History of Woman Suffrage Volume II Part 111

Mrs. LIVERMORE, referring to Mr. Gladden's remarks, said there was nothing so painful to her as the lack of faith in republicanism among cultivated American gentlemen. Political atheism seemed to be rife among them. What wonder that political corruption exists to such an extent, when the clergymen, the doctors, professors of colleges, members of churches, the educated and cultivated, refuse to exercise the rights of citizenship by going to the polls to vote--when intelligence and morality are to so great a degree eliminated from public affairs?

At a late Presidential election in Ma.s.sachusetts it was ascertained that but 54 per cent. of the legal voters actually went to the polls. Among the 46 per cent. who staid away were the clergymen, the physicians, and the professional men. There was a fearful political apathy among the educated cla.s.ses in reference to the discharge of their political duties. If educated and good men, as a body, would interest themselves in the primary meetings and the caucuses, politics would be improved, even before women got the suffrage.

It was proposed that the Convention should adjourn by singing the doxology, "Praise G.o.d from whom all blessings flow." The great audience rose and joined as with one voice in singing the grand centuries-old doxology, and then adjourned, many urging that the Convention should hold over another day.

In the autumn of 1871 the American Woman Suffrage a.s.sociation held conventions at Philadelphia, Washington, Baltimore, and Pittsburgh. The annual meeting in Philadelphia was held in National Hall, and presided over by Mrs. Tracy Cutler, who made the opening address. The number of the delegates to this Convention was sixty-two, representing fourteen States.

Mrs. LUCY STONE, Chairman of the Executive Committee, read her report, in which, among other things, she said--Pet.i.tions from each of our auxiliary State societies, asking for the ballot, were sent to their respective State Legislatures, and a hearing granted whenever it was asked. This is a great gain upon some previous years, when, as once in Rhode Island, our pet.i.tions were referred to "a committee on burial grounds."

The following letter was read from WILLIAM LLOYD GARRISON:

BOSTON, November 18, 1871.

DEAR MR. BLACKWELL--Lest some persons might be disappointed at my non-attendance, I regretted to see myself positively announced among the speakers at the annual meeting of the American Woman Suffrage a.s.sociation, to be held at Philadelphia next week. I certainly desired and hoped to be present, even to the last moment; but circ.u.mstances oblige me to remain at home, and I can do no more (and a.s.suredly no less) than to send a word of cheer by letter. Though I was careful not to commit myself as to my personal presence at the meeting, I am willing to be everywhere known as committed to the cause of Woman Suffrage, with all my understanding, heart, and soul. I regard its claims to be as reasonable, just, and valid as any ever presented in behalf of any portion of the human race, suffering from the exercise of usurped powers. Until it can be shown that women have not, by nature and destiny, the same common rights and interests as men--have not as much at stake in all matters pertaining to an impartial administration of government as men--are not held to the same allegiance as men--and are not made amenable to the same penal laws, even to the extent of being hanged, as men--their right to the ballot, and to an equal partic.i.p.ation in all munic.i.p.al, judicial, and legislative proceedings can not be sensibly denied. The mere statement of the case is its strongest argument, furnishing as it does a self-evident proposition. It is a disgrace to our democratic professions that there is yet a portion--ay, one half of our population, legally discrowned and outraged on account of a natural and necessary distinction of s.e.x, which alters nothing in regard to moral obligations and duties, or to political rights and privileges, in the courts of justice and common sense.

It is amazing to see what insulting flings are made, what ridiculous things are uttered, in derogation of the claim of women to an equal voice in making and administering the laws of the land, in quarters where we had a right to look for perfect courtesy, fair treatment, and an intelligent understanding; to say nothing of the nonsense and ribaldry proceeding from haunts of vice and "lewd fellows of the baser sort." But what great reformatory movement was ever treated any better at the outset? Still, it requires a large stock of patience to be calm under such trying provocations; and the consideration that, after all, they are indispensable to the success of the righteous object sought, can alone impart serenity.

What is the question? Not whether many or few women are demanding political enfranchis.e.m.e.nt; not whether the marriage inst.i.tution, as now regulated, is right or wrong; not whether this woman, or that, advocates "free love," so called, or anything else; not whether a wife will continue to be true to her marriage vows, or a mother faithful to her maternal instincts; not whether the cradle will be rocked, the pot boiled, and household affairs dutifully looked after; not whether women are better or worse than men; not whether they will vote wisely or foolishly, if allowed the ballot. These and a thousand similarly absurd issues are but mockeries. The one question to be settled is, shall the principles and doctrines of the Declaration of Independence be reduced to practice, so that taxation and representation shall go hand in hand, and the grand truth be made practically, as well as theoretically valid, that all are equally endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, and that all governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed?

Yours for equal rights, WM. LLOYD GARRISON.

Letters were also read from George W. Julian, Frances D. Gage, and Oliver Johnson. The Committee on Business then reported the resolutions,[191] which were unanimously adopted, after a short speech by Col. T. W. Higginson.

Mrs. JULIA WARD HOWE referred to the organization of the a.s.sociation and the necessity for it. We had felt that existing a.s.sociations had failed to represent the methods and convictions which belonged to our way of thinking. No right of a free society is more valuable than the right of free a.s.sociation, in virtue of which those who are able and willing to work can choose their own fellow-workers and adopt the center of activity which best corresponds with their feeling and with their homes. The experience of two years has confirmed our opinion of the propriety of the measures then adopted. We made no attempt to cajole or allure those who did not belong to us.

I am sure that as our work in common has gone on we have grown in good-will. We are fighting our battle still, but do not see our victory yet. We are not opposing men and women, but the enemies of men and women--ignorance, prejudice, and injustice. Many people bring into a new movement the whole intensity and unreason of their personal desires and discontents, and the train of progress must carry all this luggage along with it. Woman suffrage means equality in and out of marriage.

Mrs. Howe referred to the fact that women had been educated not to depend upon themselves, and drew a graphic picture of their condition should the tide of prosperity ebb from under them.

Remember, too, I pray you, that power to do ill can not be denied without including the power to do good. The question as to whether men, in case that women should vote, would be less polite to women, was touched upon. The speaker said, "that if ladies wish to retain this deference, they certainly pay a dear price for it." The speaker was opposed to arguing that the right of woman suffrage was guaranteed in the XIV. and XV. Amendments. I go further back and find the spirit of all liberality in every liberal clause, and the spirit of all freedom.

ROBERT DALE OWEN followed, and said woman suffrage was the only means of rectifying the injustice of the laws. His attention was first called to the value of suffrage when he endeavored to get a modification of the property laws for married women in 1836. As a member of the Indiana Legislature, he tried three successive years in vain to obtain for wives a right to their own earnings.

He was fifteen years in effecting it. When the law was pa.s.sed securing married women in their earnings, one of his fellow-members solemnly warned him that homes would be broken up and family happiness ruined, and that for all this unmeasured misery he would hereafter be held responsible. But the law still stood upon the statute book of Indiana, and homes were not destroyed.

The Rev. Mrs. CELIA BURLEIGH was the next speaker. She pictured, in a witty, epigrammatic manner, the progress of freedom in womankind. The picture drawn was of an Asiatic seraglio, where the spirit of revolution crept in, and the ladies commenced their incendiarism by walking abroad, and then followed up the direful uns.e.xing of themselves by gradually removing the inviolable veil first from one eye and then the other--and last and most horrible of all--from the nose. But it made her none the less lovely.

Mr. EDWARD M. DAVIS then spoke briefly, and was followed by Mrs.

LUCRETIA MOTT, who gave some interesting reminiscences of the contempt for women manifested by the World's Convention in 1840, from which women delegates were excluded, and of which William Lloyd Garrison, in consequence, refused to become a member.

The President, Mrs. CUTLER, said: It seems clear to me that the XIV. and XV. Amendments recognize our rights. The XIV. Amendment was pa.s.sed in the interest of a special cla.s.s, but we must not forget that the pa.s.sage of a general law for a particular cla.s.s also guarantees whatever rights can be found to come under that same general idea. [Applause.] First, we have the definition of citizenship, which applies to us fairly and squarely under the phrase all "persons." Then comes the right to vote. Some say it is not a right but a privilege. I maintain the contrary. I say it is an inalienable right. You can not maintain a republican form of government and deny to half the population its right to vote.

This may not be settled to-day or to-morrow, but the truth, like a mighty rock, stands there impregnable against all a.s.sault. We do not need to be in too much haste. Let the matter be sifted thoroughly. I do not object, therefore, to the phraseology of the resolution.

Mr. CHARLES BURLEIGH said: I have never yet been able to see that the right of voting is secured legally to women under any instrument which is recognized as having the force of law. A republican form of government does not mean universal suffrage.

We know that the framers of the Const.i.tution never dreamed that the idea of a republic would include even all the males of the country. If this is not a correct idea I answer that when you make an affirmation you must accept that affirmation as the makers of it understood it. I hold we have no right to go to any use of legal quibbling in the matter. If we stand on simple right, let us stand there; if on const.i.tutional authority, we have no right to warp that authority. So with the question of citizenship. It does not imply a voice in the government, by any means, to be a citizen.

Mr. BLACKWELL, on behalf of the Business Committee, offered some resolutions.[192]

Dr. H. T. CHILD spoke upon the second resolution. As a peace man and as a temperance man he was in favor of the resolution.

Colonel HIGGINSON said: If the resolution that has just been read commits this body to the peace, temperance, or any other movement, I would oppose it. Every great moral movement must stand by itself. Napoleon said that the next worse thing to a bad general was two good generals. I do not oppose it as an intemperate man, nor as a war man, for I served too long in the army not to wish for peace. I simply want my wife to vote, and how she votes can be dictated by her conscience. I don't believe in hitching the woman question to anything. Emerson said if you want to succeed you must hitch your wagon to a star, but two stars will only cause confusion.

Mr. EDWARD M. DAVIS opposed the temperance, etc., resolutions. We had better not, he said, pa.s.s anything but suffrage on this platform.

Mrs. GOUGH said the resolution did not indorse the peace and temperance movements. It simply opens up a channel of education.

Woman needs the growth and development coming from the exercise of higher powers than she now possesses. The resolutions were then unanimously adopted.

At the afternoon session the officers for the next year were elected. The presidency was accorded to Mrs. Lucy Stone. The speakers at this meeting were Dr. Stone, of Michigan; Mrs. Lillie Devereux Blake, of New York; John Cameron, of Delaware; John Ritchie, of Kansas; Mrs. Margaret V. Longley, Mrs. M. W. Coggins, Miss Matilda Hindman, Mrs. Cutler, Miss Mary Grew, Mrs. Lucas, sister of John Bright, and others.

Mrs. JULIA WARD HOWE, at the evening session offered resolutions of thanks for the hospitality extended to the members of the a.s.sociation by the citizens of Philadelphia, and also for the able and impartial manner in which the proceedings of the a.s.sociation had been reported by the press of the city. In a brief address, Mrs. HOWE then summed up the proceedings of the a.s.sociation, saying that she had never attended a convention where such entire harmony had prevailed, and where such an amount of good work had been accomplished. Every one, she was sure, would go away happy and contented.

The President, Mrs. CUTLER, then made the valedictory address, complimenting the audience for the attention they had shown and the interest they had manifested in the proceedings. She alluded to the fight for freedom in the days gone by--a fight in which nearly all present had taken a part, and prophesied that as they had won that fight they would win the fight in which they were now engaged. In conclusion she said that in the name of justice, in the name of humanity, in the name of love, she demanded that the rights which woman desired should be accorded to her. The Convention then adjourned.

The following extract is from an editorial in the _Woman's Journal_:

The Convention of the American Woman Suffrage a.s.sociation in Washington [1871] was in every sense a success.

It made a calm, deliberate statement of the reasons that make the exercise of suffrage woman's right and duty. It made a strong and earnest appeal to the intellect and conscience of the country in behalf of equal rights for all.

The speakers were selected beforehand, and came prepared to do justice to their subject. Accordingly the proceedings were orderly, harmonious, and effective, and the influence exerted was serious and impressive. The resolution adopted at the annual meeting in Philadelphia, a fortnight before, affirming that woman suffrage, which means equality in the home, means also greater purity, constancy, and permanence in marriage, was reaffirmed.

Hon. Geo. F. h.o.a.r made an admirable argument in behalf of suffrage at the closing session. A large number of Senators and Representatives attended the meetings. Many of these, among others Senators Morton and Wilson, a.s.sured us of their hearty sympathy with our movement. The most kindly and genial hospitality was extended to the speakers by the citizens of Washington, and nothing occurred to mar the pleasure or diminish the influence of the meetings, which were very largely attended, the audiences averaging one thousand.

We have just reason to complain of the spirit of the Washington press, as manifested in their reports of the Convention. The sole exception was the _Daily Chronicle_, which was fair and friendly. The other reports amounted to little more than a burlesque, and the editorial comments consisted chiefly of denunciation and ridicule. The N.Y.

_Tribune_, finding nothing to ridicule in our proceedings, suppressed all mention of the Convention, not publishing even the brief notices of the a.s.sociated Press. Having charged woman suffrage with hostility to marriage, the _Tribune_ has carefully refrained from informing its readers that the American Woman Suffrage a.s.sociation, representing thirteen organized State societies, has held for the first time a Convention in Washington, solely to urge the claim of woman to legal and political equality. We wait to see whether the _Tribune_ will be equally reticent, hereafter.

But neither the silence nor the misrepresentations of our opponents will check the steady growth and progress of the woman suffrage movement.

H. B. B.

The following is a short extract from the able address of Hon. G.

F. h.o.a.r, Representative from Ma.s.sachusetts, who said:

He would prefer the subject left to the leaders on the platform and only be a follower in the ranks, but on command of those having the matter in hand he had come to show his colors. As he understood the subject, it was to a.s.sure the American people that it was right to admit women to partic.i.p.ate in the affairs of government. They were using the best minds and brains to draw out the arguments on this subject, and some of our wisest fellow-citizens have been unable to see any favorable argument for granting this privilege. He then proceeded to give the ideas entertained by citizens of the different foreign countries as to what was the object of the republic, and said that this country was made up of the aggregate personal worth of the people.

There could not be in a State a man having the right to compel another to be subject to him without being unjust.

Therefore it is said that all men are created equal. Is it right and safe that the women of this country should have a voice in its administration? The only way to find out would be by having the understanding of those persons who are to accomplish it and carry it into effect. If there was anything in which woman excelled man it was her penetration and correct judgment of persons at first sight. It by no means follows that because woman has the right to vote, that ent.i.tles her to hold office. That right is vested in the judgment of our fellow-citizens, who, if they regard us as worthy and capable, will elect us to the offices.

Upon the Convention held in Baltimore, the following editorial appeared in the _Woman's Journal_:

In no one State of the Union has there been a more rapid advance in public sentiment, during the last ten years, upon all public questions, than in the State of Maryland. In 1861 a woman suffrage meeting in Baltimore would have been a failure. In 1871 the Convention of the American Woman Suffrage a.s.sociation has proved the very reverse. Two evening sessions and two intermediate day sessions were well attended. The speakers were Lucy Stone, Margaret W.

Campbell, Elizabeth K. Churchill, and Henry B. Blackwell.

Notwithstanding the disappointment felt by the audience at the unexpected absence of Mrs. Julia Ward Howe and Rev.

James Freeman Clarke, great interest was manifested, and the newspapers of the city gave the meetings candid and respectful notices. We were more than gratified by the unusual fairness and courtesy displayed by the press of Baltimore. Indeed, to this and especially to the generous aid of that admirable paper, the Baltimore _American_, are largely due the success of our meetings. We feel all the more bound to notice this frank and generous treatment of a new and unpopular movement by the press of Maryland because we have felt it our duty to condemn the striking contrast exhibited in other quarters. In Baltimore competent reporters made a conscientious abstract of the speeches they professed to report. When this is done in New York and Washington, the woman suffrage cause will have less difficulty in enlisting public attention.

We were also exceedingly gratified to find that the laws of Maryland for wives, mothers, and widows, though still far from equitable, are greatly in advance of those of Ma.s.sachusetts and of most Northern States. We are promised by one of the most eminent lawyers of Baltimore a full statement of the legal status of married women in Maryland.

We shall publish it in the _Woman's Journal_, as an evidence that equity and liberality are not bounded by "Mason and Dixon" or any other geographical line.

H. B. B.

A ma.s.s convention of the American Woman Suffrage a.s.sociation at Apollo Hall, New York, on the 9th of May, 1872, was an interesting and successful meeting. Mrs. LUCY STONE presided, and made the opening address. Rev. James Freeman Clarke, Charlotte B.

Wilbour, Mary F. Eastman, Rev. Edward Eggleston, Helen M.

Jenkins, Henry B. Blackwell, Amanda Deyo, and others addressed the Convention.