In 1902 Justice Corn, of the State Supreme Court, made the following public statement:
Women of all classes very generally vote. Bad women do not obtrude their presence at the polls, and I do not now remember ever to have seen a distinctively bad woman casting her vote.Woman suffrage has no injurious effect upon the home or the family that I have ever heard of during the twelve years I have resided in the State. It does not take so much of women's time as to interfere with their domestic duties, or with their church or charitable work. It does not impair their womanliness or make them less satisfactory as wives and mothers. They do not have less influence, or enjoy less respect and consideration socially. My impression is that they read the daily papers and inform themselves upon public questions much more generally than women elsewhere.Woman suffrage has had the effect almost entirely to exclude notoriously bad or immoral men from public office in the State. Parties refuse to nominate such men upon the distinct ground that they can not obtain the women's vote.The natural result of such conditions is to increase the respect in which women are held, and not to diminish it. They are a more important factor in affairs, and therefore more regarded. It is generally conceded, I think, that women have a higher standard of morality and right living than men. And, as they have a say in public matters, it has a tendency to make men respect their standard, and in some degree attempt to attain it themselves.I have never been an enthusiastic advocate of woman suffrage as a curefor all the ills that afflict society, but I give you in entire candor my impressions of it from my observations in this State.
Women of all classes very generally vote. Bad women do not obtrude their presence at the polls, and I do not now remember ever to have seen a distinctively bad woman casting her vote.
Woman suffrage has no injurious effect upon the home or the family that I have ever heard of during the twelve years I have resided in the State. It does not take so much of women's time as to interfere with their domestic duties, or with their church or charitable work. It does not impair their womanliness or make them less satisfactory as wives and mothers. They do not have less influence, or enjoy less respect and consideration socially. My impression is that they read the daily papers and inform themselves upon public questions much more generally than women elsewhere.
Woman suffrage has had the effect almost entirely to exclude notoriously bad or immoral men from public office in the State. Parties refuse to nominate such men upon the distinct ground that they can not obtain the women's vote.
The natural result of such conditions is to increase the respect in which women are held, and not to diminish it. They are a more important factor in affairs, and therefore more regarded. It is generally conceded, I think, that women have a higher standard of morality and right living than men. And, as they have a say in public matters, it has a tendency to make men respect their standard, and in some degree attempt to attain it themselves.
I have never been an enthusiastic advocate of woman suffrage as a curefor all the ills that afflict society, but I give you in entire candor my impressions of it from my observations in this State.
In 1889, after women in Wyoming had very generally exercised the full suffrage since 1869, Mrs. Clara B. Colby, editor of theWoman's Tribune, Washington, D. C., compiled a report from the census statistics. Those relating to crime, insanity and divorce were as follows:
The population of the United States has increased in the last decade 24.6 per cent. That of Wyoming has increased 127.9 per cent. But while the number of criminals in the whole United States has increased 40.3—an alarming ratio far beyond the increase of population—notwithstanding the immense increase of population in Wyoming, the number of criminals has not increased at all, but there has been a relative decrease, which shows a law-abiding community and a constantly improving condition of the public morals. In 1870 there were confined in the jails and prisons of Wyoming 74 criminals, 72 men and 2 women. The census of 1880 shows the same number of criminals, 74, as against an average number of criminals in the other Western States of 645. This remarkable fact is made more interesting because the 74 in 1890 are all men, and thus the scarecrow of the vicious women in politics disappears. Wyoming being the only State in which the per cent. of criminal women has decreased, it is evident that the morals of the female part of the population improve with the exercise of the right of suffrage.There were 189,503 insane in the United States, but there were but three insane persons in Wyoming in 1880, all men. The preponderance of insanity among married women is usually attributed to the monotony of their lives, and since this is much relieved by their participation in politics we should naturally expect to find, as a physical effect, a decreased proportion of insane women where woman suffrage prevails.From 1870 to 1880 the rate of divorce increased in the United States 79.4 per cent., three times the ratio of the increase of population, and in the group of Western States, omitting, Wyoming, it increased 436.7 per cent., almost four times the average increase of population, while in Wyoming the average increase in divorce was less than 50 per cent. of that of the population.Compare Wyoming with a typical Eastern State—Connecticut—the latter has one insane person to every 363 of the population, Wyoming has one to every 1,497. Nor is this wholly a difference of East and West, for Idaho, its neighbor, shows one insane to every 1,029. Especially would voting seem to increase the intelligence of women, for in Connecticut there are over seven-tenths as many female idiots as there are male idiots, while in Wyoming there are only four-tenths as many.
The population of the United States has increased in the last decade 24.6 per cent. That of Wyoming has increased 127.9 per cent. But while the number of criminals in the whole United States has increased 40.3—an alarming ratio far beyond the increase of population—notwithstanding the immense increase of population in Wyoming, the number of criminals has not increased at all, but there has been a relative decrease, which shows a law-abiding community and a constantly improving condition of the public morals. In 1870 there were confined in the jails and prisons of Wyoming 74 criminals, 72 men and 2 women. The census of 1880 shows the same number of criminals, 74, as against an average number of criminals in the other Western States of 645. This remarkable fact is made more interesting because the 74 in 1890 are all men, and thus the scarecrow of the vicious women in politics disappears. Wyoming being the only State in which the per cent. of criminal women has decreased, it is evident that the morals of the female part of the population improve with the exercise of the right of suffrage.
There were 189,503 insane in the United States, but there were but three insane persons in Wyoming in 1880, all men. The preponderance of insanity among married women is usually attributed to the monotony of their lives, and since this is much relieved by their participation in politics we should naturally expect to find, as a physical effect, a decreased proportion of insane women where woman suffrage prevails.
From 1870 to 1880 the rate of divorce increased in the United States 79.4 per cent., three times the ratio of the increase of population, and in the group of Western States, omitting, Wyoming, it increased 436.7 per cent., almost four times the average increase of population, while in Wyoming the average increase in divorce was less than 50 per cent. of that of the population.
Compare Wyoming with a typical Eastern State—Connecticut—the latter has one insane person to every 363 of the population, Wyoming has one to every 1,497. Nor is this wholly a difference of East and West, for Idaho, its neighbor, shows one insane to every 1,029. Especially would voting seem to increase the intelligence of women, for in Connecticut there are over seven-tenths as many female idiots as there are male idiots, while in Wyoming there are only four-tenths as many.
Woman suffrage may have played no part in these statistics, but if they had shown anincreaseof crime, insanity and divorce, it certainly would have been held responsible by the world at large.
The History is indebted to Attorney-General John C. Davies for most of the information on School Suffrage contained in the New York chapter, and also for the opinion which follows herewith on the right of women in that State to hold office.
By the Consolidated School Law it is provided, as regarding School Commissioners, that "No person shall be deemed ineligible to such office by reason of sex, who has the other qualifications as herewith provided;"and regarding common school districts, it is provided that "Every district officer must be a resident of his district and qualified to vote at its meetings." As certain women are qualified to vote in any common school district, such women are thus eligible to anydistrictoffice, including the offices of trustee, clerk, collector, treasurer or librarian.A similar provision in reference to union free schools, that "No person shall be eligible to hold any school district office in any union free school district unless he or she is a qualified voter in such district and is able to read and write," permits women to hold office as members of the board of education and other district offices.Aside from Chapter 214 of the Laws of 1892, which has been held to be unconstitutional, I know of no provision of law extending school suffrage to women incities, except that charters of certain third class cities have extended to women tax-payers the right to vote upon a proposition involving the raising of a tax.By the Public Officers' Law, Chap. 681 of the Laws of 1892, Section 3, it is provided that "No person shall be capable of holding a civil office who shall not, at the time he shall be chosen thereto, be of full age, a citizen of the United States, and resident of the State, and, if it be a local office, a resident of the political subdivision or municipal corporation of the State for which he shall be chosen, or within which the electors electing him reside, or within which his official functions are required to be exercised."In the case of Findlay against Thorn, in the City Court of New York, where the question arose as to the right of a woman to exercise the office of notary public, Chief Justice McAdam refused to pass upon the question, holding that the right could be decided only in a direct proceeding brought for the purpose by the Attorney-General, in which the notary might defend her title. And the court adds:"Whether a female is capable of holding a public office has never been decided by the courts of this State and it is a question about which legal minds may well differ. The Constitution regulates the right of suffrage and limits it to 'male' citizens. Disabilities are not favored and are seldom extended by implication, from which it may be argued that if it required the insertion of the term 'male' to exclude female citizens of lawful age from the right of suffrage, a similar limitation would be required to disqualify them from holding office. Citizenship is a condition or status and has no relation to age or sex. It may be contended that it was left to the good sense of the Executive and to the electors to determine whether or not they would elect females to office and that the power being lodged in safe hands was beyond danger of abuse."If on the other hand it be seriously contended that the Constitution by necessary implication, disqualifies females from holding office, it must follow as a necessary consequence that the Act of the Legislature permitting females to serve as school officers (Chap. 9, Laws of 1880), and all other legislative enactments of like import, removing such disqualifications, are unconstitutional and void. In this same connection it may be argued that if the use of the personal pronoun 'he' in the Constitution does not exclude females from public office, its use in the statute can have no greater effect. The statute, like the Constitution, in prescribing qualifications for office omits the word 'male,' leaving the question whether female citizens of lawful age are included or excluded, one of construction."I make these observations for the purpose of showing that the question whether females are eligible to public office in this State, is one not entirely free from doubt and should not therefore be decided where it arises, as it does here, incidentally and collaterally. When the law officers of the State see fit to test the question in direct proceedings for the purpose, it will be time enough to attempt to settle the contention. In such a proceeding, the case of Robinson (131 Mass. 376, and that reported in 107 Mass. 604), where it was held that a woman could not be admitted to practice as an attorney and counselor at law in Massachusetts,and those decided in other States that they can hold office, may be examined and considered."See also Am. and Eng. Ency. of Law, Vol. 19, p. 403-4. I might add that in this State there are many women who hold the office of notary public.
By the Consolidated School Law it is provided, as regarding School Commissioners, that "No person shall be deemed ineligible to such office by reason of sex, who has the other qualifications as herewith provided;"and regarding common school districts, it is provided that "Every district officer must be a resident of his district and qualified to vote at its meetings." As certain women are qualified to vote in any common school district, such women are thus eligible to anydistrictoffice, including the offices of trustee, clerk, collector, treasurer or librarian.
A similar provision in reference to union free schools, that "No person shall be eligible to hold any school district office in any union free school district unless he or she is a qualified voter in such district and is able to read and write," permits women to hold office as members of the board of education and other district offices.
Aside from Chapter 214 of the Laws of 1892, which has been held to be unconstitutional, I know of no provision of law extending school suffrage to women incities, except that charters of certain third class cities have extended to women tax-payers the right to vote upon a proposition involving the raising of a tax.
By the Public Officers' Law, Chap. 681 of the Laws of 1892, Section 3, it is provided that "No person shall be capable of holding a civil office who shall not, at the time he shall be chosen thereto, be of full age, a citizen of the United States, and resident of the State, and, if it be a local office, a resident of the political subdivision or municipal corporation of the State for which he shall be chosen, or within which the electors electing him reside, or within which his official functions are required to be exercised."
In the case of Findlay against Thorn, in the City Court of New York, where the question arose as to the right of a woman to exercise the office of notary public, Chief Justice McAdam refused to pass upon the question, holding that the right could be decided only in a direct proceeding brought for the purpose by the Attorney-General, in which the notary might defend her title. And the court adds:
"Whether a female is capable of holding a public office has never been decided by the courts of this State and it is a question about which legal minds may well differ. The Constitution regulates the right of suffrage and limits it to 'male' citizens. Disabilities are not favored and are seldom extended by implication, from which it may be argued that if it required the insertion of the term 'male' to exclude female citizens of lawful age from the right of suffrage, a similar limitation would be required to disqualify them from holding office. Citizenship is a condition or status and has no relation to age or sex. It may be contended that it was left to the good sense of the Executive and to the electors to determine whether or not they would elect females to office and that the power being lodged in safe hands was beyond danger of abuse.
"If on the other hand it be seriously contended that the Constitution by necessary implication, disqualifies females from holding office, it must follow as a necessary consequence that the Act of the Legislature permitting females to serve as school officers (Chap. 9, Laws of 1880), and all other legislative enactments of like import, removing such disqualifications, are unconstitutional and void. In this same connection it may be argued that if the use of the personal pronoun 'he' in the Constitution does not exclude females from public office, its use in the statute can have no greater effect. The statute, like the Constitution, in prescribing qualifications for office omits the word 'male,' leaving the question whether female citizens of lawful age are included or excluded, one of construction.
"I make these observations for the purpose of showing that the question whether females are eligible to public office in this State, is one not entirely free from doubt and should not therefore be decided where it arises, as it does here, incidentally and collaterally. When the law officers of the State see fit to test the question in direct proceedings for the purpose, it will be time enough to attempt to settle the contention. In such a proceeding, the case of Robinson (131 Mass. 376, and that reported in 107 Mass. 604), where it was held that a woman could not be admitted to practice as an attorney and counselor at law in Massachusetts,and those decided in other States that they can hold office, may be examined and considered."
See also Am. and Eng. Ency. of Law, Vol. 19, p. 403-4. I might add that in this State there are many women who hold the office of notary public.
The following account of the unconstitutional disfranchising of the women of Washington Territory in 1888 was carefully prepared by the editors of theWoman's Journal(Boston). When the editors of the present volume decided to incorporate it as a part of the History of Woman Suffrage it was submitted to Judge Orange J. Jacobs of Seattle for legal inspection. He returned it with the statement that it was correct in every particular. It constitutes one of the many judicial outrages which have been committed in the United States in the determination to prevent the enfranchisement of women:
Women voted in Washington Territory for the first time in 1884, and were disfranchised by its Supreme Court in 1887.Equal suffrage was granted by the Legislature in October, 1883. The women at once began to distinguish themselves there, as in Wyoming and elsewhere, by voting for the best man, irrespective of party. The old files of the Washington newspapers bear ample evidence to this fact. The first chance they had to vote was at the municipal elections of July, 1884. The SeattleMirrorsaid:"The city election of last Monday was for more reasons than one the most important ever held in Seattle. The presence of women at the voting-places had the effect of preventing the disgraceful proceedings usually seen. It was the first election in the city where the women could vote, and the first where the gambling and liquor fraternity, which had so long controlled the municipal government to an enormous extent, suffered defeat."ThePost-Intelligencersaid:"After the experience of the late election it will not do for any one here to say the women do not want to vote. They displayed as much interest as the men, and, if anything, more.... The result insures Seattle a first-class municipal administration. It is a warning to that undesirable class of the community who subsist upon the weaknesses and vices of society that disregard of law and the decencies of civilization will not be tolerated."Quotations might be multiplied from the papers of other towns, testifying to the independent voting of the women, the large size of their vote, the courtesy with which they were treated, and the greater quiet and order produced by their presence at the polls.Next came the general election of November, 1884. Again the newspapers were practically unanimous as to the result. The OlympiaTranscript, which was opposed to equal suffrage, said: "The result shows that all parties must put up good men if they expect to elect them. They can not do as they have in the past—nominate any candidates, and elect them by the force of the party lash."TheDemocratic State Journalsaid: "No one could fail to see that hereafter more attention must be given at the primaries to select the purest of material, by both parties, if they would gain the female vote."Charles J. Woodbury visited Washington about this time. In a letter to the N. Y.Evening Post, he said: "Whatever may be the vicissitudes of woman suffrage in Washington Territory in the future, it should now be put on record that at the election, Nov. 4, 1884, nine-tenths of its adult female population availed themselves of the right to vote with a hearty enthusiasm."He goes on to say that he arrived in Seattle on Sunday, and was surprised at the quiet and order he found prevailing, and at the general Sunday closing of the places of business: "Even the bars of the hotels were closed; and this was the worst town in the Territory when I first saw it. Now its uproarious theaters, dance-houses, squaw-brothels and Sunday fights are things of the past. Not a gambling house exists."Women served on juries, and meted out the full penalty of the law to gamblers and keepers of disorderly houses. The Chief Justice of the Territory was the Hon. Roger S. Greene, a cousin of U. S. Senator Hoar, a man of high character and integrity, and a magistrate celebrated throughout the Northwest for his resolute and courageous resistance to lynch law. In his charge to the grand jury at Port Townsend, August, 1884, he said:"The opponents of woman suffrage in this Territory are found allied with a solid phalanx of gamblers, prostitutes, pimps, and drunkard-makers—a phalanx composed of all in each of those classes who know the interest of the class and vote according to it."In his charge to another grand jury later, Chief Justice Greene said:"Twelve terms of court, ladies and gentlemen, I have now held, in which women have served as grand and petit jurors, and it is certainly a fact beyond dispute that no other twelve terms so salutary for restraint of crime have ever been held in this Territory. For fifteen years I have been trying to do what a judge ought, but have never till the last six months felt underneath and around me, in the degree that every judge has a right to feel it, the upbuoying might of the people in the line of full and resolute enforcement of the law."Naturally, the vicious elements disliked "the full and resolute enforcement of law." The baser sort of politicians also disliked the independent voting of the women. The Republicans had a normal majority in the Territory, but they nominated for a high office a man who was a hard drinker. The Republican women would not vote for him, and he was defeated. Next they nominated a man who had for years been openly living with an Indian woman and had a family of half-breed children. Again the Republican women refused to vote for him, and he was defeated. This brought the enmity of the Republican "machine" upon woman suffrage. The Democratic women showed equal independence, and incurred the hostility of the Democratic "machine."Between 1884 and 1888 a change of administration at Washington led to a change in the Territorial Supreme Court. The newly appointed Chief Justice and a majority of the new judges of the Supreme Court [appointed by President Cleveland] were opposed to equal suffrage, and were amenable, it is said, to the strong pressure brought to bear upon them by all the vicious elements to secure its repeal. A gambler who had been convicted by a jury composed in part of women contested the sentence on the ground that women were not legal voters, and the Supreme Court decided that the woman suffrage bill was unconstitutional, because it had been headed "An Act to Amend Section So and So, Chapter So and So of the Code," instead of "An Act to Enfranchise Women.".... When the Legislature met in 1888 it re-enacted the woman suffrage bill, giving it a full heading, and strengthening it in every way possible.Washington was about to be admitted as a State, and was preparing to hold a Constitutional Convention to frame a State constitution. There was no doubt that the majority of the women wanted to vote. Chief Justice Greene estimated that four-fifths of them had voted at the last election before they were deprived of the right. Two successive Legislatures elected by men and women jointly had re-enacted woman suffrage (for its continuance had been made a test question in the choice of the first Legislature for which the women voted, and that Legislature had been careful to insert the words "he or she" in all bills relating to the election laws). It was admitted on all hands that if the women were allowed to vote for members of the Constitutional Convention, it would be impossible to elect one that would wipe out woman suffrage. It was therefore imperative to deprive the women of their votes before the members of the convention werechosen. A scheme was arranged for the purpose. On the ground that she was a woman, the election officers at a local election refused the vote of Mrs. Nevada Bloomer, a saloon-keeper's wife, who was opposed to suffrage.They accepted the votes of all the other women.She made a test case by bringing suit against them. In the ordinary course of things, the case would not have come up till after the election of the constitutional convention. But cases for the restoration of personal rights may be advanced on the docket, and Mrs. Bloomer's ostensible object was the restoration of her personal rights, though her real object was to deprive all women of theirs. Her case was put forward on the docket and hurried to a decision.The Supreme Court [George Turner and Wm. G. Langford] this time pronounced the woman suffrage law unconstitutional on the ground thatit was beyond the power of a Territorial Legislature to enfranchise women. The Organic Act of the Territory said that at the first Territorial election persons with certain qualifications should vote, and at subsequent electionssuch persons as the Territorial Legislature might enfranchise. But the court took the ground that in giving the Legislature the right to regulate suffrage, Congress did not at the time have it specifically in mind that they might enfranchise women, and that therefore they could not do so.(!) The suffragists wanted to have the case appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States, but Mrs. Bloomer refused.The women themselves being prevented from voting, their friends were not able to overcome the combined "machines" of both political parties, and the intense opposition of all the vicious and disorderly elements, at that time very large on the Pacific Coast. A convention opposed to equal suffrage was elected, and framed a constitution excluding women. A friend of the present writer talked with many of the members while the convention was in session. He says almost every lawyer in that body acknowledged, in private conversation, that the decision by which the women had been disfranchised was illegal. "But," they said, "the women had set the community by the ears on the temperance question, and we had to get rid of them." One politician said, frankly, "Women are natural mugwumps, and I hate a mugwump."The convention, however, yielded to the pressure sufficiently to submit to the men a separate amendment proposing to strike out the word "male" from the suffrage clause of the new State constitution, but no woman was allowed to vote on it. In November, 1889, this amendment was lost, the same elements that defeated it in the convention defeating it at the polls, with the addition of a great influx of foreign immigrants.
Women voted in Washington Territory for the first time in 1884, and were disfranchised by its Supreme Court in 1887.
Equal suffrage was granted by the Legislature in October, 1883. The women at once began to distinguish themselves there, as in Wyoming and elsewhere, by voting for the best man, irrespective of party. The old files of the Washington newspapers bear ample evidence to this fact. The first chance they had to vote was at the municipal elections of July, 1884. The SeattleMirrorsaid:
"The city election of last Monday was for more reasons than one the most important ever held in Seattle. The presence of women at the voting-places had the effect of preventing the disgraceful proceedings usually seen. It was the first election in the city where the women could vote, and the first where the gambling and liquor fraternity, which had so long controlled the municipal government to an enormous extent, suffered defeat."
ThePost-Intelligencersaid:
"After the experience of the late election it will not do for any one here to say the women do not want to vote. They displayed as much interest as the men, and, if anything, more.... The result insures Seattle a first-class municipal administration. It is a warning to that undesirable class of the community who subsist upon the weaknesses and vices of society that disregard of law and the decencies of civilization will not be tolerated."
Quotations might be multiplied from the papers of other towns, testifying to the independent voting of the women, the large size of their vote, the courtesy with which they were treated, and the greater quiet and order produced by their presence at the polls.
Next came the general election of November, 1884. Again the newspapers were practically unanimous as to the result. The OlympiaTranscript, which was opposed to equal suffrage, said: "The result shows that all parties must put up good men if they expect to elect them. They can not do as they have in the past—nominate any candidates, and elect them by the force of the party lash."
TheDemocratic State Journalsaid: "No one could fail to see that hereafter more attention must be given at the primaries to select the purest of material, by both parties, if they would gain the female vote."
Charles J. Woodbury visited Washington about this time. In a letter to the N. Y.Evening Post, he said: "Whatever may be the vicissitudes of woman suffrage in Washington Territory in the future, it should now be put on record that at the election, Nov. 4, 1884, nine-tenths of its adult female population availed themselves of the right to vote with a hearty enthusiasm."
He goes on to say that he arrived in Seattle on Sunday, and was surprised at the quiet and order he found prevailing, and at the general Sunday closing of the places of business: "Even the bars of the hotels were closed; and this was the worst town in the Territory when I first saw it. Now its uproarious theaters, dance-houses, squaw-brothels and Sunday fights are things of the past. Not a gambling house exists."
Women served on juries, and meted out the full penalty of the law to gamblers and keepers of disorderly houses. The Chief Justice of the Territory was the Hon. Roger S. Greene, a cousin of U. S. Senator Hoar, a man of high character and integrity, and a magistrate celebrated throughout the Northwest for his resolute and courageous resistance to lynch law. In his charge to the grand jury at Port Townsend, August, 1884, he said:
"The opponents of woman suffrage in this Territory are found allied with a solid phalanx of gamblers, prostitutes, pimps, and drunkard-makers—a phalanx composed of all in each of those classes who know the interest of the class and vote according to it."
In his charge to another grand jury later, Chief Justice Greene said:
"Twelve terms of court, ladies and gentlemen, I have now held, in which women have served as grand and petit jurors, and it is certainly a fact beyond dispute that no other twelve terms so salutary for restraint of crime have ever been held in this Territory. For fifteen years I have been trying to do what a judge ought, but have never till the last six months felt underneath and around me, in the degree that every judge has a right to feel it, the upbuoying might of the people in the line of full and resolute enforcement of the law."
Naturally, the vicious elements disliked "the full and resolute enforcement of law." The baser sort of politicians also disliked the independent voting of the women. The Republicans had a normal majority in the Territory, but they nominated for a high office a man who was a hard drinker. The Republican women would not vote for him, and he was defeated. Next they nominated a man who had for years been openly living with an Indian woman and had a family of half-breed children. Again the Republican women refused to vote for him, and he was defeated. This brought the enmity of the Republican "machine" upon woman suffrage. The Democratic women showed equal independence, and incurred the hostility of the Democratic "machine."
Between 1884 and 1888 a change of administration at Washington led to a change in the Territorial Supreme Court. The newly appointed Chief Justice and a majority of the new judges of the Supreme Court [appointed by President Cleveland] were opposed to equal suffrage, and were amenable, it is said, to the strong pressure brought to bear upon them by all the vicious elements to secure its repeal. A gambler who had been convicted by a jury composed in part of women contested the sentence on the ground that women were not legal voters, and the Supreme Court decided that the woman suffrage bill was unconstitutional, because it had been headed "An Act to Amend Section So and So, Chapter So and So of the Code," instead of "An Act to Enfranchise Women.".... When the Legislature met in 1888 it re-enacted the woman suffrage bill, giving it a full heading, and strengthening it in every way possible.
Washington was about to be admitted as a State, and was preparing to hold a Constitutional Convention to frame a State constitution. There was no doubt that the majority of the women wanted to vote. Chief Justice Greene estimated that four-fifths of them had voted at the last election before they were deprived of the right. Two successive Legislatures elected by men and women jointly had re-enacted woman suffrage (for its continuance had been made a test question in the choice of the first Legislature for which the women voted, and that Legislature had been careful to insert the words "he or she" in all bills relating to the election laws). It was admitted on all hands that if the women were allowed to vote for members of the Constitutional Convention, it would be impossible to elect one that would wipe out woman suffrage. It was therefore imperative to deprive the women of their votes before the members of the convention werechosen. A scheme was arranged for the purpose. On the ground that she was a woman, the election officers at a local election refused the vote of Mrs. Nevada Bloomer, a saloon-keeper's wife, who was opposed to suffrage.They accepted the votes of all the other women.She made a test case by bringing suit against them. In the ordinary course of things, the case would not have come up till after the election of the constitutional convention. But cases for the restoration of personal rights may be advanced on the docket, and Mrs. Bloomer's ostensible object was the restoration of her personal rights, though her real object was to deprive all women of theirs. Her case was put forward on the docket and hurried to a decision.
The Supreme Court [George Turner and Wm. G. Langford] this time pronounced the woman suffrage law unconstitutional on the ground thatit was beyond the power of a Territorial Legislature to enfranchise women. The Organic Act of the Territory said that at the first Territorial election persons with certain qualifications should vote, and at subsequent electionssuch persons as the Territorial Legislature might enfranchise. But the court took the ground that in giving the Legislature the right to regulate suffrage, Congress did not at the time have it specifically in mind that they might enfranchise women, and that therefore they could not do so.(!) The suffragists wanted to have the case appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States, but Mrs. Bloomer refused.
The women themselves being prevented from voting, their friends were not able to overcome the combined "machines" of both political parties, and the intense opposition of all the vicious and disorderly elements, at that time very large on the Pacific Coast. A convention opposed to equal suffrage was elected, and framed a constitution excluding women. A friend of the present writer talked with many of the members while the convention was in session. He says almost every lawyer in that body acknowledged, in private conversation, that the decision by which the women had been disfranchised was illegal. "But," they said, "the women had set the community by the ears on the temperance question, and we had to get rid of them." One politician said, frankly, "Women are natural mugwumps, and I hate a mugwump."
The convention, however, yielded to the pressure sufficiently to submit to the men a separate amendment proposing to strike out the word "male" from the suffrage clause of the new State constitution, but no woman was allowed to vote on it. In November, 1889, this amendment was lost, the same elements that defeated it in the convention defeating it at the polls, with the addition of a great influx of foreign immigrants.
This is the most democratic of organizations. Its sole object is to secure for women citizens protection in their right to vote. The general officers are nominated by an informal secret ballot, no one being put in nomination. The three persons receiving the highest number of votes are considered the nominees and the election is decided by secret ballot. Those entitled to vote are three delegates-at-large for each auxiliary State society and one delegate in addition for every one hundred members of each State auxiliary; the State presidents and State members of the National Executive Committee; the general officers of the association; the chairmen of standing committees. The delegates present from each State cast the full vote to which that State is entitled. The vote is taken in the same way upon any other question whenever the delegates present from five States request it. In other caseseach delegate has one vote. Any State whose dues are unpaid on January 1 loses its vote in the convention for that year.
The two honorary presidents, president, vice-president-at-large, two secretaries, treasurer and two auditors constitute the Business Committee, which transacts the entire business of the association between the annual conventions.
The Executive Committee is composed of the Business Committee, the president of each State, and one member from each State, together with the chairmen of standing committees; fifteen make a quorum for the transaction of business. The decisions reached by the Executive Committee, which meets during the convention week, are presented in the form of recommendations at the business sessions of the convention.
The constitution may be amended by a two-thirds vote at any annual meeting, after one day's notice in the convention, notice of the proposed amendment having been previously given to the Business Committee, and by them published in the suffrage papers not less than three months in advance.
The association must hold an annual convention of regularly-elected delegates for the election of officers and the transaction of business. An annual meeting must be held in Washington, D. C., during the first session of each Congress.
The Committee on Resolutions must consist of one person from each State, elected by its delegation.
There are few changes in officers and the association is noted for the harmony of its meetings, although the delegates generally are of decided convictions and unusual force of character. Men are eligible to membership and a number belong, but the affairs of the organization are wholly in the hands of women.
Auxiliary State and Territorial associations exist in all but Wyoming, Idaho, Utah, Arkansas, Nevada and Texas. Suffrage associations are not needed in the first three, as the women have the full franchise.
OFFICERS FOR 1900.
Honorary Presidents,Elizabeth Cady Stanton, New York City;Susan B. Anthony,Rochester, N. Y.
President,Carrie Chapman Catt, New York City.
Vice-President-at-Large,Rev. Anna Howard Shaw, Philadelphia.
Recording Secretary,Alice Stone Blackwell, Boston.
Corresponding Secretary,Rachel Foster Avery, Philadelphia.
Treasurer,Harriet Taylor Upton, Warren, Ohio.
Auditors,Laura Clay, Lexington, Ky.;Catharine Waugh McCulloch, Chicago.
Honorary Vice-Presidents—[Prominent names mentioned in various States.]
STANDING COMMITTEES.
Programme—Carrie Chapman Catt, N. Y.; Rachel Foster Avery, Acting Chairman, Penn.; May Dudley Greeley, Minn.; Lucy Hobart Day, Me.; Kate M. Gordon, La.
Congressional Work—Susan B. Anthony, N. Y.; Carrie Chapman Catt, N.Y.; Harriet Taylor Upton, O.; Helen M. Warren, Wy.; Virginia Morrison Shafroth, Col.
Press Work—Elnora M. Babcock, N. Y.
Enrollment—Priscilla Dudley Hackstaff, N. Y. and all State Treasurers.
Federal Suffrage—Sallie Clay Bennett, Ky.; Martha E. Root, Mich.
Presidential Suffrage—Henry B. Blackwell, Mass, and State Presidents.
National Committee on Local Arrangements—Lucy E. Anthony, Penn.
Railroad Rates—Mary G. Hay, N. Y.
SPECIAL COMMITTEES.
Industrial Problems Affecting Women and Children—Clara Bewick Colby, D. C; Martha E. Root, Mich.; Annie L. Diggs, Kas.; Margaret O. Rhodes, Okla.; Annie English Silliman, N. J.; Mary C. C. Bradford, Col.; Gail Laughlin, N. Y.
Legislation for Civil Rights—Laura M. Johns, Kas.
Convention Resolutions—Susan B. Anthony, N. Y.; Carrie Chapman Catt, N. Y.; Ida Husted Harper, D. C.; Anna Howard Shaw, Penn.; Rachel Foster Avery, Penn.
Political Equality Series—Alice Stone Blackwell, Mass.; Ida Husted Harper, D. C.
LIFE MEMBERS. (1901.)
Alabama—Adella Hunt Logan.
California—Mrs. A. R. Faulkner, Mary Wood Swift.
Colorado—Mary C. C. Bradford, Emily A. Brown, Amy K. Cornwall, Louisa S. Janvier, Emily R. Meredith.
Connecticut—H. J. Lewis.
District of Columbia—Julia L. Langdon Barber, Lucia E. Blount, Mary Foote Henderson, Margaret J. Henry, Hannah Cassall Mills, Mary A. McPherson, Martha McWirther, Mary C. Nason, Julia T. Ripley, Sophronia C. Snow, C. W. Spofford, Jane H. Spofford, Mary E. Terry, Helen Rand Tindall, Eliza Titus Ward, Nettie L. White.
Georgia—Gertrude C. Thomas.
Illinois—Sarah O. Coonley, Climenia K. Dennett, Emily M. Gross, Ida S. Noyes, Dr. Julia Holmes Smith, Elmina Springer, Lydia A. Coonley Ward.
Indiana—Ida Husted Harper, Alice Wheeler Peirce, May Wright Sewall.
Iowa—Martha C. Callanan, Nancy Logan, Mettie Laub Romans.
Kansas—Mabel LaPorte Diggs, Sarah E. Morrow.
Kentucky—Susan Look Avery, Sallie Clay Bennett, Mary B. Trimble, Laura R. White.
Louisiana—Caroline E. Merrick.
Maryland—Caroline Hallowell Miller.
Massachusetts—Carrie Anders, Martha M. Atkins, Alice Stone Blackwell, Henry B. Blackwell, Ellen Wright Garrison, Ellen F. Powers, Caroline Scott, Pauline Agassiz Shaw, Nellie S. Smith.
Michigan—Delos A. Blodgett, Daisy Peck Blodgett, Olivia B. Hall.
Minnesota—Alice Scott Cash, Elizabeth A. Russell, Sarah Vail Thompson.
Missouri—Phoebe W. Cousins, Virginia L. Minor, Sarah E. Turner.
Nebraska—Clara Bewick Colby, Mary Smith Hayward, Mary H. Williams.
New Hampshire—Marilla M. Ricker.
New Jersey—Florence Howe Hall, Laura Lloyd Heulings, Cornelia C. Hussey, Dr. Mary D. Hussey, Mrs. S. R. Krom, Susan W. Lippincott,Calista S. Mayhew, Dr. Sarah C. Spotteswoode, Ellen Hoxie Squier, Elizabeth M. Vail.
New Mexico—Alice Paxson Hadley.
New York—Susan B. Anthony, Mary S. Anthony, Victoria Bradley, Amelia Cameron, Cornelia H. Cary, George W. Catt, Carrie Chapman Catt, Ella Hawley Crossett, Anna Dormitzer, Rebecca Friedlander, Fannie Humphreys Gaffney, Matilda Joslyn Gage, Priscilla Dudley Hackstaff, Sarah V. Hallock, Mary H. Hallowell, Mary G. Hay, Belle S. Holden, Emily Howland, Hannah L. Howland, Dorcas Hull, Emma G. Ivins, Rhody J. Kenyon, Mary Elizabeth Lapham, Semantha Vail Lapham, Mrs. Frank Leslie, Mary Hillard Loines, Anne Fitzhugh Miller, Elizabeth Smith Miller, Martha Fuller Prather, Euphemia C. Purton, Mary Thayer Sanford, James F. Sargent, Angelina M. Sargent, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Fanny Garrison Villard, Julia Willetts Williams, Sarah L. Willis.
Ohio—Caroline McCullough Everhard, Elizabeth J. Hauser, Sallie J. McCall, Anna C. Mott, Alice E. Peters, Louisa Southworth, Susan M. Sturges.
Oklahoma—Rachel Rees Griffiths.
Pennsylvania—Lucy E. Anthony, Mary Schofield Ash, Rachel Foster Avery, Emma J. Bartol, Lucretia L. Blankenburg, Ellen K. Brazier, Emma J. Brazier, Katherine J. Campbell, Kate W. Dewald, Julia T. Foster, Alvin T. James, Helen Mosher James, Edith C. James, Dr. Agnes Kemp, Caroline Lippincott, Mary W. Lippincott, Hannah Myers Longshore, Jacob Reese, Rev. Anna Howard Shaw, Nicolas M. Shaw, M. J. Stecker, M. Adeline Thomson.
Rhode Island—Sarah J. Eddy, Charlotte B. Wilbour, Sarah S. Wilbour.
South Carolina—A. Viola Neblett, Martha Schofield.
Utah—Emily S. Richards, Emmeline B. Wells.
Wisconsin—Rev. Olympia Brown.
Persia—Susan Van Valkenburg Hamilton (formerly of Indiana).
DELEGATES TO NATIONAL CONVENTIONS, 1883-1900.
At the national conventions those who occupy the platform and make the addresses naturally have the most conspicuous place, but those who come from the various localities, year after year, bringing the reports from their States and taking their necessary part in the proceedings, are equally valuable factors. Their names, at least, should be preserved, and the following list, while by no means complete, is as nearly so as it has been possible to make it. Those which are included in the National chapters are not repeated. Many of the women recorded below receive their deserved mention in the State chapters.
Alabama: Amelia M. Dillard, Minnie Henderson.Arizona: Ex-Gov. and Mrs. L. C. Hughes, Pauline M. O'Neill, Mrs. G. H. Oury. Arkansas: Mary A. Davis, Lizzie D. Fyler, C. M. Patterson.California: Nellie Holbrook Blinn, Amy G. Bowen, Emilie Gibbons Cohen, Warren C. Kimball, Lucy Wilson Moore, Julia Schlesinger, Mary Simpson Sperry, Beda S. Sperry, Mary Wood Swift.Colorado: Theodosia G. Ammons, Dr. Mary Barker Bates, Margaret Bowen, Nettie E. Caspar, Hattie E. Fox, H. Jennie James, B. R. Owens, Katharine A. G. Patterson, Eliza F. Routt, Lucy E. Ransom Scott, Mary Jewett Telford, Harriet M. Teller.Connecticut: Mrs. L. D. Allen, Rose I. Blakeslee, Sarah E. Browne, CarolineB. Buell, Mrs. E. C. Champion, Alta Starr Cressy, Mrs. N. F. Griswold, Addie S. Hale, Howard J. Hale, Ellen B. Kendrick, Emily O. Kimball, Grace C. Kimball, Mary J. Rogers, Abby Barker Sheldon.Dakota Territory: Marietta M. Bones, Linda B. Slaughter.Delaware: Mary R. De Vou, Margaret W. Houston, Margaret E. Kent, Patience W. Kent, Emma Lore, Mary Elizabeth Milligan, Adda G. Quigley, Mary H. Thatcher, Elizabeth Bacon Walling.District of Columbia: Frances B. Andrews, L. L. Bacon, Mary L. Bennett, Bessie Boone Cheshire, Anna Gray De Long, Lucy S. Doolittle, Annie M. Edgar, Dr. Susan Edson, M. J. Fowler, Emma M. Gillett, J. Minnie Holn, Martha V. Johnson, Carrie E. Kent, Mrs. J. H. La Fetra, Mary S. Lockwood, Sarah J. Messer, Henrietta C. Morrison, Helen Mitchell, Hattie E. Nash, Mary V. Noerr, Ellen M. O'Connor, Mary A. Ripley, Mary L. Talbot, Cora De La Matyr Thomas, Helen Rand Tindall, Eliza Titus Ward, Elizabeth Wilson, Theresa Williams, Dr. Caroline B. Winslow. Mary H. Williams.Florida: Ella C. Chamberlain. Georgia: D. M. Allen, Margaret Chandler, Julia Iveson Patton, Gertrude C. Thomas, Adelaide Wilson.
Idaho: Mrs. Milton Kelley.Illinois: Julia K. Barnes, Mary I. Barnes, Emma J. Bigelow, Corinne S. Brown, Hannah J. Coffee, C. H. Crocker, Angelina Craver, Climenina K. Dennet, George H. Dennet, Sylvia Doton, Emmy C. Evald, Matilda S. Garrigus, Mary T. Hager, Mrs. Frank L. Hubbard, Mary Louise Haworth, Kate Hughes, Lizzie F. Long, Lena Morrow, Angie B. Schweppe, Eva Munson Smith, Dr. Alice B. Stockham, Adeline M. Swain, Nellie J. Tweed, Jessie Waite, Dr. Lucy Waite, Margaret Will. Indiana: Lizzie M. Briant, Mary G. Hay, Dr. M. A. Jessup, Etta Mattox, Alice Wheeler Peirce, Bertha G. Wade, Alice G. Waugh, Iva G. Wooden. Iowa: Alice Ainsworth, Eunice T. Barnett, Lucy Busenbark, Narcissa T. Bemis, James Callanan, Martha C. Callanan, Margaret V. Campbell, Mary J. Coggeshall, Nettie Sanford Chapin, Martha J. Cass, Elizabeth Coughell, Anna B. Crawford, Marietta Farr Cannell, Ella G. Cline, Mary Mason Clark, Victoria Dewey, Jane Denby, C. Holt Flint, Nellie C. Flint, Louise B. Field, Mrs. W. P. Hepburn, Jane Hammond, Julia Clark Hallam, Harriet Jenks, Charles W. Jacobs, Rosina Jacobs, Mrs. M. Lloyd Kennedy, A. M. E. Leffingwell, Polly A. Maulsby, Florence M. Maskrey, Mary E. McPherson, Jane Amy McKinney, Ella Moffatt, Bessie Murray, Emily Phillips, Mary D. Palmer, Emeline B. Richardson, Mettie Laub Romans, Rowena Edson Stevens, Estelle Smith, Elmina Springer, Frances Smith, Rev. John Ogilvie Stevenson, Ina Light Taylor, Roma W. Woods, Frilla Belle Young.Kansas: Anna A. Broderick, Fannie M. Broderick, Jennie Broderick, B. B. Baird, C. H. Cushing, Mabel La Porte Diggs, Caroline Doster, Martha Powell Davis, Bertha H. Ellsworth, Nannie Garrett, Dr. Eva Harding, Antoinette Haskell, Hetta P. Mansfield, Mrs. J. McPatten, Constant P. McElroy, Jennie Robb Maher, Bina A. Otis, Josephine L. Patton, Carrie L. Prentiss, Althea B. Stryker, Sarah A. Thurston, Abbie A. Welch, Alonzo Wardall, Elizabeth M. Wardall, Anna C. Wait.Kentucky: Laura S. Bruce, Mary C. Cramer, S. M. Hubbard, Sarah G. Humphries, Mary K. Jones, Dr. Sarah M. Siewers, Sarah H. Sawyer, Mrs. M. R. Stockwell, Amanthus Shipp, Mary Wood, Sallie B. Wolcott, Laura White. Louisiana: Florence Huberwald, Matilda P. Hero, Dr. Harriet C. Keating, Caroline E. Merrick, Jr., Katharine M. Nobles, Frances Sladden.
Maine: Rev. Henry Blanchard, M. S. Carlisle, Lucy Hobart Day, Martha O. Dyer, Dr. Abby M. Fulton, Martha W. Fairfield, Helen A. Harriman, Mary C. Nason, Mary E. A. Osborne, Sarah J. L. O'Brien, Abby A. C. Peaslee, Cordelia A. Quimby, Sophronia C. Snow, Lucy A. and Lavinia Snow, Elizabeth P. Smith.Maryland: Amanda M. Best, Juliet L. Baldwin, Emma Madox Funck, Emma Frinck, Annie W. Janney, Annie R. Lamb, Mary E. Moore, Rebecca T. Miller, Martha S. Townsend, Mary J. Williamson.Massachusetts: Annie T. Auerbach, Richard and Carrie Anders, Martha Atkins, Mr. and Mrs. Oliver C. Ashton, Esther F. Boland, Catherine W. Bascom, Samuel J. Barrows, Martha Sewall Curtis, Adelaide A. Claflin, Emma Clapp, Sophia A. Forbes, Ellen Wright Garrison, Cora Chapin Godfrey, Adeline Howland, Sarah Hudson, Mary E. Hilton, Mrs. Arden Hall, Hannah Hall, Charlotte Lobdell, Eveleen L. Mason,Louisa A. Morrison, Martha A. P. Neall, Ellen F. Powers, Agnes G. Parritt, Maud Wood Park, John Parker, Cora V. Smart, Silvanus Smith, Judith W. Smith, Mary Clarke Smith, Nellie S. Smith, Mrs. W. H. Semple, Jane A. Stewart, Dora Bascom Smith, Addie E. Tarbell, Sarah E. Wall, Eliza Webber, Elizabeth H. Webster, Evelyn Williams, Dr. Marion L. Woodward, Mr. and Mrs. John L. Whiting.Michigan: Charlotte Goeway, Mrs. C. D. Hodges, De Lisle P. Holmes, Sarah L. Hazlett, Margaret M. Huckins, Frances Kinney, Dr. Clara W. McNaughton, Ida J. Marsh, Nettie McCloy, E. Matilda Moore, Carrie W. Miller, Frances Wright Spearman, Sarah E. Smith, Elizabeth A. Willard.Minnesota: Nina T. Cox, Lydia R. Eastwood, Mayme Jester, Delilah C. Reid, Judge J. B. Stearns, Sarah Burger Stearns, Martha Adams Thompson, Sarah Vail Thompson.Mississippi: Harriet B. Kells, Nellie M. Somerville, Lily Wilkinson Thompson.Missouri: Alice Blackburn, Mary Waldo Calkins, Ella Harrison, Virginia Hedges, Addie M. Johnson, Alice C. Mulky, J. B. Merwin, Sarah E. Turner, Emaline A. Templeton, Mary U. Vandwert, Mrs. E. E. Montague Winch, Victoria Conkling Whitney, Isabella Wightman, Eliza T. Wilson, William Wilson, Sarah Wilson.Montana: Dr. Maria M. Dean, Eva Hirschberg, George W. Jones, Delia A. Kellogg, Marie L. Mason, Sarepta Sanders, Harriet P. Sanders, Dora D. Wright.
Nebraska: Maria C. Arter, Rachel Brill, Clara Cross, Nettie L. Cronkhite, Abby Gay Dustin, Helen M. Goff, Ellen D. Harn, Ellen A. Herdman, Irene Hernandez, Lena McCormick, Amanda J. Marble, Maud Miller, Anna L. Spirk, Sarah K. Williams, Esther L. Warner.Nevada: Hannah R. Clapp, Mary E. Rinkle, Annie Warren, Frances A. Williamson.New Hampshire: Mary A. P. Filley, M. E. Powell, Marilla M. Ricker, Rev. H. B. Smith. New Jersey: Emma L. Blackwell, Phoebe Baily, Katherine H. Browning, Hannah Cairns, Jennie D. DeWitt, Dr. Florence De Hart, Rev. Phoebe A. Hanaford, Mrs. A. J. Jackson, Jane Bryant Kellogg, Susan W. Lippincott, Ellen Miles, Mary Philbrook, Amelia Dickinson Pope, Aaron M. Powell, Louise Downs Quigley, Theresa M. Seabrook, Minola Graham Sexton, Charlotte C. R. Smith, Laura H. Van Cise, M. Louise Watts, Phoebe C. Wright.New Mexico: Fannie Baca, I. M. Bond, H. D. Fergusson, Ida Morley Jarrett, Mayme E. Marble, Mrs. J. D. Perkins, Anna Van Schick.New York: Mrs. E. Andreas, Mrs. Wilkes Angel, Ruby Abby, Abigail A. Allen, Dr. Augusta Armstrong, Rev. Caroline A. Bassett, Victoria Bradley, Sarah F. Blackall, Frances Benedict, Mrs. R. G. Beatty, Helen M. Cook, Dr. Harriet B. Chapin, Eveleen R. Clark, Cornelia H. Cary, Noah Chapman, Margaret Livingston Chanler, Mrs. M. A. Clinton, Charlotte A. Cleveland, Ella Hawley Crossett, Lucy Hawley Calkins, Nora E. Darling, Marie Frances Driscoll, S. W. Ellis, Mrs. M. D. Fenner, Laura W. Flower, Dr. Fales, Catherine G. Foote, Theodosia C. Goss, Eliza C. Gifford, Dr. Virginia L. Glauner, Elizabeth P. Hall, Mary H. Hallowell, Frances V. Hallock, Dorcas Hull, Etta E. Hooker, Emily Howland, Isabel Howland, Cornelia K. Hood, Belle S. Holden, Mary N. Hubbard, Margherita Arlina Hamm, Ella S. Hammond, Priscilla D. Hackstaff, Mary Bush Hitchcook, Elizabeth Noyes Hopkins, Ada M. Hall, Marie R. Jenney, Julie R. Jenney, Frances C. Lewis, Jeannette R. Leavitt, Carrie S. Lerch, Mary Hillard Loines, Mrs. P. A. Moffett, Pamela S. McCown, Margaret Morton, Mrs. Joshua G. Munro, Anne Fitzhugh Miller, Sarah A. McClees, Deborah Otis, Martha F. Prather, Jessie Post, J. Mary Pearson, Lucy S. Pierce, Abby Hutchinson Patton, Lucy Boardman Smith, Marian H. Skidmore, Angeline M. Sargent, James Sargent, Jessie J. Cassidy Saunders, Mary B. Sackett, Jane M. Slocum, Mary Thayer Sanford, Emma B. Sweet, Emma M. Tucker, Kate S. Thompson, Sarah L. Willis, Kate Foster Warner, Anna Willets, Cerelle Grandin Weller.North Carolina: Lilla Ripley Barnwell, Floride Cunningham, Miriam Harris, Helen Morris Lewis, Margaret Richardson.North Dakota: Helen de Lendrecie, Dr. Cora Smith (Eaton), Henrietta Paulson Haagensen, Delia Lee Hyde, Mary S. Lounsberry, Sara E. B. Smith, Mary Whedon.
Ohio: Ella M. Bell, Sarah S. Bissell, W. O. Brown, Frances M. Casement, Katharine B. Claypole, Mary N. Cunningham, Elizabeth Coit, Martha P. Dana, Martha H. Elwell, Ellen Sully Fray, Mary C. Francis, Jannette Freer, Elizabeth Gilmer, Prof. Jennie Gifford, Mary L. Geffs, Clara Giddings, Eliza P.Houk, Emma C. Hayes, Margaret Hackadorne, Emma P. Harley, Eason Holbrook, Minnie C. Hauser, Elizabeth J. Hauser, Cecilia Halloway, Minnie Stull Harris, Prof. Mary Jewett, Josephine King, Mary J. Lawrence, Mary Folger Lang, Sallie J. McCall, Rev. Henrietta G. Moore, Mary J. McMillan, Anna C. Mott, Lydia A. D. Northway, Miss L. J. Ormstead, Addie M. Porter, Alice E. H. Peters, O. G. Peters, Sarah M. Perkins, Annie Laurie Quinby, Harriet B. Rossa, Florence Richards, Edythe E. Root, Mrs. N. Coe Stewart, Abbie Schumacher, Helen R. Smith, Katherine Dooris Sharpe, Hattie A. Sachs, Harriet Brown Stanton, Dr. Viola Swift, Lottie M. Sackett, Cornelia Shaw, C. Swezey, Rosa L. Segur.Oklahoma: Margaret Rees, Mrs. R. W. Southard, Celia Z. Titus.Oregon: Frances E. Gottshall.Pennsylvania: Olive Pond Amies, Agnes M. Biddle, Mrs. W. C. Butterfield, Mary Patterson Beaver, A. Isabel Bowers, Emma J. Bartol, Katherine J. Campbell, Anna M. Child, Alice M. Coates, Elizabeth D. Green, Susanna M. Gaskill, Caroline Gibbons, Mrs. E. N. Garrett, Bertha W. Howe, Hetty Y. Hallowell, Lidie C. W. Koethen, Mary F. Kenderdine, Mary S. Kent, Agnes Kemp, Mary B. Luckie, Alberta Moorehouse, Mrs. L. M. B. Mitchell, Dr. Jane V. Myers, Esther A. Pownall, Anna C. Pennock, Elizabeth B. Passmore, Charlotte L. Peirce, Harriet Purvis, Jacob Reese, Jean B. Stephenson, Nicolas M. Shaw, Emily H. Saxton, Mary B. Satterthwaite, Margaret B. Stone, Mattie A. N. Shaw, Mrs. G. W. Schofield, Robert Tilney, Annie L. Tilney.
Rhode Island: Mary O. Arnold, Emeline Burlingame Cheney, Elizabeth Buffum Chace, Ardelia C. Dewing, Jeannette S. French, Charlotte B. Wilbour.South Carolina: Mary P. Gridley, Jean B. Lockwood, Maude Sindersine, Claudia Gordon Tharin, May Tharin.South Dakota: Irene G. Adams, Ida R. Bailey, Mrs. F. C. Bidwell, Emma Cranmer, Mrs. W. V. Lucas, Anna R. Simmons, Mrs. C. E. Thorpe.Tennessee: Jennie Bailett, L. Graham Crozier, Mary McLeer.Texas: Rebecca Henry Hayes, L. R. Perkins.Utah: Corinne M. Allen, Sarah A. Boyer, Phebe Young Beatie, Charlotte Ives Cobb, Marilla M. Daniels, Mary E. Gilmer, Annie Godbe, Sarah M. Kimball, Aurelia S. Rodgers.Vermont: Mary N. Chase, Eliza S. Eaton, Mary Hutchinson, Alice Clinton Smith. Virginia: Elisan Brown, Nina Cross, Henderson Dangerfield, Elizabeth B. Dodge, Etta Grymes Farrar, Georgia Gibson, Emma R. Gilman, L. M. Green, Arabella B. Howard, Anna M. Snowden, Elizabeth Van Lew, Mary B. Wickersham.Washington: Mrs. Francis W. Cushman, Mrs. L. C. Kellogg, Martha E. Pike.West Virginia: Jessie G. Manley, Columbia A. Morgan, Florence M. Post, Clara Reinhammer.Wisconsin: Louisa M. Eastman, Almeda B. Gray, Laura B. James, Lucinda Lake, Jessie Nelson Luther, Maybell Park, Dora Putnam, Ellen A. Rose.Wyoming: Hon. M. C. Brown, Amalia B. Post, Mrs. Francis E. Warren.
FOOTNOTES:[499]For Congressional action seeHistory of Woman Suffrage, Vol. II, Chaps. XVII,XXIV,XXV;Vol. III, Chap. XXX;present volume, Chaps. III,V,VI,Chapter on Wyoming, and references in footnote of Chap. I.[500]This list is most incomplete, as members change so frequently and the House has not voted on the question since 1869. Most of the names given above are of those who have in some way openly advocated the measure. Practically all of the members from the States where women have the full franchise are in favor, and there always has been a large number from Kansas. In 1896, in response to letters of inquiry, many announced themselves as ready to vote for a suffrage amendment.[501]This is supplementary to matter contained in the State chapters.
[499]For Congressional action seeHistory of Woman Suffrage, Vol. II, Chaps. XVII,XXIV,XXV;Vol. III, Chap. XXX;present volume, Chaps. III,V,VI,Chapter on Wyoming, and references in footnote of Chap. I.
[499]For Congressional action seeHistory of Woman Suffrage, Vol. II, Chaps. XVII,XXIV,XXV;Vol. III, Chap. XXX;present volume, Chaps. III,V,VI,Chapter on Wyoming, and references in footnote of Chap. I.
[500]This list is most incomplete, as members change so frequently and the House has not voted on the question since 1869. Most of the names given above are of those who have in some way openly advocated the measure. Practically all of the members from the States where women have the full franchise are in favor, and there always has been a large number from Kansas. In 1896, in response to letters of inquiry, many announced themselves as ready to vote for a suffrage amendment.
[500]This list is most incomplete, as members change so frequently and the House has not voted on the question since 1869. Most of the names given above are of those who have in some way openly advocated the measure. Practically all of the members from the States where women have the full franchise are in favor, and there always has been a large number from Kansas. In 1896, in response to letters of inquiry, many announced themselves as ready to vote for a suffrage amendment.
[501]This is supplementary to matter contained in the State chapters.
[501]This is supplementary to matter contained in the State chapters.
The famous bibliographer, William Oldys, wrote early in the 18th century: "The labour and patience, the judgment and penetration, which are required to make a good index are only known to those who have gone through this most painful but least-praised part of a publication." Lord Campbell said, a century later, in his preface to The Lives of Chief Justices: "I proposed to bring a Bill into Parliament to deprive an author, who publishes a book without an index, of the privilege of copyright."
If an index were deemed so valuable in those periods of comparative leisure, one as complete as possible is surely an absolute necessity in these days when time is at the highest premium, but the maker is under obligation to study conciseness in order that the index may not be as long as the book. It has seemed practicable to reduce very greatly the length of this one without impairing its efficiency by asking the reader to bear in mind a few simple facts as to the arrangement of the History.
Chapters II-XXI are devoted exclusively to the conventions of the National Suffrage Association and the consequent hearings, reports and discussions in Congress; the story of each year is complete in its chapter and the date is in the running title on the right hand page. The work of the American Association before the two societies united is complete in Chapter XXII. These chapters contain theargument.
Chapters XXV-LXXII comprise the full history of the work in the States and Territories, one chapter given to each and all alphabetically arranged with name in running title on the right hand page. Each State is subdivided and the heads denoted by capital letters, as follows: Organization, Legislative Action, Laws, Suffrage, Office Holding, Occupation, Education.
The other chapters are clearly designated in the Table of Contents, and practically all the information which the book contains on each subject will be found in its respective chapter. The greatest problem has been the indexing of the manyspeechesso as to convey an idea of their subject-matter, as a number of them cover a variety of topics, and it has been possible to indicate only the principal points. The editors trust, however, that the systematic arrangement of the volume and the full Table of Contents will enable the reader to obtain the desired information without difficulty.