And so Alice Paul’s stupendous pageant—whose stage was the entire United

States—opened.

* * * * *

The petition which the envoys were to carry across the country to

Washington was, even when it left California, the largest ever signed in

one place. It was 18,333 feet long, and contained 500,000 names.

Very soon after the envoys started, President Wilson made his first

declaration for Suffrage. He also went to New Jersey and voted for it.

Frances Joliffe was called back to California by illness in her family

at the beginning of the journey. Sara Bard Field, therefore, continued

alone across the continent with her two Swedish convoys. It was a

remarkable trip, filled with unexpected adventure. A long procession of

Mayors and Governors welcomed Mrs. Field in her nation-wide journey.

Everywhere she advertised the Democratic record in Congress. One of the

early mishaps was to get lost in the desert of Utah. They wandered about

for a whole day, and regained the highway in time to arrive in Salt Lake

City at five o’clock in the afternoon. Later in Kansas came a more

serious mishap. But let Mrs. Field speak for herself. No better picture

can be given of her picturesque journey than her own reports, published

from time to time in the _Suffragist_.

From Fallon, Nevada, Mrs. Field wrote:

Here we are in the heart of Nevada’s desert, having traveled already

over three hundred and eighty miles of every kind of country—meadow

land, green, luxurious ranches, rolling hill country, steep mountain

grades, the grass lands of the Sierras, and now through the bare but

beautiful desert.

We reached Reno at midnight on Sunday after a vision of the sublime

chaos of the Sierras at night.

At night, from a car flying the Congressional Union colors and the

Amendment banner, Miss Martin and I spoke in the streets of Reno.

The crowd listened with close attention, and pressed closely about

the car to sign the petition.

At noon today, we left Reno for the most trying and perilous part of

our journey. We are traveling across some six hundred miles of

barren land known as the “Great American Desert.” Our next

destination is Salt Lake City.

From Salt Lake City, Mrs. Field wrote:

The State Capitol, where each meeting was held, stands on a hill.

The world is at its feet. The mountains wall the entire city....

While the earth was glowing in the light of a flaming sunset, and

the mountains about stood like everlasting witnesses, Representative

Howell of Utah pledged his full and unqualified support to the Susan

B. Anthony Amendment in the coming session of Congress.

At Colorado Springs, their reception was almost a pageant. Marching to

music, a procession of women clad in purple, white, and gold surplices

and carrying banners, accompanied the Suffrage car to the City Hall

where they sang _The March of the Women_ and _The Song of the Free

Women_. The Mayor of Colorado Springs greeted them with a welcoming

speech.

In the bogs of southern Kansas, the Suffrage car had an adventure. The

_Suffragist_ says:

Pulling into Hutchinson on Monday evening over muddy roads, the car

plunged suddenly into a deep hole filled with water. The body of the

_Flier_ was almost submerged. The petitioners, fearing to step out

of the car, sat and called “Help!” into the darkness of the night

until their voices were hoarse. No response came from the apparently

deserted country. But they knew there was a farmhouse about a mile

back. So Sara Bard Field, little but brave, slipped away from her

place on the back seat; before her companions knew it, was almost up

to her waist in slimy mud. Hardly able to pull one foot out of the

mud to plant it ahead of the other, she finally, after a two hours’

struggle, reached the ranch, where the farmer and his son were

roused from their sleep (for it was now midnight) and told of the

women’s plight. In a little while, horses were harnessed and a

rescue party was on its way; but not until three o’clock did the

women start toward Hutchinson tired and wet, and covered with mud.

In Kansas City, Missouri, the Suffragists, accompanied by a procession

of automobiles, impressively long, called first on Mayor Jost and then

on Senator Reed. The difference between Suffrage and non-Suffrage States

became immediately evident from Mayor Jost’s attitude; for, while he

bade the envoys welcome, he declined to state his own convictions on the

purposes of their journey. There was no doubt about Senator Reed’s

conviction. He had voted against the Suffrage measure in the last

Session. The women made speeches. In answer, Senator Reed spoke several

sentences in such a low and indistinct manner that no one in the crowd

that overflowed his office could understand him, and a man in the

delegation called out, “You need say only one word, Senator.” There were

more speeches from the women, and, when Senator Reed saw that something

must be said, he finally declared he “would take the matter into

consideration.”

Mrs. Field writing of Missouri, said:

“In the enemy’s country,”—that is what the newspapers said of our

arrival in Missouri, the first non-Suffrage State we reached. Such

kind, genial, hospitable “enemies.” I wish all enemies were of their

disposition. For a whole day and night, Kansas City, Missouri, was

alive with Suffrage enthusiasm; great crowds attended our advent

everywhere. We never spoke that whole day, from our noon meeting on

the City Hall steps until the last late street meeting at night, but

we had more people to talk to than our voices could reach. As our

auto procession passed down the street, crowds gathered to see it;

and the windows of every business house and office building were

lined with kindly faces. Often, there was applause and cheers; when

these were lacking, there was a peculiar sort of earnest curiosity.

And, oh the Suffragists! I wish that every western voting woman who

is making a sacrificial effort at all for National Suffrage could

have seen those grateful women. “The greatest day for Suffrage

Kansas has ever seen,” said some of the older Suffrage workers: “How

good of the western women to come to our aid!” At the City Club

meeting, which was packed, Mr. Frank P. Walsh predicted National

Suffrage in 1916. There was good fellowship over a Suffrage dinner,

and earnest street meetings afterwards; gravely interested crowds

attended, and the newspapers gave large space. The whole city talked

National Suffrage for at least two days.

At Topeka occurred another adventure. A great crowd awaited the Suffrage

automobile for two hours. But sixty miles away, afflicted with tire

trouble and engine difficulties, the car stood stationary for those two

hours. And all the time, the valiant Mabel Vernon talked, hoping against

hope that the arrival of the car would interrupt her speech. She says

that in those two hours she talked everything she ever knew, guessed,

hoped, or wished for Suffrage.

The Chicago reception was unusually picturesque. Enthusiasm was

heightened by the fact that the women voters were holding a Convention

there, and they added their welcome to that of the city.

At eleven o’clock in the morning, fifty automobiles, flying the Suffrage

colors, and filled with Suffrage workers from all organizations, met

Mrs. Field at her hotel. Then the long line of cars escorted by mounted

officers, passed through the crowded streets to the Art Museum on the

wide Michigan Boulevard. Here was a stage equal in impressiveness,

although of quite a different kind, to that of the Court of Abundance,

which saw the envoys depart down their nation-wide trail. Back of them

was the great silver-gray Lake; in front of them, the long line of

monolithic Chicago skyscrapers, grim and weather-blackened; and on both

sides the wide expanses of the Boulevard. The Suffrage women, a mass of

brilliant color, covered the steps of the Museum. At the top a chorus of

a hundred women grouped about the band. From the bronze standard in the

center of the steps hung the Amendment banner. And in their midst, like,

as somebody has said—“a brown autumn leaf blown from the West”—Sara Bard

Field in her simple traveling suit punctuated all that vividness.

Mayor Thompson said:

Speaking for the City of Chicago, which I have the honor to

represent, I can say that we wish you God-speed and much success in

your mission.

He further told Mrs. Field:

We have watched the growth of the Suffrage movement with great

interest, and as you know, we have partial Suffrage in Illinois. I

hope it will not be long before women have full Suffrage here and

throughout the nation.

Mrs. Field replied:

I like Mayor Thompson’s way of putting it. At Kansas City the other

day, the Mayor quite flustered me with his speech. He said so many

things about women—for instance, that woman was a Muse that soared;

that she was the poetry of our existence; and something about the

sun, moon, and stars. Then he added that he did not think women

should be allowed to vote. I think Mayor Thompson’s method is much

better.

“My recollections yesterday,” Mrs. Field wrote to the _Suffragist_,

“are a confused mass of impressions—music and cheers—throngs of men,

women, and children—colors flying in the sunshine, and great crowds

surging and pressing about.”

In Indianapolis, there gathered to meet the envoys the largest street

meeting ever held in Indiana in behalf of Suffrage. The _Indianapolis

News_ of November 8 says:

Mrs. Sara Bard Field, brown-eyed and slender, saw men gather at the

curbing in the shadows of the Morton Monument, on the State House

steps, shortly after noon today—watched them smile as she began her

talk for Woman Suffrage, then saw their faces grow serious as they

stepped nearer. Then she smiled herself, and her argument poured

forth while “old hands” in the State House coterie and machine

politicians stood with open mouths and drank in her pleadings.

There is only space for glimpses of this picturesque single pilgrimage

from now on to its reception at Washington. At Detroit, they were

welcomed by a glowing evening reception. A long procession of

automobiles, decorated with yellow flags, yellow pennants, yellow

balloons, and illuminated yellow lanterns, met them on the outskirts of

the city, and escorted them to the steps of the County Building. Here

four stone urns foamed with red fire. “The scene was,” one of the papers

said, “like pictures of Rome in the time of the Cæsars....” In

Cleveland, they held an open-air meeting in the public square in the

midst of a whirling snowstorm. A drum, a trombone, and a cornet escorted

them—with an effect markedly comic—through the echoing corridors of the

City Hall to the Mayor’s office; escorted them, after the official call,

onto the street again. In New York came their first real accident. On

the way to Geneva, the axle broke. The Rochester motor companies

declared it was impossible to do anything for a day at least; but Mrs.

Field telephoned to the head office at Toledo, and a new axle appeared

in Rochester at seven o’clock in the evening. However, the envoys had to

drive through cold and a light fall of snow until half-past one in the

morning, in order to make the meeting at Syracuse the next day.... In

Albany, preceded by a musical car which played _The Battle Hymn of the

Republic_, they proceeded to the enormous Capitol Building, where

Governor Whitman, surrounded by his staff, met them. The Governor was

amazed that a woman had driven the car all the way from San Francisco,

and even more amazed at the size of the envoy. “I thought you would be

six feet tall,” he said.... At Providence, after a rousing welcome in

Boston—where Governor Walsh met the envoys, and the enormous crowd which

accompanied them, in the beautiful rotunda of the State House—the little

car, which now registered nearly five thousand miles of hard travel, was

put on the boat, and its occupants brought to New York City. The

weather-beaten automobile, bearing the slogan on the front, ON TO

CONGRESS!, and on the back, the great Demand banner, WE DEMAND AN

AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES ENFRANCHISING WOMEN,

followed one hundred other cars, beautifully decorated with purple

ribbons, with gold and white chrysanthemums and with floating golden

balloons, blazed—among the jet-black motors and the glossy green busses

of Fifth Avenue—a path of purple and gold. A huge meeting was held in

the ball-room at Sherry’s at which Mrs. O. H. P. Belmont, Frances

Joliffe, and Florence Kelley spoke for the Suffragists. Sara Bard Field

closed the meeting. The _Tribune_ said: “A tired little woman in a

travel-worn brown suit, she stood in the glitter of Sherry’s ball-room,

and held out a tired little brown hand.”

“We want to help you, the voting women of the West,” she pleaded; “will

you let us?” “The audience,” the _Suffragist_ says, “was moved to tears

and action: six thousand dollars was contributed to the Congressional

Union.”

The late Mayor Mitchell telephoned to the meeting his regret that he was

unable to be present because of illness; but he received the envoys at

his home, and added his name to the petition.

At Washington, the envoys were met by an escort, planned and directed

for the Congressional Union by Mary Austin, the celebrated novelist. It

comprised a group of mounted women, representing the eleven States and

Alaska, in all of which women are enfranchised; another group,

representing the thirty-seven unenfranchised States; great numbers of

flag and banner bearers, wearing long, purple capes with deep yellow

collars and white stoles; hundreds of women carrying purple, white, and

gold pennants.

The party started at once for the Capitol to the music first of the

_Marseillaise_ and then of _Dixie_.

There were two picturesque features of the parade. The famous petition

itself, bearing five hundred thousand signatures, unrolled to the length

of one hundred feet, and carried by twenty bearers, was the focus for

all eyes. A replica of the Liberty Bell, lavishly decorated in purple,

white, and gold, and mounted on the same truck which had carried it

through the Pennsylvania State campaign, of course attracted almost an

equal degree of attention.

At the top of the high broad Capitol steps Senator Sutherland of Utah

and Representative Mondell, surrounded by a group of Senators and

Representatives, formed a reception committee. To music, Sara Bard Field

and Frances Joliffe marched up the steps followed by the petition

bearers and attendants. The envoys made speeches and Senator Sutherland

and Representative Mondell replied to them.

From the Capitol, the party proceeded to the White House.

President Wilson received the envoys in the East Room. Anne Martin

introduced Sara Bard Field and Frances Joliffe.

In closing, Miss Joliffe said: “Help us, Mr. President, to a new freedom

and a larger liberty.”

Sara Bard Field emphasized that same note:

... and, Mr. President, as I am not to have the woman’s privilege of

the last word, may I say that I know what your plan has been in the

past, that you have said it was a matter for the States. But we have

seen that, like all great men, you have changed your mind on other

questions. We have watched the change and development of your mind

on preparedness, and we honestly believe that circumstances have so

altered that you may change your mind in this regard.

Mrs. Field then requested the President to look at the petition. He

advanced, unrolled a portion of it, and examined it with interest.

The President said:

I did not come here anticipating the necessity of making an address

of any kind. As you have just heard (and here the President smiled),

I hope it is true that I am not a man set stiffly beyond the

possibility of learning. I hope that I shall continue to be a

learner as long as I live.

I can only say to you this afternoon that nothing could be more

impressive than the presentation of such a request in such numbers

and backed by such influence as undoubtedly stands behind you.

Unhappily it is too late for me to consider what is to go into my

message, because that went out to the newspapers at least a week

ago; and I have a habit—perhaps the habit of the teacher—of

confining my utterances to one subject at a time, for fear that two

subjects might compete with one another for prominence. I have felt

obliged in the present posture of affairs to devote my message to

one subject, and am, therefore, sorry to say that it is too late to

take under consideration your request that I embody this in my

message. All I can say with regard to what you are urging at present

is this: I hope I shall always have an open mind, and I shall

certainly take the greatest pleasure in conferring in the most

serious way with my colleagues at the other end of the city with

regard to what is the right thing to do at this time concerning this

great matter. I am always restrained, as some of you will remember,

by the consciousness that I must speak for others as well as for

myself as long as I occupy my present office, and, therefore, I do

not like to speak for others until I consult others and see what I

am justified in saying.

This visit of yours will remain in my mind, not only as a very

delightful compliment, but also as a very impressive thing which

undoubtedly will make it necessary for all of us to consider very

carefully what is right for us to do.

It will be noted that in this speech, the President referred to the

“influence” behind the women. He speaks of the “impressive” quality of

this demonstration.

From now on the strength of the woman voters became a dominant note in

the work with both the President and Congress.

On December 12, a great mass-meeting of welcome to the envoys was held

in the Belasco Theatre. Forty-five thousand dollars was pledged there

for the work with Congress.

* * * * *

The Sixty-fourth Congress convened December 6.

The Susan B. Anthony Amendment, at the request of the Congressional

Union, was introduced in the Senate on December 7 by Senator Sutherland

of Utah and in the House on December 6 by Representative Mondell of

Wyoming. Other members introduced the identical measure the same day. In

the Senate, it was referred to the Committee on Woman Suffrage and in

the House to the Judiciary Committee.

* * * * *

On December 16 occurred a Suffrage hearing before the Judiciary

Committee. It will be remembered that this was the first hearing since

the Congressional Union had campaigned against the Democratic Party. It

was one of the most stormy in the history of the Congressional Union.

Later a Republican Congressman referred to it, not as the “hearing,” but

as the “interruption.” The storm did not break until after two hours in

which the speakers of the other Suffrage Association had been heard, and

the following members of the Congressional Union: Mrs. Andreas Ueland,

Jennie C. Law Hardy, Florence Bayard Hilles, Mabel Vernon, all

introduced by Alice Paul.

At this point, there occurred among the Democratic members of the

Committee a sudden meeting of heads, a disturbed whispering. To informed

lookers-on, it became evident that it had just dawned on them that the

pale, delicate, slender slip of a girl in a gown of violet silk and a

long Quakerish white fichu was the power behind all this agitation, that

redoubtable Alice Paul who had waged the campaign of 1914 against them.

As Alice Paul rose to introduce one of the speakers, Mr. Taggart of

Kansas interrogated her. It will be remembered that this was the Mr.

Taggart whose majority had been diminished, by the Woman’s Party

campaign, from three thousand to three hundred.

Mr. Taggart to Miss Paul: Are you here to report progress in your

effort to defeat Democratic candidates?

Miss Paul: We are here to talk about this present Congress—this

present situation. We are here to ask the Judiciary Committee to

report this bill to the House.

Mr. Taggart: I take this occasion to say as a member of this

committee that if there was any partisan organization made up of men

who had attempted to defeat members of this committee, I do not

think we would have given them a hearing. And if they had been men,

they wouldn’t have asked it.

Miss Paul: But you hear members of the Republican Party and of the

Prohibition Party.

Mr. Webb: They aren’t partisan. (Laughter).

Mr. Taggart, coming back to the attack: You didn’t defeat a single

Democratic Member of Congress in a Suffrage State.

Miss Paul, quickly: Why, then, are you so stirred up over our

campaign? (Audible murmur from Republican left wing).

Mr. Webb: I move a recess of this committee for one hour.

After the recess Miss Paul rose to introduce Helen Todd of California.

Mr. Williams put the following question to her:

Miss Paul, would you state to me the names of the candidates for

Congress which your organization opposed in the State of Illinois?

Miss Paul: We conducted our campaign only in the nine States in

which women were able to vote for members of Congress. In no way did

we participate in the campaign in Illinois.

Miss Paul then introduced Helen Todd. After Miss Todd had spoken,

Frances Joliffe and Sara Bard Field spoke.

Later Alice Paul said:

In closing the argument before this committee, may I summarize our

position? We have come here to ask one simple thing: that the

Judiciary Committee refer this Suffrage Amendment, known as the

Susan B. Anthony Amendment, to the House of Representatives. We are

simply asking you to do what you can do—that you let the House of

Representatives decide this question. We have tried to bring people

to this hearing from all over the United States to show the desire

of women that this should be done.

I want to emphasize just one point, in addition, that we are

absolutely non-partisan. We are made up of women who are strong

Democrats, women who are strong Republicans, women who are

Socialists, Progressives—every type of women. We are all united on

this one thing—that we put Suffrage before everything else. In every

election, if we ever go into any future elections, we simply pledge

ourselves to this—that we will consider the furtherance of Suffrage

and not our party affiliations in deciding what action we shall

take.

Mr. Williams, of Illinois: Is it your policy to fight this question

out only as a national issue? Do you make any attempt to secure

relief through the States?

Miss Paul: The Congressional Union is organized to work for an

Amendment to the National Constitution. We feel that the time has

come, because of the winning of so many Suffrage States in the West,

to use the votes of women to get Suffrage nationally. In the earlier

days in this country, all the Suffrage work was done in the States,

but the winning of the Western States has given us a power which we

did not have before, so we have now turned from State work to

national work. We are concentrating on the national government.

Mr. Gard: Miss Paul, is it true that you prefer to approach this

through the State legislatures than to approach it directly through

the people?

Miss Paul: We prefer the quickest way, which we believe is by

Congressional action.

Mr. Taggart: Why did you oppose the Democrats in the last election?

Miss Paul: We came into existence when the administration of

President Wilson first came in. We appealed to all members of

Congress to have this Amendment put through at once. We did get that

measure out upon the floor of the House and Senate, but when it came

to getting a vote in the House we found we were absolutely blocked.

We went again and again, week after week, and month after month to

the Democratic members of the Rules Committee, who controlled the

apportioning of the time of the House, and asked them to give us

five or ten minutes for the discussion of Suffrage. Every time they

refused. They told us that they were powerless to act because the

Democrats had met in caucus and decided that Suffrage was a matter

to be decided in the States and should not be brought up in

Congress. (Here Miss Paul, moving the papers in front of her, deftly

extracted a letter.) I have here a letter from Mr. Henry, Chairman

of the Rules Committee, in which he says: “It would give me great

pleasure to report the Resolution to the House, except for the fact

that the Democratic caucus, by its direct action, has tied my hands

and placed me in a position where I will not be authorized to do so

unless the caucus is reconvened and changes its decision. I am sure

your good judgment will cause you to thoroughly understand my

attitude.”

(This interesting revelation was greeted by appreciative grins from

the Republican members.)

After we had been met for months with the statement that the

Democratic Party had decided in caucus not to let Suffrage come up

in Congress, we said, “We will go out to the women voters in the

West and tell them how we are blocked in Washington, and ask them if

they will use their vote for the very highest purpose for which they

can use it—to help get votes for other women.”

We campaigned against every one of the forty-three men who were

running for Congress on the Democratic ticket in any of the Suffrage

States; and only nineteen of those we campaigned against came back

to Washington. In December, at the close of the election, we went

back to the Rules Committee. They told us then that they had no

greater desire in the world than to bring the Suffrage Amendment

out. They told us that we had misunderstood them in thinking that

they were opposed to having Suffrage come up in Congress. They voted

at once to bring Suffrage upon the floor for the first time in

history. The whole opposition of the Democratic Party melted away

and the decision of the party caucus was reversed.

The part we played in the last election was simply to tell the women

voters of the West of the way the Democratic Party had blocked us at

Washington and of the way the individual members of the Party, from

the West, had supported their Party in blocking us. As soon as we

told this record they ceased blocking us and we trust they will

never block us again.

Question: But what about next time?

Miss Paul: We hope we will never have to go into another election.

We are appealing to all Parties and to all men to put this Amendment

through this Congress and send it on to the State Legislatures. What

we are doing is giving the Democrats their opportunity. We did

pursue a certain policy which we have outlined to you as you

requested. As to what we may do we cannot say. It depends upon the

future situation.

Question: But we want to know what you will do in the 1916 election?

Miss Paul: Can you possibly tell us what will be in the platform of

the Democratic Party in 1916?

Mr. Webb: I can tell one plank that will not be there, and that is a

plank in favor of Woman Suffrage.

Question: If conditions are the same, do you not propose to fight

Democrats just the same as you did a year ago?

Miss Paul: We have come to ask your help in this Congress. But in

asking it we have ventured to remind you that in the next election

one-fifth of the vote for President comes from Suffrage States. What

we shall do in that election depends upon what you do.

Mr. Webb: We would know better what to do if we knew what you were

going to do.

Mr. Gard: We should not approach this hearing in any partisan sense.

What I would like is to be informed about some facts. I asked Mrs.

Field what reason your organization had for asking Congress to

submit this question to States that have already acted upon it. Why

should there be a resubmission to the voters by national action in

States which have either voted for or against it, when the machinery

exists in these same States to vote for it again?

Miss Paul: They have never voted on the question of a National

Amendment.

Mr. Gard: The States can only ratify it. You would prefer that

course to having it taken directly to the people?

Miss Paul: Simply because we have the power of women’s votes to back

up this method.

Mr. Gard: You are using this method because you think you have power

to enforce it?

Miss Paul: Because we know we have power.

Mr. Taggart: The women who have the vote in the West are not

worrying about what women are doing in the East. You will have to

get more States before you try this nationally.

Miss Paul: We think that this repeated advice to go back to the

States proves beyond all cavil that we are on the right track.

Mr. Taggart: Suppose you get fewer votes this time? Do you think it

is fair to those members of Congress who voted for Woman Suffrage

and have stood for Woman Suffrage, to oppose them merely because a

majority of their Party were not in favor of Woman Suffrage?

Miss Paul: Every man that we opposed stood by his Party caucus in

its opposition to Suffrage.

Mr. Volstead: This inquiry is absolutely unfair and improper. It is

cheap politics, and I have gotten awfully tired listening to it.

Mr. Taggart: Have your services been bespoken by the Republican

committee of Kansas for the next campaign?

Miss Paul: We are greatly gratified by this tribute to our value.

Mr. Moss: State just whether or not it is a fact that the question

is, What is right? and not, What will be the reward or punishment of

the members of this committee? Is not that the only question that is

pending before this committee?

Miss Paul: Yes, as we have said over and over today. We have come

simply to ask that this committee report this measure to the House,

that the House may consider the question.

Mr. Moss: Can you explain to the committee what the question of what

you are going to do to a member of this committee or a Congressman

in regard to his vote has to do with the question of what we should

do as our duty?

Miss Paul: As I have said, we don’t see any reason for discussing

that.

Mr. Webb: You have no blacklist, have you, Miss Paul?

Miss Paul: No.

Mr. Taggart: You are organized, are you not, for the chastisement of

political Parties that do not do your bidding at once?

Miss Paul: We are organized to win votes for women and our method of

doing this is to organize the women who have the vote to help other

women to get it.

The meeting then adjourned.

Before going on with the work for 1916, it is perhaps expedient to

mention here one of two interesting events. The _New York Tribune_

announced on November 5 that, “accepting the advice of Mrs. Medill

McCormick of Chicago, the National American Woman Suffrage Association

announced yesterday that it had instructed the Congressional Committee

not to introduce the Shafroth-Palmer Resolution in the Sixty-fourth

Congress.” This meant, of course, that there would in the future be no

division of the energies of the Suffrage forces of the country; that all

would work for the Susan B. Anthony Amendment.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

II

THE NEW HEADQUARTERS AND THE MIDDLE YEARS

THE second event of 1915 of less importance nationally, but of great

practical importance to the Congressional Union, was the removal of

Headquarters from the dark, congested rooms in F Street to Cameron

House, sometimes known as the Little White House. Cameron House has

held, ever since its construction, a vivid place in Washington history.

It has been occupied by Senator Donald Cameron; Vice-President Garret A.

Hobart; Senator Mark Hanna. The famous breakfasts given by Senator

Hanna, to which President McKinley often came, occurred here.

Presidents, such as John Quincy Adams, Harrison, Taylor, and Fillmore;

statesmen, such as Webster, Clay, Cass, and Calhoun; historians, such as

Prescott, Bancroft, and Washington Irving, have frequented it. The

Little White House is situated at 21 Madison Place, just across

Lafayette Square from the big White House. From the windows of the big

White House could be seen great banners of purple, white, and gold,

waving at the windows of the Little White House.

Cameron House was charming inside and out. Outside, a great wistaria

vine made in the spring a marvel of its façade, and inside a combination

of fine proportions and a charming architectural arrangement of the

rooms gave it that _gemütlich_ atmosphere necessary to a rallying spot.

When you entered, you came into a great hall, from which a noble

staircase made an effective exit, and in which a huge fireplace formed a

focussing center. All winter long, a fire was going in that fireplace;

there were easy chairs in front of it, and straying off from it. The

Little White House became a place where people dropped in easily. This

big reception hall always held a gay, interesting, and interested group,

composed of Party members resident there; sympathizers and workers who

lived in Washington; people from all over the United States who had come

to Washington on a holiday. The organizers were always returning from

the four corners of the country with a harvest of news and ideas and

plans before starting off for new fields.

Perhaps there is no better place than here to speak of the work of those

remarkable young women—the organizers. It will be remembered that from

the time of the formation of the Congressional Committee to the time

when the Senate passed the Anthony Amendment was about six years and a

half. Yet in 1919, Maud Younger said to me, “There have been three

generations of organizers in this movement.” That was true. Not that

they served their average of two years and left. Most of them who came

to work for the Party stayed with it. It was only that, as the work

grew, developed, expanded, more organizers and even more became

necessary. And perhaps it is one of the chief glories of the Woman’s

Party that these organizers came to them younger and younger, until at

the end they were fresh, beautiful girls in their teens and early

twenties.

The first group consisted of:

Mabel Vernon; Elsie Hill; Margaret Whittemore; Doris Stevens; Mrs.

Sinclair Thompson; Virginia Arnold.

The second group consisted of:

Iris Calderhead; Vivian Pierce; Beulah Amidon; Lucy Branham; Hazel

Hunkins; Clara Louise Rowe; Joy Young; Margery Ross; Mary Gertrude

Fendall; Pauline Clarke; Alice Henkel; Rebecca Hourwich.

The third group consisted of:

Julia Emory; Betty Gram; Anita Pollitzer; Mary Dubrow; Catherine

Flanagan.

The difficulties which lay in the path of the organizers cannot possibly

be exaggerated: the work they accomplished cannot possibly be estimated.

Their story is one of those sealed chapters in the history of feminism,

the whole of which will never be known. With her usual astuteness Alice

Paul always chose young, fresh, convinced, inspiring, and inspired

spirits. Always she preferred enthusiasm to experience. Before an

organizer left Headquarters for parts unknown, Alice Paul talked with

her for several hours, going over her route, indicating the problems

which would arise and—in her characteristic and indescribable Alice Paul

way—suggesting how they were to be met; holding always above these

details the shining object of the journey; managing somehow to fill her

with the feeling that in spite of many obstacles, she would conquer all

these new worlds. “No matter,” she always concluded, “what other

Suffragists may say about us, pay no attention to it; go on with your

work. Our fight is not against women.”

Sometimes these girls would come into towns where there not only existed

no Suffrage organization but there had never been a Suffrage meeting.

Sometimes they would have a list of names of people to whom to go for

help; sometimes not that. At any rate they went to the best hotel and

established themselves there. Then they found Headquarters, preferably

in the hotel lobby; but if not there, in a shop window. Next they saw

the newspapers. Inevitably it seemed—Alice Paul’s sure instinct never

failed her here—they were incipient newspaper women. From the moment

they arrived, blazing their purple, white, and gold, the papers rang

with them, and that ringing continued until they left. They called on

the women whose names had been given them, asked them to serve on a

committee in order to arrange a meeting. At that meeting, to which

National Headquarters would send a well-known speaker, the work would be

explained, the aims of the Woman’s Party set forth, its history

reviewed. When the organizer left that town, she left an organization of

some sort behind her. Alice Paul always preferred, rather than a large,

inactive membership, a few active women who, when needed, could bring

pressure to bear from their State on Washington.

In the course of its history, the Woman’s Party has organized at some

time in every State of the Union.

Whenever the organizers came back to Washington, Miss Paul always sent

them to the Capitol to lobby for a while. This put them in touch with

the Congressional situation. Moreover, Congressmen were always glad to

talk with women who brought them concrete information in regard to the

country at large, and particularly in regard to the Suffrage sentiment

and the political situation in their own States, which they had often

not seen for months. On the other hand, when the organizers embarked on

their next journey, editors of small towns were always very grateful for

the chance of talking with these informed young persons, who could bring

their news straight from the national news-mint.

But one of the great secrets of Alice Paul’s success was that she

freshened her old forces all the time, by giving them new work, brought

new forces to bear all the time on the old work. If organizers showed

the first symptoms of growing stale on one beat, she transferred them to

another. Most of them performed at some time during their connection

with the Woman’s Party every phase of its work. Perpetual change ...

perpetual movement ... the onward rush of an exhilarating flood ... that

was the feeling the Woman’s Party gave the onlooker.

I reiterate that it would be impossible to do justice, short of a book

devoted entirely to their efforts, to these organizers. They turn up

everywhere. They do everything! They know not fatigue! There is no end

to their ingenuity and enthusiasm.

In spite of all this intensive thinking, and its result in action, the

Congressional Union had its lighter moments, and many of them.

On Valentine’s Day, 1916, a thousand Suffrage valentines were despatched

to Senators and Representatives by members of the Congressional Union

living in their districts; the President and Vice-President were not

forgotten. They were of all kinds and descriptions. Recalcitrant

politicians were especially favored. The Rules Committee, for instance,

were showered. One of Mr. Henry’s valentines took the form of an

acrostic:

H is for Hurry—

Which Henry should do.

E is for Every—

Which includes women too.

N is for Now—

The moment to act.

R is for Rules—

Which must bend to the fact.

Y is for You—

With statesmanlike tact.

Mr. Pou’s valentine showed an exquisitely ruffled little maiden, with

heel-less, cross-gartered slippers and a flower-trimmed hat, curtseying

to a stocked and ruffled gentleman who is presenting her with a bouquet.

Underneath it says:

The rose is red,

The violet’s blue,

But VOTES are better

Mr. Pou.

One to Representative Williams of the Judiciary Committee ran:

Oh, will you will us well, Will,

As we will will by you,

If you’ll only will to help us

Put the Amendment through!

Representative Webb’s valentine bore the words, “From a fond heart to a

Democratic (?) Congressman,” with the following verse:

Federal aid he votes for rural highways,

And Federal aid for pork each to his need;

And Federal aid for rivers, trees, and harbors,

But Federal aid for women?—No, indeed!

Representative Fitzgerald received:

Your Party’s health is very shaky,

The Western women say,

They scorn a laggard lover

And will not tell him “Yea,”

But pass the Suffrage measure,

Then watch Election Day!

Congressman Mondell’s valentine was a red heart, on which was written:

Oh, a young Lochinvar has come out of the West,

Of all the great measures his bill was the best!

So fearless in caucus, so brave on the floor

There ne’er was a leader like young Lochinvar!

On May Day, the Woman’s Party hung a May basket for the President. It

was over-brimming with purple, white, and gold flowers, and, concealed

in their midst, was a plea for the Susan B. Anthony Amendment.

Later, in May, on Representative Williams’s birthday, he was invited by

Representative Kent to go with him into the visitors’ lobby. There he

met Gertrude and Ruth Crocker of the Congressional Union, who were

carrying on a tray, made of the Congressional Union banner and the

American flag, a huge birthday cake. It was frosted and set with

fifty-nine candles, each emerging from a small, yellow rose and bore an

inscription in purple letters:

May the coming year bring you joy and the Susan B. Anthony

Amendment.

A few days later, when Representative Steele reached his office, he

found on his desk a purple basket filled with forget-me-nots. The card

bore this inscription:

“Forget me not” is the message

I bring in my gladsome blue;

Forget not the fifty-six years that have gone

And the work there is still to do;

Forget not the Suffrage Amendment

That waits in committee for you.

The first National Convention of the Congressional Union was held at

Cameron House from December 6 to December 13, 1915. The following ten

members were elected for the Executive Committee: Alice Paul; Lucy

Burns; Mrs. O. H. P. Belmont; Mrs. John Winters Brannan; Mrs. Gilson

Gardner; Mrs. William Kent; Mrs. Lawrence Lewis; Elsie Hill; Anne

Martin; Mrs. Donald R. Hooker.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

III

THE CONFLICT WITH THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE

BOTHERATION

(“Why do you come here and bother us?”—Chairman Webb, at the Suffrage

hearing in Washington.)

Girls, girls, the worst has happened;

Our cause is at its ebb.

How could you go and do it!

You’ve bothered Mr. Webb!

You came and asked for freedom,

(As law does not forbid)

Not thinking it might bother him,

And yet, it seems, it did.

Oh, can it be, my sisters,

My sisters can it be,

You did not think of Mr. Webb

When asking to be free?

You did not put his comfort

Before your cause? How strange!

But now you know the way he feels

I hope we’ll have a change.

Send word to far Australia

And let New Zealand know,

And Oregon and Sweden,

Finland and Idaho;

Make all the nations grasp it,

From Sitka to El Teb,

We never mention Suffrage now;

It bothers Mr. Webb!

ALICE DUER MILLER.

OUR IDEA OF NOTHING AT ALL

(“I am opposed to Woman Suffrage, but I am not opposed to

woman.”—Anti-Suffrage speech of Mr. Webb of North Carolina.)

Oh, women, have you heard the news

Of charity and grace?

Look, look, how joy and gratitude

Are beaming in my face!

For Mr. Webb is not opposed

To woman in her place!

Oh, Mr. Webb, how kind you are

To let us live at all,

To let us light the kitchen range

And tidy up the hall;

To tolerate the female sex

In spite of Adam’s fall.

Oh, girls, suppose that Mr. Webb

Should alter his decree!

Suppose he were opposed to us—

Opposed to you and me.

What would be left for us to do—

Except to cease to be?

ALICE DUER MILLER.

DURING 1916, the central department of the Congressional Union—the

legislative—was in the hands of Anne Martin who after her notable

success in making Nevada a free State and with the added advantage of

being a voter herself, was particularly fitted for this work. Anne

Martin showed extraordinary ability in building back-fires in

Congressional Districts, in keeping State and district chairmen informed

of the actions of the representatives, in getting pressure from home

upon them and in organizing the lobbying. Maud Younger, as chairman of

the Lobby Committee, composed of women voters, assisted her. Lucy Burns

edited the _Suffragist_.

The friends of the Susan B. Anthony Amendment were surprised—and of

course delighted—when through the tireless efforts of Anne Martin—the

Suffrage Bill came out of committee and onto the calendar of the Senate

on January 8. In the House at first, the situation seemed equally

encouraging. But unexpected obstacles manifested themselves; continued

to multiply and grow. Presently there developed between the Judiciary

Committee and the Suffragists a contest similar to that of 1914 between

the Rules Committee and the Suffragists, but more intense.

The Judiciary Committee as usual referred the Amendment to a

sub-committee. Anne Martin lobbied the members of the sub-committee and

in consequence of this pressure, the sub-committee on February 9, voted

the report out—although without recommendation, to the full committee

which would meet on February 15.

At this meeting, by a vote of nine to seven, the Judiciary Committee

referred the Suffrage Resolution back to the sub-committee with

instructions to hold it until December 14—nearly a year off. This was an

unusual thing to do. After a sub-committee has reported a measure to the

committee, it is customary to allow at least a week to elapse before it

is acted upon, so that the members who are absent may be present when

the committee, as a whole, votes upon it. There is a gentleman’s

agreement to this effect.

In her _Revelations of a Woman Lobbyist_, in _McCall’s Magazine_, Maud

Younger thus describes the meeting of February 15:

The day ended as discouragingly as it had begun and I reported the

situation to Mr. John Nelson, of Wisconsin, the only man on the

committee who showed genuine enthusiasm.

“Your Amendment can’t come up tomorrow,” he assured me. “There’s a

gentleman’s agreement that no action shall be taken on a bill for a

week after the sub-committee reports it out. The matter lies over so

that the members may be notified to be present. Your Amendment will

come up next week.”

Relying on this reprieve, I felt no apprehension when Anne and I

went to the Capitol next morning. Standing in the anteroom of the

Judiciary Committee’s chamber, we watched the members passing

through. The committee went into executive session and the door

closed.

“There’s the gentleman’s agreement,” I said to Anne. “Nothing can

happen.”

“No,” she answered meditatively.

We waited. An hour passed and Mr. Carlin came out. He walked close

to Anne and said with a laugh as he passed her, “Well, we’ve killed

Cock Robin.”

“Cock Robin?” said Anne, puzzled, looking after him.

Mr. Nelson came out, much perturbed, and explained. Upon motion of

Mr. Carlin the Judiciary Committee had voted to send the Amendment

back to the sub-committee to remain until the following December.

This was in direct violation of the gentleman’s agreement but our

opponents had the votes, nine to seven, and they used them. Our

Amendment was killed. Every one on the committee said so. Every one

in Congress with whom we talked said so. The newspaper men said so.

Soon every one believed it but Alice Paul, and she never believed it

at all.

“That’s absurd!” she said impatiently. “We have only to make them

reconsider.”

At once she went over the list of our opponents to decide who should

make the move. “Why, William Elza Williams, of Illinois, of course.

He will do it.” She sent me to see him.

Mr. Williams was necessary not only for purposes of reconsideration,

but because, when he had changed his vote, we would have a majority

in committee. But he did not see the matter at all in the same light

in which Miss Paul saw it. He had not the least intention of

changing his vote. I pointed out that the women of Illinois, being

half voters, had some claims to representation, but he remained

obdurate.

When this was reported to Miss Paul she merely said, “Mr. Williams

will have to change his vote. Elsie Hill can attend to it.”

So Elsie, buoyant with good spirits, good health, and tireless

enthusiasm, pinned her smart hat on her reddish-brown hair and set

out through Illinois for Mr. Williams’s vote.

Presently the ripples of Elsie’s passing across the Illinois

prairies began to break upon the peaceful desk of Mr. Williams in

Washington. I found him running a worried hand through his hair,

gazing at newspaper clippings about Mr. Williams and his vote on the

Judiciary Committee. Resolutions arrived from Labor Unions asking

him to reconsider; letters from constituents, telegrams, reports of

meetings, editorials.

On March 8, a deputation of twenty members of the Congressional Union,

led by Maud Younger, called on Representative Williams. I quote the

_Suffragist_:

Mr. Williams received the women with cordiality and Miss Younger at

once laid before him the object of the visit.

“On the fifteenth of February,” said Miss Younger, “the

sub-committee reported out the Suffrage Amendment. We are told that

there is a gentleman’s agreement to the effect that when a

sub-committee reports, no action shall be taken that day but the

matter shall lie over for a week. Four of our supporters were absent

on the day of the report and the opposition sent the Amendment back

to sub-committee. There were nine votes cast in favor of sending it

back, and seven against. We feel that it was you who cast the

deciding vote, for if you had voted with supporters of Suffrage, the

vote would have been a tie, and the Amendment would not now be in

sub-committee.

“You told me that you were in favor of having this matter remain in

committee until December, because you felt it would be embarrassing

to some men who would run for office next fall. As a

trades-unionist, as well as a woman voter, I feel that the eight

million working women of this country are entitled to as much

consideration as are a few politicians.”

Miss Younger then introduced Mrs. Lowell Mellett, of Seattle,

Washington; Mrs. William Kent, of California; Mrs. Gilson Gardner,

Mrs. Charles Edward Russell, of Illinois; Anne Martin, of Nevada;

each of whom made an appeal to Mr. Williams to give his support to a

report from the Judiciary Committee during the present session.

Miss Martin said:

You are in what seems to us a very undesirable position. You are a

Representative from a Suffrage State, from a State where women have

the right to vote for President. You are a professed Suffragist, yet

you are the only member of that committee who is a Suffragist and

who is in the position of having voted with the professed

anti-Suffragists against a hearing.... We urge you to do everything

in your power to reconsider the smothering of this resolution, and

bring up the question in committee again as soon as possible, to

report it to the House and then to leave to the Rules Committee the

question of what time it shall have for discussion in this session.

We urge this most earnestly.

Mr. Williams replied:

I am pleased to hear from you ladies and to know fully your side of

this case.

If I remember correctly the conversation you refer to in which I

spoke of some embarrassment—not to myself, but to some of my

colleagues—I think I stated the condition of the calendar and the

business of this session. I have not double-crossed anybody. I have

not taken any sudden change of front. I have told every

representative of the Suffrage organization who has visited me that

I do not favor a report at this first session of the Sixty-fourth

Congress. I gave, as my primary reason, the crowded condition of the

business of this Congress. I incidentally—sometimes in a

good-natured way, as I remember—stated that it did not embarrass me

to vote on the question because I was already on record, but it

might embarrass some of my colleagues. My real views have been that

Congress has duties in this, a campaign year, when all members hope

to leave at a reasonable time within which to make their campaign;

that this session is not a good time to take upon ourselves the

consideration of any unimportant question that can be disposed of

just as well at the next session.

With a campaign approaching and two national conventions in June, I

do not believe it wise for your cause to crowd this matter on now. I

do not believe that it would get that consideration that you will

get after the election and after these necessary matters—matters of

importance and urgent necessity—are disposed of.

I am opposed to smothering anything in committee. I do not propose

to smother this in committee. I intend, when I think it is the

proper time, to vote the Susan B. Anthony Amendment out and vote for

it in the House. Now that is my intention. I have not said that I

would not do so at this session. I think the strongest that I have

put it is that I would not do so unless the work of the session is

cleared away so that we can get to it.

Now I have said more than that. At any time that you get a full

attendance of the committee, or those absent represented by pairs so

that both sides are represented, and no advantage can be taken and

no criticism made of what takes place, whenever there is what is

equivalent to a full committee present, I am willing that the

committee shall again vote on the question and determine whether

they want it out now.

Miss Younger: Before the conventions will meet in June, Congress

will have been in session six months, and we ask you for only one

day out of the six months. Some of those other questions, such as

preparedness, are not ready to come before Congress.

Mr. Williams: You would not be satisfied with one day.

Miss Martin: That is all we had last time and we were satisfied.

Mrs. Russell: Whatever action Congress takes or does not take on

preparedness, we women will have to stand for it. Any program that

Congress puts through we shall be involved in. Isn’t that just one

more reason why we ought to have a vote promptly?

Mr. Williams: Yes, but you cannot get it in time for the emergency

that is now before us. I believe this: If women had full political

rights everywhere there would not be any war. But that cannot be

brought about in time for this emergency.

“We cannot conceive,” said one member of the delegation at this

juncture, “of any situation which will not permit of three-quarters

of an hour being taken on the floor of the House for a vote.”

Mr. Williams: We have no right to refuse to submit it. I would not

smother it in committee at all, but I believe the committee has a

right to exercise their discretion as to when it shall be

submitted.... How do you take my suggestion? I am willing that a

vote may be had at any time if there is the equivalent of a full

attendance of the committee. Can that be secured?

Miss Martin: I have been working with this committee for nearly

three months, and I do not know of any session at which they have

all been present. You impose upon us now a condition that you did

not exact when this Amendment was smothered.

I think that we must regard a motion to postpone until after

election as an action unfriendly to Suffrage.

Mr. Williams: It may be. I do not see how it can be.

“Last year,” a member of the delegation then reminded Mr. Williams,

“the Amendment was postponed and voted on immediately after the

elections were safely over. The plan now is to postpone it until

after the elections to the Sixty-fifth Congress are over and no

one’s election will be jeopardized. We do not like to have the vote

taken in each Congress immediately after election.”

Miss Martin: We are not saying anything with reference to a vote on

the floor of the House at this time. We are simply asking that the

Judiciary Committee perform its function and judge the bill on its

merits and make its report to the House. Does not that appeal to

you?

Mr. Williams: Yes, it does. I am told I am the only member of the

committee who voted to postpone the Amendment, who is a

Representative from a Suffrage State. Somehow or other you have put

the burden on me.

Miss Martin: You are. The burden is on you.

Miss Younger: If we could prove to you that with your vote we would

have a majority of the committee, would you be willing to vote to

report it out to the House?

Mr. Williams: There would be ten besides myself favorable to

reporting it out? Yes, if you have the ten.

Miss Martin: I have them right here. You are the eleventh. We have

those ten votes.

Mr. Williams: Well, I hope you have. May I ask you just to read

them?

Miss Martin: These are the ten who are for reporting the Amendment:

Representatives Thomas, of Kentucky; Taggart, of Kansas; Dale of New

York; Neely, of West Virginia; Volstead, of Minnesota; Nelson, of

Wisconsin; Morgan, of Oklahoma; Chandler, of New York; Dyer, of

Missouri, and Moss, of West Virginia. That makes ten.

Mr. Williams: And Mr. Williams will make eleven. When will it be

possible to get them all together?

Miss Martin: We were hoping to do that by tomorrow. Mr. Dale was

here but he has been called back to New York. Mr. Moss has been

seriously ill but has promised to attend the meeting tomorrow. I

will read the names of the men who are against a report. They are

all anti-Suffragists and you are classified with them:

Representatives Webb, of North Carolina; Carlin, of Virginia;

Walker, of Georgia; Gard, of Ohio; Whaley, of South Carolina;

Caraway, of Arkansas; Igoe, of Missouri; Steele, of Pennsylvania,

and, until now, yourself.

Mr. Williams: If a majority of the committee want to reconsider it I

will vote in favor of it.

Miss Martin: What would you do if we could only get ten Suffrage

members present tomorrow and they were a majority of those present?

Mr. Williams: Let us not make any further agreement. I have agreed

to your former proposition and I will stand by my word.

Miss Martin: We are sure you will.

After the deputation had left his office Mr. Williams promised Miss

Younger and Miss Martin that, whenever the requisite number of friends

of Suffrage were present at a meeting of the Judiciary Committee, he

himself would move a reconsideration of the question.

Again I quote Miss Younger’s, _Revelations of a Woman Lobbyist_:

We now had a majority of one on the committee. We had only to get

the majority together. It seemed a simple thing to do, but it

wasn’t.

The number of things that could take a Congressman out of town on

Tuesday and Thursday mornings, the number of minor ailments that

could develop on those days was appalling. It seemed that every time

a Congressman faced something he did not want to do, he had a

headache.

Monday after Monday, Wednesday after Wednesday, we went from office

to office, inquiring solicitously about each man’s health. Was he

quite well? Did he have a headache or any symptoms of internal

disorders? Was his wife in good health? His children? Could any

business affairs arise to take him out of town next day?...

The weeks went by and we were not able to get our majority,

together.

“You think you’re going to bring that question up again,” said Mr.

Webb, the chairman. “No power on earth will do it. It’s locked up in

sub-committee till next December, and it’s going to stay there.”

This was repeated to Miss Paul. “Nonsense!” she said. “Of course it

will be brought up.”

But why should all this petty bickering, this endless struggling

with absurdities be necessary in order to get before Congress a

measure dealing with a question of public good? No man would run his

private business that way. Yet that is the way public business is

done.

Finally after weeks of working and watchful waiting I reported to

Anne on Wednesday that a majority of our members were in town and

well. We were jubilant. Early next morning we were before the doors

of the Judiciary Committee to see them file in. They arrived one by

one, solemn, nervously hurrying by, or smiling in an amused or

friendly way. Mr. Hunter Moss, our staunch friend, appeared. Mr.

Moss was dying of cancer. Though often too ill to leave his bed, he

asked his secretary to notify him whenever Suffrage was to come up

so that he might fight for it. Mr. Moss was our tenth man. We

recounted them anxiously. Ten supporters, ten opponents—where was

Mr. Dale of New York? I flew downstairs to his office—I don’t know

who went with me but I have a faint memory of red hair—and there he

was in his shirt sleeves calmly looking over his mail.

“Hurry!” we cried. “The committee is ready to meet. Every one’s

there except you!”

He reached for his coat but we exclaimed, “Put it on in the hall!”

and hurrying him out between us we raced down the corridor, helping

him with the coat as we ran, then into the elevator and up to the

third floor and to the committee room. We deposited him in one

vacant seat. Our majority was complete!

As we stood off and looked at our eleven men sitting there together,

gathered with so much effort and trial, no artist was ever prouder

of a masterpiece than we. We stood entranced surveying them until

Mr. Webb sternly announced that the committee would go into

executive session which meant that we must go.

In the anteroom other Suffragists gathered, also the newspaper men.

Every one said that in a few moments the Amendment would be reported

out. But the minutes ran into hours. Our suspense grew. Each time

those closed doors opened and a member came out we asked for news.

There was none. “Carlin’s got the floor.”

The morning dragged past. Twelve o’clock came. Twelve-thirty. One

o’clock. The doors opened. We clustered around our supporters and

eagerly asked the news.

Well, Carlin got the floor and kept it. He took up the time. It got

late and the members were hungry and wanted to go to luncheon, and

there would have been a lot of wrangling over the Amendment. So they

adopted Carlin’s motion to make Suffrage the special order of

business two weeks from today.

“It’s all right,” our friends consoled us. “Only two weeks’ delay!”

But why two weeks? And why had Mr. Carlin, our avowed and bitter

enemy, himself made the motion to reconsider, tacking to it the two

weeks’ delay, unless something disastrous was planned?

Now began a care and watchfulness over our eleven, in comparison to

which all our previous watchfulness and care was as nothing. Not

only did we know each man’s mind minutely from day to day, but we

had their constituents on guard at home.

Washington’s mail increased. One man said, “I wish you’d ask those

Pennsylvania ladies to stop writing me!” Mr. Morgan said, “My

secretary has been busy all day long answering letters from

Suffragists. Why do you do it? You know I’m for it.” Mr. Neely, at a

desk covered with mail, broke forth in wrath, eyes blazing, “Why do

you have all those letters written to me as though you doubted my

stand? I’m as unchangeable as the Medes and Persians!”

On the 27th of March, the day before the vote, telegrams poured in.

We stumbled over messenger boys at every turn in the House office

building. Late that afternoon as Anne and I went into Mr. Taggart’s

office we passed a postman with a great bundle of special-delivery

letters.

Mr. Taggart was last on the list. Every one else was pledged to be

at the meeting next day.

“Yes, I’ll be there,” said Mr. Taggart slowly and ominously. “But

I’ll be a little late.”

“Late!” We jumped from our seats. “Why, it’s the special order for

ten-thirty!”

“Well, I may not be very late. I’ve got an appointment with the

Persian Ambassador—Haroun al Raschid,” said he, and looked at each

of us defiantly.

We pleaded, but in vain. Without Mr. Taggart we had not a majority.

What could we do? We discussed it while we walked home in the crisp

afternoon air. There was no Persian ambassador in America, but a

_chargé d’affaire_, and his name was not Haroun al Raschid, but Ali

Kuli Kahn. We smiled at Mr. Taggart’s transparency, but we were

alarmed. Our Amendment hung on Mr. Taggart’s presence.

Suppose after all he did intend to consult Persia on some matter of

moment to Kansas? To leave no loop-hole unguarded, Mary Gertrude

Fendall next morning at nine o’clock took a taxi to the Persian

legation and left it on the corner. At ten o’clock she was to ring

the bell, ask for Mr. Taggart, drive him in haste to the Capitol and

deposit him in the midst of our majority. As she walked up and down,

however, the problem became acute, for how could she get him out of

the legation when he did not go in? At last, ringing the bell,

seeing one attaché and then another, she became convinced that

nothing was known of the Kansas Congressman in the Persian legation,

so she telephoned us at the Capitol.

This confirmed our fears. Every one else was present; Mr. Taggart

was not in his office; no one knew where he was. Ten-thirty came;

ten forty-five. There was nothing of the vanquished in the faces of

our opponents. Mr. Carlin grinned affably at all of us, and the grin

chilled us. We looked anxiously from one to another as the meeting

began. Ten supporters—ten opponents. Mr. Taggart, wherever he was,

had our majority. The minutes dragged. Our friends prolonged the

preliminaries. A stranger near me pulled out his watch. I leaned

over and asked the time. “Five minutes to eleven.” And just at that

moment, looking up, I saw Mr. Taggart in the doorway—Mr. Taggart,

very much of a self-satisfied, naughty little boy, smiling

triumphantly. That did not matter. Our majority was complete.

The committee went into executive session, and we moved to the

anteroom. “A few minutes and you’ll have your Amendment reported

out,” said the newspaper men. “It’s all over but the shouting.” The

situation was ours. Suffrage was the special order; nothing could be

considered before it, and we had a majority. As the moments passed

we repeated this, trying to keep up our courage. For time lengthened

out. We eyed the door anxiously, starting up when it opened. We

caught glimpses of the room. The members were not sitting at their

places, they were on their feet, shaking their fists.

“They’re like wild animals,” said one member who came out.

“But what’s happening?” There was no answer. The door closed again.

Slowly we learned the incredible fact. When the door had shut upon

us, Mr. Carlin immediately moved that _all constitutional amendments

be indefinitely postponed_.

Now there were many constitutional amendments before that committee,

covering many subjects: marriage, divorce, election of judges, a

national anthem, prohibition. Mr. Carlin, to defeat us, had thrown

them all into one heap. A man could not vote to postpone one without

voting to postpone them all. He could not vote against one without

voting against them all. Were these men actually adult human beings,

legislating for a great nation, for the welfare of a hundred million

people?

The motion threw the committee into an uproar. Our friends protested

that it could not be considered; Suffrage was the special order of

the day. Mr. Moss moved that the Suffrage Amendment be reported out.

The chairman ruled this out of order. Now there was a majority in

that committee for Suffrage and a majority for prohibition, but they

were not the same majority. One of the strongest Suffragists

represented St. Louis with its large breweries. If he voted against

postponing the Prohibition Amendment he could never again be

re-elected from St. Louis. Yet he could not vote to postpone it

without postponing Suffrage also.

Through the closed door came the sound of loud, furious voices. We

caught glimpses of wildly gesticulating arms, fists in air,

contorted faces. One o’clock approached. Mr. Moss came out and

crossed quickly to the elevator. We hurried after him.

“Indefinitely postponed,” he said indignantly, not wanting to talk

about it.

“But our majority?”

“We lost one.”

“Who?”

“I cannot tell.” He stepped into the elevator. The other men came

trooping out. Our defeat was irrevocable, they all said. Nothing

could be done until the following December.

“You see,” said Mr. Taggart, looking very jubilant for a

just-defeated Suffragist, “You women can all go home now. You

needn’t have come at all this session. But of course you women don’t

know anything about politics. We told you not to bring up Suffrage

before election. Next December, after election, we may do something

for you.”

Our opponents, secure in victory, grew more friendly; but as they

warmed, our supporters became colder. Mr. Chandler flatly refused to

stay with us.

“I’ve voted for your Amendment twice,” he said, “and I won’t vote

for it again this session. That’s final.”

I also heard rumors of Mr. Neely’s refusing to vote for it, so I

caught him in a corridor and hurried beside him, talking as I

walked.

“That true,” he said. “I won’t vote for it again this session. It’s

no use talking. I am as unchangeable as the Medes and Persians.”

“But that’s just what you said when you were receiving so many

letters that you thought we doubted you! You said nothing could——”

“I’ve got some bills of my own to get out of this committee,” said

he, waving aside the Medes and Persians. “I won’t get them out if

you keep bringing up this Suffrage. Good day.”

In commenting upon the action of the Judiciary Committee, Miss Alice

Paul said:

The action of the Democratic leaders at Washington in again blocking

the Suffrage Amendment by postponing indefinitely its consideration

in the Judiciary Committee is an additional spur to Suffragists to

press forward with their plan of going out through the Suffrage

States to tell the women voters—particularly those who are

supporting the Democratic Party—of the opposition which the Party is

giving to the Federal Amendment at Washington.

We have now labored nearly a third of a year to persuade the

Democratic leaders in Congress to allow the Amendment to be brought

before the members of the House for their consideration. The rebuff

in the committee today shows the necessity of not delaying longer in

acquainting the four million voting women with what is going on in

Congress.

Many months still remain, in all probability, before Congress

adjourns. We will do our utmost in these months to create such a

powerful party of voting women in the West as to make it impossible

for the Democratic leaders at Washington longer to continue their

course of refusing to let this measure come before the House for

even the few minutes necessary for discussion and a vote.

Miss Younger says further:

The following Tuesday found me as usual in the Judiciary Committee

room. When I appeared in the doorway there was a surprised but

smiling greeting.

“You haven’t given up yet?”

“Not until you report our Amendment.”

For the first time Mr. Webb smiled. There was surprise in his voice.

“You women are in earnest about this.”

------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV

MORE PRESSURE ON THE PRESIDENT

IN the meantime the work with the President was going on. Mr. Wilson was

about to make a speaking trip which included Kansas. This would be the

first time since his inauguration that he would visit a Suffrage State.

On January 26, 1916, Mrs. William Kent and Maud Younger waited on the

President to ask him to receive a delegation of women in a forthcoming

visit to New York. In presenting this request, Mrs. Kent sounded a note

which was beginning to become the dominant strain in the Suffrage

demands of the western women.

“Women are anxious to express to you, Mr. President,” she said, “the

depth of earnestness of the demand for Woman Suffrage. We as western

women and as citizens are accustomed to having a request for political

consideration received with seriousness; and we feel keenly the

injustice of the popular rumor that such delegations are planned to

annoy a public official. We hope that you will appreciate the dignity

and propriety of such a representative appeal as the women of New York

are now making.”

President Wilson said that such an assumption was entirely absent from

his mind. He added that he had decided to make it a rule during his trip

to New York and throughout the Middle West not to receive any

delegations whatever, since he would “get in wrong,” as he said, if he

received one and not another; it was very possible, however, that he

might be approached by deputations which he would be able to receive.

As Mrs. Kent and Miss Younger came out from this call on the President,

the evening papers were on the stands. They announced that the next day

in New York the President would receive fifteen hundred ministers.

On the morning of January 27, 1916, over a hundred women, organized by

Doris Stevens and led by Mrs. E. Tiffany Dyer, assembled in the East

Room of the Waldorf Astoria Hotel. Fifteen minutes later they sent up a

note asking for a ten-minute audience with the President, that New York

women might lay their case for federal action upon Suffrage before him.

Secretary Tumulty sent back the following note:

For the President, I beg to acknowledge the receipt of your note

requesting a Conference with him to discuss the Suffrage Amendment.

I very much regret that the President’s engagements make it

impossible to arrange this matter as you have so generously

suggested. When a representative from your committee called at the

White House the President informed her of the crowded condition of

his calendar today.

JOSEPH TUMULTY.

As this note merely said that no time had been set aside for a

deputation of women, and did not say that it would be impossible to see

him at all, a second note was sent, asking for just five minutes and

offering to wait as long as necessary. In the meantime, an interview

between Mr. Tumulty and Mrs. Amos Pinchot took place. Mrs. Pinchot

reported to the deputation that the President and his Secretary were

“conferring.” For two hours the women waited, holding a meeting. Some of

the women thought it was undignified to wait since the President had

stated in his note that an appointment had not been secured.

“But,” said Mrs. Carol Beckwith, “why quibble about our undignified

position here in the Waldorf? Our political position is undignified, and

that is what we should remedy.”

At a quarter past eleven, the President appeared.

In answer to the speeches of Mrs. Dyer, Mrs. Henry Bruere, Mary Ritter

Beard, President Wilson said:

I ought to say, in the first place, that the apologies, I think,

ought to come from me, because I had not understood that an

appointment had been made. On the contrary, I supposed none had been

made, and, therefore, had filled my morning with work, from which it

did not seem possible to escape.

I can easily understand the embarrassment of any one of your

representatives in trying to make a speech in this situation. I feel

that embarrassment very strongly myself, and I wish very much that I

had the eloquence of some of your speakers, so that I could set my

views forth as adequately as they set forth theirs.

It may be, ladies, that my mind works slowly. I have always felt

that those things were most solidly built that were built piece by

piece, and I felt that the genius of our political development in

this country lay in the number of our States, and in the very clear

definition of the difference of sphere between the State and Federal

Government. It may be that I am a little old-fashioned in that.

When I last had the pleasure of receiving some ladies urging the

Amendment that you are urging this morning, I told them that my mind

was unchanged, but I hoped open, and that I would take pleasure in

conferring with the leaders of my Party and the leaders of Congress

with regard to this matter. I have not fulfilled that promise, and I

hope you will understand why I have not fulfilled it, because there

seemed to be questions of legislation so pressing in their necessity

that they ought to take precedence of everything else; that we could

postpone fundamental changes to immediate action along lines in the

national interest. That has been my reason, and I think it is a

sufficient reason. The business of government is a business from day

to day, ladies, and there are things that cannot wait. However great

the principle involved in this instance, action must of necessity in

great fundamental constitutional changes be deliberate, and I do not

feel that I have put the less pressing in advance of the more

pressing in the course I have taken.

I have not forgotten the promise that I made, and I certainly shall

not forget the fulfillment of it, but I want to be absolutely frank.

My own mind is still convinced that we ought to work this thing out

State by State. I did what I could to work it out in my own State in

New Jersey, and I am willing to act there whenever it comes up; but

that is so far my conviction as to the best and solidest way to

build changes of this kind, and I for my own part see no reason for

discouragement on the part of the women of the country in the

progress that this movement has been making. It may move like a

glacier, but when it does move, its effects are permanent.

[Illustration: THE SUFFRAGIST’S DREAM. PRESIDENT WILSON: My dear young

lady, you have saved my life. How can I thank you?

Nina Allender in _The Suffragist_.]

I had not expected to have this pleasure this morning, and therefore

am simply speaking offhand, and without consideration of my phrases,

but I hope in entire frankness. I thank you sincerely for this

opportunity.

Smiling the President turned to leave the room, when Mrs. Beard reminded

him that the Clayton Bill, with its far-reaching effects on the

working-man, had not been gained State by State.

“I do not care to enter into a discussion of that,” he said sharply.

In February, President Wilson visited Kansas in his “Preparedness Tour.”

As soon as it became known that he was coming to Topeka, the heads of

various Civic and Suffrage organizations in Kansas telegraphed him,

asking for an interview.

Secretary Tumulty answered by telegram that the crowded condition of the

Topeka program would not permit of this arrangement.

The Kansas women telephoned that they were sure the President could

spare them five minutes, and they would await him at the State House,

immediately after the party arranged in his honor.

When Secretary Tumulty alighted from the President’s car in Topeka, the

inspired, swift, and executive Mabel Vernon met him with a note from the

Kansas women asking the President to see them. To do this, she had had

to run the gauntlet of a large force of police, Secret Service men and

the National Guard.

Mr. Tumulty said that he could give no answer at that time, but that

later the delegation could telephone him at Governor Capper’s house,

where President and Mrs. Wilson were entertained. Governor Capper was a

strong Suffragist. The women did call later, but Secretary Tumulty

explained then that it would be impossible for the President to see

them. After much talk, an arrangement was made that the delegation

should come to the Governor’s house at twenty minutes before one. The

thermometer was at zero, and snow was falling, but the women waited

before Governor Capper’s house for an hour. Finally the President came

out. The delegation, following the purple, white, and gold, marched up

the steps in double file. Lila Day Monroe made a little speech, and

handed the President the petition. The President murmured:

“I appreciate this call very much.... I appreciate it very much....

I am much obliged, much obliged.... Pleased to meet you ...” he

repeated at intervals, but he gave no expression of opinion.

After the deputation of women had filed by, The President handed the

petition to one of the Secret Service men, who buttoned it up in his

inside pocket.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

V

FORMING THE WOMAN’S PARTY

THE Congressional Union was now to undertake another gigantic task—the

formation of a new political Party.

For this purpose, a conference of national officers, state officers,

members of the Advisory Council of the Congressional Union from the

unenfranchised States met at the Little White House April 8 and 9, 1916.

Brilliant speeches were made by Anne Martin and Lucy Burns. Alice Paul

summed the whole matter up in her usual convincingly incisive and

logical way:

This is the third time we have called together the members of our

Advisory Council and our state and national officers to lay before

them a new project. The first time was at Newport when we proposed a

campaign against all Democratic candidates for Congress in the

Suffrage States. The second time was a year ago in New York when we

proposed to convert the Congressional Union into a national

organization with branches in the different States. Today we want to

lay another plan before you for your consideration—that is the

organization of a political Party of women voters who can go into

this next election, if it is necessary to go into it, as an

independent Party.

I think we are all agreed on certain essential points. First—from

what source our opposition comes. We are agreed that it comes from

the Administration. We do not have to prove that. Second—we are

agreed as to where our power lies—that is in the Suffrage States.

Third—we are agreed as to the political situation. We know that the

two Parties are about equal, that both want to win. We know that the

Suffrage States are doubtful States and that every one of those

States is wanted by the political Parties. We know that many of the

elections will be close. The State of Nevada was won by only forty

votes in the last Senatorial election. In Utah it was a week before

the campaign was decided. In Colorado, the same. Going back over a

period of twenty years it would have been necessary to have changed

only nine per cent of the total vote cast in the presidential

elections in order to have thrown the election to the other Party.

This gives us a position of wonderful power, a position that we have

never held before and that we cannot hope to hold again for at least

four years, and which we may not hold then.

We have been working for two years to effect an organization in the

Suffrage States and have finally completed such an organization. Our

last branch was formed about ten days ago in the State of

Washington. We now have to demonstrate to the Administration, to the

majority Party in Congress, that the organization in the Suffrage

States does exist and that it is a power to be feared. There are

many months still remaining, probably, before Congress will adjourn.

If in these months we can build up so strong an organization there

that it really will be dangerous to oppose it, and if we can show

Congress that we have such an organization, then we will have the

matter in our hands.

We have sent a request to our branches in the East to select one or

more representative women who will go out to the West and make a

personal appeal to the women voters to stand by us even more loyally

than they have before—to form a stronger organization than has ever

before existed.

Today we must consider what concrete plan we shall ask these envoys

who go out to the West to propose to the voting women. I do not

think it will do very much good to go through the voting States and

simply strengthen our Suffrage organizations. That will not be

enough to terrify the men in Congress. Suffrage organizations,

unfortunately, have come to stand for feebleness of action and

supineness of spirit. What I want to propose is that when we go to

these women voters we ask them to begin to organize an independent

political Party that will be ready for the elections in November.

They may not have to go into these elections. If they prepare

diligently enough for the elections they won’t have to go into them.

The threat will be enough. We want to propose to you that we ask the

women voters to come together in Chicago at the time that the

Progressives and Republicans meet there in June, to decide how they

will use these four million votes that women have, in the next

election.

Now, if women who are Republicans simply help the Republican Party,

and if women who are Democrats help the Democratic Party, women’s

votes will not count for much. But if the political Parties see

before them a group of independent women voters who are standing

together to use their vote to promote Suffrage, it will make

Suffrage an issue—the women voters at once become a group which

counts; whose votes are wanted. The Parties will inevitably have to

go to the women voters if the latter stand aloof and do not go to

the existing political Parties. The political Parties will have to

offer them the thing which will win their votes. To count in an

election you do not have to be the biggest Party; you have to be

simply an independent Party that will stand for one object and that

cannot be diverted from that object.

Four years ago there was launched a new Party, the Progressive

Party. It really did, I suppose, decide the last Presidential

election. We can be the same determining factor in this coming

election. And if we can make Congress realize that we can be the

determining factor, we won’t have to go into the election at all.

What I would like to propose, in short, is that we go to the women

voters and ask them to hold a convention in Chicago the first week

in June, and that we spend these next two months in preparation. We

could not have a better opportunity for preparation than this trip

of the envoys through every one of the Suffrage States, calling the

women together to meet in Chicago, the place where the eyes of the

whole country will be turned in June.

We want very much to know what you think about this plan and whether

you will help us in carrying it through. It is not an easy thing to

launch a new Party and have it stand competition with the Republican

and Democratic Parties. If we undertake it, we must make it a

success. We must make it worthy to stand beside these great Parties.

That is the biggest task that we have ever dreamed of since we

started the Congressional Union.

It was unanimously decided by the Conference to send an appeal to all

members in the Suffrage States to meet in Chicago on June 5, 6, and 7,

to form a Woman’s Party. Envoys to carry this appeal to the West were

elected.

Mrs. W. D. Ascough, Harriot Stanton Blatch, Abby Scott Baker, Lucy

Burns, Agnes Campbell, Mrs. A. R. Colvin, Anna Constable, Edith Goode,

Jane Goode, Florence Bayard Hilles, Julia Hurlburt, Caroline

Katzenstein, Winifred Mallon, Mrs. Cyrus Mead, Agnes Morey, Katherine

Morey, Gertrude B. Newell, Mrs. Percy Read, Ella Riegel, Mrs. John

Rogers, Mrs. Townsend Scott, Helen Todd, Mrs. Nelson Whittemore.

All of these women were chosen by State groups of the National Woman’s

Party; they therefore went to the West as the spokesmen of the

unenfranchised women of their own States. Ahead of them went the

organizers.

This Suffrage Special must not be confused with Hughes’ “Golden

Special,” which in October—six months later—toured the West and with

which the National Woman’s Party had no connection.

Five thousand people gathered in the Union Station at Washington to see

the envoys off—what the _Washington Times_ describes as a

“banner-carrying, flag-waving, flower-laden cheering crowd.” Automobiles

flying the tri-color brought the envoys to the station. Two buglers

sounded the assembly for the farewell. The Naval Gun Factory Band

greeted them with the _Marseillaise_, and in the half-hour before the

train’s departure, it continued to play martial music. When it struck up

_Onward Christian Soldiers_ and _America_, the crowd sang with them.

The envoys made a tremendous impression in the West. Whenever their

train arrived—purple, white, and gold decorations floating from all the

windows—that arrival became an event and created excitement.

“I wish you might see some of these meetings,” Abby Baker wrote to

the _Suffragist_ of April 29, “and see the looks of amusement of the

men as our train pulls in, gay with our Congressional Union colors.

They invariably call out, ‘Here come the Suffragettes,’ but very

soon they are saying, ‘She’s all right,’ and ‘That’s straight lady,’

or some such approving phrase, and as the train pulls out of the

station, we hear, ‘Bully for you!’ ‘Good luck!’ and so forth.”

“At Williams, Arizona,” said another letter in the same number of

the _Suffragist_, “there was nothing in sight but a water tank, a

restaurant, a picture postal card shop, and yet we had a tremendous

meeting.”

At El Tova, in the same State, they carried the message of the

unenfranchised women of the East to the very rim of the canyon, a mile

below sea level!

Leaving very early in the morning, at Maricopa they found a group of

women waiting, who said plaintively, “Oh, if you could only stop longer,

so that we might drum up all the women out of the sage brush!”

It was not the people alone or the civic authorities who made this trip

of the envoys so attractive. When the Suffragists came to breakfast on

the road from Maricopa to Tucson, they found that the management of the

railway had decorated the breakfast tables in the dining car with

purple, white, and gold—sweet peas and yellow laburnums. At Tucson,

Eugene Debs came with the crowd to meet them.

At a meeting in Cheyenne, Mrs. Blatch was presented with a framed copy

of a facsimile of the Governor’s signature attached to the act

enfranchising the women of Wyoming when the State came into the Union.

In San Francisco, where there was a large meeting in the Civic

Auditorium, presided over by Gail Laughlin, Sara Bard Field spoke. At

the close of the meeting, she asked if the people present who put

Suffrage before Party affiliations would say, “I will.” The audience

arose as one man, and answered roundly, “I will.”

At Sacramento, California, where they were given a reception and

luncheon by the Chamber of Commerce, the annual fruit show was in

progress and the envoys were presented with an immense box of raisins

and two boxes of Sacramento Valley cherries.

At Seattle, the station was decorated with Congressional Union banners;

the national colors; hanging baskets of flowers. A bugler called

together the big crowd—including the Acting Mayor—which had gathered to

welcome the envoys.

“Ladies,” Mrs. Blatch ended her speech, “we are here after your votes.”

A man’s voice in the audience cried: “You’ll get them,” and when Mrs.

Blatch said, “Men, we need yours too,” the whole crowd burst into

applause.

Immediately after the address, the envoys were taken on a tour of the

city in a procession of a hundred and fifty automobiles, all, of course,

flying the purple, white, and gold. They attended court, where Seattle’s

only woman judge, a member of the Congressional Union, presided—Reah

Whitehead.

It was in Washington State that the doctrine of Suffrage first reached

what the _Suffragist_ described as “the height of its career.” Lucy

Burns, as the guest of Flight Lieutenant Maroney of the Naval Militia at

Washington, flew to a height of fourteen hundred feet over Seattle,

scattering leaflets as she went. When she started, Miss Burns carried a

Congressional Union banner, but the eighty-mile-an-hour gale soon tore

it from her hand. When last seen, it reposed gracefully on the roof of a

large Seattle mill. At Bellingham occurred one of the biggest

out-of-door meetings the envoys had had. For a solid block, the street

was packed with people from one side to the other.

At Spokane, they participated in an interesting and rather poignant

event, the planting of a tree in memory of May Arkwright Hutton, pioneer

Suffragist of Washington.

At Helena, Montana, a huge mass-meeting was held in the Auditorium. A

sand storm, which had greeted their arrival, grew worse towards night,

the wind howling louder and louder. In the midst of Mrs. Rogers’s speech

the lights suddenly went out. She did not even hesitate, and in the

absolute darkness continued to urge women to stand by women. There was

not a sound from the audience; they listened in perfect quiet till the

end.

In one State, the Governor declared the coming of the Suffrage Special a

legal holiday. Everything on wheels turned out to meet the envoys at the

train, including the fire engine.

A Convention at Salt Lake City on May 11 closed the swing of the

Suffrage Special round the circle of the twelve free States, and brought

the Western tour to its highest stage of success. The envoys passed from

the station under a great purple, white, and gold flag, through a lane

of women, their arms full of spring blossoms, to a long line of waiting

automobiles flying banners of purple, white, and gold.

The Convention passed resolutions demanding from Congress favorable

action on the Suffrage Amendment in the present session and elected

three women voters to carry these resolutions to Congress.

These women accompanied the envoys to Washington. There they were

welcomed by a luncheon in the Union Station. Then, in automobiles,

brilliantly decorated, they drove through streets lined with huge

posters which said COME TO THE CAPITOL. As they approached the Capitol,

two buglers, from the broad platforms at the top of the high, wide

stairway, alternately sounded a note of triumphant welcome. A huge

chorus of women in white sang _America_. Through the aisle formed on the

Capitol steps by ribbons held in the hands of other women in white, the

envoys passed up the steps into the Rotunda. In the Rotunda, they

grouped themselves into a semi-circle facing another semi-circle—nearly

a hundred Senators and Representatives. The Senate had taken a recess

especially to meet these women.

The envoys, elected at the Salt Lake City Convention, then presented to

the assembled Congressmen the resolutions passed at that Convention and

speeches followed.

While the envoys were rousing the West, the Congressional Union was

sending deputations to great political leaders in the hope of getting

declarations of support which would influence the coming National

Political Conventions. To a deputation consisting of Mary Beard,

Elizabeth Gerberding, Alice Carpenter, and Mrs. Evan Evans, Theodore

Roosevelt, who had long been converted to the principle of Suffrage,

announced himself in favor of the Federal Amendment and promised his

active support in the campaign. This was of course an encouraging

episode in the story of the National Amendment.

* * * * *

Three weeks later came the next important event in the history of the

Congressional Union—the launching of a Woman’s Party on July 5 at the

Blackstone Theatre in Chicago. At this time Chicago was the center of

publicity; the strategic point as far as the press was concerned. The

Woman’s Party Convention met before the Conventions of the Republicans

and Democrats. The reporters, gathered there and waiting in idleness for

these later occasions, looked upon the Woman’s Party Convention as a

gift of the gods.

Helena Hill Weed presented a report of the Credentials Committee, of

which she was Chairman. She said:

This is not a delegated body.

It is a mass convention of all members of the Congressional Union to

form a Woman’s Party, made up of enfranchised women of the eleven

full Suffrage States, and of Illinois, where women may vote for

President of the United States.

There are two classes of delegates in this convention—members of the

Union in these twelve Suffrage States, who have the right to speak

and vote in the convention; and members of the Union in the

thirty-six unfree States, who may speak from the floor, but may not

vote.

As registration is still going on, it is impossible to give a final

vote of the number of delegates attending. Over fifteen hundred

delegates have already registered.

Maud Younger was temporary Chairman of the Convention and keynote

speaker. She said in part:

A new force marches on to the political field. For the first time in

a Presidential election women are a factor to be reckoned with. Four

years ago, women voted in six States—today in twelve, including

Illinois. These States with their four million women constitute

nearly one-fourth of the electoral college and more than one-third

of the votes necessary to elect a President. With enough women

organized in each State to hold the balance of power, the women’s

votes may determine the Presidency of the United States.

The Woman’s Party has no candidates and but one plank, the

enfranchisement of the women of America through a Federal Amendment.

Anne Martin was chosen permanent Chairman of the Party; Phœbe A. Hearst,

Judge Mary A. Bartelme, Vice-Chairmen; Mabel Vernon, Secretary.

The Party platform, adopted unanimously amid cheers, reads:

The National Woman’s Party stands for the passage of the Amendment

to the United States Constitution known as the Susan B. Anthony

Amendment, proposing an Amendment to the Constitution of the United

States extending the right of Suffrage to women:

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United

States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House

concurring therein) that the following article be proposed in the

legislatures of the several States as an Amendment to the

Constitution of the United States, which, when ratified by

three-fourths of the said legislatures, shall be valid as part of

such Constitution, namely:

Article 1, Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to

vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any

State on account of sex.