The next evening the Nebraska delegation, determining not to be

outdone, captured one of their United States senators and

triumphantly brought him on the platform. It was a point gained to

have a congressman publicly give in his adhesion to the question,

but how much greater the achievement to appear in the convention

with a United States senator. It was a proud moment for Mrs. Colby

when Senator Saunders, a large man of fine proportions, stepped to

the front. But alas! her triumph over the Indiana ladies was short

indeed, for while the senator surpassed the representative in size

and official honors, he fell far below him in the logic of his

statements and the earnestness of his principles. In fact the

audience and the platform were in doubt at the close of his remarks

as to his true position on the question. Mrs. May Wright Sewall,

who followed him, sparkled with the satisfaction she expressed in

paying most glowing tributes to the men of Indiana and their State

institutions. She said:

The principal objection to woman suffrage has always been that it

will take women from their homes and destroy all home life. She

showed that there is not an interest of home which is not

represented in the State, and that the subordination of the State

to the family has kept pace with the subordination of physical to

spiritual force. Woman has an interest in everything which

affects the State, and only lacks the legitimate instrument of

these interests--the ballot--with which to enforce them. Life

regulates legislation. Domestic life is woman's sphere, but a

sphere of much larger dimensions than has ever yet been accorded

it, these dimensions reaching out and controlling the functions

of the State. The ballot is not a political or a military, but a

domestic necessity.

Mrs. Harriette R. Shattuck spoke on the golden rule, asking men to

put themselves in the place of disfranchised women, and then

legislate for them as they would be legislated for. Mrs. Robinson

gave a resume of the legal, political and educational position of

women in Massachusetts. Mrs. Hooker showed that political equality

would dignify woman in home life, give added weight to her opinions

on all questions, and command new respect for her from all classes

of men. Mrs. Colby gave an interesting address on "The Social

Evolution of Woman":

She traced the history of woman from the time when she was bought

and sold, up to the present. She said that the first believer in

woman's rights was the one who first proposed that women should

be allowed to eat with their husbands. This once granted,

everything else has followed of necessity, and the ballot will be

the crowning right. Once women were not allowed to sing soprano

because it was the "governing part." From these and many like

indignities woman has gradually evolved until she now stands on

an equality with man in many social rights.

Martha McClellan Brown read an able essay on "The Power of the

Veto." She is a woman of fine presence, pleasing manners and a well

trained voice that can fill any hall. Her address was one of the

best in the convention and all felt that in her we had a valuable

acquisition to our Association. Mrs. Gage gave an able address on

"The Moral Force of Woman Suffrage."

During the first day of the convention a request, signed by the

officers of the association, was sent to the Special Committee on

Woman Suffrage in the Senate, asking for a hearing on the sixteenth

amendment to the constitution. The hearing was granted on Friday

morning, January 20, 1882. A distinguished speaker in England

having advised the friends of suffrage there to employ young and

attractive women to advocate the measure, as the speediest means of

success, Miss Anthony took the hint in making the selection for the

first hearing before the committee of those who had never been

heard before,[85] of whom some were young, and all attractive as

speakers. Miss Anthony said that she would introduce some new

speakers to the committee, in order to disprove the allegation that

"it was always the same old set." The committee listened to them

with undivided attention throughout, and at the conclusion of the

hearing the following resolution, offered by Senator George of

Mississippi, was adopted unanimously:

_Resolved_, That the committee are under obligations to the

representatives of the women of the United States for their

attendance this morning, and for the able and instructive

addresses which have been made, and that the committee

assure them that they will give to the subject of woman

suffrage the careful and impartial consideration which its

grave importance demands.

In describing the occasion for the _Boston Transcript_, Mrs.

Shattuck said:

As we stood in the committee-room and presented our plea for

freedom, we felt that at last we had obtained a fair hearing,

whatever its result might be. And the most encouraging sign of

the impression made by our words was the change in the faces of

some of the members of the committee as the speaking went on. At

first there was a look of indifference and scorn--merely

toleration; this gradually changed to interest mingled with

surprise; finally, as Miss Anthony closed with one of her most

eloquent appeals, all the faces showed a decided and almost eager

interest in what we had to say. Senator George, who certainly

looked more unpropitious than any other one, assured the ladies

that he would give to the subject of woman suffrage that careful

and impartial consideration which its grave importance demands.

This, from one who heralded his entrance by inquiring of Miss

Anthony, in stentorian tones, if she "wanted to go to war," was,

to say the least, a concession. The speakers were closely

questioned by some members of the committee, who afterwards told

us "that they had never heard a speech on the subject before and

were surprised to find so much in the demand, and to see such

ability as was manifested by the women before them."

The committee having expressed a wish to hear others on the

subject, appointed the next morning at 10 o'clock.[86] Mrs.

Stanton, being introduced by the chairman, said:

Gentlemen, when the news of the appointment of this committee was

flashed over the wires, you cannot imagine the satisfaction that

thrilled the hearts of your countrywomen. After fourteen years of

constant petitioning, we are grateful for even this slight

recognition at last. I never before felt such an interest in any

congressional committee, and I have no doubt that all who are

interested in this reform, share in my feelings. Fortunately your

names make a great couplet in rhyme,

Lapham, Anthony and Blair,

Jackson, George, Ferry and Fair.

which will enable us to remember them always. This I discovered

in writing your names in this volume, which allow me to present

you.

The gentlemen rising in turn received with a gracious bow "The

History of Woman Suffrage" which, Mrs. Stanton told them, would

furnish all the arguments they needed to defend their clients

against the ignorance and prejudice of the world. Mr. George of

Mississippi asked why this agitation was confined to Northern

women; he had never heard the ladies of the South express the wish

to vote. Mrs. Stanton referred him to those to whom the volume

before him was dedicated. "There," said she, "you will find the

names of two ladies from one of the most distinguished families in

South Carolina, who came North over forty years ago, and set this

ball for woman's freedom in motion. But for those noble women,

Sarah and Angelina Grimke, we might not stand here to-day pleading

for justice and equality." As the speakers had requested the

committee to ask questions, they were frequently interrupted. All

urged the importance of a national protection, preferring

congressional action, to submitting the proposition to the popular

vote of the several States. On this point Mr. Jackson of Tennessee

asked many pertinent questions. Mrs. Shattuck, writing of this

occasion to the _Boston Transcript_, said:

One of the speakers eloquently testified to the interest of many

Southern women in this subject, and urged the Southern members of

the committee not to declare that the women of the South do not

want the ballot until they have investigated the matter. After

the hearing three Southern ladies, wives of congressmen, thanked

her for what she had said. The member from Mississippi showed a

great deal of interest and really became quite waked up before

the session ended. But, when we look at it in one light, there is

something exceedingly humiliating in the thought that women

representing the best intellect and the highest morality of our

country, should come here in their grand old age and ask men for

that which is theirs by right. Is it not time that this

aristocracy of sex should be overthrown? Several of the senators

were so moved by the speeches that they personally expressed

their thanks, and one who has long been friendly, said the

speeches were far above the average committee-hearings on any

subject. We might well have replied that the reason is because

all the speakers feel what they say and know that the question is

one of vital importance.

In securing these hearings before this special committee of the

Senate the friends feel they have reached a milestone in the

progress of their reform. To secure the attention for four hours

of seven representative men of the United States, must have more

effect than would a hundred times that amount of time and labor

expended upon their constituents. If one of these senators, for

instance, should become convinced of the justice of woman's claim

to the ballot, his constituency would begin to look upon that

question with respect, whereas it would take years to bring that

same constituency up to the position where they could elect such

a representative. To convince the representatives is to sound the

keynote, and it is for this reason that these hearings before the

Senate committee are of such paramount importance to the suffrage

cause.

At the close of the hearing Mrs. Robinson presented each member

of the committee with her little volume, "Massachusetts in the

Woman Suffrage Movement."

January 23 the House Committee on Rules[87] gave a hearing to Mrs.

Jane Graham Jones of Chicago, Mrs. May Wright Sewall and Miss

Anthony. During this congress the question of admitting the

territory of Dakota as a State was discussed in the Senate. Our

committee stood ready to oppose it unless the word "male" were

stricken from the proposed constitution.

Immediately after this most of the speakers went[88] to

Philadelphia where Rachel Foster had made arrangements for a

two-days convention. Rev. Charles G. Ames gave the address of

welcome.

He told of his conversion to woman suffrage from the time when he

believed women and men were ordained to be unequal, just as in

nature the mountain is different from the valley--he looking down

at her, she gazing up at him--until the time when he began to see

that women are not of necessity the valleys, nor men of necessity

the mountains; and so on, until now he believes women entitled

to stand on an equal plane with men, socially and politically.

The President, Mrs. Stanton, responded. Hannah Whitehall Smith of

Germantown, prominent in the temperance movement, spoke of the

hardship of farmers' wives, and asked:

If that condition was not one of slavery which obliged a woman to

rise early and cook the family breakfast while her husband lay in

bed; to work all day long, and then in the evening, while he

smoked his pipe or enjoyed himself at the corner grocery, to mend

and patch his old clothes. But she thought the position of woman

was changing for the better. Even among the Indians a better

feeling is beginning to prevail. It is Indian etiquette for the

man to kill the deer or bear, and leave it on the spot where it

is struck down for the woman to carry home. She must drag it over

the ground or carry it on her back as best she may, while he

quietly awaits her coming in the family wigwam. A certain Indian,

after observing that white folks did differently by their women,

once resolved to follow their example. But such was the force of

public opinion that, when it was discovered that he brought home

his own game, both he and his wife were murdered. This shows what

fearful results prejudice may bring about; and the only

difference between the prejudice which ruled his tribe in regard

to woman and that which rules white American men to-day, is a

difference in degree, dependent upon the difference in

enlightenment. The principle is the same. The result would be the

same were each equally ignorant.

The familiar faces of Edward M. Davis, Mary Grew, Adeline Thompson,

Sarah Pugh, Anna McDowell and two of Lucretia Mott's noble

daughters, gladdened many a heart during the various sessions of

the convention. Beautiful tributes were paid to Mrs. Mott by

several of the speakers. The Philadelphia convention was

supplemented by a most delightful social gathering, without mention

of which a report of the occasion would be incomplete:

Like many historical events, this was entirely unpremeditated, no

one who participated in its pleasures had any forewarning, aside

from an informal invitation to lunch with Mrs. Hannah Whitehall

Smith and her generous husband, both earnest friends of

temperance and important allies of the woman suffrage movement.

Mrs. Smith met the guests at the station in Philadelphia, tickets

in hand, marshaling them to their respective seats in the cars as

if born to command, and on arriving at Germantown, transferred

them to carriages in waiting, with the promptness of a railroad

official. Without noise or confusion one and all crossed the

threshold of her well-ordered mansion, and with other invited

guests were soon seated in the spacious parlor, talking in groups

here and there. "Ah!" said Mrs. Smith on entering, "this will

never do, think of all the good things that will be lost in these

side talks. My plan is to have a general conversation, a kind of

love-feast, each telling her experience. It would be pleasant to

know how each has reached the same platform, through the tangled

labyrinths of human life." Soon all was silence and one after

another related the special incidents in childhood, girlhood and

mature years that had turned her thoughts to the consideration of

woman's position. The stories were as varied as they were

pathetic and amusing, and were listened to amidst smiles and

tears with the deepest interest. And when all[89] had finished

the tender revelations of the hopes and fears, the struggles and

triumphs through which each soul had passed, these sacred

memories seemed to bind us anew together in a friendship that we

hope may never end. A sumptuous lunch followed, and amid much

gaiety and laughter the guests dispersed, giving the hospitable

host and hostess a warm farewell--a day to be remembered by all

of us.

Our Senate committee, through its chairman, Hon. Elbridge G.

Lapham, very soon reported in favor of the submission of a

sixteenth amendment. We had had a favorable minority report in the

House in 1871 and in the Senate in 1879--but this was the first

favorable majority report we had ever had in either house:

IN THE SENATE, MONDAY, June 5, 1882.

Mr. LAPHAM: I am instructed by the Select Committee on Woman

Suffrage, to whom was referred the joint resolution (S. R. No.

60) proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United

States, to report it with a favorable recommendation, without

amendment, for the consideration of the Senate. This is a

majority report, and the minority desire the opportunity to

present their report also, and have printed the reasons which

they give for dissenting. As this is a question of more than

ordinary importance, I should like to have 1,000 extra copies of

the report printed for the use of the committee.

Mr. GEORGE: I present the views of the minority of the committee,

consisting of the senator from Tennessee [Mr. Jackson], the

senator from Nevada [Mr. Fair], and myself.

The PRESIDENT _pro tempore_: It is moved that 1,000 extra copies

of the report be printed for the use of the Senate.

Mr. ANTHONY: The motion should go by the statute to the Committee

on Printing.

Mr. LAPHAM: I will present it in the form of a resolution for

reference to the Committee on Printing.

The resolution was referred to the Committee on Printing, as

follows:

_Resolved_, That 1,000 additional copies of the report and

views of the minority on Senate Joint Resolution No. 60 be

printed for the use of the Select Committee on Woman

Suffrage.

In the Senate of the United States, June 5, 1882, Mr. Lapham, from

the Committee on Woman Suffrage, submitted the following report:

_The Select Committee on Woman Suffrage, to whom was referred

Senate Resolution No. 60, proposing an amendment to the

Constitution of the United States to secure the right of suffrage

to all citizens without regard to sex, having considered the

same, respectfully report: _

The gravity and importance of the proposed amendment must be

obvious to all who have given the subject the consideration it

demands.

A very brief history of the origin of this movement in the United

States and of the progress made in the cause of female suffrage

will not be out of place at this time. A World's Anti-slavery

Convention was held in London on June 12, 1840, to which

delegates from all the organized societies were invited. Several

of the American societies sent women as delegates. Their

credentials were presented, and an able and exhaustive discussion

was had by many of the leading men of America and Great Britain

upon the question of their being admitted to seats in the

convention. They were allowed no part in the discussion. They

were denied seats as delegates, and, by reason of that denial, it

was determined to hold conventions after their return to the

United States, for the purpose of asserting and advocating their

rights as citizens, and especially the right of suffrage. Prior

to this, and as early as the year 1836, a proposal had been made

in the legislature of the State of New York to confer upon

married women their separate rights of property. The subject was

under consideration and agitation during the eventful period

which preceded the constitutional convention of New York in the

year 1846, and the radical changes made in the fundamental law in

that year. In 1848 the first act "For the More Effectual

Protection of the Property of Married Women" was passed by the

legislature of New York and became a law. It passed by a vote of

93 to 9 in the Assembly and 23 to 1 in the Senate. It was

subsequently amended so as to authorize women to engage in

business on their own account and to receive their own earnings.

This legislation was the outgrowth of a bill prepared several

years before under the direction of the Hon. John Savage,

chief-justice of the Supreme Court, and of the Hon. John C.

Spencer, one of the ablest lawyers in the State, one of the

revisers of the statutes of New York, and afterward a cabinet

officer. Laws granting separate rights of property and the right

to transact business, similar to those adopted in New York, have

been enacted in many, if not in most of the States, and may now

be regarded as the settled policy of American legislation on the

subject.

After the enactment of the first law in New York, as before

stated, and in the month of July, 1848, the first convention

demanding suffrage for women was held at Seneca Falls in said

State. The same persons who had been excluded from the World's

Convention in London were prominent and instrumental in calling

the meeting and in framing the declaration of sentiments adopted

by it, which, after reciting the unjust limitations and wrongs to

which women are subjected, closed in these words:

Now, in view of this entire disfranchisement of one-half of

the people of this country and their social and religious

degradation; in view of the unjust laws above mentioned, and

because women do feel themselves aggrieved, oppressed and

fraudulently deprived of their most sacred rights, we insist

that they have immediate admission to all the rights and

privileges which belong to them as citizens of the United

States. In entering upon the great work before us we

anticipate no small amount of misconception,

misrepresentation and ridicule; but we shall use every

instrumentality within our power to effect our object. We

shall employ agents, circulate tracts, petition the State

and national legislatures, and endeavor to enlist the pulpit

and the press in our behalf. We hope this convention will be

followed by a series of conventions embracing every part of

the country.

The meeting also adopted a series of resolutions, one of which

was in the following words:

_Resolved_, That it is the duty of the women of this country

to secure to themselves their sacred right to the elective

franchise.

This declaration was signed by seventy of the women of Western

New York, among whom was one or more of those who addressed your

committee on the subject of the pending amendment, and there were

present, participating in and approving of the movement, a large

number of prominent men, among whom were Elisha Foote, a lawyer

of distinction, and since that time Commissioner of Patents, and

the Hon. Jacob Chamberlain, who afterwards represented his

district in the other House. From the movement thus inaugurated,

conventions have been held from that time to the present in the

principal villages, cities and capitals of the various States, as

well as the capital of the nation.

The First National Convention upon the subject was held at

Worcester, Mass., in October, 1850, and had the support and

encouragement of many leading men of the republic, among whom we

name the following: Gerrit Smith, Joshua R. Giddings, Ralph Waldo

Emerson, John G. Whittier, A. Bronson Alcott, Samuel J. May,

Theodore Parker, William Lloyd Garrison, Wendell Phillips, Elizur

Wright, William J. Elder, Stephen S. Foster, Horace Greeley,

Oliver Johnson, Henry Ward Beecher, Horace Mann. The Fourth

National Convention was held at the city of Cleveland, Ohio,

October, 1853. The Rev. Asa Mahan, president of Oberlin College,

and Hon. Joshua R. Giddings were there. Horace Greeley and

William Henry Channing addressed letters to the convention. The

letter of Mr. Channing stated the proposition to be that--

The right of suffrage be granted to the people, universally,

without distinction of sex; and that the age for attaining

legal and political majority be made the same for women as

for men.

In 1857, Hon. Salmon P. Chase, chief-justice of the Supreme Court

of the United States, then governor of Ohio, recommended to the

legislature a constitutional amendment on the subject, and a

select committee of the Senate made an elaborate report,

concluding with a resolution in the following words:

_Resolved_, That the Judiciary Committee be instructed to

report to the Senate a bill to submit to the qualified

electors, at the next general election for senators and

representatives, an amendment to the constitution, whereby

the elective franchise shall be extended to the citizens of

Ohio _without distinction of sex_.

During the same year a similar report was made in the legislature

of Wisconsin. From the report on the subject we quote the

following:

We believe that political equality, by leading the thoughts

and purposes of men and women into the same channel, will

more completely carry out the designs of nature. Woman will

be possessed of a positive power, and hollow compliments

will be exchanged for well-grounded respect when we see her

nobly discharging her part in the great intellectual and

moral struggles of the age that wait their solution by a

direct appeal to the ballot-box. Woman's power is at present

poetical and unsubstantial; let it be practical and real.

There is no reality in any power that cannot be coined in

votes.

The effect of these discussions and efforts has been the gradual

advancement of public sentiment towards conceding the right of

suffrage without distinction of sex. In the territories of

Wyoming and Utah, full suffrage has already been given. In regard

to the exercise of the right in the territory of Wyoming, the

present governor of that territory, Hon. John W. Hoyt, in an

address delivered in Philadelphia, April 3, 1882, in answer to a

question as to the operation of the law, said:

First of all, the experience of Wyoming has shown that the

only actual trial of woman suffrage hitherto made--a trial

made in a new country where the conditions were not

exceptionably favorable--has produced none but the most

desirable results. And surely none will deny that in such a

matter a single ounce of experience is worth a ton of

conjecture. But since it may be claimed that the sole

experiment of Wyoming does not afford a sufficient guaranty

of general expediency, let us see whether reason will not

furnish a like answer. The great majority of women in this

country already possess sufficient intelligence to enable

them to vote judiciously on nearly all questions of a local

nature. I think this will be conceded. Secondly, with their

superior quickness of perception, it is fair to assume that

when stimulated by a demand for a knowledge of political

principles--such a demand as a sense of the responsibility

of the voter would create--they would not be slow in rising

to at least the rather low level at present occupied by the

average masculine voter. So that, viewing the subject from

an intellectual stand-point merely, such fears as at first

spring up, drop away, one by one, and disappear. But it must

not be forgotten that a very large proportion of questions

to be settled by the ballot, both those of principle and

such as refer to candidates, have in them a _moral_ element

which is vital. And here we are safer with the ballot in the

hands of woman; for her keener insight and truer moral sense

will more certainly guide her aright--and not her alone, but

also, by reflex action, all whose minds are open to the

influence of her example. The weight of this answer can

hardly be overestimated. In my judgment, this moral

consideration far more than offsets all the objections that

can be based on any assumed lack of an intellectual

appreciation of the few questions almost wholly commercial

and economical. Last of all, a majority of questions to be

voted on touch the interests of woman as they do those of

man. It is upon her finer sensibilities, her purer

instincts, and her maternal nature that the results of

immorality and vice in every form fall with more crushing

weight.

A criticism has been made upon the exercise of this right by the

women of Utah that the plural wives in that territory are under

the control of their polygamous husbands. Be that as it may, it

is an undoubted fact that there is probably no city of equal size

on this continent where there is less disturbance of the peace,

or where the citizen is more secure in his person or property,

either by day or night, than in the city of Salt Lake. A

qualified right of suffrage has also been given to women in

Oregon, Colorado, Minnesota, Nebraska, Kansas, Vermont, New

Hampshire, Massachusetts, Michigan, Kentucky, and New York. Of

the operation of the law in the last-named State, Governor

Cornell in a message to the legislature on May 12, said:

The recent law, 1882, making women eligible as school

trustees, has produced admirable results, not only in

securing the election of many of them as trustees of

schools, but especially in elevating the qualifications of

men proposed as candidates for school-boards, and also in

stimulating greater interest in the management of schools

generally. The effect of these new experiences is to widen

the influence and usefulness of women.

So well satisfied are the representatives in the legislature of

that State with these results that the assembly, by a large

majority, recently passed to a third reading an act giving the

full right of suffrage to women, the passage of which has been

arrested in the Senate by an opinion of the attorney-general that

a constitutional amendment is necessary to accomplish the object.

In England women are allowed to vote at all municipal elections,

and hold the office of guardian of the poor. In four States,

Nebraska, Indiana, Oregon, and Iowa, propositions have passed

their legislatures and are now pending, conferring the right of

suffrage upon women.

Notwithstanding all these efforts, it is the opinion of the best

informed men and women, who have devoted more than a third of a

century to the consideration and discussion of the subject, that

an amendment to the federal constitution, analogous to the

fifteenth amendment of that instrument, is the most safe, direct,

and expeditious mode of settling the question. It is the question

of the enfranchisement of half the race now denied the right, and

that, too, the most favored half in the estimation of those who

deny the right. Petitions, from time to time, signed by many

thousands, have been presented to congress, and there are now

upon our files seventy-five petitions representing eighteen

different States. Two years ago treble the number of petitions,

representing over twenty-five States, were presented.

If congress should adopt the pending resolution, the question

would go before the intelligent bodies who are chosen to

represent the people in the legislatures of the various States,

and would receive a more enlightened and careful consideration

than if submitted to the masses of the male population, with all

their prejudices, in the form of an amendment to the

constitutions of the several States. Besides, such an amendment,

if adopted, would secure that uniformity in the exercise of the

right which could not be expected by action from the several

States. We think the time has arrived for the submission of such

an amendment to the legislatures of the States. We know the

prejudices which the movement for suffrage to all without regard

to sex, had to encounter from the very outset, prejudices which

still exist in the minds of many. The period for employing the

weapons of ridicule and enmity has not yet passed. Now, as in the

beginning, we hear appeals to prejudice and the baser passions of

men. The anathema, "woe betide the hand that plucks the wizard

beard of hoary error," is yet employed to deter men from acting

upon their convictions as to what ought to be done with reference

to this great question. To those who are inclined to cast

ridicule upon the movement, we quote the answer made while one of

the early conventions was in session in the State of New York:

A collection of women arguing for political rights and for

the privileges usually conceded only to the other sex is one

of the easiest things in the world to make fun of. There is

no end to the smart speeches and the witty remarks that may

be made on the subject. But when we seriously attempt to

show that a woman who pays taxes ought not to have a voice

in the manner in which the taxes are expended, that a woman

whose property and liberty and person are controlled by the

laws should have no voice in framing those laws, it is not

so easy. If women are fit to rule in a monarchy, it is

difficult to say why they are not qualified to vote in a

republic; nor can there be greater indelicacy in a woman

going to the ballot-box than there is in a woman opening a

legislature or issuing orders to an army.

To all who are more serious in their opposition to the movement,

we would remind them of the words of a few distinguished men:--

I go for all sharing the privileges of the government who

assist in bearing its burdens, by no means excluding

women.--[ABRAHAM LINCOLN.

I believe that the vices in our large cities will never be

conquered until the ballot is put into the hands of

women.--[Bishop SIMPSON.

I do not think our politics will be what it ought to be till

women are legislators and voters.--[Rev. JAMES FREEMAN

CLARKE.

Women have quite as much interest in good government as men,

and I have never heard or read of any satisfactory reason

for excluding them from the ballot-box; I have no more doubt

of their ameliorating influence upon politics than I have of

the influence they exert everywhere else.--[GEORGE WILLIAM

CURTIS.

In view of the terrible corruption of our politics, people

ask, can we maintain universal suffrage? I say no, not

without women. The only bear-gardens in our community are

the town-meeting and the caucus. Why is this? Because these

are the only places at which women are not present.--[Bishop

GILBERT HAVEN.

I repeat my conviction of the right of woman suffrage.

Because suffrage is a right and not a grace, it should be

extended to women who bear their share of the public cost,

and who have the same interest that I have in the selection

of officials and the making of laws which affect their

lives, their property, and their happiness.--[Governor LONG

of Massachusetts.

However much the giving of political power to woman may

disagree with our notions of propriety, we conclude that,

being required by that first prerequisite to greater

happiness, the law of equal freedom, such a concession is

unquestionably right and good.--[HERBERT SPENCER.

In the administration of a State neither a woman as a woman,

nor a man as a man has any special functions, but the gifts

are equally diffused in both sexes. The same opportunity for

self-development which makes man a good guardian will make

woman a good guardian, for their original nature is the

same.--[PLATO.

It has become a custom, almost universal, to invite and to

welcome the presence of women at political assemblages, to listen

to discussions upon the topics involved in the canvass. Their

presence has done much toward the elevation, refinement, and

freedom from insincerity and hypocrisy, of such discussions. Why

would not the same results be wrought out by their presence at

the ballot-box? Wherever the right has been exercised by law,

both in England and this country, such has been its effect in the

conduct of elections.

The framers of our system of government embodied in the

Declaration of Independence the statement that to secure the

rights which are therein declared to be inalienable and in

respect to which all men are created equal, "governments are

instituted among men deriving their just powers from the consent

of the governed." The system of representative government they

inaugurated can only be maintained and perpetuated by allowing

all citizens to give that consent through the medium of the

ballot-box--the only mode in which the "consent of the governed"

can be obtained. To deny to one-half of the citizens of the

republic all participation in framing the laws by which they are

to be governed, simply on account of their sex, is political

despotism to those who are excluded, and "taxation without

representation" to such of them as have property liable to

taxation. Their investiture with separate estates leads,

logically and necessarily, to their right to the ballot as the

only means afforded them for the protection of their property, as

it is the only means of their full protection in the enjoyment of

the immeasurably greater right to life and liberty. To be

governed without such consent is clear denial of a right declared

to be inalienable.

It is said that the majority of women do not desire and would not

exercise the right, if acknowledged. The assertion rests in

conjecture. In ordinary elections multitudes of men do not

exercise the right. It is only in extraordinary cases, and when

their interests and patriotism are appealed to, that male voters

are with unanimity found at the polls. It would doubtless be the

same with women. In the exceptional instances in which the

exercise of the right has been permitted, they have engaged with

zeal in every important canvass. Even if the statement were

founded in fact, it furnishes no argument in favor of excluding

women from the exercise of the franchise. _It is the denial of

the right of which they complain._ There are multitudes of men

whose vote can be purchased at an election for the smallest and

most trifling consideration. Yet all such would spurn with scorn

and unutterable contempt a proposition to purchase their _right

to vote_, and no consideration would be deemed an equivalent for

such a surrender. Women are more sensitive upon this question

than men, and so long as this right, deemed by them to be sacred,

is denied, so long the agitation which has marked the progress of

this contest thus far will be continued.

Entertaining these views, your committee report back the proposed

resolution without amendment for the consideration of the Senate,

and recommend its passage.

E. G. LAPHAM,

T. M. FERRY,

H. W. BLAIR.

The constitution is wisely conservative in the provision for its

own amendment. It is eminently proper that whenever a large

number of the people have indicated a desire for an amendment,

the judgment of the amending power should be consulted. In view

of the extensive agitation of the question of woman suffrage, and

the numerous and respectable petitions that have been presented

to congress in its support, I unite with the committee in

recommending that the proposed amendment be submitted to the

States.

H. B. ANTHONY.

June 5, 1882, Mr. George, from the Committee on Woman Suffrage,

submitted the following views of the minority:

The undersigned are unable to concur in the report of the

majority recommending the adoption of the joint resolution

proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States,

for reasons which they will now proceed to state.

We do not base our dissent upon any ground having relation to the

expediency or inexpediency of vesting in women the right to vote.

Hence we shall not discuss the very grave and important social

and political questions which have arisen from the agitation to

admit to equal political rights the women of our country, and to

impose on them the burden of discharging, equally with men,

political and public duties. Whether so radical a change in our

political and social system would advance the happiness and

welfare of the American people, considered as a whole, without

distinction of sex, is a question on which there is a marked

disagreement among the most enlightened and thoughtful of both

sexes. Its solution involves considerations so intimately

pertaining to all the relations of social and private life--the

family circle--the status of women as wives, mothers, daughters,

and companions, to the functions in private and public life which

they ought to perform, and their ability and willingness to

perform them--the harmony and stability of marriage, and the

division of the labors and cares of that union--that we are

convinced that the proper and safe discussion and weighing of

them would be best secured by deliberations in the separate

communities which have so deep an interest in the rightful

solution of this grave question. Great organic changes in

government, especially when they involve, as this proposed change

does, a revolution in the modes of life, long-standing habits,

and the most sacred domestic relations of the people, should

result only upon the demand of the people, who are to be affected

by them. Such changes should originate with, and be molded and

guided in their operation and extent by, the people themselves.

They should neither precede their demand for them, nor be delayed

in opposition to their clearly expressed wishes. Their happiness,

their welfare, their advancement, are the sole objects of the

institution of government; of these they are not only the best,

but they are the exclusive judges. They have commissioned us to

exercise for their good the great powers which they have

intrusted to us by their letter of attorney, the constitution;

not to assume to ourselves a superior wisdom, or usurp a

guardianship over them, dictating reforms not demanded by them,

and attempting to grasp power not granted.

The organization of our political institutions is such that the

great mass of the powers of government, the proper exercise of

which so deeply concerns the welfare of the people, is left to

the States. In that depository the will of the people is most

certainly ascertained, and the exercise of power is more directly

under their guidance. Our free institutions have had their great

development and owe their stability more to causes connected with

the direct exercise of the power of the people in local

self-government than to all other causes combined. Recent events,

though tending strongly to centralization, have not destroyed in

the public mind the inestimable value of local self-government.

Among the powers which have hitherto been esteemed as most

essential to the public welfare is the power of the States to

regulate their domestic institutions in their own way; and among

those institutions none has been preserved by the States with

greater jealousy than their absolute control over marriage and

the relation between the sexes.

Another power of the States, deemed by the people when they

assented to the Constitution of the United States most essential

to the public welfare, was the right of each State to determine

the qualifications of electors. Wherever the federal constitution

speaks of elections for a federal office, it adopts the

qualifications for electors prescribed by the State in which the

election is to be held.

Nor has this fundamental rule been departed from in the fifteenth

amendment. That impairs it only to the extent that race, color,

or previous condition of servitude shall not be made a ground of

exclusion from the right of suffrage. In all else that pertains

to the qualifications of electors the absolute will of the State

prevails. This amendment was inserted from considerations which

pertain to no other part of the question of suffrage. The negro

race had been recently emancipated; it was supposed that the

antagonism between them and their old masters and the prejudice

of race would be such as to obstruct the equal enjoyment of the

rights of freedom conferred by the national forces, and would

prevent the white race of the South from admitting the negro

race, however deserving it might be, to equal political

privileges. And, moreover, it was deemed by the North a point of

honor that, having conferred freedom on the negro, he should be

provided with the right of suffrage.

None of these considerations applies in the present case. It is

not pretended that any such antagonism or prejudice exists

between the sexes. It is not pretended that women have been

redeemed from an intolerable slavery by the power of the

government. It is not pretended that the sex in whose hands is

the political power of the States is unwilling, from any cause,

to do full justice to the other; for it is conceded that if the

proposed amendment should be adopted, its incorporation into the

constitution must result from the voluntary action of that sex in

which is vested this political power. No good reason has been

given why the congress of the United States should force or even

hasten the States into such action, and no such reason can be

given without a reversal of the theories on which our free

institutions are based.

The history given by the majority, of the legislation of the

several States in relation to the rights of persons and property

of married women showing as it does a steady advance in the

abolition of their common-law disabilities, conclusively

demonstrates that this question may be safely left for solution

where it now is and has always hitherto belonged. The public mind

is now being agitated in many of the States as to the rights of

women, not only as to suffrage, but as to their engaging in the

various employments from which they have hitherto been excluded.

This exclusion from certain employments has not been the result

of municipal but of social laws--the strongest of all human

regulations. As these social laws have been modified, so the

sphere of woman's activities and usefulness has been enlarged.

These social laws are in the main the groundwork of the exclusion

of women from the right of suffrage. In the establishment of

these laws, as in their modification, women themselves have even

a greater influence than men. Their disability to vote is,

therefore, self-imposed; when they shall will otherwise, it is

not too much to say that the disability will no longer exist. If

in the future it shall be found that these laws deny a right to

women the enjoyment of which they desire, and for the exercise of

which they are qualified, it cannot be doubted that they will

give way. If, on the contrary, neither of these shall be

discovered, it will happen that the exclusion of suffrage will

not be considered as a denial of a right, but as an exemption

granted to women from cares and burdens which a tender and

affectionate regard for womanhood refuses to cast on them.

We are convinced, therefore, that the best mode of disposing of

the question is to leave its solution to that power most amenable

to the influences and usages of society in which women have so

large and so potential a share, confident that at no distant day

a right result will be reached in each State which will be

satisfactory to both sexes and perfectly consistent with the

welfare and happiness of the people. Certainly this must be so if

the people themselves, the source and foundation of all power,

are capable of self-government.

At two of its meetings the committee listened with great pleasure

to several eminent ladies who appeared before it as advocates of

the proposed amendment. At none of the meetings of the committee,

including that at which the members voted on the proposed

amendment, was there any discussion of this important subject;

none was asked for or desired by any member of the committee, and

the vote was taken. The reports of the majority and of the

minority of the committee are therefore to be construed only as

the individual opinions of the members who respectively concur in

them. They are in no sense to be treated as the judgment of a

deliberative body charged with the examination of this important

subject.

The foregoing leads us to but one recommendation: that the

committee should be discharged from the further consideration of

the subject, that the resolution raising it be rescinded, and

that the proposed amendment be rejected.

J. Z. GEORGE,

HOWELL E. JACKSON,

JAMES G. FAIR.

In a letter from Miss Caroline Biggs to the president of the

National Association the following congratulations came from the

friends of suffrage in England:

CENTRAL COMMITTEE OF THE NATIONAL SOCIETY FOR }

WOMAN SUFFRAGE, 64 Berners Street, LONDON, W. }

At a meeting of the Executive Committee, on May 18, 1882, the

following resolution was proposed by Mrs. Lucas, seconded by Miss

Jane Cobden, and passed unanimously:

_Resolved_, That the Executive Committee of the National

Society for Woman Suffrage have heard with hearty

satisfaction that a select committee of the United States

Senate in Washington has passed by a majority of votes the

recommendation to adopt a constitutional amendment in favor

of women's suffrage. They feel that the cause of woman is

one in all countries, and they offer their most cordial

congratulations to the women of America on the important

step which has just been gained, and their warmest

good-wishes for a speedy success in obtaining a measure

which will guarantee justice and equal rights to half the

population of a sister country.

Nebraska now became the center of interest, as a constitutional

amendment to secure the right of suffrage to woman was submitted to

be voted upon in the November election. As the submission of such a

proposition makes an important crisis in the history of a State, as

well as in the suffrage movement, the notes of preparation were as

varied as multitudinous throughout the nation, rousing all to

renewed earnestness in the work. Both the American and National

associations decided to hold their annual conventions in Omaha, the

chief city of the State, and to support as many speakers[90] as

possible through the campaign, that meetings might be held and

tracts distributed in every county of the State, an Herculean

undertaking, as Nebraska comprises 230,000 inhabitants scattered

over an area of 76,000 square miles, divided into sixty-six

counties; and yet this is what the friends of the measure proposed

to do. The American Association[91] held its convention September

12, 13, 14. The National[92] continued three days, September 27,

28, 29.

The Opera House, in which the National Association held its

meeting, was completely filled during all the sessions. The address

of welcome was given by Hon. A. J. Poppleton, one of the most

distinguished lawyers in that State. He said:

I deem it no light compliment that, in the face of an explicit

declaration that I am not in favor of woman suffrage, I have been

asked to make, on behalf of the people of Omaha and the State, an

address of welcome to the many distinguished men and women whom

this occasion has brought together. Doubtless the consideration

shown me is a recognition of the fact that I have been a

life-long advocate of the advancement of women through the

agencies of equality in education, equality in employment,

equality in wages, equality in property-rights and personal

liberty, in short, a fair, open, equal field in the struggle for

life. That I cannot go beyond this and embrace equal suffrage, is

due rather to long adherence to the political philosophy of

Edmund Burke than any lack of conviction of the absolute equality

of men and women in natural rights.

In the winter of 1852-3, when a student at Poughkeepsie, N. Y.,

while the spot on which we now stand was Indian country as yet

untouched by the formative power of national legislation, I

listened to Miss Susan B. Anthony, Miss Antoinette Brown and

others in the advocacy of the rights of women. It seems a strange

fortune that brings now, nearly thirty years after, one of those

speakers, crowned with a national reputation, into a State carved

out of that Indian country and containing 60,000 people, in

advocacy of equal suffrage for her sex. This single fact

proclaims in thunder tones the bravery, the fidelity, the

devotion of these pioneers of reform, and challenges for them the

sympathy, respect, esteem and admiration of every good man and

woman in America.

The thirty years commencing about 1850 have been prolific of

momentous changes. It is the era of the sewing machine, of the

domestication of steam and electricity, the overthrow of the

great rebellion, the destruction of slavery, the consolidation of

the German empire, the fall of the second Napoleon, the birth of

the French republic, the incorporation of India into the British

empire, and the revolution of commerce by the Pacific railways

and the Suez canal. Great changes have likewise taken place in

the structure of our own State and national legislation, the most

conspicuous and pronounced result being the centralization of

power in the federal government. It has been preeminently a

period of amelioration, a long stride in the direction of

tolerance of opinion, belief, speech and creed. Hospitals,

asylums, schools, colleges and the manifold agencies of an

advanced Christian civilization for alleviating the average lot

of humanity, have grown and multiplied beyond the experience of

former times, and men like Matthew Vassar, George Peabody and

John Hopkins have hastened to consecrate the abundant fruits of

honorable lives to the exaltation and advancement of the race.

But in no direction have greater changes occurred in this country

than in the condition of woman in respect to employment, wages,

personal and property rights. In all heathen countries at this

hour the mass of women are slaves or worse, wholly deprived of

civil rights. In most Christian countries their legal status is

one of absolute subordination in person and property to men. In

this republic alone have we attained an altitude where some small

measure of justice is meted out to women by the laws. In 1850 a

fair measure of her rights was the grim edict of the common law

holding her in guardianship prior to marriage, and upon marriage

making her and all her possessions practically the property of

her husband, while a cruel, unreasonable and vicious public

opinion excluded her from all except menial and ill-paid service.

One by one and year by year these barriers have given way, until

in many States her property and personal rights enjoy the

complete shelter of the law. Now more than half the occupations

and employments of this age of industrial activity and progress

are thronged with the faithful, efficient and contented labor of

women.

The law has broken forever the thraldom of an odious and hopeless

marriage by reasonable laws for divorce for just cause, given her

the custody of her children, vested her with the absolute power

of disposition and control over her property, inherited or

acquired, freed it from the claims of her husband's creditors,

and clothed her with ample legal remedies even against her

husband. Perhaps Nebraska alone of all the States, by its court

of last resort, has upheld the power of the wife to make

contracts with her husband and enforce them against him in her

own name by the appropriate legal remedies. This surely is

progress. Beyond this there lies but one field to win or fortress

to reduce. Then surely the worn soldier in the long campaign

crowned with the garlands of victory may rest from the battle.

Not many years ago, coming from Wisconsin, I think, a girl

presented herself in the Illinois courts for admission to the

bar, and after a rigid and unsparing examination she was admitted

with public compliment. She took an office in the great city of

Chicago and in the short remnant of an uncertain life so wrought

in her profession as to attain an average professional income,

and win the undivided respect and esteem of her professional

associates. And when from a far country, whither she had gone in

hope to escape a fell disease, her lifeless corpse was brought

back for sepulture, many of the foremost lawyers of Chicago

gathered about her bier and bore emphatic testimony to her

virtues as a woman and her attainments as a lawyer. To me no

greater work has been done by any American woman. When Alta

Hulett unobtrusively, silently but indomitably pressed her way to

the front of the legal profession, and established herself there,

she vindicated the right of her sex to contend for the highest

prizes of life, and left her countrywomen a legacy which will

ultimately blazon her name imperishably in the history of the

advancement of women; and every American woman who, like her,

goes to the front of any honorable occupation, employment or

profession, and stays there, becomes her coaedjutor in work and a

sharer in her reward.

Laden with the trophies of thirty years of conflict, of progress,

of measurable success, the vice-president of the National Woman

Suffrage Association and her associates present themselves to

Nebraska and ask a hearing upon the final issue, "Shall this work

be crowned by granting to women in this State the highest

privilege of the citizen--suffrage?" On behalf of the people of a

State whose legislature has granted everything else to

women--whose devotion to free speech, untrammeled discussion and

an independent press has been conspicuous in its constitutional

and legislative history--I welcome them to this city and State,

and bespeak for them a patient, candid, respectful, appreciative

hearing.

Miss Anthony replied briefly to Mr. Poppleton's eloquent address

and returned the thanks of the convention for the courtesy with

which its members had been received by the citizens of Omaha.[93]

She then read a letter from the president of the convention:

TOULOUSE, France, September 1, 1882.

_To the National Woman Suffrage Association in Convention

assembled:_

DEAR FRIENDS: People never appreciate the magnitude and

importance on any step in progress, at the time it is taken, nor

the full moral worth of the characters who inspire it, hence it

will be in line with the whole history of reform from the

beginning if woman's enfranchisement in Nebraska should in many

minds seem puerile and premature, and its advocates fanatical and

unreasonable. Nevertheless the proposition speaks for itself. A

constitutional amendment to crown one-half of the people of a

great State with all their civil and political rights, is the

most vital question the citizens of Nebraska have ever been

called on to consider; and the fact cannot be gainsaid that some

of the purest and ablest women America can boast, are now in the

State advocating the measure.

For the last two months I have been assisting my son in the

compilation of a work soon to be published in America, under the

title, "The Woman Question in Europe," to which distinguished

women in different nations have each contributed a sketch of the

progress made in their condition. One interesting and significant

fact as shown in this work, is, that in the very years we began

to agitate the question of equal rights, there was a simultaneous

movement by women for various privileges, industrial, social,

educational, civil and political, throughout the civilized world.

And this without the slightest concert of action, or knowledge of

each other's existence, showing that the time had come in the

natural evolution of the species, in the order of human

development, for woman to assert her rights, and to demand the

recognition of the feminine element in all the vital interests of

life.

To battle against a palpable fact in philosophy and the

accumulated facts in achievement that can be seen on all sides in

woman's work for the last forty years, from slavery to equality,

is as vain as to fight against the law of gravitation. We shall

as surely reach the goal we purposed when we started, as that the

rich prairies of Nebraska will ere long feed and educate millions

of brave men and women, gathered from every nation on the globe.

Every consideration for the improvement of your home life, for

the morality of your towns and cities, for the elevation of your

schools and colleges, and the loftiest motives of patriotism

should move you, men of Nebraska, to vote for this amendment.

Galton in his great work on Heredity says:

We are in crying want of a greater fund of ability in all

stations of life, for neither the classes of statesmen,

philosophers, artisans nor laborers, are up to the modern

complexity of their several professions. An extended

civilization like ours comprises more interests than the

ordinary statesmen or philosophers of our race are capable

of dealing with, and it exacts more intelligent work than

our ordinary artisans and laborers, are capable of

performing. Our race is overweighted, and appears likely to

be dragged into degeneracy by demands that exceed its

powers. If its average ability were raised a grade or two, a

new class of statesmen would conduct our complex affairs at

home and abroad, as easily as our best business men now do

their own private trades and professions. The needs of

centralization, communication, and culture, call for more

brains and mental stamina, than the average of our race

possesses.

Does it need a prophet to tell us where to begin this work? Does

not the physical and intellectual condition of the women of a

nation decide the capacity and power of its men? If we would give

our sons the help and inspiration of woman's thought and interest

in the complex questions of our present civilization, we must

first give her the power that political responsibility secures.

With the ballot in her own right hand, she would feel a new sense

of dignity, and command among men a respect they have never felt

before.

Nebraska has now the opportunity of making this grand experiment

of securing justice, liberty, equality, for the first time in the

world's history, to woman, through her education and

enfranchisement, of lifting man to that higher plane of thought

where he may be able wisely to meet all the emergencies of the

period in which he is called on to act. Let every man in Nebraska

now so do his duty, that, when the sun goes down on the eighth of

November, the glad news may be sent round the world that at last

one State in the American republic has fully accorded the sacred

right of self-government to all her citizens, black and white,

men and women. With sincere hope for this victory,

Cordially yours, ELIZABETH CADY STANTON.

Many interesting letters were received from friends at home and

abroad, of which we give a few. The following is from our Minister

Plenipotentiary at the German Court:

BERLIN, September 9, 1882.

Miss ANTHONY: _Esteemed Friend_: At this great distance I can

only sympathize with the earnest effort to be made this fall to

secure political recognition for women in Nebraska. I am glad

that the prospect is so good and that Nebraska, which gave a

name, with Kansas, to the first successful resistance to the

encroachments of slavery, is the arena where the battle is to be

fought under such promise of a just result. By recognizing the

right of its women to an equal share in all the duties and

responsibilities of life, Nebraska will honor itself while

securing for all time wholesome laws and administration.

I believe society would more benefit itself than grant a favor to

women by extending the suffrage to them. All the interests of

women are promoted by a government that shall guard the family

circle, restrain excess, promote education, shield the young from

temptation. While the true interests of men lie in the same

direction, women more generally appreciate these facts and

illustrate in their lives a desire for their attainment. Could we

bring to the ballot-box the great fund of virtue, intelligence

and good intention stored up in the minds and hearts of our wives

and sisters, how great the reinforcement would be for all that is

noble, patriotic and pure in public life! Who should fear the

result who desires the public welfare? From the stand-point of

better principles applied to the direction of public affairs and

the best individuals in office, the argument seems impregnable.

It is getting late to resist this measure on the ground that the

character of women themselves would be lowered by contact with

politics. That objection is identical with the motive which

causes the Turk to shut up his women in a harem and closely veil

them in public. He fears their delicacy will be tarnished if they

speak to any man but their proprietor. So prejudice feared woman

would be unsexed if she had equal education with man. The

professions were closed to women for the same consideration.

Women have vindicated their ability to endure the education and

engage in the dreaded pursuits, yet society is not dissolved, and

these fearful imaginings have proved idle dreams. As every

advance made by woman since the days when it was a mooted

law-point how large could be the stick with which her husband

could punish her, down to the day when congress opened to her the

bar of the United States Supreme Court, has been accompanied by

constantly refuted assertions that she and society were about to

be ruined. I think we can safely trust to her good sense, virtue

and delicacy to preserve for us the loved and venerated object we

have always known, even if society shall yield the still further

measure of complete enfranchisement, and thus add to her social

dignity, duties and responsibilities.

No class has ever been degraded by the ballot. All have rather

been elevated by it. We cannot rationally anticipate less

desirable personal consequences to those whose tendencies are

naturally good, than to those on whom the ballot has been

conferred belonging to a lower plane of being. But these

considerations go only to show the policy of granting suffrage to

women. From the stand-point of justice the argument is more

pressing. If woman asks for the ballot shall man deny it? By what

right? Certainly not by the right of a majority; for women are at

least as numerous. Certainly not by any right derived from

nature; for our common mother has set no brand on woman. If one

woman shall ask for a voice in the regulation of society of

which she is at least one-half, who shall say her nay? If any

woman shall ask it, who shall deny it because another woman does

not ask it? There are many men who do not value their

citizenship; shall other men therefore be deprived of the ballot?

Suppose many women would not avail themselves of such a function,

are those with higher, or other views, to be therefore kept in

tutelage?

I trust you may succeed in this work in Nebraska. It is of

supreme importance to the cause. The example of Nebraska would

soon be followed by other States. The current of such a reform

knows no retiring ebb. The suffrage once acquired will never be

relinquished; first, because it will recommend itself, as it has

in Wyoming, by its results; second, because the women will

jealously guard their rights, and defend them with their ballots.

Wishing I could do more than send you good wishes for the

cause,[94] I am, respectfully yours,

A. A. SARGENT.

The following letter is from a daughter of Elizabeth Cady Stanton

(a graduate of Vassar College, and classmate of Miss Elizabeth

Poppleton), who two years before, on the eve of her departure for

Europe, gave her eloquent address on Edmund Burke in that city:

TOULOUSE, France, September 3, 1882.

_To the Voters of my Generation in Nebraska:_

It is not my desire to present to you any argument, but only to

give you an episode in my own life. I desire to lay before you a

fact, not a fiction; a reality, not a supposition; an experience

not a theory.

I was born in a free republic and in my veins runs very

rebellious blood. An ancestor of my father was one of those

intrepid men who left the shores of old England and sailed forth

to establish on a distant continent the grandest republic that

has ever yet been known. That, you see, is not good blood to

submit to injustice. And on my mother's side we find a sturdy old

Puritan from whom our stock is traced, fleeing from England

because of the faith that was in him, and joining his rebellious

life to one of that honest Holland nation which had defied so

nobly the oppressions of the Catholic church and Spanish

inquisition. As if this were not sufficiently independent blood

to pass on to other generations, my own father became an

abolitionist, and step by step fought his belief to victory, and

my mother early gave her efforts to the elevation of woman. It is

all this, together with my living in the freest land on the globe

and in a century rife with discussions of all principles of

government, that has made me in every fiber a believer in

republican institutions.

Having been reared in a large family of boys where we enjoyed

equal freedom, and having received the same collegiate education

as my brothers, it is not until lately that I have felt the crime

of my womanhood. I have dwelt thus upon the antecedents and

influences of my life in order to ask you one question: Do you

not think I can appreciate the real meaning, the true sacredness

of a republic? Do you not believe I feel the duties it demands

of its citizens? But I want you to hold your reply in abeyance,

till I give you one bit more of history.

A ship at sea crossing on the Atlantic between Europe and

America. Of two persons on this vessel I wish to speak to you. Of

one I have already told you much; I need but add that my two

years spent in Europe,[95] previous to my return to America for a

few months last winter, had not made me less American, less a

lover of republicanism. And now this ship, baffling the February

storm, was sweeping nearer the land where the people reign. My

heart beat high as I thought it was in my native country where

women were free, more honored than in any nation in the world. As

I stood on the deck, the strong sea-wind blowing wildly about me,

and the ocean bearing on its heart-wave mountains, visions of the

grandeur of the nation lying off beyond the western horizon, rose

before me. And it was a proud heart that cried--"My Country!"

And the other person I want to speak of? It is a man, a German,

coming to the United States to escape military service in

Prussia. He came in the steerage; was poor and ignorant. He could

speak no English, not one word of your language and mine. His

fellows were all Irish, so I offered to be an interpreter for

him. I visited the steerage quarters, and returned with a heavy

heart. Such brutal faces as I saw! Ignorance, cruelty,

subserviency, were everywhere depicted. Herds of human beings

that I feared, they looked so dull and brutal. The full meaning

of a terrible truth rushed upon me. Soon these men would be my

sovereigns--I their subject!

I had just spent a year in that German's native land, and I

remembered that I had seen their women doing the work of men in

the fields, husbands returning from their day's labor

empty-handed, and their wives toiling on behind bent under heavy

burdens, and as I thought on this, our ship bore him and me

towards the land that glories in having given birth to Lucretia

Mott. In the country where he had been reared, I had seen women

harnessed with beasts of burden, dragging laden wagons, and yet

our vessel carried him and me at each moment towards a safe

harbor, in a land that pays homage to the memory of Margaret

Fuller. Our ship sailed on, taking him from a land where he had

been taught to worship royalty, whatever its worth or crime;

where he had paid cringing submission to an arbitrary rule of

police; where he had been surrounded by the degrading effects of

the mightiest military system on the globe. The ship plowed on

and on through the waves, bringing him to a republic, not one

principle of which he comprehended.

And now we sail up New York bay. The day is bright, and a

softening haze hangs over all. Surely this is some vision-land.

Yes, it is indeed a vision-land, for it has never known the

presence of a royal line; against its oppressors it fought in no

mean rebellious spirit, but rose in revolution with its motto,

"Governments derive their just powers from the consent of the

governed," written on its brow to be known of all men. And I

think as we slowly sail up the bay on our vessel, Does that

deadened soul respond to what lies before him? Does there in his

heart rise the prayer, Oh, God! make me true to the duties about

to be laid upon me; make me worthy of being free? Yes, then, for

the first time I felt the full depth of the indignity offered to

my womanhood. I felt my enthusiasm for America wavering--love of

country dead. _My_ country!--I have no country.

Young men of Nebraska, I ask you to free your minds from

prejudice, to be just towards the demands of another human soul,

to be frank, to be wholly truthful, and answer my demand: Why

should I not be a citizen of this republic? In replying, read

between the lines of my tedious story and bear in mind the words

of Voltaire: "Who would dare change a law that time has

consecrated? Is there anything more respectable than an ancient

abuse! Reason is more ancient, replied Zadig."

Respectfully, HARRIOT STANTON.

MANCHESTER NATIONAL SOCIETY FOR WOMAN SUFFRAGE, }

MANCHESTER, England, September 5, 1882. }

DEAR MISS ANTHONY: Will you accept a word of cheer and God-speed

from your sisters in England in your crusade for the emancipation

of woman in Nebraska? You carry with you the hopes and

sympathetic wishes of all on this side of the water. If you win,

as I trust you may, your victory will have a distinct influence

on the future of our parliamentary campaign, which we hope to

begin in early spring in England. In the name of English women I

would appeal to the men of Nebraska to assent to the great act of

justice to women which is proposed to them by their elected

representatives, and by so doing to aid in the enfranchisement of

women all over the world.

Yours faithfully, LYDIA E. BECKER.

LONDON, September 1, 1882.

DEAR MISS ANTHONY: Having heard that the next convention of the

National Woman Suffrage Association will meet at Omaha this

month, I cannot refrain from sending a few lines to assure our

friends who are working so steadfastly in America for the same

sacred cause as our own, of our loving sympathy and good-wishes

for success in the coming struggle. The eyes and hearts of

hundreds of women are, like my own, turned to Nebraska, where so

momentous an issue is to be decided two months hence. The news of

their vote, if rightly given, will "echo round the world" like

the first shot fired at Concord. It will be the expression of

their determination to establish their freedom by giving freedom

to others, and their example will be followed by Indiana and

Oregon, and soon by the other States of the Union and by England.

Everything points with us to a speedy triumph of the principle of

equal justice for woman. Next November, about the time when

Nebraska will be voting for equal suffrage, the women in Scotland

will be voting for the first time in their municipal elections.

The session of 1882 will be memorable in future for having passed

the act which gives a married woman the right to hold her own

property, make contracts, sue and be sued, in the same manner as

if she were a single woman. It is nearly thirty years since we

first began our efforts in this matter, and each succeeding step

has been won very slowly and with great difficulty through the

efforts of those who are working to obtain the suffrage. Mr.

Gladstone still expresses the hope that next session will place

the franchise on a "fair" basis, meaning thereby the same right

of voting for counties as for boroughs. We maintain that the

franchise can never be said to be on a fair basis while women are

debarred from the right of voting. Our progress and your progress

will keep even pace together, for if women are free in America no

long time can elapse before they are free here. We can but offer

you our sympathy and we beg this favor of you, that as soon as

you have the returns of the vote ascertained, you will telegraph

the news to us, that our English societies may keep the day of

rejoicing heart in heart with the American National Association.

With cordial sympathy in all your efforts, I am, faithfully

yours,

CAROLYN ASHURST BIGGS.

_To the National Woman Suffrage Association, in Convention

assembled, at Omaha, Nebraska, September 26, 27, 28:_

DEAR FRIENDS: The most pressing work before the National Woman

Suffrage Convention, is bringing all its forces to bear upon

congress for the submission of a sixteenth amendment to the

national constitution, which shall prohibit States from

disfranchising citizens of the United States, on the ground of

sex, or for any cause not equally applicable to all citizens.

While we of the National are glad to see an amendment to a State

constitution proposed, securing suffrage to woman, as is the case

in Nebraska this fall, we must not be led by it to forget or

neglect our legitimate work, an amendment to the national

constitution, which will secure suffrage at one and the same

moment to the women of each State. While all action of any kind

and everywhere is good because it is educational, the only real,

legitimate work of the National Woman Suffrage Association, is

upon congress. Never have our prospects been brighter than

to-day. A select committee on woman suffrage having been

appointed in both houses during the last session of congress, and

a resolution introduced in the Senate, proposing an amendment to

the Constitution of the United States, to secure the right of

suffrage to all citizens irrespective of sex, having been

referred to this select committee and receiving a favorable

majority report thereon, we have every reason to expect the

submission of such an amendment at the next session of congress.

The work then, most necessary, is with each representative and

senator; and the legislatures of the several States should be

induced to pass resolutions requesting the senators and

representatives from each State to give voice and vote in favor

of the submission of such an amendment. This work is vitally

important for the coming winter, and none the less so, even

should Nebraska vote aye November 7, upon the woman suffrage

amendment to its own constitution. In view of the probability of

the submission of a sixteenth amendment at the coming session of

congress, I offer the following resolution, which I consider one

of the most important of the series I have been asked to prepare

for adoption by the convention:

_Resolved_, That it is the duty of every woman to work with

the legislature of her own State, to secure from it the

passage of a joint resolution requesting its senators and

representatives in congress to use voice and vote in favor

of the submission of an amendment to the national

constitution which shall prohibit States from disfranchising

citizens on the ground of sex.

I hope the above resolution will be unanimously adopted, and that

each woman will strive to carry its provisions into effect as a

religious duty. With my best wishes for a grand and successful

convention, and the hope that Nebraska will set itself right

before the world by the adoption of the woman suffrage amendment

this fall, I am,

Very truly yours, MATILDA JOSLYN GAGE.[96]

_The Republican_ in describing the closing scenes of the

convention, said:

Fully 2,500 people assembled last evening to listen to the

closing proceedings of the convention. The stage, which was

beautifully furnished and upholstered, was completely occupied by

the ladies of the Association; and as they all were in full

dress, in preparation for the reception at the Paxton Hotel, the

sight was a brilliant one. As respects the audience, not only the

seats, but the lobbies were crowded, and hundreds upon hundreds

were turned away. Manager Boyd remarked as we passed in, "You

will see to-night the most magnificent gathering that has ever

been in the Opera House," and such truly it was--the intellect,

fashion and refinement of the city. Addresses were given by M'me

Neyman, whose earnest and eloquent words were breathlessly heard;

Mrs. Minor of St. Louis, whose utterances were serious and

weighty; and Miss Phoebe Couzins, who touched the springs of

sentiment, sympathy, pathos and humor by turns. After answering

two or three objections that had not been fully touched upon,

Miss Couzins fairly carried away the house, when she said in

conclusion, "Miss Anthony and myself, and another who has

addressed you are the only spinsters in the movement. We, indeed,

expect to marry, but we don't want our husbands to marry slaves

[great merriment]; we are waiting for our enfranchisement. And

now, if you want Miss Anthony and myself to move into your

State--" this hit, with all it implied, set the audience into a

convulsion of cheers and laughter which was quite prolonged; and

after the merriment had subsided, Miss Couzins completed her

sentence by saying, "We are under sailing orders to receive

proposals!" whereupon the applause broke out afresh. "However,"

she added, seeing Miss Anthony shake her head, "it takes a very

superior woman to be an old maid, and on this principle I think

Miss Anthony will stick to her colors." Miss Couzins quoted

Hawthorne as speaking through "Zenobia":

"It is my belief, yea, my prophecy, that when my sex shall

have attained its freedom there will be ten eloquent women

where there is now one eloquent man," and instanced this

convention as an illustration of what might be expected.

Miss Couzins was followed by Mrs. Saxon, Mrs. Neyman and Miss

Hindman. The resolutions,[97] which were presented by Mrs. Sewall,

among their personal commendations expressed the appreciation of

the Association for the services rendered by Mrs. Clara Bewick

Colby, in making preparations for the convention. Mrs. Colby in

making her acknowledgments said:

There was another to whom the Association owed much for the work

done which has made possible the brilliant success of the

convention--one to whom, while across the water their thoughts

and hearts had often turned; and she was sure that all present

would gladly join in extending a welcome to the late president,

and now chairman of the executive committee of the State

association, Mrs. Harriet S. Brooks.

Mrs. Brooks came forward amid applause, and said:

That at this late hour while a speech might be silvern, silence

was golden; and she would say no more than, on behalf of all the

members and officers of the State association, and the friends of

the cause in Omaha, to tender their most grateful thanks to the

National Association for "the feast of reason and the flow of

soul" with which they have been favored during the last three

days.

At the close of the convention the spacious parlors of the Paxton

House were crowded. Over a thousand ladies and gentlemen passed

through, shaking hands with the delegates and congratulating them

on the great success of the convention.

Another enthusiastic meeting was held at Lincoln, the capital of

the State, and radiating from this point in all directions these

missionaries of the new gospel of woman's equality traversed the

entire State, scattering tracts and holding meetings in churches,

school-houses and the open air, and thus the agitation was kept up

until the day of election. As it was the season for agricultural

fairs, the people were more easily drawn together, and the ladies

readily availed themselves, as they had opportunity, of these great

gatherings. Two notable debates were held in Omaha in answer to the

many challenges sent by the opposition. Miss Couzins, the first to

enter the arena, was obliged to help her antagonist in his

scriptural quotations, while Miss Anthony was compelled to supply

hers with well-known statistics. It was evident that neither of the

gentlemen had sharpened his weapons for the encounter.

To look over the list of counties visited and the immense distances

traveled in public and private conveyances, enables one in a

measure to appreciate the physical fatigue these ladies endured. In

reading of their earnest speeches, debates, conversations at every

fireside and dinner-table, in every car and carriage as they

journeyed by the way or waited at the station, their untiring

perseverance must command the unqualified admiration of those who

know what a political campaign involves. During those six weeks of

intense excitement they were alike hopeful and anxious as to the

result. At last the day dawned when the momentous question of the

enfranchisement of 75,000 women was to be decided. Every train

brought some of the speakers to their headquarters in Omaha, with

cheering news from the different localities they had canvassed. And

now one last effort must be made, they must see what can be done at

the polls. Some of the ladies went in carriages to each of the

polling booths and made earnest appeals to those who were to vote

for or against the woman's amendment. Others stood dispensing

refreshments and the tickets they wished to see voted, all day

long. And while the men sipped their coffee and ate their viands

with evident relish, the women appealed to their sense of justice,

to their love of liberty and republican institutions. Vain would be

the attempt to describe the patient waiting, the fond hopes, the

bright visions of coming freedom, that had nerved these brave women

to these untiring labors, or to shadow in colors dark enough the

fears, the anxieties, the disappointments, all centered in that

November election. A fitting subject for an historical picture was

that group of intensely earnest women gathered there, as the last

rays of the setting sun warned them that whether for weal or for

woe the decisive hour had come; no word of theirs could turn defeat

to victory.

The hours of anxious waiting were not long, the verdict soon came

flashing on every wire, from the north, the south, the west: "No!"

"No!" "No!" The mothers, wives and daughters of Nebraska must still

wear the yoke of slavery; they who endured with man the hardships

of the early days and bravely met the dangers of a pioneer life,

they who have reared two generations of boys and taught them the

elements of all they know, who have stood foremost in all good

works of charity and reform, who appreciate the genius of free

institutions, native-born American citizens, are still to be

governed by the ignorant, vicious classes from the old world. What

a verdict was this for one of the youngest States in the American

republic in the nineteenth century!

But these heroic women did not sit down in sackcloth and ashes to

weep over the cruel verdict. Anticipating victory, they had engaged

the Opera House to hold their jubilee if the women of Nebraska were

enfranchised; or, if the returns brought them no cause for

rejoicing, they would at least exalt the educational work that had

been done in the State, and dedicate themselves anew to this

struggle for liberty. They had survived three defeats, in Kansas,

Michigan, Colorado, and tasted the bitterness of repeated

disappointments, and another could not crush them. When the hour

arrived, an immense audience welcomed them in the Opera House, and

from this new baptism of sorrow they spoke more eloquently than

ever before. In their calm, determined manner they seemed to say

with Milton's hero:

"All is not lost: the unconquerable will is ours."

A report of the Fifteenth Annual Washington Convention, Jan. 23,

24, 25, 1883, was written by Miss Jessie Waite of Chicago, and

published in the _Washington Chronicle_, from which we give the

following extracts:

The proceedings of the Association were inaugurated at Lincoln

Hall Monday evening by a novel lecture, entitled "Zekle's Wife,"

by Mrs. Amy Talbot Dunn of Indianapolis. The personality of Mrs.

Dunn is so entirely lost in that of Zekle's wife that it is hard

to realize that the old lady of so many and so varied experiences

is a happy young wife. As a character sketch Mrs. Dunn's "Zekle's

Wife" stands on an equality with Denman Thompson's "Joshua

Whitcomb" and with Joe Jefferson's "Rip Van Winkle." To sustain a

conception so foreign to the natural characteristics of the actor

without once allowing the interest of the audience to flag,

requires originality of thought, independence of idea, and genius

for action. Mrs. Dunn, herself the author of her sketch,

possesses to a remarkable degree the power to impress upon her

audience the feeling that the old lady from "Kaintuck" is before

them, not only to say things for their amusement, but also to

impress upon them those great truths which have presented

themselves to her mind during the fifty years of her married

life. "Zekle's Wife" is a keen, shrewd, warm-hearted, lovable old

woman, without education or culture, yet with an innate sense of

refinement and a touching undercurrent of desire "not to be too

hard on Zekle." As she tells her story, which she informs us is a

true one from real life, she engages the attention and wins the

sympathy of all her hearers, and frequent bursts of applause

evidence the satisfaction of the audience.

The convention proper opened on Tuesday morning with the

appointment of various committees,[98] and reports[99] from the

different States filled up most of the time during the day. May

Wright Sewall said:

Women must learn that power gives power; that intelligence

alone can appreciate or be influenced by intelligence; that

justice alone is moved by appeals based on justice. More

than anything in the course of suffrage labor does the

Nebraska campaign justify the primary method of this

National Association. We have a right to expect that each

legislature will be composed of the picked men of the State.

We have a right to believe that as the intelligence, wisdom

and justice of the picked men of the nation are superior to

the same qualities in the mass of men, so is the fitness of

national and State legislators to consider the demands for

the ballot.

Mrs. Mills of Washington sang, as a solo, "Barbara Fritchie," in

excellent style. Mrs. Caroline Hallowell Miller (wife of Francis

Miller, esq., late assistant attorney for the District of

Columbia) spoke with the greatest ease and most remarkable

command of language. She is in every sense a strong woman. She

said that, born and reared as she was in a Virginia town noted

for its intense conservatism, where she had seen a woman stripped

to the waist and brutally beaten by order of the law (her skin

happened to be of a dark color) whose only crime was that of

alleged impertinence, and that impertinence provoked by improper

conduct on the part of a young man; that, reared in such a cradle

as this, still, through the blessing of a good home, she had

learned to deeply appreciate the noble efforts of women who dared

to tread new paths, to break their own way through the dense

forest of prejudice and ignorance. Man cannot represent woman. If

woman breaks any law of man, of nature, or of God, she alone must

suffer the penalty. "This fact seems to me," said Mrs. Miller,

"to settle the whole question."

Miss Anthony read the following letter from Hon. Benjamin F.

Butler, who, she said, had the honor of being an advocate of this

cause, in addition to being governor of Massachusetts:

WASHINGTON, D. C., Jan. 23, 1883.

MY DEAR MISS ANTHONY: I received your kind note asking me to

attend the National Convention of the friends of woman

suffrage at Washington, for which courtesy I am obliged. My

engagements, which have taken me out of the commonwealth,

cover all, and more than all, of my time, and I find I am to

hurry back, leaving some of them undisposed of. It will

therefore be impossible for me to attend the convention.

As I have already declared my conviction that the fourteenth

amendment fully covers the right of all persons to vote, and

as I assume that the women of the country are persons, and

very important persons to its happiness and prosperity, I

never have been able to see any reason why women do not come

within its provisions. I think such will be the decision of

the court, perhaps quite as early as you may be able to get

through congress and the legislatures of the several States

another amendment. But both lines of action may well be

followed, as they do not conflict with each other. This

course was taken in the case of the fifteenth amendment,

which was supposed to be necessary to cover the case of the

negro, although many of the friends of the colored man

looked coldly upon that amendment, because it seemed to be

an admission that the fourteenth amendment was not

sufficient. Therefore I can without inconsistency, I think,

bid you "God speed" in your agitation for the sixteenth

amendment. It will have the effect to enlighten the public

mind as to the scope of the fourteenth amendment. I am very

truly, your friend and servant,

BENJ. F. BUTLER.

Mrs. Blake presented a series of resolutions, which were laid on

the table for consideration:

WHEREAS, In larger numbers than ever before the women of the

United States are demanding the repeal of arbitrary

restrictions which now debar them from the use of the

ballot; and

WHEREAS, The recent defeat in Nebraska of a constitutional

amendment, giving the women of the State the right to vote,

proves that failure is the natural result of an appeal to

the masses on a question which is best understood and

approved by the more intelligent citizens; therefore,

_Resolved_, That we call upon this congress to pass, without

delay, the sixteenth amendment to the federal constitution

now pending in the Senate.

_Resolved_, That all competitive examinations for places in

the civil service of the United States should be open on

equal terms to citizens of both sexes, and that any

so-called civil service reform that does not correct the

existing unjust discrimination against women employes, and

grade all salaries on merit and not sex, is a dishonest

pretense at reform.

WHEREAS, The Constitution of the United States declares that

no State shall be admitted to the Union unless it have a

republican form of government; and whereas, no true republic

can exist unless all the inhabitants are given equal civil

and political rights; therefore,

_Resolved_, That we earnestly protest against the admission

of Dakota as a State, unless the right of suffrage is

secured on equal terms to all her citizens.

_Resolved_, That the women of these United States have not

deserved the infliction of this punishment of

disfranchisement, and do most earnestly demand that they be

relieved from the cruelties it imposes upon them.

WHEREAS, During the war hundreds of women throughout our

land entered the service of the nation as hospital nurses;

and

WHEREAS, Many of these women were disabled by wounds and by

disease, while many were reduced to permanent invalidism by

the hardships they endured; therefore,

_Resolved_, That these women should be placed on the pension

list and rewarded for their services.

After the reading of the resolutions an animated discussion

followed, Miss Anthony showing in scathing terms the injustice of

the employment of women to do equal work with men at half the

salaries, in the departments at Washington and elsewhere. An

additional resolution was adopted declaring that paying Dr. Susan

A. Edson for her services as attendant physician to President

Garfield, $1,000 less than was paid for an equivalent service

rendered by Dr. Boynton, a more recent graduate of the same

college from which she received her diploma, is an unjust

discrimination on account of sex.

Mrs. SEWALL said men in the departments were given extra

leave of absence each year to go home to vote, and suggested

that women be given (until the time comes for them to vote)

extra leave to meditate upon the ballot.

Miss ANTHONY said she had addressed a letter to each

secretary asking that such women as desired be given

permission to attend the meetings of this convention without

loss of time to them. She had received but one answer, which

was from Secretary Folger, who wrote: "_The condition of the

public business prevents us from acceding to your request_."

Mrs. HARRIETTE R. SHATTUCK of Boston said: Tired as some of

the audience must be of hearing the same old argument in

favor of the ballot for women repeated from year to year,

they could not possibly be more tired than the friends of

the cause were of hearing the same old objections repeated

from year to year. While the forty-year-old objections are

raised the forty-year-old rejoinders must be given. We must

continue to agitate until we force people to listen. It is

like the ringing of a bell. At first no one notices it; in a

little while, a few will listen; finally, the perpetual

ding-dong, ding-dong, will force itself to be heard by every

one. The oldest of all the old arguments is that of right

and justice, and the tune which my little bell shall ring is

merely this: "_It is right!_" This cry of woman for liberty

and equality increases every day, and it is a cry that must

some day be heard and responded to.

Mrs. Virginia L. Minor of St. Louis was then introduced as the

woman who stands to this cause in the same relation that Dred

Scott had stood to the Republican party. Miss Couzins said that

in introducing Mrs. Minor she wanted to say one word about the

work Mrs. Minor had done for the soldiers, during the sanitary

fair and all through the war. She had canned fruit, refusing the

money offered in payment, returning it all to be used for the

sick and wounded soldiers [applause]. Mrs. Minor spoke in a calm,

deliberate manner, with perfect conviction in the truth of her

statements and with a winning sweetness of expression that

indicated the highest sensibilities of a refined nature. She

showed that women voted in the early days of the country, and

that undoubtedly it was the intention of the framers of the

constitution that they should do so. This right had been taken

away when the constitution was amended and the word "male"

inserted. What is now desired is simply restoration of that which

had been taken away. She believed that this restoration was made,

unwittingly, by the addition of the fourteenth amendment, which,

without doubt, makes women citizens. It is men who have abused

the republican institution of suffrage; it is women who desire to

restore it to its proper exercise. Miss Anthony read a letter

from Mrs. Wallace, the wife of one of the former governors of

Indiana:

INDIANAPOLIS, Ind., January 21, 1883.

DEAR MISS ANTHONY: When in the call I read that for fourteen

consecutive years the National Woman Suffrage Association

had held a convention in Washington, I was oppressed by two

thoughts: First, how hard it is to overcome prejudice and

ignorance when they have been fortified by the usages and

customs of ages; and secondly, the sublime faith, courage

and perseverance of the advocates of woman's

enfranchisement, and their confidence in the ultimate

triumph of justice. After all, by what are governments

organized and maintained? By brute force alone? Despotisms

may be, but republics never. What are the qualifications for

the ballot? The power to fight? Are they not rather

intelligence, virtue, truth and patriotism? I scarce think

the most obstinate and egotistical of our opponents will

assert that men possess a monopoly of these virtues, or even

a moiety of them. As to their fighting capacities, of which

we hear so much, I think they would have cut a sorry figure

in the wars which they have been compelled to wage in order

to establish and maintain this government, if they had not

had the sympathy and cooeperation of woman. I entirely agree

with you that, while agitation in the States is necessary as

a means of education, a sixteenth amendment to the national

constitution is the quickest, surest and least laborious way

to secure the success of this great work for human liberty.

Any legislature of Indiana in the last six years would have

ratified such an amendment. With highest regards for

yourself and the best wishes for the success of the

convention, I remain,

Yours, etc., ZERELDA G. WALLACE.

After several other speakers,[100] Madame Clara Neyman of New

York city, delivered what was, without question, one of the best

addresses of the convention. She spoke with a slightly German

accent, which only served to enhance the interest and hold the

attention of the audience. Her eloquence and argument could not

fail to convince all of her earnest purpose. After showing the

philosophy of reform movements, and every step of progress, she

said:

Woman's enfranchisement will be wrought out by peaceful

means. We shall use no fire-arms, no torpedoes, no heavy

guns to gain our freedom. No precious human lives will be

sacrificed; no tears will be shed to establish our right. We

shall capture the fortresses of prejudice and injustice by

the force of our arguments; we shall send shell after shell

into these strongholds until their defective reasoning gives

way to victorious truth. "Inability to bear arms," says

Herbert Spencer, "was the reason given in feudal times for

excluding woman from succession," and to-day her position is

lowest where the military spirit prevails. A sad

illustration of this is my own country. Being a born German,

and in feeling, kindred, and patriotism attached to the

country of my birth and childhood, it is hard for me to make

such a confession. But the truth must be told, even if it

hurts. It has been observed by those who travel in Europe,

that Germany, which has the finest and best universities,

which stands highest in scholarship, nevertheless tolerates,

nay, enforces the subjection of woman. The freedom of a

country stands in direct relation to the position of its

women. America, which has proclaimed the freedom of man, has

developed _pari passu_ a finer womanhood, and has done more

for us than any other nation in existence. A new type of

manhood has been reared on American soil--a type which

Tennyson describes in his Princess:

Man shall be more of woman, she of man;

He gain in sweetness and in moral height,

Nor lose the thews that wrestle with the world;

She, mental breadth, nor fail in childward care,

Nor lose the childlike in the larger mind;

Till at the last they set them each to each,

Like perfect music unto noble words.

Then comes the statelier Eden back to man;

Then springs the crowning race of human kind.

At the evening session the time was divided between Lillie

Devereux Blake and Phoebe W. Couzins. Mrs. Blake spoke on the

question, "Is it a Crime to be a Woman?"

She showed in a clear, logical manner that wherever a woman

was apprehended for crime the discrimination against her was

not because of the crime she had committed, but because the

crime was committed by a woman. Every woman in this country

is treated by the law as if she were to blame for being a

woman. In New York an honorable married woman has no right

to her children. A man may beat his wife all he pleases; but

if he beats another man the law immediately interferes,

showing that the woman is not protected simply because she

is so indiscreet as to _be a woman_. If it is not a crime to

be a woman, why are women subjected to unequal payment with

men for the same service? Why are they forced at times to

don men's clothes in order to obtain employment that will

keep them from starvation?

Miss COUZINS said that the American-born woman was "a woman

without a country"; but before she had closed she had proved

that this country belonged exclusively to the women. It was

a woman, Queen Isabella, that enabled a man to discover this

country, and in the old flag the initials were "I" and "F,"

representing Isabella and Ferdinand, showing that it was

acknowledged that the woman's initial was the more important

in this matter and to be first considered. It was a woman,

Mary Chilton, that first landed on Plymouth rock. It was a

woman, Betsy Ross, that designed our beautiful flag, the

original eagle on our silver dollar, and the seal of the

United States without which no money is legal. All the way

down in our national history woman has been hand in hand

with man, has assisted, supported and encouraged him, and

now there are women ready to help reform the life of the

body politic, and side by side with man work to purify,

refine and ennoble the world. Miss Couzins seemed Inspired

by her own thoughts and carried the audience along with her

in her flights of eloquence.

Being asked to make a few closing remarks, Mrs. May Wright Sewall

said:

Difficult, indeed, is the task of closing a three days'

convention; vain is the hope to do it with fitting words

which shall not be mere repetitions of what has been said on

this platform. The truth which bases this claim lies in a

nut-shell, and the shell seems hard to be cracked. It is

unfair, when comparing the ability of men and women, to

compare the average woman to the exceptional man, but this

is what man always does. If, perchance, he admits not only

the equality but the superiority of woman, he tells her she

must not vote because she is so nearly an angel, so much

better than he is, and this, in the face of the fact that

every angel represented or revealed has been shown in the

form of a _handsome young man_. If any class then must

abstain from meddling in politics on account of relation to

the angels, it is the men! But she informed the gentlemen

she had no fears for them on that ground, for their

relationship was not _near_ enough to cause any serious

inconvenience. Speaking of the objections to women

undertaking grave or deep studies, that woman lacks the

logical faculty, that she has only intuition, nerve-force,

etc., Mrs. Sewall said: It is true of every woman who has

done the worthiest work in science, literature, or reform,

from Diotima, the teacher of Socrates, to Margaret Fuller,

the pupil of Channing and the peer of Emerson, that ignoring

the methods of nerves and instincts, she has placed herself

squarely on the basis of observation, investigation and

reason. Men will admit that these women had strength and

logic, but say they are exceptional women. So are Gladstone,

Bismarck, Gambetta, Lincoln and Garfield exceptional men.

She mentioned Miss Anthony's proposed trip to Europe, and

said that she had not had a holiday for thirty years.

Miss ANTHONY said she wished to call attention to the report

of the Special Committee of the Senate, which distinctly

stated that the question had had "general agitation," and

that the petitions at different times presented were both

"_numerous_ and respectable." This was sufficient answer,

coming from such high authority, that of Senator Anthony, to

all the insinuations and unjust remarks about the petitions

presented to congress, and with regard to the assertion that

women themselves did not want the ballot. She expressed her

obligations to the press, and mentioned that the _Sunday

Chronicle_ had announced its intention of giving much

valuable space to the proceedings, and that when she had

learned this, she had ordered 1,000 copies, which she would

send to the address of any friend in the audience free of

charge.

The "Star Spangled Banner" was then sung, Miss Couzins and Mrs.

Shattuck singing the solos, Mr. Wilson of the Foundry M. E.

Church, leading the audience in the chorus, the whole producing a

fine effect. Miss Anthony said the audience could see how much

better it was to have a man to help, even in singing. This

brought down the house.

In closing this report, a word may be said of the persons most

conspicuous in it. This year several remarkable additions have

been made to our number, and it is of these especially that we

would speak. Mrs. Minor of St. Louis, in her manner has all the

gentleness and sweetness of the high-born Southern lady; her

personal appearance is very pleasant, her hair a light chestnut,

untouched with gray; her face has lost the color of youth, but

her eyes have still their fire, toned down by the sorrow they

have seen. Madame Neyman is also new to the Washington platform.

She is a piquant little German lady, with vivacious manner, most

agreeable accent, and looked in her closely-fitting black-velvet

dress as if she might have just stepped out of a painting. In

direct contrast is Mrs. Miller of Maryland--a large, dark-haired

matron, past middle age, but newly born in her enthusiasm for the

cause. She is a worker as well as a talker, and is a decided

acquisition to the ranks. The other novice in the work is Mrs.

Amy Dunn, who has taken such a novel way to render assistance.

Mrs. Dunn is tall and slender, with dark hair and eyes. She is a

shrewd observer, does not talk much socially, but when she says

anything it is to the point. Her character sketch, "Zekle's

Wife," will be a stepping-stone to many a woman on her way to the

suffrage platform.

Two women who have done and are doing a great work in this city,

and who are not among the public speakers, are Mrs. Spofford, the

treasurer, wife of the proprietor of the Riggs House, and Miss

Ellen H. Sheldon, secretary of the Association. To these ladies

is due much of the success of the convention. Mrs. Sheldon is of

diminutive stature, with gray hair, and Mrs. Spofford is of large

and queenly figure, with white hair. Her magnificent presence is

always remarked at the meetings.

The following were among the letters read at this convention:

10 DUCHESS STREET, PORTLAND PLACE, LONDON, Eng., Jan. 12.

DEAR MISS ANTHONY: To you and our friends in convention

assembled, I send greeting from the old world. It needs but

little imagination to bring Lincoln Hall, the usual fine

audiences, and the well-known faces on the platform, before

my mind, so familiar have fifteen years of these conventions

in Washington made such scenes to me. How many times, as I

have sat in your midst and listened to the grand speeches of

my noble coaedjutors, I have wondered how much longer we

should be called upon to rehearse the oft-repeated arguments

in favor of equal rights to all. Surely the grand

declarations of statesmen at every period in our history

should make the principle of equality so self-evident as to

end at once all class legislation.

It is now over half a century since Frances Wright with

eloquent words first asserted the political rights of women

in our republic; and from that day to this, inspired

apostles in an unbroken line of succession have proclaimed

the new gospel of the motherhood of God and of humanity. We

have plead our case in conventions of the people, in halls

of legislation, before committees of congress, and in the

Supreme Court of the United States, and our arguments still

remain unanswered. History shows no record of a fact like

this, where so large a class of virtuous, educated,

native-born citizens have been subjugated by the national

government to foreign domination. While our American

statesmen scorn the thought that even the most gifted son of

a monarch, an emperor or a czar should ever occupy the proud

position of a president of these United States, and by

constitutional provision deny to all foreigners this high

privilege, they yet allow the very riff-raff of the old

world to make laws for the proudest women of the republic,

to make the moral code for the daughters of our people, to

sit in judgment on all our domestic relations.

England has taken two grand steps within the last year in

extending the municipal suffrage to the woman of Scotland

and in passing the Married Woman's Property bill. They are

holding meetings all over the country now in favor of

parliamentary suffrage. Statistics show that women generally

_exercise_ the rights already accorded. They have recently

passed through a very heated election for members of the

school-board in various localities. Miss Lydia Becker was

elected in Manchester, and Miss Eva Mueller in one of the

districts of London, and several other women in different

cities.

A little incident will show you how naturally the political

equality of woman is coming about in Queen Victoria's

dominions. I was invited to dine at Barn Elms, a beautiful

estate on the banks of the Thames, a spot full of classic

associations, the residence of Mr. Charles McLaren, a member

of parliament. Opposite me at dinner sat a bright young girl

tastefully attired; on my right the gentleman to whom she

was engaged; at the head of the table a sparkling matron of

twenty-five, one of the most popular speakers here on the

woman suffrage platform. The dinner-table talk was such as

might be heard in any cultivated circle--art, literature,

amusements, passing events, etc., etc.--and when the repast

was finished, ladies and gentlemen, in full dinner dress,

went off to attend an important school-board meeting, our

host to preside and the young lady opposite me to make the

speech of the evening, and all done in as matter-of-fact a

way as if the party were going to the opera. Members of

parliament and lord-mayors preside and speak at all their

public meetings and help in every way to carry on the

movement, giving money most liberally; and yet how seldom

any of our senators or congressmen will even speak at our

meetings, to say nothing of sending us a check of fifty or a

hundred dollars. I trust that we shall accomplish enough

this year to place the women of republican America at least

on an even platform with monarchical England. With sincere

wishes for the success of the convention, cordially yours,

ELIZABETH CADY STANTON.

LONDON, January 10, 1883.

DEAR MISS ANTHONY: I was very glad indeed to receive notice

of your mid-winter conference in time to send you a few

words about the progress of our work in England. I believe

our disappointment at the result of the vote in Nebraska

must have been greater than yours, as, being on the spot,

you saw the difficulties to be surmounted. I had so hoped

that the men of a free new State would prove themselves

juster and wiser than the men of our older civilizations,

whose prejudice and precedents are such formidable barriers.

But we cannot, judging from a distance, look upon the work

of the campaign as thrown away. Twenty-five thousand votes

in favor of woman suffrage in the face of such enormous odds

is really a victory, and the legislatures of these States

are deeply pledged to ratify the constitutional amendment,

if passed by congress. We look forward hopefully to the

discussion in congress. The majority report of the Senate

cannot fail to secure attention, and I hope your present

convention will bring together national forces that will

greatly influence the debate.

CAROLINE A. BIGGS.

51 RUE DE VARENNE, PARIS, January 15, 1883.

MY DEAR MISS ANTHONY: Perhaps a brief account of what has

been done with the two packages of "The History of Woman

Suffrage" which you sent me for distribution in Europe may

prove interesting to the convention. In the first place,

sets in sheep have been deposited already, or will have been

before spring, in all the great continental libraries from

Russia to France, and from Denmark to Turkey. In the second

place, copies in cloth have been presented to reformers,

publicists, editors, etc, in every country of the old

world. This generous distribution of a costly work has

already begun to produce an effect. Besides a large number

of private letters from all parts of Europe acknowledging

the receipt of the volumes and bestowing on their contents

the highest praise, the History has been reviewed in

numerous reform, educational and socialistic periodicals and

newspapers in almost every modern European tongue. Nor is

this all. Every week a new pamphlet or book is sent me, or

comes under my notice, in which this History is cited,

sometimes at great length, and is pronounced to be the

authority on the American women's movement. I have carefully

kept all these letters, newspaper notices, etc., and at the

proper time I hope to prepare a little pamphlet for your

publisher on European opinion concerning your great work.

Very truly yours, THEODORE STANTON.

51 RUE DE VARENNE, PARIS, January 15, 1883.

DEAR MISS ANTHONY: My husband has just read me a letter he

has written you concerning the enthusiastic reception your

big History has had among liberal people on this side of the

Atlantic, but he did not inform you that he should send the

American public next spring a similar though much smaller

work, entitled "The Woman Question in Europe." The Putnams

of New York are now busy on the volume. You in the new world

have little idea how the leaders of the women's movement

here watch everything you do in the United States. The great

fact which my husband's volume will teach you in America is

the important and direct influence your movement is having

on the younger, less developed, but growing revolution in

favor of our sex, now in progress in every country of the

old world. While assisting in the preparation of the

manuscript for this book this fact has been thrust upon my

notice at every instant, and never before did I fully

realize the grand role the United States is acting in this

nineteenth century, for, rest assured, the moment European

women are emancipated monarchy gives way to the republic

everywhere.

Most sincerely yours, MARGUERITTE BERRY STANTON.

134 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE, S. E., January 25, 1883.

DEAR SUSAN ANTHONY: I believe that this is the only week of

the whole winter when I could not come to you nor attend

your convention, much as I wish to do so. It has been an

exceptional week to me in the way of work and engagements,

full of both as I always am. I could not call on you last

Monday, as I was in my own crowded parlors from 1 till 10

o'clock at night. I tell you this that you may know that I

did not of my own accord stay away from you. I have not had

a moment to write you a coherent letter, such as I would be

willing you should read. But I _have_ saved the best reports

of the convention, and it shall have a good notice in the

_Independent_ of week after next. It shall have only praise.

Of course I could write a brighter, more characteristic

notice could I myself have attended. Should you stay over

next Sunday I can see you yet; but if not, remember I think

of you always with the warmest interest, and meet you always

with unchanged affection.

Ever your friend, MARY CLEMMER.

May God bless and keep you, I ever pray.[101]

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, THURSDAY, March 1, 1883.

Mr. WHITE, by unanimous consent, from the Special Committee on

Woman Suffrage, reported back the joint resolution (H. Res., 255)

proposing an amendment to the constitution, which was referred to

the House calendar, and, with the accompanying report, ordered to

be printed.

Mr. SPRINGER: As a member of that committee I have not seen the

report, and do not know whether it meets with my

concurrence.[102]

Mr. WHITE: I ask by unanimous consent that the minority may have

leave to submit their views, to be printed with the majority

report.

The SPEAKER: The Chair hears no objection.

MR. WHITE, from the Select Committee on Woman Suffrage, submitted

the following:

_The Select Committee on Woman Suffrage, to whom was

referred House Resolution No. 255, proposing an amendment to

the Constitution of the United States to secure the right of

suffrage to citizens of the United States without regard to

sex, having considered the same, respectfully report:_

In attempting to comprehend the vast results that could and

would be attained by the adoption of the proposed article to

the constitution, a few considerations are presented that

are claimed by the friends of woman suffrage to be worthy of

the most serious attention, among which are the following:

I. There are vast interests in property vested in women,

which property is affected by taxation and legislation,

without the owners having voice or representation in regard

to it. The adoption of the proposed amendment would remove a

manifest injustice.

II. Consider the unjust discriminations made against women

in industrial and educational pursuits, and against those

who are compelled to earn a livelihood by work of hand or

brain. By conferring upon such the right of suffrage, their

condition, it is claimed, would be greatly improved by the

enlargement of their influence.

III. The questions of social and family relations are of

equal importance to and affect as many women as men. Giving

to women a voice in the enactment of laws pertaining to

divorce and the custody of children and division of property

would be merely recognizing an undeniable right.

IV. Municipal regulations in regard to houses of

prostitution, of gambling, of retail liquor traffic, and of

all other abominations of modern society, might be shaped

very differently and more perfectly were women allowed the

ballot.

V. If women had a voice in legislation, the momentous

question of peace and war, which may act with such fearful

intensity upon women, might be settled with less bloodshed.

VI. Finally, there is no condition, status in life, of rich

or poor; no question, moral or political; no interest,

present or future; no ties, foreign or domestic; no issues,

local or national; no phase of human life, in which the

mother is not equally interested with the father, the

daughter with the son, the sister with the brother.

Therefore the one should have equal voice with the other in

molding the destiny of this nation.

Believing these considerations to be so important as to

challenge the attention of all patriotic citizens, and that

the people have a right to be heard in the only

authoritative manner recognized by the constitution, we

report the accompanying resolution with a favorable

recommendation in order that the people, through the

legislatures of their respective States, may express their

views:

JOINT RESOLUTION _proposing an amendment to the Constitution

of the United States_: