lay you across
her knee and give you a good spanking for that sermon." "O, no," said
Mrs. Stanton quickly, "allow me to congratulate you. I have been trying
for years to make women understand that the worst enemy they have is in
the pulpit, and you have illustrated the truth of it." Then, while the
great divine was trying to recover his breath, they walked out of the
church. The nine days' commotion which this produced can be imagined
better than described. After some reflection Miss Anthony regretted that
she should have been provoked into her remark, but Mrs. Stanton wrote:
"Don't worry a moment. The more I think about it, the better I like it,
because it was the most contemptuous thing which could have been said.
Like that shot at Lexington, it will go round the world."
On February 6, Thomas W. Palmer called up in the Senate the resolution
for a Sixteenth Amendment and supported it by that masterly speech which
ever since has been one of the strongest suffrage campaign documents.
At the request of Miss Anthony thousands of copies were sent out under
his frank. She went from Washington to Boston to attend a meeting of the
National branch of the Massachusetts association, and soon afterwards,
on March 2, started for the New Orleans Exposition. She was warmly
welcomed by Mrs. Caroline E. Merrick, wife of Judge E. T. Merrick, at
whose lovely home she was entertained during part of her stay. It was
her first visit to the Crescent City and she was soon deluged with
invitations to speak and received many charming tokens of the
justly-famed southern hospitality.
She spoke before the Woman's Club in the hall of the Continental Guards,
with May Wright Sewall, representative from Indiana; gave seven
addresses, in as many days, before schools and colleges and, by
invitation of the Press Association, spoke in Agricultural Hall at the
exposition and visited the headquarters of the different papers. The
next day, by request of Commissioner Truman, she gave an address and
held a reception at the New York headquarters. Her last appearance was
at Tulane Hall under the auspices of the teachers of the city schools.
She was everywhere beautifully received, although her doctrines were new
and unpopular, and at the close of each meeting her audience crowded
about her with words of appreciation and cordiality. Miss Anthony here
met for the first time "Catherine Cole," of the editorial staff, and
Mrs. Eliza J. Nicholson, owner and manager of the Picayune. The latter
presented her with an Indian basket filled to overflowing with orange
blossoms, and this tribute was paid in her paper:
THE APOSTLE OF WOMAN'S RIGHTS.--Miss Susan B. Anthony has made a
most favorable impression upon the New Orleans public, and has by
her gentleness and courtesy won many friends for herself and her
cause. She came here a total stranger, and recognized the fact that
there were many who did not approve of her or her doctrines. She
has been sincere, truly polite and simply womanly in all her
dealings with the southern people, and by these very qualities has
commanded the respectful esteem of all. Miss Anthony has not
striven to make herself "solid" with the people who give the best
dinners.... The workingwoman, the unfashionable woman, have been
made as heartily welcome as the leader of society; and for their
appreciation they have been repaid by the friendship and esteem of
one of the grandest old maids that ever lived.
The Times-Democrat and Daily States also gave full and favorable reports
of her visit and lectures. The two weeks allowed for this holiday sped
quickly away and Miss Anthony left for the North on March 20, laden with
luncheon, flowers and many tokens of affection from the women of New
Orleans. At Marshall, Tex., she dined with President and Mrs. Culver, of
Bishops' University, and reached St. Louis Sunday evening, where she was
the guest of her nephew, Arthur A. Mosher, and his wife. The next four
or five weeks were spent in the lecture field at hard work, under the
management of the Slayton Bureau. In answer to her letter of regret at
not meeting Mrs. J. Ellen Foster at an Iowa convention, as she had
requested, Mrs. Foster wrote: "I was sorry enough not to see you but I
gave the people your message in the evening. Dear soul, how long you
have stood for the truth delivered unto you! God bless your words and
works. I do not see creeds and dogmas just as you see them, I do not
believe in all that you do, but I believe in you!"
The last of April came the long-expected summons to Boston to receive
the legacy of Mrs. Eddy, the courts having sustained the will. While
eastward bound, crossing the State of Illinois, newspapers were brought
on the train announcing the death of Grant, and she writes: "The weather
is lovely and springlike today, but how still and solemn it seems out
here on these broad prairies with that great general gone forever!" The
case had been in litigation three years, Benjamin F. Butler appearing
for Miss Anthony and Lucy Stone. His fees were very reasonable but
several thousand dollars were swallowed up in the suit. The legacy, in
first-class securities, stocks, bonds, etc., was paid April 27, each
receiving $24,125.[26] Miss Anthony gives an amusing account, in one of
her letters, of the awful nightmare she had on board the sleeper going
home, when she dreamed that a woman was at the head of her berth
stifling her while a man knelt in front, his hand cautiously creeping
toward the inside pocket where she had sewed the money and bonds. She
awoke with a scream and did not go to sleep again.
If this bequest had been left to Miss Anthony for her own personal use,
she could not have felt one-half the joy she now experienced in having
the means to carry on the work which always had been so seriously
impeded for lack of funds. Of course its receipt was heralded far and
wide by the papers, and appeals began to pour in from all sides, nor
were they always appeals, but often demands. Scores of women considered
themselves entitled to a share because the money had been left to
further the cause of woman. One wanted it to help lift a mortgage on her
home, others to educate their children, to pay a debt, to reward them
for the valuable services they had given to woman suffrage, to start a
paper, to carry one already started, and so on without end. The men also
were willing to relieve her of a portion. "I am terribly oppressed by it
all," Miss Anthony writes, "and nothing would make me happier than to
respond to every one, but my money would melt away in a month." It was
ludicrous and yet pitiful to see certain persons who had repudiated her
in days gone by because she was too radical and too aggressive,
discovering all at once how much they always had valued her and how
anxious they had been for a long time to renew the old friendship--the
common story, ancient as the world.
The one thing she was determined to do first of all was to complete the
History of Woman Suffrage, upon which she and Mrs. Stanton had spent all
the days that could be spared for nearly ten years. The work had been
delayed by the many other demands upon their time, by their trips
abroad, but more than all else by lack of money. The authors were to pay
for composition, stereotyping, the making of the plates for the
engravings and the printing of the same; Fowler & Wells for the paper,
press-work, binding and advertising. Miss Anthony and her co-workers
were to receive only 12-1/2 per cent. commission on the sales. It
readily may be seen that she did not go into this as a money-making
scheme. Her only thought, her only desire, was to collect the facts in
connection with the movement to secure the rights of women, before they
should be scattered and lost, and to preserve and put them into shape
for reference.
In preparing the first two volumes she had used every dollar she had
been able to earn and all she could obtain from generous friends, and
there were still large unpaid bills. Now, with plenty of money at her
command, she bought out the rights of Fowler & Wells, and engaged
Charles Mann, of Rochester, to print the third volume. Mrs. Stanton had
returned to Tenafly, and there Miss Anthony again sent all the trunks
and boxes of precious documents. She completed her lecture engagements
and the first of June, 1885, found the two women once more hard at work.
"I really think of you with pity these hot midsummer days," wrote Mrs.
Sewall to Mrs. Stanton, "under the lash of blessed Susan's relentless
energy; but the reflection that she applies it with the most vigor to
her own back enables one to regard that instrument, after all, with more
admiration than terror." It was indeed true that Mrs. Stanton's luxury
and ease-loving nature required much urging,[27] and while Miss Anthony
took upon herself all the drudgery possible and all the financial
anxiety and burden, she was compelled to keep Mrs. Stanton keyed up to
do a great portion of the literary work. "It is the one drawback at
every turn," she writes, "that I have not the faculty to frame easy,
polished sentences. If I could but do this, I would finish up the
History without asking aid of anyone." And again: "It has been the bane
of my life that I am powerless to put on paper the glimpses of thoughts
which come and go like flashes of lightning." As has been said before in
these pages, she is a perfect critic and delightful letter-writer, but
finds difficulty in doing what is called "literary work." Practice
undoubtedly would have enabled her to overcome this, but she felt
always that her chief strength lay in executive ability.
[Illustration: MISS ANTHONY AND MRS. STANTON.
WRITING THE HISTORY OF WOMAN SUFFRAGE.]
Early in June Miss Anthony slipped away from the work long enough to go
to the Progressive Friends' meeting at Kennett Square, Penn., where she
was the guest of Deborah Pennock and met, for the first time, Sarah J.
Eddy. In her diary she says: "Last evening as I sat on the sofa Miss
Eddy put her arms around me and said, 'I am so glad I love you; I should
have felt very sorry if I had not.' And so should I, for the sake of her
dear mother and grandfather, who had so much confidence in me." The two
went on to New York together and then over to Mrs. Stanton's for a
little visit, and the friendship formed at that time has been maintained
ever since. Later when Miss Eddy was going to Rochester to a convention,
Miss Anthony wrote Mrs. Hallowell: "I am sure you would be glad to
entertain her; she is a sweet, lovely little woman; thoroughly
sympathizing with everything and everybody that suffers injustice. I am
very sorry that sister Mary and I must be away and can not have the dear
girl with us."
Miss Anthony experienced a great disadvantage in being so far away from
her publisher, the more especially as she had to send a chapter at a
time, read proofs of each as soon as it was set up, send back corrected
proof, get the revises, etc., and she soon found it necessary to spend
about half her time in Rochester. The women who were preparing the
chapters for their respective States delayed the work, neglecting to
send them when promised; many occupied twice as much space as had been
assigned them and were highly indignant when Mrs. Stanton used the blue
pencil unsparingly on their productions. They vented their feelings on
Miss Anthony, knowing that nothing they could say would ruffle Mrs.
Stanton's equipoise, and she writes in her diary: "To decide between the
two has almost torn me in twain. People who can write are so tenacious,
each thinking her own style better than any other, while poor I don't
know which is the best."
Every few weeks she was obliged to rush over to Fayetteville to confer
with Mrs. Gage, who was industriously preparing her part of the work.
Urgent appeals came from women in Michigan, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Kansas
and Indiana that they could not possibly make a success of their State
conventions unless she came to their assistance, but she steeled her
heart against them and stuck closely to her task. From the lecture
bureau came a list of ten engagements at $50 a night, but she refused
them. Some of the expressions in her letters of those busy days show the
state of her mind better than could volumes of description:
All the work of today put aside to grope into the old past. I feel
like rushing to you this very minute, but here Mrs. Stanton and I
are, scratching, scratching every hour, not each other's eyes but
the History papers. I am a fish out of water.... It makes me feel
growly all the time.... I can not get away from my ball and
chain.... I think we'll make things snap and crackle a little....
This is the biggest swamp I ever tried to wriggle through.... We'll
both put on our thinking caps and I guess get quite a lot of
funnies in the reminiscences.... Now here is the publisher's
screech for money.... O, to get out of this History prison!... I am
too tired to write--I mean too lazy.... No warhorse ever panted for
the rush of battle more than I for outside work. I love to make
history but hate to write it.
On November 12 Mrs. Stanton's seventieth birthday was celebrated by a
large reception held in the parlors of Dr. Lozier in New York, where
Mrs. Stanton read a charming paper on "The Pleasures of Old Age." Her
daughter, Harriot Stanton Blatch, sent the following bright and breezy
message:
... How I wish I could give my congratulations in the flesh!
Distance is the foe of love. Kiss dear Susan and let her kiss you
for me. On November 12 I shall think of you both, for you two are
not easily separated in my mind, and there will be a tenderness in
my thoughts and a thankfulness that you both have lived. In your
worries over the History, remember that at least one woman
appreciates the fact that her life has been made easier because of
your combined public work. You ought to be overflowing with
gratitude for each other's existence, for neither without the other
would have achieved the work you have accomplished. Every day of
your lives let your hearts praise the good fortune that brought you
together. Friendship is the grandest relation in the world, and I
feel infinitely blessed in having two such women as friends. You
and dear Susan are not yet to be sainted; you have no end of work
in you still, and must labor on for many a long year, and gain many
a triumphant victory. I throw up my cap and cry hurrah for you two
grand old warriors! The curl is from Nora's little head. She shall
be taught to reverence her Queen Mother and Maid of Honor Susan.
Now farewell, dear ladies; I am wishing you on birthdays and every
day a long and happy life.
The next morning came the cablegram announcing the sudden death in
Switzerland of the mother of Julia and Rachel Foster. Miss Anthony
dropped all work when the sisters arrived at New York, went with them to
Philadelphia and rendered every possible consolation and assistance. But
not even to go to Washington to push the work in Congress and arrange
for the National Convention would she delay the task she was so anxious
to finish. She wrote scores of letters, however, in regard to both, and
the congressmen particularly had reason to feel that she had not
forgotten their promises. Her long and persistent labors were rewarded,
for the close of 1885 found the whole third volume of the History in the
hands of the printers.
FOOTNOTES:
[19] An official request was sent to the heads of the departments to
permit the women employes to attend one session of this convention but
it was refused. A few days later permission was given them to go to Mrs.
McElroy's reception at the White House, and the male employes were given
a half-holiday to attend the exercises on St. Patrick's Day.
[20] The Methodist bishops Bowman, Warren, Newman, Haven, Turner and
Walters have favored woman suffrage.
[21] Signed by Maybury, Michigan; Poland, Vermont; Tucker, Virginia;
Hammond, Georgia; Culbertson, Texas; Moulton, Illinois; Broadhead,
Missouri; Dorsheimer, New York; Collins, Massachusetts; Seney, Ohio;
Bisbee, Florida.
[22] Miss Anthony's letters show how desirous she was that everybody who
assisted at these conventions should have full measure of credit: "They
are earnest and anxious to do for woman's cause and I want them treated
fairly and leniently as to all mistakes." Again she writes: "Since
Oregon was never before represented in our conventions, her speakers
must have more room in the report than we old stagers."
[23] When Miss Anthony learned that this action had been taken with the
sanction of Frances E. Willard, she pointed out to her in vigorous
language how the Prohibition-Republicans had left that party this year
because a temperance resolution had failed in the platform committee and
had gone over to the Prohibition party, charging that the Republicans
were cowardly. Yet the very first act of this Prohibition convention, to
which Miss Willard was a delegate, was to abandon the idea of National
Supremacy and accept that of State Rights in order to conciliate the
southern members. She further said: "When the time comes in which it
will be political expediency for the Prohibition party to throw woman
suffrage overboard altogether, over it will go." Miss Willard lived to
see this prophecy fulfilled at the National Prohibition Convention of
1896.
[24] Apropos of this discussion, an amusing anecdote is related of Miss
Anthony. When confronted, in an argument, with the passage of scripture,
"Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands," etc., she replied:
"Gentlemen, no one objects to the husband being the head of the wife as
Christ was the head of the church--to crucify himself; what we object to
is his crucifying his wife."
[25] This account of the sermon is taken from the reports of half a
dozen reputable newspapers.
[26] This is the only instance where a woman has bequeathed a large
amount of money to the cause of equal rights, although a number of small
bequests have been made. Women have given millions of dollars to
churches, charities, and colleges for men but comparatively nothing to
secure freedom for those of their own sex.
[27] In one of Miss Anthony's letters she relates with amusement that
Mr. Stanton had just come in and, seeing his wife lying on the couch,
remarked, "Ah, resting, I see." "No," she replied, "I am exercising by
lying down."