The Rev. Isaac W. See, pastor of the Wickliffe Church,

Newark, N. J., was charged by Rev. Elijah R. Craven, D. D.,

with disobedience to the divinely enacted ordinance in

reference to the public speaking and teaching of women in

the churches as recorded in I Corinthians, xiv., 33-37, and

in I Timothy, ii., 11-13, in that twice on a specified

Sabbath, in the pulpit of his said church, at the usual time

of public service, he did introduce a woman, whom he

permitted and encouraged then and there publicly to preach

and teach.

The Presbytery of Newark sustained the charge, and from its

decision Mr. See appealed to the synod of New Jersey, which

refused by a decided vote to sustain the appeal, expressing

its judgment in a minute of which the following is a part:

In sustaining the Presbytery of Newark as against the appeal

of the Rev. I. M. See, the synod holds that the passages of

scripture referred to in the action of the Presbytery, do

prohibit the fulfilling by women of the offices of public

preachers in the regular assemblies of the church.

From this decision Mr. See has further appealed to the

General Assembly, which, having thereupon proceeded to issue

the appeal, and having fully heard the original parties and

members of the inferior judicatory, decided that the said

appeal from the synod of New Jersey be not sustained by the

following vote: To sustain, 85. To sustain in part, 71. Not

to sustain, 201.

From the following description by Mrs. Devereux Blake, we have

conclusive evidence of woman's capacity to govern under most

trying circumstances:

A certain little woman living in Jersey City has, from time

to time, occupied a portion of public consideration; this is

Mrs. Ericka C. Jones, for four years and a half warden of

the Hudson county jail, probably the only woman in the world

who holds such a position. Her history is briefly this: Some

seven years ago her husband obtained the appointment of

jailor at this institution, and moved to it with his bride.

From the time of their incoming a marked improvement in the

administration of the jail became apparent, which continued,

when, after two years, Mr. Jones was stricken down with

softening of the brain, which reduced him to a condition of

idiocy for six months before his death. When at last this

occurred, by unanimous vote of the board of freeholders the

woman who had really performed the duties of jailor was

appointed warden of Hudson county jail. All this has been a

matter of report in the papers, as well as the attempt to

oust her from the position, which was made last fall, when

certain male politicians wanted the place for some friend

and voter, and appealed to Attorney-General Vanetta, who

gave an opinion adverse to the lady's claims. Resolutions on

the subject were passed by various woman suffrage societies,

and anxious to see the subject of so much dispute, and hear

her story from her own lips, a party of ladies was made up

to call upon her.

Hudson-county jail stands in the same inclosure with the

court-house, a small, neatly-kept park, well shaded by fine

trees, and being on very high ground commands a view over

the North River and New York Bay. The building is a

substantial one of stone, with nothing of the repulsive

aspect of a jail about it. Asking for Mrs. Jones, we were at

once shown into the office. We had expected to see a woman

of middle age and somewhat stern aspect. Instead, we beheld

a pretty, young person, apparently not more than twenty-five

years old, with bright, black eyes, waving brown hair, good

features and plump figure. She was very neatly dressed and

pleasant in manner, making us cordially welcome. We were

conducted into the parlor and at once begged her to tell us

all about her case, which she did very clearly and

concisely. When she was left a widow with two little

children she had no idea that this place would be given her,

but it was tendered to her by unanimous vote of the board of

freeholders. At that time there were in jail three desperate

criminals, Proctor, Demsing and Foley, bank robbers, and

some persons feared that a woman could not hold them, but

they were safely transferred at the proper time from the

jail to the state-prison. "And," she added, with a bright

smile, "I never have lost a prisoner, which is more than

many men-jailors can say. Some of them tried to escape last

fall, but I had warning in time, sent for the police, and

the attempt was prevented."

"And do you think there is any danger of your being turned

out?" "I don't know. I intend to remain in the place until

the end of my term, if possible, since as long as the effort

to dismiss me is based solely on the ground of my sex and

not of my incompetency, it ought justly to be resisted."

"But Attorney-General Vanetta gave an adverse opinion as to

the legality of your appointment?" "Yes, but

ex-Attorney-General Robert Gilchrist, a very able lawyer,

has given an opinion in my favor, while Mr. Lippincott,

counsel of the board when I was appointed, also held that I

was eligible for the place."

She then went on to tell us some of the petty persecutions

and indirect measures Which have been resorted to in order

to induce her to resign, as her term of office will not

expire for two years. When her husband was given the

position, the allowance consisted of 40 cents a day for each

prisoner, 50 cents for each sick person, 25 cents for every

committal, and 12-1/2 cents for every discharge. The daily

allowance has been cut down from 40 to 25 cents, and all the

other allowances have been entirely done away with. She is,

therefore, at this moment running that jail on 25 cents a

day for each prisoner. Out of this sum she must pay for all

food, all salaries of assistant jailors, etc., all wages of

servants, and even the furniture of the place. She is

supplied with fuel and gas, but no stores of any

description. She has also had other annoyances. The payment

of money justly due has been opposed or delayed; and whereas

her husband was required to give bond for only $5,000, she

has been forced to give one for $10,000. She has also been

troubled by the visits of persons representing themselves to

be reporters of papers, who have wished to borrow money of

her, and failing in this, have printed disagreeable articles

about her. She has, of course, no salary whatever. "However,

I do as well as I can with the money I receive," she said,

with that pleasant smile. "And now would you like to see the

jail?" * * * *

Ex-Attorney Gilchrist's opinion on her case is an able

indorsement of her position. He says, in the first place,

that as Attorney-General Vanetta's adverse view was not

given officially, it is not binding on the Board of

Freeholders, and then goes on to cite precedents. "Alice

Stubbs, in 1787, was appointed overseer of the poor in the

county of Stafford, England, and the Court of King's Bench

sustained her in the office. A woman was appointed governor

of the work-house at Chelmsford, England, and the court held

it to be a good appointment. Lady Brangleton was appointed

keeper of the Gate-House jail in London. Lady Russell was

appointed keeper of the Castle of Dunnington. All these

cases are reported in _Stranges R._, as clearly establishing

the right and duty of woman to hold office. The case of Ann,

Countess of Pembroke, Dorsett and Montgomery, who was

sheriff of Westmoreland, is very well known." The opinion

winds up by saying: "The argument that a woman is

incompetent to perform the duties of such an office is

doubly answered--first, by the array of cases in which it is

held that she is competent; second, by the resolution of the

board when Mrs. Jones was appointed, that she had for a long

time prior thereto actually kept the jail while her husband

was jailor." How this whole matter would be simplified if

women could vote and hold office, so that merit and not sex

should be the only qualification for any place.--_New York

Record, 1876._

The following incident shows not only what physical training will

do in giving a girl self-reliance in emergencies, but it shows

the nice sense of humor that grows out of conscious power with

which a girl can always take a presuming youth at disadvantage.

No doubt Miss McCosh, as a student in Princeton, could as easily

distance her compeers in science, philosophy and the languages,

as she did the dude on the highway. Why not open the doors of

that institution and let her make the experiment?

The distinguished president of Princeton College, Dr.

McCosh, has two daughters who are great walkers. They are in

the habit of going to Trenton and back, a distance of about

twenty miles, where they do their shopping. One day a dude

accosted Miss Bridget on the road, and said, in the usual

manner: "Beg pardon, but may I walk with you?" She replied,

"Certainly," and quickened her pace a little. After the

first half-mile the masher began to gasp, and then, as she

passed on with a smile, he sat down panting on a mile-stone,

and mopped the perspiration from his brow.

At the sixteenth national convention, held in Washington, March,

1884, the State was well represented;[283] Mrs. Hanaford gave an

address on "New Jersey as a Leader." In her letter to the

convention, Mrs. Hussey wrote:

An old gentleman, Aaron Burr Harrison, a resident of East

Orange, has just passed on to his long home, full of

years--eighty-eight--and with a good record. He told me

about his sister's voting in New jersey, when he was a

child--probably about 1807. The last time I took a petition

for woman suffrage to him, he signed it willingly, and his

daughter also.

February 12, 1884, a special committee of the New Jersey Assembly

granted a hearing[284] on the petition of Mrs. Celia B.

Whitehead, and 220 other citizens of Bloomfield, asking the

restoration of woman's right to vote; fully one-half of the

members of the Assembly were present. Mrs. Seagrove handed the

committee an ancient printed copy of the original constitution of

New Jersey, dated July 2, 1776. The name of James Seagrove, her

husband's grandfather, is endorsed upon it in his own

hand-writing. In the suffrage clause of this document the words

"all inhabitants" were substituted for those of "male

freeholders" in the provincial charter. Hence the constitution of

1776 gave suffrage to women and men of color. Mrs. Seagrove made

an appeal on behalf of the women of the State. Mr. Blackwell gave

a resume of the unconstitutional action of the legislature in its

depriving women of their right to vote. Mrs. Hanaford, in answer

to a question of the committee, claimed the right for women not

only to vote but to hold office; and instanced from her own

observation the need of women as police officers, and especially

as matrons in the police stations. The result of these appeals

may be seen in a paragraph from the Boston _Commonwealth_, a

paper in hearty sympathy:

In the lower House of the New Jersey legislature a

Democratic member recently moved that the word "male" be

stricken from the constitution of the State. After some

positive discussion a non-partisan vote of 27 to 24 defeated

the motion. This occurrence, it is to be observed, is

chronicled of one of the most conservative States in the

Union. The arguments used on both sides were not new or

remarkable. But the vote was very close. If such a measure

could in so conservative a State be nearly carried, we can

have reasonable hope of its favorable reception, in more

radical sections. In New Jersey we did not expect success

for the resolution proposed. The favorable votes really

surprised us. We do not mistake the omen. Gradually the

point of woman's responsibility is being conceded. The

arbitrary lines now drawn politically and socially are

without reason. Indeed, one of the members of the New Jersey

Assembly called attention to the fact that to grant suffrage

now would not be the conferring of a new gift on women, but

only a restoration of rights exercised in colonial times.

FOOTNOTES:

[274] See Vol. I., page 447.

[275] Mrs. Pryor lived formerly in Waterloo, New York. She was

present at the first convention at Seneca Falls, and sustained the

demand for woman suffrage with earnest sympathy. I have been

indebted to her for a splendid housekeeper, trained by her in all

domestic accomplishments, who lived in my family for thirty years,

a faithful, devoted friend to me and my children. Much that I have

enjoyed and accomplished in life is due to her untiring and

unselfish services. My cares were the lighter for all the heavy

burdens she willingly took on her shoulders. The name of Amelia

Willard should always be mentioned with loving praise by me and

mine. Her sympathies have ever been in our reform. When Abby Kelly

was a young girl, speaking through New York in the height of the

anti-slavery mobs, Margaret Pryor traveled with her for company and

protection. Abby used to say she always felt safe when she could

see Margaret Pryor's Quaker bonnet.--[E. C. S.

[276] In a letter to Mary F. Davis, February 13, 1882, asking her

for some facts in regard to that period, Lucy Stone says: "I have

never kept any diary or record of my work. I have been too busy

with the work itself. I could not answer your questions without a

search among old letters and papers, which have been packed away

for years, and I have not time to make the search, and cannot be

accurate without. I know we had many meetings in New Jersey in all

the large towns, beginning in Newark and Orange, and following the

line of the railroad to Trenton, Camden, and Vineland, and then

another series that included towns reached by stage, Salem being

one, but I cannot tell whether these meetings were before or after

the formation of the State Society." The records show that they

were before, says Mrs. Davis; newspaper reports of them are in the

archives of the Historical Society.

[277] _President_, Lucy Stone, Roseville; _Vice-Presidents_,

Antoinette Brown Blackwell, Thomas B. Peddie, Portia Gage, Rev.

Robert McMurdy, Cornelia Collins Hussey, George T. Cobb, Sarah E.

Webb, Dr. James Brotherton, Isaac Stevens, Rev. H. A. Butler, A. J.

Davis, James H. Nixon, Dr. G. H. Haskell, I. M. Peebles, Rev. C. H.

Dezanne, William Baldwin; _Corresponding Secretaries_, Phebe A.

Pierson, Miss P. Fowler; _Recording Secretary_, C. A. Paul;

_Treasurer_, S. G. Silvester; _Executive Committee_, Mary F. Davis,

Mrs. E. L. Bush, H. B. Blackwell, Rev. Oscar Clute, Miss Charlotte

Bathgate, Rowland Johnson, Mrs. Robert McMurdy, Dr. D. N. Allen,

Sarah Pierson, Lizzie Prentice, W. D. Conan, John Whitehead.

[278] Among those who addressed the conventions and the legislature

we find the names of Lucretia Mott, Ernestine L. Rose, Lucy Stone,

Antoinette Brown Blackwell, Mary F. Davis, Charlotte B. Wilbour,

Elizabeth R. Churchill, Elizabeth A. Kingsbury, Deborah Butler,

Olive F. Stevens, Rev. Phebe A. Hanaford, Mrs. Devereux Blake, Rev.

Oscar Clute, Rev. Olympia Brown, Rev. Mr. McMurdy, Mr. Taylor, John

Whitehead, Mrs. Seagrove, Henry B. Blackwell, Hon. James Scovell.

[279] This has been well illustrated by Mrs. Hanaford in her own

case, she having preached for nearly twenty years with but three

changes of place, and ten of these passed successively in the

Universalist churches in Jersey City.--[E. C. S.

[280] VINELAND, July 15, 1879.--Club met at the residence of Mrs.

Bristol. The meeting was opened with music by Mrs. Parkhurst,

followed by a recitation by Miss Etta Taylor. Mrs. Andrew read an

excellent essay, opposing the national bank system. Mrs. Bristol

gave an instructive lesson in political economy on "Appropriation."

The next lesson will be upon "Changes of Matter in Place."

Appropriate remarks were made by Mrs. Neyman of New York, Mr.

Broom, Mrs. Duffey and Mr. Bristol. Several new names were added to

the list of membership. Miss Etta Taylor gave another recitation,

which closed the exercises of the afternoon. In the evening a

pleasant reception was held, and many invited guests were present.

The exercises consisted of vocal and instrumental music, social

converse and dancing. The club will meet again in two weeks.--[C.

L. LADD, _Secretary_.

[281] Isaac Collins, her grandfather, died at Burlington, March 21,

1817, a man remarkable alike for his uprightness, industry,

intelligence and enterprise. He was a Quaker by birth and

conviction, and a printer, appointed by King George III. for the

province of New Jersey. He printed many valuable books, almanacs,

Bibles, revised laws, government money, and a weekly paper, _The

New Jersey Gazette_. In making his will he so divided his property

that each of his six daughters received twice the sum that he gave

to each of the seven sons. This he explained by saying that the

latter could go into business and support themselves, but his

daughters must have enough to live upon, if they chose to remain

single; he did not wish them to be forced to marry for a support.

[282] In the audience were several advocates of woman suffrage,

probably there to take observations of the manner in which

Christian clergymen conduct their meetings. This class of men had

been so severe in their criticisms of woman suffrage conventions

that we hoped to learn lessons of wisdom from the dignity,

refinement and parliamentary order of their proceedings. Among

these ladies were Rev. Phebe A. Hanaford, Miss Arathusia Forbes,

Mrs. Devereux Blake and Miss Susan King of New York, a wealthy

tea-merchant and extensive traveler, and myself. That day the Rev.

Dr. Craven was the principal speaker. The whole tenor of his

remarks were so insulting to women that Miss King proposed to send

an artist the following Sunday to photograph the women possessing

so little self-respect as to sit under his ministrations. He

punctuated his four-hours' vulgar diatribe by a series of

resounding whacks with the Bible on the table before him.--[M. J.

G.

[283] Rev. Phebe A. Hanaford, Miss Ellen Miles and Mrs. Jackson of

Jersey City.

[284] Mrs. Theresa Walling Seagrove of Keyport, Rev. Phebe A.

Hanaford of Jersey City and Henry B. Blackwell of Boston were the

speakers.

CHAPTER XL.

OHIO.

The First Soldiers' Aid Society--Mrs. Mendenhall--Cincinnati

Equal Rights Association, 1868--Homeopathic Medical College and

Hospital--Hon. J. M. Ashley--State Society, 1869--Murat

Halstead's Letter--Dayton Convention, 1870--Women Protest against

Enfranchisement--Sarah Knowles Bolton--Statistics on

Coeducation--Thomas Wentworth Higginson--Woman's Crusade,

1874--Miriam M. Cole--Ladies' Health Association--Professor

Curtis--Hospital for Women and Children, 1879--Letter from J. D.

Buck, M. D.--March, 1881, Degrees Conferred on Women--Toledo

Association, 1869--Sarah Langdon Williams--_The Sunday

Journal_--_The Ballot-Box_--Constitutional Convention--Judge

Waite--Amendment Making Women Eligible to Office--Mr. Voris,

Chairman Special Committee on Woman Suffrage--State Convention,

1873--Rev. Robert McCune--Centennial Celebration--Women Decline

to Take Part--Correspondence--Newbury Association--Women Voting,

1871--Sophia Ober Allen--Annual Meeting, Painesville, 1885--State

Society, Mrs. Frances M. Casement, President--Adelbert College.

Early in the year 1862, Cincinnati became a hospital for the army

operations under General Grant and was soon filled with wounded

heroes from Fort Donelson and Pittsburg Landing, and the women

here, as in all other cities, were absorbed in hospital and

sanitary work. To the women of Cleveland is justly due the honor of

organizing the first soldiers' aid society, a meeting being called

for this purpose five days after the fall of Fort Sumter. Through

the influence of Mrs. Mendenhall were inaugurated the great

sanitary fairs[285] there, and by her untiring energy and that of

the ladies who labored with her, many of our brave soldiers were

restored to health. Mrs. Annie L. Quinby writes:

In the autumn of 1867 Mrs. Stanton and Miss Anthony made a

lecturing tour through Ohio and roused popular thought on the

question of suffrage. March 28, 1868, the Cincinnati Equal Rights

Association[286] was formed, auxiliary to the National Society,

of which Lucretia Mott was president. April 7, 1869, Mrs. Ryder

called the attention of the meeting to a resolution offered by

Mr. Gordon in the State legislature, to amend the constitution so

as to strike out the word male, proposing that at the October

election, "in all precincts in the State, there shall be a

separate poll, at which all white women over 21 years of age

shall be permitted to vote, and if the votes cast be a majority

of all the white women, the constitution shall be amended." Mrs.

Ryder seemed to think the proposition a very fair one, or

intended by the mover to give the women, if they wanted to vote,

the opportunity of saying so on this amendment to the

constitution. Mrs. Blangy also concurred in this view of the

subject. Mrs. Quinby expressed her indignation at the

proposition, saying she believed its passage by the legislature

would be detrimental to the cause, both on account of its

provisions and the mode of accomplishing the object of the

resolution. As it stood, it could but fail, as women were not

prepared for it at the present time, and the proposition was not

that the majority of votes cast should settle the question, but

that the number cast in favor of it should be a majority of all

the women in the State 21 years of age. She therefore thought we

should express our decided disapproval of this amendment. Mrs.

Leavitt also declared her opposition to this resolution,

believing it to have been offered for the sole purpose of

stalling the woman suffrage movement for years to come. She

thought this association should express its decided opposition to

this resolution. Mrs. Butterwood and others followed in the same

strain, and it was finally agreed unanimously that the

corresponding secretary be instructed to write to the mover of

the resolution, expressing disapprobation of some of the terms of

the amendment, with the hope that it will not pass in the form

offered, and politely requesting Mr. Gordon to define his

position as the resolution is susceptible of being construed both

for and against equal rights.

At a meeting held April 21, 1869, delegates[287] were elected to

attend the May anniversary of the American Equal Rights

Association in New York. Mrs. Margaret V. Longley was placed on

the executive committee of the National Association to represent

Ohio. On her return from New York she joined with the Cincinnati

Equal Rights Society in a call for a convention in Pike's Hall,

September 15, 16, 1869, for the organization of an Ohio State

Society.[288] Mrs. Longley presided; the audiences were large and

enthusiastic;[289] the press of the city gave extended reports.

Murat Halstead, editor of the Cincinnati _Commercial_, sent the

following reply to his invitation:

CINCINNATI, July 28, 1869.

Mrs. M. V. LONGLEY: _Dear Madam_--I cannot sign your call

for a woman suffrage convention, for I do not feel a serious

interest in the subject. That there are woman's wrongs that

the law-makers should right, I believe. For instance, I

think married women should hold property independently; that

they should be able to save and enjoy the fruits of their

own industry; and that they should not be absolutely in the

power of lazy, dissipated or worthless husbands. But I

cannot see clearly how the possession of the ballot would

help women in the reform indicated. If, however, a majority

of the women of Ohio should signify by means proving their

active interest in the subject that they wanted to acquire

the right of suffrage, I don't think I would offer

opposition.

M. HALSTEAD.

Mrs. Livermore and Miss Anthony made some amusing strictures on

Mr. Halstead's letter, which called out laughter and cheers from

the audience. April 27 and 28, 1870, a mass-meeting was held in

Dayton. Describing the occasion, Miss Sallie Joy, in a letter to

a Boston paper, says:

The west is evidently wide awake on the suffrage question.

The people are working with zeal almost unknown in the East,

except to the more immediately interested, who are making a

life-labor of the cause. The two days' convention at Dayton

was freighted with interest. Earnest women were there from

all parts of the State. They of the west do not think much

of distances, and consequently nearly every town of note was

represented. Cleveland sent her women from the borders of

the lake; Cincinnati sent hers from the banks of the Ohio;

Columbus, Springfield, Toledo and Sydney were represented.

Not merely the leaders were there, but those who were

comparatively new to the cause; all in earnest,--young girls

in the first flush of youth, a new light dawning on their

lives and shining through their eyes, waiting, reaching

longing hands for this new gift to womanhood,--mothers on

the down-hill side of life, quietly but gladly expectant of

the good that was coming so surely to crown all these human

lives. Most of the speakers were western women--Mrs. Cutler,

Mrs. Cole, Mrs. Stewart, of Ohio, and Miss Boynton, of

Indiana. The East sent our own Susan B. Anthony, and Mrs.

Livermore of Boston. Like every other convention, it grew

more interesting the longer it continued, and just when the

speakers were so tired that they were glad the work for the

time was done, the listeners, like a whole army of Oliver

Twists, were crying for more. They are likely to have

more--a great deal more--before the work is done completely,

for it is evident the leaders don't intend to let the thing

rest where it is, but to push it forward to final success.

From the list of resolutions considered and adopted, I send

the following:

_Resolved_, That as the Democratic party has long since

abolished the political aristocracy of wealth; and the

Republican party has now abolished the aristocracy of race;

so the true spirit of Republican Democracy of the present,

demands the abolition of the political aristocracy of sex.

_Resolved_, That as the government of the United States has,

by the adoption of the fifteenth amendment, admitted the

theory that one man cannot define the rights and duties of

another man, so we demand the adoption of a sixteenth

amendment on the same principle, that one sex cannot define

the rights and duties of another sex.

_Resolved_, That we rejoice in the noble action of the men

of Wyoming, by which the right of suffrage has been granted

to the women of that territory.

_Resolved_, That we feel justly proud of the action of those

representatives of the General Assembly of Ohio, who have

endeavored to secure an amendment to the State constitution,

striking out the word "male" from that instrument.

It is rather remarkable that in a State which so early established

two colleges admitting women--Oberlin in 1834, and Antioch in

1853--any intelligent women should have been found at so late a

date as April 15, 1870, to protest against the right of

self-government for themselves, yet such is the case, as the

following protest shows:

We acknowledge no inferiority to men. We claim to have no less

ability to perform the duties which God has imposed upon us than

they have to perform those imposed upon them. We believe that God

has wisely and well adapted each sex to the proper performance of

the duties of each. We believe our trusts to be as important and

as sacred as any that exist on earth. We feel that our present

duties fill up the whole measure of our time and abilities; and

that they are such as none but ourselves can perform. Their

importance requires us to protest against all efforts to compel

us to assume those obligations which cannot be separated from

suffrage; but which cannot be performed by us without the

sacrifice of the highest interests of our families and of

society. It is our fathers, brothers, husbands and sons, who

represent us at the ballot-box. Our fathers and brothers love us.

Our husbands are our choice, and one with us. Our sons are what

_we_ make them. We are content that they represent us in the

corn-field, the battle-field, at the ballot-box and the jury-box,

and we them, in the church, the school-room, at the fireside and

at the cradle; believing our representation, even at the

ballot-box, to be thus more full and impartial than it could

possibly be, were all women allowed to vote. We do, therefore

respectively protest against legislation to establish woman

suffrage in Ohio.

The above paper, signed by more than one hundred ladies of Lorain

county, was presented, March 14, 1870, to the legislature assembled

at Columbus. Mrs. Sarah Knowles Bolton, criticising the Oberlin

protestants, said:

That so many signed is not strange, because the non-suffrage side

is the popular one at present. Years hence, when it shall be

customary for women to vote, it is questionable whether the lady

who drew up that document would have many supporters.

If "we are not inferior to men," we must have as clear opinions

and as good judgment as they. To say, then, that we are not

capable of judging of political questions, is untrue. To say that

we are not interested in such things is absurd, for who can be

more anxious for good laws and good law-makers than women, who,

for the most part, have sons and daughters in this whirlpool of

temptation, called social and business life. If we are too

ignorant to have an opinion, the fault lies at our own door.

These ladies reason upon the premises that the duties imposed

upon us as we find them in this nineteenth century, are the

duties, conditions, and relations established of God. Two things

we do certainly find in the Bible with regard to this matter;

that women are to bear children, and men to earn bread. The first

duty we believe has been confined entirely to the female sex, but

the male sex have not kept the other in all cases. If anybody has

belonged for any considerable time to a benevolent institution,

he has ascertained that women sometimes are obliged to earn bread

and bear children also. A century or two ago, when women seldom

thought of writing books, or being physicians or lawyers,

professors or teachers, or doing anything but housework, probably

they thought, as the ladies of Lorain county do to-day, they were

in the blessed noonday of woman's enlightenment and happiness.

Their husbands, very likely, needed something of the same

companionship as the men of the present, but it was unpopular for

girls to attend school. If these ladies, after careful study and

thought, believe that woman suffrage will work evil in the land,

they ought to say that, rather than base it upon lack of time.

The enfranchisement of 15,000,000 women will be a balance of

power for good or evil that will need looking after. As for our

representing men at the fireside, I think it a great deal

pleasanter that they be there in person. Nothing is more blessed

than the home circle, and here I think if husbands were not so

often represented by their wives, while they are absent evening

after evening on "important business," the condition of things

would be improved. If the ladies aforesaid cannot vote without

the highest interests of their families being sacrificed, they

ought to be allowed to remain in peace. I am glad they made this

protest, not only because this is a country where honest views

ought to be expressed, but because agitation pushes forward

reform. I am glad that nearly half of our representatives were in

favor of submitting this question to the women of the State, and

that our interests were so ably defended by a talented

representative from our own district. I do not think, however, by

submitting it to the women, they would get a correct expression

upon the subject. A good many would vote for suffrage, a few

against it, and thousands would be afraid to vote. If it is

granted, I do not suppose all women will vote immediately. Many

prejudices will first have to give way. If women vote what they

wish to vote, and there is no disorderly conduct at the polls in

consequence, and no general disorder in the body politic, I do

not see any objection to the voting being continued from year to

year.

When women like Miss Jones of our city, now in California, take a

few more professorships in a university over half-a-hundred

competitors, write a few more libraries, show themselves capable

of solving great questions, become ornaments to their

professions, it will seem more absurd for them not to be

enfranchised than it does now for them to be so.

Hon. J. M. Ashley, of Toledo, in a speech on the floor of congress,

June 1, 1868, said:

I want citizenship and suffrage to be synonymous. To put the

question beyond the power of States to withhold it, I propose the

amendment to article fourteen, now submitted. A large number of

Republicans who concede that the qualifications of an elector

ought to be the same in every State, and that it is more properly

a national than a State question, do not believe congress has the

power under our present constitution to enact a law conferring

suffrage in the States, nevertheless they are ready and willing

to vote for such an amendment to the constitution as shall make

citizenship and suffrage uniform throughout the nation. For this

purpose I have added to the proposed amendment for the election

of president a section on suffrage, to which I invite special

attention.

This is the third or fourth time I have brought forward a

proposition on suffrage substantially like the one just presented

to the House. I do so again because I believe the question of

citizenship suffrage one which ought to be met and settled now.

Important and all-absorbing as many questions are which now press

themselves upon our consideration, to me no one is so vitally

important as this. Tariffs, taxation, and finance ought not to be

permitted to supersede a question affecting the peace and

personal security of every citizen, and, I may add, the peace and

security of the nation. No party can be justified in withholding

the ballot from any citizen of mature years, native or foreign

born, except such as are _non compos_ or are guilty of infamous

crimes; nor can they justly confer this great privilege upon one

class of citizens to the exclusion of another class.

The _Revolution_ of March 19, 1868, said:

Notwithstanding the most determined hostility to the demands of

the age for female physicians, institutions for their educational

preparation for professional responsibilities are rapidly

increasing. The ball first began to move in the United

States,[290] and now a female medical college is in successful

operation in London, where the favored monopolizers of physic and

surgery were resolved to keep out all new ideas in their line by

acts of parliament. But the ice-walls of opposition have melted

away, and even in Russia a woman has graduated with high medical

honors.

The following statistics from Thomas Wentworth Higginson settle

many popular objections to a collegiate education for women:

GRADUATES OF ANTIOCH COLLEGE.--In a paper read before the Social

Science Association in the spring of 1874 I pointed out the

presumption to be, that if a desire for knowledge was implanted

in the minds of women, they had also as a class the physical

capacity to gratify it; and that therefore the burden of proof

lay on those who opposed such education, on physiological

grounds, to collect facts in support of their position. In

criticising Dr. Clarke's book, "Sex in Education," I called

attention to the fact that he has made no attempt to do this, but

has merely given a few detached cases, whose scientific value is

impaired by the absence of all proof whether they stand for few

or many. We need many facts and a cautious induction; not merely

a few facts and a sweeping induction. I am now glad to put on

record a tabular view[291] of the graduates of Antioch, with

special reference to their physical health and condition; the

facts being collected and mainly arranged by Professor J. B.

Weston of Antioch--who has been connected with that institution

from its foundation--with the aid of Mrs. Weston and Rev. Olympia

Brown, both graduates of the college. For the present form of the

table, however, I alone am responsible.

It appears that of the 41 graduates, ranging from the year 1857

to 1873, no fewer than 36 are now living. Of these the health of

11 is reported as "very good"; 19 "good"; making 30 in all; 1 is

reported as "fair"; 1 "uncertain"; 1 "not good," and 3 "unknown."

Of the 41 graduates, 30 are reported as married and 11 are

single, five of these last having graduated within three years.

Of the 30 married, 24 have children, numbering 48 or 49 in all.

Of the 6 childless, 3 are reported as very recently married; one

died a few months after marriage, and the facts in the other

cases are not given. Thirty-four of the forty-one have taught

since graduated, and I agree with Professor Weston that teaching

is as severe a draft on the constitution as study. Taking these

facts as a whole, I do not see how the most earnest advocate of

higher education could ask for a more encouraging exhibit; and I

submit the case without argument, so far as this pioneer

experiment at coeducation is concerned. If any man seriously

believes that his non-collegiate relatives are in better physical

condition than this table shows, I advise him to question

forty-one of them and tabulate the statistics obtained.

In the following editorial in the _Woman's Journal_ Mr. Higginson

pursues the opposition still more closely, and answers their

frivolous objections:

I am surprised to find that Professor W.S. Tyler of Amherst

College, in his paper on "The Higher Education of Woman," in

_Scribner's Monthly_ for February, repeats the unfair statements

of President Eliot of Harvard, in regard to Oberlin College. The

fallacy and incorrectness of those statements were pointed out on

the spot by several, and were afterwards thoroughly shown by

President Fairchild of Oberlin; yet Professor Tyler repeats them

all. He asserts that there has been a great falling off in the

number of students in that college; he entirely ignores the

important fact of the great multiplication of colleges which

admit women; and he implies, if he does not assert, that the

separate ladies' course at Oberlin has risen as a substitute for

the regular college course. His words are these, the italics

being my own:

In Oberlin, where the experiment has been tried under the

most favorable circumstances, it has proved a failure so far

as the regular college course is concerned. The number of

young women in that course, instead of increasing with the

prosperity of the institution, _has diminished, so that it

now averages only two or three to a class_. The rest pursue

a different curriculum, live in a separate dormitory, and

study by themselves in a course of their own, reciting,

indeed, with the young men, and by way of reciprocity and in

true womanly compassion, allowing some of them to sit at

their table in the dining-hall, but yet constituting

substantially a female seminary, or, if you please, a

woman's college in the university.--_Scribner, February,

page 457._

Now, it was distinctly stated by President Fairchild last summer,

that this "different curriculum" was the course originally marked

out for women, and that the regular college course was an

after-thought. This disposes of the latter part of Professor

Tyler's statement. I revert, therefore, to his main statement,

that "the number of young women in the collegiate course has

diminished, so that it now averages only two or three to a

class." Any reader would suppose his meaning to be that taking

one year with another, and comparing later years with the early

years of Oberlin, there has been a diminution of women. What is

the fact? The Oberlin College triennial catalogue of 1872 lies

before me, and I have taken the pains to count and tabulate the

women graduated in different years, during the thirty-two years

after 1841, when they began to be graduated there. Dividing them

into decennial periods, I find the numbers to be as follows:

1841-1850, thirty-two women were graduated; 1851-1860, seventeen

women were graduated; 1861-1870, forty women were graduated. From

this it appears that during the third decennial period there was

not only no diminution, but actually a higher average than

before. During the first period the classes averaged 3.2 women;

during the second period 1.7 women, and during the third period 4

women. Or if, to complete the exhibit, we take in the two odd

classes at the end, and make the third period consist of twelve

classes, the average will still be 3.8, and will be larger than

either of the previous periods. Or if, disregarding the even

distribution of periods, we take simply the last ten years, the

average will be 3.1. Moreover, during the first period there was

one class (1842) which contained no women at all; and during the

second period there were three such classes (1852-3, 7); while

during the third period every class has had at least one woman.

It certainly would not have been at all strange if there had been

a great falling off in the number of graduates of Oberlin. At the

outset it had the field to itself. Now the census gives

fifty-five "colleges" for women, besides seventy-seven which

admit both sexes. Many of these are inferior to Oberlin, no

doubt, but some rose rapidly to a prestige far beyond this

pioneer institution. With Cornell University on the one side, and

the University of Michigan on the other--to say nothing of minor

institutions--the wonder is that Oberlin could have held its own

at all. Yet the largest class of women it ever graduated

(thirteen) was so late as 1865, and if the classes since then

"average but two or three," so did the classes for several years

before that date. Professor Tyler knows very well that classes

fluctuate in every college, and that a decennial period is the

least by which the working of any system can be tested. Tried by

this test, the alleged diminution assumes a very different

aspect. If, however, there were a great decline at Oberlin, it

would simply show a transfer of students to other colleges, since

neither Professor Tyler nor President Eliot will deny that the

total statistics of colleges show a rapid increase in the number

of women.

Moreover, I confess that my confidence in Professor Tyler's sense

of accuracy is greatly impaired by these assertions about

Oberlin, and also by his statement, which I must call reckless,

at least, in regard to the inferiority in truth, purity and

virtue of those women who seek the suffrage. He asserts (page

456) that "women--women generally--the truest, purest and best of

the sex--do not wish for the right of suffrage." Now, if the

women who oppose suffrage are truest, purest and best, the women

who advocate it must plainly be inferior at all these points; and

that is an assertion which not only these women themselves, but

their brothers, husbands and sons are certainly entitled to

resent. Mr. Tyler has a perfect right to argue for his own views,

for or against suffrage, but he has no right to copy the Oriental

imprecation, and say to his opponents, "May the grave of your

mother be defiled!." He claims that he holds official relations

to one "woman's college," one "female seminary" and one "young

ladies' institute." Will it conduce to the moral training of

those who enter those institutions that their officers set them

the example of impugning the purity and virtue of those who

differ in opinion from themselves?

But supposing Professor Tyler not to be bound by the usual bonds

of courtesy or of justice, he is at least bound by the

consistency of his own position. Thus, he goes out of his way to

compliment Mrs. Somerville and Miss Mitchell. Both these ladies

are identified with the claim for suffrage. He lauds "Uncle Tom's

Cabin," but Mrs. Stowe has written almost as ably for the

enfranchisement of woman as for the freedom of the blacks. He

praises the "sacramental host of authoresses," who, he says,

"will move on with ever-growing power, overthrowing oppression,

restraining vice and crime, reforming morals and manners,

purifying public sentiment, revolutionizing business, society and

government, till every yoke is broken and all nations are won to

the truth." But it has been again and again shown that the

authoresses of America are, with but two or three exceptions, in

favor of woman suffrage, and, therefore, instead of being

"sacramental," do not even belong to Professor Tyler's class of

"wisest, truest and best." He thus selects for compliment on one

page the very women whom he has traduced on another. His own

witnesses testify against him. It is a pity that such phrases of

discourtesy and unfairness should disfigure an essay which in

many respects says good words for women, recommends that they

should study Greek, and says, in closing, that their elevation

"is at once the measure and the means of the elevation of

mankind."

In the autumn of 1884 an effort was made to exclude women from

Adelbert College. We give an account thereof from the pen of Mrs.

Sarah Knowles Bolton, published in the _English Woman's Review_ of

January, 1885:

DEAR EDITOR: The city of Cleveland has been stirred for weeks on

this question of woman's higher education. Western Reserve

College, founded in 1826, at Hudson, was moved to Cleveland in

1874, because of a gift of $100,000 from Mr. Amasa Stone, with

the change of name to Adelbert College, in memory of an only son.

A few young women had been students since 1873. In Cleveland,

about twenty young ladies availed themselves of such admirable

home privileges. Their scholarship was excellent--higher than

that of the young men. They were absent from exercises only half

as much as the men. Their conduct was above reproach. A short

time since the faculty, except the president, Dr. Carroll Cutler,

petitioned the board of trustees to discontinue coeducation at

the college, for the assumed reasons that girls require different

training from boys, never "identical" education; that it is

trying to their health to recite before young men; "the strain

upon the nervous system from mortifying mistakes and serious

corrections is to many young ladies a cruel additional burden

laid upon them in the course of study"; "that the provision we

offer to girls is not the best, and is even dangerous"; that

"where women are admitted, the college becomes second or

third-rate, and that, worst of all, young men will be deterred

from coming to this college by the presence of ladies." An

"annex" was recommended, not with college degrees, but a

subordinate arrangement with "diploma examinations, so far and so

fast as the resources of the college shall allow."

As soon as the subject became known, the newspapers of the city

took up the question. As the public furnishes the means and the

students for every college, the public were vitally interested.

Ministers preached about it, and they, with doctors and lawyers,

wrote strong articles, showing that no "annex" was desired; that

parents wished thorough, high, self-reliant education for their

daughters as for their sons; that health was not injured by the

embarrassment (?) of reciting before young men; that young men

had not been deterred from going to Ann Arbor, Oberlin, Cornell,

and other institutions where there are young women; that it was

unjust to make girls go hundreds of miles away to Vassar or Smith

or Wellesley, when boys were provided with the best education at

their very doors; that, with over half the colleges of this

country admitting women, with the colleges of Italy, Switzerland,

Sweden, Holland and France throwing open their doors to women,

for Adelbert College to shut them out, would be a step backward

in civilization.

The women of the city took up the matter, and several thousands

of our best names were obtained to a petition, asking that girls

be retained members of the college; judges and leading persons

gladly signed. The trustees met November 7, 1884. The whole city

eagerly waited the result. The chairman of the committee, Hon. I.

W. Chamberlain of Columbus, who had been opposed to coeducation

at first, from the favorable reports received by him from

colleges all over the country, had become a thorough convert, and

the report was able and convincing.

President Angell of Michigan University, where there are 1,500

students, wrote: "Women were admitted here under the pressure of

public sentiment against the wishes of most of the professors.

But I think no professor now regrets it, or would favor the

exclusion of women. We made no solitary modification of our rules

or requirements. The women did not become hoydenish; they did not

fail in their studies; they did not break down in health; they

have been graduated in all departments; they have not been

inferior in scholarship to the men. We count the experiment here

successful."

Galusha Anderson, president of Chicago University, wrote: "Our

only law here is that the students shall act as gentlemen and

ladies. They mingle freely together, just as they do in society,

as I think God intended that they should, and the effect in all

respects is good. I have never had the slightest trouble from the

association of the sexes."

Chancellor Manatt of Nebraska University, for four years engaged

in university work at Yale, in answer to the questions as to

whether boys would be driven away from the institution, replied:

"This question sounds like a joke in this longitude. As well say

a girl's being born into a family turns the boys out of doors. It

rather strengthens the home attraction. So in the university. I

believe there is not a professor or student here who would not,

for good and solid reasons, fight for the system."

President Warren of Boston University, lately the recipient of,

L200,000, wrote: "The only opponents of coeducation I have ever

known are persons who know nothing about it practically, and

whose difficulties are all speculative and imaginary. Men are

more manly and women more womanly when concerted in a wholly

human society than when educated in a half-human one."

President White of Cornell wrote: "I regard the 'annex' for women

in our colleges as a mere make-shift and step in the progress

toward the full admission of women to all college classes, and I

think that this is a very general view among men who have given

unprejudiced thought to the subject. Having now gone through one

more year, making twelve in all since women were admitted, I do

not hesitate to say that I believe their presence here is good

for us in every respect."

Professor Moses Coit Tyler of Cornell said: "My observation has

been that under the joint system the tone of college life has

grown more earnest, more courteous and refined, less flippant and

cynical. The women are usually among the very best scholars, and

lead instead of drag, and their lapses from good health are

rather, yes, decidedly, less numerous than those alleged by the

men. There is a sort of young man who thinks it not quite the

thing, you know, to be in a college where women are; and he goes

away, if he can, and I am glad to have him do so. The vacuum he

causes is not a large one, and his departure is more than made up

by the arrival in his stead of a more robust and manlier sort."

The only objectors to coeducation were from those colleges which

had never tried it; President Porter of Yale thought it a

suitable method for post-graduate classes, and President Seeley

for a course of "lower grade" than Amherst.

President Cutler of Adelbert College made an able report, showing

that the progress of the age is towards coeducation. Only

fifty-three Protestant colleges, founded since 1830, exclude

women; while 156 coeducational institutions have been established

since that date.

Some of the trustees thought it desirable to imitate Yale,[292]

and others felt that _they_ knew what studies are desirable for

woman better than she knew herself! When the vote was taken, to

their honor be it said, it was twelve to six, or two to one, in

favor of coeducation. The girls celebrated this just and manly

decision by a banquet.

The inauguration of the women's crusade at this time (1874) in Ohio

created immense excitement, not only throughout that State, but it

was the topic for the pulpit and the press all over the nation.

Those identified with the woman suffrage movement, while deeply

interested in the question of temperance, had no sympathy with what

they felt to be a desecration of womanhood and of the religious

element in woman. They felt that the fitting place for petitions

and appeals was in the halls of legislation, to senators and

congressmen, rather than rumsellers and drunkards in the dens of

vice and the public thoroughfares. It was pitiful to see the faith

of women in God's power to effect impossibilities. Like produces

like in the universe of matter and mind, and so long as women

consent to make licentious, drunken men the fathers of their

children, no power in earth or heaven can save the race from these

twin vices. The following letter from Miriam M. Cole makes some

good points on this question:

If the "woman's war against whisky" had been inaugurated by the

woman suffrage party, its aspect, in the eyes of newspapers,

would be different from what it now is. If Lucy Stone had set the

movement on foot, it would have been so characteristic of her!

What more could one expect from such a disturber of public peace?

She, who has no instinctive scruples against miscellaneous crowds

at the polls, might be expected to visit saloons and piously

serenade their owners, until patience ceases to be a virtue. But

for women who are so pressed with domestic cares that they have

no time to vote; for women who shun notoriety so much that they

are unwilling to ask permission to vote; for women who believe

that men are quite capable of managing State and municipal

affairs without their interference; for them to have set on foot

the present crusade, how queer! Their singing, though charged

with a moral purpose, and their prayers, though directed to a

specific end, do not make their warfare a whit more feminine, nor

their situation more attractive. A woman knocking out the head of

a whisky barrel with an ax, to the tune of Old Hundred, is not

the ideal woman sitting on a sofa, dining on strawberries and

cream, and sweetly warbling, "The Rose that All are Praising."

She is as far from it as Susan B. Anthony was when pushing her

ballot into the box. And all the difference between the musical

saint spilling the precious liquid and the unmusical saint

offering her vote is, that the latter tried to kill several birds

with one stone, and the former aims at only one.

Intemperance, great a curse as it is, is not the only evil whose

effects bear most heavily on women. Wrong is hydra-headed, and to

work so hard to cut off one head, when there is a way by which

all may be dissevered, is not a far-sighted movement; and when

you add to this the fact that the head is not really cut off, but

only dazed by unexpected melodies and supplications, there is

little satisfaction in the effort. We learn that, outside of town

corporations that have been lately "rectified," the liquor

traffic still goes on, and the war is to be carried into the

suburbs. What then? Where next? Which party can play this game

the longer? Tears, prayers and songs will soon lose their

novelty--this spasmodic effort will be likely soon to spend

itself; is there any permanent good being wrought? Liquor traffic

opposes woman suffrage, and with good reasons. It knows that

votes change laws, and it also knows that the votes of women

would change the present temperance laws and make them worth the

paper on which they are printed. While this uprising of women is

a hopeful sign, yet it cannot make one law black or white. It

may, for a time, mold public opinion, but depraved passions and

appetites need wholesome laws to restrain them. If women would

only see this and demand the exercise of their right of suffrage

with half the zeal and unanimity with which they storm a man's

castle, it would be granted. This is the only ax to lay at the

root of the tree.

Springfield, Ohio, has just had a case in a Justice Court which

attracted much attention and awakened much interest. A woman

whose husband had reduced his family to utter want by

drunkenness, entered a suit against the rumseller. An appeal from

the drunkard's wife to the ladies of Springfield had been

circulated in the daily papers, which so aroused them that a

large delegation of the most respectable and pious women of the

city came into the court. But the case was adjourned for a week.

During this time the excitement had become so great that when the

trial came on the court-room was full of spectators, and the

number of ladies within the rail was increased three-fold. Mrs.

E. D. Stewart made the plea to the jury. A verdict was rendered

against the rumseller. An appeal will be taken; but the citizens

of Springfield will never forget the influence which the presence

of women, in sympathy with another wronged woman, had upon the

court. And what added power those women would have had as

judges, jurors and advocates; citizens crowned with all the

rights, privileges and immunities justly theirs by law and

constitution.

Of the work in Geauga county, Mrs. Sophia Ober Allen, of South

Newbury writes:

In the winter of 1851-2, Anson Read circulated a petition praying

the legislature to protect married women in their property

rights; and from that time the subject of women's rights was

frequently discussed in social and literary gatherings. In 1871,

Mrs. Lima Ober proposed to be one of six women to go to the

township election and offer her vote. Nine[293] joined her, but

all their votes were rejected, the judges saying they feared

trouble would be the result if they received them. From that year

to 1876 these heroic women of South Newbury persisted in offering

their votes at the town, state and presidential elections; and

though always refused, they would repair to another room with the

few noble men who sustained them, and there duly cast their

ballots for justice and equality. On one occasion they polled

fifty votes--thirty-one women and nineteen men. In 1876 they

adopted a series of stirring resolutions with a patriotic

declaration of principles.

In 1873, large meetings were held, and a memorial sent to the

constitutional convention, asking for an amendment, that "the

right to vote shall not be denied or abridged to any adult

citizen except for crime, idiocy or lunacy." On January 12, 1874,

a political club was organized,[294] which has been active in

holding meetings and picnics, circulating petitions and tracts.

On July 4, 1874, a basket picnic was held in Ober and Allen's

grove, at which Gen. A. C. Voris was among the speakers.[295]

Hon. A. G. Riddle, whose early life was spent mostly in Newbury,

encouraged and assisted the work, both by voice and pen. During

the winter of 1878, Susan B. Anthony, in company with my husband

and myself, lectured in several towns under the auspices of the

club. Miss Eva L. Pinney, a native of Newbury, was employed by

the club to canvass the county. Her success was marked. In 1879

the treasury received a bequest of $50, from Reuben H. Ober, who,

though spending much of his time in the East, ever sustained a

live interest in the home society.[296]

Mrs. Sarah Langdon Williams sends us the following report from the

Toledo society:

In the winter of 1869, Mrs. Stanton and Miss Anthony returning

from an extended trip through the West, spent a few days in

Toledo. In addition to public meetings, their coming was the

occasion for many pleasant and hospitable gatherings. A large

circle of intelligent and earnest women were longing and waiting

to do something to speed the movement for woman suffrage, when

the coming of these pioneers of reform roused them to action. It

was like the match to the fire all ready for kindling, and an

organization was speedily effected.[297] From that time forward,

the air seemed magnetized with reform ideas, and to the loyal

band who stood true to their flag, new members were added from

time to time, and from this little band went forth an influence,

a steady force which has operated silently though continuously

through both visible and invisible channels, moulding the thought

and action of the community. The meetings of this association

were regularly reported by the daily press, with more or less

justice, according as the reporter present, or the newspaper

which reported the proceedings, was more or less friendly.

A letter published in _The Revolution_ of June 10, 1869,

indicates the practical work of our association:

The first skirmish along the line of the suffrage army in

Ohio has been fought, and the friends of reformation may

well rejoice at the result. In this city there has existed

for a long time a library association to which women were

admitted as members, but in the control or management of

which they had no voice. Under the pressure of influences

set in motion by your visit, it was resolved that this relic

of the past should be swept away, that women should be

represented in the management as well as in the membership

of the association. At the late election six directors were

to be chosen among other officers, and Miss Anna C.

Mott,[298] Mrs. M. W. Bond and Mrs. M. J. Barker were

candidates upon a ticket called the Equal Rights Ticket,

headed by Mr. A. W. Gleason, for president. The dangerous

proposition, not only of allowing women to vote, but of

giving them offices, was a bombshell in the camp of

conservatism, and every influence that could be, was brought

to bear against this ticket. After an exciting contest, the

result showed that notwithstanding a powerful and

influential opposition, the ticket was elected by a vote of

from 186 to 220 out of 327 votes. This result has been all

the more grateful, because in the opposition were to be

found many of the most wealthy and respected citizens of

Toledo.

As an index of the interest the women manifested in that

election, three-fourths of them voted. It was interesting to

notice the firmness with which the women walked up to the

ballot-box. No trembling was perceptible. They carried the

ballot with ease, deposited it with coolness, watched to see

that no fraud was perpetrated, and then departed as

noiselessly as they came. The deed was done. Woman's honor,

woman's purity, woman's domestic felicity, woman's conjugal

love, woman's fidelity to her home duties, all these and a

thousand other of the finer qualities were destroyed. No

more peace in families; no more quiet home evenings; no more

refined domestic women; but wrangling and discords instead.

Soldiers and sailors, policemen and gravel-shovelers had

taken the place of wives and mothers. Sick at heart I went

to my home and wept for American womanhood. But the sun rose

as usual, and the world still revolved. I went to the

police-court--all was quiet. I passed to the county-court,

and looked over the docket--no new divorce cases met my

gaze. With unsteady hand I have opened the morning papers

for the past few days, but nothing there betrayed the

terrible results of that false step. Oh, women! women! In

the days of Indian warfare, the skilled hunter would tell

you that after an attack, when all was quiet, and you

thought the enemy had departed, the greatest danger awaited,

and the most careful vigilance was required. So I still keep

watching, for I know the vengeance of the gods must fall

upon this worse than Sodom, for since women have voted,

surely there be not five righteous within the city. Real

estate is not falling, however, but then!--

The evening after the election, the friends of the

association and of the successful tickets, gathered to

witness the incoming of the new administration. Hearty words

of cheer for the future were spoken. The president, Mr.

Gleason, delivered a beautiful inaugural address, of which I

send you a few sentences, and the meeting adjourned.

The president said: While thanking you most heartily, ladies

and gentlemen, for the distinguished honor conferred upon me

in the election, I do not forget that it is due to the great

principles of equal rights and universal suffrage--not to

any merits of my own. We live in an age of progress. In my

humble opinion we have taken a great step forward in

admitting ladies to the management of this association--not

only from the fact that in this particular institution they

hold an equal footing with ourselves, and of right are

entitled to all its privileges, but from the more important

fact that it is a recognition here of those principles which

are now claiming recognition in the political institutions

of our country. It is in the natural order of events that

this "equal rights" movement should meet with opposition.

All movements of a novel and radical character at their

commencement meet with opposition. This is the ordeal

through which they must pass, but their success or failure

depends upon their intrinsic merit. Nothing is to be feared

from opposition to any movement that possesses these

elements. Whatsoever idea has its origin in the recesses of

human nature, will, sooner or later, become embodied in

living action, and so we have this assurance--that as here,

so also in the political institutions of our country--this

principle of equal rights, both to man and woman, will at

last prevail.

In 1871 the _Sunday Journal_ offered the association half a

column, which was gratefully accepted, and Mrs. Sarah Langdon

Williams appointed editor. The department increased to a full

page, and the circulation of the paper became as large as that of

either of the city dailies. When there was danger of its being

sold to opponents of the cause, Mrs. Williams purchased one-half

interest, and by so doing kept the other half in the hands of the

friendly proprietor. In the _Sunday Journal_ the association had

a medium through which it could promptly answer all unjust

attacks, and thus kept up a constant agitation. In November,

1875, the sale of the paper closed for a while direct

communication between the association and the public. But soon

becoming restive without any medium through which to express

itself, the society started _The Ballot-Box_ in April, 1876,

raising money among the citizens in aid of the enterprise. With

this first assistance the paper became at once self-supporting,

and continued thus until April, 1878,[299] when it was

transferred to Matilda Joslyn Gage, and published at Syracuse, N.

Y.

The convention for the remodeling of the constitution of the

State, in 1873-74, afforded an opportunity for unflagging efforts

of the members of the association in the circulation of

petitions; and so successful were they that when their delegates

presented themselves with 1,500 signatures, asking for an

amendment securing the right of suffrage to women, a member of

the convention, on scanning the roll, exclaimed: "Why, you have

here all the solid men of Lucas county." Mr. M. R. Waite, since

chief-justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, was

president of the convention, and in presenting the petition said

the names on that paper represented fifteen millions of dollars.

Mr. Waite's courtesy indicated stronger convictions regarding the

rights of women than he really possessed. In an interview with

our committee, appointed to secure a hearing from the

members-elect--Mr. Waite and Mr. Scribner--Mr. Waite declared

himself in favor of according equal wages to women, and believed

them entitled to all other rights, except the right to vote. He

thought women were entitled to a hearing in the convention, and

would aid them all he could to secure the privilege. Mr. Waite,

with great kindness of nature, possesses an inborn conservatism

which curbs his more generous impulses. He adhered to this

position in his decision in the case of _Minor vs. Happersett_,

declaring that "the constitution of the United States has no

voters." Many of the most sanguine friends were greatly

disappointed. They had fully believed his love of justice would

lead him to the broad interpretation of the constitution, so

clearly the true one, set forth in the first article of the

fourteenth amendment. It did prevail, however, when, after saying

the constitution does not confer the right of suffrage with

citizenship, he said: "If the law is wrong, it ought to be

changed; but the power is not with the Supreme Court."

When, in February, 1873, an irascible judge of the Court of

Common Pleas refused to ratify the appointment of a woman--Miss

Mary Sibley--to the office of deputy clerk, which she had filled

for eight years with unusual acceptance, on the ground that not

being an elector she was legally disqualified, the association

determined to dispute the decision in her behalf, and on applying

through their president to Mr. Waite to act as counsel, he gave

his unhesitating acceptance, and declared that if the appointment

was illegal, the law ought to be changed at once. True to his

promise, he defended her most ably, and engaged other counsel to

act with him. His services were given gratuitously.

Subsequently, in the constitutional convention, an amendment was

adopted making women eligible to appointive offices, and also to

any office under the school control, with the exception of State

commissioner. But when voted upon, the new constitution was lost,

and with it these amendments. The cause had able advocates in the

convention, leading whom was General A. C. Voris of Akron, who

was made chairman of the Special Committee on Woman Suffrage. The

Standing Committee on Elective Franchise was extremely

unfriendly, conspicuously so the chairman, Mr. Sample. A Special

Committee on Woman Suffrage was appointed, which performed its

duty faithfully, and reported unanimously in favor. Mr. Voris

worked for the measure with an enthusiasm equaled only by his

ability. When the report came up for discussion he made a

masterly speech of two hours, during which the attention was so

close that a pin could be heard to drop. Other able speeches were

also made in favor of the measure by some of the most talented

members of the convention. It came within two votes of being

carried. The defeat was largely due to the liquor influence in

the convention. The cause, however, received a new impetus

through the exertions of General Voris, to whom, second to no

other person in Ohio, should the thanks of the women be rendered.

During the contest the Toledo society was constantly on the

alert. On three occasions it sent its delegates to the

convention; but it has not limited its work to Ohio alone; it has

given freely of its means whenever it could to aid the struggle

in other States, and has rolled up large petitions to congress

asking for a sixteenth amendment.

When the State convention met in Toledo, February, 1873, the

members of the city society exerted themselves to the utmost to

have all arrangements for their reception and entertainment of

the most satisfactory character, and the delegates unanimously

agreed they had never before had so delightful and successful a

meeting. Many lasting friendships were formed. The opera-house

was well filled at every session of the three days' convention.

At the opening session a cordial address of welcome was given by

Rev. Robert McCune, one of Toledo's most eloquent Republicans.

The mayor of the city, Dr. W. W. Jones, a staunch Democrat, also

made a courteous speech.

The Toledo Society has always held itself an independent

organization, though its members, individually, have identified

themselves as they chose with other associations. Its attitude

has been of the most uncompromising character. It has never been

cajoled into accepting a crumb in any way in the place of the

whole loaf. Sometimes this has brought upon it the condemnation

of friends, but in the long run it has won respect, even from

bitter opponents. An illustration of this was given in its action

with regard to the centennial celebration. The Fourth of July,

1876, was to be observed in Toledo as a great gala day. Long

before its arrival preparations were in progress through which

patriotic citizens were to express their gratitude over the

nation's prosperity on the one-hundredth anniversary of freedom.

All trades, professions and organizations were to join in one

vast triumphal procession. A call was issued for a meeting, to

which all organizations were requested to send representatives.

The Woman Suffrage Association was not neglected, and a circular

of invitation was mailed to its president. This raised a delicate

question, for how could women take part in celebrating the

triumphs of their country whose laws disfranchised them? But,

having received a courteous recognition, they must respond with

equal courtesy. The letter was laid before the society, and the

president instructed to politely decline the honor. _The

Ballot-Box_ of May, 1876, contains the correspondence:

TOLEDO, Ohio, April 8, 1876.

At a meeting of citizens, held at White's Hall, on the

evening of the 6th inst., the undersigned were instructed to

invite your organization, with others, to send a

representative to a meeting to be held at White's Hall, on

the evening of Monday, April 17, which will elect an

executive committee, and make other arrangements for a

celebration by Toledo of the one-hundredth anniversary of

American independence in a manner befitting the occasion and

the character of our city. It is earnestly desired that

every organization, of whatever nature, in Toledo, be

represented at this meeting. We would, therefore, ask of you

that you lay the matter before your organization at its next

regular meeting, or in case it shall hold no meeting before

the 17th, that you appear as a representative yourself.

GUIDO MARX, _Chairman_.

D. R. LOCKE, JAMES H. EMORY, _Secretaries_.

This was laid before the association at a meeting which occurred

the same afternoon, and by the order of the society the

invitation therein conveyed was replied to in season to be read

at the meeting at White's Hall, April 17:

TOLEDO, Ohio, April 15, 1876.

_Hon. Guido Marx, Messrs. D. R. Locke and James H. Emory_:

GENTLEMEN: The printed circular, with your names attached,

inclosed to my address as president of the Toledo Woman

Suffrage Association, inviting that body to send a

representative to a meeting to be held at White's Hall,

Monday evening, April 17, to elect an executive committee

and make other arrangements for a celebration by Toledo of

the one-hundredth anniversary of American independence, was

received just in time to lay before the meeting held April

10. It was there decided that while the members of the

association fully appreciate the generosity of the men of

Toledo, and feel grateful for the implied recognition of

their citizenship, yet they manifestly have no centennial to

celebrate, as the government still holds them in a condition

of political serfdom, denying them the greatest right of

citizenship--representation.

Conscious, however, of the great results which the nation's

hundred years have achieved in building up a great people,

we are aware that you, as American men, have cause for

rejoicing, and we bid you God-speed in all efforts which you

may make in the approaching celebration. In an equal degree

we feel it inconsistent, as a disfranchised class, to unite

with you in the celebration of that liberty which is the

heritage of but one-half the people. It is the will,

therefore, of the association that I respond to the above

effect, thanking you for your courteous invitation, and

recognizing with pleasure among your names those who have

heretofore extended to us their sympathy and aid. I remain,

with sincere respect, yours,

SARAH R. L. WILLIAMS, _President T. W. S. A._

The letter was intended to be in all respects courteous, as the

writer and the society which she represented had naught but the

kindest of feelings toward those who, in so friendly a manner,

recognized their citizenship by inviting them to take part in the

meeting, and also toward the Toledo public, who, as a general

thing, had treated their organization with friendly

consideration. It appears, however, that their attitude was

misconstrued, according to articles subsequently published in the

_Blade_ and _Commercial_, which we reproduce below:

The women say they "manifestly have no centennial to

celebrate." If we are not mistaken, the women of this

country have enjoyed greater progress than the men under our

free government, and it illy becomes them now to steadily

and persistently pout because they have not yet attained the

full measure of their earthly desires--the ballot-box.

Better by far give a hearty show of appreciation of benefits

received, and thereby materially aid in further progress.

Nothing can be gained by their refusing to celebrate the

one-hundredth anniversary of civil and religious liberty.

The rights of all are necessarily restricted wherever there

is a government, and time and experience can alone

demonstrate just what extension or contraction of rights and

liberties may be essential to the general good. In our

judgment the women, by refusing to participate in the coming

Fourth of July celebration, have committed an error, the

influence of which cannot but prove prejudicial to the

interests of their association. The opposite course would

undoubtedly have won friends.--_Blade._

A singularly uncourteous letter was the one sent by the

Woman Suffrage Association to the meeting at White's Hall.

Ninety-nine-hundredths of the women of the country will be

surprised to learn that they "have no centennial to

celebrate," and will be still more surprised when they

discover that it is "inconsistent" for them to unite with

their brothers, fathers, sons and husbands "in the

celebration of the liberty which is the heritage" of _all_

the people. We cannot but feel that the claims set forth by

the association would command more respectful consideration

with the display of a different spirit. The maids and

matrons of 1776 were of a different mold.--_Commercial._

The _Blade_ has been a good friend to woman suffrage for many

years, but we feel that the present article was written in a

spirit of needless irritability, such as we should think might

ensue from a fit of indigestion. The _Commercial_, since its

change of management, has certainly not been unfriendly, and we

have thought fair. Its present comments are unjust. The following

editorial appeared in _The Ballot-Box_ of the same date:

WHY WE CANNOT CELEBRATE THE CENTENNIAL.--The city dailies

criticise the suffrage association somewhat severely for

declining to unite in the centennial celebration. Perhaps

from the outlook of masculine satisfaction it may seem

astonishing that patriotism should not inspire us with

gratitude for the crumbs from the national table; that we

should not rejoice at the great banquet being prepared. But

it is as impossible for us to look from their standpoint, as

for them to see from ours. While appreciating the kindnesses

measured out to us in this city by our friends and the

press, yet laboring without visible results for the

recognition of our rights as citizens of the United States,

we cannot, even through the potent incentive of sympathizing

with our "husbands, fathers, brothers and sons," lay aside

our grievances and rejoice in a triumph which more clearly

marks our own humiliation.

Can our friends inform us what is our crime, that we are

denied the right of representation? Can they point to any

mental or moral deficiency, to render justifiable our being

denied political rights? If not--if there is no just cause

for our disfranchisement, it surely should not excite

surprise that we cannot rejoice with those who

systematically persist in perpetrating this great wrong.

With no discredit to any of the sovereign voters of this

nation, we cannot forget that the most ignorant negro, the

most degraded foreigner, even refugees from justice, are

accorded the rights which we have been demanding in vain;

and we are conscious every day and hour these privileges are

denied us, that we are not only wronged by the American

government, but insulted. Every year that our appeals for

political rights to congress and the legislature are denied,

insult is heaped upon injury. Women are told by those who

are in the full enjoyment of all the privileges which this

government can confer, to rejoice in what little they have,

and wait patiently until more is bestowed. Wait we must,

because they have the reins of power, but to wait patiently,

with the light we have to perceive our relative condition,

would be doing that for which we should despise ourselves.

We are not laboring for to-day alone, but for the fruition

which must come from the establishment of justice. If we

fail in this memorial year, a brighter day must surely come.

Our failure now will be the failure of the country to

improve its opportunities. All the successes which may be

rejoiced over, all the triumphs of trade, commerce and

invention are secondary to the rights of citizens, to those

principles which lie at the foundation of national liberty.

When women are recognized as citizens of this republic,

there will be some occasion for their thankfulness and

rejoicing; then they can join in the jubilee which

celebrates the birthday of a mighty nation.

At the June meeting of the association, a declaration of rights,

and a series of radical resolutions were adopted. The president

urged the society to stand firm in the determination to take no

part in the centennial celebration, and the members of the

suffrage association passed the Fourth of July quietly at their

own homes, but they caused a banner, bearing the inscription,

"Woman Suffrage and Equal Rights," to be hung across one of the

principal streets, under which the whole procession passed. Of

the original members of the society,[300] some who during its

earlier years took an active part have removed elsewhere, and a

few have passed to the beyond. But the majority still remain, and

are earnest in their labors with the hope for a better day,

undampened by the delays and disappointments which attend every

step in progress.

There is a flourishing association at Cleveland called the Western

Reserve Club;[301] Mrs. Sarah M. Perkins and her highly educated

daughters, graduates of Vassar College, are among the leading

members. They hold regular meetings, have a course of lectures

every winter and are exerting a wide influence. The club consists

of thirty members, paying five dollars annually into the treasury.

The Painesville Equal Rights Society,[302] formed November 20,

1883, is one of the most flourishing county associations in the

State. It numbers 150 members, and it has organized many local

societies in the vicinity. The annual meeting of the State

society,[303] held at Painesville, May 11, 12, 13, 1885, with a

large representation of the most active friends present, by a

unanimous vote declared itself no longer auxiliary to the

American, and thereby secured the cooeperation of the Toledo,

South Newbury, and other independent local organizations of the

State.

We are indebted to Annie Laurie Quinby for the following account of

the founding of a hospital for women and children, and of some of

the difficulties women encountered in gaining admittance into the

medical colleges:

Mrs. Quinby says: In 1867, some Cincinnati ladies met at the

residence of Mrs. J. L. Roberts and organized a health

association, the object of which was to obtain and disseminate

knowledge in regard to the science of life and health. Mrs.

Leavett addressed the ladies on the importance of instituting a

medical school for women, stating a recent conversation she had

with Prof. Curtis, and suggesting that he be invited to lay his

views before them. A vote to that effect was passed, and in his

address Professor Curtis touched the following points:

Women have greater need than men of the knowledge of the

science of life, and can make more profitable use of it.

_First_: They need this knowledge. In a practice of

thirty-six years, full seven-tenths of my services have been

devoted to women who, had they been properly instructed in

the science of life, and careful to obey those instructions,

would not have needed one-seventh of those services, while

they would have prevented six-sevenths of their sickness,

suffering and loss of time, and a like proportion of the

expenses of doctoring, nursing, medicines, etc., etc.

_Second_: They can make a far better and more profitable use

of this knowledge than men can, because they can better

appreciate the liabilities, sufferings and wants of their

sex, which are far more numerous and imperative than ours;

and they are always with us, from infancy to boyhood and

womanhood, to watch us and protect us from injury, and to

relieve us promptly from the sufferings that may afflict us,

as well as to teach us how to avoid them. _Third_: Their

intellectual power to learn principles is as great as ours,

their perceptions are quicker than ours, their sympathies

are more tender and persistent, and their watchfulness and

patient perseverance with the sick are untiring. I regard

the teaching and practice of the science of life as woman's

peculiarly appropriate sphere. Its value to the family of

the wife and the mother, is beyond estimation in dollars and

cents, by the husband and father. No money that he can

properly spend to secure it to his daughters, should be

otherwise appropriated; for, should they never enter the

family relation, it will be a means of escape from sickness

mortification and expense to themselves, and of useful and

honorable subsistence, not only priceless in its possession,

but totally inalienable by any reverses of fortune. The

possession of this knowledge from their infancy up, would do

more to prevent their becoming poor and "friendless," than

do all the alms houses for the former, and "homes" for the

latter that society can build, while it would cost less to

each individual than does an elegant modern piano. Forty

years ago your speaker obtained from the legislature of Ohio

a liberal university charter under the title of "The

Literary and Botanical Medical College of Ohio," which was

afterwards changed to "The Cincinnati Literary and

Scientific Institute and Physio-Medical College." By the aid

of able assistants he conducted this institution for the

benefit of men only, till, in 1851, the students of the

class were between eighty and ninety. From that time to the

present, he has received women into the classes and

demonstrated that they are not only as competent as men to

learn all parts of the science of life, but, in very many

particulars, far better qualified for the practice of the

art of curing disease. The last session of the college was

suspended that he might travel in the country and learn the

disposition of the friends of progress to establish the

institution on a permanent foundation, and is happy to say

that all that seems necessary to that glorious consummation

is the prompt and concentrated effort of a few judicious and

influential ladies and their friends to secure pecuniary

aid.

June 11, 1879, a dispensary for women and children was opened in

Cincinnati, by Drs. Ellen M. Kirk, and M. May Howells, graduates

of the New York College and Hospital for Women. Their undertaking

proving successful, with other ladies of wealth and ability they

soon after established a hospital. November 1, 1881, the

certificate of incorporation[304] was filed in the office of the

secretary of state. The ladies labored unweariedly for the

support of these institutions. At two public entertainments they

realized nearly a thousand dollars. For the establishment of a

homeopathic college they manifested equal earnestness and

enthusiasm. Many of them interested in this mode of practice,

seeing the trials of Dr. Pulte in introducing this new theory of

medicine, determined to help him in building up a college and

hospital for that practice. By one fair they raised $13,500, net

profits, and the Pulte Medical College was established. But the

remarkable fact about these institutions is that after being

started through the labors of women, women appealed in vain for

admission for scholarships for a long time. For a clear

understanding of the matter, and a knowledge of the defense made

in behalf of the right of women to enter the college, I send you

the following from Dr. J. D. Buck:

Pulte Medical College, of Cincinnati, was organized under

the common law, and opened in 1872, for the admission of

students, with no provision, either for or against the

admission of women. From time to time, during the first

seven years, the subject of the admission of women was

broached, but generally bullied out of court amid sneers and

ridicule. The faculty stood five against and four for. The

opposition was the most pronounced and bitter imaginable,

the staple argument being that the mingling of the sexes in

medical colleges led always and necessarily to

licentiousness.

Finally, in the fall of 1877, seven of the nine members of

the faculty voted to admit women. One professor voted no,

and the leader of the opposition, Prof. S. R. Beckwith--a

life-long opponent of the broader culture of women--left the

meeting with the purpose of arresting all action. In this,

however, he failed; the vote was confirmed.

On the following day another meeting was held, when the vote

was re-considered and again confirmed, each of the seven

members agreeing to stand by it. Still again, another

meeting was called, at the instance of the leader of the

opposition, and in the absence of two of the staunch

friends, a bare majority of the whole faculty voted to

exclude women, as heretofore, and notified the applicants

for admission, who had been officially informed of the

previous resolution to admit them, that they would not be

admitted.

Forbearance on the part of the friends of justice was no

more to be thought of, and notice was given that the wrong

should be righted, at all hazards. For the next two years

war raged persistent and unflinching on the part of the

friends of the rights of women, bitter and slanderous on the

part of the opposition. All the tricks of the politician

were resorted to to defeat the cause of right, and more than

once by misrepresentation they obtained the announcement in

the public press that the case was decided, and women

forever excluded. Still the cause moved on to complete

triumph, and to the disgrace and final exclusion from the

college of two of the most bitter leaders of the opposition.

In the fall of 1879 it was announced in the annual

catalogue, "that students will be admitted to the lectures

of Pulte college without distinction of sex," a very simple

result indeed, as the outcome of two years' warfare. At the

opening of lectures the first of October, four female

students presented themselves, and were admitted to

matriculation. Every prophecy of disaster had failed. The

class was an increase in numbers over that of any preceding

year, and showed a marked improvement in deportment and

moral tone from the presence of ladies, who from their high

character and bearing exerted a restraining influence, as

they always do, on those disposed to be gentlemen. At the

commencement exercises in March, 1881, three women, viz:

Miss S. C. O'Keefe, Mrs. Mary N. Street, and Mrs. M. J.

Taylor, received the degree of the college, after having

attended the same lectures and been submitted to the same

examination as the male graduates. The prize for the best

examination (in writing) in physiology, was awarded to Miss

Stella Hunt, of Cincinnati. The right of women to admittance

to this college cannot again be raised except by a

two-thirds vote of both faculty and trustees--a majority

which will be difficult to obtain after the record which the

women have already made as students in the institution.

Yours truly, J. D. BUCK.

After all this educational work and this seeming triumph for the

recognition of an equal status in the colleges for women, we find

this item going the rounds of the daily journals, under date of

Cleveland, March 29, 1885:

Considerable excitement prevails among the homeopathists of

Cleveland. Commencement exercises of the college are to be held

next Tuesday evening, and Miss Madge Dickson, of Chambers, Pa.,

was to have delivered the salutatory address. Dr. H. H. Baxter, a

prominent professor of the college, objected, saying a woman

salutatorian would disgrace the college. Miss Dickson resigned

the honor, and no address will be delivered.

In April, 1873, Miss Nettie Cronise of Tiffin, was admitted to the

bar. In the following September, her sister Florence was admitted,

and they practiced as N. & F. Cronise, until Miss Nettie's marriage

with N. B. Lutes, with whom she has since been associated under the

firm name of Lutes & Lutes. Miss Florence Cronise has her office in

Tiffin. Soon after commencing practice Mrs. Lutes was appointed to

examine applicants for admission to the bar, the first instance of

a woman serving in this capacity in the United States, although

Florence Cronise and one or two other women have since done like

duty. These ladies and Miss Hulett were the first women to open law

offices and begin an active, energetic practice of the profession.

In 1885, Miss Mary P. Spargo of Cleveland, was admitted to the bar.

FOOTNOTES:

[285] Among those associated with Mrs. Mendenhall were Mrs. Calvin

W. Starbuck, Mrs. W. Woods, Miss Elizabeth Morris, Miss Ellen

Thomas, Mrs. Kendrick, sister to General Anderson, Mrs. Caldwell,

Mrs. Annie Ryder, Mrs. Mary Graham, Mrs. Louisa Hill, Mrs. Hoadly.

[286] The officers of Cincinnati Equal Rights Society were:

_President_, Mrs. H. A. Leavitt; _Vice-President_, Mr. J.

B. Quinby; _Corresponding-Secretary_, Mrs. A. L. Ryder;

_Recording-Secretary_, Mrs. L. H. Blangy; _Treasurer_, Mrs. Mary

Moulton; _Executive Committee_, Mrs. J. B. Quinby, Mr. ---- Hill,

Mrs. A. L. Ryder. Mrs. Dr. Mortell, Mrs. Mary Moulton, Mrs. Mary

Graham, Mrs. Annie Laurie Quinby, Mrs. L. H. Blangy and Mrs. Dr.

Gibson.

[287] The delegates appointed were, Mr. and Mrs. J. B. Quinby, Mrs.

Mary Graham, Mrs. Charles Graham, Mrs. Mary Moulton, Mrs. Dr.

Morrel, Mrs. Blangy, Mrs. M. V. Longley, Mr. and Mrs. A. G. W.

Carter, and Mrs. Soula and daughter.

[288] The officers of the State Society were: _President_, Mrs. H.

Tracy Cutler, M. D., Cleveland; _Vice-President_, Mrs. M. V.

Longley; _Recording Secretary_, Mrs. H. M. Downey, Xenia;

_Corresponding Secretary_, Mrs. Miriam M. Cole, Sidney;

_Treasurer_, Mrs. L. H. Crall, Cincinnati; _Warden_, Mr. J. B.

Quinby, Cincinnati; _Business Committee_, A. J. Boyer, esq.,

Dayton; Elias Longley, esq., Cincinnati; Mrs. R. L. Segur, Toledo;

Mrs. Morgan K. Warwick, Cleveland; Dr. M. T. Organ, Urbana; Mrs. E.

D. Stewart, Springfield; Miss Rebecca S. Rice, Yellow Springs.

[289] The speakers at Pike's Hall were Susan B. Anthony, Mary A.

Livermore, Lucy Stone, Henry B. Blackwell, Mrs. Dr. Chase, Miriam

M. Cole, Mr. A. J. Boyer, Dr. Mary Walker, J. J. Bellville, Mary B.

Hall, Mrs. Dr. Keckeler, Mrs. Longley, Mrs. Graham, Mrs. Griffin,

and Elizabeth Boynton.

[290] At a meeting of the corporators of the Cleveland Homeopathic

Medical College and Hospital for Women, the following board of

trustees was appointed: Stillman Witt, T. S. Beckwith, Bolivar

Butts, N. Schneider, M. D., T. S. Lindsey, Mrs. D.R. Tilden, Mrs.

S. F. Lester, Mrs. Peter Thatcher, Mrs. C. A. Seaman, M. D., Mrs.

M. K. Merrick, M. D., Mrs. S. D. McMillan, Mrs. M. B. Ambler, Mrs.

Lemuel Crawford, Mrs. Henry Chisholm, Mrs. G. B. Bowers. At a

subsequent meeting of the board of trustees, the following

officers were chosen: _President_, Mrs. C. A. Seaman, M. D.;

_Vice-president_, Mrs. S. F. Lester; _Secretary_, Mrs. M. B.

Ambler; _Treasurer_, Mrs. S. D. McMillan.

[291]

A = Individual.

B = Year of Graduation.

C = Married or Single.

D = Number of Children.

E = Health.

+--+----+-------+-------+----------+------------------------------------+

| A| B | C | D | E |Remarks |

+--+----+-------+-------+----------+------------------------------------+

| 1|1857|Married| 3 |Not living|Died, 1874. |

+--+----+-------+-------+----------+------------------------------------+

| 2| " | " | 1 | Good |Taught eleven years; now in Indiana.|

+--+----+-------+-------+----------+------------------------------------+

| 3| " | " | 2 | " |Has taught ever since graduating; |

| | | | | |now in Ohio. |

+--+----+-------+-------+----------+------------------------------------+

| 4|1858| " | 2 |Very good |Taught five years; now in Ohio. |

+--+----+-------+-------+----------+------------------------------------+

| 5| " | " | 6 | Good |Has taught school; slight bronchial |

| | | | | |trouble. |

+--+----+-------+-------+----------+------------------------------------+

| 6|1859| " | 3 | " | |

+--+----+-------+-------+----------+------------------------------------+

| 7| " | " | 3 |Uncertain |Has taught school. |

+--+----+-------+-------+----------+------------------------------------+

| 8| " | " | | Good |Taught thirteen years, till married,|

| | | | | |in 1872. |

+--+----+-------+-------+----------+------------------------------------+

| 9| " | " |2 or 3 | |No recent intelligence; health good |

| | | | | |so far as known. |

+--+----+-------+-------+----------+------------------------------------+

|10|1860|Single | | " |Taught some years; now in England. |

+--+----+-------+-------+----------+------------------------------------+

|11| " |Married| 2 | |Taught three years. |

+--+----+-------+-------+----------+------------------------------------+

|12| " |Single | | " |Has taught school. |

+--+----+-------+-------+----------+------------------------------------+

|13| " | " | |Very good |Physician in Missouri. |

+--+----+-------+-------+----------+------------------------------------+

|14| " |Married| 1 | " " |Has taught school. |

+--+----+-------+-------+----------+------------------------------------+

|15| " |Single | | " " |Constantly a teacher, except two |

| | | | | |years in Europe. |

+--+----+-------+-------+----------+------------------------------------+

|16| " |Married| | " " |Minister in Connecticut; lately |

| | | | | |married. |

+--+----+-------+-------+----------+------------------------------------+

|17|1861| " | | Good |Taught three years; journalist in |

| | | | | |Ohio. |

+--+----+-------+-------+----------+------------------------------------+

|18| " | " | 1 | |Has taught school. |

+--+----+-------+-------+----------+------------------------------------+

|19|1862| " | 1 |Not living|Died of hereditary consumption. |

+--+----+-------+-------+----------+------------------------------------+

|20| " | " | 1 | " " | |

+--+----+-------+-------+----------+------------------------------------+

|21| " | " | 1 | Good | |

+--+----+-------+-------+----------+------------------------------------+

|22| " | " | 2 |Very good |Resides in Ohio. |

+--+----+-------+-------+----------+------------------------------------+

|23| " | " | 2 | " " |Resides in Vermont. |

+--+----+-------+-------+----------+------------------------------------+

|24| " | " | 2 | " " |Resides in New York. |

+--+----+-------+-------+----------+------------------------------------+

|25| " | " | | Good |Lately married. |

+--+----+-------+-------+----------+------------------------------------+

|26| " | " | 3 | " |Has taught school. |

+--+----+-------+-------+----------+------------------------------------+

|27|1863| " | 2 |Very good |Taught four years, till married. |

+--+----+-------+-------+----------+------------------------------------+

|28|1864| " | 3 | " " |Taught one year. |

+--+----+-------+-------+----------+------------------------------------+

|29|1866| " | | Not good |Troubled with scrofula, dating back |

| | | | | |earlier than her school days; |

| | | | | |practices medicine in Missouri. |

+--+----+-------+-------+----------+------------------------------------+

|30|1868|Single | | Good |Very good & Has just returned from |

| | | | | |three years in Europe, where she |

| | | | | |took long pedestrian journeys. |

+--+----+-------+-------+----------+------------------------------------+

|31| " |Married| 1 | " |Has taught school and is teaching |

| | | | | |now. |

+--+----+-------+-------+----------+------------------------------------+

|32| " | " | 2 | " |Taught three years. |

+--+----+-------+-------+----------+------------------------------------+

|33|1869|Single | | |Taught constantly and is teaching |

| | | | | |now. |

+--+----+-------+-------+----------+------------------------------------+

|34|1870|Married| |Not living|Died, 1871. |

+--+----+-------+-------+----------+------------------------------------+

|35| " | " | 1 | Good |Has taught school in Missouri. |

+--+----+-------+-------+----------+------------------------------------+

|36| " | " | 1 | " |Taught one year. |

+--+----+-------+-------+----------+------------------------------------+

|37|1871|Single | | Unknown |Came to college in delicate health, |

| | | | | |which improved while there; the |

| | | | | |youngest woman ever graduated at |

| | | | | |Antioch. |

+--+----+-------+-------+----------+------------------------------------+

|38|1872| " | |Not living|Died, 1873, of hereditary |

| | | | | |consumption. |

+--+----+-------+-------+----------+------------------------------------+

|39| " | " | | Fair |Teaching in Massachusetts. |

+--+----+-------+-------+----------+------------------------------------+

|40|1873| " | | Good | |

+--+----+-------+-------+----------+------------------------------------+

|41| " | " | | " | |

+--+----+-------+-------+----------+------------------------------------+

[292] But even old Yale has to succumb to the on-sweeping tide of

equal chances to women, as will be seen by the following Associated

Press item in the New York _Sun_ of October 2, 1885: "NEW HAVEN,

Conn., Oct. 1.--Miss Alice B. Jordin, of Coldwater, Mich., a

graduate of the academic and law departments of the University of

Michigan, entered the Yale law school to-day. She is the first

woman ever entered in any department of Yale outside of the art

school.

[293] Mesdames Lima H. Ober, Lovina Greene, Hophni Smith, Ruth F.

Munn, Perleyette M. Burnett, Sophia L. O. Allen, Mary Hodges, Lydia

Smith, Sarah A. Knox. The men who sustained and voted with these

women were Deacon Amplias Greene, Darius M. Allen, Ransom Knox,

Apollos D. Greene, Wesley Brown. Their tickets were different each

year; their first read, "Our Motto--Equal Rights for all--Taxation

without Representation is Tyranny. Our Foes--Tradition and

Superstition." Among the speakers invited to address the people at

the polls were Mrs. Organ, of Yellow Springs, and Mrs. Hope

Whipple, of Clyde.

[294] _President_, Ruth F. Munn; _Vice-Presidents_, Joel Walker, D.

M. Allen; _Recording Secretary_, Ellen Munn; _Corresponding

Secretary_, Julia P. Greene; _Treasurer_, Mary Hodges; _Executive

Committee_, William Munn, Sophia L. O. Allen, Amanda M. Greene,

Apollos D. Greene, Ransom Knox.

[295] At other picnics the speakers were, Mrs. S. B. Chase, M. D.,

Colonel S. D. Harris, J. W. Tyler Jane O. DeForrest, T. W. Porter.

[296] The Society of South Newbury, like that of Toledo, refrained

from auxiliaryship with the State Association from the time of its

organization to June, 1885, when such relationship was made

possible by the State Society voting itself an independent

organization, free to cooeperate with all national or local

associations that have for their object the enfranchisement of

women; and to Mrs. Allen may be ascribed a large share of the

credit for the good work and broad platform of the South Newbury

club.

[297] The presidents of the Toledo Society have been, Emma J.

Ashley, Elizabeth R. Collins, Sarah R. L. Williams, Rosa L. Segur,

Julia P. Cole, Sarah S. Bissell, Ellen S. Fray, Mary J. Cravens.

The vice-presidents, Martha Stebbins, Julia Harris, S. R. L.

Williams, Sarah S. Bissell, Ellen Sully Fray, Mary J. Barker. Miss

Charlotte Langdon Williams rendered valuable service in the

business department of _The Ballot-Box_, and served for three years

as secretary and treasurer of the association.

[298] Miss Anna C. Mott, and her father, Richard Mott, were two

strong pillars of the woman suffrage movement in Ohio; their

beautiful home has for many years been a harbor of rest alike to

the advocates of anti-slavery, temperance and woman's rights.

[299] Mrs. Williams further adds that _The Ballot-Box_ became also

a foster child of the National Association, Miss Anthony canvassing

for it after each of her lectures during the winters of 1877 and

1878, thus largely increasing the circulation. It, on the other

hand, gave full and faithful account of the work of the National

Association, so that in reality it was the organ of the National as

well as of the Toledo society.

[300] The officers of the Toledo Society are, 1885, _President_,

Mrs. Mary J. Cravens; _Vice-president_, Sarah R. L. Williams;

_Recording Secretary_ Mrs. E. R. Collins; _Corresponding

Secretary_, Mrs. Sarah S. Bissell; _Treasurer_, Mrs. Mary J.

Barker; _Executive Committee_, Mrs. Rosa L. Segur, Mrs. Julia P.

Cole, Mrs. Caroline T. Morgan, Miss Anna C. Mott, Mrs. E. M.

Hawley.

[301] _President_, Mrs. Judge Caldwell; _Secretary_, Mrs. Bushnell;

_Treasurer_, Mrs. Ammon.

[302] The officers of the Painesville Society, 1885, are,

_President_, Mrs. Frances Jennings Casement; _Vice-Presidents_,

Mrs. Eliza P. Chesney, Mrs. Lydia Wilcox, Mrs. Cornelia Swezey;

_Recording Secretary_, Mrs. Martha Paine; _Corresponding

Secretary_, Mrs. Lou J. Bates; _Treasurer_, Mrs. Adelia J. Bates;

_Trustees_, Mrs. J. B. Burrows, Mrs. A. G. Smith, Mrs. C. C.

Beardslee.

[303] The officers of the Ohio State Association for 1885

are, _President_, Mrs. Frances M. Casement, Painesville;

_Vice-Presidents_, Mrs. N. Coe Stewart, Cleveland; Mrs. C. C.

Swezey, Painesville; Hon. Richard Mott, Toledo; Mrs. U. R. Walker,

Cincinnati; Mrs. Dr. Warren, Elyria; _Recording Secretary_, Miss

Mary P. Spargo, Cleveland; _Corresponding Secretary_, Mrs. Rosa L.

Segur, Toledo; _Treasurer_, Mrs. Elizabeth Coit, Columbus;

_Executive Committee_, Dr. N. S. Townshend, Columbus; Mrs. M. B.

Haven, Cleveland; Mrs. M. Cole, Painesville; Mrs. W. J. Sheppard,

Cleveland; Mrs. Elizabeth Coit, Columbus; Mrs. Ports Wilson,

Warren; Mrs. Sarah M. Perkins, Cleveland.

[304] The incorporators were, Mrs. Davies Wilson, Mrs. John

Goddard, Mrs. Jane Wendte, Mrs. William N. Hobart, Dr. Ellen M.

Kirk, Dr. M. May Howells, Miss Jennie S. Smith, and Miss Harriet M.

Hinsdale; _Resident Physician_, Dr. Sarah J. Bebout; _Visiting

Physicians_, Drs. Ellen M. Kirk, M. May Howells.

CHAPTER XLI.

MICHIGAN.

Women's Literary Clubs and Libraries--Mrs. Lucinda H.

Stone--Classes of Girls in Europe--Ernestine L. Rose--Legislative

Action, _1849-1885_--State Woman Suffrage Society, 1870--Annual

Conventions--Northwestern Association--Wendell Phillips'

Letter--Nannette Gardner Votes--Catharine A. F. Stebbins

Refused--Legislative Action--Amendments Submitted--An Active

Canvass of the State by Women--Election Day--The Amendment Lost,

40,000 Men Voted in Favor--University at Ann Arbor Opened to

Girls, 1869--Kalamazoo Institute--J. A. B. Stone, Miss Madeline

Stockwell and Miss Sarah Burger Applied for Admission to the

University in 1857--Episcopal Church Bill--Local

Societies--Quincy--Lansing--St. Johns--Manistee--Grand

Rapids--Sojourner Truth--Laura C. Haviland--Sybil Lawrence.

Traveling through the State of Michigan, sufficiently at leisure to

make acquaintances, one would readily remark the unusual

intelligence and cultivation of the women. Every large town can

boast a woman's literary club, a reading-room, nicely furnished,

with a library containing, in many cases, one and two thousand

volumes, a choice collection of scientific, historical and

classical works. This may be attributed in part to the fact that

the population is largely from New York and New England, partly to

the many institutions of learning early opened to girls, and partly

to the extensive social influence of Mrs. Lucinda H. Stone,[305]

whose rare culture, foreign travels and liberal views have fitted

her, both as a woman and as a teacher, to inspire the girls of

Michigan with a desire for thorough education. Mrs. Stone has

traveled through many countries in the old world with large classes

of young ladies under her charge, superintending their reading and

studies, and giving them lectures on history and art on classic

ground, where some of the greatest tragedies of the past were

enacted; in ancient palaces, temples and grand cathedrals; upon the

very spots still rich with the memories of kings and popes, great

generals, statesmen, poets and philosophers. We cannot estimate the

advantages to these young travelers of having one always at hand,

able to point out the beauties in painting and statuary, to

interpret the symbols and mysteries of architecture, the language

of music, the facts of history, and the philosophy of the rise and

fall of mighty nations. Mrs. Stone has also given courses of parlor

lectures to large classes of ladies in every city of the State,

thus, with her rare experiences and extensive observations,

enriching every circle of society in which she moved.

To Catharine A. F. Stebbins we are indebted for compiling many of

the facts contained in this chapter. Reviewing the last forty

years, she says:

The agitation on the question of woman suffrage began in this

State in 1846, with the advent of Ernestine L. Rose,[306] who

spoke twice in the legislative hall in Detroit--once on the

"Science of Government," and once on the "Antagonisms in

Society." A resolution was passed by the House of

Representatives, expressing a high sense of her ability,

eloquence and grace of delivery. Her work in Detroit, Ann Arbor

and other places was three or four years prior to the first

report by the Special Committee of the Senate in the general

revision of the constitution, nine years before the House

Committee's report on elections in response to women's petitions,

and a dozen years before the favorable "report of the Senate upon

the memorial of ladies praying for the privilege of the elective

franchise," signed by Thomas W. Ferry.

_The Revolution_ of April 30, 1868, gives an account of the

manner the women of Sturgis voted on the question of prohibition:

"A few weeks ago, at a large meeting of the citizens of

Sturgis, Michigan, the ladies were asked to help in the

coming election the cause of prohibition. They replied that

they would if they were allowed to vote. At a subsequent

meeting the gentlemen could do no less than to invite them.

A committee of twelve was appointed. They canvassed the

village and invited all the ladies to come out and join in

the demonstration. At 2 o'clock on election day they

assembled at Union School Hall and marched to the room where

the election was held, and one hundred and fourteen

deposited their votes in favor of prohibition, and six

against it. Whilst they were marching through the room the

utmost order prevailed, and when they were retiring three

hearty cheers were given for the ladies of Sturgis. Great

credit is due to Mrs. William Kyte, chairman of the

committee, as well as to all the other members, for their

management of the whole affair. The utmost good feeling

prevailed, and not a sneer or a jeer was heard from the

lords of creation, but a large majority seemed to hail this

as a precursor of what they expect in the future, when the

people shall be educated to respect the rights of all."

We find the above in the Sturgis _Journal_, by the way, one

of the best in tone and talent of all our western

exchanges. Its editor, Mr. Wait, is a prominent leader in

the State, a member of the legislature, and a believer in

the equal civil and political rights of women. We have more

than once suggested in _The Revolution_ that the women

should appear at the polls on election days and demand their

rights as citizens. The effect could not but be beneficial

wherever tried. Any considerable number of intelligent women

in almost any locality would in this way soon inaugurate a

movement to result in a speedy triumph. Let these noble

Sturgis women persevere. Methodist Bishop Simpson was right

when he declared the vote of woman at the polls would soon

extinguish the perdition fires of intemperance. The Sturgis

women have begun the good work, a hundred and fourteen to

six! Surely, blessed are the husbands and children of such

wives and mothers.

P. P.

In _The Revolution_ of September 3, 1868, we find the following

from the Sturgis _Star_:

Last spring the ladies of Sturgis went to the polls one

hundred and twenty in number, and demonstrated the propriety

of the movement. Their votes did not count, for they could

only be cast in a separate box, and the movement was only

good in its moral effect. But at the school meeting the

ladies have an equal right to vote with the men. Whatever

qualifications a man must possess to exercise privileges in

that meeting, any woman possessing like qualifications can

exercise like privileges there. To substantiate this, it is

only necessary to read the school law. Section 145 of the

Primary School law: "The words 'qualified voter' shall be

taken and construed to mean and include _all taxable

persons_ residing in the district of the age of twenty-one

years, and who have resided therein three months next

preceding the time of voting."

Ex-State Superintendent John M. Gregory's opinion of that

is, that "under this section (145) all persons liable to be

taxed in the district, and twenty-one years of age, and

having resided three months in the district, without

distinction of sex, color, or nationality, may vote in the

district meetings." In districts where they elect only a

director, assessor and moderator, the women can vote on all

questions except the election of officers. In graded

districts they can vote on all questions, election of

trustees included. Men having no taxable property, but who

vote at town meetings and general elections, can only vote

for trustees at a school meeting. Any woman, then, having a

watch, cow, buggy, or personal property of any kind, subject

to tax, or who has real estate in her own name, or jointly

with her husband, can vote. Here, then, is a lawful right

for women to vote at school meetings, and as there can be no

impropriety in it, we advocate it. We believe that it will

work good. Our Union school is something that all should

feel an active interest in. We hope, then, that those ladies

entitled to vote will exercise the rights that the law

grants them. To give these suggestions a practical effect,

we cheerfully publish the following notice:

The undersigned respectfully request those ladies residing

in District No. 3, of the township of Sturgis, who are

entitled to vote at the annual meeting, to assemble in Mrs.

Pendleton's parlor, at the Exchange Hotel, on Friday evening

next, August 28, at 7:30 o'clock, to consider the matter of

exercising the privilege which the law gives them.

This call is signed by about twenty of the best women of the

borough. Last week we called attention in _The Revolution_

to the earnestness of the English women in urging their

claim to the right of suffrage, and appealed to American

women from their example. We hear from different sources

that American women will attempt, to some extent, to be

registered this year as voters, and we hope so brave an

example will become a contagion. A boastful warrior once

demanded of his foe, "Deliver up your arms." The answer was,

"Come, if you dare, and take them!" Let women become brave

enough to take their rights, and there will not be much

resistance. According to their faith and their courage, so

shall it be.

P. P.

The Michigan State Suffrage Society--always an independent

association--was organized at the close of the first convention

held in Hamblin's Opera-house, Battle Creek,[307] January 20,

1870, and has done the usual work of aiding in the formation of

local societies, circulating tracts and petitions, securing

hearings before the legislature, and holding its annual meetings

from year to year in the different cities of the State.

The Northwestern Association held its first annual convention in

the Young Men's Hall, Detroit, November 28, 29, 1870, with large

and appreciative audiences.[308] Legislative action on the

question of woman suffrage began in Michigan in 1849, when:

The special report favorable to Senate document No. 10, for

universal suffrage, was signed by Dwight Webb, Edward H.

Thompson and Rix Robinson.--House document No. 31,

legislature of 1855: "The Committee on Elections, to whom

was referred the petition of Betsy P. Parker, Lucinda Knapp,

Nancy Fleming, Electa Myers, and several other

'strong-minded' ladies of Lenawee county, asking such

amendments to the constitution of the State as will secure

to women an equal right to the elective franchise with men,"

reported adversely, ridiculed the petitioners, and was

signed by A. P. Moorman.--Senate document No. 27, in the

session of 1857: On a memorial of ladies praying the

legislature to grant them the elective franchise, the report

was signed by Thomas W. Ferry, and was favorable and

respectful.--House document No. 25, legislature of 1859: On

constitutional amendments in favor of universal suffrage,

the report was favorable for extending suffrage to colored

men, but doubtful as to the wisdom of extending it to women.

This was signed by Fabius Miles, chairman.--Senate document

No. 12: Upon the same constitutional amendments, in the

legislature of 1859, the report signed by R. E. Trowbridge,

chairman of the committee, was adverse to extending suffrage

to women.

On February 13, 1873, Mr. Lamb introduced "a joint

resolution granting the privilege of the elective franchise

to the women of the State." Mr. Bartholomew introduced "a

joint resolution proposing an amendment to section 1,

article 1., of the constitution, in relation to the

qualifications of electors." Both were referred to the

Committee on Elections, which made the following report:

The Committee on Elections, to whom was referred the joint

resolution granting the privilege of the elective franchise

to women of this State, respectfully report that they have

had the same under consideration, and have directed me to

report the same back to the House without recommendation. We

think the time has not arrived for us to decide on so

important a matter. We await further developments, and are

under the impression that there is no popular demand for the

change--at least not sufficient to warrant us in

recommending so important a change in our form of government

at the present session of the legislature--and ask to be

discharged from the further consideration of the subject.

[Signed:] A. HEWITT, _Acting Chairman._

Motion carried to lay the joint resolution on the table.

March 4, it was taken from the table and referred to the

Committee of the Whole, who recommended its passage, and

April 10 it was lost by a vote of 50 to 24:

The committee have considered the matters embraced in the

several resolutions referred to them relative to providing

for woman's suffrage, and have instructed me to report

against adding any such provision to the constitution at

present. The committee ask to be discharged from the further

consideration of the subject.

[Signed:] E. W. MEDDAUGH, _Chairman._

October 14.--A bill for separate submission to a vote of the

people of an amendment to the constitution relating to

woman's suffrage, was lost by a tie vote--7 for and 7

against.

At the extra session of the legislature, 1874, in the House,

March 10, Mr. Hoyt introduced a joint resolution for

separate submission to a vote of the people of an amendment

to the constitution relating to woman suffrage. Referred to

the Committee on Elections and State Affairs, jointly. On

March 12 the following memorial from the State Woman

Suffrage Association[309] was presented in the House:

_To the Senate and House of Representatives of the State of

Michigan, in Special Session Convened: _

The Executive Committee of the Michigan State Woman Suffrage

Association, at their meeting held in Kalamazoo, February

10, 1874, voted to memorialize your honorable body, at your

special session now being held.

We beg leave to represent to you that the object of this

association is to secure, in a legal way, the

enfranchisement of the women of the State. They are, as you

well know, already recognized as citizens of the State

according to the laws of the United States. They are now

taxed for all purposes of public interest as well as the

men. But they are not represented in the legislature, nor in

any branch of the State government, thus affording a great

example, and an unjust one for women, of taxation without

representation, which our fathers declared to be tyranny;

and which is contrary to the genius of our republican

institutions, and to the general polity of this

commonwealth. Women are also governed, while they have no

direct voice in the government, and made subject to laws

affecting their property, their personal rights and liberty,

in whose enactment they have no voice.

We therefore petition your honorable body, that in preparing

a new constitution, to be submitted for adoption or

rejection by the people of this State, you will strike out

the word "male" from the article defining the qualifications

of electors; or if deemed best by you, will provide for the

separate submission of an article for the enfranchisement of

the women of Michigan, giving them equal rights and

privileges with the men. By thus taking the lead of the

States of the Union, to more fully secure the personal

rights of all the citizens, you will show yourselves in

harmony with the spirit of the age and worthy to be called

pioneers in this cause, as you are already most honorably

accounted pioneers in your educational system, which affords

equal and impartial advantages to the population of our

State, irrespective of sex or condition in life--thus aiming

to elevate the entire people to the highest practicable

plane of intelligence and true civilization.

By order, and in the name of the Michigan Woman Suffrage

Association.

LUCINDA H. STONE, _Corresponding Secretary._

Mrs. A. H. WALKER, _President._

On March 14, the joint committee made the following report:

The committees on State affairs and elections, to whom was

referred the joint resolution proposing an amendment to

section I, article VII., of the constitution, in relation to

the qualifications of electors, respectfully report that

they have had the same under consideration, and have

directed us to report the same back to the House without

amendment, and recommend that it do pass and ask to be

discharged from the further consideration of the subject.