The History of Woman Suffrage Volume IV Part 133

EDUCATION: For the higher education the women of Virginia must go outside of their State.[454] The State Superintendent of Free Schools and the Secretary of the State Board of Education both express great regret at this fact, and the hope that all inst.i.tutions of learning will soon be opened to them. Secretary Frank P. Brent says:

We have as yet no women acting as school superintendents or members of school boards, but I feel sure the Const.i.tutional Convention will make women eligible to one or both of these positions.

Last year I had the honor to decide that in matters pertaining to the educational affairs of this State, the wife may be regarded as the head of the family, although the husband is living; and this decision has just been reaffirmed by the United States Court of Appeals.[455]

Women are admitted to several of the smaller colleges. The Randolph-Macon College in Ashland, and the Woman's College at Lynchburgh, both under the same presidency, rank well among inst.i.tutions for women only. Miss Celestia C. Parrish is vice-president. Hampton Inst.i.tute, for negroes and Indians, is co-educational.

The public schools make no distinction of s.e.x. There are 2,909 men and 5,927 women teachers. The average monthly salary of the men is $32.09; of the women, $26.39.

FOOTNOTES:

[454] The State Universities are closed to women only in Virginia, Georgia and Louisiana, and the undergraduate departments in North Carolina.

[455] The decision of the court was "When an intelligent, active, industrious, frugal woman finds she has married a man who, instead of coming up to the standard of a husband, is a mere dependent ... and leaves to her the support of the family, it would be contradictory of fact and an absurd construction of the law to say that he, and not she, is the head of the family."

This is believed to be the first legal decision of the kind and has created wide discussion.

CHAPTER LXIX.

WASHINGTON.[456]

The history of woman suffrage in Washington begins with the pa.s.sage of a bill by the Legislature, giving women the full rights of the ballot on the same terms as men, which was approved Nov. 23, 1883, by the Territorial Governor, William A. Newell. This was due princ.i.p.ally to the efforts of a few individuals, both men and women, as there was no organization.[457]

The munic.i.p.al elections of the following spring brought the first opportunity to exercise the newly-acquired right. The women evinced their appreciation of it by casting 8,368 ballots out of the whole number of 34,000, and the leading papers testified to the widespread acknowledgment of the strength and moral uplift of their vote.

The general election of November, 1884, naturally showed a larger vote by both men and women, the latter casting 12,000 out of the 48,000 ballots. It was estimated at this time that there were less than one-third as many women as men in the Territory. When the scattered population, the long distances and the difficulties of travel are taken into consideration it must be admitted that women took the largest possible advantage of the recently granted privileges.

For the next two years they continued to use the franchise with unabated zeal, and newspapers and public speakers were unanimous in their approval. In a number of instances the official returns, during the three-and-a-half years they possessed the suffrage, exhibited _a larger percentage of women voting than of men_. Chief Justice Roger S.

Greene of the Supreme Court estimated that at the last election before they were disfranchised four-fifths of all the women in the Territory went to the polls.

Many women have remarked upon the increased respect and courtesy of the men during this period. Mrs. Elizabeth Matthews, who removed from New Orleans to Port Townsend in 1885, states that, although accustomed from babyhood to the deferential gallantry of the men of the South, she never had dreamed that any women in the world were receiving such respectful consideration as she found in Washington Territory at that time. The political parties realized the necessity of putting their best men to the front, and it was fully conceded that ethics had become a factor in politics.

Prior to the Legislature of 1886 some discussion arose as to the const.i.tutionality of the Equal Suffrage Law, and, in order to remove all doubt, a strengthening Act was pa.s.sed, which was approved by Gov.

Watson C. Squire, November 29.

On Feb. 3, 1887, the case of _Harlan vs. Washington_ came before the Territorial Supreme Court. Harlan had been convicted of carrying on a swindling game by a jury composed of both men and women, and he contested the verdict on the ground that women were not legal voters.

The Supreme Court, whose _personnel_ had been entirely changed through a new Presidential administration, decided that the law conferring the elective franchise upon them was void because it had not been fully described in its t.i.tle. This decision also rendered void nineteen other laws which had been enacted under the same conditions.

The members of the next Legislature had been elected so long before the rendering of this decision that their seats could not be contested; and as their election had been by both men and women they were determined to re-establish the law which the Supreme Court had ruthlessly overthrown. Therefore the Equal Suffrage Law was re-enacted, perfectly t.i.tled and worded, and was approved by Gov.

Eugene Semple, Jan. 18, 1888.

The members of a convention to prepare a State const.i.tution were soon to be chosen, and the opponents of woman suffrage were most anxious to have the question considered by the Supreme Court before the election of the delegates. They arranged that the judges of the spring munic.i.p.al election in a certain precinct should refuse to accept the vote of a Mrs. Nevada Bloomer, the wife of a saloon-keeper and herself an avowed opponent of woman suffrage. This was done on April 3, and she brought suit against them. The case was rushed through, and on August 14 the Supreme Court decided that the Act of January 18 was invalid, as a Territorial Legislature had no right to enfranchise women, and that in consequence the Equal Suffrage Law was void. The Judges responsible for this decision were a.s.sociate Justices George Turner and William G. Langford.

The very Act of Congress which organized the Territory of Washington stated explicitly that, at elections subsequent to the first, _all persons should be allowed to vote upon whom the Territorial Legislature might confer the elective franchise_.

By the organic act under which all the Territories were formed women had been voting in Wyoming since 1869 and in Utah since 1870. The arbitrary disfranchis.e.m.e.nt of the women of the latter by Congress in 1887 demonstrated that this body did have supreme control over suffrage in the Territories, and therefore unimpeachable power to authorize their Legislatures to confer it on women, as had been done by that of Washington. There never was a more unconst.i.tutional decision than that of this Territorial Supreme Court. Congress should have refused to admit the Territory until women had voted for delegates to the const.i.tutional convention and on the const.i.tution itself.[458]

Without doubt the Supreme Court of the United States would have reversed the decision of the Territorial Court, but Mrs. Bloomer refused to allow the case to be appealed, and no one else had authority to do so.

As the women were thus illegally restrained from voting for delegates, the opponents of their enfranchis.e.m.e.nt were enabled to elect a convention with a majority sufficient to prevent a woman suffrage clause in the const.i.tution for Statehood.

Henry B. Blackwell, corresponding secretary of the American W. S. A., came from Ma.s.sachusetts to a.s.sist in securing such a clause. After a long discussion as to whether he should be permitted to address the convention, both sides agreed that the delegates should be invited to hear him in Tacoma Hall. His address was highly praised even by newspapers and persons opposed to equal suffrage. Four days later, with Judge Orange J. Jacobs and Mrs. Elizabeth Lyle Saxon, he was granted a hearing before the Suffrage Committee of the convention.

The question of incorporating woman suffrage in the new State const.i.tution was debated at intervals from Aug. 9 to 15, 1889. The fight for the measure was led by Edward Eldridge and W. S. Bush. In a long and able argument Mr. Eldridge reviewed the recent decision of the Supreme Court and made an eloquent plea for justice to women.

Subst.i.tutes granting to women Munic.i.p.al Suffrage, School Suffrage, the right to hold office, the privilege of voting on the const.i.tution, all were defeated. Finally a compromise was forced by which it was agreed to submit a separate amendment giving them Full Suffrage, to be voted on at the same time as the rest of the const.i.tution, women themselves not being allowed to vote upon it.[459]

Only two-and-a-half months remained before election, the women were practically unorganized, there were few speakers, no money, and the towns were widely scattered. Miss Matilda Hindman of Pennsylvania and Mrs. Clara Bewick Colby of Washington, D. C., editor of the _Woman's Tribune_, came on and canva.s.sed the State. Both were effective speakers and they received as much local a.s.sistance as possible, but all the money and influence which could be commanded by the disreputable element that had suffered from the woman's vote were brought to bear against the amendment, and its defeat was inevitable.

The const.i.tution was adopted Nov. 5, 1889, the woman suffrage amendment receiving 16,521 ayes, 35,913 noes; an adverse majority of 19,392.

In 1890 the first State Legislature conferred School Suffrage on women to the extent of voting for trustees and directors.

The political campaign of 1896 was one in which reform of all kinds was unusually in evidence. Three women sat as delegates in the State Fusion Convention at Ellensburg. Mrs. Laura E. Peters, president of the suffrage club at Port Angeles, was a Populist delegate and was chosen a member of the Platform Committee. Through her efforts a suffrage plank was inserted in the platform of that branch of the convention.

The president of the State Suffrage a.s.sociation, Mrs. Homer M. Hill, said in her official report: "The People's Party was composed of Silver Republicans, Populists and Democrats. At the State convention these met in separate sessions. The Democrats voted down a resolution demanding that the Committee on Platform bring in a report favoring the amendment. The Silver Republicans pa.s.sed one 'commending the action of the Free Silver party in presenting to the people the proposed amendment to the const.i.tution.' The Populists inserted in their platform a plank declaring that 'direct legislation without equal suffrage would be government by but one-half of the people,' and unequivocally favored the amendment.

"Although each of these three parties had its own platform, the combination formed the People's Party and made its fight upon one composed of eleven planks, or articles of faith, to which all three agreed, _but equal suffrage was not one of them_. Therefore the so-called union platform, minus suffrage, was the one generally published and used as the basis of the campaign speeches. Because of this no speaker of the People's Party was obliged to mention the amendment, and it was avoided as an issue in the campaign; the State Central Committee permitted each speaker to say what he pleased personally, but he was not allowed to commit the party or to urge men to vote for it. Nearly every one, however, advocated equal suffrage.

"The Republicans, in convention at Tacoma, adopted the following: 'Firmly believing in the principle of equal rights to all and special privileges to none, we recommend to the voters of the State a careful consideration of the proposed const.i.tutional amendment granting equal suffrage;' and this always was published as part of the platform. A few of the leading Republican orators advocated the amendment and none spoke against it. Its defeat is commonly attributed to the fact that 20,000 of the People's party did not vote upon it, and that _the Republicans pa.s.sed the word a short time before election to vote against it_.

"Mrs. W. Winslow Crannell, who was sent out by the Albany (N. Y.) Anti-Suffrage a.s.sociation, did not hold a meeting of women or a public meeting in the State. She conferred with men whom the anti-suffrage representative, Alfred Downing of Seattle, already knew, and her coming tended to arouse the loyal support of the suffragists.

"The Prohibition party gave official indors.e.m.e.nt. The Social Democratic party and the Socialist Labor party both inserted suffrage planks in their platforms. The latter claims 9,000 votes in the State."

The Fusion party was everywhere successful and the Legislature of 1897 was composed of reform elements. Mrs. Peters had charge of the Equal Suffrage Bill, which was introduced on the first day of the session by the Hon. J. P. de Mattos, and proposed to amend the const.i.tution by striking out the word "male" from the suffrage clause. This pa.s.sed the House on February 4 by 54 ayes, 15 noes. The bill was amended in the Senate and was strongly supported by Joseph Hill and W. V. Rinehart.

The amended bill pa.s.sed the Senate on February 25 by 23 ayes, 11 noes, and was returned to the House.

Here it reached a vote March 11, the last day before the close of the session, only through Mrs. Peters' slipping up to Speaker Charles E.

Cline's desk and whispering to him to recognize L. E. Rader, who wished to present it. As the Speaker was a staunch suffragist he did so. The bill pa.s.sed by 54 ayes, 15 noes, and was sent back for the signature of the President of the Senate and then returned to the House for the Speaker to sign. Mrs. Peters thus relates what happened after he had done so:

By the merest accident, Senator Thomas Miller, a friend, obeyed an impression to examine the bill to see if it were all right, when lo and behold! he discovered that the true bill had been stolen during the short recess and an absolutely worthless bill engrossed and signed. Senator Miller at once made the fraud public and Speaker Cline tore his signature from the bill. On Thursday morning, the last day, a certified copy of the true bill was sent to the House, where it was ratified and returned to the Senate. I then requested the President of the Senate to make me a special messenger to take the bill to the Governor for his signature. As I happened to hold the peculiar position of having voted (at the State convention) for both those gentlemen, and as I had taken pains to remind them of that fact, and as both the Governor and Lieutenant-Governor were suffragists, I found no difficulty in having my request granted. I said that the bill had been delayed, deformed, pigeon-holed and stolen, and I would not feel safe until it was made law by the Governor's signature.

I was duly sworn in as special messenger, and very proudly carried the bill to the office, where Gov. John R. Rogers affixed his signature to it and declared it law.

The history of the campaign which followed, as condensed by the president, Mrs. Hill, shows that active work did not begin until the convention held at Seattle in January, 1898. The executive committee was called together after its adjournment and the situation thoroughly canva.s.sed. A resolution which welcomed work for the amendment by other societies under their own auspices was unanimously pa.s.sed, as it was realized that there was not time in which to bring all suffragists into line under one management. Money was scarce and hard to obtain, and public attention was divided between the Spanish-American War and the gold excitement in Alaska. The a.s.sociation at once turned its attention to the obtaining of funds, the securing of the favorable att.i.tude of the press and the formal indors.e.m.e.nt of the amendment by other organizations.

Clubs were formed in wards and precincts to hold meetings, a.s.sist the State a.s.sociation financially, distribute literature and circulate a pet.i.tion for signatures of women only, asking that the voters cast their ballots for the proposed amendment. It was impossible to prosecute the pet.i.tion work thoroughly throughout the State, but the largest cities--Seattle, Tacoma, Spokane and Olympia--with many country precincts, both east and west of the mountains, were very satisfactorily canva.s.sed. It was found that over 88 per cent. of all the women asked to sign the pet.i.tion did so. The rest were divided between the indifferent and those positively opposed. No one received a salary for services. Less than $500 was collected, and $5.47 remained in the treasury, after every bill was paid, the day before election.

The State a.s.sociation issued 5,000 pieces of literature of its own, a booklet of thirty pages containing testimonials from leading citizens of the four Free States--Wyoming, Colorado, Utah and Idaho. Early in the campaign Mrs. Carrie Chapman Catt, chairman of the national organization committee, sent 62,200 pieces. Henry B. Blackwell, editor of the _Woman's Journal_, shortly before the election forwarded from Boston 500 pieces to each of the thirty-four counties in Washington.

This literature no doubt helped to swell the vote for the amendment.

Forty country newspapers were regularly sent free to State headquarters; the city papers at half-rates. The press was courteous in every instance, and either advocated equal suffrage, kept silence or opened its columns to both sides. The Seattle _Daily Times_ strongly favored it.