The History of Woman Suffrage Volume V Part 39

Dr. Shaw introduced Mrs. Pattie Ruffner Jacobs of Alabama, who quoted from distinguished southern members of Congress on State's rights and asked that these sentiments be applied to the National Amendment for Woman Suffrage, saying in part:

If this amendment is adopted it in no wise regulates or interferes with any existing qualification for voting (except s.e.x) which the various State const.i.tutions now exact. It leaves all others to be determined by the various States through their const.i.tutional agencies. It is a fallacy to contend that to prohibit discrimination on account of s.e.x would involve the race problem. The actual application of the principle in the South would be to enfranchise a very large number of white women and the same sort of negro women as of negro men now permitted to exercise the privilege....

However much these chivalrous gentlemen may wish it were so, that southern women might truly be called roses and lilies which toil not, they must know that their compliments do not provide equal pay for equal service, which obtains in all the woman suffrage States and that their flowers of speech do not help us secure a co-guardians.h.i.+p law, which every suffrage State has and which is non-existent in all southern States. The pedestal plat.i.tude appeals less and less to the intelligence of southern women, who are learning in increasing numbers that the a.s.sertion that they are too good, too n.o.ble, too pure to vote, in reality brands them as incompetents. It cannot be sugarcoated into any other significance as long as we remain cla.s.sed with idiots, criminals and some of the negro men who also are disfranchised. As things stand in the South an incentive is held out to the negro man to become educated that he may meet the tests; to practice industry and frugality and acquire property to meet the taxpaying qualification; but no such incentive is held out to the white women, who meet the insuperable barrier of s.e.x at every turn which might lead to progress....

We women of the South today, while proud of our past do not live in it. We wish to be proud of our present that we may look forward with confidence to our future. We know that sectionalism should have no place in our hearts or lives. This demand for suffrage is not sectional, it has its adherents in every State and in almost every town in every State. There is little or no organized opposition in my part of the country but there are many thousands of fine, thoughtful, forward-looking southern women banded together seeking the removal of this last badge of incompetency. For them there is no North or South but one great nation, the interest of whose women is the same. We realize that we are not different or better, we southern women, than the women in Montana, Illinois, Maine or Ma.s.sachusetts but are just human beings as they are. We are not queens but political and industrial serfs. We are not angels but our better natures, our higher selves are becoming aroused by the needs of our common humanity with a solidarity of purpose, a keenness of vision unmarred by selfish motives.

Miss Caroline Ruutz-Rees, head of the Rosemary School for Girls in Greenwich, Conn., described the work of the National Suffrage a.s.sociation and its sixty-three auxiliaries in the many State campaigns and the long effort for a Federal Amendment and said in closing: "In its propaganda and campaigns the a.s.sociation has steadily maintained a non-partisan att.i.tude, endeavoring so far as it had power to help the friends of suffrage and considering as antagonistic only its opponents. It does not hold its friends responsible for the failure of their party to pa.s.s its measures. It never forgets that it may have to look for help in amending the State const.i.tutions to the adherents of a party unfriendly to a Federal Amendment. It believes in educating the public until the demand for the enfranchis.e.m.e.nt of women becomes so strong as to be irresistible. The enormous change of opinion in that public within a few years inspires the a.s.sociation to hope for the speedy conclusion of its labors."

Mrs. George Ba.s.s, the well-known suffrage and political worker of Chicago, said in the course of her remarks:

Women want the ballot because they need it in their business--the business of being a woman--in the business that began when the first man and the first woman commenced housekeeping in a cave.

The duties of the man and the woman differentiated themselves at that time and they have been differentiated ever since. The woman as mother became the first artisan because she had to clothe the children. She became the first doctor because she had to treat the ills that came to those children of hers and to the man who lived by her side. She had to invent tools; she was the first farmer. Man and his duties and his responsibilities have been the same from that time to this. He brought in to her the slain animal which she trans.m.u.ted into food and changed into clothing.

He was the protector, and the first government that grew up about that first home considered only the problems of offense and defense. As the governments of the world became more stable, as they developed, they still centered about war, offense and defense.... Woman still is the mother of the race but what of the home? It has become socialized and the spinning wheel is in the attic and millions of women are standing at the great looms of this country. The women are in the shops, the factories, the offices, everywhere that modern industrialism is extending itself. The school has been socialized and the children are by the thousands in the schools.

Mrs. Ba.s.s then strikingly ill.u.s.trated how the business of being a woman now took women to legislative bodies in the interest of the State's dependent children, of the women in the industries, of the so-called fallen women, and showed how fatally handicapped all were without the power of the ballot.

Mrs. Medill McCormick, chairman of the Congressional Committee of the a.s.sociation, sent a comprehensive report of the vast work it had done in district organization throughout the States and the evident influence this had exerted on Congress. Dr. Shaw introduced Mrs.

Carrie Chapman Catt, president of the International Woman Suffrage Alliance, who made the princ.i.p.al address, a searching and comprehensive review of the methods by which men had obtained the ballot compared to those which had been used by women and showed the many requirements made of the latter which were entirely omitted in the case of men. She took the four recent campaigns in Ma.s.sachusetts, New York, New Jersey and Pennsylvania as the basis of her masterly address, which will be found in the Appendix of this chapter. At the end of it she said: "It was twenty-two years ago that I had the privilege and pleasure of standing upon the same platform with the chairman of this committee when he made an eloquent appeal to the citizens of Colorado for the women there and many said that his speech turned the tide and gave women the vote. I hope that he and every member will not only make a favorable report but will do more--will follow that report on the floor of the Senate and work for it and immortalize themselves while freeing us from the humiliation and the burden of this struggle."

The hearing was closed by Dr. Shaw with a strong and convincing argument to show that "if nothing entered into the life of the homes of this nation except what came through State action it might be said that only the State should decide who should vote but since the women are as much affected by the acts of Congress as are the men, this becomes a national question." She drew a striking picture of conditions among the nations of Europe where the war was raging; of how "women in our own country every morning scanned the papers to see whether we were nearer with the rising sun than we were with the setting sun of the day before to connections with the Old World which will plunge us into the war." She took up the questions of tariff and of prohibition, asked if women should not have a vote on these and the other great national issues before the country and concluded: "I only wish that the woman whose name is so closely a.s.sociated with this amendment--Susan B. Anthony--might have lived to see this committee as it exists today instead of having pa.s.sed away before it was composed of members of the character of those before whom we now come to present our cause."

At the hearing of the Congressional Union the following day, Senator Thomas, chairman of the committee, was present but refused to preside, as the leaders of the Union had gone to Colorado during the recent campaign and spoken and worked, though unsuccessfully, against his re-election. Senator Sutherland took the chair. It was conducted by the vice-president of the Union, Miss Anne Martin. "One of our chief purposes in asking this hearing," she said, "is to bring before you not only the ethical importance but the political urgency of settling this question of national suffrage for women. At present the thought and strength of large numbers of them throughout the country are absorbed by this campaign to secure fundamental justice, which prevents their giving a.s.sistance in matters vitally affecting the interests of the men, women and children of the nation." There would be five-minute speeches, she said, until the last half hour, which would be divided between the envoys of the women voters' convention in San Francisco during the past summer.[101]

Most of the speeches were crisp and clever and well fortified with facts and figures to prove the advantage of a Federal Amendment over State amendments in securing universal woman suffrage. The two "envoys" were Miss Frances Jolliffe and Mrs. Sara Bard Field of California, who started in an automobile from the grounds of the Exposition in San Francisco to motor to Was.h.i.+ngton to present to Congress a pet.i.tion which had been collected during the Fair and to do propaganda work on the way. The former made only part of the trip in the car but Mrs. Field completed the entire 3,000 miles. Both made excellent addresses.

Senator Hollis occupied the chair at the hearing of the National Anti-Suffrage a.s.sociation December 20. Its president, Mrs. Arthur M.

Dodge, introduced the speakers, saying: "We appear before you to urge that you do not report this resolution to the Senate because we believe very earnestly that it is a question which should be taken to the States to be voted on by the electorates and not submitted to the Legislatures." Mrs. M. C. Talbot, secretary of the Maryland Anti-Suffrage a.s.sociation, read a paper prepared by the Hon. John W.

Foster, a strong argument against a Federal Amendment but without a word of opposition to the granting of woman suffrage by the States.

The other speakers were Miss Florence H. Hall, publicity chairman of the Pennsylvania a.s.sociation; Mrs. George P. White, a member of its executive board; Miss Lucy J. Price, secretary of the Cleveland, O., branch; Mrs. A. J. George (Ma.s.s.), executive secretary of the National Congressional Committee. They were trained speakers and their side of the question was well presented. It was heard by the Senate Committee without interruption except on one point. Miss Hall said: "On waves of Populism, Mormonism, insurgency and Socialism ten States have been added to the pioneer State of Wyoming and are recognizing the suffrage flag." When she had finished the following colloquy took place:

Senator Sutherland. I do not ordinarily like to inject anything into these hearings, but one statement has been made by the last speaker which I do not think I ought to let go without making a suggestion in regard to it. If I understood her correctly she insists that Mormonism has had something to do with the granting of woman suffrage in the ten States in which it has been granted.

I want to say that in California, Oregon, Was.h.i.+ngton and Kansas, taking those four States which are the largest in which suffrage has been granted, the Mormon population and Mormon vote are practically negligible.

Miss Hall. I did not base it on that. I said Mormonism, Populism, Socialism and insurgency brought suffrage along with them.

Senator Sutherland. There is only one State in all of these, so far as I know, where Mormons are in the majority and that is in my own State of Utah. There are comparatively few in Colorado, probably not more than a thousand altogether in the entire population, and their numbers are practically negligible in the other States.

Miss Hall. How about Idaho? Forty per cent. there.

Senator Sutherland. I think perhaps there are twenty-five per cent. There are probably 400 or 500 in the State of Nevada. In Arizona I do not know just what the percentage is but there are a number of Mormon voters there.

Miss Hall. I would refer the committee to Senator Cannon's recent letter on that question, where he names eleven States----

Senator Sutherland (interposing). I know that claim has been made but I undertake to say that it is utterly without foundation. I speak in regard to this matter with just as much knowledge as Mr.

Cannon or anybody else.

Senator Jones. It is without foundation, so far as the State of Was.h.i.+ngton is concerned.

Senator Sutherland. While I am not a member of the Mormon Church and never have been, I have lived in that section practically all my life and it is not correct to say that such a situation as has been described prevails in those States.

Miss Hall. I thought I had pretty good authority for making that statement and I think I could produce the evidence to show it.

Senator Sutherland. I would be surprised if you could produce any evidence whatever to substantiate that statement.

Mrs. George, who spoke last, came to the rescue of Miss Hall and this dialogue occurred:

Mrs. George. I am confident that the speaker only meant to imply that woman suffrage has always been a radical movement and that where Mormonism did exist it helped on suffrage....

Senator Sutherland. As a matter of fact, the Mormon Church and the Mormon people are not radical. They are conservative and in some instances almost ultra conservative....

Mrs. George. They may be conservative along certain lines but we do look upon the Mormon Church as advocating certain social measures which seem to us radical.

Senator Sutherland. I will grant you that in the past there have been some things that you and I would not agree with, but from a very careful observation of events I can say to you with perfect confidence in the truth of what I say, that that sort of thing has pa.s.sed away.

Mrs. George. May I say un-American, if you object to the word "radical"?

Senator Sutherland. I object to the word "un-American" much more strongly because the Mormon people are not un-American. They are good citizens, among the best in this country.

Mrs. George concluded her address to the committee with these words: "These are grave times. Questions of international relations.h.i.+ps, of preparedness, of the national defense, of finance, are vexing the wisest minds. Is it a time to further the propaganda of this new crop of hyphenated Americans--Suffrage-Americans--who place their propaganda above every need of the country?"

With the women of eleven States now eligible to vote for all candidates at the general election of 1916 and the large number in Illinois possessing the Presidential franchise woman suffrage had become a leading issue. Most of the House Judiciary Committee of twenty-one members, including the chairman, Edwin Y. Webb of North Carolina, an immovable opponent, were present at the hearing on December 16 and they faced sixteen speakers for the Federal Amendment and twelve opposed. Three hours were granted to the former, divided between the National American a.s.sociation and the Congressional Union, and two hours to the National a.s.sociation Opposed to Woman Suffrage.

Dr. Shaw opened the hearing by referring to the thirty-seven years that had seen the leaders of her a.s.sociation pleading with Congress for favorable action on this amendment and introduced Mrs. Carrie Chapman Catt, president of the International Woman Suffrage Alliance, comprising twenty-six nations.

Mrs. Catt said in part:

Mr. Chairman and Gentlemen of the Committee, I fear that the hearings before this Judiciary Committee have become in the eyes and understanding of many of the members a rather perfunctory affair which you have to endure. May I remind you that since the last hearing something new has happened in the United States and that is that more than a million men have voted for woman suffrage in four of the most conservative States of the East? I consider that that big vote presents to this committee a mandate for action which was never presented before. There are those, doubtless, who will say that this is a question of State rights.

I have been studying Congressmen for a good many years and I have discovered that when a man believes in woman suffrage it is a national question and when he does not believe in it he says it is a question for the States....

Mrs. Catt told of the prominent educator who was sent from Belgium to investigate the working of woman suffrage in the United States and after he had made a visit to the States where it existed he summed up the result by saying: "I am convinced in favor in my mind but my heart is still opposed." "There are members of this committee," she said, "who are governed by their hearts instead of their heads," and she continued:

Gentlemen, this movement has grown bigger and stronger as the years have pa.s.sed by until today millions of women are asking in all the States for the vote. The president of Cornell University, Dr. Schurman, said that his reason for now aggressively advocating woman suffrage was because he had discovered in studying history that it was never good for a government to have a restless and dissatisfied cla.s.s; he had made up his mind that the women of the nation did think that they had a grievance, whether they had or not, and he believed that a government was stronger and safer when grievances were relieved.

A few days before the election in order to show that the women wanted to vote there was a parade in New York City and 20,000 marched up Fifth Avenue, among them a great number of public school teachers of the city, 12,000 of whom had contributed to our campaign funds. These women deal with the most difficult problems; they are teaching all that the new-coming people know of citizens.h.i.+p and they were asking their own share in that citizens.h.i.+p. A man whose name is known to every one of you was sitting at the window of a clubhouse watching the women pa.s.s hour after hour until at last this great group of teachers, sixteen abreast, marched by with their banners. He looked out upon them and do you think he said, "I am convinced that the women of New York do want to vote and I will help them?" That is what an honorable American citizen, an open-minded man, would have said.

Instead he exclaimed: "My G.o.d! I never realized what a menace the woman suffrage movement is to this country; we have got to do something next Tuesday to keep the women from getting the vote."

There is not a man on this committee or in this House who can produce a single argument against woman suffrage that will hold water, and the thing that is rousing the women of this land continually and making them realize that our Government visits upon us a daily injustice is that the doors of our ports are left wide open and the men of all the nations on earth are permitted to enter and receive the franchise. In New York City women must ask for it in twenty-four languages....

Walter M. Chandler of New York City, a member of the committee, asked Mrs. Catt if she thought a Representative should vote against the mandate of his district, which in his case had given a majority of 2,000 against a State amendment in November, although he himself had spoken and voted for it. A spirited dialogue followed which filled several pages of the printed report, Mrs. Catt insisting that he should stand by the broad principle of justice and Mr. Chandler equally insistent that he must represent his const.i.tuents. As Dr. Shaw rose to return to the convention Mr. Carlin of Virginia said: "Dr.

Shaw, would you mind explaining to this committee the essential difference between this organization known as the National Woman Suffrage a.s.sociation and the Congressional Union? There is a great deal of confusion among the members of the committee as to just what is the difference between them," and she answered:

It is, perhaps, like two different political parties, which believe in different procedure. The National Woman Suffrage a.s.sociation has two fundamental ideas--to secure the suffrage through State and national const.i.tutions--and we appeal both to Congress and to the States. The Congressional Union, as I understand it, appeals only to the Congress. Another essential difference is that the policy of the Union is to hold the party in power responsible for the acts of Congress, whether they are acts of that party by itself or of the whole Congress. They follow a partisan method of attacking the political party in power, whether the members of it are friendly to the woman-suffrage movement or not. For instance, Senator Thomas of Colorado, Senator Chamberlain of Oregon and other Senators and Representatives who have always been favorable to our movement and have aided us all the way along, have been attacked by this Union not because of their personal att.i.tude toward our question but because of the att.i.tude of their party. The National Suffrage a.s.sociation pursues a non-partisan method, attacking no political party. If we could defeat a member of any political party who persistently opposed our measure we would do it, whether in the Republican or the Democratic or any other, but would never hold any party responsible for the acts of its individual members.