The History of Woman Suffrage Volume V Part 34

The evening closed with the president's address. The report said: Dr.

Shaw declared she had some sympathy for the anti-suffragists, as they were bound to lose. "When the campaign for woman suffrage was begun,"

she said, "the 'antis' had all of the earth and the suffragists had only hope of heaven but now many nations of the world and half of the United States have been converted to the cause of votes for women."

She ridiculed the arguments of the anti-suffragists and said: "Until you grant the right of a vote to all persons, you haven't a democracy--you have an aristocracy and the worst of all--an aristocracy of s.e.x. Soon the divine right of s.e.x here will be as obsolete as the divine right of Kings in Europe." Answering the argument that if women have the ballot they ought also to have the musket, Dr. Shaw said in telling of the sufferings of the women during the war: "It is said that 300,000 of the flower of Europe's manhood have been killed in the last nine weeks of the war. I can't grasp the thought of that many dead men but I can look into the face of one dead soldier and know that he had a mother. If this woman had escaped death at childbirth she had watched over him day by day until she had to look up into the eyes of her boy. And then that boy was called by his country and soon he was dead--he was in the happy peace of glory and she was facing the empty years of agony. Then they ask what a woman knows about war!... The very flower of a country perishes in a war, leaving the maimed and diseased to father the children of future generations. Women ought to have the ballot during war and during peace, for we know that if they had had it in all countries this war would not have occurred."

The report of Mrs. Mary Ware Dennett, corresponding and executive secretary, covered much of the work of the National a.s.sociation during 1914, which was more extensive probably than in any preceding year in its history. It said in part:

This year has completely broken all records in the number of campaign States--seven in all. In four of them--Nevada, Montana, North and South Dakota--the amendment was submitted by legislative act; in three--Nebraska, Missouri and Ohio--by initiative pet.i.tion. It is noteworthy that in all of the last the suffragists consider the work of securing the requisite number of signatures, although it was exceedingly arduous, an invaluable a.s.set to the campaign, each signer being practically guaranteed to vote right on the amendment itself. In Ohio, Nevada, Montana and South Dakota, only a simple majority vote on the amendment is necessary to pa.s.s it, but in Nebraska 35 per cent. of all the votes cast at the election is required and in North Dakota and Missouri a majority of all the votes cast.

The year 1914 has been what suffragists call an "off year," since most of the State Legislatures meet biennially in the odd years.

Nevertheless, what acts of Legislatures there have been are of the greatest significance. Those of Ma.s.sachusetts and New Jersey submitted the suffrage amendment by overwhelming votes and in both States the suffragists are confident of the approval of the 1915 Legislatures, which is necessary before final submission to the voters. An amendment was introduced into the Legislatures of eight others. The national legislative record shows that never before has the Congressional atmosphere been so thoroughly permeated with woman suffrage. The anxiety of some members of Congress to show that they stood right with their const.i.tuents on the question and the agility of others in side-stepping every possible necessity for meeting the issue, have unerringly indicated that they all recognize the fact that the time has come when national politics must reckon with woman suffrage.

All through the year there has been the most hearty cooperation between national headquarters and the Washington and Chicago offices of our Congressional Committee.... It is impossible to mention this committee without expressing on behalf of the officers of the a.s.sociation a most thorough appreciation of the service of its chairman, Mrs. Medill McCormick, who has not only given money generously to the work but has added what is more valuable still--steady, hard, personal labor, coupled with an indefatigable good humor, frequently under most trying circ.u.mstances....

The new State a.s.sociations formed and the many suffrage organizations applying for affiliated or auxiliary membership were named and an account was given of the large sums of money, the vast amount of literature and the many workers supplied to the seven State campaigns of the year. These facts and the other activities of the a.s.sociation were related in part as follows:

Miss Harriet Grim of Wisconsin was sent by request to North Dakota to cover the series of Chautauqua meetings in June and July. Miss Katharine Devereux Blake of New York offered her services for only expenses for a month of campaign work in July.

Hurried arrangements were made by telegram and as the promptest, most urgent pleas came from Montana, it won her, although later she did some work in North Dakota also. Miss Shaw's special fund was the backing which provided for both tours. Miss Blake made the wonderful record of obtaining from the collections at her meetings enough to cover all her travelling and living expenses.

Miss Shaw's fund,[84] which has often seemed like the miraculous pitcher, also provided part of the expense of sending Mrs. Jennie Wells Wentworth to Ohio and Mrs. Laura Gregg Cannon to Nevada.

Miss Addams has contributed several weeks of campaigning and Dr.

Shaw herself has made an itinerary, giving ten days to each of the campaign States, starting August 27 and ending with Election Day....

Another noteworthy feature of the year's work was the establishment of Woman's Independence Day on the first Sat.u.r.day of May, initiated by Mrs. McCormick and phenomenally successful.

There was a wonderful response to the ringing call sent out by the National Board to all the suffragists of the country to meet together in every city and town at a given time and sing a suffrage hymn, declare their faith, pa.s.s a resolution and have a speech. A woman's version of the Declaration of Independence was prepared for the occasion and President Wilson was asked by Dr.

Shaw to proclaim the day a legal holiday to be celebrated in recognition of the right and necessity that the women of the United States should become citizens in fact as well as in name.

The President did not heed Dr. Shaw's request but the women of the country did. Not a State was silent, not even the equal suffrage States, and many added parades and other events to the regular program.

The story was told of the National Junior Suffrage Corps to enroll the young people, the idea of Miss Caroline Ruutz-Rees (Conn.); of the large amount of Congressional doc.u.ments distributed, among them 1,000 copies of the speech of Senator Henry F. Ashurst (Ariz.) before the Senate on the Federal Amendment, presented by him; the travelling schools organized; lists prepared of many thousand active members and an infinite variety of details. Mrs. Dennett had severed her connection with the a.s.sociation the preceding September after four years' invaluable service.

Mrs. Dennett made also the report of the Literature Committee, whose duties had now been merged in the National Woman Suffrage Publishing Co. The latter reported through its chairman, Mrs. Cyrus W. Field. The greatly needed Data Department had been established under the cooperation of Miss Elinor Byrns, chairman also of the Press Department; Mrs. Frances Maule Bjorkman and Mrs. Dennett. The volunteer services of Miss Helen Raulett, like Miss Byrns a lawyer, had been obtained, and while its great need and possibilities had been demonstrated it was evident that it must be put on a paid, business basis to be effective. Miss Byrns gave an interesting account of the ramifications of the Press and Publicity Department and its important accomplishments. "In my opinion," she said, "it is almost impossible to have suffrage news given out successfully by any one who is not an earnest suffragist. Knowledge of publicity does not make up for the lack of conviction and enthusiasm," and she gave this instance: "A few months ago a writer for one of the New York newspapers--the worst 'anti' paper we have--telephoned me, saying, 'I have been told to write an editorial on the menace of woman suffrage. Can you help me?'

I said, 'Yes, I can prove to you that the majority of the presidential electors in 1916 may represent equal suffrage States and that in all probability every political party will have to endorse woman suffrage before that time. What could be worse than that?' He agreed with me and his editorial based on the facts Dr. Shaw and I gave him has been a most successful campaign doc.u.ment for us."

Among other valuable suggestions Miss Byrns said: "While there are some editors who give us s.p.a.ce because they have to--that is because we are always doing something 'different' and making news which cannot be ignored--there are perhaps even more who have a real interest in the suffrage movement and are therefore eager to give us all the s.p.a.ce which the business department of their paper permits. And, by the way, one of the most valuable kinds of press work is that which can be done by every suffragist individually. Newspaper and magazine offices are most sensitive to the praise and blame of readers. Suffrage departments are sometimes stopped because no readers write their approval. Individual newspaper policies, belittling or perverting the suffrage issue, are sometimes persisted in because no readers write their disapproval. It is discouraging to an editor when a reader writes a letter complaining of one opposing news item or one cartoon although she has ignored everything which has been printed in favor of suffrage."

Miss Jane Thompson, field secretary, told of the 8,000 miles she had travelled in the campaign States since early in April; of her experiences pleasant and unpleasant; of the excellent opportunities it had afforded of establishing thorough understanding and cordial relations between the National a.s.sociation and the States. She spoke of the long and arduous work of the national president and presented the following expression of loyalty and appreciation from those who had conducted the campaigns in Ohio, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Montana and Nevada:

To Dr. Anna Howard Shaw:

When service of the highest type has been faithfully and loyally rendered it is the pleasure of those most benefited by that service to express, though inadequately, their deep appreciation.

We, the representatives of the Campaign States, feel that to you we owe much for the splendid way in which you and your Executive Board stood by us in our efforts, but even more do we appreciate your personal labor, your untiring, beautiful spirit. Always ready to meet whatever situation arose, regardless of fatigue, you encouraged the believers, braced up the uncertain and converted the unbelieving. Your service, in our estimation, is invaluable and cannot be dispensed with.

The legal adviser announced the settlement at last of the bequest of Mrs. Sarah J. McCall of Ohio, including 100 shares of Cincinnati Street Railway stock, worth from $5,000 to $6,000, and $705 interest; also the receipt of a legacy of $4,750, after the inheritance tax was paid, from former U. S. Senator Thomas W. Palmer of Michigan.

Miss Elizabeth Yates said in her report on Presidential suffrage: "The favorable decision the past year by the Supreme Court of Illinois leaves no room for any further contention regarding its const.i.tutionality. It can be granted by any Legislature by a bare majority vote and this can be obtained by many States that could not secure the large vote necessary to submit a const.i.tutional amendment for full suffrage." She strongly urged that any State contemplating a campaign for full suffrage should first secure the Presidential franchise. In her usual excellent report on Church Work, Mrs. Mary E.

Craigie told of her visits to the Methodist Ministerial a.s.sociations of Atlanta, Tampa and New Orleans with most gratifying results, as a friendly spirit towards woman suffrage was developed and the last named recommended the General Conference to give laity rights to women. In cooperation with Dr. Nina Wilson Dewey, her chairman for Iowa, arrangements were made during the Mississippi Valley Conference in Des Moines with the clergymen of eighteen Protestant churches to have their pulpits filled at some service on Sunday by women delegates and the combined audiences by actual count numbered 6,000. Four thousand copies of the annual letter asking for a mention of the need of women's influence in State affairs in their Mothers' Day sermons were sent to as many clergymen.

One of the most valuable sessions was Voters' Evening, under the auspices of the National Men's League, with its president, James Lees Laidlaw (N. Y.) in the chair. The opening address was made by U. S.

Senator Luke Lea (Tenn.), who received a great ovation when he began and the audience rose with cheers and waving handkerchiefs when he finished. He said in the course of his speech:

I am embarra.s.sed by not knowing how to address this distinguished audience.... Much as I regret it I must address you as "my disfranchised friends," who, in spite of your learning, your cultivation and your intelligence, under our enlightened and progressive civilization occupy the same political plane as insane persons, idiots, infants and others laboring under disabilities. To say I regret to be forced to address you thus is no mere lip service, contradictory of real sentiment and conviction, for I was one of the three Southern Senators who were sufficiently impressed with the absolute necessity of woman suffrage to step beyond the sacred portals of State rights and vote for the amendment to the const.i.tution of the United States, removing from the electoral franchise the limitation of s.e.x, and I am glad to have an opportunity to express the reasons for my faith.

These two twofold: First, the wholesome effect upon our Government of extending the privilege of voting to women; and second, the far-reaching results upon womanhood of granting this right. The first reason is justified by the statement which will be conceded by all, even the "antis," that an overwhelming majority of women are good rather than bad and have the highest ideals of government and politics. Therefore, to give the right to vote to this cla.s.s is to increase overwhelmingly the number of good voters and to multiply the number of citizens with these highest ideals.

In answer to this, some "anti," who, by her opposition to woman suffrage, pleads guilty to the threadbare charge that women have not sufficient intelligence to vote, comes forward and says: "But the good women won't vote; only the bad women will exercise the privilege." This argument is answered by the contrary experience in States where women vote. If woman suffrage only increased the number of bad voters, then instead of spreading like a prairie fire from coast to coast it would be repealed in the States where it was originally tried as an experiment. The results in the States where the franchise has been granted are an absolute and irrefutable argument in favor of national woman suffrage. In these States it has removed the polling places from the dives to the churches and has opened more schools and closed more saloons than all other political movements combined. The ideals of government and the standard of right and wrong by which public officials are measured have been raised without lowering one iota the standard of motherhood, of wifehood and of womanhood, a standard of which every woman is proud and which every man reverences and worships....

Other speakers were President H. S. Barker of the University of Kentucky; R. A. McDowell (Ky.), the Hon. Leon Locke (La.), Miss S.

Grace Nicholes of Chicago, and Charles T. Hallinan, vice-president of the league. A branch of the Men's National League was formed during the convention by about thirty prominent men, with John Bell Keble, dean of the Vanderbilt Law School, as temporary chairman.

Delegates to these national conventions now felt less need of oratorical eloquence and more of practical knowledge of the work which was under way that they might carry back with them to their own States. One evening was profitably spent in listening to short speeches by Miss Alice Stone Blackwell on the work of the National a.s.sociation; Mrs. Antoinette Funk on that of the Congressional Committee; Mrs. Raymond Brown, president of the New York a.s.sociation, on the unusual and spectacular campaign now under way in that State; Miss Hannah J. Patterson on the preparatory campaign in Pennsylvania; Mrs. Maud Wood Park, secretary of the Boston Equal Suffrage a.s.sociation, and Mrs. Teresa A. Crowley on the coming campaign in Ma.s.sachusetts; Mrs. Lillian J. Feickert, president of the State a.s.sociation, on that of New Jersey. In all of these States amendments had been submitted for 1915. Miss Rankin told the welcome story of the Montana victory.

The ma.s.s meeting on Sunday afternoon was one of the largest ever a.s.sembled in Ryman Auditorium, all the standing room occupied and many turned from the doors. The audience represented every station in life and the large number of men was noticeable. Dr. Shaw presided and paid a splendid tribute to the people of Nashville. Miss Jane Addams took for a text her visit to the historic home of Andrew Jackson, which, she said, had caused her to think of the great part the men of the South had in shaping the policies of the early government of the States, and how Chief Justice John Marshall, a southern man, had welded them together into an unconquerable whole. She referred to the way in which women had borne their part and asked why the men were so progressive in those early days and yet so reactionary now, when women asked that they should make another experiment in popular government.

Miss Rose Schneiderman, president of the New York City Women's Trade Union, spoke on the Industrial Woman's Need of the Vote, telling of the 800,000 working women in New York State, the low wages of many, the unjust conditions. "Do you talk of chivalry?" she exclaimed. "We women who work will tell you that we have no chivalry shown us in industry and we will also tell you that we go home with half the wages that men get. These same men who tell us we are angels send vice commissioners to investigate why girls go wrong. I should think a glance at the pay-roll would give them the answer."

Miss Rosika Schwimmer of Budapest, who had come with a pet.i.tion to President Wilson from the women of fifteen countries that were at war to use his influence to bring about peace, made an eloquent and impa.s.sioned address. A storm of applause greeted her appeal to the men of this country to avoid the catastrophe of war in the future by granting the vote to women, who would always use it for peace. Mrs.

Desha Breckinridge, president of the Kentucky Equal Rights a.s.sociation, one of the most brilliant and forceful of the suffrage speakers, took for a subject The South Needs her Women. "Do not call upon the women of the South to help you solve your cotton problems while you are using up the children of women in the cotton mills," she said. "Women must have the ballot to cope with all the hard conditions of life. When we think of war and patriotism we think of men. We forget the little army of women that always follow in the wake of the big armies and brave the bullets and the fearful conditions of warfare that they may become ministering angels on the battlefields; the Florence Nightingales who undergo the hardships to nurse the wounded.

We are also likely to forget the large army that stays behind, the women on whom the hardships of war fall heavily, those who must endure the sorrow and waiting. Is it fair to say woman shall have no part in the every-day affairs of life when she must bear so much in war?"

The program closed with an address by Mrs. Kate Waller Barrett on The Att.i.tude toward Woman Suffrage of the International Council of Women, of which she was an officer. She described its quinquennial meeting in Rome the preceding May, shortly before the breaking out of the war, and said the desire for the suffrage was the connecting link between the women of all nations. She declared that the safety of the country depended on women's having a vote in the administration of all that concerned the welfare of men as well as of women and children. In the evening the officers, delegates and visitors were entertained by Mrs.

Benjamin F. Wilson at her beautiful home, Wilmor Manor.

This convention of 1914 will be always noted for the long controversy over what was known as the Shafroth National Suffrage Amendment. It occupied all or a part of several sessions and the _Woman's Journal_ said: "The greatest emphasis of the convention was laid on the work in Congress; this was true even to the extent of cutting short discussion of State methods. The story of the year's work in the different States for both full and Presidential suffrage had to be abruptly dismissed."

A new Congressional Committee had been appointed on January 1, consisting of Mrs. Medill McCormick, Mrs. Antoinette Funk and Mrs.

Sherman M. Booth, of Illinois, Mrs. Breckinridge (Ky.), Mrs. Mary C.

C. Bradford (Colo.); Mrs. John Tucker (Cal.); Mrs. Edward Dreier (N.

Y.); Mrs. Helen H. Gardener (D. C.). Mrs. Dreier resigned; Mrs.

Gardener was largely prevented from serving by illness and absence.

Other members were too far away for active work and the headquarters in Washington were in charge of the three comparatively young, energetic women from Illinois, who had shown such remarkable political ac.u.men in getting the Presidential suffrage bill through the Legislature of that State and were leaders in the Progressive party.

The remarkable report of the committee's work presented by the chairman, Mrs. McCormick, including her report as chairman of the Campaign Committee, filled 45 pages of the printed Handbook of the convention. It contained a full account of the action on woman suffrage in both houses of the 63rd Congress, names and votes of members, committee hearings, Senate debate, record of speeches, statistics and information such as was never before presented to a suffrage convention, and showed an amount of committee work accomplished almost equal to that which had been done in all preceding sessions of Congress combined.[85] It was clear that for the first time the attempt to secure action by Congress on woman suffrage was being made in political fashion, which was the proper way, but unfortunately it showed also that the Federal Amendment, which had been the princ.i.p.al object of the National a.s.sociation for the past forty-four years, was in danger of being replaced with one of a totally different character. s.p.a.ce can be given for only enough of Mrs. McCormick's exceedingly clever presentation of this proposed amendment to make the matter fully understood.

I a.s.sumed the responsibility as chairman early in January, 1914, and after opening our headquarters in the Munsey Building at Washington, D. C., divided the committee's work into three departments--Lobby, Publicity and Organization. The lobby and publicity were continued from the Washington office and an organization office was opened in Chicago during the latter part of January, as it was decided that Chicago was much better situated geographically to carry on the program of this department.

As Congress was in session it was necessary for us to concentrate our attention on our lobby at the Capitol and to determine as quickly as possible both our policy to be adopted and the wisest method of legislative procedure. In order to facilitate this work Mrs. Booth and I joined Mrs. Funk in Washington, and, dividing our duties, we proceeded to investigate the temper of Congress.

What was known in the present Congress as the Bristow-Mondell resolution had been reported out favorably by the Standing Committee on Suffrage in the Senate and, if we desired, could be placed as unfinished business on the calendar, which would result in a discussion terminating in a vote.

The situation in the House of Representatives was not so favorable. It has no suffrage committee and the Mondell amendment was in the Judiciary. As that committee was composed of men if not actually opposed at least indifferent there did not seem to be any immediate chance of action. We discovered very soon, however, that the Congressional Union was circulating a pet.i.tion among the Democrats requesting them to caucus on the subject of establishing a Suffrage Standing Committee. The members of your Congressional Committee felt this to be a great mistake. It gave the Democratic party a splendid opportunity to commit themselves as opposed to woman suffrage, using their State's rights doctrine as a reason for their action. We discussed it with the members of the Congressional Union, who were convinced they were right in putting the Democratic party on record for or against suffrage, and it developed during our discussion that their policy of holding this party responsible, as the party in power, was to be put into action at once and announced as soon as the Democrats had voted in caucus. Knowing that this policy was diametrically opposed to that of the National a.s.sociation, which has always been non-partisan--to hold the individual and not the party responsible--we tried desperately hard to block the pet.i.tion and avoid the Democratic caucus at that time, but as the Congressional Union had a lobby of forty women against our three, it was impossible for us to head it off. The party caucused and not only voted against a Standing Committee on Suffrage but Mr.

Heflin of Alabama amended the resolution before the caucus so that the members were enabled to vote on February 3 by 123 to 55 that woman suffrage was a question to be determined by the States and not by the national government.

It was now necessary for us to make a complete canva.s.s of both Houses of Congress, to tabulate the records of the men, in so far as we were able to secure the information, and to determine at the earliest possible moment whether or not it was advisable to bring the Bristow amendment to a vote in the Senate.... My first call was on Senator Borah of Idaho, who is a personal friend, a suffragist, and has the advantage of being a progressive Republican from an equal suffrage State. "I cannot vote for this amendment," he said, "and want you to understand my reasons for taking such a stand. I do not believe the suffragists realize what they are doing to the women of the South if they force upon them universal suffrage before they are ready for it. The race question is one of the most serious before the country today and the women must help solve it before they can take on greater responsibilities. I am also a strong conservationist and entertain a State's rights att.i.tude of mind on both these questions."

Mrs. McCormick then called on Senator Burton of Ohio, whom she described as "a reactionary Republican"; Senator Johnson of Maine and Senator Saulsbury of Delaware, "strong States' rights Democrats," and she gathered the impression that the new amendment which her Congressional Committee had in mind would have a better chance than the original, to which the Congressional Union had given the name Susan B. Anthony Amendment. The following men agreed to serve on the Advisory Committee in the Senate: Borah of Idaho; Bristow of Kansas; Shafroth and Thomas of Colorado; Owen of Oklahoma; Clapp of Minnesota; Smoot of Utah; Kern of Indiana; Lea of Tennessee and Ashurst of Arizona. "They unanimously agreed with us," she said, "that it would be of great educational value to have the question brought up before the Senate during the present session, as there had never been a debate on the question of woman suffrage in Congress."[86]

Mrs. McCormick told how the amendment had been put on the calendar as unfinished business and discussed daily at 2 o'clock for ten days until the vote was taken March 19, 1914, when it received 35 ayes, 34 noes, a majority but not the necessary two-thirds. A change of 11 votes would have carried it and more than half of the absentees were known to be in favor but these facts did not give her any faith in the amendment. "During the canva.s.sing of the Senate," she said, "we were more and more impressed with the necessity of meeting the State's rights argument and felt more and more keenly the barrier of the State const.i.tutions in advancing our cause. An a.n.a.lysis of these const.i.tutions proved most illuminating and in arguing with the Senators upon this point they constantly reiterated the general idea of submitting this question, as well as other big national questions, to the decision of the people. We also discovered at this time that there were seven or eight different amendments before Congress on the woman suffrage question. For example, there is a bill giving us the right to vote for Presidential electors. There is another bill giving us the right to vote for Senators and Congressmen, etc....[87] A general canva.s.s of the Lower House and also the action of the Democratic caucus convinced us in an even more p.r.o.nounced way that we are blocked by the State's rights doctrine." The report continued:

It was at this time that Mrs. Funk, Mrs. Booth and myself interpreted our duty as a committee to mean that we were appointed not only for the purpose of national propaganda and for the promotion of the Bristow amendment but that our duty was a more extensive one and required us to meet whatever political emergency might arise during our term of office. We, therefore, set about to originate a new form of amendment to the U. S.

Const.i.tution which would meet the State's rights argument, if such a thing were possible. As Mrs. Funk is a lawyer, Mrs. Booth and I agreed that it was most important for her to draw up such an amendment. This was done; it was submitted to several lawyers, to our Advisory Committees of Senate and House; to an able const.i.tutional lawyer in Washington, to Judge William J. Calhoun, of Chicago, a lawyer of international reputation, and to Judge Hiram Gilbert, one of the best const.i.tutional lawyers in Illinois. We accepted Judge Gilbert's rewording and then sent it on to the Progressive party's legislative bureau in New York, where it was endorsed by their corps of lawyers, who draft all their bills.

The amendment was at this time discussed with our Advisory Committee in the Senate and met not only with their approval as an amendment but they considered it a very shrewd political move on the part of our organization. At the next meeting of the National Suffrage Board I presented the amendment, and, after nearly two months' consideration and discussion with some of the leading suffragists of the country, they voted _unanimously_ endorsing it and instructing us to have it introduced whenever we thought it advisable. This action was taken by the National Board about two weeks before the vote came up in the Senate. Not wishing in any way to interfere with the Bristow amendment, we did not discuss even the idea of this one with any other member of Congress excepting of course our Advisory Committees.[88]

Senator John F. Shafroth of Colorado, at the request of Mrs.