The History of Woman Suffrage Volume III Part 56

Mr. MOSHER of Dover said: There ought to be a new motion gotten up; to "indefinitely postpone" is getting to be stereotyped. This bill needs no further championing. Its justice is apparent.

Mr. HOBBS of Ossippee said: If women are capable of holding office they are also capable of saying who shall hold it.

[Applause.]

Mr. PATTEN of Manchester favored the bill and hoped the motion of Mr. Whicher would be voted down.

The SPEAKER [Mr. WOOLSON of Lisbon] said: The bill had pa.s.sed the Senate unanimously, been reported unanimously by the committee, and he hoped it would be pa.s.sed promptly by the House.

[Applause.]

Mr. PATTERSON of Hanover said he would congratulate the gentleman from Bethlehem on being orthodox on this question.

Mr. SINCLAIR congratulated his friend from Hanover on his display of courage in waiting until the ice was broken all round before making a forward step.

Mr. Whicher withdrew his motion to postpone and then moved to lay the bill upon the table. This being lost, the bill was pa.s.sed, August 8, 1878. Mrs. White, the president of the State a.s.sociation, in a letter to a friend, wrote as follows:

To our surprise and delight the bill allowing women to vote at school-district meetings pa.s.sed the House yesterday amid much cheering and clapping of hands, the ladies in the gallery joining in the demonstration. Thus conservative New Hampshire leads New England in this branch of reform for women.

The governor, B. F. Prescott, signed the bill without delay and words of cheer poured into the capital city from all quarters; especially were Mr. and Mrs. White congratulated upon this good result of their earnest and persistent labors. The following is from the _Woman's Journal_:

At the first election at the State capital of New Hampshire under the new law allowing women to vote on school questions, the result was a wonderfully full vote, not less than 2,160 ballots being cast, of which over half were deposited by women. The Boston _Investigator_, from which we gather these facts, says:

The balloting extended over three meetings and the number of women who partic.i.p.ated was almost exactly doubled on the second and third evenings--150, 299, 662. Another interesting feature of this election was the fact that the s.e.xes did not rally to the support of opposing tickets, but men and women divided their votes very evenly. A ticket bearing the names of two men was elected by a narrow majority over another which bore the names of a man and woman.

Of the first evening's election the telegraphic dispatch to the _Boston Globe_ was headed, "Crowds of Women Voting in New Hampshire":

CONCORD, N. H., March 22.--The occasion of the annual meeting of the Union-school district of this city, which comprises all of the city proper, this evening, was one of unprecedented interest. For months school matters have been sharply agitated and the election has been looked forward to as an opportunity by all parties. To the uncommon interest centered in the matter the right of women to vote at school meetings, delegated by the last session of the legislature, greatly added. The new condition of affairs had been fully canva.s.sed and the women had determined on making the best of their first opportunity and winning a decisive victory if possible. The night of the meeting proved inauspicious, but notwithstanding the severe storm of snow and sleet that was falling the newly const.i.tuted citizens were out in force. At the hour of opening the meeting the City Hall was packed to suffocation, 500 of the audience, at least, being ladies.

The first business was the choice of a moderator, and in this the ladies may claim a victory, as the candidate a majority of them supported was elected in the person of ex-mayor John Kimball. After this came the reading of the report of the board of education, which was strenuously objected to by the male supporters of the ladies. In this they were beaten by a large majority. The reading completed, the meeting commenced to ballot for three members of the board. The scene then became one beyond the power of the reportorial pen to describe. It was an old-fashioned New Hampshire town-meeting, with the concomitant boisterousness and profanity subdued by the presence of the ladies. A line was formed to the polls and a struggling ma.s.s of humanity in which male and female citizens were incongruously and indecorously mixed, surged towards the ballot-box. The crowding, squeezing and pushing were severe enough for the taste of the masculine voter, and were harsh enough to make it extremely unpleasant for the dear creatures who were undergoing so much to cast their maiden vote. To add to the delay the Hon. Nathaniel White had planted his somewhat corpulent form directly in front of the ballot-box and stayed the surging tide to shake hands with every woman that voted. Having voted, the men were only too glad to leave the crowded hall and let the anxious crowd rush in. The vote was at last all in, and the work of counting completed shortly before 11 o'clock. It was found that there were some ten different tickets in the field, and forty-two candidates voted for; but from this ma.s.s of votes there was no choice, though the regular candidates, the outgoing members of the board, who would have been elected had it not been for the new element in the election, were ahead, having a plurality.

The meeting was then adjourned till next Sat.u.r.day evening, when the scenes of to-night will be intensified by a larger attendance and still greater interest. The meeting to-night obtains importance in New Hampshire, as this is the center of female suffrage sentiment in this State, and the women are determined to win here if possible.

In the opening convention of November 5, 1879, Mrs. White, the president, made the following address:

_Ladies and Gentlemen, Friends of the N. H. Woman Suffrage a.s.sociation_: We hold the seventh meeting of this a.s.sociation under circ.u.mstances that mark an epoch in the progress of equal rights, irrespective of s.e.x, in this State. After more than a decade of agitation, and pet.i.tioning of our legislature, women hold in their hand the ballot on one important matter. Let us exchange congratulations on this occasion, that so much has been gained toward the final triumph of our cause.

You will remember when this a.s.sociation was last in session, July, 1878, that the bill giving the women of New Hampshire the right to vote on the public-school questions, was pending in our legislature. At our first hearing before that body, we hardly dared antic.i.p.ate the pa.s.sage of the bill during that session. But agitation, vigilance and perseverance ever bring their sure reward in the end, therefore we continued to press our claim, and soon learned to our great satisfaction that our allies in behalf of this bill, were the very _cream_ of our legislature. We at once took courage, and as day after day we went up to the state-house, with friends who plead for it before the committee, who kindly gave us several hearings; we saw the gradual growth of interest in behalf of this bill soon ripen into a final decision causing it to pa.s.s; thereby enacting a law, to which our worthy governor, B. F. Prescott, immediately gave his willing signature, securing to the women of this State the high privilege many of them gladly exercised last spring. Many feared this law would be repealed; but to show with what favor it has been received, we have only to refer to the legislature of the present year, which pa.s.sed an additional law, giving to women not only the right to vote for and serve on school boards, but also the power to serve as moderator or clerk in school meetings, for which the former law did not provide. This, it would seem must remove all fears of a repeal.

Pet.i.tions asking munic.i.p.al suffrage for women, were sent to our last legislature, and a bill to that effect, introduced in the House, was referred to a special committee, who reported in its favor: and after more or less discussion, although the bill did not pa.s.s, about one hundred members voted for it, and their names are registered, and with the committee, will be kindly remembered by those women whose cause they did not desert. From past experience we see the importance of continued labor and proper measures for the accomplishment of our work. The present degree of progress indicates the fact that we are not to obtain the full recognition of our rights at one bound, but that they are coming step by step. To note the growth of our principles in the various reform movements, let us look at the temperance organizations throughout the length and breadth of this country; we find nearly all of them now discussing the ballot for women. Why, no sooner had Ma.s.sachusetts, following the example of New Hampshire, obtained the school ballot for women, than the Woman's Christian Temperance Unions all over the State were a unit for the temperance ballot, and the past year have had their agents canva.s.sing the State in the interest of school suffrage and "home protection."

All who read the reports last winter of Frances E. Willard's labors in Illinois in behalf of her Home Protection bill (for it originated with her), of the list of pet.i.tioners of both s.e.xes she secured and took to Springfield, of the delegation of women who accompanied her there to advocate her bill, must acknowledge the educating force of all such untiring devotion for the right to vote. Although she was not victorious, she was successful beyond all expectation, for it is said, "Success is not always a victory, nor is victory always a success in the end." Let me say here, Miss Willard believes in the entire enfranchis.e.m.e.nt of her s.e.x, but in her earnest and faithful labors makes a specialty of the temperance ballot.

At the annual meeting of the New Hampshire Woman's Christian Temperance Union, held here one year ago, a resolution was offered by a most worthy lady, indorsing suffrage for women on all temperance questions. It was at once vigorously opposed by some, while others, although believing in it, feared it would divide their ranks if it pa.s.sed, and felt too timid to give it their support. The lady offering it, seeing it would be defeated, withdrew it, at the same time giving notice that she should present the same, or one similar, to that body every year as long as she lived, or until it pa.s.sed. Last month the same organization held its annual meeting in Portsmouth, and that lady, as good as her word, was there with her resolution on temperance suffrage, and it pa.s.sed unanimously, about 100 delegates being present and voting, many of whom acknowledged the timidity they felt last year, but now earnestly gave it their support. Such experiences give us some idea of the different instrumentalities by which our cause is forced upon conservative minds for consideration, ending in honest conviction.

In closing, I know you will all unite with me in tributes to Mr.

Garrison. Now that he has gone to join that innumerable host of philanthropists in the higher life, let us rejoice that he was one of the leaders of that reform which brings us here to-day.

And now, friends, in view of the present status of our cause, have we not much to encourage us in our work? May we go forward in that spirit of good-will that shall bring us a speedy victory.

Resolutions of respect to the memory of Mrs. Abby P. Ela, William Lloyd Garrison and Angelina Grimke Weld were adopted by a rising vote.

In the _National Citizen_ of December 14, 1879, we find the following:

Marilla M. Ricker of New Hampshire had an executive hearing before the governor and council of that State, November 18, in regard to the management of the State prison. Mrs. Ricker, who in winter practices law in Washington, and is known as "the prisoner's friend," referred to the cruel treatment of convicts in various States, notably in New Hampshire, where prisoners are not permitted to read the magazines or the weekly newspapers which contain no record of crime, nor to receive words from their friends, as in other States they are allowed at stated times to do. When Mrs. Ricker desired to see a certain prisoner and let him know he had friends who were yet mindful of his comfort, the warden replied that he did not wish that man "to think he had a friend in the world." Mrs. Ricker warmly protested against such brutality. The attorney-general agreed with Mrs. Ricker, remarking that the line between crimes punished and those not punished, and the lines between those in prison and those outside who ought to be there, were so dim and shadowy that great care should be exercised in order to secure just and humane treatment for prisoners. Mrs. Ricker's remarks were earnest and dignified, and were listened to with the closest attention by the governor and his official advisers. At the close of the hearing the governor referred the subject to the special prison committee of the council, directing its members to procure all possible information as to the management of penitentiaries in other States, and report at the next meeting. Through Mrs. Ricker's influence the last legislature pa.s.sed an act providing that any convict may send sealed letters to the governor or council without their being read by the warden.

In 1882 a judicial decision in New Hampshire recognized the advance legislation of that State in regard to the position of married women. This decision shows that they are no longer under the shadow of the old common law, but now hold equal dignity and power as individuals and joint heads in family life. The "divinely ordained head," with absolute control in the home, to rule according to his will and pleasure, is at last ruled out of the courts altogether, as the following case ill.u.s.trates:

Mrs. Harris and her husband sued Mrs. Webster and her husband for slanders uttered by Mrs. Webster against Mrs. Harris. The suit was brought on the old theory that the legal personality of the wife is merged in that of her husband; that she is under his control, his chattel, his ox, and therefore he is responsible for her trespa.s.ses as for those of his other domestic cattle. The Court held that the wife is no longer an "ox" or "chattel," but a person responsible for her acts, and that her innocent husband could not be held responsible for her wrong. In rendering the decision in this case, Judge Foster further said: "It is no longer possible to say that in New Hampshire a married woman is a household slave or a chattel, or that in New Hampshire the conjugal unity is represented solely by the husband. By custom and by statute the wife is now joint master of the household, and not a slave or a servant. The rule now is that her legal existence is not suspended. So practically has the ancient unity become dissevered and dissolved that the wife may not only have her separate property, contracts, debts, wages, and causes of separate action growing out of a violation of her personal rights, but she may enter into legal contract with her husband and enforce it by suit against him."

The writer of the following letter is a successful farmer, remarkable for her executive ability in all the practical affairs of life, as well as for her broad philanthropy. One year she sent, as a contribution to our Washington convention, a tub of b.u.t.ter holding about sixty pounds, which was sold on the platform and the proceeds put into the treasury of the National a.s.sociation:

_Dear Friends a.s.sembled in the Washington Convention:_

Last week our new town-house was dedicated. The women accompanied their husbands. One man spoke in favor of woman suffrage--said it was "surely coming." In this town, at the Corners, for several years they tried to get a graded school, but the men voted it down. After the women had the school-suffrage, one lady, who had a large family and did not wish to send her children away from home, rallied all the women of the Corners, carried the vote, and they now have a good graded school. Our village is moving down, that the boys and girls may have the benefit of the good school there. I think the women who have been indifferent and not availed themselves of their small voting privilege, by which we might have established the same cla.s.s of school in our village, will now regret their negligence, at least every time they have to send three miles for a doctor. Thus, stupid people, blind to their own interest, punish themselves. I regret not being able to send a fuller report of the good that woman's use of the ballot, in a limited form, has done for us in this State. The voting in the town-hall is the "infant school" for women in the use of the ballot. Thanking the ladies all for meeting at the capital of the nation, and regretting not to be counted among the number, I am,

Yours sincerely, MARY A. P. FILLEY.

_North Haverill, January 5, 1884._

In closing this chapter some mention should be made of the invaluable services of Senator Blair,[193] who, in his place, has always n.o.bly defended the rights of women. He was a member of the first special committee ever appointed to look after the interests of women in the United States Senate. The leaders of the movement in that State claim that they helped to place Senator Blair in his present position by defeating his predecessor, Mr. Wadleigh, who was hostile to the enfranchis.e.m.e.nt of women.

UNITED STATES SENATE, WASHINGTON, D. C., March 5, 1884.

MY DEAR MISS ANTHONY: I had the honor duly to receive your invitation to address the National a.s.sociation during its sessions in this city, for which I heartily thank you; but the pressure of duties in the Senate, service upon committees being just now specially exacting, makes it impossible for me to accept.

I trust that I need not a.s.sure you of my full belief that woman has the right and ought to have the privilege to vote. Whenever a fundamental right exists both public and individual welfare are promoted by its exercise and injured by its suppression. The exercise of rights is only another name for the discharge of duties, and the denial of the suffrage to an adult human being, not deprived of it for mental or penal disability, is an intolerable wrong. Such denial is not only a deprivation of right to the individual, but it is an injury to the State, which is only well governed when controlled by the conflicting opinions, sentiments and interests of the whole, harmonized in the ballot-box, and, by its fiat, elevated to the functions of law.

But you have no occasion for expression of theoretical views from me.

If I may be pardoned a suggestion, it would be the specification to the public mind of the practical uses and benefits which would result from the exercise of the suffrage by women. Men are not conscious that women lack the practical protection of the laws or the comforts and conveniences of material and social relations more than themselves. The possession of the ballot as a practical means of securing happiness does not appear to the ma.s.ses to be necessary to women in our country. Men say: "We do the best we can for our wives and children and relatives. They are as well off as we." In a certain sense this appears to be true. The other and higher truth is that woman suffrage is necessary in order that society may advance. The natural conservatism of an existing order of things will not give way to a new factor in the control of affairs, until it has been shown in what way enlightened selfishness may hope for good to society if the change be made.

Here it seems to me that the convention may now strike a blow more powerful than for many years. Society has not so labored with the great problems which concern its own salvation for generations.

What would woman do with the ballot if she had it? What for education? What for sobriety? What for social purity? What for equalizing the conditions and the rewards of labor--the labor of her own s.e.x first--and towards a just division of production among all members of the community? What for the removal, or for the amelioration when removal is impossible, of hunger, cold, disease and degradation, from the daily lives of human beings?

What could and what _would_ woman do with the ballot which is not now as well done by man alone, to improve the conditions which envelope individual existence as with bands of iron? What good things--state them _seriatim_, as the lawyers say--could woman do in New Hampshire and in New York city, and ultimately among the savage tribes of the earth, which she cannot do as well without as with the suffrage? Would woman by her suffrage even _help_ to remove illiteracy from Louisiana, intemperance from New England, and stop society from committing murder by the tenement-house abuses of New York? Let the convention specify what practical good woman will try to achieve with her G.o.d-given rights, provided that men will permit her to enjoy them. Show us wherein you will do _us_ good if we will rob you no longer. It might influence us greatly. Why should we do right for nothing? In fact, unless you show that the exercise of your alleged right will be useful, can you logically conclude that you have any? We must have proof that the experiment will not fail before we will even try it. You must connect the ballot with progress and reform and convince men that they, as well as women, will be better off for its possession by the whole of the adult community rather than only by a part. Theories may be true, but they are seldom reduced to practice by society unless it can be clearly seen that their adoption will heal some hurt or introduce some broad and general good.

The increasing discussion of industrial, educational, sanitary, and social questions generally, indicates the domain of argument and effort where victories for the advocates of enlarged suffrage are most likely, and I think are sure to be won. Woman should study specially what is called, for the want of a better term, the labor problem--a problem which includes in its scope almost everything important to everybody. I know this is an unnecessary suggestion, for it is just what you are doing. I only write it because repet.i.tion of the important is better than to recite plat.i.tudes or even to quote the declaration. I believe in your success because I believe in justice and in the advancement of mankind.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant, HENRY W. BLAIR.

FOOTNOTES:

[188] _Concord_, Nathaniel P. White, Mrs. Sarah Pillsbury, Rev. J.

F. Lovering, P. B. Cogswell, Mrs. Eliza Morrill, Mrs. Louisa W.

Wood, Col. James E. Larkin, Mrs. J. F. Lovering, Charles S. Piper, Mrs. Armenia S. White, Mrs. M. M. Smith, Mrs. F. E. Kittredge, Mrs.

Sarah Piper, Mrs. Ira Abbott, Mrs. L. M. Bust, Dr. A. Morrill, Mrs.

P. Ladd, Mrs. R. A. Smith, George W. Brown, Mr. and Mrs. J. V.

Aldrich, Mr. and Mrs. M. B. Smith, Mrs. T. H. Brown, Mrs. R. Hatch, Mrs. J. L. Crawford, Mrs. Anna Dumas, Miss Harriet C. Edmunds, Miss Salina Stevens, Miss Mary A. Denning, Miss N. E. Fessender, Miss M.

L. Noyes, Miss Clara Noyes, James H. Chase, Peter Sanborn; _Lancaster_, Rev. J. M. L. Babc.o.c.k; _Rochester_, Mrs. Abby P. Ela; _Bradford_, Mrs. L. A. T. Lane, Miss M. J. Tappan; _Laconia_, Rev.

J. L. Gorman, William M. Blair; _Manchester_, Dr. M. O. A. Hunt; _Plymouth_, Hon. D. R. Burnham; _Portsmouth_, Hon. A. W. Haven; _Canterbury_, Mr. and Mrs. D. M. Clough; _Lebanon_, A. M. Shaw; _Keene_, Col. and Mrs. Wilson; _Grafton_, Mr. and Mrs. Peter Kimball; _Northfield_, Mrs. D. E. Hill; _Franklin_, Rev. Wm. T.

Savage; _Canaan_, William W. George; _Littleton_, R. D. Runneville.

[189] They had their influence in the church as well as the State, as the following item in _The Revolution_, July 16, 1868, shows: "The New Hampshire convention of Universalists, at their late anniversary, adopted unanimously a resolution in favor of woman's elevation to entire equality with man in every civil, political and religious right."