The History of Woman Suffrage Volume IV Part 97

_1890_--Suffrage pet.i.tions were presented and also pet.i.tions asking that fathers and mothers be made equal guardians of their children; that contracts between husbands and wives be legally valid; and that a widow be allowed to stay more than forty days in the house of her deceased husband without paying rent. All these were refused.

On March 12 a hearing was given to the pet.i.tioners for suffrage. Mrs.

Stone, Mr. Blackwell, the Rev. J. W. Hamilton, Mrs. Ellen B. Dietrick, the Rev. Frederick A. Hinckley, Mr. Crane of Woburn and Miss Alice Stone Blackwell spoke in behalf of the W. S. A., and Mrs. Susan S.

Fessenden, Mrs. Amelia C. Thorpe and Miss Tobey in behalf of the W. C.

T. U. Mr. Ropes, Dr. A. P. Peabody and J. B. Wiggin spoke against woman suffrage. Mr. Lord asked that the hearing be extended for another day, as he wished to speak in behalf of the remonstrants, although no pet.i.tions had been sent in. Mr. Blackwell requested the chairman of the committee to ask Mr. Lord to state definitely whom he represented. The chairman answered that if he did not choose to tell he could not compel him. On March 19 a hearing was given to Mr. Lord, who spoke for more than an hour. The usual distinguished suffrage advocates spoke in answer.

On April 8 seventy-nine Republican Representatives met at the Parker House, Boston, in response to an invitation from the Republican members of the House Committee on Woman Suffrage. Ex-Gov. John D. Long presided. Addresses were made by Mr. Long, U. S. Collector Beard, Mayor Thomas N. Hart of Boston, the Hon. Albert E. Pillsbury, ex-president of the Senate, ex-Governor Claflin and State Treasurer George E. Marden. Letters were read from the Hon. W. W. c.r.a.po and ex-Governor Ames. The following was unanimously adopted:

_Resolved_, That it is the duty of the Republican party of Ma.s.sachusetts forthwith to extend Munic.i.p.al Suffrage to the women of the commonwealth.

On April 17, after extended discussion in the House, the bill was lost, including pairs, by 73 yeas, 141 nays. The same Legislature defeated a proposal to disfranchise for a term of three years men convicted of infamous crimes, and it voted to admit to suffrage men who did not pay their poll-tax.

_1891_--On February 4 a hearing was granted to the pet.i.tioners for Munic.i.p.al Suffrage, conducted by Mr. Blackwell for the a.s.sociation, by Mrs. Fessenden for the W. C. T. U. To the usual speakers for the former were added Mrs. Helen Campbell, the Rev. Charles G. Ames, and also the Rev. Daniel Whitney, who had advocated woman suffrage in the Ma.s.sachusetts const.i.tutional convention of 1853 and now celebrated his eighty-first birthday by supporting it again. The speakers for the W.

C. T. U. were the Rev. Joseph Cook, Mrs. Thorpe, President Elmer Hewitt Capen of Tufts College, Mrs. Katherine Lente Stevenson and others. Mrs. Martha Moore Avery spoke for the labor reformers. No remonstrants appeared.

In the Senate, March 31, Senators Gilman, Nutter and Breed spoke for Munic.i.p.al Suffrage, and no one in the negative. The bill was lost by a vote, including pairs, of 12 yeas, 25 nays.

This year a bill was pa.s.sed requiring the appointment of women as factory inspectors, and two were appointed.

_1892_--The suffrage a.s.sociation pet.i.tioned for Munic.i.p.al and Full Suffrage, also for equal property rights for women. The W. C. T. U.

for Munic.i.p.al and License Suffrage, and both societies for legislation granting women equal facilities with men in registering to vote for school committee. On March 2 a hearing was given by the Committee on Election Laws on an order introduced by Senator Gorham D. Gilman to remove the poll-tax prerequisite for women's school vote, as it had been removed from men. Bills to secure for them a more just and liberal method of registration, drafted by ex-Governor Long and Mr.

Blackwell, were submitted. Addresses were made by these two, Senator Gilman, Mrs. Cheney, Dr. Salome Merritt, Mrs. Brockway and others.

On February 19 a hearing was given on the suffrage pet.i.tions which were advocated by Senator Gilman, Colonel Dudley, Mrs. Howe, Lucy Stone, Mr. Blackwell, the Hon. George S. Hale, Mrs. Trask Hill and others. No remonstrants appeared. On March 14 the hearing for the W.

C. T. U. was held with many prominent advocates.

License Suffrage was discussed in the House April 27, and on a _viva voce_ vote was declared carried, but on a roll call was defeated, 93 yeas, 96 nays. A reconsideration was moved next day and the advocates of the bill secured twenty-three additional votes, but the opponents also increased their vote and the motion was refused. Out of the 240 members 117 recorded themselves in favor of the bill. Munic.i.p.al Suffrage was voted down in the Senate May 2, without debate, by 10 yeas, 22 nays.

The poll-tax was abolished as a prerequisite for voting in the case of women. This had been done in the case of men in 1890. A bill to permit a wife to bring an action against her husband, at law or in equity, for any matter relating to her separate property or estate pa.s.sed the House but was defeated in the Senate. The Senate Judiciary Committee reported against legislation to enable a woman to be appointed a justice of the peace.

_1893_--This year for the first time the State W. S. A., the National W. S. A. of Ma.s.sachusetts, the W. C. T. U., the Independent Women Voters and the Loyal Women of American Liberty all united in pet.i.tioning for a single measure, Munic.i.p.al Suffrage. The hearing at the State House on February 1 was conducted by Mr. Blackwell.

Addresses were made by Lucy Stone,[318] Mrs. Howe, Mrs. Mary A.

Livermore, Mrs. Stevenson, the Rev. Louis A. Banks, Mayor Elihu B.

Hayes of Lynn, Mrs. A. J. Gordon, Mrs. Trask Hill, Mrs. A. P.

d.i.c.kerman, Mrs. Fiske of St. Johns, N. B., Amos Beckford, George E.

Lothrop, Mrs. M. E. S. Cheney and Miss Blackwell. Mrs. M. E. Tucker Faunce was the sole remonstrant.

The committee reported in favor of the pet.i.tioners, 7 yeas, 4 nays.

The question was debated in the Legislature February 21. Every inch of s.p.a.ce was crowded, the first three rows of the men's gallery were allowed on this occasion to be occupied by women and even then many stood. On motion of Representative White of Brookline an amendment was adopted by 110 yeas, 90 nays, providing that Munic.i.p.al Suffrage should be granted conditionally; the question be submitted to a vote of the men and women of the State, and the measure to go into effect only in case the majority of those voting on it voted in favor. The bill as amended was then defeated by 111 yeas, 101 nays, almost every opponent of suffrage voting against it. They thus virtually declared that they were not willing women should have Munic.i.p.al Suffrage even if the majority of both men and women could be shown to favor it. The adverse majority this year was ten votes; the smallest in any previous year had been 49.

_1894_--Gov. Frederick T. Greenhalge, in his inaugural message to the Legislature, strongly urged that it should consider the extension of Munic.i.p.al Suffrage to women.

On January 18 a hearing was given by the Joint Special Committee. No remonstrant pet.i.tions had been sent in. The chairman invited alternate speeches from suffragists and opponents, but only one of the latter presented himself, J. Otis Wardwell of Haverhill, who said:

I appear here this morning for a lady who, I understand, has occupied a position as chairman or secretary of an organization that has for some time been an active opponent of woman suffrage.

_Mr. Blackwell_--May I inquire what the organization is that the gentleman refers to? We have never been able to find out much about this organization against woman suffrage. We hear that there is one, but if so it is a secret society. What is the name of it?

MR. WARDWELL--I do not know the name of it, sir. [Laughter.]

When pressed for the name of the lady at whose request he appeared he finally acknowledged that it was Mrs. C. D. Homans of Boston. It was afterwards reported that she was extremely indignant with him for having disclosed her name.

Addresses in favor of suffrage were made by Mrs. Howe, Mrs. Livermore, Mr. Ernst, Mr. Garrison, Mr. and Miss Blackwell, for the State W. S.

A.; by Mrs. Cheney, president, for the State School Suffrage a.s.sociation; by Dr. Salome Merritt and Miss Charlotte Lobdell for the National W. S. A. of Ma.s.sachusetts; by Willard Howland, Mrs. Gleason and others for the W. C. T. U.; by Mrs. Trask Hill for the Independent Women Voters; and by Mrs. Avery for the labor element; also by Miss Catherine Spence of Australia, Mrs. Emily A. Fifield of the Boston school board, and others. Henry H. Faxon added a few words.

A second hearing was given January 19, at which Mrs. Fessenden and twelve other speakers represented the W. C. T. U. No remonstrants appeared. At the request of a member of the Joint Special Committee a third hearing was given on January 29. The Rev. Dr. Hamilton, Mrs. L.

A. Morrison, Mrs. Trask Hill and others spoke in favor of suffrage, and Jeremiah J. Donovan against it. The committee made a majority report against Munic.i.p.al Suffrage and a minority report in favor.

On January 31 Arthur S. Kneil offered an amendment providing that the question should be submitted to the men and women of the State, and that the act should take effect only if a majority of the votes cast on the proposition were in favor. Wm. H. Burges wanted it submitted to the men only. A second amendment proposed to lay the whole matter on the table till the opinion of the Supreme Court could be taken on the const.i.tutionality of Mr. Kneil's amendment. On February 1 there was a spirited discussion but finally both amendments were defeated, and the minority report in favor of the bill was subst.i.tuted for the adverse majority report by a vote of 104 yeas, 90 nays.

On February 2 Senator Arthur H. Wellman urged the adoption of his order that the Justices of the Supreme Court should be required to give their opinion to the House on three questions:

1. Is it const.i.tutional, in an act granting to women the right to vote in town and city elections, to provide that such act shall take effect throughout the commonwealth upon its acceptance by a majority of the voters of the commonwealth?

2. Is it const.i.tutional to provide in such an act that it shall take effect in a city or town upon its acceptance by a majority of the voters of such city or town?

3. Is it const.i.tutional to provide that such an act shall take effect throughout the commonwealth upon its acceptance by a majority of the voters of the commonwealth, including women specially authorized to register and vote upon this question?

Alfred S. Roe and the other leading advocates of Munic.i.p.al Suffrage withdrew their opposition to the order, saying that they preferred the bill as it stood, but that if amendments were to be added to it at any subsequent stage it would be well to know whether they were const.i.tutional. The order was adopted.

On March 3 four Justices of the Supreme Court--Field, Allen, Morton and Lathrop--answered "No" to all three questions. Justices Holmes and Barker answered "Yes" to all three; and Justice Knowlton answered "No"

to the first and third and "Yes" to the second. These opinions were published in full in the _Woman's Journal_ of March 10, 1894.

On March 14 Munic.i.p.al Suffrage was discussed in open session. An amendment was offered to limit the right to taxpaying women and a subst.i.tute bill to allow women to vote at one election only. The latter was offered by Richard J. Hayes of Boston, who said, "You would see the lowest women literally driven to the polls by thousands by mercenary politicians. The object lesson would settle the question forever." The amendment and the subst.i.tute were lost and the bill was pa.s.sed to its third reading by a vote, including pairs, of 122 yeas, 106 nays.

On March 29 the galleries were crowded with women. Richard Sullivan of Boston offered an additional section that the question be submitted to the men at the November election for an expression of opinion. This was adopted by 109 yeas, 93 nays. The bill to grant women Munic.i.p.al Suffrage at once, irrespective of what the expression of opinion in November might be, was then pa.s.sed to be engrossed, by a vote, including pairs, of 118 yeas, 107 nays. A motion to reconsider was voted down.

On April 5 the bill came up in the Senate. Floor and galleries were crowded and hundreds were turned away. Senator William B. Lawrence of Medford, a distiller, offered as a subst.i.tute for the bill a proposal to submit the question to the men at the November election for an expression of opinion as a guide to action by the next Legislature. He said it was absurd to grant women the suffrage first and call for an expression of opinion by the men afterward. The vote on the subst.i.tute was a tie, 19 yeas, 19 nays. To relieve the president of the Senate from the necessity of voting Senator John F. Fitzgerald changed his vote, but Senator Butler declined to be so relieved and gave his casting vote against the subst.i.tute. The bill for Munic.i.p.al Suffrage was then defeated by 14 yeas, 24 nays.

The Boston _Herald_, of April 9, had an editorial ent.i.tled Liquor and Woman Suffrage, expressing satisfaction in the defeat of the bill but emphatic disapproval of the corrupt methods used against it in the Senate. A majority of the Senators had promised to vote for it but the Liquor Dealer's a.s.sociation raised a large sum of money to accomplish its defeat, a persistent lobby worked against it and several Senators changed front. The _Herald_ plainly intimated that the result was due to bribery.

The credit of the unusually good vote in the House in 1893 and '94 was largely due to Representative Alfred S. Roe of Worcester, an able member, highly esteemed and very popular, who worked for the bill with the utmost zeal and perseverance.

There were pet.i.tions this year from many different organizations representing a vast aggregate membership. On June 9 a bill to allow women to be notaries public was defeated in the Senate by 10 yeas, 12 nays.

_1895._--On January 30 a great hearing was held in old Representatives' Hall at the State House, with floor, aisles and galleries crowded to the utmost capacity. Senator Alpheus M. Eldridge presided and Mrs. Livermore, as president of the State a.s.sociation, conducted the hearing for the five organizations that appeared as pet.i.tioners. Addresses were made by Lady Henry Somerset, Mrs. Howe, Mr. Blackwell, Profs. Hayes and Webster of Wellesley College, Mrs.

Fessenden, Mrs. Trask Hill, Mrs. Emily McLaughlin, Mrs. Boland, John Dean, F. C. Nash, Frank H. Foster, chairman of the legislative committee of the American Federation of Labor for Ma.s.sachusetts, James F. Norton, the representative of 10,000 Good Templars.

No opposing pet.i.tions had been sent in but Thomas Russell appeared as attorney for the remonstrants and said: "Believing as they do that the proper place for women is not in public urging or remonstrating against legislation before public gatherings, but rather in the home, the hospital, the school, the public inst.i.tution where sin and suffering are to be found and to be alleviated, they have not themselves appeared before you"--but had sent him.[319] Representative Roe said that the lawyer who had spoken for the remonstrants at the hearing of 1894 had received $500 for his services, and asked Mr.

Russell if he appeared in the same capacity. He answered that no compensation had been promised him, and that he did not mean to accept any. He added: "I represent no organization, anything more than an informal gathering of ladies, and as for the numbers I can not state.

But I do not come here basing my claim to be heard on the numbers of those who have asked me to appear. It is the justice of the cause which I speak upon that ent.i.tles me to a hearing, as it would if there were no one but myself."

Later twelve remonstrances were sent in, signed by 748 women. For suffrage there were 210 pet.i.tions from 186 towns and cities representing 133,111 individuals, men and women.

The opposition, alarmed by the large affirmative vote of 1894, this year put forth unprecedented efforts. Daily papers were paid for publishing voluminous letters against suffrage--sometimes of four columns--and an active and unscrupulous lobby worked against the bill.

For the first time in history an anti-suffrage a.s.sociation was formed within the Legislature itself. Representatives Dallinger, Humphrey, Bancroft of Clinton, Eddy of New Bedford, and others, organized themselves into a society, elected a chairman and secretary and worked strenuously and systematically, making a thorough canva.s.s of the House and pledging as many members as possible to vote "No."

The suffragists made the mistake of devoting their attention mainly to the Senate, where it was expected that the bill would come up first, and where it was believed that the main difficulty would be, but on March 5 the Munic.i.p.al Suffrage Bill was brought up in the House. Every inch of s.p.a.ce was crowded with spectators. After much discussion the bill was defeated by 137 yeas, 97 nays.