_Executive Committee_--May Wright Sewall, _Chairman_, 429 North New

Jersey street, Indianapolis, Ind.; Laura DeForce Gordon, San

Francisco; Mary J. Channing, Pasadena, Cal.; Dr. Alida C. Avery,

Denver, Col.; Frances Ellen Burr, Emily P. Collins, Hartford,

Conn.; Mrs. J. S. Pickler, Falktown; Linda W. Slaughter, Bismark,

Dak. Ter.; Belva A. Lockwood, Dr. Caroline B. Winslow, Washington,

D. C.; Flora M. Wright, Drayton Island, Fla.; Julia Mills Dunn,

Moline; Rev. Florence Kollock, Englewood; Dr. Alice B. Stockham,

Ada C. Sweet, Chicago, Ill.; Mary E. Haggart, Mary E. N. Cary,

Indianapolis, Ind.; Narcisa T. Bemis, Independence; Mary J.

Coggeshall, Des Moines, Ia; Annie C. Wait, Lincoln Center;

Henrietta B. Wall, Mrs. S. A. Hauk, Hutchinson, Kan.; Sally Clay

Bennett, Mary A. Somers, Richmond; Laura White, Manchester, Ky.;

Maria I. Johnson, Mound, La.; Charlotte A. Thomas, Portland, Me.;

Amanda M. Best, Bright Seat, Md.; Harriet H. Robinson, Malden; Sara

A. Underwood, Dorchester Mass.; Julia Upton, Big Rapids; Cordelia

Fitch Briggs, Grand Rapids, Mich.; Julia Bullard Nelson, Red Wing:

Mrs. L. H. Hawkins, Shakopee; Mary P. Wheeler, Kasson, Minn.; Anne

R. Irvine, Oregon; Elizabeth A. Meriwether, St. Louis, Mo.; Jennie

F. Holmes, Tecumseh; Orpha C. Dinsmoore, Omaha, Neb.; Hannah R.

Clapp, Carson City, Nev.; Mrs. A. B. I. Roberts, Candia, N. H.;

Augusta Cooper Bristol, Vineland; Theresa A. Seabrook, Keyport, N.

J.; Mathilde F. Wendt, New York; Caroline G. Rogers, Lansingburgh;

Ellen S. Fray, Lewia C. Smith, Rochester, N. Y.; Sarah M. Perkins,

Elvira J. Bushnell, Cleveland; Sarah S. Bissell, Toledo, O.; Mrs.

J. M. Kelty, Lafayette, Ore.; Deborah L. Pennock, Kennett Square;

Harriet Purvis, Philadelphia, Penn.; Lillie Chace Wyman, Valley

Falls, R. I.; Lide Meriwether, Memphis, Tenn.; Mrs. D. Clinton

Smith, Middleboro', Vt.; Mrs. F. D. Gordon, Richmond, Va.; Eliza T.

Wilson, Menomonie; Laura James, Richland Center, Wis.; Barbara J,

Thompson, Tacoma, Wash. Ter.; Mrs. J. H. Hayford, Laramie City,

Wyoming Ter.

_Recording Secretaries_--Julia A. Wilbur, Caroline A. Sherman,

Washington, D. C.

_Corresponding Secretaries_--Rachel G. Foster, Philadelphia, Penn.;

Ellen H. Sheldon, Washington, D. C.

_Foreign Corresponding Secretaries_--Caroline A. Biggs, London;

Lydia E. Becker, Manchester, England; Marguerite Berry Stanton,

Hubertine Auclert, Charlotte B. Wilbour, Paris, France; Clara

Neymann, Berlin, Germany.

_Treasurer_--Jane H. Spofford, Riggs House, Washington, D. C.

_Auditors_--Eliza T. Ward, Ellen M. O'Connor, Washington, D. C.

* * * * *

CHAPTER XXXII.

CONNECTICUT.

_Is the Family the Basis of the State?_

BY JOHN HOOKER.

The proposition that the family is the basis of the State has come

down through many generations, so far as I know, unchallenged; but

in the sense in which it is ordinarily understood, and for the

purpose for which it is ordinarily used, it is entirely a fallacy.

The State depends upon the family for the continuance of its

population, just as it depends upon the school for the intelligence

of its people and on religious institutions for their morality.

But the State stands in no political relation to the family any

more than to the school and the church. What is meant by the

proposition as generally used is, that the State is politically an

aggregate of families and not of individuals. This is entirely

untrue, and if true the fact would be calamitous. Civil government

is supposed to have had its origin in family government, the

patriarch becoming chief of a tribe which was substantially the

outgrowth and expansion of a single family; but if a nation was to

be formed of such tribes it would be essential to its peace and

prosperity that they should as soon as possible mingle into one

homogeneous mass, and that no citizen should consider himself of

one tribe rather than another. It is the family idea in a

government like ours that makes the feuds which are handed down

from generation to generation in some parts of the country. It made

the frequent bloody contests of the clans in Scotland, and the

dissensions of the Hebrew tribes. In a republic nothing can be more

disastrous than that great political leaders should have large

family followings. The first duty of the citizen is to forget that

he belongs to any family in particular. He is an individual citizen

of the State, and when he becomes a magistrate he must practically

ignore the fact that he has family relatives who feel entitled to

his special favor. He must, like justice, be blind to every fact

except that the applicant for office or for justice is an

individual citizen and must stand wholly on his personal merits or

the justice of his cause.

The proposition that the family is the basis of the State thus

taken by itself is entirely false; but even if true, the use made

of it as an argument against giving suffrage to women is equally

fallacious. This can be shown by a single illustration. We will

suppose there are two families, in both of which the father dies,

leaving in one case a widow and one son, and in the other a widow

and six daughters. Where is now the family representation? The son

whom we will suppose to be of age, goes to the polls and we will

suppose sufficiently represents the family to which he belongs; but

where is the family representation for the other widow and her six

daughters? She may be the largest tax-payer in the State, and yet

she can have no voice in determining what taxes shall be laid, nor

to what purposes the money shall be appropriated.

The question whether the family is the basis of the State cannot be

made an abstract question of political philosophy. Indeed the

question is unmeaning when put as an abstract one. We might just as

well ask, "Is the climate cold in a State?" or, "Is the English

language spoken in a State?" It is only as we ask these questions

about a _particular_ State that they have any meaning. "Is it cold

in Russia?" "Is English spoken in Connecticut?"

Take the case of a State ruled by a despot. Here the people are not

the political basis of the State, either as families or as

individuals. They have no political power whatever. The political

basis of the State is the will of the despot. He is himself and

alone the State politically. He makes the laws himself, and shoots

and hangs those who disobey them. The people are indispensable to

the State, and so in one sense its basis, just as the square miles

that compose its territory are its physical basis, but the people

stand in no political relation whatever to the State, any more than

the rocks and gravel of its territory. It is only where the people

of the State have the whole or a part of its political power, that

the question can possibly arise as to whether individuals or

families are its political basis. And when it thus arises, it comes

up wholly with reference to a particular State, and not as an

abstract question. And then it is wholly a question of fact, not

one of political philosophy; a matter for simple ascertainment, not

for speculation and reasoning. Thus, suppose the question to be,

"Is the family or the individual the political basis of the State

of Connecticut?" We are to answer the question solely by looking at

the constitution and laws of the State. We look there and find that

it is as clear as language can make it that the political basis of

the State is the individual and not the family. The individual is

made the voter--not the family--and that is the whole question. It

was perfectly easy for the people, if they had so desired, when

they were adopting a constitution, to make families and not

individuals the depositaries of political power, but they chose to

give the power to individuals, and thus the question is absolutely

settled for the State. It is true, the State does not carry out

completely its own theory, but this was its theory, and what it did

was wholly in this direction and away from the family theory. We go

to the constitution of the State to settle this question, just as

we would to settle the question whether the governor's term is one

year or two, or whether the judges hold office for a term of years

or for life. While considering whether either of these provisions

ought to be adopted, we are dealing with a matter proper for

opinions and argument, but when the provisions have been adopted,

the whole question becomes one of fact, and we look only to the

constitution to determine it, and treat it as a matter not for

discussion but for absolute ascertainment.

When one is advocating the theory that the family should be the

political basis of the State, he is simply saying that the

constitution ought to be amended and the right of voting taken away

from individuals and given to families. But it is idle to urge

this. Such a measure would not get even a respectable minority

of votes. It is decisive on this point that not a single

representative government, so far as the writer knows, has adopted

the theory that the family and not the individual should vote. A

law peculiar to Russia gives its villages, in the management of

their local matters, the right of voting by families--a perfect

illustration, on a very small scale, of the family as the political

basis of a State. But here woman suffrage is admitted as a

necessary result; and where there is no man to represent the

family, or he is unable to attend, the woman of the house casts the

vote.

The advocates of woman suffrage have no interest whatever in this

question, as it is idle to suppose that it can become a practical

one. The writer has taken what trouble he has in the matter solely

in the interest of correct thinking.

_Hartford, May, 1879._

* * * * *

CHAPTER XXXVII.

NEW YORK.

_Brief on the Legislature's Power to Extend the Suffrage,

Submitted February 19, 1880, to the Judiciary Committee of the

Assembly of the State of New York._

BY HAMILTON WILCOX.

I. LEGISLATURE OMNIPOTENT.--Unlike the Federal constitution, the

State constitution does not reserve all powers not expressly

delegated. It is held by the authorities that in the absence of

positive restriction the legislature is omnipotent.

"In a judicial sense, their authority is absolute and unlimited,

except by the express restrictions of the fundamental law" (Court

of Appeals, 1863, Bank of Chenango vs. Brown, 26 N. Y., 467; S. P.,

Cathcart vs. Fire Department of New York, Id., 529; Supreme Court,

1864, Clark vs. Miller, 42 Barb., 255; Luke vs. City of Brooklyn,

43 Id., 54).

"Only on the ground of express constitutional provisions limiting

legislative power, can courts declare void any legislative

enactment" (Court of Error. 1838, Cochran vs. Van Surlay, 29 Wend.,

365; Newell vs. People, 7 N. Y. [3 Seld.], 9, 109).

"Before proceeding to amend, by judicial sentence, what has been

enacted by the law-making power, it should clearly appear that the

act cannot be supported by any reasonable intendment or allowable

presumption" (Court of Appeals, 1858, People vs. Supervisors of

Orange, 17 N. Y., 235; affi'g, 27 Barb., 575).

II. POWERS UNDEFINED.--The constitution forbids the legislature to

do certain things. Otherwise it does not define or limit the

legislature's powers (Art. 3, Sec.Sec. 3, 18, 19, 24).

III. NO PROHIBITION.--No constitution of New York has ever

forbidden the legislature to extend the suffrage beyond the

classes specified by such constitution; nor has any ever forbidden

unspecified persons to vote. The constitution simply secures the

suffrage to certain classes, and there leaves the matter.

IV. RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.--The constitution declares that the

object of its establishment is to secure the blessings of freedom

to the people (Preamble, Revised Statutes, vol. 1., p. 82). Hence

it, and all enactments under it, must be understood and construed,

where a contrary intent is not clearly expressed, to be aimed at

securing freedom to all.

V. DISFRANCHISEMENT.--The constitution follows this declaration by

laying down at its outset, as its fundamental principle, that "No

member of this State shall be disfranchised or deprived of any of

the rights or privileges secured to any citizens thereof, except by

the law of the land" (Art. 1, Sec. 1, do., do.). Disfranchisement,

then, must be express by the law. It cannot constitutionally be

inflicted through mere implication or silence.

Rules for the securing of freedom have often been found to cover

unforeseen cases. Such was the fact in the famous decision of Lord

Mansfield in 1774, that slavery was against the common law, under

which slavery was afterward abolished throughout the British

empire; and the decision of the highest court of Massachusetts,

that the terms of the constitution of 1780 conferred freedom on the

slaves of that State.

Women, it is now fully recognized, are citizens, and hence "members

of the State," entitled to the security guaranteed. The _practice_

under the constitution has been to treat as _disfranchised_ all

persons _not specified_ as entitled to vote. Though this practice

is plainly against the declared object and principle of the

constitution, it has been general and mostly continuous, and has

thus acquired the force of law. This, however, does not impair the

legislature's power to correct the practice by express enactment.

VI. PRECEDENTS.--The legislature _has_ repeatedly corrected this

practice by express enactments securing freedom to various portions

of the people.

(_a_). CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1801.--The act calling this

convention extended the suffrage for members of that body--_the

highest officers of the State_--to "all free male citizens over

twenty-one years of age," while the constitution secured suffrage

only to male holders of and actual taxpayers on a fixed amount of

real estate (Session Law 1801, ch. 69, p. 151; constitution of

1777, do., 1, 39).

(_b_). CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1821.--The act providing for the

convention that framed the constitution of 1822, while the existing

constitution (as above) only specified as entitled to vote, holders

of and taxpayers on a fixed amount of real estate--this act allowed

_all_ freeholders, however small the value of their holdings, all

actual taxpayers, all officers and privates, ex-officers and

ex-privates, in militia or in volunteer or uniform corps, all

persons exempt by law from taxation or militia duty, all workers on

public roads and highways, or payers of commutation for such work;

to vote on the question whether the convention should be held, to

vote in the choice of delegates thereto--_again for the highest

officers of the State_--and to vote on the question of adoption of

the new constitution--_to exercise a voice in framing the State's

fundamental law_. The council of revision, including the governor,

which opposed and defeated part of this act, made no objection to

this feature (Session Laws 1821, ch. 90, p. 83).

The vote for governor, 1820, was 93,437--the largest ever cast in

the State. That on the question of calling the convention in 1821

was 144,247. One act of the legislature thus enfranchised _fifty

thousand persons_. The vote on the new constitution stood: For,

74,732; against, 41,402; majority for, 33,330. Thus the votes of

fifty thousand persons--enfranchised, not by the constitution but

by the legislature--carried the adoption of a new constitution,

which further secured to them the freedom which the legislature had

opened to them. The vote for governor in 1824--the next

hotly-contested election--was 190,545; so that the immediate effect

of the legislature's act was to add 97,108 persons to the

constituency--to make a mass of new voters who outnumbered those

specified by the constitution.

(_c_). ALIENS VOTING.--The constitution specifies none but

"citizens" as entitled to vote; yet the legislature, by a school

law of many years' standing, allowed _aliens_ to vote for school

functionaries, on filing with the secretary of state notice of

intention to become naturalized (1 R. S., art. 2, Sec. 1, p. 65; 2 R.

S., 63, Sec. 12; 2 R. S., 1,096, Sec. 31).

(_d_). NORTHFIELD.--The proprietors of swamp-lands in the town of

Northfield, Richmond county, were authorized to elect directors of

drainage, without any restriction or qualification but ownership

(Session Laws 1862, ch. 80, Sec. 2, p. 233).

(_e_). The taxpayers of Newport, Herkimer county, were authorized

to vote on the question of issuing bonds to raise money for a

town-house. Under this law women who were taxpayers voted (Act

April 9, 1873, Session Laws, ch. 187, Sec. 3, p. 304).

(_f_). The taxpayers of Dansville, Livingston county, were

authorized to vote on the issue of water-bonds. Under this act

women voted (Act April 24, 1873, Session Laws, ch. 285, Sec. 4, p.

409).

(_g_). The taxpayers of Saratoga Springs were authorized to vote on

the question of issuing bonds for the construction of an additional

water-main. Under this ninety-nine women voted (Act May 13, 1876,

Session Laws, ch. 254, Sec. 4, p. 250).

VII. SCHOOL SUFFRAGE.--If the legislature can admit aliens to vote

at school-meetings, it can admit female citizens to do so.

VIII. PRESIDENTIAL SUFFRAGE.--1. The federal constitution provides

that electors of president and vice-president shall be appointed

"in such manner as the legislature thereof may direct" (Art. 2, Sec.

2).

2. It also provides that "this constitution shall be the supreme

law of the land, and the judges in every State shall be bound

thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any State to the

contrary notwithstanding" (Art. 6, Sec. 2).

3. The legislature has the power under the federal constitution to

provide whatever method it may choose for the appointment of the

electors. The courts have no power to interfere, and even an

executive veto would have no force. The legislature has sole and

full power to say who may vote for electors and how the election

shall be held.

* * * * *

CHAPTER XXXVIII.

PENNSYLVANIA.

BY CARRIE S. BURNHAM.

The common law of England as modified by English statutes prior to

the Revolution has been formally adopted either by constitutions

and statutes or assumed by courts of justice as the law of the land

in every State save Louisiana, and in the absence of positive

statutes is the common law of the United States. To understand the

legal status of woman in Pennsylvania it is therefore necessary,

_First_--To ascertain her condition under the common law;

_Second_--How this law has been modified in this State by statutes.

COMMON LAW.

By the common law, which Lord Coke calls "the perfection of

reason," women arrive at the age of discretion at twelve, men at

fourteen; both sexes are of full age at twenty-one, entitled to

civil rights, and if unmarried and possessed of freehold, they are

equally entitled to the exercise of political rights (Blackstone,

I., 463; IV., 212; Bouvier's Institutes, 156, 157; Decisions of

English courts in 1612, quoted in 7 Mod. Rep., 264).

"By marriage, the husband and wife are one person in law"; that is,

the legal existence of the woman is "merged in that of her

husband." He is her "baron," or "lord," bound to supply her with

shelter, food, clothing and medicine, and is entitled to her

earnings--the use and custody of her person, which he may seize

wherever he may find it (Blackstone, I., 442, 443; Coke Litt., 112

a, 187 b; 8 Dowl., P. C., 632.)

The husband being bound to provide for his wife the necessaries of

life, and being responsible for "her morals" and the good order of

the household, may choose and govern the domicil, choose her

associates, separate her from her relatives, restrain her religious

and personal freedom, compel her to cohabit with him, correct her

faults by mild means and, if necessary, chastise her with

moderation, as though she was his apprentice or child. This is in

"respect to the terms of the marriage contract and the infirmity of

the sex" (Bl., I., 444; 1 Bishop on Mar. and Div., 758; 8 Dowl. P.

C., 632; Bouv. Insts., 277, 278, 2,283; 1 Wend. Bl., 442, note; 4

Petersdorf's A. B., 21, note).

Woman's character, exposed to the vilest slanders of "malignity and

falsehood," and her chastity are protected on account of the injury

sustained by the father, husband or master from loss of her

services, or wrongful entry of his house, rather than the injury

done to her as an individual (Bl. I., 445, note; III., 141, 143,

note; 3 Serg. and Rawle, Penn., 36; 3 Penn., 49; 2 Watts' Penn.,

474).

The husband is entitled to recover damages for "criminal

conversation with his wife," or for injury to her person whereby he

is deprived of his "marital rights," or of her "company and

assistance"; also an action of _trespass vi et armis_ against the

individual enticing her away or encouraging her to live separately

from him; the offense implies force and constraint, "the wife

having no power to consent," and is punishable with fine and

imprisonment (Bl., III., 139; 2 Inst., 434; Bouvier's Institutes,

3,495).

The wife has no action for injuries to her husband as she is not

entitled to his services, neither has she any separate interest in

anything during her coverture. The law takes notice only of the

injuries done to the "superior of the parties related"; because

"the inferior has no kind of property in the company, care or

assistance of the superior, as the superior is held to have in

those of the inferior" (Blackstone, III., 143; Bouv. Insts.,

3,495).

The husband, by marriage, becomes entitled absolutely to the

personal property of his wife, which at his death goes to his

representatives; also to the rents and profits of her lands, to the

interest in her chattels real and _choses_ in action, of which he

can dispose at pleasure, except by will. He acquires the same right

in any property whether real or personal of which she may become

possessed after marriage, and is liable during coverture for her

debts contracted before marriage (Bl., II., 434, 435; Bouv. Insts.,

4,005; Coke Litt., 46, 351).

At his death she becomes possessed of her wardrobe and jewels, such

of her chattels as remain undisposed of, and her own real estate;

also quarantine (_i. e._, forty days' residence in "his mansion"),

one-third of his personality absolutely and the use of one-third of

any real estate of which he is possessed during coverture for the

term of her natural life. _His_ mansion, realty and personalty

includes what they have jointly earned as well as that of which he

was possessed at marriage. The widow's right to one-third of the

personal estate was abolished by English statutes prior to the

Revolution, but has since been revived by Pennsylvania statutes

(Blackstone, II., 129, 134, 139, 436, 492, 493; Coke Litt., 31, 34;

Bouvier's Institutes, 1,750; Brightley's Purdon, 806, 2 and 3).

At the death of the wife their joint earnings, also her chattels

real, vest absolutely in the husband, and if they have had a living

child the husband, as "tenant by the curtesy," becomes possessed of

her entire real estate for life. The wife loses her dower by

adultery, but the husband does not lose his curtesy on that

account. Her dower is also barred by his treason and by a divorce

grounded on his adultery (Blackstone, II., 127, 434; Roper, Husband

and Wife, 1,210; 2 Kent, 131; 7 Watts, 563; Bouvier's Institutes,

1,732).

A husband cannot convey real estate directly to his wife, but may

through a trustee; neither can he give "anything to her nor

covenant with her, for the grant would be to suppose her separate

existence, and to covenant with her would be to covenant with

himself." Their covenants or indebtedness to each other before

marriage are by the marriage extinguished (Blackstone, I., 442;

Coke Litt., 3, 30; 112 a; 187 b; Connyn. Dig. Baron and Feme, D).

The husband may devise any property to his wife, but the wife

cannot make a will, the law supposing her to be under his coercion;

neither can she bind her person or property, nor make nor enforce a

contract, nor can she be a witness in any matter in which her

husband is interested (Blackstone, II., 293, 498, 444; 2 Kent, 179;

Bouv. Insts., 1,441; Connyn. Dig. Pleader, 2 A, 1; Baron and Feme,

W; 2 Roper, Husband and Wife, 171).

A wife, with the consent of her husband, may act as his or other's

attorney, may be a guardian, trustee, administratrix or executrix,

but cannot sue in _auter droit_ unless her husband join in the

suit. This incapacitates her to act independently in either

capacity (Blackstone, II., 503; 1 Anders., 117; 2 Story, Eq.

Juris., 1,367, note; 57 Penn. St. Rep., 356).

A wife cannot enforce her rights nor defend any action brought

against her, but must plead coverture in person, being incapable of

appointing an attorney (Bouv. Insts., 2,787, 2,907; 41 N. H., 106;

2 Saund., 209; c. n. 1).

When a woman marries after having commenced a suit, the suit

abates; but the husband may _in equity_ sue her for his marital

rights in her property; marriage of a female partner dissolves the

partnership (Bouv. Insts., 4,037, 1,494; 4 Russ. Ch., 247; 3 Atk.

Ch., 478; 2 P. Will Ch., 243).

The father of legitimate children is bound for their maintenance

and education, is entitled to their labor and custody and has power

to dispose of them until twenty-one years of age, by deed or

legacy, even though they are unborn at his death. The testamentary

guardian's right to their custody supersedes that of their mother

(Bl., I., 447, 451, 453; 2 Kent, 191 and 193; Bouv. Insts., 344; 5

Rawle, 323; 2 Watts, 406; 5 East, 221; Purd. Dig., New Ed., 411,

29; 5 Pitts, L. J., 406; 1 Pitts, 412).

"A mother is entitled to no power, but to reverence and respect,

from her children"; she has no legal authority over them nor right

to their services, but her property is liable for their maintenance

if the father has not an estate. The mother's appointment of a

testamentary guardian is absolutely void (Bl., I., 453 and 461,

note by Chitty; Vaughan, 180; 1 Leg. Gaz. R., 56).

The mother of a "natural or illegitimate" child is its natural

guardian, entitled to its control and custody and her settlement is

its domicil (Bl., I., 459; 2 Kent, 216; 5 Term Rep., 278; Newton

vs. Braintree, 14 Mass., 382).

"Intestate personal property is divided equally between males and

females, but a son, though younger than all his sisters, is the

heir to the whole of real property" (Bl., I., 444, note by

Christian).

PENNSYLVANIA STATUTES AND COURT DECISIONS.

This "perfection of reason" (the common law) has been changed in

Pennsylvania in the following particulars:

All women, married and single, are deprived of political rights by

the use of the generic word "freeman" in the constitution (29 Legal

Intelligencer, 5).

Heir at common law is abolished by statute; however, the right to

administer vests in the male in preference to the female of the

same degree of consanguinity. Half-brothers are entitled to the

preference over own sisters (Purdon, 410, 27; Single's Appeal, 59

Penn. St. R., 55).

Any property belonging to a woman before marriage, or which accrues

to her during coverture by gift, bequest or purchase, continues, by

the act of April 11, 1848, to be her separate property after

marriage, and is not liable for the debts of her husband nor

subject to his disposal without her written consent, duly

acknowledged before one of the judges of the Court of Common Pleas

as voluntarily given; _provided_, that he is not liable for the

debts contracted before or after marriage, or for her torts

(Purdon's Dig., 1,005, 13).

"This act protects the wife's interest in her separate property

both as to title and possession," but "does not empower her to

convey her real estate by a deed in which her husband has not

joined," nor "create a lease without his concurrence," nor "execute

an obligation for the payment of money or the performance of any

other act," nor in any way dispose of her property save by gift or

loan to him; she may bind her separate estate for his debts, and in

security for the loan she may take a judgment or mortgage against

the estate of the husband in the name of a third person, who shall

act as her trustee (18 Penn. St. R., 506, 582; 21, 402; 1 Gr., 402;

6 Phila., 531; Pur. Dig., 1,007, 21).

The husband is the natural guardian or trustee of the property of

the wife; but by application "to the Court of Common Pleas of the

county where she was domiciled at the time of her marriage," the

court will appoint a trustee (not her husband) to take charge of

the property secured to her by the act of 1848. This act, however,

does not authorize the appointment of a trustee, to the exclusion

of her husband, of property owned by her prior to the passage of

the act, nor was it intended to affect vested rights of husbands

and does not protect them for the wife's benefit against the claims

of creditors (10 Penn. St. Rep., 398 and 505; 18, 392 and 509; 21,

260; 1 Jones, 272).

In a clear case the wife's real estate cannot be levied upon and

sold by a creditor of the husband, _but the burden of proof_ is

upon her to show by evidence "which does not admit of a reasonable

doubt," that she owned the property before marriage or acquired it

subsequently by gift, bequest, or paid for it with funds not

furnished by her husband nor the result of their joint earnings.

The wife's possession of money is no evidence of her title to it

(18 Penn. St. Rep., 366; 7 Phila., 118).

If no property, or not sufficient property, of the husband can be

found, the separate property and goods of the wife may be levied

upon and sold for rent or for debts incurred for the support of the

family (Purd. Dig., 1,006, 15; 38 Penn. St. Rep., 344).

A married woman's bond and warrant of attorney are absolutely void,

nor can she make a valid contract except for a sewing-machine or

for the improvement of her separate property, and her bond given or

a judgment confessed by her for such debt is void (24 Penn. St.

Rep., 80; Act of 1872, Pur. Dig., 1,010).

She may sell and transfer shares of the capital stock of any

railroad company, but cannot herself or by attorney transfer

certificates of city loan (28 Leg. Int., 116; Act June 2, 1871).

A married woman cannot enforce her rights against third persons,

either for the performance of a contract or the recovery of her

property, without her husband join in the suit, although the party

contracting with her is liable to an action (1 Gr., 21; Act of 1850

and 1839; 6 Phila., 223).

If divorced or separated from her husband by his neglect or

desertion, she may protect her reputation by an action for slander

and libel; but if her husband is the defendant, this suit, as also

for alimony and divorce, must be in the name of a "next friend."

She is entitled to a writ of _habeas corpus_ if unlawfully

restrained of her liberty (Purd. Dig., 510, 12; 513, 24; 754, 1).

The wife of a drunkard or profligate man by petitioning the Court

of Common Pleas, setting forth these facts and his desertion of her

and neglect to provide for her and their children, may be entitled

to the custody of her children, and, as a "_feme sole trader_,"

empowered to transact business and acquire a separate property,

which shall be subject to her own disposal during life, and liable

for the maintenance and education of her children. Her testimony

must be sustained "by two respectable witnesses" (Pur. Dig., 692,

5; Act of 1855, 2; 2 Roper, Husband and Wife, 171, 173).

By act of April, 1872, any married woman having first petitioned

the court, stating under oath or affirmation her intention of

claiming her separate earnings, is entitled to acquire by her labor

a separate property which shall not be subject to any legal claim

of her husband or of his creditors, she, however, being compelled

"to show title and ownership in the same." The husband's possession

of property is evidence of his title to it; not so with the wife

(Purd. Dig., 1,010, 38, 39; 4 Lansing, 164; 61 Barb., 145).

A married woman may devise her separate property by will, subject,

however, to the husband's curtesy, which in Pennsylvania attaches,

though there be no issue born alive, and which she cannot bar

(Purd. Dig., 806, 804; I Pars., 489; 26 Penn. St. R., 202, 203; 2

Brewster, 302).

The husband may bar the wife's dower by a _bona fide_ mortgage

given by himself alone or by a judicial sale for the payment of his

debts. It is also barred by a divorce obtained by her on the ground

of his adultery, and in case of such divorce she is entitled to the

value of one-half of the money and property which the husband

received through her at marriage (Purd. Dig., 514; 2 Dall. 127; 12

Serg. and R., 21; I Yeates Pa., 300).

A single woman's will is revoked by her subsequent marriage, and is

not again revived by the death of her husband; a single man's will

is revoked by marriage absolutely only when he leaves a widow but

no known heirs or kindred (Purd. Dig., 1,477, 18 and 19; 47 Penn.

S. Rep., 144, 34, 483).

If the husband die intestate leaving a widow and issue, the widow

shall have one-third of his and their joint personalty absolutely,

and one-third of the real estate for life; if there are no

children, but collateral heirs, she is entitled to the use of

one-half the realty, including the mansion-house, for her life, and

one-half the personalty absolutely (Purd. Dig., 806, 2 and 3; Act

of 1833, 1).

If the wife die intestate leaving a husband and no issue, he is

entitled to her entire personalty and realty during his life; if

there are children her personal estate is divided between the

husband and children share and share alike; in either case he is

entitled to their entire joint estate (Purd. Dig., 806, 5; Act of

1848, 9).

Married women may be corporate members of any institution composed

of and managed by women, having as its object the care and

education of children or the support of sick and indigent women

(Purd. Dig., 283; Act of 1859, 1).

It is a crime, punishable by fine and imprisonment, to employ any

woman to attend or wait upon an audience in a theater, opera or

licensed entertainment, to procure or furnish commodities or

refreshments (Purd. Dig., 337, 112).

A man, by marriage, is subjected to no political, civil, legal or

commercial disabilities, but acquires all the rights and powers

previously vested in his wife. He is capable of all the offices of

the government from that of postmaster to the presidency, and of

transacting all kinds of business from the measuring of tape to the

practice of the most learned professions. Woman, deprived of

political power, is limited in opportunities for education, and, if

married, is incapable of making a contract; hence crippled in the

transaction of any kind of business.

* * * * *

CHAPTER XLII.

INDIANA.

[A.]

Governor Porter made the following novel appointment: On August 30,

1882, Mrs. Georgia A. Ruggles, from Bartholomew county, presented

to Governor Porter an application for a requisition from the

governor of Indiana upon the governor of Kansas, for William J.

Beck, charged with the crime of bigamy. Beck had been living a few

months in Bartholomew county and had passed as an unmarried man;

had gained the affections of a young lady much younger than himself

and much superior to him by birth and education. After their

marriage the fact that Beck had already one wife became known and

he fled to Kansas. Mrs. Ruggles was a friend to the young lady who

had been thus duped, and upon learning the facts she called the

attention of the proper authorities to the matter, and begged them

to effect Beck's arrest. They were not disposed to do so, and upon

various excuses postponed action. She therefore determined to take

the matter into her own hands. Governor Porter granted her the

desired requisition; she went to Kansas, and on September 10, 1882,

she received Beck from Samuel Hamilton, sheriff of Ellsworth

county; she herself brought the prisoner, in cuffs, to Indiana,

and, September 13, she delivered him into the hands of Thomas E.

Burgess, sheriff of Bartholomew county. Beck was tried, convicted

and sent to the penitentiary. This bit of justice was the fruit of

a woman's pluck and a governor's good sense.

EXTRACT FROM GEN. COBURN'S ADDRESS.

The people expect that they will in their own way and time

inaugurate such measures as will bring these questions in their

entire magnitude into the arena. I hope to see 10,000 women in

convention here. They can, if they will, create a public sentiment

in favor of their enfranchisement that will be irresistible. They

have the ears of the voters; they have access to the columns of the

newspapers; they control all the avenues of social life. What can

they not accomplish, if, with their whole hearts they set about it?

The sphere of public life has many vacant places to be filled by

women. Why shall they not serve upon the boards of trustees of our

great reformatory and benevolent institutions, as superintendents

in our hospitals, and as directors and inspectors in our prisons?

The last legislature conferred upon them the right to hold any

office in our great school system except one, that of State

superintendent of public instruction. From them may now be

selected, president of the State university, or of the Normal

School, or of Purdue University, school commissioners and county

superintendents. But the legislature should give them the power to

rescue our prisons, hospitals and asylums from the indescribable

horror of filth, neglect and cruelty which hangs like a murky cloud

over many of them. Men have tried it and failed. Stupidity or

partisanship or brutality or avarice, has transformed many a noble

foundation of benevolence into a hell of abomination. Some one must

step in to inspect; to enforce order, cleanliness and virtue; to

bring comfort and hope to the downcast and to the outcast of

society. This purpose must be backed up by the strong arm of power,

by the sanction of the law, and that law must have upon it the

stamp of woman's intellect. This year the women of Indiana can

place themselves in the van of human progress and dictate the

policy which mankind must recognize as just and true for ages to

come. The public mind is not unprepared for this measure. The

spread and the acceptance of great ideas is almost miraculous in

intelligent communities.

[B.]

LEGAL OPINION BY W. D. WALLACE, ESQ., UPON THE POWER OF THE

LEGISLATURE TO AUTHORIZE WOMEN TO VOTE FOR PRESIDENTIAL ELECTORS.

_Capt. W. DeWitt Wallace, Attorney-at-law, Lafayette, Ind.:_

DEAR SIR: You will confer a favor upon the friends of woman

suffrage in Indiana, if you will send me, in writing, your opinion,

as a lawyer, in answer to the following question, giving your

reasons therefor: Can the legislature of this State empower women

to vote for presidential electors?

MARY F. THOMAS, _President I. W. S. A._

_Richmond, Ind._, December 30, 1880.

LAFAYETTE, Ind., January 5, 1881.

_Dr. Mary F. Thomas, President of Indiana Woman Suffrage

Association, Richmond, Indiana:_

DEAR MADAM: In your favor of the 30th ult., you ask my opinion

upon, to me, a novel and most interesting question, viz.: "Can the

legislature empower women to vote for presidential electors?" After

the most careful consideration which I have been able to give to

the subject, consistent with other duties, and with the aid of such

books as I have at command, I answer your question in the

affirmative. The grounds of my opinion I will proceed to state:

Section 1, article 2, of the Constitution of the United States,

which provides that the president and vice-president shall be

chosen by electors appointed by the several States, declares in

the following words how said electors shall be appointed:

Each State shall appoint in such manner as the legislature

thereof may direct, a number of electors, equal to the whole

number of senators and representatives to which said State may be

entitled in the congress, etc., etc.

Now, in the absence of any provision in the State constitution,

limiting or attempting to limit the discretion of the legislature

as to the manner in which the presidential electors shall be

chosen, there can be no doubt but that the legislature could

empower female, as well as male, citizens to participate in the

choice of presidential electors.

Section 2, article 2 of our State constitution is as follows: In

all elections, not otherwise provided for by this constitution,

every white male citizen of the United States, of the age of

twenty-one years, and upwards, who shall have resided in the State

during the six months immediately preceding such election * * * *

shall be entitled to vote in the township or precinct where he may

reside.

Two questions at once suggest themselves upon the reading of this

section: _First_--Does the section apply to elections of

presidential electors, and thus become a limitation upon the

discretion of the legislature in case it shall direct the

appointment of the electors by a popular vote? _Second_--If so, can

a State constitution thus limit the discretion which the

Constitution of the United States directs shall be exercised by the

legislature? I shall consider the last question first.

While the legislature is created by the State, all its powers are

not derived from, nor are all its duties enjoined by the State. The

moment the State brings the legislature into being, that moment

certain duties enjoined, and certain powers conferred, by the

nation, attach to it. Among the powers and duties of the

legislature, which spring from the national constitution, is the

power and duty of determining how the State shall appoint

presidential electors. The Constitution of the United States

declares in the most explicit terms that the State shall do this

"in such manner as the legislature may direct." In the case of

_Ex-Parte_ Henry E. Hayne, _et al._, reported in volume 9, at page

106, of the Chicago Legal News, the Circuit Court of the United

States for the district of South Carolina, in speaking of the

authority upon which a State legislature acts in providing for the

appointment of presidential electors, says:

Section 1, article 2 of the constitution provides that electors

shall be appointed in such manner as the legislature of each State

may direct. When the legislature of a State, in obedience to that

provision, has, by law, directed the manner of appointment of the

electors, that law has its authorities solely from the Constitution

of the United States. It is a law passed in pursuance of the

constitution.

Hon. James A. Garfield, who was a member of the Electoral

Commission, in discussing before that body the source of the power

to appoint electors, said:

The constitution prescribes that States only shall choose

electors. * * * To speak more accurately, I should say that the

power is placed in the legislatures of the States; for if the

constitution of any State were silent upon the subject, its

legislature is none the less armed with plenary authority

conferred upon it directly by the national

constitution.--[Electoral Commission, p. 242.

That this section of the national constitution has always been

understood to lodge an absolute discretion in the legislature, is

proved by the practice in the different States. Chief Justice

Story, in his "Commentaries on the Constitution of the United

States," in speaking of this section of the constitution and the

practice under it, says:

Under this authority, the appointment of electors has been

variously provided for by the State legislatures. In some States

the legislatures have directly chosen the electors by themselves;

in others they have been chosen by the people by a general ticket

throughout the whole State, and in others by the people in

electoral districts fixed by the legislature, a certain number of

electors being apportioned to each district. No question has ever

arisen as to the constitutionality of either mode, except that of

a direct choice by the legislature. But this, though often

doubted by able and ingenious minds, has been firmly established

in practice ever since the adoption of the constitution, and does

not now seem to admit of controversy, even if a suitable tribunal

existed to adjudicate upon it.--[2 Story on Constitution, section

1,472.

Judge Strong, one of the justices of the Supreme Court of the

United States, and a member of the electoral commission, in

discussing the subject of this section, says:

I doubt whether they [the framers of the national constitution]

had in mind at all [in adopting this section] the idea of a

popular election as a mode of appointing State electors. They

used the word _appoint_, doubtless thinking that the legislatures

of the States would themselves select the electors, or empower

the governor or some other State officer to select them. The word

appoint is not the most appropriate word for describing the

result of a popular election. Such a mode of appointment, I

submit is allowable, but there is little reason to think it was

contemplated. * * * It was not until years afterward that the

electors were chosen by vote.--[Electoral Commission, p. 252.

Senator Frelinghuysen, also a member of the Electoral Commission,

thus speaks of the practice in the several States:

Under this power [the power given by the section of the national

constitution, which we are now considering] the legislature might

direct that the electors should be appointed by the legislature,

by the executive, by the judiciary, or by the people. In the

earliest days of the republic, electors were appointed by the

legislatures. In Pennsylvania they were appointed by the

judiciary. Now, in all the States except Colorado, they are

appointed by the people.--[Electoral Commission, p. 204.

If then it be true that the power to determine how the presidential

electors shall be appointed is derived from the national

constitution, and that power is a discretionary one, to be

exercised in such manner as the legislature may direct, how can it

be said that a State constitution can limit or control the

legislative discretion? If the State can limit that discretion in

one respect it can limit it in another, and in another, and in

another, until it may shut up the legislature to but a single mode

of appointment, which is to take away, and absolutely destroy all

its discretion, and this is nullification, pure and simple. One of

the questions before the electoral commission in the case of South

Carolina, was whether the electoral vote of that State should not

be rejected because the legislature, in providing for the

appointment of the electors, had failed to obey a requirement of

the State constitution in regard to a registry law. This raised, in

principle, the very question we are now considering, and on that

question Senator O. P. Morton, who was a member of the commission,

and who was an able lawyer as well as a great statesman, thus

expressed himself:

They [the presidential electors] are to be appointed in the

manner prescribed by the legislature of the State, and not by the

constitution of the State. The manner of the appointment of

electors has been placed by the Constitution of the United States

in the legislature of each State, and cannot be taken from that

body by the provisions of a State constitution. * * * The power

to appoint electors by a State, is conferred by the Constitution

of the United States, and does not spring from a State

constitution, and cannot be impaired or controlled by a State

constitution.--[Electoral Commission, p. 200.

The distinguished lawyer and statesman [Hon. William Lawrence] who

made the principle argument before the commission in favor of

admitting the vote of the State, took the same ground (Electoral

Commission, p. 186).

The opinion of Justice Story, expressed in the Massachusetts

constitutional convention of 1820, on a very similar question, and

one involving the same principle, quoted by Mr. Lawrence in his

argument, is very high authority, and I reproduce it here. He

(Justice Story) said:

The question then was whether we have a right to insert in our

constitution a provision which controls or destroys a discretion

which may be, nay _must_ be, exercised by the legislature in

_virtue_ of _powers confided_ to it by the Constitution of the

United States. The fourth section of the first article of the

Constitution of the United States declares that the times, places

and manner of holding elections for senators and representatives

shall be prescribed by the legislature thereof. Here an express

provision was made for the manner of choosing representatives by

the State legislatures. They have an _unlimited_ discretion on

the subject. They may provide for an election in districts

sending more than one, or by general ticket for the whole State.

Here is a general discretion, a power of choice. What is the

proposition on the table? It is to limit the discretion, to leave

no choice to the legislature, to compel representatives to be

chosen in districts; in other words to compel them to be chosen

in a specific manner, excluding all others. Were not this plainly

a violation of the constitution? Does it not affect to control

the legislature in the exercise of its powers? * * * It assumes a

control over the legislature, which the Constitution of the

United States does not justify. It is bound to exercise its

authority according to its _own view_ of _public policy_ and

_principle_; and yet this proposition compels it to surrender all

discretion. In my humble judgment * * * it is a direct and

palpable infringement of the constitutional provisions to which I

have referred.--[Electoral Commission, p. 186.

The conclusion seems irresistible that a State constitution cannot

determine for the legislature who shall, or shall not, participate

in the choice of presidential electors, and that in so far as our

State constitution may attempt to do so, it is an infringement of

the national constitution. The discretion of the legislature, by

virtue of the supreme law of the land, being (except in so far as

it is controlled by the national constitution itself) thus

absolutely unlimited, it may, without doubt, as I think, authorize

all citizens without regard to sex, to participate in the choice of

presidential electors. But it has been suggested to me that

possibly by the State legislature, as used in the section of the

national constitution which we have been considering, was meant the

whole people of the State in whom the legislative power originally

resides and not the organized legislative body which they may

create. We answer first that the language of the section will not

admit of this construction. It clearly recognizes a distinction

between the State or the people of the State, and its legislature.

The language is not "each State shall appoint in such manner as

_it_ may direct," etc., but it is, "each State shall appoint in

such manner as the _legislature_ thereof may direct," etc.

Again, it is a familiar canon of construction that in determining

the meaning of a statute, recourse may be had to the history of the

times in which it was enacted. When the Constitution of the United

States was framed, all of the States had organized legislatures, or

representative bodies who wielded the legislative power, and

without doing violence to language, we must suppose that it was to

_them_ the constitution referred. Again, the State legislatures are

referred to not less than ten times in the national constitution,

and in each instance the reference is such as to make it clear that

the organized representative bodies are intended, and in article 5

they are, in express terms, distinguished from conventions of the

States. Indeed, the fundamental idea of the American government is

that of a representative republic as opposed to a pure democracy,

and it may well be doubted whether a State government, without a

representative legislative body of some kind, would, in the

American sense, be republican in form.

Finally, it is apparent from the debates in the constitutional

convention which framed the constitution, and from the whole plan

devised for the election of president and vice-president, that it

was not intended by the framers of the constitution to commit

directly to the whole people of a State the authority to determine

how the presidential electors should be chosen. Nothing seems to

have given the convention more trouble than the mode of selecting a

president. Many plans were proposed. Chief among these were:

election by congress; election by the executives of the States;

election by the people; election by the State legislatures; and

election by electors. These were presented in many forms. The

convention decided not less than three times, and once by a

unanimous vote, in favor of election by the national congress, and

as often reconsidered it (2 Madison Papers, pp. 770, 1,124, 1,190).

The proposition that the president should be elected directly by

the people, instead of by the national congress, received but one

vote, while the proposition that he should be appointed by the

State legislatures received two votes (2 Madison Papers, p. 1,124).

The most cursory examination of the debates will, I think, convince

any mind that it was to the _organized_ legislature of the State,

and not to the people of a State, that the framers of the

constitution intended to commit the power of determining how the

presidential electors should be chosen. It seems, both from the

debates and the plan adopted, to have been their studied effort to

prevent the people from acting in the choice of their chief

magistrate otherwise than through their representatives, and in no

single step of the process are the people directly required or

authorized by the national constitution to act, but in every

instance the duty and the authority are devolved upon their

representatives. For these reasons I think it clear that it was

intended to invest the organized State legislatures with the power

of determining how the presidential electors should be chosen, and

that the discretion thus lodged in the legislature cannot be

limited or controlled by a State constitution.

W. DE WITT WALLACE.

[C.]

In 1868, the Indiana (Friends) Yearly Meeting appointed Mrs. Sarah

J. Smith of Indianapolis, and Mrs. Rhoda M. Coffin of Richmond, to

visit the prisons of the State, with a view to ascertain the spirit

of the management of these institutions, and the moral condition of

their inmates. In obedience to this appointment the two ladies

visited both of the State prisons of Indiana, and made a

particularly thorough examination of the condition of the Southern

prison (at Jeffersonville) where all our women convicts were kept.

Here they found the vilest immoralities being practiced; they

discovered that the rumors which had induced their appointment were

far surpassed by the revolting facts.

They visited Gov. Conrad Baker and urged him to recommend the

General Assembly to make an appropriation for a separate prison for

women. With the full sympathy of Governor Baker, who was not only a

most honorable gentleman, but a sincere believer in the equal

political rights of women, Mrs. Smith and Mrs. Coffin appeared

before the legislature of 1869, and by an unvarnished account of

what they had witnessed and learned in the Southern prison, they

aroused the legislators to immediate action, and an act to

establish a "Reformatory Institution for Women and Girls" was

passed at that session (viz., that of 1869). By statute the new

institution was located at Indianapolis. It was opened in 1873, the

first separate prison for women in this country. Mrs. Sarah J.

Smith was made its first superintendent, and she retained that

office, discharging all its duties with great ability, until 1883,

when upon her resignation she was succeeded by Mrs. Elmina S.

Johnson, who had up to that time been associated with Mrs. Smith as

assistant superintendent.

The first managing board of women consisted of Mrs. Eliza C.

Hendricks (wife of Hon. Thomas A. Hendricks who was governor of

Indiana on the opening of the prison), Mrs. Rhoda M. Coffin and

Mrs. Emily A. Roach. The changes upon the board have been so

infrequent that in addition to those on the first board and to

those on the board at present, only three ladies can be mentioned

in this connection, viz.: Mrs. Eliza S. Dodd of Indianapolis, Mrs.

Mary E. Burson (a banker of Muncie) and Mrs. Sarah J. Smith, who,

after resigning the superintendency, served on the board for a

brief time.

The board at present consists of Mrs. Eliza C. Hendricks,

president, Mrs. Claire A. Walker and Mrs. M. M. James. From the

opening of this institution Mrs. Hendricks has been connected with

it; first as a member of the advisory board, for eight years a

member of the managing board and during a large part of the time

its president, she has served its interest with singular fidelity.

The position is no sinecure. The purchasing of all the supplies is

only a part of the board's work; the business meetings are held

monthly and often occupy half a day, sometimes an entire day. These

Mrs. Hendricks always attends whether she is in Indianapolis or in

Washington; from the latter point she has many times journeyed in

weather most inclement by heat and by cold, simply to look after

the prison and to transact the business for it imposed by her

position on its board. During the last eight years, since women

have had control of its affairs, Miss Anna Dunlop of Indianapolis

has served the institution as its secretary and treasurer. Perhaps

the highest tribute that can be paid to the ability with which Miss

Dunlop has discharged the responsible and complicated duties of her

double office, lies in the fact that with the General Assembly of

the State it has passed into a proverb that "The Woman's

Reformatory is the best and most economically managed of the State

institutions." The committees appointed to visit the penal

institutions always report that "The accounts of the reformatory

are kept so accurately that its financial status can always be

understood at a glance."

This institution has two distinct departments, the penal and the

reformatory, occupying two sides of one main building and joined

under one management. Convicts above sixteen years of age are

ranked as women and confined in the penal department; those under

sixteen years are accounted girls (children) and lodged in the

reformatory department.

The average number of girls in the institution from its opening has

been 150; the number of women 45. There are now (July, 1885,) over

200 inmates.

All of the work of the institution is done by its inmates. A school

is maintained in the building for the children; a few trades are

taught the girls; all are taught housework, laundry work, plain

sewing and mending; the greatest pains is taken to form in the

inmates habits of industry and personal tidiness, and to prepare

them to be good servants; and when their period of incarceration

has expired, the ladies interest themselves in finding homes and

employment for the discharged convicts whom they seek to restore to

normal relations to society. The secretary estimates that of those

who have been discharged from the institution during the last

twelve years, fully seventy-five per cent. have been really

restored and are leading honest and industrious lives.

[D.]

GOV. PORTER'S BIENNIAL MESSAGE, 1883: "I recommend that in the

department for women in this hospital it shall be required by law

that at least one of the physicians shall be a woman. There are now

in this State not a few women who bear diplomas from respectable

medical colleges, and who are qualified by professional attainments

and experience to fill places as physicians in public institutions

with credit and usefulness. It would be peculiarly fit that their

services should be sought in cases of insanity among members of

their own sex."

[E.]

About the year 1867, Miss Lucinda B. Jenkins, formerly of Wayne

county, Indiana, left her work among the "Freedmen" in the South,

to accept the position of matron in "The Soldiers' Orphans' Home"

at Knightstown, Indiana. She afterwards became the wife of Dr.

Wishard, the superintendent; and when the office was vacated by his

death, she was authorized to assume his responsibilities, and

perform his duties, with the exception of receipting bills and

drawing appropriations, which latter duties, not being then

considered as within the province of a woman, were delegated to the

steward until the doctor's successor could be legally appointed.

She was a lady of intelligence and true moral worth, possessing a

dignified, pleasing manner, and other good qualities, which, with

her long experience as co-manager of the institution, admirably

fitted her for the position of superintendent; but she was a woman,

without a vote or political influence, and it was necessary that

"party debts" should be paid. She therefore continued her influence

for the good of the institution without public recognition until

1882, when she left to take charge of a private orphan asylum under

the management of ladies of Indianapolis.

[F.]

Miss Susan Fussell is the daughter of the late Dr. B. Fussell of

Philadelphia, to whom, with his estimable wife, women are indebted

as the founder of the first medical college for women in the United

States. At that period of our civil war, when women were admitted

to the hospitals as nurses, Miss Fussell was at her brother's home

at Pendleton, Indiana. She immediately volunteered her services,

and was assigned to duty by the Indiana sanitary commission in the

military hospitals in Louisville, Kentucky, where she served

faithfully until the close of the war, giving the bloom of her

youth to her country without hope of reward other than that which

comes to all as the result of self-sacrificing devotion to the

cause of humanity.

At the close of the war she returned to Philadelphia, but learning

soon that an effort was being made to induce the State of Indiana

to provide a home for the soldiers' orphans, she again offered her

services in any useful capacity in that work. A benevolent

gentleman of Indianapolis who had been most urgent in calling the

attention of the officers of the State to their duty in that

matter, finding that there was no hope, offered to furnish Miss

Fussell with the money necessary to clothe, rear, educate and care

for a family of ten orphans of soldiers, and bring them up to

maturity, if she would furnish the motherly love, the years of hard

labor and self-sacrifice, the sleepless nights and endless patience

needed for the work. After a few days of prayerful consideration

she accepted, and in the fall of 1865 ten orphans were gathered

together in Indianapolis from various parts of the State from among

those who had no friends able or willing to care for them. In the

spring of 1866 they were removed to the Soldiers' Home near

Knightstown, where a small cottage and garden were assigned to

their use. In 1875, she placed the older boys in houses where their

growing strength could be better utilized, and moved with the girls

and younger boys to Spiceland to secure the benefit of better

schools. In 1877, all of the ten but one were self-supporting, and

have since taken useful and respectable positions in society. The

one exception was a little feeble-minded boy, who, with his

brother, had been found in the county poor-house; his condition and

wants very soon impressed her with the necessity for a State home

for feeble-minded children in Indiana, it having been found

necessary to send this boy to another State to be educated.

He is now in a neighboring State institution, and is almost

self-supporting. With her usual energy and directness, she went to

work to gather statistics on the subject of "Feeble-minded

Children" in this and other States, and to interest others in their

welfare. She at last found an active co-worker in Charles Hubbard,

the representative from Henry county in the legislature, and their

united efforts, aided by other friends of the cause, secured in

1876 the enactment of the law establishing the Home for

Feeble-minded Children, now in operation near Knightstown, Indiana.

Having seen all her children well provided for, she began to look

for further work, and soon conceived the idea of taking the

children from the county poor-houses of the State and forming them

into families. She offered to take the children in the Henry county

poor-house and provide for them home, food, clothing and education,

for the small sum of twenty-five cents per day for each child,

which her experience had proven to be the smallest sum that would

accomplish the good she desired; but the county commissioners would

only allow her twenty cents per day. She accepted their terms,

furnishing the deficit from her own means, and so earnest was she

and so completely did she demonstrate the superiority of her plan

for the care of these children, that she interested many others in

the work, and the result was the passage of a law by the

legislature of 1880-1881, giving to county commissioners the right

to place their destitute children under the care of a matron,

giving her sole charge of them and full credit for her work, and

providing for her salary and their support. Under that law Miss

Fussell now has all the destitute children of Henry county under

her care, and has created a model orphans' home. Thus has this one

woman been a power for good, and by following in the direct line of

her duty, has been obliged to "meddle in the affairs of State" and

to influence legislation.

If in giving this sketch we have exceeded the limits allotted us,

let us remember that our subject represents thousands of noble

women who care rather that their light shall carry with it comfort

and warmth, than be noted for its brilliancy, and who, having no

voice in the government, are obliged to work out their beneficent

ideas with much unnecessary labor.

[G.]

The friends of woman's equality addressed the following petition to

each member of the State legislature:

Being personally acquainted with Mrs. SARAH A. OREN, and knowing

her to be a woman of refinement and culture, we can consistently

urge upon you a favorable consideration of her claims as a

candidate for election to the office of State librarian. She has

had the benefit of a collegiate education, and has been for several

years a successful teacher in Antioch College and in the public

high-school of Indianapolis. She is mainly dependent on her own

labor for the means to support and educate her children, who were

_made fatherless by a rebel bullet_ at the siege of Petersburg. Her

education and experience have admirably fitted her for the

discharge of all the duties of the office of State librarian; and

by electing her to that office, the Republican party will secure a

faithful and efficient officer, and have the pleasure of making

another payment on the debt we owe to the widows and orphans of

those who died that our country might live.[586]

Mrs. Oren was elected to the office of State librarian and

performed the duties belonging to it with great efficiency and

fidelity. She has been succeeded by Mrs. Margaret Peele, Mrs. Emma

A. Winsor and Miss Lizzie H. Callis.

* * * * *

CHAPTER XLVII.

MINNESOTA.

[A.]

In the early days, long before the organization of either State or

local societies, there were, besides those mentioned in the main

chapter, a few earnest women who were ever ready to subscribe for

suffrage papers and circulate tracts and petitions to congress and

the State legislature, whose names should be honored with at least

a mention on the page of history. Among them were: Mrs. Addie

Ballou, Mrs. Ellis White, Mrs. Eliza Dutcher, Mrs. Sarah Clark,

Miss Amelia Heebner, Miss Emily A. Emerson, Mrs. Mary F. Mead, Mrs.

E. M. O'Brien, Miss Ellen C. Thompson, Miss R. J. Haner, Mrs. Mary

Hulett, Mrs. Gorham Powers, Mrs. C. A. Hotchkiss, Mrs. Emma Wilson,

Mrs. Mary Wilkins, Mrs. Anna D. Weeks, Mrs. Mary Leland, Mrs. Susan

C. Burger, Mrs. A. R. Lovejoy, and others.

[B.]

Of the seventy-six organized counties in Minnesota we give the

following partial list of those that have elected women to the

office of superintendent of public schools: _Mille Lacs County_,

Olive R. Barker; _Pine_, Ella Gorton; _Lac Qui Parle_, Malena P.

Kirley; _Anoka_, Mrs. Catharine J. Pierce, Mrs. Ellen Conforth,

Miss Dailey; _Benton_, Mrs. Belle Graham, Mrs. E. K. Whitney;

_Cottonwood_, Mrs. E. C. Huntington, Mrs. B. J. Banks, Mrs. L.

Huntington; _Dodge_, Mrs. Mary Powell Wheeler, Mrs. P. L. Dart,

Mrs. J. W. Willard, Barbara Van Allen; _Dakota_, Mrs. Martha

Wallace, Harriet E. Jones, Mrs. C. H. Day, Mrs. C. Teachout, Nellie

Duff, Mary Mather, Anna Manners, Jennie Horton; _Freeborn_, Mrs. J.

B. Foote, Mrs. D. R. Hibbs, Mrs. A. W. Johnson, Mrs. J. H.

Pickard; _Fillmore_, Charlotte Taeor, Margaret Hood, Mrs. M. E.

Molstad, Mrs. A. E. Harsh; _Fairbault_, Jane Harris, Georgia Adams,

Mrs. A. B. Thorp, Mrs. Levi Crump, Mrs. R. C. Smith, Mary Rumage,

Mrs. L. A. Scott; _Goodhue_, Mrs. H. A. Hobart; _Brown_, Mrs. O. B.

Ingraham; _Douglass_, Mrs. M. C. Lewis, Mrs. J. B. Van Hoesen, Mrs.

Trask; _Houston_, Mrs. Annie M. Carpenter; _Hennepin_, Angelina

Dupont, Mrs. M. F. Taylor; _Lyon_, Louise M. Ferro, M. D., Mrs. W.

C. Robinson, Mertie Caley; _Mower_, Mrs. W. H. Parker, Mrs. V. J.

Duffy, Mrs. J. F. Rockwell, Mrs. E. Hoppin, Sarah M. Dean;

_Marshall_, Mrs. L. H. Stone; _Meeker_, Mrs. A. R. Jackman, Mrs.

Orin Whitney, Mary E. Ferguson; _Martin_, Mrs. J. W. Fuller, Mrs.

M. E. St. John, Mary E. Harvey, Mary A. McLean; _Olmstead_, Adelle

Moore, Jane Haggerty, Mrs. R. S. Carver; _Polk_, Mrs. M. C. Perrin,

Mrs. J. A. Barnum; _Ramsey_, Mrs. B. McGuire, Annie E. Dunn; _St.

Louis_, Sarah Burger Stearns; _Winona_, Dr. Adaline Williams;

_Stevens_ county reports one lady serving as school-district

treasurer; _Otter Tail_ county reports six ladies serving in

different places; _Wright_ county, four serving as clerks of

school-districts; and in _Beeker_ county it is said ladies

sometimes serve as deputies during their husbands' absence.

[C.]

In a volume edited by Harriet N. R. Arnold, entitled, "The Poets

and Poetry of Minnesota," published in 1864, are the following

names: Mrs. Laura E. Bacon Hunt, Mrs. Emily F. Bugbee Moore, Miss

Eleanor C. Donnelly, Miss Jane Gray Fuller, Mrs. E. M. Harris, Miss

Ninetta Maine, Mrs. J. R. McMasters, Harriet E. Bishop, Irene

Galloway, Mary R. Lyon, Miss M. E. Pierson Smith, Mrs. Helen L.

Pandergast, Julia A. A. Wood. Among the later writers possessing

true poetic genius are Mrs. Julia Cooley Carruth, Miss Eva J.

Stickney, Miss Jennie E. M. Caine, Mrs. Emily Huntington Miller.

Among the authors who sent their books to the New Orleans

Exposition in 1885, are Frances A. Shaw, Marion Shaw, Minnie May

Lee, Eleanor G. Donnelly, Mrs. M. M. Sanford, Mrs. Julia Wood, Edna

A. Barnard, Mrs. Arnold, Miss Franc E. Babbett, Mrs. Henderson,

Miss Campbell, Mrs. C. H. Plummer, Mrs. Will E. Haskell, Mrs. Delia

Whitney Norton, Maria A. Drew, Mrs. Jennie Lynch, Miss Mary A.

Cruikshank.

[D.]

Mrs. Winchell, wife of the president of the Minnesota State

University, kindly sent us the names of the fifty-six young women

who were graduated from that institution between 1875 and 1885:

Class of '75, Helen Mar Ely; '76, Martha Butler; '77, Matilda J.

Campbell, Viola Fuller, Charlotte A. Rollet, Mary A. Maes; '78,

Mary Robinson, Nettie Getchel; '79, Marian H. Roe, Caroline Rollet,

Martha J. West, Evelyn May Champlin, Etta Medora Eliot; '80, Lizzie

A. House, Bessie S. Lawrence, Minnie Reynolds, Lillian Todd, Cora

Inez Brown; '81, Emily Hough, Diana Burns, Sarah E. Palmer, Lilla

Ruth Williams; '82, Carrie Holt, Lydia Holt, Mary Eliza Holt, Alice

E. Demmon, Louise Lillian Hilbourn, Emily D. McMillan, Ada Eva

Pillsbury, Agnes V. Bonniwell, Grace W. Curtis, Marie Louise Henry,

Mary Nancy Hughes, Carrie D. Fletcher; '83, Annie Harriet

Jefferson, Kate Louise Kennedy, Sarah Pierrepont McNair, Anna

Calista Marston, Janet Nunn, Emma Frances Trussell, Helen Louise

Pierce, Martha Sheldon, Louise E. Hollister, Emma J. Ware; '84,

Hannah Sewall, Susie Sewall, Anna Bonfoy, Bessie Latho, Addie

Kingsbury, Belle Bradford, Emma Twinggi; '85, Mary Benton, Bertha

Brown, Ida Mann, Mary Irving, Mabel Smith.

Among the women who have been successful as preceptresses in the

State University are: Helen Sutherland, M. A., Mrs. Augusta Norwood

Smith, Matilda J. Campbell, B. L., Maria L. Sanford.

Among the teachers in the normal schools of the State are the

following:

_Winona_--Martha Brechbill, Sophia L. Haight, Jennie Ellis, Sarah

E. Whittaker, Kate L. Sprague, Vienna Dodge, Ada L. Mitchell, Anna

C. Foekens, Rena M. Mead, Mary E. Couse, B. S.

_Mankato Normal School_--Helen M. Philips, Defransa A. Swan, Anna

McCutcheon, Genevieve S. Hawley, Mary E. Hutcheson, Eliza A.

Cheney, Charity A. Green, M. Adda Holton.

_St. Cloud Normal School_--Isabel Lawrence, Ada A. Warner, Minnie

F. Wheelock, Rose A. Joclin, Mary L. Wright, Kittie W. Allen.

Nearly all of the above-named teachers were graduated from Eastern

colleges and universities.

Women occupy the same positions as men and receive corresponding

salaries. A recent report of Minneapolis schools names fifteen

women in the High School receiving from $650 to $900 per year;

twelve principals of ward schools, receiving from $750 to $1,000;

and eleven primary principals receiving from $650 to $800. At St.

Paul there were reported two principals getting $1,200 each, two

getting $900, and twelve others getting $600 each; of the five lady

assistants in the High School, one received $900, one $800, and

three received $700 each. The principal of the High School at

Duluth receives $750 per annum, and some of the assistants and

principals of ward schools, $600.

Miss Sarah E. Sprague, a graduate of St. Lawrence University, and

of the Normal and Training School at Oswego, N. Y., has been

employed since August, 1884, by the State Department of Public

Instruction, for institute work, at a salary of $1,260 per year and

expenses. Miss Sprague is a lady of rare ability and an honor to

her profession.

Prominent among private schools for young ladies is the Bennett

Seminary at Minneapolis, Mrs. B. B. Bennett, principal; also the

Wasioja Seminary, Mrs. C. B. P. Lang, preceptress, and Miss M. V.

Paine, instructor in music. The services of Miss Mary E. Hutcheson

have been highly valued as instructor in vocal music and elocution

in the Mankato Normal School. Miss Florence Barton at Minneapolis,

Mrs. Emily Moore of Duluth, are excellent teachers of music, and

Miss Zella D'Unger, of elocution.

Prominent among the kindergarten schools is that of Mrs. D. V. S.

Brown at St. Paul; Mrs. Mary Dowse, Duluth; Miss Endora Hailman,

Winona. The latter is director of the kindergarten connected with

the Winona State Normal School. Miss Fannie Wood, Miss Kate E.

Barry, Miss Ella P. McWhorter and Miss Abby E. Axtell, are reported

as having rendered very efficient service as teachers in the State

Deaf and Dumb Asylum; Miss Mary Kirk, Miss Alice Mott and Miss Emma

L. Rohow are spoken of as having been earnest and devoted teachers

in the State Institution for the Blind.

Mrs. Viola Fuller Miner of Minneapolis, graduated from the State

University, has long been known as a teacher and writer of much

ability. Her pen never touches the suffrage question except to its

advantage. Miss Eloise Butler, teaching in the High School of the

same city, would gladly have lent her personal aid to suffrage work

had time and strength permitted. We have at least the blessing of

her membership and influence. Mrs. Sadie Martin, likewise a teacher

of advanced classes and an easy writer, will be remembered as the

first president of the local suffrage society of Minneapolis, and

one much devoted to its interests. Mrs. Maggie McDonald, formerly a

teacher at Rochester and long a resident of St. Paul, has ever been

a devoted friend of the suffrage cause--commenced work as long ago

as '69, and is to-day unflagging in hope and zeal. Mrs. Caroline

Nolte of the same city, though much occupied as a teacher in the

High School, still found time to aid in forming the St. Paul

Suffrage Society. Miss Helen M. McGowan, a teacher at Owatonna, is

spoken of as "a grand woman who believes in the ballot as a means

to higher ends." Miss S. A. Mayo, a lady of fine culture and a

successful teacher of elocution, was also an active member of this

society while in the city. Miss Clara M. Coleman, a classical

scholar from Michigan University, for one year principal of the

Duluth High School, was a believer in equal rights for all and did

not hesitate to say so. Miss Louise Hollister, a graduate of the

Minnesota University, is Miss Coleman's successor and a friend of

suffrage for women, with an educational qualification; she is

vice-president of the Equal Rights League of Duluth. Miss Jenny

Lind Gowdy, graduated from the Winona Normal School, is an

excellent primary principal who teaches her pupils that girls

should have the same rights and privileges as boys--no more, no

less.

[E.]

The names of the women who have been admitted to the Minnesota

State Medical Society are: Clara E. Atkinson, Ida Clark, Mary G.

Hood, A. M. Hunt, Harriet E. Preston, Belle M. Walrath, Annes F.

Wass, Lizzie R. Wass, Mary Twoddy Whetsone.

Among the women who have practiced medicine in Minnesota are:

Catharine Underwood Jewell, Lake City; E. M. Roys, Rochester;

Harriet E. Preston, M. Mason, Mary E. Emery, Jennie Fuller, Clara

E. Atkinson, St. Paul; Mary G. Hood, Mary J. Twoddy Whetsone, R. C.

Henderson, A. M. Hunt, Adele S. Hutchinson, Mary L. Swain, D. A.

Coombe, Minneapolis; E. M. Roys, Mary Whitney, Ida S. Clark,

Rochester; Augusta L. Rosenthal, Winona; Fannie E. Holden, Anna

Brockway Gray, Duluth.

The board of officers of the Sisters of Bethany has for many years

consisted of: _President_, Mrs. Charlotte O. Van Cleve;

_Vice-President_, Mrs. Euphemia N. Overlock; _Secretary_, Mrs.

Harriet G. Walker; _Treasurer_, Mrs. Abbie G. Mendenhall.

The city of Minneapolis takes the lead of all others in the State

in the number of its benevolent institutions. It has its Woman's

Industrial Exchange, as an aid to business women; its Woman's Home,

or pleasant boarding-house; for the care of sick women, its

Northwestern Woman's Hospital and training-school for nurses; also

a homeopathic hospital for women; for the care of homeless infants,

its Foundlings' Home; for unfortunate girls, its Bethany Home. All

of these institutions are in the hands of the best of women. Among

the most active are: Mrs. M. B. Lewis, Miss Abby Adair, Mrs. O. A.

Pray, Mrs. J. M. Robinson, Mrs. John Edwards, Mrs. L. Christian,

Mrs. S. W. Farnham, Mrs. Wm. Harrison, Mrs. H. M. Carpenter, Mrs.

D. Morrison, Mrs. John Crosby, Mrs. George B. Wright, Mrs. Moses

Marston, Mrs. Charlotte O. Van Cleve, Mrs. T. B. Walker, Dr. Mary

S. Whetsone, Mrs. C. S. Winchell, Dr. Mary G. Hood, Mrs. R. W.

Jordan, Miss A. M. Henderson.

In the city of Duluth there is a woman's home unlike any other in

the State. It is managed by a corporate body of ladies known as

home missionaries. The charter members are: Sarah B. Stearns, Laura

Coppernell, Jennie C. Swanstrom, Fanny H. Anthony, Olive Murphy,

Flora Davey, Jennie S. Lloyd, Fannie E. Holden, M. D. The work of

this corporation is to seek out all poor women needing temporary

shelter and employment. The classes chiefly cared for are poor

widows and deserted wives, and such small children as may belong to

them; also over-worked young women who may need a temporary

resting-place; also young girls thrown suddenly upon their own

resources without knowledge of how to care for themselves. These

ladies care also for the unfortunate of another class, but in a

retired place, unmarked by any sign. They prefer that to the usual

plan of caring for the victims of men.

[F.]

Portrait and landscape-painters in oil and water-colors, who give

promise of success: _Minneapolis_, Miss Clara V. Shaw, Miss Mary E.

Neagle, Mrs. Frank Painter, Miss Mary Dunn, Mrs. Irene W. Clark,

Miss C. M. Lenora, Mrs. Arthur Clark, Mrs. A. M. West, Miss Myra H.

Twitchell, Mrs. A. L. Loring, Miss Luella Gurney, Mrs. Charles

Fairfield, Mrs. A. T. Rand, Miss E. Robeson, Miss Helen Goodwin,

Mrs. Sarah E. Corbett, Mrs. Lucille Hunkle, Miss Mary Kennedy, Mrs.

Frances A. Pray. Mrs. W. B. Mead, Miss Flora Edwards, Mrs. Knight,

Mrs. I. W. Mauley, Mrs. M. P. Hawkins; _St. Paul_, Miss Florence M.

Cole, Miss Mary Hollingshead, Miss A. M. Shavre, Miss Alice

Chandler, Mrs. Martha Griggs, Miss L. B. West, Mrs. Knox, Mrs.

Theodosia Rose Cleveland, Mrs. Genevieve Jefferson, Mrs. C. B.

Grant, Jennie Lynch, Miss Wilson, Miss Lilla Inness, Mrs. George

Eastman, Mrs. Paine, Mrs. Fannie Smith, Miss Alice Page, Mrs.

Hunter; _Winona_, Mrs. W. Ely, Mrs. Ella Newell, Miss D. E. Barr;

_Lake City_, Mrs. H. B. Sargent, Mrs. J. G. Richardson, Bessie

Milliken; _Stillwater_, Sadie S. Clark, Miss Field, Sarah Murdock;

_Albert Lea_, Birdie Slocum; _Fairbault_, Grace McKinster, Miss S.

E. Cook; _Litchfield_, Mrs. Carter; _Alexandria_, Mamie Lewis; _St.

Cloud_, Mary Clarke; _Fergus Falls_, Mrs. Wurtle; _Owatonna_, Mrs.

D. O. Searles; _Duluth_, Emma F. Shaw Newcome, Anna E. Gilbert,

Mrs. A. D. Frost, De Etta Evans, Mrs. Persis Norton, Addie W. L.

Barrow, Gertrude Olmstead, Addie Hunter, Fanny Woodbridge.

Doubtless there are many others of worth in other localities

improving their talents and finding real enjoyment and pecuniary

recompense in the pursuit of their loved art.

It is one of the imperfections of this chapter that the names

cannot be given of the many gifted young ladies who have gone from

Minnesota for a musical education to the New York and Boston

Conservatories of Music. Of those who have gone from Duluth, and

returned as proficients, may be named Mary Willis, Mary Ensign

Hunter, Mary Munger, Florence Moore and Jessie Hopkins. With this

beautiful thought in mind, "_noblesse oblige_," the christian

workers of Duluth call upon these talented young ladies for aid in

furnishing many entertainments for charity's sake, and are seldom

disappointed.

[G.]

Among the occasional speakers and writers not mentioned in the main

chapter are: Abbie J. Spaulding, Mrs. M. M. Elliot, Miss A. M.

Henderson, Mrs. M. J. Warner, Lizzie Manson, Rebecca S. Smith,

Viola Fuller Miner, Harriet G. Walker, Eliza Burt Gamble, Emma

Harriman, Eva McIntyre, Mary Hall Dubois, Minnie Reed, Mrs. G. H.

Miller, Dr. Mary Whetsone, Mrs. M. C. Ladd, Mrs. M. A. Seely, Mrs.

E. S. Wright, Mrs. M. H. Drew, Mrs. E. J. Holly, Mrs. David

Sanford, Mrs. F. E. Russell, Lily Long. Zoe McClary, daughter of

Rev. and Mrs. Thomas McClary, gives promise of distinction.

Since the formation of the State and local societies there are many

women in their quiet homes who are ever ready to encourage any

effort toward making all women more free, helpful and happy. Let

this paragraph record the names of a few of these: Mary E. Chute,

Isabelle L. Blaisdell, Mary Partridge, Mrs. C. C. Curtis, Frances

A. Shaw, Lucy E. Prescott, Mrs. S. J. Squires, Minnie Reed, Mrs. E.

S. Wright, Nellie H. Hazeltine, Adelle J. Grow, Mrs. A. B. Cole,

Mrs. A. F. Bliss, Mrs. E. J. Holley, Frances P. Sawyer, Frances L.

James, Mrs. M. C. Clark, Lucy Gibbs, Prudence Lusk, Lizzie P.

Hawkins, M. Hammond, Mrs. E. Southworth, Josephine Strait, Kittie

Manson, Mrs. R. C. Watson, Alice B. Cash, Emma Drew, Helen M. Olds,

Mrs. W. W. Bilson, Adaline Smith, Mrs. L. A. Watts, Emily Moore,

Olive Murphy, Mrs. L. A. Wentworth, Gertrude L. Gow, Della W.

Norton, Mrs. V. A. Wright, Mrs. M. H. Wells, Aurelia Bassett, Kate

C. Stevens, Mary Vrouman, Belle Hazen, Mrs. D. C. Hunt, Mrs. L. H.

Young, Louisa Stevens, Esther Hayes, Sarah J. Crawford, Lucinda

Roberts, Carrie Rawson, Sarah Herrick, Kate Tabor, Charlotte

Herbert, Belle McClelland, Jane E. Knott, Margaret Bryson, Mary

McKnight, Emma Coleman, Sarah Ricker, Mary M. Pomeroy, Sarah

Pribble, Mary A. Grinnell, Eliza Van Ambden.

* * * * *

CHAPTER LIII.

CALIFORNIA.

We give not only the names of the delegates present at the

convention of 1870, but also of a few of the most earnest friends

of the cause in the several counties of the State, not heretofore

mentioned in connection with the early conventions.

In San Francisco we must not omit the venerable Eliza Taylor, a

sweet-faced Quaker, eighty years of age, nor Fanny Green

McDougall--"Aunt" Fanny, as we loved to call her--nor Mrs. C. C.

Calhoun, Mary F. Snow, Minnie Edwards, Mrs. O. Fuller, Mrs. C. M.

Parker, Wm. R. Ryder, Mrs. M. J. Hendee, Kate Collins, Mary

Kellogg, Louise Fowler, M. J. Hemsley and Mrs. H. T. Perry. In

October, 1883, Elizabeth McComb, Mary Coggins, Mrs. J. V.

Drinkhouse, Dr. and Mrs. E. D. Smith, Mrs. E. Sloan, Mrs. C. J.

Furman, Elizabeth D. Layres, Miss Prince, Kate Kennedy, Carrie

Parker, Marion Hill,[587] Mrs. Olmstead, Mrs. Dr. White, Dr. Laura

P. Williams and Mrs. Olive Washburn were all members of the city

and State associations. There was the brilliant Sallie Hart, who

took such an active part in the "local option" contest in 1871, and

who as a newspaper reporter and correspondent in the State

legislature for two or three sessions was very active in urging the

claims of woman upon the consideration of our law-makers.

Hon. Philip A. Roach, often a prominent official of the State, and

for many years editor of the _Daily Examiner_, is an advocate of

woman's rights and was instrumental in getting an act, known as

"Senator Roach's bill to Punish Wife-whippers," passed. It provided

that such offenders should be punished by flogging upon the bare

back at the whipping-post. A wise and just law, but it was

afterward declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. Hon.

James G. Maguire, a brilliant and rising young lawyer, a member of

the legislature in 1875, now a judge of the Superior Court of San

Francisco, is a most reliable and talented advocate of equality for

women. Among the members of the bar and other prominent men of the

State are to be found a number who are either pronounced in their

views of woman's right to vote, or are inclined to favor all

measures tending to ameliorate woman's condition in life; of whom

are Judge G. M. Clough, Judge Darwin, D. J. Murphy, Judge L. Quint,

Col. J. P. Jackson of the _Daily Post_, Hon. Charles Gildea of the

Board of Equalization, Judge Toohey, the late Judge Charles Wolff,

Rev. Dr. F. F. Jewell, Dr. R. H. McDonald, the prominent temperance

advocate; Hon. J. T. Wharton, P. S. Dorney, esq., Judge J. B.

Lamar, Rev. Dr. Robert McKenzie, Capt. Walker of the _City Argus_,

Hon. Frank Pixley of the _Argonaut_, ex-Gov. James A. Johnson of

the _Daily Alta_, Alfred Cridge, esq., Dr. R. B. Murphy, N. Hawks,

W. H. Barnes of _The Call_, O. Dearing, Hon. W. W. Marrow, Hon.

Charles A. Sumner, representative in congress; Hon. J. B. Webster

of the _California Patron_, in San Francisco. In other parts of the

State are; Senator Cross of Nevada county, Assemblyman Cominette of

Amador, Judge G. G. Clough, and Senator Kellogg of Plumas county,

Hon. H. M. Larue, Speaker of the House, and Assemblyman Doty of

Sacramento county, Senator Del Valle of Los Angeles, Hon. O. B.

Hitchcock of Tulare county, Judge McCannaughy and Judge E. Steele

of Siskyon county, Hon. T. B. Wigginton, Judge Charles Marks, R. J.

Steele, esq., of Merced county; John Mitchell, John T. Davis and

Capt. Gray of Stanislaus; Hon. J. McM. Shafter of Marin county;

Senator Brooks and Judge J. D. Hinds of Ventura county.

Sacramento county contains a large number of progressive men and

women, though the good work has consisted mainly in the efforts

made by committees appointed by the State society to attend the

biennial sessions of the legislature, most of whom were not

residents of the county. But among those who have done good service

in Sacramento, the first and most active for many years has been

Mrs. L. G. Waterhouse, now of Monterey. She espoused the cause in

early life, and when many added years compelled her to retire from

active service, her efforts in behalf of women were still

continued. Miss Dr. Kellogg is not only a successful practitioner

of medicine, but is gifted with eloquent speech, and has on several

occasions addressed the legislature of the State; Dr. Jennie

Bearby, for some years a resident of Sacramento, now of Idaho, is

worthy of mention; Mrs. M. J. Young, attorney-at-law since June,

1879; Annie G. Cummings and daughter, have been among the earliest

and most faithful adherents to our cause. Mrs. E. B. Crocker has,

through her social position, exerted great influence in a quiet

way, and has contributed liberally from her vast wealth to aid the

cause; she founded the Marguerite Home for aged women. Dr. and Mrs.

Bowman, now of Oakland, were pioneers in this work; while Mesdames

Jackson, Hontoon, Perley Watson, and Miss Hattie Moore are among

the recent converts. Hon. Grove L. Johnson has been one of the most

eloquent of all the fearless champions of women who have occupied a

seat in the legislature; Hon. Creed Haymond deserves to rank with

the foremost, as an able advocate of woman's political rights; Hon.

S. J. Finney of Santa Cruz, Talbot Wallis, State Librarian, Judge

Taylor, a prominent lawyer, and his brilliant wife, are also among

our friends. Sarah A. Montgomery, Mattie A. Shaw, Mrs. A. Wilcox,

Mary B. Lewis, Judge and Mrs. McFarland, Judge J. W. Armstrong,

encouraged by his devoted and talented wife, and a large number of

others, favor in a quiet way the ballot for women.

San Joaquin county has been the home of Laura De Force Gordon since

1870, and much of her practice as a lawyer has been in the courts

at Stockton. Among the earliest advocates of suffrage were Mr. and

Mrs. William Condy, Mr. and Mrs. Harry, Judge Brush, Hattie Brush,

Judge Roysdon, William Hickman and wife, Mrs. E. Emery, William

Israel, Hannah Israel, Miss E. Clifford, Dr. Holden, Richard Condy

and his noble wife Elizabeth, who was the first president of the

San Joaquin county society. Among a host of others are Mr. and Mrs.

W. F. Freeman and their bright young daughter Sophronia, who gives

promise of future usefulness in the lecture-field; Mr. and Mrs. J.

C. Gage, whose daughter Hattie possesses marked artistic ability,

and though still in her teens has produced oil paintings of rare

beauty; Dr. Brown, physician in charge of the State Insane Asylum;

Dr. Phoebe Tabor, for many years a successful medical practitioner;

Mrs. N. G. Cary, Mrs. M. S. Webb, Mrs. Zignago, a successful

business woman; Mr. and Mrs. H. B. Loomis, R. B. Lane, Mr. and Mrs.

H. M. Bond, and Mr. and Mrs. W. L. Overhiser, both of whom are

active members of that liberal woman's rights order, the Patrons of

Husbandry. Hon. R. C. Sargent, a member of the legislature for

several terms, has always aided the woman's cause by his vote and

influence. Dr. J. L. Sargent and his intelligent wife are also

friends to every measure tending to benefit woman. Hon. S. L.

Terry, Senator F. T. Baldwin, James A. Lontitt, esq., Judge J. H.

Budd, Judge A. Van R. Patterson, George B. McStay, Judge Buckley

and a number of other prominent officials and members of the legal

profession, are all in favor of equal rights.

Sonoma county has a few fearless friends of woman suffrage. Mary

Jewett, Mrs. Prince, Fannie M. Wertz and Miss E. Merrill were

officers in the first organization formed at Healdsburg in that

county in 1870, and together with J. G. Howell and wife, who were

proprietors of the _Russian River Flag_, kept up the society for

years. At Petaluma, Mrs. A. A. Haskell, Mr. and Mrs. A. L. Hatch,

Kate Lovejoy and Mrs. Judge Latimer organized a society in 1869. In

Solano county are Mr. and Mrs. Denio and Mrs. E. L. Hale of

Vallejo; Mrs. Elizabeth Ober and Mrs. Celia Geddes of Fairfield.

Napa county soon became an objective point for lecturers; a society

was organized at St. Helena in 1871, with Mr. and Mrs. John

Lewellyn, Charles King, Mrs. Potter and Dr. and Mrs. Allyn as

officers; at Napa were Joseph Eggleton and wife and Mrs. Ellis. In

San Mateo county was Mrs. Dr. Kilpatrick. Contra Costa county was

organized in 1870, and Mrs. Phebe Benedict, Mrs. Abbott, Mary

O'Brien, Sarah Sellers, Dr. and Mrs. Howard, Hannah Israel, an able

writer and lecturer, and Capt. Kimball of Antioch, took an active

part therein. Mrs. J. H. Chase of Martinez, E. H. Cox and wife of

Danville, were pioneers in the cause, and Henry and Abigail Bush of

Martinez, were most prominent in the first meetings held there.

Mrs. Bush had the honor to preside over the second woman suffrage

convention ever held in the United States, that at Rochester, N.

Y., in 1848. O. Alley and wife, also of Martinez, extended their

hospitality to lecturers who visited that place, and fully

sympathized in the cause.

In Marin county a society was formed in 1870, with Isabella Irwin,

Mrs. Barney, Flora Whitney, Mrs. M. Dubois and Mary Battey Smith,

as officers; Mrs. McM. Shafter, a gifted and influential lady, was

also an active worker in the good cause. Alameda county--Rev. John

Benton and wife, Professor E. Carr and wife, Mrs. C. C. Calhoun,

Mrs. M. L. S. Duncan, Mrs. S. S. Allen, Dr. and Mrs. Powers, Mr.

and Mrs. Ingersoll, Angie Eager, Mary Kenny, George and Martha

Parry and Mr. and Mrs. William Stevens, were interested in the

earlier agitation of the question; Mrs. Sanford, Mrs. A. M.

Stoddard and Mrs. M. Johnson are among the later converts. Merced

county the home of Rowena Granice Steele, the author, and publisher

of the _San Joaquin Valley Argus_, has furnished the State with a

worthy and capable advocate of woman suffrage, both as a speaker

and writer. In her cozy, rose-embowered cottage at Merced, she

generously entertains her numerous guests, who always seek out this

distinguished and warm-hearted friend of woman. Stanislaus county

is the present home of Jennie Phelps Purvis, a talented and

brilliant woman, well known in literary circles in an early day and

for some years a prominent officer and member of the State society.

At Modesto are Mrs. Lapham and daughter Amel, and Mr. and Mrs.

Brown, good friends to suffrage. In San Diego are Mrs. F. P.

Kingsbury, Mrs. Tallant. In Santa Cruz county, Georgiana Bruce

Kirby, Mrs. H. M. Blackburn, Mrs. M. E. Heacock, Rev. D. G.

Ingraham, Ellen Van Valkenburg. In Los Angeles county, Mrs. Eliza

J. Hall, M. D. Ingo county, J. A. Jennings. Santa Clara county, J.

J. Owen, the able editor of the _San Jose Mercury_; Laura J.

Watkins, Hon. O. H. Smith and wife, Mrs. G. B. McKee, Mrs.

McFarland, Mrs. Herman, Mrs. Montgomery, Mrs. Miller, Mrs. J. J.

Crawford, Mrs. R. B. Hall, Mrs. Knox, Mrs. Wallis, Mrs. C. M.

Putney, Mrs. Damon, Miss Walsh, and many others, have all helped

the good cause in San Jose; while Louisa Smith of Santa Clara, a

lady of advancing years, was ever a faithful friend of the cause,

as was also Miss Emma S. Sleeper of Mountain View, formerly of Mt.

Morris, N. Y. In Nevada county, originally the home of Senator A.

A. Sargent, the question of woman suffrage was agitated at an early

day. The most active friends were: Ellen Clark Sargent, Emily

Rolfe, Mrs. Leavett, Mrs. E. P. Keeney, Mrs. E. Loyed, Elmira Eddy,

Mr. and Mrs. William Stevens, Mrs. Hanson, Judge Palmer and Mrs.

Cynthia Palmer.

* * * * *

CHAPTER LVI.

GREAT BRITAIN.

A CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE OF THE SUCCESSIVE STEPS OF PROGRESS TOWARDS

FREEDOM FOR WOMEN.

1848. Queen's College, Harley street, London, founded for girls.

1849. Bedford College, London, founded; incorporated, 1869.

1850. North London Collegiate School for girls opened by Miss

Buss, April 4.

1854. Cheltenham Ladies' College commenced.... Miss Nightingale

goes to Sentari; from hence may be dated the beginning of

training schools for nurses, metropolitan associations for

nursing the poor, etc., etc.

1856. Female Artists' Society founded.

1857. Divorce and Matrimonial Causes act passed, by which divorce

and judicial separation became attainable in course of law....

Ladies' Sanitary Association, founded October 1.

1858. _Englishwoman's Journal_ started (now _Englishwoman's

Review_) by Bessie R. Parkes and Mdme. Bodichon, March 2....

First swimming bath for ladies, opened in Marylebone, July 14.

1859. Society for the Employment of Women established in London,

June 22.

1860. Law-copying Office for women opened February 15....

Victoria Printing Press, established March 26.... Institution for

the Employment of Needle-women commenced.... First admission of

women students to the Royal Academy (Miss Herford).

1861. Lectures on Physiology to ladies at University College,

April.

1862. Social Science Congress in London; though not the first

time ladies had read papers at the congress--this was remarkable

for the increased share they took in its proceedings.... Ladies'

Negro Emancipation Society commenced.... New church order of

deaconesses founded on the model of Kaiserwerth.... First voyage

of Miss Rye to Australia, and commencement of her system of

emigration.

1863. Establishment of Queen's Institute, Dublin, for industrial

training of women.

1864. Female Medical and Obstetrical Society begun.... Working

Women's College, Queen's Square, opened October 26.

1865. Miss Garrett receives her medical diploma from

Apothecaries' Hall.

1866. A petition of 1,500 women for the franchise presented, and

the first women's suffrage society formed.

1867. Mr. Mill's motion in the House of Commons to give the

suffrage to women.... Lily Maxwell voted in Manchester for Mr.

Jacob Bright.

1868. In the general election many women who were left on the

register voted. Women's suffrage was declared illegal by the

Court of Common Pleas, November 9.... London University

establishes a women's examination.

1869. Ladies' Educational Association begun in London, which was

dissolved July 18, 1878, upon London University College admitting

women as regular students.... Women's College established at

Hitchin, October ... The telegraph service was transferred to

government, and women clerks were retained, thus entering the

civil service.... Municipal Franchise act passed; women first

voted under it November 1.

1870. Publication of _Women's Suffrage Journal_ commenced March

1.... Women's Disabilities Removal bill introduced by Mr. Jacob

Bright, M.P., read a second time, but rejected in committee,

May.... Lectures for women begun in Cambridge.... First

examinations of women in Queen's University, Ireland.... Married

Women's Property act (England) passed, August 9.... National

Indian Association established by Mary Carpenter (principal

object: the improvement of women's education in India),

September.... Vigilance Association established, October; mainly

occupied in women's questions.... Elementary Education act

passed.... First school-board election in London, November 25

(Miss Garrett and Miss Emily Davies elected in London; Miss

Becker, Manchester, etc.).

1871. Ladies' National Health Association commenced by Dr.

Elizabeth Blackwell.... Law of Ireland amended slightly with

regard to married women's property.... National Union for

improving the education of women established by Mrs. Grey,

November.

1872. New Hospital for Women, opened February, in Marylebone

(women doctors).... Girls' Public Day School Company formed.

First school opened January 1, at Chelsea; there are now

fifteen.... Girton College, Cambridge, incorporated. Hitchin

College subsequently removed to it.... New Bastardy act, passed

August 10, affording a greater measure of relief to unmarried

mothers.

1873. Mrs. Nassau Senior, appointed assistant inspector of

workhouses, January; the first government appointment of a lady;

made permanent, February, 1874.... First school-board election in

Scotland, February (twenty ladies elected).... Second English

school-board.... Custody of Infants act passed, which enables a

man, having a deed of separation from his wife, to give up the

custody of the children to her if he chooses.

1874. Women's Peace and Arbitration Auxiliary of the London Peace

Society formed, April.... Women's Protection and Provident League

formed, July 8 (benefit societies and trades unions for working

women).... Protection Orders given to wives in Scotland, July

19.... College for Working Women, Fitzroy street, London, opened

October.... London School of Medicine for Women, opened October

12.

1875. A lady first elected as poor-law guardian (Miss Merington,

in Kensington), April.... Albemarle Club opened for ladies and

gentlemen, May 29.... Newnham College, Cambridge, opened....

Employment of Women Office, opened in Brighton.... Female

clerkships in Post-Office Savings Bank.... Pharmaceutical Society

of Ireland admitted women to examinations.... Madras Medical

School opened to women.... First woman lawyer's office opened in

London (Miss Orme).... Metropolitan and National Nursing

Association formed.... Women delegates from women's unions first

admitted to Trades' Congress in Glasgow, October.

1876. Admission of women to Manchester New College, February

9.... First qualified woman pharmacist established in London

(Miss Isabella Clarke).... Plan-tracing office for women opened

(Miss Crosbie).... Employment of Women Office, opened in

Glasgow.... Scholarship for women established in Bristol

University College.... British Women's Temperance Association

commenced.... Passing of the act, known as Russell-Gurney's act,

enabling universities to admit women to degrees, August....

Resolutions of King and Queen's College of Physicians in Ireland

to confer medical degrees on women; five ladies passed their

examinations and received degrees in the following spring.... A

memorial, signed by 45,000 women, presented to the queen on

behalf of the Bulgarians.

1877. Teachers, Training and Registration Society inaugurated,

February 2.... Trinity College, London, decided to throw open its

musical examinations to women.... St. Andrew's University offered

"Literate in Arts" degrees to women.... A bill to amend the

Married Women's Property Law (Scotland) passed; came into force

January 1, 1878.... International Congress on Public Morality met

at Geneva, September.... Admission of women medical students to

the Royal Free Hospital, October 1.... Manchester and Salford

College for women (now affiliated to the Victoria University)

opened, October.

1878. Society to extend the knowledge of law among women

started.... Matrimonial Causes Amendment act passed; a clause

being inserted by Lord Penzance enabling magistrates to grant a

judicial separation to women if brutally treated by their

husbands, a maintenance to be given them, and the children to

remain under their mother's care.... Admission of women to London

University degrees and examinations, July 1.... Intermediate

Education act, Ireland; participation of girls in its benefits.

1879. Victoria University charter grants degrees to women....

Oxford, Somerville and Lady Margaret Halls opened, October....

Nine ladies elected on London school-board, November....

Pharmaceutical Society admits women as members, October.... Order

of St. Katherine for nurses established.... School for

wood-engraving and one for wood-carving established.

1880. Charter of Irish University gives degrees to women....

Demonstration of women in Manchester in favor of the suffrage,

February 3; followed by London, Bristol and Nottingham in the

same year.... Bill to give further protection to little girls

under 13 passed.... Mason College in Birmingham founded; equal

facilities to girls and boys.... First lady B. A. in London

University, October.... Melbourne University matriculates women,

March 22.... The Burial bill gives women the right to conduct

funeral services.... The House of Keys in the Isle of Man passed

women's suffrage for women who are owners of property, November

5.

1881. Suffrage bill in the Isle of Man received royal assent

January 5; seven hundred women are electors; general election

began March 21.... Cambridge University admits women students to

formal examinations by a vote of 398 against 32, February 24....

Durham University votes that women may become members.

1881. Sydney University (New South Wales) admits women to

matriculation and degrees.... New Zealand University confers

title of M. A. on a woman, August.... Poor-law Guardian

Association for promoting the election of ladies established,

March; seven ladies elected in London.... Somerville Club for

women opened.... Women clerks admitted to the civil service by

open competition.... Municipal Franchise act for Scotland, passed

June 3; came into operation January 1, 1882.... Married Women's

Property act for Scotland, passed July 18.

1882. London University Convocation resolves to admit women as

graduates, January 17.... Twelve women elected in London as

poor-law guardians, April; fifteen in the country.... Married

Women's Property act passed by the Lords and brought down to the

Commons May 22; passed and returned to the Lords August 16;

received royal assent August 18.... Addition to Municipal

Franchise act (Scotland) by inclusion of police burghs.... Women

first voted in Scotland under the new act, November 8....

Appointment of women as registrars of births and deaths in four

parishes.

1883. Married Women's Property act comes into operation January

1.... Appointment of Miss E. Shove as physician to female staff

in post-office; first appointment by government of a woman....

Poor-law guardian elections, April; thirteen ladies in London,

two in Scotland for the first time; thirteen in other towns in

England.... Mr. Stansfeld's resolution against the Contagious

Diseases acts carried in the House of Commons by a majority of

72, April 26; the acts consequently are suspended....

May.--Memorial to the Prime Minister signed by 110 independent

Liberal members, asking that women's suffrage shall be included

in the coming Reform bill.... Mr. Mason's resolution for women's

suffrage thrown out by a majority of only 16.... Great conference

of Liberal associations at Leeds on parliamentary reform votes

for woman suffrage, October 17, followed by similar votes at

Edinburgh, November 16; Manchester, November 21; Bristol,

November 26, and in many smaller places.... Guarantee-fund raised

in Bombay for lady physicians and hospitals for women commenced;

Calcutta University opened to women.

1884. Second reading of the bill for the Custody and Guardianship

of children carried, March 26, by a majority of 134.... First

lady, Mrs. Bryant, obtained degree of Doctor of Science in London

University.... Nine ladies obtain B. A. degree in Royal Irish

University.

1885. College of Surgeons, Ireland, opens its degrees to

women.... Criminal-law Amendment Bill passed in August, raising

the age of protection for girls, and giving increased facilities

for rescuing them from ruin.... Municipal suffrage granted to

women in Madras.... Miss Mason appointed inspector of workhouses

by local government board, November.

FOOTNOTES:

[586] Signed by Superintendents Public Schools, A. C. Shortridge,

Indianapolis, Alexander M. Gow, Evansville, Wm. H. Wiley, Terre

Haute, Jas. McNeil, Richmond, J. H. Smart, Fort Wayne, Wm. Phelan,

Laporte, Barnabas C. Hobbs, Bloomingdale; Thomas Holmes, president

Union Christian College, Mrs. Thos. Holmes, Merom; Geo. P. Brown,

principal high-school, Mrs. Geo. P. Brown, Jessie H. Brown,

assistant-superintendent public schools, Prof. W. A. Bell, Prof. T.

Charles, Hon. Byron K. Elliott, Geo. Merritt, Mrs. George Merritt,

Wm. Coughlen, Jno. S. Newman, president Merchants National Bank,

Col. James B. Black, Jos. E. Perry, Dr. E. S. Newcomer, Mrs. S. E.

Newcomer, Col. Samuel Merrill, Franklin Taylor, Phebe M. Taylor, H.

H. Lee, Mrs. Elizabeth Lee, Dr. O. S. Runnels, Mrs. Dora C.

Runnels, Horace McKay, Thomas E. Chandler, David Gibson, Miss Mary

Bradshaw, Dr. J. C. Walker, Indianapolis; Elias Hicks Swayne,

Mahala M. Swayne, Richmond; Dr. Geo. M. Dakin, Mrs. Geo. M. Dakin,

Laporte.

[587] Mrs. Hill was President of the San Francisco Woman Suffrage

Society for three years prior to her death in 1884.

INDEX

TO

THE HISTORY OF WOMAN SUFFRAGE.

Compiled by JOHN WEINHEIMER of _The New York Tribune_.

A.

Abelard, i, 759.

Abbott, Francis, iii, 127.

Adam and Eve, i, 561.

Adams, Abigail Smith, i, 32, 201.

Adams, Hannah, author, i, 205.

Adams, John, i, 31, iii, 79.

Adams, John Q., iii, 479.

Adams, Mary N., lecturer, iii, 614.

Addresses and appeals, i, 106, 595, 676, 742, 856; ii, 51, 67, 167,

168, 364, 485, 517; iii, 58, 129, 580.

Adelbert College, iii, 498.

_Agitator_, ii, 373, iii, 274.

Agrippa, Cornelius, i, 29.

Alabama, iii, 830.

_Albany Evening Journal_, ii, 282.

_Albany Knickerbocker_ on woman's rights, i, 611.

_Albany Register_ on woman's rights, i, 608, 609, 610, 611.

_Albany Law Journal_, ii, 691, 947.

--on "our laws," iii, 94.

Alcibiades and the dog, ii, 103.

Alcott, A. Bronson, iii, 193

--on woman suffrage, iii, 519.

Alcott, Abby May, appeal, i, 247.

Alcott, Louisa May, letter to Mrs. Stone, ii, 831.

Alexander, Janet, iii, 298.

Allen, Jane, case of, ii, 592.

Allen, Nancy R., argument before Senate Committee, iii, 160

--legacy, iii, 624

--Notary Public, made, iii, 626.

Allen, Sophia Ober, iii, 502.

Almanac, Woman's Rights, i, 863.

Amberly, Lady, letter to Mrs. P. W. Davis, ii, 439.

AMERICAN EQUAL RIGHTS ASSOCIATION:

--"colored," the word, discussion, ii, 214

--Constitution, ii, 173

--Meetings:

Academy of Music (Brooklyn), ii, 398,

Church of the Puritans, ii, 182,

Cooper Institute, ii, 309,

Steinway Hall, ii, 378

--Memorial to Congress, ii, 226

--name changed to "Nat. Woman Suffrage Association," ii, 400

--officers, ii, 174

--organized, ii, 173

--letter of B. F. Wade, ii, 117

--report, Susan B. Anthony's, ii, 183.

American flag, design, i, 323.

AMERICAN WOMAN SUFFRAGE ASSOCIATION, ii, 756

--Celebration of Woman Suffrage in New Jersey, ii, 846

--constitution of, ii, 763

--conventions:

call for first, ii, 757,

Baltimore, 820,

Brooklyn in Plymouth Church, 831,

Cincinnati, O., 854,

Cleveland, O., 802,

Detroit, Mich., 834,

Indianapolis, Ind., 851,

Louisville, Ky., 861,

New York City in Apollo Hall, 821,

in Cooper Institute, 825,

in Steinway Hall, 809, 840,

Philadelphia, 815, 849,

St. Louis, Mo., 821,

Washington, D. C., 819, 858

--letter, circular, ii, 757

--members received at the White House by Mrs. Hayes, ii., 860

--memorial to Congress, ii., 859,

referred to Committee on Territories, 860

--report of chairman of Executive Committee, ii, 803

--resolutions, ii, 805, 809, 810, 818, 826, 837, 843, 849, 851, 859.

Ames, Chas. G., i, 271, ii, 844, iii, 754.

Amnesty, universal, ii, 315.

Amos, Sheldon, on vice, i, 796.

Anderson, Geo. W., iii, 699.

Andrews, Margaret H., letter to S. J. May, i, 531.

Angell, John W., iii, 341.

Ann Arbor University, ii, 541.

Anneke, Franceska, i, 571, ii, 374, 393

--sketch of, iii, 646.

Anniversaries, _See Conventions_.

Anthony, Daniel, Lucy and Mary, i. 461.

Anthony, Hon, Henry B., on woman suffrage, i, 867, ii, 106, 273

--Pembina Territory bill, on the, ii, 568

--Sargent's amendment to the Pembina Territory bill, on, _ib._

--suffrage on, iii, 339

--woman suffrage, his last utterance on, iii, 350.

History of Woman Suffrage, Volume III · 第 55 / 57 章