The History of Woman Suffrage Volume V Part 22

KATE M. GORDON, Corresponding Secretary.

ALICE STONE BLACKWELL, Recording Secretary.

HARRIET TAYLOR UPTON, Treasurer.

LAURA CLAY, } Auditors.

ELLA S. STEWART, }

The Call ended with the touching poem of the young Southern poet, Mrs.

Olive Tilford Dargan, "The Lord of little children to the sleeping mothers spoke."

[61] The resolutions declared the movement for woman suffrage to be but a part of the great struggle for human liberty; called for the enactment of initiative and referendum laws; equal pay for women and men in public and private employment; uniform State laws against child labor and for compulsory education; more industrial training for boys and girls in the public schools; more strenuous effort against the white slave traffic. They demanded that the United States should take the lead in an international movement for the limitation of armaments.

A cordial vote of thanks was given for the hospitality and courtesies of the city and the people of Seattle.

[62] See History of Woman Suffrage, Volume IV, page 1096.

[63] The ministers of Seattle who opened the various sessions with prayer were: Doctors A. Norman Ward, Protestant Methodist; Thomas E.

Elliott, Queen Anne Methodist; George Robert Cairns, Temple Baptist; Edward Lincoln Smith, Pilgrim Congregational; Sydney Strong, Queen Anne Congregational; the Reverends J. D. O. Powers, Unitarian; W. H.

W. Rees, First Methodist Episcopal; W. A. Major, Bethany Presbyterian; Joseph L. Garvin, First Christian; C. Lyng Hanson, Scandinavian Methodist; F. O. Iverson, Norwegian Lutheran; P. Nelson, Norwegian Congregational Missionary.

[64] Committee: Mrs. DeVoe, Dr. Cora Smith Eaton, Mrs. Bessie J.

Savage, Miss Adella M. Parker, Dr. Sarah A. Kendall, Mrs. Ellen S.

Lockenby and a small army of a.s.sistants.

CHAPTER X.

NATIONAL AMERICAN CONVENTION OF 1910.

As a national convention had not been held in Washington since 1904 the suffragists were pleased to return to that city with the Forty-second in the long list, which was held April 14-19, 1910.[65]

Three special cars were filled by delegates from New York City alone.

It had become very difficult to get a suitable place for conventions in the national capital and the experiment was made of holding this one in the large ball room of the Arlington Hotel, which proved entirely inadequate for the audiences. The convention was called to order on the first afternoon by the national president, Dr. Anna Howard Shaw, and welcomed by the president of the District of Columbia suffrage a.s.sociation, Miss Harriette J. Hifton, and the president of the District branch of the College Equal Suffrage League, Miss Mabel Foster. The response for the National a.s.sociation was made by Miss Laura Clay of Kentucky, one of its officers.

The report of the Committee on Church Work was read by its chairman, Mrs. Mary E. Craigie, who gave a record of the accomplishments of her committees in the various States and said: "The moral awakening of the churches to a need for more united efforts along lines of social and moral reform carries with it a great responsibility for women, who, representing two-thirds of the numerical power of the churches, are in their present disfranchised condition negative factors in those broader fields of activity which now const.i.tute church work. Women are beginning to realize that they are wasting their efforts and energies in trying to effect moral and social reforms dependent upon legislative action or law enforcement and they are asking: 'Shall we go on with the farce of attacking the constantly growing evils of intemperance, immorality and crime which menace our homes, our children and society at large, knowing that our efforts are useless and futile, or shall we take a stand which will show that we are in earnest and demand the weapon of the ballot which is necessary before we can do our part as Christian citizens in advancing the kingdom of G.o.d on earth?'"

The excellent report of the new headquarters secretary, Professor Mary Gray Peck, filled ten pages of the printed Minutes and in addition to the large collection of statistics contained many useful suggestions.

Like all of the reports from the headquarters it showed the great advantage of having them in a large center. Referring to the literature department she said: "Local chairmen should see that tables with suffrage literature are placed in all church and charitable bazaars as far as possible and that our papers may be subscribed for at all subscription agencies; also that our publications are on the shelves and on file in the public libraries throughout the State. One of the things Mrs. Pankhurst said when she was looking over our work-room was: 'Don't give away your publications. We found we got rid of much more when we sold and now we give away nothing.' We have always given away ours with considerable freedom and been glad to have them read at our expense but at the low figure we put on them we could draw the gratis line closer without impairing our popularity.... The average daily output of literature since the opening of headquarters in New York--and this does not include the orders which continued to be filled in Warren--has been 2,742 pieces, or a growth of more than 25 per cent. over the average of last year. Our cash sales from January 1 to April 1 have amounted to $938, or an average of $312 per month as against the average of $89 per month for 1908-9. That is, our cash sales for the past three months are three and a half times greater than they were at the same time last year."

"The propagandist part of the correspondence," said Miss Peck, "soon makes a wise woman of the headquarters secretary. The time for general argument and abstract appeal has largely gone by. The call now is for statistics, laws, definite citations, instances of industrial conditions, legal status of women and children, etc.... The State organizations could do no more valuable service in aiding our efficiency as an information agency than by each getting out a condensed and reliable bulletin of State laws relating to women and children; and also by collecting data as to the property held and taxes paid by women, with ill.u.s.trative instances where disfranchis.e.m.e.nt has forced these taxpayers to submit to injustice and unfair discrimination." She told of the increasing call for woman suffrage literature from public libraries to meet the demand and urged the encouragement of debates, saying: "If the State organizations would make a persistent effort to have suffrage debated in the schools and if they advertised the national headquarters as prepared to furnish a volume of debate material for thirty cents, suffrage would receive continuous advertising at no financial expense to us, nor would the good to the movement cease with the debate. Get the young people interested and you catch the mothers. Also by keeping a card register of the young debaters, the State organization would have the names and addresses of an ever-growing list of oncoming citizens interested in the subject. Debaters are a good deal cheaper than organizers. The State University of Wisconsin is sending out through its university extension department our suffrage literature in travelling libraries to meet the demand in the public schools for debate material. I believe most State universities would be glad to do the same for us. Many universities and colleges have discussed suffrage the past winter, notably Dartmouth, Williams and Brown in their annual intercollegiate debate, Yale in the inter-cla.s.s debate, the University of Texas against Tulane University of Louisiana, and Stanford will debate with Berkeley, April 16." Miss Peck made many other valuable suggestions from the trained viewpoint of a university woman.

Representative A. W. Rucker was introduced as a proxy for the Colorado a.s.sociation and gave its report with a warm personal endors.e.m.e.nt of equal suffrage as it had existed in his State for seventeen years. The convention greeted with enthusiasm the mother of U. S. Senator Robert L. Owen of Oklahoma, who said she could not make a speech but would send her son to do so that evening.

Although national suffrage conventions had been held in Washington since 1869 no official recognition ever had been asked for or given by the President of the United States. The leaders thought that now the movement was of sufficient size and importance to justify them in inviting President Taft to give simply an address of welcome. The invitation was sent with the statement that its acceptance would not be regarded as committing him to an advocacy of woman suffrage and it was accepted with this understanding, although Mrs. Elihu Root presented a request from the Anti-Suffrage a.s.sociation that he would not accept it. The entire country was interested and on the opening evening, when he was to speak, the auditorium was crowded and lines of people reached to the street. President Taft came in with his escort while Dr. Shaw was in the midst of her annual address but she stopped instantly and welcomed him to the platform. The audience arose and with applause and waving of handkerchiefs remained standing until he was seated. At one point in his brief address there was apparently a slight hissing in the back part of the room. The President paused; Dr.

Shaw sprang to her feet exclaiming, "Oh, my children!" and the audience, which was excited and amazed, instantly became quiet and listened respectfully to the rest of his speech, but as he left the room, after shaking hands with Dr. Shaw, a few remained seated. As this incident attracted nation-wide comment and much criticism it seems advisable to publish the proceedings in full. The address was as follows:

I am not entirely certain that I ought to have come tonight, but your committee who invited me a.s.sured me that I should be welcome even if I did not support all the views which were here advanced.

I considered that this movement represented a sufficient part of the intelligence of the community to justify my coming here and welcoming you to Washington. The difficulty I expect to encounter is this--at least it is a difficulty that occurs to me as I judge my own feelings in causes in which I have an intense interest--to wit: that I am always a good deal more impatient with those who only go half-way with me than with those who actually oppose me.

Now when I was sixteen years old and was graduated from the Woodward High School in Cincinnati, I took for my subject "Woman Suffrage" and I was as strong an advocate of it as any member of this convention. I had read Mills's "Subjection of Women"; my father was a woman suffragist and so at that time I was orthodox but in the actual political experience which I have had I have modified my views somewhat.

In the first place popular representative government we approve and support because on the whole every cla.s.s, that is, every set of individuals who are similarly situated in the community, who are intelligent enough to know what their own interests are, are better qualified to determine how those interests shall be cared for and preserved than any other cla.s.s, however altruistic that cla.s.s may be; but I call your attention to two qualifications in that statement. One is that the cla.s.s should be intelligent enough to know its own interests. The theory that Hottentots or any other uneducated, altogether unintelligent cla.s.s is fitted for self-government at once or to take part in government is a theory that I wholly dissent from--but this qualification is not applicable here. The other qualification to which I call your attention is that the cla.s.s should as a whole care enough to look after its interests, to take part as a whole in the exercise of political power if it is conferred. Now if it does not care enough for this, then it seems to me that the danger is, if the power is conferred, that it may be exercised by that part of the cla.s.s least desirable as political const.i.tuents and be neglected by many of those who are intelligent and patriotic and would be most desirable as members of the electorate.

It was at this point the supposed hissing occurred and the President continued:

Now, my dear ladies, you must show yourselves equal to self-government by exercising, in listening to opposing arguments, that degree of restraint without which self-government is impossible. If I could be sure that women as a cla.s.s in the community, including all the intelligent women most desirable as political const.i.tuents, would exercise the franchise, I should be in favor of it. At present there is considerable doubt upon that point. In certain of the States which have tried it woman suffrage has not been a failure. It has not made, I think, any substantial difference in politics. I think it is perhaps possible to say that its adoption has shown an improvement in the body politic, but it has been tested only in those States where population is spa.r.s.e and where the problem of entrusting such power to women in the concentrated population of large cities is not presented. For this reason, if you will permit me to say so, my impression is that the task before you in securing what you think ought to be granted in respect to the political rights of women is not in convincing men but it is in convincing the majority of your own cla.s.s of the wisdom of extending the suffrage to them and of their duty to exercise it.

Now that is my confession of faith. I am glad to welcome you here. I am glad to welcome an intelligent body of women, earnest in the discussion of politics, earnest in the question of good government and earnest and high-minded in the cause they are pursuing, even if I disagree with them, not in principle but in the application of it to the present situation. More than this I ought not to say and I hope you will not deem me ungracious in saying as much as I have said, but I came here at the invitation of your committee with the understanding as to what I might say and that I should not subscribe to all the principles that you are here to advocate. I congratulate you on coming to Washington, this most beautiful of cities, to hold your convention. I trust that it may result in everything that you hope for and I am sure that the coming together of honest, intelligent and earnest women like these cannot but be productive of good.

Some persons thought that the hissing was done by one or more delegates from the equal suffrage States because of the aspersion cast on the cla.s.s of women who were likely to vote. Others believed there was no hissing but that it was merely an exclamation of "hush" because of the noise caused by the moving of loose chairs, many in the back part of the room standing up on them to get a better view. It was, however, a matter of great concern and regret on the part of the national officers, who met early the next morning and framed the following resolution:

WHEREAS the President of the United States in welcoming the Forty-second Annual Convention of the National American Woman Suffrage a.s.sociation has taken the historic position of being the first inc.u.mbent of his office to recognize officially our determination to secure a complete democracy, thereby testifying his conviction as to its power and growth, and WHEREAS his seriousness, honesty and friendliness converted what might have been an empty form into an official courtesy, historic alike for him and for us,

THEREFORE be it resolved that we convey to President William H.

Taft the thanks and appreciation of this convention for his welcome, a.s.suring him at the same time that the patriotism and public spirit of the women of America intend to make themselves directly felt in the government of which he is the honored head and that at no distant date.

This was adopted at the morning's session of the convention by a unanimous rising vote. At the opening of the afternoon session Dr.

Shaw said: "I think one of the saddest hours that I have ever spent in connection with one of our national conventions I spent last night after the occurrence of an incident here for which none of the officers of this a.s.sociation bears the least responsibility and we trust none of the delegates needs to bear any of it, when there was a dissent made to an utterance of President Taft. It seemed to us a most unwise and ungracious act and we feel the keenest possible regret over it. Because of this the Official Board has prepared a letter to the President expressing our regret that the occurrence should have taken place, whether by a member of this body or by a visitor. It is impossible to control a great public audience individually and an organization is not responsible for everything which takes place in its public meetings. While I do not think our organization as a body is at all responsible for what took place last night I feel that, since the President was our guest, it is our duty to express our very deep regret for the incident. I ask, therefore, that, without discussion and without further speech, there shall be concurrence on the part of the convention with the Official Board in sending a letter of regret to the President."

The convention agreed to this instantly with but one dissenting and it was ascertained that she was not only not a delegate but not a member of the a.s.sociation. This justified the general opinion that if there had been any hissing the night before it was done by some of the large number of outsiders in the audience. The letter signed by Professor Frances Squire Potter, as corresponding secretary, read as follows:

To President William Howard Taft,

My dear Mr. President:

The enclosed resolution, introduced by the Committee on Convention Resolutions, was pa.s.sed unanimously by the National American Woman Suffrage a.s.sociation today at the opening of its morning session. I am instructed by the unanimous vote of the Official Board and of the delegates now a.s.sembled to send you with the resolution this official communication.

The official board and delegates were but a small part of the very large gathering to hear your greeting last evening but as the representatives of the a.s.sociation these delegates feel great sorrow that any one present, either a member or an outsider, should have interrupted your address by an expression of personal feeling, and they herewith disclaim responsibility for such interruption and ask your acceptance of this expression of regret in the spirit in which it is given.

The letter was sent in the afternoon by messenger across Lafayette Square, which separated the Arlington from the White House, and the next morning the following answer was received:

The White House, Washington, April 16, 1910.

My dear Mrs. Potter:

I beg to acknowledge your favor of April 15. I unite with you in regretting the incident occurring during my address to which your letter refers. I regret it not because of any personal feeling, for I have none on the subject at all, but only because much more significance has been given to it than it deserves and because it may be used in an unfair way to embarra.s.s the leaders of your movement.

I thank the a.s.sociation for the kindly and cordial tone of the resolutions transmitted and hope that the feature of Thursday night's meeting, which you describe as having given your a.s.sociation much sorrow, may soon be entirely forgotten.

Sincerely yours, William H. Taft.

This closed the incident as far as it could be closed but there was a great deal of sympathy with the sentiment expressed by Miss Alice Stone Blackwell in the _Woman's Journal_: "It was known that while the President was not an anti-suffragist he was not a strong suffragist and might not even be wholly with us. It was, therefore, not expected that he would at the convention 'come out for suffrage.' Indeed, he was not invited to make an address but simply to extend to the convention the welcome of the national capital, not because he was a suffragist but because the convention thought that it was representative enough and of sufficient size and standing in the country to warrant asking the President to do this one thing. He could have declined the invitation and no one would have been offended. He could have said he was an anti-suffragist. He could have tactfully omitted his opinion and confined his time to greetings and welcome as Chief Executive to the convention as a large organization of the women of the nation. At the point where the supposed hissing occurred, it was as if the speaker had struck those women in the face with a whip.

Even those who most resented the President's remarks regretted the expression of open disapproval in such a manner, but, to a person, the audience felt that he had been untactful, and, however unintentionally, had implied an odious comparison; that he had not sufficiently considered this great body of the picked women of the land to choose his language in addressing them."

The President's address was preceded by one given by Professor Potter on The Making of Democracy, which had seldom been equalled in its statesmanlike qualities. This was followed by a powerful argument on Why Women Should Have the Suffrage, by Senator Robert L. Owen (Okla.), one of the ablest speakers in the U. S. Senate and always an uncompromising supporter of the political rights of women.

At an afternoon session Mrs. Rachel Foster Avery (Penn.), who had succeeded Mrs. Carrie Chapman Catt as chairman of the Committee on Pet.i.tion to Congress, took up the report where it had ended at the last convention. She said that, in addition to the 100,000 pet.i.tions and 5,000 individual letters sent from New York under Mrs. Catt's supervision, there had gone out from the headquarters after they had been removed to Washington and placed in charge of Mrs. Rachel Brill Ezekiel, 60,000 more pet.i.tions, 11,000 more letters and 1,185 postals with appeals. "The pet.i.tion," she said, "has been a means of introducing suffrage into thousands of households and hundreds of meetings of all kinds in which the subject had not before been mentioned. Even women's clubs have had to listen to suffrage when brought to them by eager seekers after signatures. It has given to many people who have never before done anything for suffrage an opportunity. In some cases whole neighborhoods have been reached through the work of a single energetic woman willing to go from house to house circulating the pet.i.tion and leaving literature with families where she found little or no sympathy for our movement. All letters sent out from pet.i.tion headquarters enclosed suffrage leaflets and carried to thousands of men and women the first suffrage literature they had seen." All this vast work had cost only $4,555, of which Mrs.

Catt had contributed $1,000. The most strenuous effort had not succeeded in getting the return of all the pet.i.tions in time for the convention but those at hand contained 404,825 names.[66]

The arrangements for the parade which was to carry the pet.i.tions to Congress were in the hands of Miss Mary Garrett Hay. Mrs. Helen H.

Gardener obtained the use of fifty cars from interested residents of Washington and these were handsomely adorned with the flag of the United States and suffrage banners. The official report said: "The most picturesque incident of the convention was the long line of fifty decorated automobiles which bore the pet.i.tions and delegates of each State from the Hotel Arlington to the Capitol, where the pet.i.tions were personally delivered to the various Senators and Representatives who were to present them to Congress. The large piles of rolled pet.i.tions, the respect of the people who lined the streets, the courtesy of the Congressmen and the crowds which watched the presentation in Senate and House were all impressive. Senator LaFollette brought instant silence when, presenting his share of the pet.i.tions, he said, "I hope the time will come when this great body of intelligent people will not find it necessary to pet.i.tion for that which ought to be accorded as a right in a country of equal opportunities."