The advent of Anna Dickinson afforded the ladies an opportunity

to attest their admiration for her as a representative woman,

which they did, giving her a public breakfast, September 14.

Their honored guest appreciated the compliment; and in an earnest

and eloquent speech referred to it, saying that although she had

received many demonstrations of the kind, this was the first ever

given her exclusively by her own sex.[500]

Soon after Miss Dickinson's departure, Mrs. Schenck, much to the

regret of the society, resigned the chair, and Mrs. J. W. Stow

was appointed to fill the vacancy. The ladies having for some

time considered the organizing of a State Society of great

importance, it was decided to hold a grand mass convention for

that purpose. There was need of funds to carry forward the work,

and a course of three lectures was suggested as a means to raise

money. This carried, on motion of Mrs. Stow, and her offer to

deliver the first lecture of the course was accepted. All the

members of the society devoted their energies to secure the

success of the undertaking. Many of them engaged in selling

tickets for the two weeks intervening, and on November 2, Mrs.

Stow gave her lecture to a large and interested audience, taking

for her theme, "Woman's Work." The Rev. Mr. Hamilton followed,

November 9, with "The Parlor and the Harem," and the Rev. C. G.

Ames concluded the course, November 18, with "What Does it Mean?"

The lectures were well received, and though not particularly

directed to the right of suffrage for women, succeeded in

attracting attention to the society under whose auspices they

were given, and helped it financially. About this time Mrs.

Gordon returned from the East and took an active part in

canvassing the State, lecturing and forming county societies

preparatory to securing as large a representation as possible at

the coming convention. The following report of the proceedings is

taken from the San Francisco dailies:

[Illustration: Laura deForce Gordon]

The convention to form a State Woman Suffrage Society, held

its first meeting in Dashaway Hall, Wednesday afternoon,

January 26, 1870. The hall was well filled. Mrs. E. T.

Schenck, vice-president of the National Association, was

chosen president, _pro. tem._, and Miss Kate Atkinson,

Secretary. A committee on credentials was appointed by the

chair, consisting of one member from each organization.[501]

During the absence of the committee quite an animated

discussion arose as to the admission of delegates. Mrs.

Gordon said the greatest possible liberality should be

exercised in admitting persons to the right to speak and

vote; that all who signed the roll, paid the fee, and

expressed themselves in sympathy with the movement, should

be admitted. After some discussion, Mrs. Gordon's views

prevailed, and the names of those who chose to qualify

themselves were enrolled. About 120 delegates were thus

chosen from nine suffrage societies in different parts of

the State. Many counties were represented in which no

organizations had yet been formed. Some rather humorous

discussion was had as to whether the president should be

called Mrs. Chairman or Mrs. Chairwoman. The venerable Mr.

Spear arose and suggested the title be Mrs. President, which

was adopted. Mrs. Gordon said she had noticed that when

questions were put to the meeting not more than a dozen

timid voices could be heard saying "aye," or "no." The

ladies must not sit like mummies, but open their mouths and

vote audibly. This disinclination to do business in a

business-like way, is discreditable. (Cheers). Mrs. Gordon's

hint was taken, and unequivocal demonstration of voices was

made thereafter upon the taking of each vote. Long before

the time arrived for the evening session, the hall in every

part, platform, floor and gallery, was crowded, and large

numbers were unable to gain entrance.

The Committee on Permanent Organization presented the

following names for officers of the convention: President,

Mrs. Wallis of Mayfield; Vice-Presidents, J. A. Collins, C.

G. Ames, Mrs. Mary W. Coggins; Secretaries, Mrs. McKee, Mrs.

Rider, Mrs. Perry; Treasurer, Mrs. Collins. On motion, Mrs.

Haskell and Mrs. Ames escorted the president to the rostrum,

and introduced her to the convention. Mrs. Wallis is a lady

of imposing presence, and very earnest in the movement. Upon

being introduced she said:

LADIES AND GENTLEMEN--I thank you for this expression of

your high esteem and confidence in electing me to preside

over your deliberations. I regard this as a severe ordeal,

but, having already been tested in this respect, I do not

fear the trials to come. I shall persevere until the

emancipation of women is effected, and in order to fulfill

my duties successfully upon this occasion, I ask the hearty

cooeperation of all. [Applause].

Mrs. Stow gave the opening address, after which

delegates[502] from various localities made interesting

reports. An able series of resolutions was presented and

discussed at length by various members of the convention,

and letters of sympathy were read from friends throughout

the country.[503]

From the first session, some anxiety was felt regarding the

action of the State Society in affiliating with one of the two

rival associations in the East. The Rev. C. G. Ames of San

Francisco, whose wife had been in attendance upon the Cleveland

convention of the American Association, was appointed

vice-president for California, while Mrs. E. T. Schenck had been

appointed vice-president by the National Association. In addition

to the names of officers of county societies appended to the call

for this convention, both Mrs. Schenck and Mrs. Ames signed in

their official capacity, as vice-president of their respective

Associations. Under these circumstances it was not strange that a

spirit of rivalry should manifest itself, but it was unfortunate

that it was carried so far as to breed disturbance in this infant

organization. The leading women looked upon Mrs. E. Cady Stanton

and Miss Susan B. Anthony as among the first who organized the

suffrage movement in the United States, and therefore felt that

it was due to them that our California Society which owed its

existence mainly to the efforts of Mrs. Schenck whom they had

appointed vice-president for California, should show its loyalty,

devotion and gratitude to them, by becoming auxiliary to the

National Association. On the other hand, Rev. C. G. Ames, being

an enthusiastic admirer of some of the leading spirits in the

American Association, desired it to be auxiliary to that. This

conflict having been foreshadowed, a letter was written to Miss

Anthony in relation to it. Her reply was received by Mrs. Schenck

on the first day of the convention, breathing a noble spirit of

unselfishness, advising us not to allow any personal feelings

towards Mrs. Stanton or herself to influence us in the matter,

but rather to keep our association entirely independent, free to

cooeperate with all societies having for their object the

enfranchisement of woman. Accordingly, the following resolution

was almost unanimously adopted:

_Resolved_, That the California Woman Suffrage Society

remain independent of all other associations for one year.

The result was satisfactory to Mrs. Schenck and her sympathizers,

but Mr. Ames seemed loth to relinquish his preference for the

American, and the course taken had the effect of lessening his

zeal and that of his followers, until they gradually dropped from

the ranks. But the convention, despite the unfortunate schism,

was a grand success. The sessions were crowded, and so great was

the interest awakened in the public mind that a final adjournment

was not had until Saturday night, after four days of earnest,

profitable work. The press of the city gave full and fair reports

of the proceedings, though very far from endorsing woman's claim

to suffrage, and men and women of all classes and professions

took an active part in the deliberations. But of the multitude

who met in that first woman suffrage convention on the Pacific

coast but few were prominent in after years.

The newly organized society immediately arranged to send a

delegation to Sacramento, to present to the legislature then in

session a petition for woman suffrage. The delegation consisted

of Laura DeForce Gordon, Caroline H. Spear and Laura Cuppy Smith,

who were accorded a hearing before a special committee of the

Senate, of which the venerable Judge Tweed, an able advocate of

woman suffrage, was chairman. The proceeding was without a

parallel in the history of the State. The novelty of women

addressing the legislature attracted universal attention, and the

newspapers were filled with reports of that important meeting.

During the year 1870 a general agitation was kept up. A number of

speakers[504] held meetings in various parts of the State. The

newspapers were constrained to notice this all-absorbing topic,

though most of them were opposed to the innovation, and

maintained a bitter war against its advocates. Prominent among

them was the sensational San Francisco _Chronicle_ followed by

the _Bulletin_, the _Call_, and in its usual negative style, the

_Alta_, while the _Examiner_ mildly ridiculed the subject, and a

score of lesser journalistic lights throughout the State

exhibited open hostility to woman suffrage, or simply mentioned

the fact of its agitation as a matter of news. But the brave

pioneers in this unpopular movement received kindly sympathy and

encouragement from some journals of influence, first among which

was the San Francisco _Post_, then under the management of that

popular journalist, Harry George, afterwards distinguished as the

author of "Progress and Poverty." The San Jose _Mercury_ was our

friend from the first, and its fearless and able editor, J. J.

Owen, accepted the office of president of the State woman

suffrage society to which he was elected in 1878. The Sacramento

_Bee_ also did valiant service in defending and advocating

woman's political equality, its veteran editor, James McClatchy,

being a man of liberal views and great breadth of thought, whose

powerful pen was wielded in advocacy of justice to all until his

death, which occurred in October, 1883. There were several county

journals that spoke kind words in our behalf, and occasionally

one under the editorial management of a woman would fearlessly

advocate political equality.

During the year of 1870, Mrs. Gordon traveled extensively over

the State, delivering more than one hundred lectures, beside

making an extended tour, in company with Mrs. Pitts Stevens,

through Nevada, where on the Fourth of July, at a convention held

at Battle Mountain, the first suffrage organization for that

State was effected. In February, 1871, Mrs. Gordon again lectured

in Nevada, remaining several weeks in Carson while the

legislature was in session. She was invited by that body to

address them upon the proposed amendment to the State

constitution to allow women to vote, which amendment was lost by

a majority of only two votes, obtained by a political trick, the

question being voted upon without a call of the House, when

several members friendly to the measure were absent. The author

of the proposed amendment was the Hon. C. J. Hillier, a prominent

lawyer of Virginia City, who, in bringing the bill before the

legislature in 1869, delivered one of the ablest arguments ever

given in favor of woman suffrage.

In 1871 Mrs. Gordon again made an extended tour through

California, Oregon, and Washington Territory, traveling mostly by

stage, enduring hardships, braving dangers and everywhere

overcoming prejudice and antagonism to strong-minded women, by

the persuasiveness of her arguments. In September, while

lecturing in Seaettle, a telegram informed her of her nomination

by the Independent party of San Joaquin county for the office of

State senator, requesting her immediate return to California.

This necessitated a journey of nearly a thousand miles, one-half

by stage-coach. Six days of continuous travel brought her to

Stockton, where she entered at once upon the senatorial campaign.

Mrs. Gordon spoke every night until election, and succeeded in

awakening a lively interest in her own candidacy and in the

subject of woman suffrage. Her eligibility to the office was

vehemently denied, particularly by Republicans, who were badly

frightened at the appearance of this unlooked-for rival. The

pulpit, press, and stump speakers alternated in ridiculing the

idea of a woman being allowed to take a seat in the Senate, even

if elected. The Democratic party, being in the minority, offered

but little opposition, and watched with great amusement this

unequal contest between the great dominant party on the one side,

and the little Spartan band on the other. The contest was as

exciting as it was brief, and despite the great odds of money,

official power, political superiority, and the perfect machinery

of party organization in favor of her opponents, Mrs. Gordon

received about 200 votes, besides as many more which were

rejected owing to some technical irregularity. Among those who

took part in that novel campaign and deserving special mention,

was the venerable pioneer familiarly called Uncle Jarvis, who had

voted a straight Whig or Republican ticket for fifty years, and

who for the first time in his life scratched his ticket and voted

for Mrs. Gordon.

In July, 1871, California was favored by a visit from Mrs.

Stanton and Miss Anthony, who awakened new interest wherever

their logical and eloquent appeals were heard. Their advent was

hailed with joy, and they received marked attention from all

classes, the clergy not excepted. Every lecture given by them

drew out large assemblies of the most influential of the

citizens. Indeed, they received a continual ovation during their

stay in San Francisco. After Mrs. Stanton returned to New York,

Miss Anthony remained and traveled in California, Nevada, Oregon

and Washington Territory several months, speaking at conventions

held in San Francisco and Sacramento, besides lecturing in all

the principal towns, winning for herself great praise, and a

deeper respect for the cause she so ably represented. A

complimentary banquet was tendered her in San Francisco on the

eve of her departure eastward, at which eighty guests,

distinguished in art, literature and social life, sat down to a

sumptuous collation spread in the Grand Hotel.

In the early part of that year, 1871, Hon. A. A. Sargent and wife

returned to California from Washington, his term as

representative having expired, and both took an active part in

the work of woman's political enfranchisement. Mr. Sargent, with

commendable bravery, which under the circumstances was indeed a

test of courage, delivered an address in favor of woman suffrage

at a convention held in San Francisco, just on the eve of an

important political campaign, in which he was a candidate for

reelection to congress, and also to the United States Senate. Of

course, those opposed to woman suffrage tried to make capital out

of it against him, but without avail, for that able and

distinguished statesman was elected to both offices, his term as

representative expiring before he would be called upon to take

his seat in the United States Senate. His noble wife, Ellen Clark

Sargent, took an active interest in all the woman suffrage

meetings, and in November, 1871, was appointed, as was also Mrs.

Gordon, to represent California in the National convention to be

held in Washington in January, 1872.

During the session of the California legislature in 1871-2 a

delegation from the State Society visited Sacramento and was

accorded a hearing in the Assembly-chamber before the Judiciary

Committee of that body. Addresses were made by Mrs. Pitts

Stevens, Mrs. A. A. Haskell, Mrs. E. A. H. DeWolf and Hon. John

A. Collins.

During the session of 1873-4 a bill was passed by the legislature

making women eligible to school offices, and also one which

provided that all women employed in the public schools should

receive the same compensation as men holding the same grade

certificates.

Mrs. Laura Morton has filled and ably discharged the office of

assistant State librarian for the past ten years. Mrs. Mandeville

was deputy-controller during the Democratic administration of

Governor Irwin, and proved herself fully capable of discharging

the duties of that responsible office; while for several years

women have been elected to various positions in the legislature

and employed as clerks.

July 10, 1873, the Woman Suffrage Society was incorporated under

the laws of the State, with Mrs. Sarah Wallis, president. Mrs.

Clara S. Foltz, a brilliant young woman who had begun the study

of law in San Jose, knew the statutes permitted no woman to be

admitted to the bar, and early in the session of 1877 drafted a

bill amending the code in favor of women, and sent it to Senator

Murphy of Santa Clara to be presented. Five years before this,

however, Mrs. Nettie Tator had applied for admission to the bar

at Santa Cruz. A committee of prominent attorneys appointed by

the court examined her qualifications as a lawyer. She passed

creditably and was unanimously recommended by the committee, when

it was discovered that the law would not admit women to that

learned profession.

Following the presentation of Mrs. Foltz' bill, Mrs. Knox

Goodrich, Laura Watkins, Mrs. Wallis and Laura De Force Gordon

were appointed by the State Society a committee to visit

Sacramento during the session and use their influence to secure

the passage of the "Woman's Lawyer Bill," as it was termed, and

to petition for suffrage. Mrs. Gordon, who was also reading law,

was in Sacramento as editorial correspondent for her paper, the

_Daily Democrat_ of Oakland, and had ample opportunity to render

valuable service to the cause she had so much at heart. The bill

passed the Senate by a vote of 22 to 9, being ably advocated by

Senators N. Green Curtis, Judge Niles Searles of Nevada county,

Creed Haymond of Sacramento, and Joseph Craig of Yolo. In the

Assembly, after weeks of tedious delay and almost endless debate,

the bill was indefinitely postponed by a majority of one. By the

persistent efforts of Assemblymen Grove L. Johnson of Sacramento,

R. W. Murphy, Charles Gildea and Dr. May of San Francisco, the

bill was brought up on reconsideration and passed by two

majority. The session was within three days of its close, and so

bitter was the opposition to the bill that an effort was made to

prevent its engrossment in time to be presented for the

governor's signature. The women and their allies, who were on the

watch for tricks, defeated the scheme of their enemies and had

the bill duly presented to Governor Irwin, but not till the last

day of the session. Then the suspense became painful to those

most interested lest it might not receive his approval. Mrs.

Gordon, as editor of a Democratic journal, asserted her claims to

some recognition from that party and strongly urged that a

Democratic governor should sign the bill. Aided by a personal

appeal from Senator Niles Searles to his excellency, her efforts

were crowned with success; the governor's message sent to the

Senate, when the hands of the clock pointed to fifteen minutes of

twelve, midnight (at which hour the president's gavel would

descend with the words adjourning the Senate _sine die_),

announced that Senate bill number 66, which permitted the

admission of women to all the courts of the State, had received

his approval. There was great rejoicing over this victory among

the friends everywhere, though the battle was not yet ended.

The same legislature had passed a bill accepting the munificent

donation to the State of $100,000 from Judge Hastings to found

the Hastings College of Law, on condition that it be the law

department of the State University, and the college was duly

opened for the admission of students. At the beginning of the

December term Mrs. Foltz, who had been admitted to the District

Court in San Jose (being the first woman ever admitted to any

court in the State), came to San Francisco, and with Mrs. Gordon

applied for admission to the law college. The dean, Judge

Hastings, himself opposed to women being received as students,

told them it was a matter that must be laid before the board of

directors, but that they could attend the lectures _ad interim_.

Three days later they were informed that their application had

been denied. Satisfied that the law was in their favor, they

immediately appealed to the courts. To save time Mrs. Gordon

applied to the Supreme Court and Mrs. Foltz to the District

Court, simultaneously, for a writ of mandamus to compel the

directors to act in obedience to the law which, the petitioners

claimed, did not discriminate against women in founding the State

University or its departments. The Supreme Court, wishing perhaps

to shirk the responsibility of acting in the first instance, sent

their petitioner, Mrs. Gordon, to the lower court, which had in

the meantime ordered the writ to issue for Mrs. Foltz; so it was

decided to make hers the test-case, and by the courtesy of Judge

Morrison, now chief-justice of the Supreme Court, Mrs. Gordon was

joined with Mrs. Foltz in the prosecution of the cause. The board

of directors of the college consisted of the chief-justice of the

Supreme Bench and seven other lawyers, among the most

distinguished and able in the State. The case attracted great

attention and deep interest was taken in the proceedings. Judges

Lake and Cope, who were ex-justices of the Supreme Court,

assisted by T. B. Bishop, another learned practitioner at the

bar, were arrayed as counsel for the defense against these

comparatively young students in the law, who appeared unaided in

their own behalf. After one of the most interesting legal

contests in the history of the State these women came off

victors, and the good-natured public, through the press, offered

them congratulations. But the defendants would not yield without

a stubborn resistance and carried their cause on appeal to the

Supreme Court; hence many months elapsed before the final

struggle came, but victory again rewarded the petitioners, the

Supreme Court deciding that women _should_ be admitted to the law

department of the State University. Although excluded from the

benefit of the lectures in the college, Mesdames Gordon and Foltz

had improved their time in study, and in December, 1879, both

were admitted to the Supreme Court of the State, after a thorough

examination.

Prior to this legal contest, in the summer of 1878, when

delegates to the constitutional convention were to be elected,

Mrs. Gordon, urged by her friends in San Joaquin county, became

an independent candidate only a week or two before the election.

With Mrs. Foltz she made a very brief though brilliant canvass,

attracting larger and more enthusiastic audiences than any other

speaker. Mrs. Gordon received several hundred votes for the

office, and felt compensated for the time and money spent by the

great interest awakened in the subject of woman suffrage.

As soon as the constitutional convention assembled in September,

Mrs. Gordon, although still pursuing her legal studies, was able

as a newspaper correspondent to closely watch the deliberations

of that body and urge the insertion of a woman suffrage clause in

the new organic law. The State Society delegated Mrs. Knox

Goodrich, Mrs. Sarah Wallis and Mrs. Watkins to join Mrs. Gordon

in pressing the claims of woman, but the opposition was too

strong and the suffrage clause remained declaring male citizens

entitled to vote, though a section in the bill of rights,

together with other provisions in the new constitution, renders

it quite probable that the legislature has the right to

enfranchise women without having to amend the organic law. At all

events the new instrument is far more favorable to women than the

old, as will now be shown. The agitation of the question of the

admission of women to the Law College, which began during the

session of the convention, led that body to incorporate the

following provision in the constitution:

ARTICLE II., SEC. 18. No person shall be debarred admission

to any of the collegiate departments of the State University

on account of sex.

Remembering the hard struggle by which the right to practice law

had been secured to women, and the danger of leaving it to the

caprice of future legislatures, Mrs. Gordon drafted a clause

which protects women in all lawful vocations, and by persistent

effort succeeded in getting it inserted in the new constitution,

as follows:

ARTICLE XX., SEC. 18. No person shall, on account of sex, be

disqualified from entering upon or pursuing any lawful

business, vocation or profession.

The adoption of this clause, so valuable to women, was mainly

accomplished by the skillful diplomacy of Hon. Charles S.

Ringgold, delegate from San Francisco, who introduced it in the

convention and worked faithfully for its adoption. Thus

California stands to-day one of the first States in the Union, as

regards the educational, industrial and property rights of women,

and the probability of equal political rights being secured to

them at an early day, is conceded by the most conservative.

About the time Mrs. Foltz and Mrs. Gordon were admitted to the

bar, they, as chief officers of the State W. S. S.

(incorporated), called a convention in San Francisco. It convened

in February, 1880, and was well attended. Mrs. Sargent took an

active part in the meetings, occupied the chair as president _pro

tem._, and subsequently spoke of the work done by the National

Association in Washington. Several prominent officials, unable to

be present, sent letters heartily endorsing our claims; among

these were Governor Perkins, State Senator Chace, and A. M.

Crane, judge of the Superior Court. Addresses were delivered by

Judge Swift, Marian Todd and Mrs. Thorndyke of Los Angeles, Judge

Palmer of Nevada city, and others. The newspapers of the city,

though still hostile to the object of the convention, gave very

fair reports. In September following, the annual meeting of the

society was held, and made particularly interesting by the fact

that the proposed new city charter, which contained a clause

proscriptive of women, was denounced, and a plan of action agreed

upon whereby its defeat should be secured, if possible, at the

coming election. The women worked assiduously against the

adoption of the city charter, and rejoiced to see it rejected by

a large majority.

The following facts in regard to the constitution and statute

laws of California were sent us by the Hon. A. A. Sargent:

In 1879, California adopted a new constitution, by means of

a constitutional convention. It was an unfortunate time for

such organic legislation, for the reason that the State was

rife at the time with the agitation of "sand-lotters," as

they were called, a violent faction which assailed property

rights and demanded extreme concessions to labor. The

balance of power in the constitutional convention was held

by persons elected by this element, and resulted in a

constitution extraordinary in some of its features, but

which was adopted by the people after a fierce contest.

Women fared badly at the hands of these constitution-makers,

so far as suffrage is concerned. Section 1, article 2,

confirms the right of voting to "every native male citizen,"

and "every male naturalized citizen," although a heroic

effort was made by the friends of woman suffrage to keep out

the word "male." But section 18, article XX., provides that

"no person shall, on account of sex, be disqualified from

entering upon or pursuing any lawful business, vocation or

profession."

Some years before, the State had adopted a "civil code,"

which was abreast of the world in liberality to women. This

code discarded the idea of any servility in the relation of

the wife to the husband. This code is still the law, and

provides, in effect, that husband and wife contract toward

each other obligations of mutual respect, fidelity and

support. The husband is the head of the family, and may

choose any reasonable place and mode of life, and the wife

must conform thereto. Neither has any interest in the

property of the other, and neither can be excluded from the

other's dwelling. Either may enter into any engagement or

transaction with the other, or with any other person,

respecting property, which either might if unmarried. They

may hold property as tenants in common or otherwise, with

each other, and with others. All property of the wife owned

by her before marriage, and acquired afterwards by gift,

devise, bequest or descent, with the rents, issues and

profit thereof, is her separate property, and she may convey

the same without his consent. All property acquired after

marriage is community property. The earnings of the wife are

not liable for the debts of the husband. Her earnings, and

those of minor children in her custody, are her separate

property. A married woman may dispose of her separate

property by will, without the consent of her husband, as if

she were single. One-half of the community property goes

absolutely to the wife, on the death of the husband, and

cannot be diverted by his testamentary disposition. A

married woman can carry on business in her own name, on

complying with certain formalities, and her stock, capital

and earnings are not liable to her husband's creditors, or

his intermeddling. The husband and father, as such, has no

rights superior to those of the wife and mother, in regard

to the care, custody, education and control of the children

of their marriage, while such husband and wife live separate

and apart from each other.

The foregoing exhibits the spirit of the California law. It

is believed by friends of woman suffrage that had the

convention been held under normal conditions, the word

"male" might have been eliminated from that instrument.

Several creditable attempts were early made in journalism. In

1855 Mrs. S. M. Clark published the weekly _Contra Costa_ in

Oakland. In 1858, _The Hesperian_, a semi-monthly magazine, was

issued in San Francisco, Mrs. Hermione Day and Mrs. A. M. Shultz,

editors. It was quite an able periodical,[505] and finally passed

into the hands of Elizabeth T. Schenck.

As journalists and printers, women have met with encouraging

success. The most prominent among them is Laura DeForce Gordon,

who began the publication of the _Daily Leader_ at Stockton in

1873, continued afterward at Oakland as the _Daily Democrat_,

until 1878. In Geo. P. Rowell's _Newspaper Reporter_ for 1874,

the _Stockton Leader_ is announced as "the only daily newspaper

in the world edited and published by a woman." Mrs. Boyer, known

as "Dora Darmoor," published different magazines and journals in

San Francisco during a period of several years, the most

successful being the _Golden Dawn_. Mrs. Theresa Corlett has been

connected with various leading journals of San Francisco, and is

well known as a brilliant and interesting writer. Miss Madge

Morris has not only made a place for herself in light literature,

but has been acting-clerk in the legislature for several

sessions. Mrs. Sarah M. Clark published a volume entitled

"Teachings of the Ages"; Mrs. Josephine Wolcott, a volume of

poems, called "The World of Song."

Mrs. Amanda Slocum Reed, one of our most efficient advocates of

suffrage, has proved her executive ability, and capacity for

business, by the management of a large printing and publishing

establishment for several years. The liberal magazine called

_Common Sense_, was published by her and her husband--most of its

original contents the product of her pen; and when the

radicalism of her husband caused the suspension of that journal

in 1878, Mrs. Slocum began the publication of _Roll Call_, a

temperance magazine which was mainly edited by her gifted little

daughter Clara, only fifteen years old, who also set all the

type. Among the earliest printers of California was Lyle Lester.

She established a printing office in San Francisco in 1860, in

which she employed a large number of girls and women as

compositors. Miss Delia Murphy--now Mrs. Dearing--ranks with the

best printers in San Francisco, and several women in various

portions of the State have taken like standing. "Mrs. Richmond &

Son," is the novel sign which decorates the front of a large

printing establishment on Montgomery street, San Francisco, known

for many years as the "Woman's Cooeperative Printing Company," but

which, in fact, was always an individual enterprise. Mrs. Augusta

DeForce Cluff has entered upon her seventh year in practical

journalism as publisher of a sprightly weekly, the _Valley

Review_, at Lodi, in which enterprise she has met with remarkable

success, being a superior business manager as well as a facile

and talented writer. Some of her little poems have great merit.

Mrs. Cluff and Mrs. Gordon have both filled official positions in

the Pacific Coast Press Association. Miss Mary Bogardus, the

gifted young daughter of that pioneer journalist, H. B. Bogardus,

editor of _Figaro_, is her father's main assistant in all the

business of his office. Mrs. Wittingham has been elected

postmaster of the State Senate several terms, and is at present

employed in the U. S. branch mint in San Francisco.

One of the most meritorious and successful enterprises occupying

the attention of the women of California, is the silk culture,

which promises to develop into one of the dominant industries of

the nation. Mrs. G. H. Hittel first brought the subject into

public notice by able articles on the cultivation of the mulberry

tree, published in various journals. In 1880 she formed the

Ladies' Silk Culture Society of California. This association like

its predecessor, the first Woman Suffrage Society, was organized

and held its meetings in private parlors for a time, but it soon

required more room. Men have been taken into membership since the

object for which the society was formed seemed to be feasible,

and, as a natural result, whatever of financial and honorary

reward may be accorded the self-sacrificing women who performed

the arduous and thankless labor of founding the institution, will

be shared with the men who now come into the work.

During the session of the legislature of 1883, a committee was

appointed to ask an appropriation from the State for the purpose

of establishing a Filature or free silk-reeling school. After

considerable delay the committee called to their aid Mrs. Gordon,

and asked her to visit the State capital and see what could be

done. The session was rapidly drawing to a close, and even the

warmest friends of the measure feared that it was too late to

accomplish anything. But happily the bill was got through both

branches of the legislature and sent to the governor the last

hour of the session. By its provisions a State Board of Silk

Culture was created consisting of nine members, five of whom were

to be women, and the sum of $7,500 was appropriated. Thus women

have begun and are now fostering a great industrial enterprise

which in the near future will give to millions of hitherto

unemployed or ill-paid women and children an occupation

peculiarly suited to them, and which will add millions of dollars

annually to the revenue of the country. Mrs. Florence Kimball of

San Diego county was appointed a member of the State Board of

Silk Commissioners by Governor Stoneman in 1883.

Since the expiration of their term as superintendents of the

public schools of the State, Dr. and Mrs. James Carr have made

their home in that loveliest spot of southern

California--Passadena, where, overlooking rich orange groves and

luxurious vineyards, they enjoy the blessings of prosperity, and

where Mrs. Carr, with her ambitious, active nature, finds

congenial employment in demonstrating what woman can accomplish

in silk-culture, raisin-making, and the crystalizing of fruit.

Miss Austen, formerly a teacher in the public schools of San

Francisco, has a vineyard at Fresno, where she employs women and

girls to prepare all her considerable crop of raisins for market,

conceded to be of the best quality produced in the State. Mrs.

Ellen McConnell Wilson of Sacramento county, from the small

beginning, twenty years ago, of 320 acres of land, and less than

1,000 sheep, has now over 5,000 acres of rich farming land and

6,000 sheep. Mrs. H. P. Gregory of Sacramento, left a widow with

a large family of little children, succeeded her husband in the

shipping and commission business in which he was engaged on a

small scale. From such a beginning, Mrs. Gregory has built up one

of the largest trades in that city, and has by judicious

investments in real estate acquired property of a value exceeding

$100,000, besides having reared and educated her numerous family.

Mrs. Elizabeth Hill was one of the early settlers in Calaveras

county, where her husband located land on the Mokelumne river

near Camanche in 1855. Six years after she was left a widow with

four little children. The support of the family devolved upon the

mother, and she engaged in cultivating the land, adding thereto

several hundred acres. In 1877 Mrs. Hill began the cultivation of

the Persian-insect-powder plant, known to commerce as Buhach. So

successful has this venture proved that she has now over 200

acres planted to that shrub, and manufactures each year about

fifteen tons of the Buhach powder, for which she finds a ready

sale. The number of women who have supported their families

(often including the husband), and acquired a competency in

boarding and lodging-house keeping, dressmaking, millinery,

type-setting, painting, fancy work, stock-dealing, and even in

manufacturing and mercantile pursuits, is legion.

In regard to the position of women in medicine, Miss Elizabeth

Sargent, M. D., writes:

Women are admitted on equal terms with men to the medical

and dental departments of the State University, and to the

Cooper Medical College of San Francisco. Women are also

eligible to membership in the State and various county

medical associations, as well as in the dental association.

There are in the State 73 women who have been recognized by

the authorities as qualified to practice. They may be

classified as follows: Practitioners of regular medicine,

30, 16 of whom are established in San Francisco; eclectics,

22, 9 in San Francisco; homoeopathists, 21, 2 in San

Francisco. Among these physicians two make a specialty of

the eye and ear, one in San Francisco and one in San Jose.

Two women have been graduated from the State Dental College,

located in San Francisco. In April, 1875, the Pacific

Dispensary Hospital for women and children was founded by

women. In 1881 a training-school for nurses was added. The

hospital department, although admitting women, is intended

especially for children, and is the only children's hospital

on the coast. The dispensary is for out-patients, both women

and children. The board of ten directors, the resident and

attending physicians of the hospital, and five out of the

seven connected with the dispensary are women. From a small

beginning the institution has increased to importance, and

bids fair to continue in its present prosperity and capacity

for good work. I have written thus lengthily that you may

see how energetic our women have been in originating and

carrying on such an institution.

The most prominent literary woman of the coast is undoubtedly

Miss M. W. Shinn. She is a graduate of our State University and

was the medal scholar of her class. At present she is the editor

of the _Overland Monthly_, and the excellent prospects of the

magazine are largely the result of her own courage and the hard

work she has done.

The higher education in the State is being put upon a secure

basis. Hon. Leland Stanford and his wife, Jane Lathrop Stanford,

have recently given a great part of their vast fortune for the

establishment of a university which bids fair to be the foremost

educational institution on the continent. In a letter specifying

his views in regard to the management of the university, Governor

Stanford says:

We deem it of the first importance that the education of

both sexes shall be equally full and complete, varied only

as nature dictates. The rights of one sex, political and

other, are the same as those of the other sex, and this

equality of rights ought to be fully recognized.

There are many men and women throughout the State who have

faithfully advocated political equality for all citizens.[506]

Mendocino county has the honor of claiming as a citizen, one of

the earliest and ablest women in this reform, Clarina Howard

Nichols, who may be said to have sown the seeds of liberty in

three States in which she has resided, Vermont, Kansas and

California. Since 1870, her home has been with a son in Pomo,

where she finished her heroic life January 11, 1885. Though

always in rather straitened circumstances, Mrs. Nichols was

uniformly calm and cheerful, living in an atmosphere above the

petty annoyances of every-day life with the great souls of our

day and generation, keeping time in the march of progress. She

was too much absorbed in the vital questions of the hour even to

take note of her personal discomforts. Many of her able articles

published in magazines and the journals of the day, and letters

from year to year to our conventions, were written in such

conditions of weakness and suffering, as only a hero could have

overcome. She was a good writer, an effective speaker, and a

preeminently brave woman, gifted with that rarest of all virtues,

common sense.

The advocacy of woman's rights began in Santa Cruz county, with

the advent of that grand champion of her sex, the immortal Eliza

Farnham, who braved public scorn and contumely because of her

advanced views, for many years before the suffrage movement

assumed organized form. Mrs. Farnham's work rendered it possible

for those advocating woman suffrage years later, to do so with

comparative immunity from public ridicule. A society was

organized there in 1869, and Rev. D. G. Ingraham, E. B. Heacock,

H. M. Blackburn, Mrs. Georgiana Bruce Kirby, Mrs. Van

Valkenburgh, W. W. Broughton and wife, and Mrs. Jewell were

active members.

Prominent in Santa Clara county is Mrs. Sarah Wallis of Mayfield.

From the first agitation of the subject in 1868, when she entered

heartily into the work of getting subscribers to _The

Revolution_, she has been untiring in her efforts to advance the

interests of women. A lady of fine presence, great energy and

perseverance, Mrs. Wallis has been able to accomplish great good

for her sex. With a large separate estate, when the statutes

prevented her as a married woman from managing it, she determined

that the laws should be changed, and never ceased her efforts

until she succeeded in getting an amendment to the civil code

which enables married women to make contracts. The most

successful suffrage meetings ever held in Santa Clara county have

been at Mayfield. There Mrs. Wallis and her husband, Judge Joseph

S. Wallace, make their spacious and luxurious home the rendezvous

of lecturers and writers in the great work of woman's

emancipation.

Mrs. Sarah Knox Goodrich of San Jose, was among the first to see

the significance of the movement for woman's rights in 1868. Her

husband, William J. Knox, who shortly before his death had been

State senator, secured the passage of a bill, drafted by himself,

giving to married women the right to dispose of their own

separate property by will. Having been from her youth the

cherished companion of a man who believed in the equality of the

sexes, and being herself a thoughtful, clear-headed person, she

naturally took her place with those whose aim was the social and

political emancipation of woman, and has stood from the first a

tower of strength in this cause, giving largely of her wealth for

the propagation of its doctrines. Mrs. Knox Goodrich has for many

years paid her taxes, sometimes exorbitant, under protest, and at

important elections has also offered her vote, to have it

refused. The county suffrage society has had an untiring leader

in Mrs. Goodrich, and on all occasions she has nerved the weak

and encouraged the timid by her example of unflinching devotion.

The following extracts from a letter written by the lady will

show how effective her work has been:

In 1872, our society was invited to take part in the Fourth

of July celebration, which we did, and had the handsomest

carriages and more of them than any other society in the

procession. We paid our own expenses, although the city had

made an appropriation for the celebration. In 1876 we were

not invited to take part in the festivities, but some of us

felt that on such a day, our centennial anniversary, we

should not be ignored. Accordingly I started out to see what

could be done, but finding some of our most active friends

ill and others absent from home, I decided to do what I

could alone. I had mottoes from the grand declarations of

the Fathers painted and put on my house, which the

procession would pass on two sides.

Some of our most prominent ladies seeing that I was

determined to make a manifestation, drove with me in the

procession, our carriage and horses decorated with flags,

the ladies wearing sashes of red, white and blue, and

bearing banners with mottoes and evergreens. A little

daughter of Mrs. Clara Foltz, the lawyer, dressed in red,

white and blue, was seated in the center of the carriage,

carrying a white banner with silver fringe, a small flag at

the top with a silver star above that, with streamers of

red, white and blue floating from it, and in the center, in

letters large enough to be seen some distance, the one word

"Hope." On my flag the motto was: "We are Taxed without

being Represented"; Mrs. Maria H. Weldon's, "We are the

disfranchised Class"; Mrs. Marion Hooker's, "The Class

entitled to respectful Consideration"; and Miss Hannah

Millard's, "We are governed without our Consent." On the

front of my house in large letters was the motto: "Taxation

without Representation is Tyranny as much in 1876, as it was

in 1776"; on the other side was, "We are Denied the Ballot,

but Compelled to Pay Taxes"; fronting the other side was,

"Governments Derive their Just Powers from the Consent of

the Governed." Mrs. McKee also had the last motto on her

house. On the evening of July 3, after we had all our

preparations completed, we sent to one of the marshals and

asked him to give us a place in the procession _next to the

negroes_, as we wished to let our legal protectors have a

practical illustration of the position occupied by their

mothers, wives, sisters and daughters in this boasted

republic. We _did_ want to go in, however, _ahead of the

Chinamen_, as we considered our position at present to be

between the two. The marshal willingly assigned us a place,

but not the one we desired. "We cannot allow you," said he,

"to occupy such a position. You must go in front, next to

the Pioneer Association"; and being in part members of that

society we accepted the decision. Our carriage was the

center of attraction. Many, after reading our mottoes, said:

"Well, ladies, we will help you to get your rights"; "It is

a shame for you to be taxed and not have the right to vote."

Hundreds of people stood and read the mottoes on the house,

making their comments, both grave and gay: "Good for Mrs.

Knox"; "She is right"; "If I were in her place I would never

pay a tax"; "I guess one of the strong-minded lives here."

Mrs. Knox was married to Mr. Goodrich, the well-known architect,

in 1878, in whom she has found a grand, noble-souled companion,

fully in sympathy with all her progressive views, and with whom

she is passing the advancing years of her well-spent life in

luxury and unalloyed happiness.

Mrs. Van Valkenburg tried to vote under the claim that the

fourteenth amendment to the Constitution of the United States

entitled her to registration, and being refused, brought suit

against the registrars. The case was decided against her after

being carried to the Supreme Court of California. These cases

argued in the Supreme Court have been of inestimable value in the

progress of the movement, lifting the question of woman's rights

as a citizen above the mists of ridicule and prejudice, into the

region of reason and constitutional law. We cannot too highly

appreciate the bravery and persistence of the few women who have

furnished these test cases and compelled the highest courts to

record their decisions.

FOOTNOTES:

[496] Having spent several days with Mrs. Schenck, in her cozy,

artistic home surrounded with a hedge of brilliant geraniums, I can

readily testify to the many virtues and attractions her large

circle of friends has always accorded her. From all I had heard I

was prepared to find Mrs. Schenck a woman of remarkable cultivation

and research, and I was not disappointed. Refined, honorable in her

feeling, clear in her judgments of men and measures, just and

upright In all her words and actions, she was indeed the fitting

leader for the uprising of women on the Pacific Slope. The

preparation of this chapter occupied the last year of her life, her

one wish to live was to complete the task, but when her failing

powers made that impossible she charged her friend Mrs. Manning,

with whom she resided, to take up the work that had fallen from her

hands and make a fair record of all that had been done and said, by

her noble coaedjutors, who had labored so faithfully to inaugurate

the greatest reform of the century.--[E. C. S.

[497] Among them are Laura Fowler, Kate Kennedy, Mary N. Wadleigh,

Trinity County; Anna L. Spencer, Alpine; Mrs. D. M. Coleman,

Shasta; Miss A. L. Irish, Mono; Los Angeles City Board of Education

has three women out of its five members, to-wit., Mrs. C. B. Jones

(chairman), Mrs. M. A. Hodgkins (secretary), Mrs. M. Graham.

Oakland Board, Miss A. Aldrich; Sacramento, Charlotte Slater; San

Jose, Mrs. B. L. Hollenbeck. Sister Mary Frances of the order of

"Sisters of Charity" came to California in 1849, and devoted her

great energies, and rare accomplishments, to the cause of education

up to the time of her demise in April, 1881. Annie Haven, Miss

Prince, Miss Austin, and a host of others have been successful in

the same field of labor, including Miss Merweidel, founder of the

kindergarten system in San Francisco.

[498] Among them were Mrs. Sarah Wallis of Mayfield, Mrs. E. T.

Schenck, Mrs. L. M. Clarke, Emily Pitts (afterwards Mrs. Stevens of

San Francisco).

[499] _President_, Elizabeth T. Schenck; _Vice-President_,

Emily Pitts Stevens; _Recording Secretary_, Mrs. Hutchinson;

_Corresponding Secretary_, Mrs. Celia Curtis; _Treasurer_, Mrs. S.

J. Corbett.

[500] The following persons were present: Mrs. E. T. Schenck,

president of Woman Suffrage Associasion of San Francisco; Mrs. E.

Pitts Stevens, Mrs. Celia Curtis, Mrs. Walton, Mrs. Watson, Mrs. S.

J. Corbett, M. D.; Mary Collins, Mrs. E. P. Meade, M. D.; Mrs.

Alpheus Bull, Mrs. James S. Bush, Mrs. S. M. Clarke, Mrs. Judge

Shafter, Mrs. Judge Burke, Mrs. Thomas Varney, Mrs. R. B. Swain,

Mrs. Carlton Curtis, Mrs. T. Richardson, Mrs. I. W. Hobson, Mrs.

Smythe, Mrs. J. W. Stow, Mrs. C. G. Ames, Mrs. Barry and 30 others.

[501] Rev. C. G. Ames, San Francisco; Mrs. S. S. Allyn, Oakland;

Mrs. Sarah Wallis, Mayfield; Mrs. Bowman, Sacramento; Mrs.

Georgiana Bruce Kirby, Santa Cruz; Mrs. Fannie Kingsbury, San

Diego; Mrs. Elmira Eddy, Nevada; Mrs. A. A. Haskell, Petaluma;

Minnie H. McKee, Santa Clara.

[502] See Appendix to California chapter.

[503] At the close of the convention a State society was organized,

with the following officers: _President_, Mrs. A. A. Haskell of

Petaluma; _Vice-Presidents_, Mrs. J. W. McComb of San Francisco,

Mrs. Denio of Solano, Mrs. Kingsbury of San Diego, Mrs. E. J. Hall

of Los Angeles, Mrs. Eddy of Nevada, Mrs. Lewis of Sacramento, Mrs.

Kirby of Santa Cruz, Mrs. Agnes Eager of Alameda, Mrs. Watkins of

Santa Clara, Mrs. L. D. Latimer of Sonoma; _Secretary_, Mrs. Minnie

McKee of Santa Clara. _Board of Control_, Mrs. C. H. Spear, Mrs. C.

G. Ames, Mrs. Minnie Edwards, Mrs. Celia Curtis, Miss Laura Fowler,

Mr. John A. Collins, Miss Kate Atkinson, Mrs. Pitts Stevens.

[504] Mrs. Kingsbury of San Diego, Mrs. H. F. M. Brown, Addie L.

Ballou, Paulina Roberts, Mrs. C. H. Spear, Laura Cuppy Smith, Mrs.

F. A. Logan, M. D., Mrs. C. M. Churchill, John A. Collins, and a

large number of local speakers, who aided in organizing societies,

or in keeping up the interest in those already formed.

[505] Chief among its contributors were Eliza W. Farnham, Sarah M.

Clark, Amanda Simonton Page, Mrs. M. D. Strong, Fanny Green, Annie

K. Fader, Eliza A. Pittsinger, Mrs. James Neal, Mrs. Elizabeth

Williams.

[506] Among the many who have been active and faithful in the

movement for the political rights of women, whose names should be

mentioned, are: Mrs. Eliza Taylor, Mrs. O. Fuller, Elizabeth

McComb, Dr. Laura P. Williams, Mrs. Dr. White, Sallie Hart, Dr. R.

H. McDonald, Hon. Frank Pixley, and many others in _San Francisco_;

Fanny Green McDougal, _Oakland_; Mrs. Phebe Benedict, _Antioch_;

Mrs. Isabella Irwin, _San Rafael_; Mrs. Cynthia Palmer, Mrs. Emily

Rolfe, _Nevada City_; Mrs. Elizabeth Condy, _Stockton_; Miss E. S.

Sleeper, _Mountain View_; Mrs. Laura J. Watkins, Mrs. Damon, _Santa

Clara_; Mrs. Dr. Kilpatrick, _San Mateo_; Mrs. S. G. Waterhouse,

Drs. Kellogg and Bearby, Mrs. M. J. Young, Mrs. E. B. Crocker, and

others, _Sacramento_; Mrs. Mary Jewett, Mr. and Mrs. Howell,

_Healdsburgh_; Mrs. Lattimer, _Windsor_; Mr. and Mrs. Denio, Mrs.

E. L. Hale, _Vallejo_; Mrs. J. Lewellyn, Mrs. Potter, _St. Helena_;

Mr. and Mrs. J. Egglesson, _Napa_; Henry and Abigail Bush,

_Martinez_; Rowena Granice Steele, _Merced_; Mrs. Jennie Phelps

Purvis, Mrs. Lapham and daughter, _Modesto_.

CHAPTER LIV.

THE PACIFIC NORTHWEST.

The Long Marches Westward--Abigail Scott Duniway--Mary Olney

Brown--The First Steps in Oregon--Col. C. A. Reed--Judge G. W.

Lawson--1870--The New Northwest, 1871--Campaign, Mrs. Duniway and

Miss Anthony--They Address the Legislature in Washington

Territory--Hon. Elwood Evans--Suffrage Society Organized at

Olympia and at Portland--Before the Oregon Legislature--Donation

Land Act--Hon. Samuel Corwin's Suffrage Bill--Married Woman's

_Sole_ Traders' Bill--Temperance Alliance--Women Rejected--Major

Williams Fights their Battles and Triumphs--Mrs. H. A.

Loughary--Progressive Legislation, 1874--Mob-Law in Jacksonville,

1879--Dr. Mary A. Thompson--Constitutional Convention,

1878--Woman Suffrage Bill, 1880--Hon. W. C. Fulton--Women

Enfranchised in Washington Territory, Nov. 15, 1883--Great

Rejoicing, Bonfires, Ratification Meetings--Constitutional

Amendment Submitted in Oregon and Lost, June, 1884--Suffrage by

Legislative Enactment Lost--Fourth of July Celebrated at

Vancouvers--Benjamin and Mary Olney Brown--Washington

Territory--Legislation in 1867-68 Favorable to Women--Mrs. Brown

Attempts to Vote and is Refused--Charlotte Olney French--Women

Vote at Grand Mound and Black River Precincts,

1870--Retrogressive Legislation, 1871--Abby H. Stuart in

Land-Office--Hon. William H. White--Idaho and Montana.

In the spring of 1852, when the great _furor_ for going West was at

its height, in the long trails of miners, merchants and farmers

wending their way in ox-carts and canvas-covered wagons over the

vast plains, mountains and rivers, two remarkable women, then in

the flush of youth, might have been seen; one, Abigail Scott

Duniway, destined to leave an indelible mark on the civilization of

Oregon, and the other, Mary Olney Brown, on that of Washington

territory. What ideas were revolving in these young minds in that

long journey of 3,000 miles, six months in duration, it would be

difficult to imagine, but the love of liberty had been infused in

their dreams somewhere, either in their eastern homes from the

tragic scenes of the anti-slavery conflict, or on that perilous

march amidst those eternal solitudes by day and the solemn

stillness of the far-off stars in the gathering darkness. That this

long communion with great nature left its impress on their young

hearts and sanctified their lives to the best interests of humanity

at large, is clearly seen in the deeply interesting accounts they

give of their endeavors to mould the governments of their

respective territories on republican principles. Writing of herself

and her labors, Mrs. Duniway says:

I was born in Pleasant Grove, Tazewell county, Illinois, October

22, 1834, of the traditional "poor but respectable parentage"

which has honored the advent of many a more illustrious worker

than myself. Brought up on a farm and familiar from my earliest

years with the avocations of rural life, spending the early

spring-times in the maple-sugar camp, the later weeks in

gardening and gathering stove-wood, the summers in picking and

spinning wool, and the autumns in drying apples, I found little

opportunity, and that only in winter, for books or play. My

father was a generous-hearted, impulsive, talented, but

uneducated man; my mother was a conscientious, self-sacrificing,

intelligent, but uneducated woman. Both were devotedly religious,

and both believed implicitly that self-abnegation was the crowing

glory of womanhood. Before I was seventeen I was employed as a

district school teacher, received a first-class certificate and

taught with success, though how I became possessed of the

necessary qualifications I to this day know not. I never did,

could, or would study when at school.

In the spring of 1852 my father decided to emigrate to Oregon. My

invalid mother expostulated in vain; she and nine of us children

were stowed away in ox-wagons, where for six months we made our

home, cooking food and washing dishes around camp-fires, sleeping

at night in the wagons, and crossing many streams upon

wagon-beds, rigged as ferryboats. When our weary line of march

had reached the Black Hills of Wyoming my mother became a victim

to the dreadful epidemic, cholera, that devastated the emigrant

trains in that never-to-be-forgotten year, and after a few hours'

illness her weary spirit was called to the skies. We made her a

grave in the solitudes of the eternal hills, and again took up

our line of march, "too sad to talk, too dumb to pray." But ten

weeks after, our Willie, the baby, was buried in the sands of the

Burnt River mountains. Reaching Oregon in the fall with our

broken household, consisting of my father and eight motherless

children, I engaged in school-teaching till the following August,

when I allowed the name of "Scott" to become "Duniway." Then for

twenty years I devoted myself, soul and body, to the cares,

toils, loves and hopes of a conscientious wife and mother. Five

sons and one daughter have been born to us, all of whom are

living and at home, engaged with their parents in harmonious

efforts for the enfranchisement of women.

The first woman suffrage society ever formed in Oregon, was

organized in Salem, the capital of the State, in the autumn of

1870, and consisted of about a dozen members. Col. C. A. Reed was

chosen president and G. W. Lawson, secretary. This little society

which maintained a quiescent existence for a year or more and

then disbanded without ceremony, was, in part, the basis of all

subsequent work of its character in Oregon. In the winter of 1871

this society honored me with credentials to a seat in the woman

suffrage convention which was to meet in San Francisco the

following May. My business called me to the Golden City before

the time for the convention, and a telegraphic summons compelled

me to return to Oregon without meeting with the California

Association in an official way, as I had hoped. But my

credentials introduced me to the San Francisco leaders, among

whom Emily Pitts Stevens occupied a prominent position as editor

and publisher of the _The Pioneer_, the first woman suffrage

paper that appeared on the Pacific coast. Before returning to

Oregon I resolved to purchase an outfit and begin the publication

of a newspaper myself, as I felt that the time had come for

vigorous work in my own State, and we had no journal in which the

demands of women for added rights were treated with respectful

consideration.

[Illustration: "Yours for Liberty, Abigail Scott Duniway"]

Soon after reaching my home in Albany I sold my millinery store

and removed to Portland, where, on May 5, 1871, the _New

Northwest_ made its appearance, and a siege of the citadels of a

one-sexed government began, which at this writing is going on

with unabated persistency. The first issue of this journal was

greeted by storms of ridicule. Everybody prophesied its early

death, and my personal friends regarded the enterprise with

sincere pity, believing it would speedily end in financial

disaster. But the paper, in spite of opposition and burlesque,

has grown and prospered.

In August, 1871, Susan B. Anthony favored Oregon and Washington

territory with a visit. The fame of this veteran leader had

preceded her, and she commanded a wide hearing. We traveled

together over the country, visiting inland villages as well as

larger towns, holding woman suffrage meetings and getting many

subscribers for the _New Northwest_. During these journeyings I

became quite thoroughly initiated into the movement and made my

first efforts at public speaking. After a six weeks' campaign in

Oregon, we went to Olympia, the capital of Washington territory,

where the legislature was in session, and where, through a motion

of Hon. Elwood Evans, we were invited to address the Assembly in

advocacy of equal rights for all the people. From Olympia we

proceeded to Victoria, a border city belonging to a woman's

government, where we found that the idea of the ballot for woman

was even more unpopular than in the United States, though all, by

strange inconsistency, were intensely loyal to their queen. After

an interesting and profitable experience in the British

possessions we returned to Puget Sound, stopping over on our

route at the different milling towns that teem with busy life

upon the evergreen shores of this Mediterranean of the Pacific.

At Seaettle we organized an association[507] in which many of the

leading ladies and gentlemen took a prominent part; after which

we returned to Olympia, where a territorial organization was

effected.[508]

Returning to Portland, we called a convention, and organized the

Oregon State Woman Suffrage Association, with Harriet W.

Williams, a venerated octogenarian, president. This estimable

woman had been one of the earliest leaders of the woman suffrage

movement in the State of New York, and her presence at the head

of our meetings in Oregon was a source of genuine satisfaction to

the friends of the cause in the new State of her adoption.

Subsequently, Mrs. Williams was compelled to resign on account of

increasing infirmities, but her wise counsels are still cherished

by her successors, whom she regards with motherly solicitude as

she serenely awaits the final summons of the unseen messenger.

Many of those who early distinguished themselves in this

connection deserve special mention because of their

long-continued zeal in the work.[509] If others failed us, these

were always ready to work the hardest when the fight was hottest.

And whatever might be our differences of opinion personally, we

have always presented an unbroken phalanx to the foe. The

original society at Salem having disbanded, its members joined

the new State Association organized at Portland, which has ever

since been regarded as the nucleus of all our activities.

In September of 1872, I visited the Oregon legislature, where I

went clothed by our association with discretionary power to do

what I could to secure special legislation for the women of the

State, who, with few exceptions, were at that time entirely under

the dominion of the old common law. The exceptions were those

fortunate women who, having come to Oregon as early as 1850 and

'52, had, by virtue of a United States law, known as the Oregon

Donation Land Act, become possessed of "claims," as they were

called, on equal shares with their husbands, their half, or

halves, of the original ground being set apart as their separate

property in realty and _fee simple_. This Donation Land Act

deserves especial mention, it being the first law enacted in the

United States which recognized the individual personality of a

married woman. It became a temporary law of congress in 1850,

mainly through the efforts of Hon. Samuel R. Thurston, delegate

from Oregon territory (which at that time included the whole of

Washington territory), aided by the eminent Dr. Linn of Missouri,

from whom one of the principal counties of the State of Oregon

derives its name.

My first experience in the capitol was particularly trying. I

spent two days among my acquaintances in Salem in a vain attempt

to find a woman who was ready or willing to accompany me to the

state-house. All were anxious that I should go, but each was

afraid to offend her husband, or make herself conspicuous, by

going herself. Finally, when I had despaired of securing company,

and had nerved myself to go alone, Mary P. Sawtelle, who

afterwards became a physician, and now resides in San Francisco

where she has a lucrative practice, volunteered to stand by me,

and together we entered the dominion hitherto considered sacred

to the aristocracy of sex, and took seats in the lobby, our

hearts beating audibly. Hon. Joseph Engle, perceiving the

innovation and knowing me personally, at once arose, and, after a

complimentary speech in which he was pleased to recognize my

position as a journalist, moved that I be invited to a seat

within the bar and provided with table and stationery as were

other members of the profession. The motion carried, with only

two or three dissenting votes; and the way was open from that

time forward for women to compete with men on equal terms for all

minor positions in both branches of the legislature--a privilege

they have not been slow to avail themselves of, scores of them

thronging the capitol in these later years, and holding valuable

clerkships, many of them sneering the while at the efforts of

those who opened the way for them to be there at all.

Hon. Samuel Corwin introduced a woman suffrage bill in the House

of Representatives early in the session; and while it was

pending, I was invited to make an appeal in its behalf, of which

I remember very little, so frightened and astonished was I,

except that once I inadvertently alluded to a gentleman by his

name instead of his county, whereupon, being called to order, I

blushed and begged pardon, but put myself at ease by informing

the gentlemen that in all the bygone years while they had been

studying parliamentary rules, I had been rocking the cradle.

One member who had made a vehement speech against the bill, in

which he had declared that no respectable woman in his county

desired the elective franchise, became particularly incensed, as

was natural, upon my exhibiting a woman suffrage petition signed

by the women he had misrepresented, and headed, _mirabile dictu_,

by the name of his own wife! The so-called representative of

women lost his temper, and gave vent to some inelegant

expletives, for which he was promptly reprimanded by the chair.

This offender has since been many times a candidate for office,

but the ladies of his district have always secured his defeat.

The woman suffrage bill received an unexpectedly large vote at

this session, and was favored in 1874 by a still larger one, when

it was ably championed by Hon. C. A. Reed, the before named

ex-president of the first woman suffrage society in the State.

In 1872 the Senate, the House concurring, passed a Married

Woman's Sole Trader bill, under the able leadership of Hon. J. N.

Dolph, who has since distinguished himself as our champion in the

Senate of the United States. This bill has ever since enabled any

woman engaged in business on her own account to register the fact

in the office of the county clerk, and thereby secure her tools,

furniture, or stock in trade against the liability of seizure by

her husband's creditors.

Perhaps I cannot better illustrate the general feeling of

opposition to women having a place in public affairs at that

time, than by describing the scenes in the State Temperance

Alliance in February of that year, when somebody placed my name

in nomination as chairman of an important committee. The

presiding officer was seized with a sudden deafness when the

nomination was made, and the Alliance was convulsed with

merriment. Ladies on all sides buzzed about me, and urged me to

resent the insult in the name of womanhood. And, as none of them

were at that time public speakers, I felt obliged to rise and

speak for myself.

"Mr. President," I exclaimed, "by what right do you refuse to

recognize women when their names are called? Are men the only

lawful members of this Alliance? And if so, is it not better for

the women delegates to go home?"

"Mr. President: The committees are now full!" shouted an excited

voter. Somebody, doubtless in ridicule, then nominated me as

vice-president-at-large, which was carried amid uproarious

merriment. I took my seat, half frightened and wholly indignant;

and the deliberations of the sovereign voters were undisturbed

for several hours thereafter by word or sign from women. At last

they got to discussing a bill for a prohibitory liquor law, and

the heat of debate ran high. During the excitement somebody

carried a note to the presiding officer, who read it, smiled,

colored, and rising, said: "We are hearing nothing from the

ladies, and yet they constitute a large majority of this

Alliance. Mrs. Duniway, will you not favor us with a speech?"

I was taken wholly by surprise, but sprang to my feet and said:

"Mr. President: I have always wondered what it was that consumed

so much time in men's conventions. I hope gentlemen will pardon

the criticism, but you talk too much, and too many of you try to

talk at once. My head is aching from the roar and din of your

noisy orators. Gentlemen, what does it all amount to? You are

talking about prohibition, but you overestimate your political

strength. Disastrous failures attend upon all your endeavors to

conquer existing evils by the votes of men alone. Give women the

legal power to combat intemperance, and they will soon be able to

prove that they do not like drunken husbands any better than men

like drunken wives. Make women _free_. Give them the power the

ballot gives to you, and the control of their own earnings which

rightfully belong to them, and every woman will be able to settle

this prohibition business in her own home and on her own account.

Men will not tolerate drunkenness in their wives; and women will

not tolerate it in husbands unless compelled to."

A prominent clergyman arose, and said: "Mr. President: I charge

the sins of the world upon the mothers of men. There are twenty

thousand fallen women in New York--two millions of them in

America. We cannot afford to let this element vote." Before I was

aware of what I was doing I was on my feet again. Shaking my

finger at the clergymen, I exclaimed: "How _dare_ you make such

charges against the mothers of men? You tell us of two millions

of fallen women who, you say, would vote for drunkenness; but

what say you, sir, to the twenty millions of fallen men--all

voters--whose patronage alone enables fallen women to live? Would

you disfranchise them, sir? I pronounce your charge a libel upon

womanhood, and I know that if we were voters you would not _dare_

to utter it."

A gentleman from Michigan--Mr. Curtis--called me to order, saying

my remarks were personal. "You, sir, sat still and didn't call

this man to order while he stood up and insulted all womanhood!"

I exclaimed, vehemently. "Prohibition is the question before the

house," said the gentleman, "and the lady should confine herself

to the resolution." "That is what I am doing, sir. I am talking

about prohibition, and the only way possible to make it succeed."

The chair sustained me amid cries of "good!" "good!" but I had

become too thoroughly self-conscious by this time to be able to

say anything further, and, with a bow to the chairman whom I had

before forgotten to address, I tremblingly took my seat.

A resolution was passed, after a long and stormy debate,

declaring it the duty of the legislature to empower women to vote

on all questions connected with the liquor traffic; and I, as its

author, was chosen a committee to present the same for

consideration at the coming legislative session. Woman suffrage

gained a new impetus all over the Northwest through this victory.

Everybody congratulated its advocates, and the good minister who

had unwittingly caused the commotion seized the first opportunity

to explain that he had always been an advocate of the cause. I

was by this time so thoroughly advertised by the abuse of the

press that I had no difficulty in securing large audiences in all

parts of the Pacific Northwest.

I was chosen in April, 1872, as delegate to the annual meeting of

the National Association, held in New York the following month.

Horace Greeley received the nomination for the presidency at the

Cincinnati Liberal Republican Convention while I was on the way;

and when I reached New York I at first threw what influence I had

in the Association in favor of the great editor. But Miss

Anthony, who knew Mr. Greeley better than I did, caused me to be

appointed chairman of a committee to interview the reputed

statesman and officially report the result at the evening

session. Miss Anthony and Mrs. Jane Graham Jones of Chicago were

the other members of this committee. We obtained the desired

interview, of which it only needs to be said that it became my

humiliating duty to ask pardon in the evening for the speech in

advocacy of the illustrious candidate which in my ignorance I had

made in the morning. That Mr. Greeley owed his defeat in part to

the opposition of women in that memorable campaign, I have never

doubted. But he builded better than he knew in earlier years, for

he planted many a tree of liberty that shall live through the

ages to come, overshadowing in a measure his failure to recognize

the divine right of political equality for woman in his later

days.

The first annual convention of the Oregon State Association met

in Portland, February 9, 1873. Many ladies and several

gentlemen[510] of more or less local prominence assisted at this

convention, but we were able to prevail upon but one gentleman,

Col. C. A. Reed of Salem, to occupy the platform with us. This

convention received favorable notice from the respectable press

of the State, and was largely attended by the best elements of

the city and country. Delegates were chosen to attend the

forthcoming State Temperance Alliance which held its second

annual meeting February 20, and to which a dozen of us went

bearing credentials. It was evident from the first that trouble

was brewing. The enemy had had a whole year to prepare an

ambuscade of which our party had no suspicion. A Committee on

Credentials was appointed with instructions to rule the woman

suffrage delegation out of the Alliance as a "disturbing

element." Hon J. Quinn Thornton was chairman of that committee.

In his report he declared all delegations to be satisfactory

(including those from the penitentiary) except the women whom he

styled "setting hens," "belligerent females," etc., after which

he subsided with pompous gravity. All eyes were turned upon me,

and I felt as I fancy a general must when the success or failure

of an army in battle depends upon his word. "Mr. President," I

exclaimed, as soon as I could get the floor, "I move to so amend

the report of the committee as to admit the suffrage delegation."

The motion was seconded by a half-dozen voices. Then followed a

scene which beggars description. It was pandemonium broken loose.

When I arose again to address the chair that worthy ordered my

arrest by the sergeant-at-arms, saying: "Take that crazy woman

out of the house and take care of her." The officer came forward

in discharge of his duty, but he quailed before my uplifted

pencil, and several gentlemen stepped into the aisle and began

drawing off their coats to defend me, among them a veteran

minister of the gospel. I smiled and bowed my thanks, and as

nobody could hear a word amid the uproar I complacently took my

seat while the officer skulked away, crestfallen. All that day

and evening, and until one o'clock the next afternoon, a noisy

rabble of self-styled temperance men sought to prevent bringing

the question to a square and honorable vote. Major George

Williams, a brave man who had lost a limb in fighting for his

country, at last succeeded in wearying the chairman into a

semblance of duty. The result was a triumph for the advocates of

suffrage. A recess was then taken, during which my hand was so

often and enthusiastically shaken that my shoulder was severely

lamed. The first thing in order after resuming business was my

report as Legislative Committee. I advanced to the platform amid

deafening cheers and, as soon as I could make myself heard, said,

in substance, that the legislature had decided that it was an

insult to womanhood to grant women the right to vote on

intemperance and debar them from voting on all honorable

questions. I then offered a fair and unequivocal woman suffrage

resolution, which was triumphantly carried. The disappointed

minority seceded from the Alliance and set up a "Union" for

themselves; but their confederacy did not live long, and its few

followers finally returned to their _alma mater_ and gave us no

further trouble.

Woman suffrage associations were formed in several counties

during the year 1874. Our strength was now much increased by the

able assistance of Mrs. H. A. Loughary, who suddenly took her

place in the front rank as a platform speaker. The editorial work

of the _New Northwest_ received a valuable auxiliary in June of

this year in the person of Catharine A. Coburn, a lady of rare

journalistic ability, who held her position five years, when my

sons, W. S., H. R. and W. C. Duniway, having completed their

school duties and attained their majority, were admitted to

partnership in the business. Mrs. Coburn now holds a situation on

the editorial staff of the _Daily Oregonian_.

In the autumn of 1876 I was absent at the Centennial Exposition,

whither I had gone in the summer in response to an invitation

from the National Woman Suffrage Association to "Come over into

Macedonia and help." The work for equal rights made favorable

headway in the legislature of Oregon that year through the

influence of a convention held at Salem under the able leadership

of Mrs. H. A. Loughary and Dr. Mary A. Thompson.

In June, 1878, a convention met in Walla Walla, Washington

territory, for the purpose of forming a constitution for the

proposed new State of Washington, and in compliance with the

invitation of many prominent women of the territory I visited the

convention and was permitted to present a memorial in person,

praying that the word "male" be omitted from the fundamental law

of the incubating State. But my plea (like that of Abigail Adams

a century before) failed of success, through a close vote

however--it stood 8 to 7--and men went on as before, saying, as

they did in the beginning: "Women do not wish to vote. If they

desire the ballot let them ask for it." In September of that year

I was again at my post in the Oregon legislature circulating the

_New Northwest_ among the law-makers, and doing what else I could

to keep the cause before them in a manner to enlist their

confidence and command their respect. An opportunity was given me

at this session to make an extended argument upon constitutional

liberty before a joint convention of the two Houses, which

occupied an hour in delivery and was accorded profound attention.

I was much opposed to the growing desire of the legislature to

shirk its responsibility upon the voters at large by submitting a

proposed constitutional amendment to them when the constitution

nowhere prohibits women from voting, and I labored to show that

all we need is a declaratory act extending to us the franchise

under the existing fundamental law. Dr. Mary A. Thompson followed

in a brief speech and was courteously received. The Married

Woman's Property bill, passed in 1874, received some necessary

amendments at this session, and an act entitling women to vote

upon school questions and making them eligible to school offices,

was passed by a triumphant majority.

I went to Southern Oregon in 1879, and while sojourning in

Jacksonville was assailed with a shower of eggs (since known in

that section as "Jacksonville arguments") and was also burned in

effigy on a principal street after the sun went down.

Jacksonville is an old mining town, beautifully situated in the

heart of the Southern Oregon mountains, and has no connection

with the outside world except through the daily stagecoaches. Its

would-be leading men are old miners or refugees from the

bushwhacking district whence they were driven by the civil war.

The taint of slavery is yet upon them and the methods of

border-ruffians are their hearts' delight. It is true that there

are many good people among them, but they are often over-awed by

the lawless crowd whose very instincts lead them to oppose a

republican form of government. But that raid of the outlaws

proved a good thing for the woman suffrage movement. It aroused

the better classes, and finally shamed the border ruffians by its

own reaection. When I returned to Portland a perfect ovation

awaited me. Hundreds of men and women who had not before allied

themselves with the movement made haste to do so. The newspapers

were filled with severe denunciations of the mob, and

"Jackson-villains," as the perpetrators of the outrage were

styled, grew heartily disgusted over their questionable glory.

When the legislature met in the autumn of 1880 it was decided by

the Woman Suffrage Association that we could "raise the blockade"

and encourage agitation in the work by consenting to an attempt

to amend the State constitution. Pursuant to this decision a

resolution was offered in the Senate by Hon. W. C. Fulton of

Clatsop, and in the House by Hon. Lee Laughlin, which, after

considerable discussion _pro_ and _con_ in which I was graciously

invited to participate on the floor of both Houses, was passed by

the requisite two-thirds majority. The result was considered a

triumph for the cause. A grand ratification jubilee was held in

the opera-house in honor of the event, and resolutions of thanks

to the lawmakers were passed, accompanied by many expressions of

faith in the legislation of the future.

In the meantime the work was going steadily on in Washington

territory, my own labors being distributed about equally between

the two sections of the Pacific Northwest that had formerly been

united under one territorial government. In the autumn of 1881

the legislature of Washington met one afternoon in joint

convention to listen to arguments from Hon. William H. White and

myself, on which occasion I held the floor for nearly three

hours, in the midst of an auditory that was itself an

inspiration. Mr. White, a Democrat of the old school, and now

(1885) holding the office of United States marshal in the

territory, under commission from President Cleveland, based his

plea for woman suffrage upon the enfranchisement of the colored

men, urging it strongly as a means of Democratic retaliation. The

suffrage bill passed in the House on the following day by a

majority of two, but was defeated in the Council by a majority of

two, showing that the vote would have been a tie if taken under

the joint-ballot rule.

Returning to Oregon I renewed the contest, and in the autumn of

1882 we were all gratified by the passage of the pending

constitutional amendment by a very nearly unanimous vote of each

House. Then the Oregon campaign began in earnest. The question

had assumed formidable proportions and was no longer an ignored

issue. The work went on with accelerated speed, and as far as

could be ascertained there was little or no opposition to it. The

meetings were largely attended and affirmative speakers were

ready to assist at all times, the help of this kind representing

all grades of the professions, led by the best and most

influential men of the State everywhere.

Another year went by, and the time for assembling the Washington

territory legislature was again at hand. Immediately upon

arriving at Olympia I learned that a coterie of politicians,

finding open hostility no longer effectual, had combined to crush

the woman suffrage bill, which had passed the House triumphantly,

by lobbying a "substitute" through the Council. In pursuance of

this seemingly plausible idea they talked with the ladies of

Olympia and succeeded in convincing a few of them that all women,

and especially all leaders of the movement, must be kept away

from the capitol or the bill would certainly be defeated.

Several women who ought to have have known better were deceived

by these specious pleaders, and but for some years of experience

in legislative assemblies that had brought me to comprehend the

"ways that are dark and tricks that are vain," for which the

average politician is "peculiar," the ruse would have succeeded.

I remained at headquarters, enduring alike the open attacks of

the venal press and the more covert opposition of the saloons and

brothels, and, as vigilantly as I could, watched all legislative

movements, taking much pains to keep the public mind excited

through the columns of the _Daily Oregonian_ and the weekly

issues of the _New Northwest_. The bill, which had been prepared

by Professor William H. Roberts, passed the House early in the

session; but it tarried long in the Council, and those most

interested were well-nigh worn out with work and watching before

the measure reached a vote. It came up for final passage November

15, 1883, when only three or four women were present. The Council

had been thoroughly canvassed before-hand and no member offered

to make a speech for or against it. The deathly stillness of the

chamber was broken only by the clerk's call of the names and the

firm responses of the "ayes" and "noes." I kept the tally with a

nervous hand, and my heart fairly stood still as the fateful

moment came that gave us the majority. Then I arose and without

exchanging words with any one left the state-house and rushed

toward the telegraph-office, half a mile distant, my feet seeming

to tread the air. Judge J. W. Range of Cheney, president of a

local woman suffrage society, overtook me on the way, bound on

the same errand. He spoke, and I felt as if called back to earth

with a painful reminder that I was yet mortal. A few minutes more

and my message was on the way to the _New Northwest_. It was

publication-day and the paper had gone to press, but my jubilant

and faithful sons opened the forms and inserted the news, and in

less than half an hour the newsboys were crying the fact through

the streets of Portland, making the _New Northwest_, which had

fought the fight and led the work to the point where legislation

could give a victory, the very first paper in the nation to

herald the news to the world. The rejoicing in Oregon, as well as

in Washington territory, was most inspiriting. A bloodless battle

had been fought and won, and the enemy, asleep in carnal

security, had been surrendered unawares. The women of Oregon

thanked God and took courage.

After passing the Council the bill passed leisurely, and some of

us feared perilously, through the various stages of clerical

progress till November 22, when it received the signature of

Governor William A. Newell, who used a gold pen presented him for

the purpose by women whom his act made free. And when at a given

signal the church bells rang in glad acclaim, and the loud boom

of minute-guns reverberated from the forest-clothed hills that

border Puget Sound and lost itself at last in the faint echoes of

the far-off hights, the scroll of the dead century unrolled

before my inner vision and I beheld in spirit another scene on

the further verge of the continent, when men in designing to ring

the bell at Independence Hall in professed honor of the triumph

of liberty, although not a woman in the land was free, had sought

in vain to force the loyal metal into glad responses; for the

old bell quivered in every nerve and broke its heart rather than

tell a lie!

An immense ratification jubilee was held in the evening of the

same day at the city hall in Olympia, with many distinguished

speakers.[511] Similar meetings were subsequently held in all the

principal towns of the Pacific Northwest. The freed women of

Washington thankfully accepted their new prerogatives. They were

appointed as jurors in many localities, and have ever since

performed their duties with eminent satisfaction to judges,

lawyers and all clients who are seeking to obey the laws. But

their jurisdiction soon became decidedly uncomfortable for the

law-breaking elements, which speedily escaped to Oregon, where,

as the sequel proved, they began a secret and effective war upon

the pending constitutional amendment. We all knew we had a

formidable foe to fight at the ballot-box. Our own hands were

tied and our own guns spiked, while our foe was armed to the

teeth with ballots, backed by money and controlled by vice,

bigotry and tyranny. But the leading men of the State had long

been known to favor the amendment; the respectable press had

become mildly, and in a few cases earnestly acquiescent; no

opposition could be raised at any of our public meetings, and we

felt measurably sure of a victory until near election time, when

we discovered to our dismay that most of the leading politicians

upon whom we had relied for aid had suddenly been seized with an

alarming reticence. They ceased to attend the public meetings and

in every possible way ignored the amendment, lest by openly

allying themselves with it they might lose votes; and as all of

them were posing in some way for office, for themselves or

friends, and women had no votes with which to repay their

allegiance, it was not strange that they should thus desert us.

Our Republican senator in congress, Hon. J. N. Dolph, favored the

Woman Suffrage Association with an able and comprehensive letter,

which was widely circulated, urging the adoption of the amendment

as a measure of justice and right, and appealing to the voters to

make Oregon the banner State of the great reform. Leading

clergymen, especially of Portland, preached in favor of woman

suffrage, prominent among them being Rev. T. L. Eliot, pastor of

the Unitarian church; Chaplain R. S. Stubbs of the Church of Sea

and Land, and Rev. Frederic R. Marvin of the First Congregational

society. Appeals to voters were widely circulated from the pens

and speeches of many able gentlemen.[512] Not one influential man

made audible objection anywhere.

We had carefully districted and organized the State, sparing

neither labor nor money in providing "Yes" tickets for all

parties and all candidates and putting them everywhere in the

hands of friends for use at the polls. But the polls were no

sooner open than it began to appear that the battle was one of

great odds. Masked batteries were opened in almost every

precinct, and multitudes of legal voters who are rarely seen in

daylight except at a general election, many of whom were refugees

from Washington territory, crowded forth from their hiding-places

to strike the manacled women down. They accused the earnest

ladies who had dared to ask for simple justice of every crime in

the social catalogue. Railroad gangs were driven to the polls

like sheep and voted against us in battalions. But, in spite of

all this, nearly one-third of the vote was thrown in our favor,

requiring a change of only about one-fourth of the opposing vote

to have given us a victory, and proving to the amazement of our

enemies that the strength of our cause was already

formidable.[513] We were repulsed but not conquered. Before the

smoke of the battle had cleared away we had called immense

meetings and passed vigorous resolutions, thanking the lovers of

liberty who had favored us with their suffrages, and pledging

ourselves anew to the conflict.

We at once decided that we would never again permit the

legislature to remand us to the rabble in a vain appeal for

justice. We had demonstrated the impossibility of receiving a

fair, impartial vote at the hands of the ignorant, lawless and

unthinking multitude whose ballots outweigh all reason and

overpower all sense. In pursuance of this purpose I went to the

legislature of 1885 and found no difficulty in securing the aid

of friendly members of both Houses who kindly championed the

following bill:

_Be it enacted by the Legislative Assembly of Oregon:_

That the elective franchise shall not hereafter be denied to

any person in this State on account of sex.

This act to be in force from and after its approval by the

governor.

After much parliamentary fillibustering the vote of both Houses

was recorded upon this bill and stood conjointly 34 to 54. This

vote, coming so soon after our defeat at the polls, is regarded

as the greatest victory we have yet won. The ablest lawyers of

the State and of Washington territory are preparing elaborate

opinions showing the constitutionality of our present plan, and

these are to be published in the form of a standard work, with

appropriate references for convenient use. The movement exhibits

a healthy, steady and encouraging growth, and is much accelerated

by its success in Washington territory.

On the Fourth of July of this year a grand celebration was held

at Vancouver, on Washington soil, the women of Oregon having

resolved in large numbers that they would never again unite in

celebrating men's independence-day in a State where they are

denied their liberty. The celebration was a success from first to

last. Boys and girls in equal numbers rode in the liberty-car and

represented the age of the government. The military post at

Vancouver joined heartily in the festivities, headed by the

gallant soldier, General Nelson A. Miles, commander-in-chief of

the department of the Columbia. The fine Fourteenth Infantry Band

furnished the instrumental music, and a local choir rendered

spirited choruses. The New Declaration of Independence was read

by Josie De Vore Johnson, the oration was delivered by Mattie A.

Bridge, and Louise Lester, the famous _prima donna_, electrified

the delighted crowd by her triumphant rendition of the

"Star-Spangled Banner." The exercises closed with the

announcement by the writer, who had officiated as president of

the day, that the Executive Committee of the Oregon Woman

Suffrage Association had, during the noon recess, adopted the

following resolutions:

_Resolved_, That our thanks are due to General Nelson A.

Miles of the department of the Columbia for his valuable

cooeperation in the exercises and entertainments of this

historic day.

_Resolved_, That we thank the citizens of Clarke County, and

especially of Vancouver, for their hospitality and kindness,

so graciously bestowed upon their less fortunate Oregon

neighbors, who have not yet achieved their full

independence, and we shall ever cherish their fraternal

recognition in grateful remembrance.

_Resolved_, That while we deplore the injustice that still

deprives the women of Oregon of the liberty to exercise

their right to the elective franchise, we rejoice in the

record the women of Washington are making as citizens, as

voters and as jurors. We congratulate them upon their

newly-acquired liberties, and especially upon the

intelligent and conscientious manner in which they are

discharging the important public duties that in no wise

interfere with their home affairs. And we are further

_Resolved_, That if our own fathers, husbands, sons and

brothers do not at the next session of the Oregon

legislature bestow upon us the same electoral privileges

which the women of Washington already enjoy, we will prepare

to cross the Columbia River and take up our permanent abode

in this "land of the free and home of the brave."

The resolutions evoked cheers that waked the echoes, and the

celebration, reported by the Oregon press, contributed largely to

the growth of the equal-rights sentiment among the people of the

State. Two stanzas of a spirited poem are subjoined, written for

the Woman Suffrage Association just after our defeat at the

polls, by a young man from Southern Oregon who has withheld his

own name but included the names of all the counties in his

glorious prophecy:

From Clatsop and from Clackamas, from Linn and Tillamook;

From Grant, Multnomah, Lane and Coos, and Benton, Lake and

Crook;

From Josephine, Columbia, and loyal Washington,

And Union, Baker and Yamhill, and proud old Marion;

From where the Cascade mountain-streams their foaming waters

pour,

We're coming, mothers, sisters, dear, "ten times ten thousand

more."

From Klamath's lakes and Wasco's plains, and Jackson's rolling

hills;

From Douglas with her mines of gold, and Curry with her mills;

From Umatilla's burdened fields, and hills and dales of Polk,

We're coming with our votes and songs to break the tyrant's

yoke,

And in the ears of Liberty this song of joy we'll pour,

We're coming, mothers, sisters, dear, "ten times ten thousand

more."

Mrs. Mary Olney Brown gives an amusing account of her attempts to

vote in Washington territory. The incidents related occurred

several years before the passage of the act specifically

enfranchising women. She says:

I do not think there has ever been a session of our legislature

that has not had before it the subject of woman suffrage. It has

been my habit to write out, and send to all parts of the

territory, before the assembling of each legislature, petitions

to be signed, asking for a law guaranteeing to women the

exercise of their right to vote. These petitions were not without

their effect, though no one knew who sent them out, or, when

returned, who selected the member to receive and present them to

the legislature. At the session of 1867, mainly through the

efforts of Edward Eldridge of Whatcom County, an act was passed

giving "all white American citizens above the age of twenty-one

years" the right to vote. This law is still on our statute books;

but, like the fourteenth amendment, is interpreted to mean only

male citizens. During the time between the passage of this law

and the next election, I wrote to some of the prominent women of

the principal towns, telling them of the law, and urging them to

go out and vote at the coming election, and also to induce as

many more to go as they could. But no notice was taken of my

letters. I was looked upon as a fanatic, and the idea of a woman

voting was regarded as an absurdity. The law seemed to be in

advance of the people. It needed lectures and organized societies

among us to educate the women into a just appreciation of their

rights and duties.

In the autumn of 1868, Dr. Smith wrote several articles on the

right of women to the ballot, as did also Mr. Eldridge. The

latter asserted that it was the intention of the law to give the

women of the territory the right to vote; that being a member of

the legislature he had purposely stated in his remarks, that if

the bill passed in that form, it would give the women the right

to vote; and a member from his seat cried out, "That is what we

want!" Mr. Eldridge urged the women to go out to the polls and

vote. These articles were published in the Olympia _Transcript_,

the Republican paper, J. N. Gale, one of the editors, being an

advocate of suffrage. Still not a woman made a move. Many wished

to vote; they knew it was the only way to secure their rights,

and yet they had not the courage to go to the polls in defiance

of custom.

Seeing this to be the case, and knowing that if anything was done

some one must take the initiative, I determined to cast aside my

timidity and set the ball rolling. Accordingly, several weeks

before the election of 1869 I gave out word that I was going to

the polls to vote. I had the previous year removed with my family

from Olympia, and was living on White River in King county. The

announcement that I would attend the election caused a great

commotion in White River precinct. A fearful hue and cry was

raised. The news reached Olympia and Seaettle, and some of the

papers deprecated the idea that "a woman should unsex herself by

dabbling in the filthy pool of politics." But I was fully

committed. The law had been on our statute books for nearly three

years. If it was intended for our benefit, it was time we were

availing ourselves of it. So, nothing daunted, I determined to

repair to the polling place, the district school-house,

accompanied by my husband, my daughter (Mrs. Axtell) and her

husband--a little band of four--looked upon with pity and

contempt for what was called our "fanaticism."

For several days before the election the excitement in the

neighborhood and other settlements along the river was intense.

Many gentlemen called on me and tried to persuade me to stay at

home and save myself from insult. I thanked them for their

kindness, and told them I fully appreciated their good

intentions, but that I had associated with men all my life, and

had always been treated as a lady; that the men I should meet at

the polls were the same that I met in church and social

gatherings, and I knew they would treat me with respect. Then

they begged my husband not to allow me to go; but he told them

his wife had as good a right to vote as he had; and that no

citizen can legally deprive another of the right to vote.

On the morning of the election, just before we reached the

school-house, a man met us and said, "Mr. Brown, look here now!

If Mrs. Brown goes up to vote she will be insulted! If I was in

your place I wouldn't let her go any farther. She had better go

back." My husband answered, "Mr. Brannan, my wife has as good a

right to vote as I have, and I would not prevent her if I could.

She has a mind of her own and will do as she thinks best, and I

shall stand by her and see that she is well treated! Besides

[speaking with emphasis], she will not be insulted either!"

"Well," said the man, "if she was my wife she shouldn't go!

She'll be sure to be insulted!" I looked him full in the face,

and said with decision, "Mr. Brannan, a gentleman will be a

gentleman under all circumstances, and will always treat a lady

with respect." I said this because I knew the man, and knew that

if anyone offered any annoyance, it would be he, and so it

proved.

As we drove up to the school-house and alighted, a man in an

angry voice snapped out, "Well! if the women are coming to vote,

I'm going home!" But he did not go; he had too much curiosity; he

wanted to see the fun. He stayed and was converted. After

watching the sovereign "white male citizen" perform the laborious

task of depositing his vote in the ballot-box, I thought if I

braced myself up I might be equal to the task. So, summoning all

my strength, I walked up to the desk behind which sat the august

officers of election, and presented my vote. When behold! I was

pompously met with the assertion, "You are not an American

citizen; hence not entitled to vote." The great unabridged

dictionary of Noah Webster was opened, and the definition of the

word citizen read to me. They all looked to see me vanquished;

they thought I would have to retreat before such an overwhelming

array of sagacity. The countenances of the judges wore a pleased

expression that they had hit on so easy an expedient to put me

_hors du combat_, while the crowd looked astonished that I did

not sink out of sight. Waiting a moment, I said, "The definition

is correct. A citizen of the United States, is a _person_ owing

allegiance to the government; but then all persons are not _men_;

and the definition of "citizeness" is a female citizen. I claim

to be an American citizen, and a native-born citizen at that; and

I wish to show you from the fourteenth amendment to the

constitution of the United States, that women are not only

citizens having the constitutional right to vote, but also that

our territorial election law gives women the privilege of

exercising that right."

When I commenced speaking, all the men, with the exception of

two--the one who had urged my husband not to let me go to the

school-house, and a low, degraded fellow, who had a squaw for a

wife--came and ranged themselves around me and the judges before

whom I stood, and listened attentively. It was a new subject to

them. They had heard of woman suffrage, but only in ridicule. Now

it was being presented to them in a very different light. As I

proceeded there was a death-like stillness, so intent were they

to catch every word. Even the man who had declared he would go

home if the women were going to vote, was among the most

interested of the listeners. There was but one interruption; the

two men, of whom I have spoken, to make good their assertion that

I would be insulted, got behind a desk in the far corner of the

room, and began talking and laughing very loudly; but they were

promptly called to order. Silence being restored, I went on to

show them that the original constitution recognized women as

citizens, and that the word citizen includes both sexes, as is

proved by the phrases, "male citizen," and "female citizen"; that

women from the beginning had been unjustly deprived of the

exercise of their constitutional rights; that they had for years

been petitioning those in power to restore them to their

political freedom, when the emancipation of the Southern slaves

threw upon the country a class of people, who, like the women of

the nation, owed allegiance to the government, but whose

citizenship was not recognized. To settle this question, the

fourteenth amendment was adopted. Its first section declares

emphatically who are citizens, and guarantees to them the

exercise of all their natural rights under the equal protection

of the law. (Here I read to them the section.) No distinction is

made in regard to sex; the word "person" being used, which

includes both men and women.

"And now, honorable gentlemen," I said, in conclusion, "I am a

'person,' declared by the fourteenth amendment to be a citizen,

and still further, I am a native-born citizen of the same race

and color of these gentlemen by whom I am surrounded, and whose

votes you do not hesitate to receive; and, had our territorial

law failed to give me the right to vote, this amendment would

protect me in the exercise of it. I again offer my vote, and hope

you will not refuse it." No hand was extended to receive it; but

one of the judges threw himself back in his seat, and with great

dignity of manner and an immense display of ignorance, exclaimed,

"Women have no right to vote; and the laws of Congress don't

extend over Washington territory." This was too much for even the

strongest opponents. On every side was heard, "Oh, Mr. Alvord!

why, yes, they do!" "Mr. Alvord, you are mistaken, the laws of

congress do extend over our territory"; and some tried to explain

to him that the territory belonged to the United States and was

under the jurisdiction of the national government, and that of

course the laws of congress extended over it. But still more

pompously, he again declared, "It is no such thing, the laws of

congress don't extend over Washington territory." A look of

disgust and shame was depicted on nearly every countenance, and

the cause of woman suffrage had advanced perceptibly in the minds

of the audience.

Another of the judges arose, and said, he had never thought much

on the subject. He had no doubt but Mrs. Brown was right, woman

were citizens and had the right to vote; but as the courts had

not instructed the election officers to take the votes of women,

and as the precinct was a small one, he was afraid their whole

vote would be thrown out if they received the women's ballots.

So, although he should like to see the women have their rights,

he should have to refuse Mrs. Brown's vote. Here an Irishman

called out, "It would be more sensible to let an intelligent

white woman vote than an ignorant nigger." Cries of "Good for

you, Pat! good for you, Pat!" indicated the impression that had

been made. My daughter now went up and offered her vote, which

was, of course, rejected.

My going to the polls was noised abroad, and set men as well as

women thinking. They examined the law for themselves, and found

that women had a right to vote, so that before the next election

many were prepared to act. In May, 1870, I published an appeal to

the women of the territory, quoting to them the law, and urging

them to avail themselves of its provisions by going to the polls

and voting. My sister, Charlotte Olney French, living in Grand

Mound precinct, some twenty-five miles from Olympia, began

talking the matter up; and, being a woman of energy and

influence, she soon had the whole neighborhood interested. With

the assistance of an old lady, Mrs. Peck, she planned a regular

campaign. By the programme the women were to get up a picnic

dinner at the school-house where the election was to be held, and

directly after, while the officers of election were in good humor

(wives will understand the philosophy of this), they were to

present their votes. My sister, being a good talker and well

informed on all the constitutional, judicial and social phases of

the question as well as a good judge of human nature, was able to

meet and parry every objection, and give information where

needed, so that by the time dinner was over, the judges, as well

as everybody else, were in the best of spirits. When the voting

was resumed, the women (my sister being the first) handed in

their ballots as if they had always been accustomed to voting,

and everything passed off pleasantly. One lady, Mrs. Sargent,

seventy-two years old, said she thanked the Lord that He had let

her live until she could vote. She had often prayed to see the

day, and now she was proud to cast her first ballot.

It had been talked of for some days before the election in the

adjoining precinct--Black River--that Mrs. French was organizing

a party of women to attend the election in Grand Mound precinct;

but they were not sure the judges would let them vote. "If they

do," said they, "if the Grand Mound women vote, the Black River

women shall!" So they stationed a man on a fleet horse, at the

Grand Mound polls, with instructions to start as soon as the

women began to vote, and ride with all haste back to their

precinct and let them know. The moment the man rode in sight of

the school-house he swung his hat, and screeched at the top of

his voice, "They're voting! They're voting!" The teams were all

ready in anticipation of the news, and were instantly flying in

every direction, and soon the women were ushered into the

school-house, their choice of tickets furnished them, and all

allowed to vote as "American citizens."

While the women of these two precincts were enjoying the exercise

of their political rights, the women of Olympia were suffering

the vexation of disappointment. I had been stopping there for

some weeks previous to the election, trying to induce the women

to go to the polls, and also to convince the men that women had a

legal right to vote, and that their right must be respected. The

day before election the judges were interviewed as to whether

they would take the votes of the women. They replied, "Yes; we

shall be obliged to take them. The law gives them the right to

vote, and we can not refuse." This decision was heralded all over

the city, and women felt as if their millennium had come.

To-morrow, for the first time, their voice would be heard in the

government through the ballot. All day long women met each other,

and asked: "Are you going to the election to-morrow?" Groups

gathered in parlors and discussed the matter, and everything

seemed auspicious.

But how true the saying: "There's many a slip 'twixt the cup and

the lip!" Before nine o'clock the next morning, the word had been

communicated all over town that "the women need not come out to

the polls as the judges would not take their votes." They would

give no reason why, but said "they had decided not to take the

votes of the women." About a dozen of us gathered together to

consult what was best to be done; finding most of them inclined

to back out, I urged the necessity of our making an effort; that

whether the judges took our votes or not, it was not best to give

it up as the rest had done; if we did, it would be harder to make

an effort next time; that I had been to the polls once and had my

vote refused, and could be refused again; at any rate, I had the

right to vote, and I should go and offer it if I had to go alone.

Three of the number said they would go with me--Mrs. Patterson,

Mrs. Wiley and Mrs. Dofflemyer; these, with Mr. Patterson, my

husband and myself made our party. As we reached the court-house

where the election was held, Mr. Dofflemyer met us and took his

wife home, she meekly submitting.

Just before us a cart rattled up bearing a male citizen, who was

too drunk to know what he was doing, or even to do anything. He

was lying on his back in the cart, with feet and hands up,

hurrahing at the top of his voice. This disgusting, drunken idiot

was picked up out of the cart by two men, who put a ticket into

his hand, carried him to the window (he was too drunk to stand),

shoved him up and raised his arm into the aperture; his vote

received, he was tumbled back into the cart.

I then stepped up and offered my vote, and was answered with, "We

have decided not to take the votes of the women!" "On what

grounds do you refuse?" I asked. No answer. "Do you refuse it on

legal grounds?" Still no answer. I then said, "Under the election

law of this territory, setting aside my constitutional right as a

citizen of the United States, I have the right to vote at this

election. Have you the election law by you?" "No, we have not got

it here," they said. I knew they had, but did not dispute their

word. "Very well," I said, "I can quote it for you." I did so,

and then said, "Under this territorial law I claim my right, and

again I offer you my vote as an American citizen. If you doubt my

citizenship, I will insist on taking the oath. Will you receive

it?" The answer was, "No; we have decided not to take women's

votes, and we cannot take yours." "Then," said I, "it amounts to

this: the law gives women the right to vote in this territory,

and you three men who have been appointed to receive our votes,

sit here and arbitrarily refuse to take them, giving no reason

why, only that you have decided not to take the women's votes.

There is no law to sustain you in this usurpation of power. We

can claim legal redress. Are you willing to stand a legal

prosecution?" "Yes," was the response of each one separately. It

was now plain to see why the votes of the women were refused; the

judges had been hired to do the dirty work, and money pledged in

case of prosecution. They were men in moderate circumstances and

could not have stood the cost of a suit individually. The ready

assent they gave showed such a contingency had been thought of

and provided against by the opponents of woman suffrage. The

other two women then offered their votes, which were also

refused.

In the autumn of 1871 Susan B. Anthony came to Olympia and

attended the first woman suffrage convention ever held here. Our

legislature was in session, and a joint hearing before the two

Houses was extended to her. Her statesman-like argument clearly

proved the right of our women to vote under both the national

constitution and the territorial law. After Miss Anthony left,

there arose a rumor that the election law was to be repealed, and

a committee of women attended every session, determined if

possible to prevent it. They were at the capitol the last day,

prepared to stay until the adjournment; they were urged to go

home, but would not unless a solemn promise was made them that

the law should in no way be tampered with. This the members

refused to do, until a bright idea struck one of them, which was

that they need not disturb the law, but could make it inoperative

by enacting another statute. This being whispered among the

members, the promise was given, and the women retired.

Immediately after, the following act was passed by both Houses,

approved and signed by the governor:

_Be it enacted by the Legislative Assembly of the Territory

of Washington:_

SECTION 1. That hereafter no female shall have the right of

ballot, or vote at any poll or election precinct in this

territory until the Congress of the United States of America

shall, by direct legislation, declare the same to be the

supreme law of the land.

SEC. 2. This act to take effect from and after its passage.

Approved November 29, 1871. EDWARD S. SOLOMON, _Governor_.

When the proclamation to hold a convention to form a constitution

preparatory to our admission into the Union as a State, was

issued, I recommended to the Territorial Woman Suffrage

Association that we make every effort to secure to the convention

as many delegates as possible in favor of woman suffrage, and

then that we circulate petitions asking them to leave out the

word "male" from the constitution. Failing to get the society to

take any associated action, I went to work individually, wrote

and sent out petitions into every town and country place where

there was a post-office, asking that the word "male" be left out

of the constitution. With each petition I sent a letter to the

person whose name I had procured from the postmaster of the

place, stating the object, urging a thorough circulation, and

directing its return at a given date to Mary Olney Brown,

President of the Washington Territorial Woman Suffrage

Association; thus giving the credit of the work to the Society.

I could not get a member of our Association to circulate the

petition in Olympia, so every day that I could get away from home

I took my petition in hand and canvassed for signatures. If I

went shopping or on an errand I took it with me, and in that way

I procured over 300 names. My experience had taught me that the

principal opposition to woman's voting came from ignorance as to

her true position under the government. She had come to be looked

upon almost as a foreign element in our nation, having no lot nor

part with the male citizen, and I felt that it was necessary to

disabuse the minds of the people generally, and the delegates to

the convention particularly, of this notion. I therefore wrote

five articles on the "Equality of Citizenship," which Mrs.

Duniway kindly published in the _New Northwest_. The Olympia

_Courier_ also printed them, and placed the paper on file in the

city reading-room; and when I met a man who had not made up his

mind on the subject I recommended him to the reading-room, and

several after perusing the articles were converted and signed the

petition.

On the assembling of the legislature Mrs. A. H. H. Stuart and

myself watched a favorable opportunity to present an equal rights

bill. We let them talk up the matter pretty well over a petition

signed by fifty women of one of the upper counties, when one day

Mrs. Stuart came to me and said: "Now, Mrs. Brown, write out your

bill; the speaker of the House sent me word they were ready for

it." I sat down and framed a bill[514] to the best of my ability,

which was duly presented and respectfully debated. Mrs. Duniway

came from Portland to urge its passage, and the day before it

came to a vote both Houses adjourned and invited her to speak in

the hall of representatives. She made one of her best speeches.

The members of both Houses were present, besides a large audience

from the city. The next day the House passed the bill by two

majority, and on the day following it was lost in the Council by

two majority. In the House the vote stood, ayes, 13; nays, 11. In

the Council, ayes, 5; nays, 7.

Saturday evening Mrs. Duniway made another telling speech in the

city hall, at the close of which Mr. White, a lobby member, made

a few remarks, in which he disclosed the cause of the defeat of

the bill in the Council. He said, after the bill passed the House

the saloon-keepers, alarmed lest their occupation would be gone

if women should vote, button-holed the members of the Council,

and as many of them as could be bought by drinks pledged

themselves to vote against the bill. The members of the Council

were present, and though an urgent invitation was given to all to

speak, not one of them denied the charge made by Mr. White. On

the following Monday an effort was made in the Council to

reconsider the bill, but failed. Thus stands our cause at

present. There will be a greater effort than ever before put

forth during the next two years to secure an affirmative vote in

our legislature.

As Mrs. Brown wrote the above in 1881, the promise in the closing

sentence was really quite prophetic, since the legislature of 1883

passed a law enfranchising the women of the territory.[515] Mrs.

Duniway concludes her account with a brief reference to the work in

neighboring territories:

In addition to all that is being done in Oregon and Washington,

we are actively engaged in pushing the work in Idaho and Montana

territories, where the _New Northwest_ has been thoroughly

circulated in many localities and many spirited public meetings

have been held. The Idaho legislature seriously considered and

came near adopting a woman suffrage bill last winter, and the

women of the territory are confidently awaiting a triumph at the

next biennial session. Remembering Dakota's set-back through the

governor's veto in 1885, they are carefully planning to avoid a

like calamity in their own territory. In Montana the cause has

made less apparent progress, but there is much quiet and

constantly increasing agitation in its favor. Popular feeling is

steadily ripening for the change, and let the rest of the world

wag as it will, there cannot be much longer hindrance to the

complete triumph of liberty in the Pacific Northwest.

FOOTNOTES:

[507] Hon. H. L. Yesler, the city's founder and mayor; Mrs. Yesler,

Rev. John F. Damon, Mrs. Mary Olney Brown, Rev. Daniel Bagley and

others.

[508] Its leaders being Mrs. Abble H. H. Stuart, Mrs. P. C. Hale,

Hon. Marshall Blinn, Hon. Elwood Evans, and Mr. J. M. Murphy,

editor of the _Washington Standard_.

[509] Mr. D. W. Williams, Mr. and Mrs. W. T. Shanahan, Mr. and Mrs.

A. B. Gibson, Rev. T. L. Eliot, Mr. B. C. Duniway, Dr. Mary A.

Thompson, Rev. Isaac Dillon and Hon. and Mrs. G. W. Brown.

[510] Addresses were made in advocacy of the cause by Col. Reed,

Mrs. J. Devore Johnson, Miss V. M. Olds, Rev. T. L. Eliot, Mrs. C.

A. Coburn, Mrs. Beatty (colored), and the writer. The celebrated

McGibeney family furnished the music, and the Portland press gave

favorable reports of the proceedings. Valuable aid was also

contributed by Mr. and Mrs. D. H. Hendee, Mr. and Mrs. J. W.

Peters, and Mrs. M. J. Foster.

[511] Governor Newell, Judge Orange Jacobs, Judge B. F. Dennison,

Mrs. Pamela Hale, Hon. Philip D. Moore, Mr. W. S. Duniway, Captain

William H. Smallwood, the writer, and a large number of the members

of the legislature.

[512] S. F. Chadwick, United States Representative M. C. George,

ex-United States Senator J. H. Mitchell, United States District

Judge M. P. Deady, Hon. H. W. Scott, editor of the _Oregonian_,

ex-Governor A. C. Gibbs, District-Attorneys J. F. Caples and T. A.

McBride, and various ex-members of the legislature.

[513] The official vote of the State was 11,223 for the amendment,

and 28,176 against.

[514] _Be it enacted by the Legislature of the Territory of

Washington:_

SECTION 1. All female citizens of the age of twenty-one years shall

be entitled to vote at all elections in the territory, subject only

to such regulations as male citizens.

SEC. 2. Any officer of election who shall refuse to take the vote

of a woman citizen (otherwise qualified to vote), shall be liable

to a fine of not less than $100 nor more than $500.

SEC. 3. All laws in conflict with this act are hereby repealed.

SEC. 4. This act to be in force on and after its passage.

[515] The bill was introduced in the Washington House by

Representative Coply, and was supported in speeches by Messrs.

Coply, Besserer, Miles, Clark and Stitzel, while Messrs. Landrum

and Kincaid spoke against it. The vote was: _Ayes_--Besserer,

Brooks, Clark, Coply, Foster, Goodell, Hungate, Kuhn, Lloyd,

Martin, Miles, Shaw, Stitzel and Speaker Ferguson--14.

_Noes_--Barlow, Brining, Landrum, Ping, Kincaid, Shoudy and

Young--7. _Absent_--Blackwell, Turpin and Warner--3. The bill was

favorably reported in the Council, November 15, by Chairman Burk of

the Judiciary Committee. No one offered to speak on it. The vote

stood: _Ayes_--Burk, Edmiston, Hale, Harper, Kerr, Power and

Smith--7. _Noes_--Caton, Collins, Houghton, Whitehouse and

President Truax--5. Governor W. A. Newell approved the bill

November 22, 1883.

CHAPTER LV.

LOUISIANA--TEXAS--ARKANSAS--MISSISSIPPI.

St. Anna's Asylum, Managed by Women--Constitutional Convention,

1879--Women Petition--Clara Merrick Guthrie--Petition Referred to

Committee on Suffrage--A Hearing Granted--Mrs. Keating--Mrs.

Saxon--Mrs. Merrick--Col. John M. Sandige--Efforts of the Women

all in Vain--Action in 1885--Gov. McEnery--The _Daily

Picayune_--Women as Members of the School-Board--Physiology in

the Schools--Miss Eliza Rudolph--Mrs. E. J. Nicholson--Judge

Merrick's Digest of Laws--Texas--Arkansas--Mississippi--Sarah A.

Dorsey.

I.--LOUISIANA.

Mrs. Caroline E. Merrick has furnished the following interesting

facts from her native State, for which we feel ourselves deeply

indebted:

Like the children of one family the States have a common

resemblance, but they are various in character as in geographical

outline. In Louisiana the Anglo-American finds himself

side-by-side with inhabitants of French or Spanish descent, and

in many of the country parishes the African freedmen outnumber

all the rest.

St. Anna's Asylum in New Orleans is controlled and managed by a

board of directors composed entirely of women. Among the inmates

in 1878 was a German woman who had resided in the institution for

many years. Finding herself in ill-health and fearing the

approach of the end, she confided to the ladies of the board that

she had a thousand dollars in bank which she wished to bequeath

to the home where she had been provided for and sheltered so

long. At her earnest request a will was drawn up in accordance

with her wishes, and signed by members of the board who were

present as witnesses. Shortly after, the woman died and her will

was submitted to the proper authority for admission to probate.

When the ladies were duly informed that the will was null and

void, they naturally asked why, and were told that under

Louisiana law women were not lawful witnesses to a will. Had they

only called in the old darkey wood-sawyer, doing a day's work in

the asylum yard, and had him affix his mark to the paper, the

money would have accrued to the asylum; as it was, it went to the

State.