Transcript

Hepburn, Katharine Houghton. The revolution in women's work makes votes for women a practical necessity. New York: National American Woman Suffrage Association, [1918?]. 324.623 H529r. Connecticut Historical Society.

THE REVOLUTION IN WOMEN’S WORK MAKES
VOTES FOR WOMEN
A PRACTICAL NECESSITY

During the past hundred years there has been a complete revolution in industrial and social conditions.
In consequence of this, the position of women and their conditions of work have undergone a change nothing short of revolutionary.

A hundred years ago women in their own homes spun the cloth, made the clothes for the family, cured the meat, preserved and canned the fruits and vegetables, baked the bread, made the butter, made the soap and candles, had charge of the entire education of girls and the early education of boys, and took care of all the sick. Women then could protect their children from evil influences, their daughters from unhealthy and demoralizing conditions and their homes from infectious clothing and impure food.

To-day industrial conditions have completely. The cloth is now spun not in the home but in the factory. The clothes are made not in the home but in the sweat shop. The meat is cured not in the home but by the beef trust. The fruits and vegetables are canned not in the home but in the factory. The bread is baked not in the home but the bake shop. The butter is not made in the home but in the creamery. The soap, candles, etc., are not made in the home but in the factory. The girls and boys are educated not in the home but in the public school. The sick are cared for not in the home but in the hospital.

As women’s work has gone out of the home into the factory many women have been forced to follow their work into the factory, and there are to-day there are nearly eight million women in the United States working outside the home. The hours of labor of these women and their

conditions of their work, both moral and sanitary, depend upon the laws, and yet the women in the making or enforcing of the laws.

The women who are left in the home are trying to bring up their children and to keep their homes free from evil influences, both physical and moral. Under present day conditions, the homemakers are directly dependent upon the outside world for all the things which are necessary for the very life of their families, and yet women have no voice in the making or enforcing of laws which regulate the conditions under which these things are produced.

Women in their work as homemakers and mothers are even more intimately touched by the influences which reach their children from the outside world. The playgrounds, the school, the saloon, public amusements, etc., all influence their powers to make their homes what they should be, and yet women have no voice in making the laws which for good or evil so vitally affect their work.

A hundred years ago the government of this country was primarily concerned with establishing its independence from other nations.

To-day the government of this country is primarily concerned with social and industrial problems, which vitally affect the lives of women and children.

History proves that governments pay attention to the demands of the people who keep them in power and not to the demands of a disenfranchised class.

For this reason Votes for Women is a natural and necessary result of present day conditions.

Women need Votes now in order to do the work which Women have always done.

Working conditions of 8,000,000 women
2,000,000 little children at work

Sweat shops

Adulterated and impure food
Unsanitary tenements
Demoralizing living conditions
The White Slave Traffic

DEMAND VOTES FOR WOMEN

Reprinted by courtesy of Katherine Houghton Hepburn

#

Transcript

Women in the home. Political Equality League, Hartford, CT, 191-. Broadsides Small 191- W872w. Connecticut Historical Society.

WOMEN IN THE HOME
------------
We are forever being told that the place of woman is in the HOME. Well, so be it. But what do we expect of her in the home? Merely to stay in the home is not enough. She is a failure unless she does certain things for the home. She must make the home minister, as far as her means allow, to the health and welfare, moral as well as physical, of her family, and especially of her children. She, more than anyone else, is held responsible for what they become.
SHE is responsible for the cleanliness of her house. SHE is responsible for the wholesomeness of the food. SHE is responsible for the children’s health.
SHE, above all, is responsible for their morals, for their sense of truth, of honesty and of decency, for what they turn out to be.
How Far Can the Mother Control These Things?
She can clean her own rooms, BUT if the neighbors are allowed to live in filth, she cannot keep her rooms from being filled with bad airs and smells, or from being infested by vermin.
She can cook her food well, BUT if dealers are permitted to sell poor food, unclean milk or stale eggs, she cannot make the food wholesome for her children.
She can care for her own plumbing and her refuse, BUT, if the plumbing in the rest of the house is unsanitary, if garbage accumulates and the halls and stairs are left dirty, she cannot protect her children from the sickness and infection that these conditions bring.
She can take every care to avoid fire, BUT if the house has been badly built, if the fire-escapes are insufficient or not fireproof, she cannot guard her children from the horrors of being maimed or killed by fire.
She can open her windows to give her children the air that we are told is so necessary, BUT if the air is laden with infection, with tuberculosis and other contagious diseases, she cannot protect her children from this danger.

She can send her children out for air and exercise, BUT if the conditions that surround them on the streets are immoral and degrading, she cannot protect them from these dangers.
ALONE, she CANNOT make these things right. WHO or WHAT can? THE CITY can do it--the CITY GOVERNMENT that is elected BY
THE PEOPLE, to take care of the interests of THE PEOPLE. And who decides what the city government shall do?
FIRST, the officials of that government; and, SECOND, those who elect them.
DO THE WOMEN ELECT THEM? NO, the men do. So it is the MEN and NOT THE WOMEN that are really responsible for the
UNCLEAN HOUSES BAD PLUMBING UNWHOLESOME FOOD DANGER OF FIRE RISK OF TUBERCULOSIS AND OTHER DISEASES IMMORAL INFLUENCES OF THE STREET.
In fact, MEN are responsible for the conditions under which the children live, but we hold WOMEN responsible for the results of those conditions. If we hold women responsible for the results, must we not, in simple justice, let them have something to say as to what these conditions shall be? There is one simple way of doing this. Give them the same means that men have. LET THEM VOTE.
Women are, by nature and training, housekeepers. Let them have a hand in the city’s housekeeping, even if they introduce an occasional house-cleaning.

For information or membership, apply to
POLITICAL EQUALITY LEAGUE, 133 Hawthorn Street, Hartford.

The Libbie Printing Co. 242 Dover St., Boston
#

Transcript

No. 4.
AN ECONOMICAL WOMAN,
Who Thinks Men Need No Help From Others in Politics.

There is one thing I can never understand about the woman suffragists, and that is why they want men and women to do the same work. It seems so wasteful. I can never bear to see two people doing what one can do just as well. I may not be able to rise above the plain, common-sense side of the question, but I know I have a love of economy, and I do not like to see time and strength wasted any more than I do money; in fact, time and strength are so much harder to get than even money, that I would rather throw away money. Of course, if the men can’t possibly get along in politics without the women, that is a different thing. If they are unable any longer to take care of what has so long been considered their department, let them say so, and then, out of pity, and the spirit of helpfulness for which women are noted, perhaps we will turn to and help them. But it will have to be a beseeching and heartrending wail from our enfeebled men that will make the greater part of our women willing to use their time and strength that way. Our women do not seem to have any superabundance of strength and nerves anyway, and what will they become if the woman suffrage reign should come in? I love to see people work, and I love to work myself, but I would rather women should set men a good example, by doing their work well, than by pitching in to help the men and neglecting their own special duties. Woman’s work is the noblest in the world; her power and influence the strongest. The homes, the babies, the charities, the schools need woman, and let our legislators consider carefully whether woman can attend to all these duties and a hundred others, as well as do their part in the political world. Let us hope and pray that these legislators of ours will not vote away so much of the time and strength of the women of this state in as thoughtless a way as they sometimes do its money.

1909.

ISSUED BY

AN ECONOMICAL WOMAN.

THE NEW YORK STATE ASSOCIATION OPPOSED TO WOMAN SUFFRAGE,
29 WEST 39TH STREET, NEW YORK CITY.

15 Cents per 100.

Transcript

Connecticut Western News Volume L, Number 8 Canaan, Connecticut Thursday, August 26, 1920
Page 1

HOW SUFFRAGE WAS ATTAINED BY WOMEN

After Sixty-Six Years of Endeavors, Women May Vote
With the ratification of the [eighteenth (sic)] nineteenth amendment by the Tennessee legislature, giving some twenty-seven million women the right to vote, a brief history of the long and many times discouraging battle by leaders of the cause will be of interest.
Sixty-six years have passed since Susan Brownell Anthony, a Quaker school teacher, born in Massachusetts and reared in Rochester, N.Y., began her fight for complete legal equality of the sexes -- known and ridiculed for a long time thereafter as "women's rights." Her federal suffrage amendment, now ratified line for line just as she wrote it, she offered in 1878 forty-two years ago. Both the big political parties put suffrage into their platforms in 1916 -- four years ago. The house of representatives passed the amendment first on January 10, 1918 -- two years and seven months ago. The senate passed it on June 4, 1919 - fourteen months ago.

Tennessee, the thirty-sixth state, ratified it last week.

Those are milestones of suffrage. At the beginning women who ventured to assert that they and their sisters had political rights were set down as "brazen hussies." At the end more than 26,000,000 of them are entitled to vote this fall for president of the United States or
anybody else who Is running for office.

The complete historian of suffrage will go much further back than, Susan B. Anthony, but the "movement" for a Federal amendment began with her. Few women sided with Abigail Adams when she wrote to her hue band, John Adams, then serving in the Continental congress, threatened a women's rebellion and saying:
"We will not hold ourselves bound to obey laws in which we have no voice or representation.”
Lucretia Mott Is credited with being the first woman to speak at a public meeting in America. She, too, was a Quaker. In 1848 she and Elizabeth Cady Stanton called a convention at Seneca Falls, N. Y., which drew up a woman’s bill of rights. Even by most members of their own sex they were regarded as freaks, as were the generation of workers who came after them.
In 1852 Susan B. Anthony, who had been fighting slavery and rum

and who founded the first American women's temperance society, attended a convention of the sons of Temperance in Albany. To her astonishment, when she rose to speak she was rebuked by the presiding officer.
Rebuke for Susan B. Anthony
"The sisters were not invited here to speak but to listen and learn," he said.
Thereafter she gave suffrage her serious attention, and after 1854 de voted her life to it except in the Civil War period. In the early '50's "women's rights" conventions were held in several states. In I860 two national organizations were formed -- the American Woman Suffrage
Association and the National Woman Suffrage Association.

Lucy Stone and Julia Ward Howe were leaders of the first and Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Miss Anthony the second. There was a cleavage of purpose which has existed between two groups up to a recent
time. The Anthony-Stanton group believed it most important to work for a federal amendment, the Stone-Howe group preferred to win the fight state by state. In the end the winning of states helped mightily in the winning of congress.
The pioneer suffrage state, Wyoming, then a territory, came in 1869; for twenty-four years thereafter, despite all the efforts for the

“cause" not another state, joined her.

Meanwhile Susan Anthony, traveling first through New York state, toured the whole country, enduring no end of discomfort, even going to the mining camps of California, to preach her gospel. In 1872 she tried, by having herself arrested, to obtain an interpretation of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth amendments, which would allow women to vote. She went to the polls in Rochester and cast her ballot. A jury, after six months, found her guilty and she was sentenced to pay a fine of $100 and costs.
"May it please your Honor," she said to the Judge, "I will never pay a dollar of your unjust penalty and I shall earnestly and persistently continue to urge all women to the practical recognition of the old revolutionary maxim, 'Resistance to tyranny is obedience to God.'”
Fellow suffragists sent in money, but Miss Anthony never paid the fine and was never imprisoned. The court in this case, not knowing what to do, discreetly did nothing. She and followers made another attempt for recognition under the fourteenth amendment and carried it to the
supreme court.

The adverse decision there caused Miss Anthony to draw up the amendment to the constitution, the ratification of which was completed last week. She wrote the text in 1875, since which year suffragists have worked

both in the states and through congress to establish their right to the ballot.

The amendment in its present form was presented to the United States senate in 1878 in behalf of the National Woman Suffrage Association by Senator A. A. Sargent, of California, and was promptly voted down in committee of both branches of congress. Every year thereafter the suffragists saw to it that their amendment was reintroduced, but congress continued to discourage their efforts, although now and then
a committee returned a favorable report. Mrs. Stanton served as president of the association from 1869 to 1892; Miss Anthony, who had at first declined to accept any office higher than membership in the executive committee, was president from l892 to 1900. Mrs. Carrie Chapman Catt from 1900 to 1904; Dr. Anna Howard Shaw from 1904 to 1915, and Mrs.
Catt, reelected two years before Dr. Shaw's death, from 1915 to the present time.
Much vain knocking at the doors of congress persuaded the women that before national suffrage was achieved they must first win over enough states to make the vote of women a real political power. While Miss Anthony led the national campaign in Washington, Lucy Stone and Julia Ward Howe labored with the state legislatures. They got Wyoming, as has been said, in 1869. They also got Utah in 1870, but

congress upset this decision and Utah did not actually arrive at equal suffrage until 1895. Colorado enfranchised women in 1893, Idaho in 1896.
There, for fourteen years the case rested. Not another state was added.

The suffrage movement seemed to have stopped. Little was heard of it. When it came to a vote for the first time in the senate, on January
25, 1887, the score of the defeat was 34 to 16. It did not come up again until March 19, 1914, and never reached a vote in the house until January 25, 1915.
With the beginning of the new century the struggle entered what is known as its "political period." In 1900 the two national organizations
were combined under the name of the National American Woman Suffrage Association. In 1909 it moved its headquarters from Warrenton, Ohio, to New York. Since then it has conducted its campaign from New York first from offices at 505 Fifth avenue, partly financed by Mrs. O. H. P. Belmont, and later from 171 Madison avenue, the present headquarters.
Suffrage Party Is Launched

In the same year Mrs. Catt launched her woman suffrage party, organized first in New York city on strict political lines and copied all over the country. Through modern organization the movement gained new headway and more states began granting suffrage to their women.

Washington came into line in 1910, California in 1911, Arizona, Oregon and Kansas in 1912, Montana and Nevada in 1914.
The next piece of applied strategy was the presidential suffrage conferred by states upon their own women. A Chicago woman lawyer, Mrs. Catherine Waugh McCulloch, devised this plan of boring from within. Illinois voted for presidential suffrage in 1913, North Dakota and Nebraska in 1917, and others trooped into line. Many states now had full suffrage and in others women voted for presidential electors.
The moral and political effect of this growth was enormous, but the biggest and most potent event in the history of the victory period of suffrage was the winning of the vote by the women of New York state in 1917. When New York, the back bone of the east, gave in, all the stoutest of the antis were ready to admit that the end was in sight.
In 1912 the National American Woman Suffrage Association renewed its drive on congress. Alice Paul and Lucy Burns then identified
themselves with it. Alice Paul -- a Quaker, as were Lucretia Mott and Susan

B. Anthony -- was just back from England, where she had served a term in Holloway jail for militancy under the guidance of Mrs. Pankhurst.
The ordinary suffrage tactics in this country were too tame for her. She did not remain long as chairman of the old association's congress

committee, but organized the Congressional Union on Pankhurst lines. From it developed the National's Woman's party, founded in 1916.
After Paul's group were the "picketing suffragists." It picketed the White House in 1917, and the women were arrested and subjected to imprisonment, which was declared illegal by the District Court of Appeals. Alice Paul was forcibly fed. When the picketers were released they hired a train -- the "prison special" -- and toured the country with their propaganda.
The militants of the Woman's party favored the use of spectacular methods, and of bringing to bear on members of congress the weapon of ridicule wherever they could. They made the conservatives furious, and there was much quarreling back and forth, yet it now seems to be agreed that both groups of women, each working its own way, contributed to
the victory.
"West Slambang at Job"

With its countrywide organization and an aggressive lobby in Washington, the National Woman's party went slambang at the job of getting the amendment through congress and the state legislatures. Latterly by the use of adroit political methods, it has been moving heaven and earth to obtain ratification by the thirty-sixth state in time for women to vote this year.

While its chairman, Alice Paul, stayed in the east, working upon the powers in Washington, its political chairman, Mrs. Abby Scott Baker, went to Chicago and San Francisco and buzzed the two conventions. Alice Paul kept suffrage constantly before President Wilson until congress had passed the amendment and later until the legislatures of the necessary thirty-six states had ratified it. The basis of the power of the National Woman's party was the power of the woman voters of the suffrage states of the west. Its policy was to hold the party in power responsible for the passage of the amendment.
In 1914 the party entered every suffrage state, appealing to the women to refuse to return to office the party which had withheld national suffrage. As every candidate in the suffrage states was in favor of the national amendment this meant an attack on men who were individually the friends of suffrage, but only in this way could the party be reached. Of the forty-two men campaigned against only twenty-one were elected.
Suffrage Plank Inevitable

Inevitably a suffrage plank was placed in the platforms of both the republican and democratic parties in the national conventions of 1916.
There was endless criticism of the picketing of the White House, but it

is to be noted that one year from the day it began the amendment passed

the house with President Wilson as its staunch advocate. That was on January 10, 1918, the vote began 274 yeas and 136 nays out of 410 voting. The measure was now before the senate, and there it stayed for a year and a half, blocked most of the time by one vote. The senate finally capitulated on June 14, 1919, when the yeas totaled 66 and the noes 30. The lower house had again voted for the amendment on May 31, 1919, giving 304 yeas and 89 nays.
Then began the fight for ratification. The senate's delay increased the difficulty of this campaign, for the amendment could not be brought before the regular 1918-1919 sessions of the various legislatures. In order to obtain ratification in time for women to vote for president this
year the suffragists had to influence twenty-nine governors to call special sessions of their state legislatures.
Redoubled Effort

The expense of special session, the fear that other and unwanted legislation would be slipped through and local political quarrels, as well as opposition to suffrage itself, were all factors against the women, but having got thus far they redoubled their efforts. National suffrage was now a certainty, even if not quite established. To politicians it seemed that refusal to call special sessions might be a matter for reprisal when

the men actually did vote. But in some cases the state governors refused to act until word came down the line from, the highest party leaders.
Wisconsin, Illinois and Michigan ratified on June 10. New York's was the second legislature to meet especially for ratification. In West Virginia the amendment was saved by the vote of a state senator who was rushed from California on a special train. On March 22 last Washington ratified. It was the thirty-fifth state. Delaware was expected to be the thirty sixth, but Delaware failed the women.
The struggle for the thirty-sixth state lasted five months. The antis, with their backs against the wall, cried, "You shall not have it!" The pressure on the legislature of Tennessee from the leaders of both political parties was terrific. Tennessee wabbled, but last week it came through, and as soon as the formalities of proclamation and so on are complied with we shall have votes for women -- twenty-seven million of them.

Transcript

The Hartford Daily Courant Established 1764
Wednesday morning, Feb. 7, 1900 Sixteen Pages
Price Three Cents Page 10
Women Who Don’t Want to Vote

Every year, Massachusetts legislators are petitioned to give suffrage to women. Last year three measures were brought to the attention of one or more branches of the General Assembly. These measures were: A proposed amendment to the constitution giving women full suffrage, a license suffrage bill, and a municipal suffrage bill. All three were defeated. “The Remonstrance,” a little four-page anti-woman suffrage journal published annually at Boston, rejoices at these defeats.
It is to be presumed that these annual petitions emanating from Massachusetts woman suffragists are what call out the annual numbers of “The Remonstrance.” But the paper does not confine its attention to Massachusetts. It has cheering words for anti-woman suffragists in many states of the Union. The organization of women that publishes the paper is

a long-named society – to writ the Massachusetts Association Opposed to the Further Extension of Suffrage to Women. The members of this association believe that the great majority of women “do not want the ballot, and that to force it upon them would not only be an injustice to women, but would lessen their influence for good and imperil the community.”
We do not find many facts in “The Remonstrance” to support the claim that, if women voted, the community would be imperiled, but figures are given to show that the “great majority” of women don’t want the ballot. Take the way women vote on school questions for example. “The Remonstrance” gives the following statistics from Chicago and Cleveland, with the remark that, they are “significant;”
CHICAGO
Women registered in 1894 to vote on school questions: Less than 80 percent voted.
Women registered in 1896; 5,636. About 50 percent voted.
Women registered in 1898; 1,488. About 75 percent voted.

CLEVELAND OHIO

Women registered in 1895; 5,831 of whom 4,845 voted.
Women registered in 1896: 2,728 of whom 1,632 voted.

Women registered in 1897: 408, of whom 228 voted.

Women registered in 1898: 82, of who 20 voted.

The registration and vote of women in Boston on school questions, for 16 years can be seen from this table:
YEAR. Registration. Vote.

1881 ………………… 1,119 1,026
1885…………………. 2,238 2,063
1886………………….1,193 878
1887………………….837 725
1888………………….20,253 19,400
1889…………………10,689 10,051
1890…………………7,935 7,439
1891…………………6,008 5,428
1892…………………9,992 9,510
1893………………..10,296 8,915
1894………………..11,091 8,733
1895 ………………..12,073 9,049
1896 ……………….10,340 6,417
1897 ………………..9,262 5,721
1898 ………………..8,723 6,201
1899 ………………..10,385 7,090

“The Remonstrance” thinks that it is a question whether the growth last year will be permanent, or whether, “as has happened so often in the past, this vote on the vital question of the public schools will prove a fluctuating quantity.” To give an idea of the situation in New York state, the paper quotes from a letter sent January 7, 1899, by Charles R. Skinner, state superintendent of public instruction, to the Brooklyn auxiliary of the New York Anti-Suffrage Association. Mr. Skinner wrote:
Replying to your inquiry of the 6th, I advise you that so far as we have been able to secure statistics in reference to the participation of women in school meetings throughout the state, we find that less than 2 percent of the women take advantage of the power to vote at school meetings conferred by the law of 1880.
In February, 1898, the Legislature of Oregon, after “hasty consideration” – as “The Remonstrance” puts it – adopted a resolution to submit to the people a constitutional amendment conferring full suffrage upon women. This proposition will be voted on next June. “The Remonstrance” lets it be known that “representatives of the large majority” of the women of that state are aroused over the question. But, asks some suffragists, is this not because they want to vote? Bless you no; according to “The Remonstrance” the ballot is the last thing that they want. They have

formed an Oregon branch of the Massachusetts anti-woman suffrage society with a long name, and are out with an address to the voters of Oregon. Here are a few extracts from the address:
We believe that only a small percentage of the women of our state ask or desire the ballot. Our school elections prove as do those of every state in the Union which permits women to vote at such elections, that the great majority of Oregon women do not use the ballot even in school matters, in which they may be presumed to take special interest on account of their children.
We believe that the majority should rule in this as in other political matters, and that a small though eager minority of our sex should not force the ballot (and its attendant privileges of sitting on juries, and running for offices) upon the far larger number of women who do not desire to vote.
We have no quarrel with our suffragist sisters; but we protest against their being regarded as representatives of the true opinion of Oregon women upon this vital subject.
We also believe that the adoption of this suffrage amendment would necessarily lead to serious complications in both the political and social conditions of the state, and that such complications would be harmful to the state in every way.

We ask you especially to record your vote on this amendment because, although any intelligent voter of this state knows that an overwhelming majority of his sex, as well as ours, are opposed to suffrage for women, yet there is a danger that the minority vote will be rallied to the polls by the suffragists, while the majority neglect to cast their votes against the amendment.
“The Remonstrance” prints the anti-woman suffrage platform on the first of its four pages. On the last page appears a list of the defeats of woman suffrage in 1897, 1898 and 1899. To the 1900 list, the association publishing the paper hopes to add an “anti” majority in the state of Oregon.

Transcript

Hartford Courant

Daily Established in 1764 Hartford, Connecticut Wednesday, June 15, 1881 Price Four cents
Page 1

Woman Suffrage
Mrs. Isabella Beecher Hooker’s Address Before Congress

At the woman suffrage convention at Unity hall, Monday, Mrs.

Hooker, by particular request, read the phonographic report of an extemporaneous address made by her before the House judiciary committee of Congress in 1871. It is as follows:
“We are told by men themselves that there are too many voters already; restriction is what we want, not enlargement of the suffrage. Let us see how this is, my friends, let us reason together on this point for a few moments. This one great propelling power of this government that moves the great pollical engine, and that keeps us alive as a nation on the face of the earth, is God’s own doctrine of personal liberty and personal responsibility.

That is all we have to go upon. It is, in fact, fuel and steam. Liberty is the steam, responsibility puts on the brakes, and then what is the safety valve, I ask you? Is it not our election day? Look at it in this way. Every honest lawyer will tell you that the next best thing to settling a quarrel between two belligerents is to bring the parties into court. Because the court room is a great cooing off place, a perfect refrigerator. A man who has quarreled with his neighbor comes into court, and before the lawyers get through with him, he wishes he hadn’t quarreled. How is it that our courts act in this way? What do we gain in this? Everything. In old times a dispute between man and man was settled by blows – fisticuffs – gradually superseded by the sword – at last by the pistol; and now we have thrown that out, and established a system of jurisprudence. Now all these petty grievances must be settled in court. Private violence must no longer be permitted, and that is a great march in civilization.
Now the parallel case is this: We in this country – we men, I mean, for women are nobodies and nowhere when you come to the discussion of great questions like these – but I use the conventional we -- we in this country are attempting to carry our ideas of liberty and responsibility into legislation; and we don’t agree – we quarrel bitterly and almost come to blows again – but election days cool us off, acting like a court room itself

upon us. We accept their judgement, and go about our business quietly till next time. Now if we were all Americans, acting under an intelligent sense of responsibility, everything might be expected to run smoothly under this regime; but the trouble is when the foreigner comes in who does not understand our institutions, who is perhaps, ignorant, debased and superstitious. But the foreigner is, it seems to me, the very man who needs this safety valve of the election day more than any other on the face of the globe. We ourselves could run on our own nationality; but where comes this man from the principalities of the old world – from Europe we will say, to begin with – and he has an idea that he is going to be richer, smarter, happier – more on an equality with every other man than ever he was before. He comes here, and what does he find? He finds a ladder, reaching higher into the clouds, perhaps, but the lower rounds are just as near the earth as over there, and he is on the lowest round still. He sees his next door neighbor has more money than he has, is better educated, and commands the respect of the community, as he does not, and he is filled with disappointment, and sometimes with rage. What would he naturally do, with his old world antecedents and training, when he is thus aggrieved as he conceives himself to be? Why, burn your barn – break into your house – steal all he can from you. But what does election day do for him? On that

day he is as good as anybody. He goes to the polls side by side with the first man in the land, and he rides in a carriage there – if he is too drunk to walk – and he can vote the first man in the line, if he chooses. The richest man in the country must walk behind him and wait for his turn. He drops his ballot and he is cooled off. He soon begins to get hold a little of this idea of responsibility that I am speaking of, and after a while it will come into his head – very slowly, perhaps, for we are all slow to learn these things – that he has got to work himself up and get on a par with those intelligent and influential people who are so powerful in making laws and customs.
Now, friends, it seems to me if you could disfranchise every foreigner today, who was not intelligent, or if you could make intelligence the test of voting, you would have ten barns burned where you have one now. I believe it firmly. Being naturally conservative, as I think all women are, a few years ago I really thought that ten, even twenty years residence might be required of foreigners before they should be allowed to vote. I said they did not know enough, and so ought to be kept out as long as that. Today, I am inclined not to limit the time a moment longer than it is necessary for men to get their naturalization papers out, and go through the required legal formalities. If disfranchisement meant annihilation, selfishly, I might be glad to get rid of this troublesome question in that way – the task of ruling

this country would then be a far easier one than it is – but it does not mean annihilation. So when gentlemen talk with me, and say we have too many voters already, I reply – do not disfranchise these men – enlighten them, for God has sent them here for a purpose of His own. And I say to you, tonight, that the ballot in the hands of every man is the only thing that saves us from anarchy today, that keeps us alive as a republic, the ballot in the hands of these ignorant men, and the more ignorant they are the more they need it, and the more we need they should have it. And let me say, in passing, that reconstruction at the south is hindered today for the same reason, responsibility is taken away from a large class of citizens. A disfranchised class is always a restless class; a class that, if it be not as a whole given up to deeds of violence, will at least wink at them, when committed by men either in or out of its own ranks. What the south needs today is ballots, not bullets.
I leave out of the question the ultimate educating power of the ballot, though I would like to make you an argument upon that alone. But I say give the poor men, ignorant men, the ballot, for purposes of self-defense, and because we could not live in safety in our homes otherwise. New York is poorly governed, we say, today, and getting to be a pretty dangerous place to live in. But what would it be if every foreigner and every ignorant

man could not go out on election day, and prove that he was as good as anybody? That is human nature, and it is human nature, and plenty of it too, that we have to deal with.
And now, my friends, let me ask you, what are these men sent here for and who sent them? We have got all Europe and all Asia is coming, and who sends them? When God put into that good ship Mayflower those two great ribs of oak, personal liberty and personal responsibility, He knew the precious freight she was to bear, and all the hopes bound up in her, and He pledged Himself by both the greater eternities, the past and the future, that the ship would weather all storms and come safe to port with all she had on board. And what God has promised He will perform. So I beg of you not to think for a moment of limiting manhood suffrage. You cut your own throats the day you do it.
And if men cannot live in this country in safe homes, except their neighbor men are enfranchised, can they live without enfranchised women anymore? If you cannot live in safety with irresponsible men in your midst, how can you live with irresponsible women? Much more, how can you grow into the stature of perfect men in Christ Jesus, our Lord, how can you become perfect legislators, except your mothers are instructed on these great subjects you are call(ed) to legislate upon, that may instruct you in

their turn? You do not know any thing so well as what your mothers have taught you; but they have not taught you political economy. It is not their fault that they have not, or yours, perhaps. No man nor woman studies a subject profoundly except he or she is called upon to act upon it. What business man studies a business foreign to his own? What woman studies a business foreign to her own? In past ages, this woman, in the providence of God, we will say, has been shut out from political action, for, so long as the sword ruled and man had to get his liberty by the sword, so long woman had all she could do to guard the home, for that was her part of the work – and she did it bravely and well, you will say. But now men are not fighting for their liberty with the gun by the door, and the Indians outside.
You are fighting for it in the halls of legislation, with the spirit of truth – with spiritual weapons – and woman would be disloyal to her womanhood, if she did not ask to share these heavy responsibilities with you. And she has really been training herself all these years she has seemed so indifferent; she has neglected her duty in part – ( confess it, freely – it is not your fault alone, gentlemen, that we are not with you today. If we had been as conscious of our duty and privilege, years ago, as we are today, if we had known our birthright, we should have stood by your aide, welcome co- adjutors, long since. So we will take the blame of the past alike – we have

all been walking very slowly this path of Christian civilization. But in the greatest conflict of modern times you announced great principles and fought for them on the field, and we stood by there in the home and we stand by them still, there. And when we come to deliberate with you in solemn council, as to how these principles shall be carried into legislation, your task will be easier, our opportunity will be larger, and still our hearts will be where they have every been, in our homes.”

Transcript

The Thompsonville Press Established 1880 Thompsonville, Conn.
Thursday, Aug. 13 1914

Page 3

Connecticut Suffrage News
The summer automobile campaign of the suffragists, which comes to an end tomorrow, has been one of the most successful enterprises undertaken by the Connecticut Woman Suffrage Association during the last four years of its active and energetic career. The campaign opened on June 15th in Thompson, and during the eight weeks over which it has extended over fifty meetings have been held in halls in the evenings and almost an equal number in the open air in the day time. The workers have been under the leadership and management of Miss Emily Pierson with Miss Alyse Gregory as her chief lieutenant. The young women who have been constantly at work include Miss Ann Tuttner and Miss Vera Kirchwey of New York, Miss Rankin of Colorado, Miss Vera Buck of New Haven, and Miss Catherine Fanagan of Hartford. Besides these whole time workers, Miss Pierson has had the aid of numbers of volunteer suffragists, including

Mrs. Grace Gallatin Seton, who is now in California, but who was with the campaigners in the early days of the campaign, Mrs. T. N. Hepburn, Mrs. Edward Porritt, the press secretary, Mrs. L. F. Middlebrook, and Mrs. C. H. Gallup of Hartford.
Dr. Donald Hooker of Baltimore and his wife, Mrs. Edith Houghton Hooker, Mrs. Hepburn’s sister, have also given valuable volunteer help, and the suffragists have also to acknowledge a large amount of aid from local clergymen and sympathizers who have done much to make the campaign a success and to render possible the holding of so large a number of suffrage meetings. At the end of the campaign Miss Pierson sums up the results of the work as entirely satisfactory “There is nothing like a continuous campaign,” she remarked in reviewing the work. “The interest is cumulative. One meeting helps the net one and the next, and the people of one town when they hear of the meetings held in a neighborhood town or village, become keenly anxious to see and hear for themselves the women who are invading their territory with this new message.”
Three counties – Windham, Tolland and Middlesex – have been completely covered in the course of this campaign, and the suffragists have had energy enough to spare to hold several meetings also in border towns in Hartford and New London County. The final meetings to be held this

evening are at Higganum and Middletown – at both of which places Miss Pierson has every reason to expect big audiences and keen interest. The meeting on Monday evening at Cromwell was a proof that Miss Pierson’s fame has even penetrated into her own town and as Middletown is so near to Cromwell, it is to be expected that the people there will also be anxious to hear the woman who has made for herself a national fame during her three years of work in the Connecticut suffrage movement.
As soon as the campaign is over both Miss Emily Pierson and Miss Alyse Gregory are planning to take their vacations. Miss Gregory has taken her passage for England on August 15th, but it remains to be seen whether the sailings will be disrupted by the European war which has unfortunately broken out. Miss Pierson has not yet made her vacation plans public, but both she and Miss Gregory has abundantly earned the vacation with which they are about to take.
Mrs. George D. Harrison of Lakeville has arranged a meeting for Monday afternoon for members of the Salisbury Equal Franchise League and their friends. The meeting will be open to the public. The speakers will be Mr. and Mrs. Edward Porritt of Hartford. On Monday evening Mrs.
Harrison with the help of Mr. and Mrs. Porritt will hold an outdoor meeting in

Lakeville in order to reach many of the inhabitants of the town who are not easily induced to attend suffrage meetings indoors.
At the Putnam Chautauqua this week were speakers both for and against woman suffrage. For suffrage the speaker was Mr. Frank Stephens, the sculptor and lecturer. Mrs. Minnie Bronson appeared for the other side, and in her talk quoted many of the assertions that have been so fully and adequately refuted by Miss Goldmarek and Prof. Sophonisba Breckinridge of the University of Chicago. The effect of Mrs. Bronson’s address was to stir the enthusiasm of the Putnam suffragists to fever heat ad to turn many wavers over into the suffrage camp.

Next Saturday is the day set apart by the National Suffrage association as Sacrifice Day for the benefit of the campaign States. All kinds of devices are being used to accumulate a large fund to aid in these important campaigns. One of the most picturesque is the Melting Pot. The melting pot in this case is a literal and actual fact, not merely a figure of speech. It is the invention and possession of the National Campaign Committee, and bears the inscription “For Our Sisters in the Campaign States.” Women from all over the United States are sending their old trinkets and keepsakes to be melted down and converted into coin for the

fund for the campaign States. Almost every woman has some old bit of jewelry of gold or silver of little value as far as artistic workmanship is concerned, unwearable in modern days, and yet of intrinsic value for the previous metal it contains. Some of these keepsakes may be broken, but they will be none the less welcome in the melting pot for that. Keepsakes of greater value might be sold to realize a higher price, and some of the articles sent to the campaign committee have already been disposed of to the highest bidder. Such a one was Miss L. Dock’s gold thimble which was not allowed to go into the melting pot.
The women who are in charge of the melting pot have their headquarters in Chicago, and all articles sent to them should be addressed National Suffrage Campaign Committee, City Hall Square, Chicago, Ill.
Money earned or saved on Aug. 15 – Sacrifice Day – should be sent to the State Suffrage Treasurer, Mrs. M. Toscan Bennett, Suffrage headquarters, Hartford, to form part of the Connecticut contribution for the Campaign States. Nor need any woman who contributes think that she is thereby neglecting suffrage work nearer home. Nothing can be more beneficial even to Connecticut suffrage work that the gain of these seven campaign States next November. Nine States have now full suffrage – five of them gained since 1910. Illinois has presidential, municipal and partial suffrage.

Seven additional suffrage states – Nevada, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska Missouri and Ohio – would vastly change the color of the map of the United States and would make it different for legislatures in other States to refuse enfranchisement to their women in view of the wide area over which woman suffrage would then extend.
A few of the daily newspapers are pleased to poke fun at the gift by Miss Lavinia Dock of her thimble They pretend to believe that a thimble is an article the use of which is unknown to the advocates of woman suffrage. People who know the suffrage workers in Connecticut know how ridiculous such an assertion is in their case. A few days ago a gentleman was discussing with the president of the Connecticut Woman Suffrage association the best way of winning over an indifferent politician. “Give him some of your red current jelly,” was the advice offered to Mrs.
Hepburn. “No politician could resist that argument. Suffragists have provided by the food sales, their cake and candy sales, and their sales of needlework that the homely household arts are just as much their field as is suffrage agitation. In fact, a very large proportion of the members of the C.
W. S. A. [Connecticut Woman Suffrage Association] have joined the association because they desire the vote for the protection of the home.

The heavy burden of women during war has been emphasized since the outbreak of hostilities in Europe, even by newspapers opposed to woman suffrage. A Hartford paper printed an editorial about the weeping women of Europe and a most impressive cartoon appeared in a New York paper showing the women facing in desolation and despair the outbreak of the threatening storm. When the full accounts of the world’s wars are balanced it is probably that it will be found that the biggest contribution of lives will be found to have been exacted from the babies and the little children. It is an old and well authenticated saying in Europe that no baby under six months ever survives a prolonged siege, and the hunger and overwork that the absence of fathers and brothers brings upon the families of the poor have created siege conditions in many a town far from the scene of combat. While the babies have been actually sacrificed in greatest numbers probably the largest share of the suffering produced by war has been borne by the women, and women in all European countries have had also to bear unspeakable horrors which by the nature of things can only be inflicted upon their sex.

Transcript

Labor
Vol. II, No. 4

Washington, D.C. Saturday August 28, 1920 Price Five Cents
To Save 3 Senators Big Business Would Kill Suffrage Law
Why the L. & N. “Persuaded” Members of Tennessee House to Shift Front
INTERESTS FEAR WOMEN VOTERS
Shall millions of women be disfranchised for an indefinite period in order that three reactionary New England Senators may be re-elected to the American House of Lords?
That’s the real issue in the dramatic fight in the Tennessee legislature over the ratification of the amendment to the Federal Constitution granting women the right to vote.
Of course, many of the members of the Tennessee legislature are honorable men, conscientiously opposed to women voting, but they constitute only a part of the opposition.

The men who are making the “last ditch” fight against suffrage represent the most sinister influence in the political life of Tennessee – the Louisville & Nashville Railroad.
Why does the Louisville & Nashville wish to defeat the suffrage amendment?
See Defeat In Enlarged Franchise

Here is the story:
Senators Brandegee of Connecticut, Dillingham of Vermont and Moses of New Hampshire are up for re-election this year. All three were bitterly opposed to the suffrage amendment, and Brandegee was so offensive that the suffrage leaders say he insulted them o the floor of the Senate.
The women of Connecticut, Vermont and New Hampshire know the story and they are awaiting an opportunity to scratch the names of Messrs. Brandegee, Dillingham and Moses.
But the three senators are among the most precious members of the Lodge-Penrose-Smooth senatorial combine. Their defeat would weaken and perhaps destroy the machine.

Therefore the word was given out months ago – and the fact noted in the columns of Labor – that the suffrage amendment must not be ratified until after the November election.
Explains Harding’s Nugatory Position
That was why Senator Harding announced at one time that he did not think he would be justified in asking the governor of Vermont to convene the legislature in special session to act on the amendment.
That was why the governor of Vermont refused to convene the legislature after Harding changed his mind and publicly pleaded with him to take such action.
The suffrage leaders believed they could defeat the senatorial combine by shifting the battle round to the Southern State where the Democrats rule. They argued that the Democrats would be anxious to assist in defeating three reactionary Republican Senators.
But they forgot that “Big Business” is as strong among the Democrats of the South as among the Republicans of the North. “Big Business” wanted Senators Brandegee, Dillingham, and Moses re-elected, not because they were Republicans but because they were friendly to “Big Business.”
Had Safe Majority in Tennessee

The women concentrated on Tennessee. At the request of Governor Cox and other party leaders the governor called the legislature in extra session. Senator Harding joined in the appeal to the legislators to ratify the amendment. A poll showed a safe majority for ratification.
Then the L. & N. got busy. The L. & N. has played a corrupt part I Tennessee politics for many years. It owns men in both parties. When the United States Senate sought to investigate it some years ago, Brandegee had opposed the proposition.
Effect of L. & N. “Persuasion”

The effect of its opposition was soon apparent. Men who had promised to vote for ratification switched, and became vehement in their opposition. Rumors of the use of money became so strong that a grand jury was convened.
When the vote came suffrage won by a margin of four votes, but the speaker of the House made a motion to reconsider and before that could be disposed of a sufficient number of the anti-suffrage members fled from the state over into Alabama to deprive the House of a quorum.
To further complicate matters a local judge was induced to issue an injunction restraining the governor from certifying the passage of the amendment.

The L. & N. hopes to keep the matter in the courts until after the election.
In that event, “Big Business” believes Senators Moses, Brandegee and Dillingham will be returned to represent the people of their states in the Senate of the United States.

Transcript

Veterans Journal and State Guard News
May 1919

Copyright 1919 by State Guard Publishing Company Subscription rates by mail: $1:00 per year.
Per copy, 10 cents.

42 Church St., New Haven Page 11

Antis Stand for Good Government; Not Against It

Mrs. Bolmer Writes Interest Letter to Veterans’ Journal on Aims of Those Opposed to Suffrage
The following communication has been received: Editor of the Veterans’ Journal:
Sir: -- The Connecticut State Association Opposed to Woman Suffrage stands for good government more than against votes for women, and good government is found to prevail in many suffrage states more than in equal suffrage states. Take the result of the recent election in Chicago,

where “Big Bill” Thompson has been re-elected and where women have voted since 1913.
The only thing votes for women has done for that city has been to keep the decent men and women away from the polls, thus increasing the indifferent vote, and to keep in power the political machine which controls the radical element; doubtless many Socialists cast their votes for Thompson this year. Then, too, in New York state, when the women voted in 1918 for the first time, they elected two Socialists to the General Assembly in Albany, both of whom voted last week against the bill to investigate bolshevism in New York state.
Seven Socialistic aldermen were also elected to the New York city board of aldermen, one of whom, Beckerman by the name, from the 6th district, is quoted as saying the following in the New York Sun editorial of April 3, 1919:
“I regard the present Russian government as the highest form of democracy that the world has ever seen. In the soviet government no exploiter, no graft can exist. I am proud to be classed as a Bolshevist, one who favors that kind of government.” This man lives in New York city and represents the East Side, where Dr. Simons, who recently returned from Russia (Petrograd), stated that Bolshevism originated. Still more proof that

suffrage and socialism approves of Bolshevism is found as far back as April 1918, when the New York Woman’s Peace Party, made up of suffragists and socialists, cabled the following to the Bolsheviks: “Please express to the Bolsheviki government our firm belief in their courage, wisdom and ultimate triumph. Be assured that we will use all our strength toward bringing about official recognition of the Bolsheviki government by our own.” Some of us are wondering today if that is why President Wilson delays action in the great crisis now existing in Europe!
Women have had equal suffrage in some parts of our country for fifty years, representing two generations, and yet at their golden jubilee, which they recently held in St. Louis, the following topics had to be presented for discussion and action:
“What may women voters do to further the welfare of women in industry?” Chairman, Mrs. Raymond Robins.
“How may women conserve the welfare of the nation’s children?” “How many women voters assist the movement toward improved
social morality and social hygiene?”

The answer to the above is that the best laws for women in industry are in Massachusetts and other male suffrage states; that the worst waste of childhood is in Colorado, Illinois, and other equal-suffrage states; that the

lowest depths of morality exist in Chicago today, where minors are allowed to drink in dance halls and where immorality is rampant.
With the above results accruing from votes for women what reason have we to believe that women in politics will restrain the radical elements, or in any way better our government? As far as one can see, the only sure results are increase in election expenses, as witness in New York, where it cost the state $2,500,000 extra to allow 515,000 women out of 2,400,000 eligibles to vote, and out of which 400,000 polled votes for Tammany and socialists, increase in taxes and immorality in an alarming way.
Equal suffrage also stands for exploitation of women in politics as is being evidenced every day with the result, that their votes do not elect men to whom they have promised to give their full support, nor does it defeat others whom they threaten to defeat. Mrs. Carrie Chapman Catt has been urging our national legislators to “catch up with “Russia” and the other European countries which have enfranchised their women; if American women were so “emancipated” they might have to perform the same kind of “state duty” as required of the Russian women, i.e., to act the part of nationalized propagator of the human race. Why should we American women be so forcibly lowered from the high pedestal upon which the American men have placed us in order to become emancipated?

Evidently the one hope we anti-suffragists have is the return of our brave boys from over there who have been eye-witnesses to the ravages of women, the brutalities to men, and who know what woman suffrage has produced in those European countries which have adopted it. These men will advise our own men what they will be stirring up by endorsing woman suffrage; and let us hope that our men will lay aside sentiment and gallantry long enough to weigh the pros and cons of woman suffrage before taking any action to “emancipate” their mothers, wives, sisters, or daughters, the great majority of whom do not want to vote.
Signed,
Mrs. Clarence B. Bolmer

State Chairman Press Committee, Antis New Haven, Conn. April 3rd, 1919.

Transcript

NEED TRANSCRIPT

Transcript

The Hartford Courant Established 1764 Hartford, Conn.
Monday Morning, Nov. 15 1920 Member of the Associated Press Price Three Cents
Page 10
Letters from the People The Suffragettes
Mrs. Hepburn Says Picketing Did it. To the Editor of The Courant:
I want to protest against your article on the Connecticut Woman Suffrage Association in the feature section of the “Sunday Courant.”
You blame the Connecticut Woman Suffrage Association for the picketing of the White House and other militant tactics. Your facts are all wrong. The policy of the Connecticut Woman Suffrage Association has always been non-militant; so mild. In fact, that in my opinion, women would not be voting now had their policy been followed by us all!

In 1917 I became convinced that the policy of the militant suffragists was the only practical one and so realigned as president of the Connecticut Woman Suffrage Association and joined the militant group, the Woman’s Party. Miss Katherine Ludington was elected president of the Connecticut Woman Suffrage Association in 1917 and has been its president since then, working with infinite patience, industry, and effectiveness. Certainly no one could accuse Miss Ludington of militancy!
On part of the militants, I recant your saying that we picketed the White House simply for the sake of publicity. The fact of the case is that we took our disfranchisement as seriously as men have -- only that we behaved in a much more orderly way than men have in protesting against disfranchisement. We realized that if we did not adopt vigorous methods our sons could be drafted to fight for democracy abroad, but we should be denied democracy at home.
Would men in our position have behaved as mildly as we did? I doubt it. Remember that our American Revolution was fought for votes for men.
Yours very truly,

Katharine Houghton Hepburn

Nov. 14

Transcript

Bridgeport Times and Evening Farmer
Established in 1790 Bridgeport, Conn.
Thursday, August 19 1920
Price – Two Cents

Governor may Call Special Session of the Legislature
He and His Advisers Are Now Looking Over the Present Statutes to Ascertain If They Offer Means For Making the Many Thousands of "Voters
Who Will Come to the Polls Under the Woman Suffrage Amendment.

(Special to The Times.)
Hartford, Aug. 19 -- The legislature of the state of Connecticut may be called in session if Gov. Holcomb and his advisers believe, after a review
of the present election laws that they are inadequate to give the election
machinery necessary to meet the situation caused by the franchisement
of over 300,000 women in this state.
That is the statement as given by Executive Secretary Buckley this
morning. He said that nothing would be done in the matter of calling a special session of the legislature until after the official proclamation by Secretary of State Colby that suffrage had been ratified. That would be in about two weeks after the Tennessee resolution has been approved by the governor of the state.
When suffrage has been proclaimed and, if it is found that the state law
does not provide sufficient means for making the great crowds of voters
the legislature will be called in special session.

Transcript

The Bridgeport Times and Evening Farmer Established 1790
Bridgeport, Conn. Thursday, August 19, 1920 Price – Two Cents

“REPUBLICANS OF STATE MUST BEAR THE BLAME”
Hartford, Aug. 19 ---"The outstanding thought in women's minds today is thankfulness and relief," said Miss Katherine Ludington, president of the
C. W. S. A., after receiving news of Tennessee's ratification of the Federal Suffrage Amendment. We shall immediately turn our attention to providing schools for the new women voters and making plans for the formation of a League of Women Voters.
"As to which of the major parties did the most toward our enfranchisement, I suppose there will always be a controversy which can only be settled by an accurate study of their records over a great many years.
"One thing is clear that – that at the last both parties contributed to putting ratification through in Tennessee, and thus finally met the acid test of sincerity which suffragists have been holding before them.

"For a long time it looked as if neither party wanted us voting in November. This deadlock was broken at last. When we learn which side broke it, we shall know which party actually took the decisive step in our enfranchisement.
"As to Connecticut ---The leaders of the Connecticut Republican party have remained obstinately and uncompromisingly opposed.
"It is due to them that we Connecticut women must always remember that we owe our enfranchisement to Southern men --- that we have come into the electorate by a back door with no act of welcome or honor on the part of the men of our own state. When our legislature meet to complete the details of our admission, they will undoubtedly ratify --- but this will be a graceless act with none of the significance which it would have had if Connecticut had been the 36th state. And the members of the legislature will remember that they owe this unjust position in which they find themselves to the leaders whom they have repeatedly put back in power.
The Republican party of Connecticut must bear this responsibility. Their opportunity has passed and the story is ended."

Transcript

Bridgeport Times and Evening Farmer Established 1790
Bridgeport, Conn. Thursday, Aug. 19 1920 Price – Two Cents

TWO ASK TO VOTE HERE
Bridgeport Registrars Probably the First in the Country to Receive Applications for The Franchise -- Requests Made This Morning -- 23,000 Women Are Eligible Here.
Two women filed applications to be made voters this morning in the office of the registrars of voters in the City hall. The first Bridgeport woman to present an application, now that Tennessee has ratified the suffrage amendment, was Mrs. Edith M. F. O'Hara, an employee of the Contract and Supply office in the City hall. Miss Florence Clancy, of 205 East Main street, was the second applicant. More applications are expected during the day.
Selectmen and the Town clerk are preparing for the rush of new applicants which is expected to start today, and according to statements made this morning are well able to handle the situation. At the present

time there are approximately 23,000 male voters in Bridgeport, and it is believed that the same number of women will be made eligible through
the advent of national suffrage. It is not expected, however, that more than 10,000 applications will be made by Bridgeport women this fall.
All applications are to be made at the registrars' office in the City hall and may be entered any time from the present date until October 4 at five o'clock in the afternoon. New women voters will be made between
October 8 and 15 the same as the men. William F. Lounsbury and Thomas
F. White, registrars of voters will administer the oath to the new voters.
In discussing the suffrage success this morning, City Clerk J. Alex H. Robinson, former chairman of the Republican Town committee said:
"I am very much pleased that Tennessee has ratified the suffrage amendment. I have always been in favor of woman suffrage, and my only regret is, that Connecticut was not the state to put it across."

Transcript

Bridgeport Times and Evening Farmer

Established 1790 Bridgeport, Conn. Thursday, August 19, 1920 Price – Two Cents

Praise for Women and Suffrage
Democrats Faithful says Fitzgerald. Women and men prominent in the national, state and city affairs have expressed their gratification at the action of the Tennessee assembly in ratifying the suffrage amendment. In the following list will be found the opinions of most of the leaders: DEMOCRATS FAITHFUL SAYS FITZGERALD
(Special to The Times)

New Haven, Aug. 19 - When asked for a statement on the ratification of the Suffrage Amendment Mayor David E. Fitzgerald of New Haven said:
"What can I say except that it is what Connecticut Democracy has been working on for the past ten years? We have been back of this matter
for the past ten years and in all sincerity. Our efforts have not been
merely surface ones like those of the Republicans who have been favoring suffrage for the past year merely as a matter of political expediency.

"If the inner workings of the Republican leaders' plans could be brought to light it would have been found that their attitude, some for and some against, was merely to keep the people guessing.
"The Democrats have and do believe that women are entitled to participation in affairs of state and the making of the laws from a political standpoint. Women are just as intelligent, just as broad in their conception of public matters, have as great a vision of affairs as men.
"It is a matter of justice and of paying to woman the tribute due her.

Connecticut Democracy has always favored suffrage and for the, past five years have- included a plank in its platform to that effect. The Republicans have merely treated from the viewpoint of political expediency and only because it was surely coming.”
WOMEN NOT MEN DESERVE CREDIT

Lynn W. Wilson said this morning in reference to the action by Tennessee:
"Woman suffrage being accomplished, it remains to get from this revolutionary reform the early and the late fruits which it will produce. The nation, which has been governed by half the national mind, consents to be governed by the whole. We have been, if not precisely half witted, something approximating that state, and being now whole witted, will do

better.

"It is regrettable that Connecticut could not complete by its act the chivalrous ratification of the Susan B. Anthony amendment, but no applause is to be withheld from Tennessee, which is advantaged in dignity and glory, because the political leadership of Connecticut is of the
blind leading the blind.

"I am proud because I was not late in espousal of this cause, which I have supported politically and in the newspapers I edited, during many years. I know how little the movement owes to men, except that they have yielded a tardy wisdom and a slow justice. The movement has been led by women, who are the equal of any leadership whatever.."

Miss Grace Murray, acting executive secretary at Hartford and organizer for Fairfield county: "There is of course a possibility of contention. I was talking with national headquarters in New York this evening and the leaders are very happy down there, and feel that nothing can be done now to upset things. We, however, are waiting."
Hugh J. Lavery; member of the Democratic state central committee: "There may be cases where the wife will follow the politics of her husband strictly and some people believe it merely means the amassing of so many

additional votes on each side, but I believe the incentive of greater freedom of action will be a bigger boon to the Democratic party."
Mrs. Chapman Catt, president of the Women's Suffrage Association, telegraphed the following statement:
"Tennessee has triumphantly closed the sixty years of women's struggle for the right to have their prayers counted on election day. The gallant men of the Volunteer State, unafraid of the noisy threats to intimidate, have opened at last the long locked door through which millions of grateful women will pass to political freedom."

From Governor Cox:

"The civilization of the world is saved. The mothers of America will stay the hand of war and repudiate those who traffic with a great principle.
The action of the Tennessee Legislature has another significance. It is an earnest of the democratic policy to pay its platform obligations."

From Senator Harding:

"All along I have wished for the completion of ratification, and have said so, and I am glad to have all the citizenship of the United States take part in the Presidential elections.

"The Republican Party will welcome the response of American womanhood to its appeal to the confidence of all our people."

From Democratic Chairman White:
"Whatever the Republicans have tried to do with regard to suffrage they have failed, and it remained for the Democratic leaders to put suffrage through."

Chairman Hays of the Republican National Committee stated:

"I cannot too strongly voice the gratitude which I feel that the suffrage amendment is ratified. Both parties recognize that the effects of the
approaching Presidential election will influence our national life, for weal* or for woe, for at least fifty years."

Transcript

Bridgeport Times and Evening Farmer Established 1790
Bridgeport, Conn. Thursday, August 19 1920 Price – Two Cents
Page Six EDITORIAL
Tennessee Puts It Over!
WOMAN SUFFRAGE became inevitable when men became intelligent enough to assure to women the same education granted to themselves. This, like every great evolution, has been of slow growth, measured against man's individual life, but of rapid growth, when considered against the infinitely enduring procession of time.
The ballot was conferred upon women humbly at first. They were permitted to participate in school elections. They had it for municipal elections. Here and there they were admitted to full share in national elections. The movement was world wide. It

affected, China, as much as it did the United States.

This was necessarily so. This is one world, bound by general laws, which apply with about equal force to all nations. Since in China the degree of civilization was sufficient, Chinese thought had the same course as occidental thought.
The Times was the first daily newspaper in Connecticut to advocate votes for women. It is not entitled to any special credit for this.
The world is divided into two groups, the conservative and the progressive, both necessary, the first to stability; the other, to progress. When The Times came into the movement, some fifteen years ago, it was as certain as could be that the crusade for equal suffrage was nearing its triumphant victory.
Women were voting in nearly every country.
One seeing the first automobile, would have little difficulty in predicating the use of many automobiles. One seeing
the first state admit women to the ballot, could as readily look forward to a time when every state would let women vote.

The nearing triumph has latterly been shown by the speed ling hosts of politicians who have been "climbing aboard," as the saying is. Recently there have been few men in public life, so stupid as not to understand that women are about to vote.
Even Senator Brandegee has appreciated the inevitability of the ballot revolution. His recent antagonism was not probably an antagonism of ignorance. He knew what was coming, but hoped to delay the advent of woman's power until he could receive another election.
The recent history of the women's movement augurs well for the share which women will take in the administration of American affairs, and, indeed, in the affairs of the world.
The enfranchisement of half the race is a reform of a magnitude vaster than any other which has been accomplished in so brief a period. It is the most sweeping and revolutionary addition to the governing power that has ever been made, taking into consideration the numbers of individuals affected, as well as

the nature of the change which has been made.

This sweeping revolution, made, not against the opposition of rulers alone, but against those tremendous forces of human inertia which make all progress difficult, was accomplished
without wars, without bloodshed, almost without disturbance. The militancy of women hardly rose beyond the stage of vivid advertising. For the most part the cause has been promoted by persuasion, by process of calm reason, by appeal to those instincts of humanity and justice without which civilization
could scarcely exist, much less, make any progress.
Thinkers are now concerned with the future of woman's authority, rather than with the means by which it has been brought about. The tiny human atoms, who get in the way of the laws of the universe, are not especially to be blamed in this hour of triumph. A Brandegee or a Holcomb, are what they are through environment, through inheritance, through long processes which it "is impossible to see completely, or altogether understand.

In so far as the class of which these men are a type are dispensed with by the new order, the motive is not of prejudice, or of hatred. The elimination takes place simply because
the machine does not function. The old machine serves its purpose, has its useful day. The new machine, product of wiser times and a higher efficiency of civilization, is installed, and production continues on a higher plane.
It is not, therefore, the yesterday, of woman suffrage which is interesting, but today and tomorrow, and the long hereafter.
What changes may be expected in the world, by reason of the new forces added to the helm. The consequences which flow from any change, however slight, are not immediately perceived.
Centuries will not complete the changes which this single change will bring about.
The early end of war may be predicated. Woman is the influence making for peace. Her half of the human mind, working with the other half, is the missing quantity necessary for rational settlements. Equal suffrage implies a general upward progress of

the mind. While men were in the tribal state, and violence was continuous, and nobody dreamed of another settlement than war, women could not have attained the ballot, nor men the civilization necessary to endow them with the ballot.
What woman will do is indicated by what she has done. Women could not have received the ballot unless they had previously been admitted to education. They could not have received the ballot unless they had achieved tremendous precedent influence in affairs. From the influence which they have before the vote, there would appear certain effects upon legislation, such as prohibition, laws raising the age of consent, laws like the Mann act, laws to protect children and the like.
The home will be the central theme of legislation in the new regime, and the family the first consideration of the stateliness under the discipline of women.
It will become a brighter, happier, more comfortable world, as a world should be which is ruled by the whole instead of by half of its mind.

The women of America are to be congratulated upon the leadership which brings them the victory at this time. Never
into one group has more humanity, more vision, more eloquence, more intellectual power been gathered. The woman’s movement has been led by women. Its great leaders are women. Its orators are women. Its statesmen are women. They are the equals of any other leadership of any other cause, without respect to place or time.

Transcript

The Connecticut Labor Press

Organized Labor’s Only Newspaper in New Haven “A newspaper for the People”
New Haven, Conn. Saturday, August 21, 1920 Price Three Cents
Page 1
WOMAN’S VOTE GIVES POLITICAL AID TO LABOR

Interests Identical so Far as Some Candidates and Measures Are Concerned.
BIG VICTORY WELCOMED

Connecticut Federation of Labor Has Endorsed Suffrage at Several Conventions.
The final victory of the Suffrage Amendment, gained by the ratification of Tennessee, is pleasing to organized labor. In Connecticut the State Federation of Labor, has endorsed woman suffrage at several conventions and it has come to be recognized that legislation for the benefit of humanity stands a much better show with women voting than without them.
It is believed that the influence of the women's vote will be a great help

in the passage of remedial child labor legislation and measures affecting working conditions for women and children generally.
The sudden advent of the woman as a voter is a tremendous shock to some of the politicians, just as the non-partisan movement of organized labor has been and between the two new factors in the political game at the coming election there's many a public official who is wondering “where he is at,” so to speak.
Labor's determination to elect its friends and defeat its enemies is going to receive a lot of support from the advent of the woman voter for, in many instances, the interests are identical. Some of labor's most bitter antagonists have also been strongly opposed to suffrage and with the combined opposition of the suffragists and labor to combat their pathway will hardly be rose strewn in the coming struggle.
In Connecticut United States Senator Frank B. Brandegee of New London, who has" been pronounced as a decided reactionary so far as labor legislation is concerned, has also been a consistent opponent to suffrage ' and there is a feeling that between the two interests he will have a hard row to hoe when it comes to winning his way back to Congressional halls.
Senator Brandegee in an interview published in the New York World,

yesterday, expresses his view of "the women's victory as follows: "Women will vote in the coming elections exactly as they please,"
declared United States Senator Frank B. Brandegee in discussing the passing of the Woman Suffrage Amendment by the Legislature of Tennessee.
"Both political parties have been playing a game in the attempt to catch the woman vote," he said. "In my opinion, they will both be fooled. The women will vote exactly as they please on the great-issues before the country, as they ought to. They will align themselves between the parties according to their convictions, and the artful politicians who-have been angling for their votes will be disappointed.
"When the matter was in the Senate I was opposed to submitting the amendment because I took the position taken by both national parties in their platforms, and also by the President, that the question was one for state action, and States ought to have the right to prescribe the qualifications of their own electors. But inasmuch as Congress submitted the amendment to the Legislatures and inasmuch as more than three- quarters of the States approve the amendment, it seems to me the sooner it is ratified the better, because it is perfectly evident that it is going to be ratified, and if the women are to have the right to vote, as they are, it had

better come in time so that they can use it in the coming election."

It is also a foregone conclusion that the advent of the woman voter in Connecticut politics sounds the political death knell of Governor Marcus M. Holcomb, another strong reactionary so far as organized labor is concerned. His continued refusal to call a special session of the General Assembly to vote on the ratification of suffrage, together with his well- known antagonism to it, seals his fate for a fourth term under suffrage.
In view of the combined opposition of .the suffrage vote and labor it is not at all likely that the republican party managers would consider his nomination as the" head of the ticket for a moment and if they did what the combined suffrage and labor vote would do to "Uncle Marcus" at the polls would be plenty.

Transcript

The New Britain Herald

Established in 1870 New Britain, Connecticut Wednesday, August 18, 1920
Twelve pages Price Three Cents
TENNESSEE PASSES SUFFRAGE WHEN LOWER HOUSE VOTES AYE BY SMALL MAJORITY

Attempt Made to Reconsider By Change of Votes 17,000,000 WOMEN WILL BECOME VOTERS

Susan B. Anthony Amendment Will Be Taken to Secretary of State in Washington.

Nashville, Tenn., Aug. 18 -- Tennessee today became the 36th state to ratify the Susan B. Anthony federal suffrage amendment. The constitutional change thus will become effective in time for the 17,000,000 women of the country to vote in the presidential election in November, unless the lower house of the Tennessee assembly rescinds its action of today in adopting the ratification resolution 49 to 47.
Speaker Walker, leader to the anti-suffragists, put opponents in a position to demand reconsideration by changing his vote from nay to aye and moving to reconsider.
The house adjourned until 10 o’clock tomorrow, when the speaker’s motion will have the right of way. Suffrage and anti-suffrage forces tightened their lines this afternoon for the final fight and both sides were claiming victory.
The suffragists, however, had the advantage of today’s victory and expressed confidence that Speaker Walker’s motion would be voted down
2

tomorrow. The next step in ratification then would be the certifying of the action of the Tennessee assembly to the secretary of state of the United States who, upon its receipt, would issue a proclamation declaring the amendment ratified.
The Tennessee senate ratified the amendment last Friday by a vote of 25 to 4.
Ratification by the Tennessee legislature was the culmination of an intensive drive made by suffrage proponents to have the amendment made effective in time for the women of the country to vote in the presidential election in November. This drive was started when West Virginia became the 34th state to ratify early this year.
Washington was the 35th state to ratify, and on the same day it acted --- March 22 --- Governor Townsend, of Delaware, called a special session of the legislature to act upon the amendment.
On June 2 the legislature adjourned with the ratification resolution still in the house committee of the whole despite pressure brought by President Wilson and leaders of both parties.
Meantime the Louisiana legislature met and efforts were made to have it act favorably. President Wilson and Governor Cox of Ohio both made appeals. The legislature adjourned on July 8 however, without acting.

Suffrage planks later were inserted in both democratic and republican national platforms.
The women tried to have Governor Clement of Vermont call a special session of the legislature. He refused. Senator Harding declined to interfere with the governor.
President Wilson then appealed to Governor Bickett of North Carolina and Governor Roberts of Tennessee to call special sessions of their legislatures and they consented. Solicitor General Frierson ruled that the supreme court decision on the Ohio referendum case set at naught a provision in the Tennessee constitution that a legislature could not act on a federal amendment unless the members were elected after the amendment was submitted.

Transcript

Norwich Bulletin Population, 29,685 Norwich, Conn.
Thursday, August 26, 1920
10 pages – 74 columns Price Two Cents

ANTI-SUFFRAGISTS FAIL TO GET A RESTRAINING ORDER

Injunction Was Denied by Justice Siddons of the District of Columbia Supreme Court -- No Further Effort Will Be Made to Prevent the Issuance of the Proclamation
Next Move is to Test the Validity of the Tennessee Ratification in the United States Supreme Court.

Washington. Aug. 25. Anti-suffrage forces received another setback today when Justice Siddons of the District of Columbia supreme court refused to issue a “show cause" order against Secretary Colby preliminary to the issuance of an injunction to restrain that official from proclaiming the nineteenth amendment a law of the land. The order would have required

Mr. Colby to show cause why the injunction should not be issued. The action was brought by Charles S. Fairchilds, an official of the American Constitutional league, on behalf of himself and the organization.
No further effort would be made to prevent the issuance of the proclamation, Alfred P. Smith, attorney for Mr. Fairchilds, said.
The official certification of Tennessee's ratification of the amendment was expected to arrive from Nashville some time tonight and Secretary Colby indicated that he would issue the proclamation as soon as he received Governor Roberts' certification.
The anti-suffrage forces will now attempt to obtain early action in the United States supreme court on the question of the validity of the Tennessee ratification, Mr. Smith announced. He said that he would ask a formal order of dismissal from Justice Siddons in order that he might appeal to the District of Columbia court of appeals at once with a request that the case be certified directly to the federal supreme court and set for early trial.
The action of Justice Siddons today paralleled in a measure that of Justice Bailey of the same court last month, except that Justice Bailey granted a "show cause" order against Secretary Colby in a similar bill filed by the same plaintiffs, but after hearing declined to issue the injunction

asked on grounds of lack of Jurisdiction and insufficient showing.

Mr. Smith said that he still hoped to obtain a decision before the November elections. If, however, the appeal should be carried through the District of Columbia court of appeals to the supreme court it could not be argued until after the regular meeting of the court in October, with little likelihood that a decision would be reached before election day, Nov. 2. In that event, it was pointed out, the women of the country would be legally entitled to vote, with the result that should the supreme court later decide against the legality of the Tennessee ratification the validity of the entire nation election would be in question.
The anti-suffrage forces are also challenging the legality of ratification in Missouri, West Virginia and Ohio.

Transcript

New Britain Herald

Established in 1870 New Britain, Connecticut,

Thursday, August 26, 1920

Ten PAGES

Price Three Cents

COLBY SIGNS SUFF RATIFICATION TODAY

Amendment to U. S. Constitution Legalized With State Dept. 0. K.

ANTIS WANT COURT DECISION

May Attempt to Have Supreme Court Act on Legality of Tennessee's Ratification --- Women Planning Jollification Meeting Tonight.

Washington, Aug. 26. -- The proclamation announcing officially that the

suffrage amendment to the constitution has been ratified was signed today by Secretary of State Colby.

Signed at 8 o'clock.
The document was signed at 8 o'clock this morning at Mr. Colby's home when the certificate from Governor Roberts that the Tennessee legislature had ratified the amendment was received. Secretary Colby announced his action on his arrival at his office later.

Workers Disappointed.
The announcement disappointed a group of suffrage workers who had gathered at the state department hoping to be present when Mr. Colby signed. Miss Alice Paul, chairman of the National Woman's party, was among them.
"We are confident that the signature of Secretary Colby completes the suffrage struggle in this country," she said. "The Woman's Party will not relax its vigilance, however, until It Is satisfied that no further attempts will be made to wrest from the women of the United States the political equality which they have won."
Antis Active.
Antl-suffragists who yesterday failed in their attempt to have the District

of Columbia supreme court issue an order to restrain Secretary Colby from proclaiming the amendment, said that efforts would be made to have the United States supreme court 'pass on the legality of Tennessee on the suffrage amendment jollification will be held tonight in a theater.
Colby Prepares Statement.

Secretary Colby had prepared a statement regarding ratification of the suffrage amendment which he planned to read to the officials of the National Women's party had they accepted the Invitation. The officials and members of the National American Woman Suffrage association listened to it.
Secretary Colby's statement follows: "The certified record of the action of the legislature of the state of Tennessee on the suffrage amendment was received by mail this morning. Immediately on Its receipt the record was brought to my house. This was in compliance with my directions and in accordance with numerous requests for prompt action. I thereupon signed the certificate required of the secretary of state this morning at 8 o'clock In the presence of Mr. F. K. Nielson, the solicitor of the state department and Mr. Charles L. Cook, also of the state department. The seal of the United States has been duly affixed to the certificate and the suffrage amendment is now the 19th amendment of the constitution. It was decided not to accompany the simple ministerial action on my part with any

ceremony or setting. This secondary aspect of the subject has, regretfully, been the source of considerable contention as to who shall participate in it and who shall not. In as much as I am not Interested in the aftermath of any of the frictions or collisions which may have been developed in the long struggle for the ratification of the amendment, I contented myself with the performance in the simplest manner of the duties devolved upon me under the law.
Congratulates Women.

"I congratulate the women of the country upon the successful culmination of their efforts which have been sustained in the face of many discouragements and which have now conducted them to the achievement of that great object.
"The day marks the day of the opening of a great and new era in the political life of the nation. I confidently believe that every salutary, forward and upward force in our public life will receive fresh vigor and reinforcement from the enfranchisement of the women of the country.
"To the leaders of this great movement, I tender my sincere congratulations. To every one, from the president, who uttered the call to duty whenever the cause seemed to falter, to the humblest worker in this great reform, the praise not only of this generation, but of posterity will be freely given."

The proclamation recounts the process by which the new article 19 of the constitution was presented and ratified, naming the ratifying states, and continues:
Signs Ratification.

"Now therefore be it known, that I, Bainbridge Colby, secretary of state of the United States by virtue and in pursuance of Section 205 of the revised statutes of the United States, do hereby certify that the amendment aforesaid has become valid to all intents and purposes as a part of the constitution of the United States."

Transcript

Connecticut Western News

Canaan, Connecticut Thursday, August 26, 1920
Page 4 Editorial
VOTES FOR WOMEN

The inevitable has happened. The legislature of Tennessee has ratified the eighteenth (sic) amendment granting equal rights at the polls to women which marks the end of a fight by prominent women throughout this county extending more than sixty years.
The battle is over and they who have used suffrage as a means for diversion may now turn their attention to the political side of it, whereby we shall expect to vote for "our leading woman" in place of common-place man. This is not sarcasm, as we fully expect that women officeholders will be a common occurrence during the next few years.
On the impulse of the moment one is naturally pleased along with the women, that the long contest has reached a conclusion, but after
second thought we wish the coming few years could be passed while the necessary adjustments are being made. The questions involved are at

present puzzling many of the most able lawyers, while it is also true that reconstruction or readjustment must bow, take the hand of suffrage on one side and prohibition on the other of its weary journey through the coming few years until these infants can care for themselves.
What effect the women's votes will have at the polls in November is pure conjectural. The democrats claim that it was through their efforts the amendment was finally passed, while records show that the legislatures of twenty-nine of the states were republican, leaving only seven democratic. This should have some influence on the new voters who will be divided principally between the two great parties, as we cannot picture but few women voting the socialist ticket.
The News has been opposed to suffrage and has not hesitated to say so, but now that it has come we shall do everything possible to assist our women voters during election and also agree not to “sling mud” at any woman who runs for office.

Transcript

The Bridgeport Times and Evening Farmer Tuesday, Sept. 14, 1920
Vol. 66-No. 218 Est. 1700

P. 1

Headline: Gov. Holcomb Asks for Ratification

Sub-headline: 100 Antis From Tennessee Are Coming Tomorrow: Says Tennessee's Doubtful Action Makes Emergency
Article Heading: 200 Women Take Possession of the Capital in the Hours Preceding the Convening of the Legislature - Gov. Holcomb - Calls Special Session on Ratification for Sept. 21- Tennessee Delegation on the Way.
(Special to the Times)

Hartford, Sept. 14 - Connecticut will ratify the Woman Suffrage amendment to the Constitution, and thus remove all doubt as to the legality of the women's vote in the election this fall. At 1 o'clock this afternoon Governor Marcus H. Holcomb appeared before the joint session of the Legislature in Hartford and read a message calling upon the joint session of the Legislature to ratify the amendment.
He said in his message, that under the original call for the special session no action upon ratification could be taken but that a real emergency had arisen by reason of the fact that Tennessee had acted upon suffrage and that the Legislature had refused them [then?] to reconsider, leaving the whole matter more or less in doubt.
Because of the existence of this emergency he thought it his duty to ask the Legislature of the State of Connecticut to ratify the amendment and thus remove all doubt as to its legality.
There is no doubt but that the Legislature will carry out the suggestion of the governor because they might have done so even without the message.

The message of the governor was in effect a proclamation convening the Legislature in special session on September 21 for the purpose of ratifying the amendment.
The message of the governor was a great surprise to everybody, and particularly to the 200 women who early this morning stormed the Capitol and buttonholed every member on action on the amendment. J. Henry Roraback and Lieutenant Governor Wilson were the storm centers of the situation. nobody at that time having knowledge, apparently, that the governor was to ask for ratification.
The news that 100 members of the Anti-Suffrage association of Tennessee were en route to Hartford to fight the ratification of suffrage caused quite a little excitement among the women workers, and there will probably be plenty of fun when the Tennessee special arrives here tomorrow.
There were conferences in every nook and corner of the Capitol this (Continued on Page Six.)
Article heading: Legislature to Ratify (Continued from Page One.)
morning, and there were conferences outside the Capitol. Chairman J. Henry Roraback, the Republican State convention was a storm center of ebbing and flowing politicians, Chairman Fitzgerald, of the Democratic State committee was lining up the Democratic members for suffrage, while Colonel I.M Ullman was also doing missionary work for the women.
Lieutenant-Governor Clifford B. Wilson was the man to whom all of the suffrage leaders were looking for advice, and the smile of the mayor of Bridgeport refused to be dimmed by any thoughts of state conventions or any other unpleasant features of the campaign.
As the hour for the convention drew near it seemed to be taken for granted that efforts will be made to adjourn the session without action on the ratification of suffrage while it was equally certain that such a procedure would be met with determined opposition.

Bills which were intended to be introduced into the senate were brought by Senator Bailey in behalf of former Senator John E. Doughan, now town clerk of New Haven. One of these considerably simplified the so-call Blodgett bills, providing the machinery for women's voting, which was the main business of the session.
One Doughan bill provides briefly that Chapter 42 of the 1919 Public Acts be suspended, and that cities over 50,000 be permitted to make voters from Oct. 4 to Oct. 16 from 9 a.m. to 9 p.m., provided the voters have the necessary qualifications. This act is not to be operative after Jan. 1 next, according to its provisions.
The Blodgett bill, as already published, is much more complicated and provides for individual registration boards in various wards of the large cities.
Another Doughan bill provided that Nov. 1, 1920, election day, be a legal holiday and that hereafter all national and State election days be legal holidays except for town clerks' offices which shall be open solely for the purpose of correcting the voting lists.
Ex-Senator Doughan sponsored another bill which would strike out of Section 711 of the General Statutes the following words:
"When more than twelve justices of the peace are to be elected and nominations are made for justices of the peace suitable ballots for voting split tickets for justice of the peace on the voting machines shall be furnished and printed for electors by the town clerk."
A fourth bill introduced by Senator Bailey for Mr. Doughan would restore to the statutes a part of Section 566, which was recently omitted from the statute revision, and which provides that registration boards shall endorse their approval or disapproval of naturalization papers of voters to be made.

Transcript

Label audio file: WS CTLabor4241920

The Connecticut Labor Press Volume 8, number 7
New Haven, Conn. Saturday April 24, 1920 Page 5

Headline: THE SPECIAL EMERGENCY DEMANDS SPECIAL SESSION OF LEGISLATURE

Sub headline: Say Women of Forty-Seven States, Coming From Every Corner of the United States to Ask Suffrage Session of Connecticut.

Forty-seven women from forty-seven states, journeying into Connecticut from the Pacific Coast, from the northern and southern boundaries of the country, from states where women vote, and from states where women’s vote may depend on the action of the governor of Connecticut, will join, on May 3, with the president of the Connecticut Woman Suffrage Association in launching a national protest week in Connecticut—a consolidated and concentrated protest of the women of the country and the men and women of Connecticut against the refusal of Governor Holcomb to call a special session of the legislature to act on the federal suffrage amendment.

The protest will cover the week of May 3-8, and will embody a series of some thirty or forty meetings throughout the state which will be addressed by groups of the fort-seven women, who will spend the week in Connecticut as guests of the Connecticut Woman Suffrage Association. These women will be leaders of the suffrage movement in their own states. Thirty of them will represent 9,500,000 women in the states where the women’s vote will depend on ratification of the federal suffrage amendment.
Arrangements for bringing these women into the state are being made by the National American Woman Suffrage Association, which is co-operating in every possible way with the state association to “make Connecticut the thirty-sixth.”
The primary purpose of this protest week will be to provide the governor with the proof of the special emergency which he has said he is ready to receive. It will be a protest of Connecticut people, men and women, against the false position in which the state has been put by the refusal of the governor to give the legislature an opportunity to act on the matter. “It will not,” says Miss Ludington1, president of the state association, “be an attempt to tell Connecticut how to handle her own affairs, but an endeavor to make plain that this is not Connecticut’s sole affair because by the method provided for ratification of the amendment the voting of 9,500,000 women hangs in the action of Connecticut.”
According to plans announced today by the Connecticut Woman Suffrage Association the women will arrive in Hartford, Monday, May 3, and will be given a reception on Monday afternoon. They will spend the night in Hartford, and on the following day will separate into four groups of twelve each to hold meetings in New

1 Pronounced: LUD ding ton

Haven, Bridgeport, Waterbury and Norwich. On Wednesday the women will form twelve groups of four each and during the next three days they will speak at meetings in the following
[photograph - Caption: MISS KATHERINE LUDINGTON, Regional Director of the League of Women Voters [-] Leader of the Campaign to "Make Connecticut the Thirty- sixth."]
cities and towns Manchester, New Britain, Thompsonville, Southington, Farmington, Windsor Locks, Bristol, Ansonia, Meriden, Naugatuck, Wallingford, Guilford, Branford, New London, Stonington, Jewett City, Mystic, Niantic, Willimantic, Putnam, Danielson, Central Village, Middletown, Haddam, Saybrook, Essex, Norwalk, Stamford, Greenwich, Danbury, Ridgefield, Torrington, Winsted, New Milford, Litchfield, Thomaston, Lakeville, Rockville, Stafford Spring.
A motor corps will be provided to make the tour of the state.
On Saturday the flying squadron will meet again in Hartford, and will ask for a hearing before the governor on that day, following which a large mass meeting will be held. Mrs. Carrie Chapman Catt, president of the National American Woman Suffrage Association, will probably be the chief speaker at this meeting.
Members of the Men’s Republican Ratification Committee have announced their approval of and readiness to co-operate with plans for the protest week, and it is possible that they will also furnish speakers for the various rallies. Members of the ratification committee were guests of Miss Ludington and the Political Committee of the Woman Suffrage Association at a buffet luncheon held recently at suffrage headquarters, when further plans for the protest week were discussed.

Transcript

New Britain Herald
New Britain, Connecticut, Thursday, September 2, 1920 Page 1

Headline: Suffs1 Score G.O.P. Gov2. Possibilities

Sub-headline: Eight Who Might Receive Republican Nomination Blacklisted

Sub-headline: CLIFFORD WILSON FAVORED

Article heading: Connecticut Women Have Been Watching Politics in This State—The Following is a List of Desirable and Undesirables.

One hundred and twenty-two members of the Connecticut Woman Suffrage Association met in session at the state headquarters in Hartford this afternoon. The session was a close one, it is reported, but it was announced that matters of particular importance politically would be discussed. Miss Grace Murray, acting executive secretary of the state association, today confirmed reports of the activities of the women of the state in the coming Republican convention when a candidate for governor will be chosen. Miss Murray stated that there were women from every part of the state at this afternoon’s session and things of great interest were being discussed.

1 Suffragists
2 Governor

Sub-heading: Black List Sent Out

The Connecticut Woman Suffrage association has sent a blacklist of Republicans seeking the governorship to all its members throughout the state with items of interest concerning the stand the en took on suffrage as well as reasons for opposing them. A list of favorable candidates was likewise sent to each worker.

Sub-heading: Eight Unfavorable

Eight men mentioned as possibilities for the nomination as republican candidate for governor were unfavorable to the Connecticut Woman Suffrage Association because of their stand on suffrage in general and a special session of the Connecticut legislature in particular. Six are favorable. In a statement issued by the association to county and state workers, supplemented by a later list of three additional possibilities, the attitude of the association is made clear. The statement says

Sub-heading: Considering Seriously

“The following men apparently are seriously considered and are therefore of importance to us. Opposite their names is given the information in regard to their stand on ratification and our attitude toward them
“Clifford B. Wilson, favorable. Judge John L. Gilson, favorable. Robert Scoville, favorable. Senator Charles A. Templeton, unfavorable. Senator John A. Brooks,

unfavorable. Robbins B. Stoekel3, unfavorable. Governor Marcus H. Holcomb, unfavorable Judge James T. Walsh, unfavorable. Hon[orable]. Frank Healy, unfavorable. Colonel W.H. Hall of Washington, unfavorable.
“In view of this we suggest that you tell those men who are probably going as delegates to the convention what men we oppose. The four men who have answered satisfactorily would be acceptable to us. But as between them, Schuyler Merritt would probably not accept a nomination and Judge Gilson’s name has been less prominently mentioned, so the choice of the women seems to narrow down to Lieut. Governor Wilson and Robert Scoville.
“All women know and are grateful for the way that Clifford Wilson has stood by us both during the fight for the presidential bill and at other times. Robert Scoville has been less prominently identified with our movement, but has helped us with his time and money and has the respect of the state for the work that he did as food administrator during the war.”
Later this list was supplemented by the names of Dist. Attorney Hugh M. Alcorn4 and John T. Robinson, who are listed as favorable to suffrage and acceptable to the association.

3 Pronounced: STOE kul
4 Pronounces: AL korn

Transcript

D.f-'"Ar-i.-.o ,n,,+ ,,::,,,,..:,..-::v,,.--"'J C/\Of\//Cr':'J,'
b.JI fl..,.;':j"--(-''.JI '· '-...,s''-......i!UOC l .--,,l\.J'!! I"-•

(Special to The Farmer.)
Hartford, Sept. 20, At the Suffrage
association e>cecutive committee heici yesterday afternoon at suffrage
!1eadouarters. fv1rs. Thomas" fvL Heohurn. oresidF!iTi- nf 1-he c,ssncfatron <1nd Mrs, M, Toscan accepted, Bennett, treasurer, - - tendered their resignations, whicl1 we1-e ;""u JL i.,/_; /;, - t,/f ,,,d.• ' i.,USG;L/.f)t(L /26 Th2J/ \1\tUl fH! out their ter...rns1 !1cvie\-'er1 because ivirs. En7est Thornpson Seton/ who was e!ected to the p1·es!dency1 said she vvouid be unab!e to take the job because of work she is doing at VVasl1ington, The request to Mrs. Hepburn to stay in office tempora1·i 1Nas accompanied b\f one to fVlrs, Bennett Mrs, Hepburnrs !etter of resignation fo!iovvs: 'The time l1as come when I can no ionger continue to be president of t!1e CorH1ect[cut VVorr1an Suffrage association end I f1e!--e\Nlth send you 111v l·ec!:;:n:,n,d~'L-1'on,1, 'For the past seven years we have vvorked together and I have come to have a very deep personal affection for the n1embers of the board. It is a great grief to me to realize that if I am to follow my honest convictions I must sever my official relations vvith you.' "During the time that we have worked together the C. W. S, A, has grown from small, organization to one with over a hundred local branches and 38,000 enrolled rT1embers. I like" to fee! that the hard work and generous contributions, not only of the members of the board, but of the officers and mernbers, of our local leagues, a:"e largely' responsible for these thousands of converts to the suffrage cause in Connecticut. l!In the ear:"y' davs of our association vve vvere entfre!y independent and could adopt any policy that we beiieved to be good fO!- the promotion of C'/ rff, d-C1P b1 r·i- {·r- /_. :::1\/ '·hle h·-c -,!l .---,,d- ,-,r· r'1 -1,he. '\'1-.Ft''".,..1: d r\ ·n-,e;••!r- ('"', '1/1,,,..., 1-,74 ·1-, •• , -::;; -- -•_ t ,_Ju u ;,, c. , "..:> , a..,, c , i '- , : L ,._, , _ , l .. a '-· vi v, il ;-,-;_, b i ! 1....d j i Iv u i , t.-. "

poncy and detern lries a!! of our essential concen1s_; -\1 I arn- not protesting

the11 ,cannot do otherwise, Today national work is of firs\importance,
\/Vomen now vote In 19 states fo1· president and it is obvio,::rs' tl1at the shortest vvay to secu1·e suffrage for all the women of I the United States is for suffragists to concentrate on the fede,-al amendi,,ent instead of trying 1 to secure the vote through state action, Naturally the national association feels that it should don1inate the states in order to ensure a uniform policy witl1in its own organization, Tl1e question before us is therefore whether or not we believe in the policies of tl1e national association,
"I have reluctantly come to feel that the policy of the national association in their work for tl1e fede1·al amendment is futi!e, acaden1ic, 'and out of date, Afl:er the last national convention, held in Atlantic Citv1 I felt pretty l1ope!ess about the ability of the national association to lead us to victory. The president of the association made a very fine speech called "Tl1e Crisis" in which she said that we must change from academic to political methods,
but every practical effort I made at the convention to secure tl1e adoption of any constructive political policy on the part of the national was frowned upon. This summer the national l1as lined up with the Anti-Suffragists in their condemnation of the suffrage work wl1ich the \Noma n's party is doing at 1/Vashington in spite of the fact that this is the most practical work which has been done this sumn1er toward securing the passage of the federal amendment This carping attitude on the part of the national association, taken in connection with their own unwillingness or inability to adopt any adequate political pQUcy_ilas_made me realize thatl cannot cons-fs-te-Atly serve as president of a state branch of the national association, notwithstanding my devotion to the' Connecticut Woman Suffrage association.

"The National VVoman Suffrage association is not the only national association working for won1an suffrage, The I/Voman's' party1 a younger and more vigorous body, is devoting all its energies to securing the passage of the federal amendment While, the national association Ignores the women's vote in the west as a lever toward securing the passage of this an1end111ent the Won1an's party asks them to vote against 'the party that has refused, to pass the amendment I think that tile VVoman's party is

r.-,;=,'-, t- c,,. / ?
.'

.women's vote to pusl1 through the federal amendment would seem to be ti1e ;:, BC of political n1etl1ods in any pi"actical attempt to secure the national enfranchisement of women.

"Today, more than ever, the impo1"tance of woman suffrage is thrown into i1igl1 relief. England, Russia, and Canada have given women the vote since the war began. Witl1 thei1· men gone it is Imperative for the women left at horne, the only representatives of their famiiies, to have a voice, in tl1e government. Botl1 industrially politically women in war tin1e have to do the work of the men w!10 have gone to the front. Our government should pass
• the federal amendment at once to protect themselves and their families,
but we know that the government will not do this uniess tl1ose most interested insist upon it.
"\/Ve have, gone to war for democracy and yet millions of wo:~nen in our country are denied the right to vote. Simply 111entioning this fact in suffrage journals and to suffrage audiences is futile. VVe must say it in such a way tl1at all the world will hear and that is what the pickets of tl1e V\/oman's Party have done at Washington .. My sympatl1ies are all with tl1em. I admire their honesty, their self-forgetfulness, and their practical wisdom. In my opinion it is through such women as these, that we shall secure, the suffrage, in Connecticut by federal an1endment. In the future - I shall support the Woman's party."

Mrs. M. Toscari Bennett's letter:
'Together with this communication i present my resignation as treasurer and member of the executive "board of the Connecticut Wornan Suffrage association. I hope that the members of the board will be able to accept this resignation at once, for I feel that the difference between my convictions and th,ose-orthe members of the national American Woman Suffrage 2:issociation with which our Connecticut association is affiliated is so great and Is based up n such fundamental matters of principle as to make it possibie for me J:o continue longer· in my present official position.

L [ I

.. _,,-Y

'At tne nsk,0f-fi Tng rnisJ,JP(derstood, misinterpreted, yes, even
_,.r·"'· (, -- 'i . -?""'-
171isrepri;;sented, a's othe1·s of my faith have been, I wish to endeavor to set
,.· /
before ,vou theyeasons for t11at faith. I feel ti1at our long association in a
\ _,.
comn1ort co0se makes t!1is encumbent upon rne now when our ways seem
to lie apart.
"For years we have worked for the advancement and fulfillment of the reality of democracy. VVe have all felt that this must of necessity precede any true and lasting betterment of the conditions of our country and of our peopie1 for it has 'seemed to us that so iong as one-half of tl1ose people have no share in the control of the government under which they live; democracy was a ho/!ovv h10ckery and human bettern1ent dependent up on the grace of those wl10 thougl1t their ovvn thoughts and perhaps thought tl1em well but wl1ose thoughts were not our thoughts.
"In increasing numbers each year the men and women of our state and of our country have been brought to believe in the value of women's possible contribution to the poiiticai iife and in the Justice of her being allowed to participate therein, I assume that all of us have fe!t that this value and this justice were matte1·s of firm and abiding conviction. To me they were as deep and meaning a part of my life as any other matters of spiritual faith were. To me they seemed of at least as great a practical and immediate in1portance for realization as any other subjects for which n1y creed urged me to labor.
"My position fciday seems the logical Inevitable one based upon my continuing faith. To me the day of the reality- of democracy seems as much worth working for as ever. The coming of this calamitous war and our entry into it seem rather to increase not to diminish the importance of that work. The necessity for - women's participation in government seems greater/ rnore irn111ediate. If the welfare of our country and of our people required that women be represented in the solution of peace problems1 it requires it still n1ore in the solution of war and after war problems.
"Believing as I do1 no cou,-se appears honorable to me except the one I have adopted. Believing as I 'do' it is basically impossible for me to continue my official connection with a group whose1 connection with the national Arnerican 1JVoman Suffrage association, seems to require, me to deny the1

farth that ts in n-te. Beilevi1-t'd as l do, I ;eei s1Jft-ltu.a;1y bout1d tv tese;--\,'2 to myself the right to expI·ess freely by speech and action my fundamental convictions, VVhat other wo1·1< I may feel cailed upon to perform, I can11ot forsake a task "whicl1 lies so close to my heart1 nor abandon to the vituperative epithets of foe and fair weather friend the wornen whose convictions seem to be as my own. "Tl1e Washington pickets seem to me to embody the spiritual principle which has been responsible for every great advance in civilization. They and their- associates have clung to this faith in spite of every obstac!e and hindrance1- legal and illegal, which could be raised against then1. And now ' to crown their sacrifice they are being accused of the very crime their • inability to commit1 which is responsible, for their doing what they "are doing. "Pro-Gen11an traitors, disloyal" are but a few of the names which have been applied to them even by suffragists. Calumny is l1eaped upon them by those who are unable to see that it is this very loyalty to their country whicl1 compels then1 to suffer. That the day of the realization of democracy may soon dawn, not only in Europe but here at home as well they have fought and 1,viil continue to figl1t1 even as their men will soon be fighting. These women have not the tirne nor the will to explain. Their acts must speak for then1 with those who can see and understand. They have given generously, freely, not alone in the line of pure suffrage work, but in straight war help as well. Those who impugn their motives must do so from ignorance or malice, they cannot or will not understand, and I cannot bring rnyself-to add to the+r-burden even-by my silenee;"

Transcript

What’s the Matter with Connecticut?. Connecticut Woman Suffrage Association. Ruth Dadourian collection,1920-1981, MS 100201.
Connecticut Historical Society.

WHAT’S THE MATTER WITH CONNECTICUT? .

[Graphic of a map of the United States. Several states are colored in black including: Connecticut, New Jersey, Maryland, Delaware, West Virginia, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, and New Mexico] .

LOOK AT THIS MAP. .

In the white states, men have given the women the full or presidential suffrage or have ratified the Federal Suffrage Amendment. .

In the black states they have not. .

Are the women of the white states more intelligent than Connecticut women? .

IF NOT, WHY IS CONNECTICUT BLACK? .
Because it has given its women nothing but the school vote. .

HOW CAN IT BECOME WHITE? .

By ratifying the Federal Suffrage Amendment. .

.

.
Connecticut men and women are now asking Governor Holcomb to call a special session of the legislature to ratify this amendment so that ALL the women of the United States may vote in 1920. .

GIVE CONNECTICUT WOMEN A SQUARE DEAL. .

ASK THE GOVERNOR TO CALL A SPECIAL SESSION. .

.
Connecticut Woman Suffrage Association Ratification Leaflet No. 1.

#

Transcript

Connecticut Women Want Their Own Men to Give Them the Vote.
Connecticut Woman Suffrage Association. Ruth Dadourian collection,1920- 1981. MS 100201. Connecticut Historical Society.

Connecticut Women Want Their Own Men to Give Them the Vote
This is why they are asking Governor Holcomb to call a special session of the Legislature.
IS IT POSSIBLE FOR CONNECTICUT WOMEN TO BE GIVEN TO BE GIVEN BY MEN OUTSIDE OUR STATE?
Yes, if Connecticut is not among the 36 states to ratify the Federal Suffrage Amendment. 22 states have already ratified. Others are acting now.
HAS GOVERNOR HOLCOMB EVER CALLED A SPECIAL SESSION?
Yes; twice. In 1916 and in 1918.
What was his reason?
To provide for the vote of men in service.
DID THE STATE APPROVE OF THE GOVERNOR’S ACTION?
Yes.
DOES THE STATE APPROVE OF ANOTHER SPECIAL SESSION?
Yes; 61% of the legislators have petitioned the Governor to call this session.
Ask the Governor to call a Special Session.
Connecticut Woman Suffrage Association
Ratification Leaflet No. 2
#

Transcript

EXTRACT FROM A MESSAGE FROM HIS EMINENCE JAMES, CARDINAL GIBBONS
To the National Association Opposed to Woman Suffrage Read by THE RIGHT REVEREND WILLIAM T. RUSSELL Bishop of Charleston,
S. C.

at NATIONAL ANTI-SUFFRAGE CONVENTION Washington, D.C.

(December 7, 1916)

When I deprecate female suffrage I am pleading for the dignity of woman; I am contending for her honor; I am striving to perpetuate those peerless prerogatives inherent in her sex, those charms and graces which exalt womankind and make her the ornament and coveted companion of man. Woman is queen indeed, but her empire is the domestic kingdom.
The greatest political triumphs she would achieve in public life fade into insignificance compared with the serene glory which radiates from the domestic shrine and which she illumines and warms by her conjugal and motherly virtues. If she is ambitious of the dual empire of public and private life, then, the fabled dog beholding his image in the water, she will lose both; she will fall from the lofty pedestal where nature and Christianity have

placed her and will fail to grasp the scepter of political authority from the strong hand of her male competitor.
“*** I regard ‘woman’s rights’ women and the leaders of the new school of female progress as the worst enemies of the female sex. I wish I could impress on American women the dangers that would attach to such innovations. I wish I could show them the ultimate result of participating in public life. It has but one end – the abandonment, or at least the neglect, of the home. “The most precious undeveloped asset of any nation is its children. An all-wise God through the law of nature has committed this precious treasure in a special manner to the mother. Any occupations, however alluring in its specious pretense, which draws woman’s attention from her most exalted duties of motherhood, will result in detriment to the nation and the race. Women cannot vote intelligently unless they give time to an intelligent study of political questions, and all such time taken from the household will be injurious to the future generation, by robbing it of its natural right, a mother’s care, without giving to the present generation any appreciable benefit in the purifying of the ballot. ***”
James, Cardinal Gibbons.

Transcript

“Reproduced from the Collections of the Manuscript Division, Library of Congress, scanned from Watkinson Library, Trinity College, Hartford Studies Project – Transcription of letter from Alice Paul, national chairman of the National Woman’s Party to the editor of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, on March 30, 1919.”

National Woman’s Party

National Headquarters, Lafayette Square

Washington, D. C.

March 30, 1919

Editor, Branch Bulletin,

National Association for the Advancement of Colored People

70 Fifth Avenue

New York City.

Dear Sir:

My attention has been called to an article in your March Bulletin, attributing to me an interview in the New York Times, concerning the vote of negro women in South Carolina.

I have not seen the article in the Times to which your Bulletin makes reference, and do not know its source. I have had no interview with the Times on this subject.

The National Woman’s Party works for but one object – the securing of an amendment to the United States Constitution, enfranchising women. This amendment would prevent the debarring of any one from voting on the ground of sex, but would not interfere with any other franchise regulations made by the states. Whatever franchise conditions apply in the states to men, would, after the passage of this amendment, apply to women also.

Since a previous amendment to the Constitution has forbidden disenfranchisement on the ground of race and color, that question is already settled, and would not in any way be affected by the proposed woman suffrage amendment.

The resolution introduced by Senator Jones, to which your article refers, was designed to meet the parliamentary difficulty arising from the ruling, prepared by the Parliamentarian of the Senate that the Anthony Amendment could not, after

Its defeat, in February, be reintroduced in the same form. While this parliamentary objection might have been overruled in time, it presented an obstacle to speedy action. In order to secure its reintroduction, verbal changes were made and it was reintroduced by Senator Jones, in a form which did not, as far as we could ascertain, change the substance of the original Amendment, but which made sufficient change in the form to permit its reintroduction.

We hope that in the future you will write to us for information concerning the national suffrage amendment when you plan to discuss it in your Bulletin, in order that misunderstandings such as occurred in the March issue, may be avoided.

In closing may I say that women who are struggling for political freedom, feel a sincere regret that the negro, whose enfranchisement women helped to win, should now that his own enfranchisement has been obtained, speak with sarcasm, as in this article in your Bulletin, of the campaign for the franchise which women are still conducting. It shows little comprehension of the battle which women are waging for political liberty to characterize as “pranks before the White House”, their protests against disenfranchisement which have brought upon them sentences of imprisonment for terms as long as seven months.

Very truly yours,

Alice Paul

National Chairman.

Transcript

"Reproduced from the Collections of the Manuscript Division, Library of

Congress, scanned from Watkinson Library, Trinity College, Hartford
Studies Project – Transcription of letter from Ida Husted Harper, an

American author, journalist, columnist, and suffragist, as well as the author
of the biography of Susan B. Anthony, to Elizabeth C. Carter, president,

Northeastern Federation of Women’s Clubs, on March 18, 1919."

LESLIE WOMAN SUFFRAGE COMMISSION, INC.

171 Madison Ave. New York City March 18, 1919
Miss Elizabeth C. Carter,
President, Northeastern Federation of Women’s Clubs New Bedford, Mass.
My dear Miss Carter:
Mrs. Carrie Chapman Catt, president of the National Woman Suffrage Association, has been talking with me in reference to the application of the Northeastern Federation of Women’s Clubs for co-operative membership and has asked me to write you my views. She feels that as I am not an officer of the association I can do this simply as a friend. My father and mother were Abolitionists, and before and during the Civil War their doors

were always open to the colored people. They were in favor of women suffrage before there was any movement for it. I have helped it since I was in my twenties and as Secretary for my State Association arranged a course of lectures for Susan B. Anthony in 1887. I went with her through the California campaign of 1896 and at its close she asked me to write her Biography because of my intense sympathy with all that she stood for.
While I was in her home writing the book we entertained Booker Washington, the "Methodist Episcopal Bishop Walters, Ida Wells Barnett and other colored guests.
I write you these things to show you my sympathy and interest for the colored race. And its women especially have no stronger friend than myself. Some years ago the National Association of Colored Women passed an official resolution thanking me for my writings in their behalf. It would be impossible for me to give any advice that I did not believe to be for their highest welfare and in this spirit I am asking your Federation to withdraw temporarily its application for admission to the National American Suffrage
Association.

The situation in regard to the Federal Amendment has now reached its climax and without that amendment there will not be universal woman suffrage in your life time. Until within a few years the Southern members of Congress have stood like a solid wall against it and have been sustained by

the women of their States. Through reason, argument, logic and diplomacy every Southern State Suffrage Association now supports the Federal Amendment. With this backing 56 Southern Representatives voted for it when it was carried in the Lower House, Jan. 10, 1917. In March, 1914, three Democratic Senators voted for it; in October 1916, 12; in February, 1919, 13. These figures show the remarkable progress in Southern sentiment.
This Federal Amendment has now become a question of cold, hard politics. Even if the Republican members of Congress should stand solidly for it they have not the two-thirds necessary to carry it, but eight from the
six States represented by your Federation are unalterably opposed to it. Some Democratic votes are absolutely essential to carry it and most of these must come from the South. Without the consent of some Southern Legislatures it positively cannot be ratified after it has been submitted. In the closing days of the last session Senator Jones, Chairman of the Suffrage Committee, offered the amendment with a change in the enabling act which Senator Gay of Louisiana was willing to accept and, if a vote could have been secured, it would have carried, but the Republicans prevented a vote.
Such is the situation. Many of the Southern members are now willing to surrender their beloved doctrine of State’s rights, and their only obstacle

is fear of “the colored woman’s vote” in the States where it is likely to equal or exceed the white woman’s vote. It has been the policy of the leaders of the National Association to meet this foreboding with silence. It has never yielded one inch of its original position taken when it was founded fifty years ago: “The right of suffrage shall not be denied or abridged on account of sex.” This was its first demand, this is the exact wording of the
Federal Amendment today. It has refused to assist in any way the effort of the women of any state for a white women’s franchise, a tax-paying women’s franchise or anything except universal suffrage. The proposed Federal Amendment applies to colored women exactly as it applies to white women. If it fails, both alike will remain disfranchised.
Two-thirds of both houses of the new Congress are pledged to vote for this amendment. There is every indication that it will be adopted early in the session. The opponents are not leaving a stone unturned to defeat it and if the news is flashed throughout the Southern States at this most critical moment that the National American Association has just admitted an organization of 6,000 colored women, the enemies can cease from further effort--the defeat of the Amendment will be assured. It is for the Northeastern Federation of Women’s Clubs to determine whether admission as a co-operative member of the Association at the present time is worth to it the sacrifice of the Federal Amendment, or whether it cannot

afford to delay its application until this crisis has passed. Many personal sacrifices have been made during the last threescore years by those who have carried on the struggle for woman suffrage. Can you not accept this as the one laid upon you?
Cordially yours,

(signed) Ida Husted Harper

This letter is not for publication. I will be pleased to receive an answer.

Transcript

Reproduced from the Collections of the Manuscript Division, Library of

Congress, scanned from Watkinson Library, Trinity College, Hartford
Studies Project – Transcription of letter from Alice Paul, Chairwoman of the

National Woman’s Party, to Mary Ovington, Chairman of the Board,
National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, on March

31, 1919."

[March 31 1919] handwritten date

[Letterhead] NATIONAL WOMAN’S PARTY

NATIONAL HEADQUARTERS LAFAYETTE SQUARE
WASHINGTON, D. C.

Miss Mary White Ovington, Chairman of the Board,

National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, 70 Fifth Avenue
New York City.

Dear Miss Ovington:

I have received the resolutions passed by the Board of Directors of your organization on March 10, and sent to me by Mr. Shillady. As I explained some weeks ago in a telephone conversation with your office, I do not know anything about the alleged interview to which your resolutions refer.
Your resolutions ask whether the Woman’s Party consents to “the non- enfranchisement of the nearly five million colored women.”
The National Woman’s Party has only one object - - the passage of an amendment to the National Constitution removing the sex qualification from the franchise regulations. We take no stand whatever on any other subject. This amendment to the Constitution would not, of course, interfere with the states making any restrictions they desire upon the franchise, provided such restrictions were not forbidden by the National Constitution. All that our amendment would do would be to see that the franchise conditions for every state were the same for woman as for men.
Since an earlier amendment to the Constitution has removed the race qualification from the franchise regulations, the question of race

disqualification has already been settled and does not have to be settled in the campaign for removal of the sex disqualification.
Sincerely yours, Alice Paul National Chairman AP/OB

Transcript

"Reproduced from the Collections of the Manuscript Division, Library of

Congress, scanned from Watkinson Library, Trinity College, Hartford
Studies Project – Transcription of letter from Carrie Chapman Catt,

president of the National American Woman Suffrage Association, to Mrs. L.
B. Fouse, Ex-President Kentucky Colored Women’s Club, and Mrs. F. H.

White, Principal, Patterson School and Committee of two hundred colored

women, Lexington, Kentucky on May 2, 1919.

NATIONAL AMERICAN WOMAN SUFFRAGE ASSOCIATION. May 2, 1919
To

Mrs. L. B. Fouse, Ex-President Kentucky Colored Women’s Club,

Mrs. F. H. White, Principal, Patterson School and Committee of two hundred colored women
Lexington, Kentucky

My dear Mesdames:

During the convention of the National American Woman Suffrage Association, held the last week of March in St. Louis, I received your

telegram. I have selected from the list of names signed, the two which seem to have the most likely post office addresses and am sending a copy of this letter to Mrs. Fouse and to Mrs. White.
The National American Woman Suffrage Association has never made any recommendation nor endorsed any action which discriminated against Negroes in the matter of the vote and I was, therefore, surprised to have received your telegram, for some misrepresentation must have reached you.
The qualifications for the vote are questions for state action and not national. If, therefore, there shall, at any time, be a move of discrimination against colored women, you should appeal to the state and not to the national suffrage association for help.
In all northern states where women are enfranchised, Negro women and Negro men vote on equal terms with white women and white men.
Yours very truly,

Signed Carrie Chapman Catt President
Pronunciation Guide

Mes·dames
/māˈdäm/
plural form of Madame. https://www.google.com/search?sxsrf=ALeKk006Dgbj6cIxJbiKTn6SfeS_19 Jm1Q%3A1600808303192&source=hp&ei=b2VqX4- sCMKf_QaW45joBQ&q=Mesdames&oq=Mesdames&gs_lcp=CgZwc3ktYW IQAzIFCAAQsQMyAggAMgIIADICCAAyAggAMgIIADICCC4yAggAMgIIADI CCAA6BwgjEOoCECc6DQguEMcBEK8BEOoCECc6DQguEMcBEKMCEO oCECdQoQ5Y8SJg7iloAXAAeACAAWCIAfsBkgEBM5gBAKABAqABAaoB
B2d3cy13aXqwAQo&sclient=psy- ab&ved=0ahUKEwjPn4zS0_3rAhXCT98KHZYxBl0Q4dUDCAk&uact=5

Transcript

"Reproduced from the Collections of the Manuscript Division, Library of

Congress, scanned from Watkinson Library, Trinity College, Hartford

Studies Project – Transcription of letter from Carrie Chapman Catt,

president, National American Woman Suffrage Association to John
Shillady, NAACP on May 6 1919."

May 6, 1919
[Letterhead] NATIONAL AMERICAN WOMAN SUFFRAGE ASSOCIATION NATIONAL HEADQUARTERS
171 MADISON AVENUE NEW YORK

Mr. John R. Shillady, 70 Fifth Avenue, New York, New York. Dear Sir:
In reply to your letter of April 9th, allow me to say that the National American Woman Suffrage Association has never endorsed and never proposes to endorse any amendment to the federal constitution which deals with the

qualification of the voter. It is well understood that that is a question assigned to the states. We stand for the removal of the sex restriction, nothing more, nothing less.
Yours very truly, Carrie Chapman Catt President

Transcript

NEED TRANSCRIPT

Transcript

STATE OF CONNECTICUT GENERAL ASSEMBLY,
SPECIAL SESSION, Sept. 21, 1920.

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION RATIFYING THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES ON WOMAN SUFFRAGE.
WHEREAS, the Sixty-sixth Congress of the United States of America, in both Houses by a constitutional majority of two-thirds thereof has made the following proposition to amend the Constitution of the United States, in the following words, to wit:
Joint Resolution

Proposing an Amendment to the Constitution extending the Right of Suffrage to Women:
RESOLVED, by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, two-thirds of each house concurring therein, that the following article is proposed as an Amendment to the Constitution, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the Legislatures of three-fourths of the several state.

ARTICLE XIX

THE RIGHT OF CITIZENS OF THE UNITED STATES TO VOTE SHALL NOT BE DENIED OR ABRIDGED BY THE UNITEDSTATES [SIC] OR BY ANY STATE ON ACCOUNT OF SEX.
CONGRESS SHALL HAVE POWER TO ENFORCE THIS ARTICLE BY APPROPIRATE LEGISLATION:
Therefore be it

RESOLVED, by the General Assembly of the State of Connecticut that the said proposed amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America be and the same is hereby ratified by the General Assembly of the State of Connecticut.
RESOLVED, That certified copies of the foregoing preamble and resolution be forwarded by the Secretary of the State of Connecticut to the President of the United States, the Secretary of State of the United States, the President of the Senate of the United States and the Speaker of the House of Representatives of the United State.

[Verso of Document] Senate Joint Resolution No. 2
[XX’d out – “Resolution”] CONCURRENT RESOLUTION RATIFYING THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATE ON WOMAN SUFFRAGE
[handwritten annotation] State of Connecticut Senate
September [crossed out “14”] ^ 21, 1920
[inserted text] reconvened Adopted by Roll call vote R. S. Transmitted
[the above text over writes] Passed R.S. Trans[mitted] [Signature] [Illegible] J. Noonan Ass’t Clerk
[Illegible] R.S

State of Conn[ecticut] House of Rep[resentative]s. Passed R.S. by roll vote
W. Arthur Countyman, Jr.
Sept. 21, 1920 Clerk. Introduced by Senator [name xx’d out]

Of the [xx’d out] District

Transcript

[Handwritten in blue] 118

September 20, 1920.

Dear Sir:

Your letter and telegraph, both dated the 16th inst[ant]. are received. I did refuse to call a special session of the General Assembly to ratify the Nineteen Amendment because the majority of the women of this State do not desire it. However, when Tennessee ratified, as it was shown by Secretary Colby’s certification, I called a special session to permit legislation to be passed which would enable the women to enjoy the rights which had been given them. Then came the further action by the Tennessee Legislature, assuming to re-consider and turn down their act of ratification. If the November election should occur and be thrown into doubt because of the women voting, and it should appear by a decision of the Supreme Court that they were not entitled to vote because Tennessee had not ratified, there would be a condition created which would be a great deal more serious than the woman suffrage question.
The Legislature of this State was unanimous in desiring to ratify the Amendment and they did pass a resolution ratifying it at a special session. I called for the purpose of enabling women to be made voters. This I claimed to be unwarranted because they were not called for that purpose. I think practically every-one in this Sate now is desirous that the Nineteenth Amendment shall be ratified to avoid possible much greater evil from the uncertainty surrounding the November election, in case of a reversal of the act of ratification by the Tennessee Legislature by a decision of the Supreme Court. I have called another special session

which meets to-morrow to consider the Nineteenth Amendment, and I presume that they will ratify it again.
I regret very much the fiasco in Tennessee. If they desired to turn ratification down they should have found it out without creating this dangerous uncertainty.
Very truly yours.

[sent to]

William H. Williamson, President

States’ Rights Defense League of North Carolina, Raleigh, North Caroline.

Transcript

Reproduced from the Collections of the Manuscript Division, Library of Congress, Watkinson Library, Trinity College, Hartford Studies Project – Transcription of hand-written letter from Mary Townsend Seymour to Mary Ovington on April 21st, 1919

420 New Britain Ave. Hartford, Conn.
April 21st, 1919

My dear Miss Ovington –
Am enclosing Miss Milholland answer to my letter of March 15th –

I have not received any word as yet from Miss Paul – asking her to make a public denial of her alleged statement. Since Miss Milholland’s
letter reached – Monday of this week – have sent Miss Paul a second letter urging her further to declare herself publicly. Will you write Mrs. M. Toscan Bennett, 22 Forest Street who is a member of our Branch executive board
N.A.A.C.P. and is a woman who does not know the meaning of the word expediency -- and is very near Miss Paul – was a picket and stands firmly
on the Negro getting a square deal a near friend of Miss Milholland too – Also, Mrs. Thomas N. Hepburn, 352 Laurel St. – who is chairman of the

Connecticut Branch of the Executive Board of the Woman’s Party – a Southern woman – very democratic in some things – but not to be trusted too far on the Negro question She is a politician in every sense of the word.
Mrs. Edward Porritt – 63 Tremont St. a splendid type of Englishwoman – who was instrumental in placing me on the Health and Recreation Committee of the State Council representing the N.A.A.C.P. and is now --- tho’ the council is fast being dissolved by our Legislature – being reorganized and will continue as a committee under another name now under consideration –. Through this committee we have been able to get two Negro representatives for girls work on a city recreation program which is being worked out – and for which an appropriation has been granted in City’s budget within the month – also – in the House Service work -- we have seen the dire need of a visiting nurse for months and have finally gotten one of our girls appointed.
Miss Susan N. Upshur – a Hartford girl - educated in our schools – graduate of Mercy Hospital – Philadelphia, Pa – 1915 – Miss Arnold – who is acting secretary for our Branch – our Secretary – whom it has seemed - has never taken the interest in our work– We would have been glad to have her – having gone to Boston for short period – everything being left to us who know that the work must be done–

Miss Arnold has been and is a great help – everything has since-our president- Mr. Bell went overseas – been on my shoulders - and I do hope you realize all that it must mean – to fight in silence – hatred and petty jealousies – pitting against all such -- uphill work that counts with telling results–
The Association is so dear to me – my people altho’ they do not always understand – cannot afford – now – at any rate – as never before – to lose a worker – so discouraging tho’ it often becomes – your love and untiring devotion is a constant incentive to help me in every way I can in this great work –
At our luncheon at the Allyn House the day the “Prison Special” came through. In pledging - I said “I pledge five dollars in the name of the Hartford Branch of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People – urging that the Susan B. Anthony Amendment without
compromise be allowed to stand. “Miss Mabel Vernon – National Secretary
who was asking for pledges – stopped the confusion by clapping her hands and said – “I want you all to hear this pledge - ! “asked me to repeat it –
which I was very glad to have the opportunity to do – very slowly – with emphasis – for I realized full well what the quibbling of these woman would mean at this crucial time --to our women of the South who already are

suffering more than they can easily bear. There was great applause – really more than any other at the meeting and hundreds were pledged. I had scarcely sat down - when Miss Sue White of Tennessee jumped to her feet – bubbling over with enthusiasm and waiting for the applause to cease- she said – “As a Southern woman I give endorsing that pledge!” Lucy Branham
followed with the same sort of pledge – altho’ hers had not the same ring of sincerity as did Miss Whites’ –
Miss (Mabel) Vernon said – “We need money – lots of it – to educate public

sentiment – to make that possible – but we can do it!

After the luncheon I found Miss White and talked with her a few minutes – she is very frank and fearless – she said she knew numbers of white women in the South who believes as she does but do not dare express their views – She told me one thing that I could heartily agree with – “She knew when the black women of the South got the vote they were
going to use it to better advantage – as far as their race was concerned than the colored men had – in all these years --. That of course – opened various lines of thought – but knowing the white women feel the same way about their own use of the ballot in comparison with the use of the ballot [by] their men -- I could but appreciate the thought -- you will see [this] circular – did they not use them in New York? And I saw but two here.

Will you kindly return Miss Milholland’s letter when you have finished with it. Hoping you are real well – and I have made this situation clear as far as I know.
I am very truly yours Mary T. Seymour.
P.S. Do not hesitate, dear Miss Ovington – to call on me at any time to do whatever you may see fit.
M.

Transcript

Reproduced from the Collections of the Manuscript Division, Library of

Congress and provided by Trinity College, Watkinson Library, Hartford
Studies Project

Pronunciation: https://www.howtopronounce.com/shillady
March 10, 1919 Memorandum:
Subject – National Woman’s Party and Woman Suffrage amendment matter.
Mrs. Mary Townsend Seymour, member of Hartford, Connecticut Branch telephoned to J. R. S. (John R. Shillady, executive secretary of the NAACP) in re(gard to) her and her husband’s attendance at a luncheon of the Woman’s Party at which the attitude of the Party was discussed. There was a pamphlet distributed which went into the question of Southern States and amendment. Mrs. Seymour attempted to explain the matter over the ‘phone and to read from the pamphlet but it was very difficult to understand what she was trying to say. She was anxious that some of the Staff should be in attendance tonight.
It appears that they were trying to assure the South that the passing of the amendment would not have an adverse effect upon voting as related to colored people, quoting facts as to the relative population and voting

strength of the races, men and, if the amendment passed, women. Further than this, I was not able to understand what was said.
J.R.S. (John R. Shillady)

Transcript

Reproduced from the Collections of the Manuscript Division, Library of Congress, provided by Trinity

College, Watkinson Library, Hartford Studies Project. March 11, 1919
Mrs. F. W. Seymour, 420 New Britain Avenue Hartford, Connecticut

My dear Mrs. Seymour:

Mr. Shillady did not understand all of your telephone conversation yesterday. Won’t you send us the pamphlet from which you read to him?
We had two representatives at the meeting last night but we did not heckle the speakers as we had thought of doing. We, however, sent up a resolution from the Board asking that they take a stand on this matter. We don’t mean to let this drop.
Will you write to Miss Vida Milholland, 247 Fifth Avenue, asking her if the National Woman’s Party will not take a firm stand on the matter of recognizing the right of the colored women in the South? Miss Milholland is John Milholland’s daughter.
Always sincerely,

MJO/ALB

Transcript

Reproduced from the Collections of the Manuscript Division, Library of

Congress, provided by Trinity College, Watkinson Library, Hartford Studies
Project

157 William St., Catskill, N.Y. February 7, 1921

Mrs. M. Toscan Bennett, 22 Forest Street, Hartford, Connecticut

My dear Mrs. Bennett:

When the Convention of the Woman’s Party takes place on February 15th, there will be many important questions coming up for consideration, if it is decided that we are to reorganize for future work. I am writing to you, (as a fellow member of the Advisory Council), to ask your perusal of the enclosed pamphlet, which explains itself.
It seems to me that the question of disfranchisement in any section of the country is the most vital matter which can possibly come before the Convention. It is, moreover, by its very existence, a direct refutation of that Federal Amendment for which the Woman’s Party has so earnestly striven.

Since we, of the National Woman’s Party, fully believe ourselves to have been the strongest influence towards the final ratification of the Anthony Amendment, it seems impossible that we can reorganize permanently, without giving our first attention to the flagrant disfranchisement of the women of the Southern States of both races. While it is true that there is to come before Congress, a Bill enforcing the 19th Amendment, nevertheless, that Bill provides only against discrimination on account of sex, which is not the means used, of course, to keep women from voting in the South, but rather, countless, so-called technicalities.
This state of things also applies to Negro men generally, nevertheless, it lies in our power as a Woman’s Party, to condemn the injustices against women. Moreover, in the case of the Negro male franchise, embraced by the 14th and 15th Amendments, there has never been an organization among men covering the grounds upon which the Woman’s Party sprang into being. We hold a unique place of power in this country; and we can, by our action regarding the disfranchisement of the colored women, become of equal assistance to the white women, who would naturally be forced to the polls in opposition to the colored women. In the event of the latter’s enfranchisement.

What could be a greater opportunity for us than this vital question: first, because of its justice, second, because we cannot consistently continue our work if we permit our main object, so laboriously attained, to be ruthlessly set aside by that element what has for so long bitterly opposed us?
Very truly yours, Ella Rush Murray
Encl.

Transcript

[Letter head]

ADDRESS OFFICIAL COMMUNICATIONS TO THE SECRETARY OF STATE
WASHINGTON, D.C.

[Seal of the United States] DEPARTMENT OF STATE WASHINGTON
In reply refer To So-
September 17 1920

A.J. Dwyer, Esquire,

Deputy Secretary of State, Hartford, Connecticut

Sir:

I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of September 15,1920, enclosing a certified copy of “Concurrent Resolution Ratifying the Proposed Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of Woman Suffrage,” passed by the General Assembly of Connecticut, at a Special Session September 14, 1920.
I have to the honor to be, Sir, Your obedient servant,
[signature of] Bainbridge Colby

Transcript

Republican National Committee

[Left side] [Right side]

Will H. Hays 19 West 44th Street

Chairman New York City

August 20,1920

Hon[orable] Marcus H. Holcomb, Executive Chambers,
Hartford, Conn[ecticut]

My dear Governor:

I am just back and find your letter of the thirteenth and appreciate it.

I am, of course, glad that the Tennessee development has relieved the whole situation, but I want, however, to reply to that part of your letter concerning the subject mater of my letter which you way you read in substance two days before in the newspapers. I did not get out a report. A large part of your letter was in the statement made here to the women, and that was given out so nearly analogous that, no doubt, it seemed to you to be the same as the letter.
With very kindest regards, I am,

Sincerely yours, [Signature of] Will H. Hays
hg

Transcript

LETTERHEAD
[Left side] [Right Side]
Marcus H. Holcomb

Governor

[Image of the State State of Connecticut

Executive Chambers
John Buckley
Frank D. Rood Executive Clerk Seal of Connecticut] Hartford

September 21, 1920.

To The General Assembly:

I have the honor to submit for your consideration and action thereon, a certified copy of a Resolution of Congress, entitled “Joint Resolution Proposing an Amendment to the Constitution extending the right of suffrage to women”.
[Signature in Script] Marcus H. Holcomb
Governor

Transcript

CONFIRMATION OF MESSAGE SENT VIA POSTAL TELEGRAPH COMPANY
FROM

PILOT COTTON MILLS COMPANY RALEIGH, N. C.
FILED 10.30 P M.

Sept 16th 1920

Governor Holcomb, Hartford, Conn.
We admire your stand in not certifying an illegal ratification of the nineteenth amendment as we believe has been done in Tennessee, West Virginia and possibly other states.
If Connecticut will only stand firm, feel sure Tennessee[‘]s ratification will not hold court test, and thus this unwelcome measure will not be thrust upon an unwilling majority of both sexes of the nation. Sincerely trust you will and urge that you stand firm and use your influence against even a legal ratification and thus render an everlasting service to your country and humanity.”
[handwritten “H” inserted]
W[illiam]. ^ Williamson, Pres[iden]t.,

State[‘]s Rights Defense League of North Carolina.

Paid and charge acct.

NIGHT LETTER.

Transcript

Letter from Mrs. Clara T. Leonard: in opposition to woman suffrage. Boston: Massachusetts Association Opposed to the Further Extension of Suffrage to Woman, [1884?]. 324.623 L465l. Connecticut Historical Society.

LETTER FROM MRS. CLARA T. LEONARD, IN OPPOSITION TO WOMAN SUFFRAGE,
FIRST WOMAN MEMBER OF THE STATE BOARD OF HEALTH, LUNACY, AND CHARITY OF MASSACHUSETTS.

THE following letter was read by Thornton K. Lothrop, Esq., at the hearing before the Legislative Committee on Woman Suffrage, January 29, 1884:—
The principal reason assigned for giving suffrage to women are these:
That the right to vote is a natural and inherent right of which women are deprived by the tyranny of men.
That the fact that the majority of women do not wish for the right or privilege to vote is not a reason for depriving the minority of an inborn right.
That women are taxed but not represented, contrary to the principles of free government.
That society would gain by the participation of women in government, because women are purer and more conscientious than men, and especially that the cause of temperance would be promoted by women’s votes.
Those women who are averse to female suffrage hold differing opinions on all of these points, and are entitled to be heard fairly and without unjust reproach and contempt on the part of “suffragists,” so called.
The right to vote is not an inherent right, but, like the right to hold land, is conferred upon individuals by general consent, with certain limitations, and for the good of all.
It is as true to say that the earth was made for all of its inhabitants, and that no man has a right to appropriate a portion of its surface, as to say that all persons have a right to participate in government. Many persons can be found to hold both these opinions. Experience has proved that the general good is promoted by ownership of the soil, with the resultant inducement to its improvement.
Voting is simply a mathematical test of strength. Uncivilized nations strive for mastery by physical combat, thus wasting life and resources.

Enlightened societies agree to determine the relative strength of opposing parties by actual count. God has made women weaker than men, incapable of taking part in battles, indisposed to make riot and political disturbance.
The vote which, in the hand of a man, is a “possible bayonet,” would not, when thrown by a woman, represent any physical power to enforce her will. If all the women in the State voted in one way, and all the men in the opposite one, the women, even if in the majority, would not carry the day, because the vote would not be an estimate of material strength and the power to enforce the will of the majority. When one considers the strong passions and conflicts excited in elections, it is vain to suppose that the really stronger would yield to the weaker party.
It is no more unjust to deprive women of the ballot than to deprive minors, who outnumber those above the age of majority, and who might well claim, many of them, to be as well able to decide political questions as their elders.
If the majority of women are either not desirous to vote or are strongly opposed to voting, the minority should yield in this, as they are obliged to do in all other public matters. In fact, they will be obliged to yield, so long as the present state of opinion exists among women in general, for legislators will naturally consult the wishes of the women of their own families and neighborhood, and be governed by them. There can be no doubt that in this State, where women are highly respected and have great influence, the ballot would be readily granted to them by men, if they desired it, or generally approved of woman suffrage. Women are taxed, it is true; so are minors, without the ballot; it is untrue, to say that either class is not represented. The thousand ties of relationship and friendship cause the identity of interest between the sexes. What is good in a community for men, is good also for their wives and sisters, daughters and friends. The laws of Massachusetts discriminate much in favor of women, by exempting unmarried women of small estate from taxation; by allowing women, and not men, to acquire a settlement without paying a tax; by compelling husbands to support their wives, but exempting the wife, even when rich, from supporting an indigent husband; by making men liable for debts of wives, and not vice versa. In the days of the American Revolution, the first cause of complaint was, that a whole people were taxed but not represented. To-day there is not a single interest of woman which is not shared and defended by men, not a subject in which she takes an intelligent interest in which she cannot exert an influence in the community proportional to her character and ability. It is, because the men who govern, live, not in a remote country with separate interests, but in the closest

relations of family and neighborhood, and bound by the tenderest ties to the other sex, who are fully and well represented by relations, friends, and neighbors in every locality. That women are purer and more conscientious than men, as a sex, is exceedingly doubtful when applied to politics. The faults of the sexes are different, according to their constitution and habits of life. Men are more violent and open in their misdeeds; but any person who knows human nature well, and has examined it in its various phases, knows that each sex is open to its peculiar temptation and sin; that the human heart is weak and prone to evil without distinction of sex. It seems certain that, were women admitted to vote and to hold political office, all the intrigue, corruption, and selfishness displayed by men in political life would also be found among women. In the temperance cause we should gain little or nothing by admitting women to vote, for two reasons: first, that experience has proved that the strictest laws cannot be enforced if a great number of people determine to drink liquor; secondly, because among women voters we should find in our cities thousands of foreign birth who habitually drink beer and spirits daily without intoxication, and who regard license or prohibitory laws as an infringement of their liberty. It has been said that municipal suffrage for women in England has proved a political success. Even if this is true, it offers no parallel to the condition of things in our own cities: first, because there is in England a property qualification required to vote, which excludes the more ignorant and irresponsible classes, and makes women voters few and generally intelligent; secondly, because England is an old, conservative country, with much emigration and but little immigration. Here is a constant influx of foreigners: illiterate, without love of our country or interest in, or knowledge of, the history of our liberties, to whom, after a short residence, we give a full share in our government. The result begins to be alarming — enormous taxation, purchasable votes, demagogism, — all these alarm the more thoughtful, and we are not yet sure of the end. It is a wise thought that the possible bayonet or ruder weapon in the hands of our new citizens would be even worse than the ballot, and our safer course is to give the immigrants a stake and interest in the government. But when we learn that on an average one thousand immigrants per week landed at the port of Boston in the past calendar year, is it not well to consider carefully how we double and more than double the popular vote, with all its dangers and its ingredients of ignorance and irresponsibility? Last of all, it must be considered that the lives of men and women are essentially different. One sex lives in public, in constant conflict with the world; the other sex must live chiefly in private and domestic life, or the race will be without homes

and gradually die out. If nearly one-half of the male voters of our State forego their duty or privilege, as is the fact, what proportion of women would exercise the suffrage? Probably a very small one. The heaviest vote would be in the cities, as now, and the ignorant and unfit women would be the ready prey of the unscrupulous demagogue. Women do not hold a position inferior to men. In this land they have the softer side of life, — the best of everything. There are, of course, exceptions — individuals — whose struggle in life is hard, whose husbands and fathers are tyrants instead of protectors; so there are bad wives, and men ruined and disheartened by selfish, idle women.
The best work that a woman can do for the purifying of politics is by her influence over men, by the wise training of her children, by her intelligent, unselfish counsel to husband, brother, or friend, by a thorough knowledge and discussion of the needs of her community. Many laws on the statute books of our own and other States have been the work of women. More might be added.
It is the opinion of many of us, that woman’s power is greater without the ballot or possibility of office-holding for gain, when, standing outside of politics, she discusses great questions upon their merit. Much has been achieved by women in the anti-slavery cause, the temperance cause, the improvement of public and private charities, the reformation of criminals, all by intelligent discussion and influence upon men. Our legislators have been ready to listen to women, and carry out their plans when well framed.
Women can do much useful public service upon boards of education, school committees, and public charities, and are beginning to do such work. It is of vital importance to the integrity of our charitable and educational administration that it be kept out of politics. Is it not well, that we should have one sex who have no political ends to serve, who can fill responsible positions of public trust? Voting alone can easily be performed by women without rude contact, but to attain any political power women must affiliate themselves with men; because women will differ on public questions, must attend primary meetings and caucuses, will inevitably hold public office and strive for it; in short, women must enter the political arena. This result will be repulsive to a large portion of the sex, and would tend to make women unfeminine and combative, which would be a detriment to society.
It is well that men after the burden and heat of the day should return to homes where the quiet side of life is presented to them. In these peaceful New England homes of ours, great and noble men have been reared by wise and pious mothers, who instructed them, not in politics, but

in those general principles of justice, integrity, and unselfishness, which belong to and will insure statesmanship in the men who are true to them. Here is the stronghold of the sex, weakest in body, powerful for good or evil over the stronger one, whom women sway and govern; not by the ballot and by greater numbers, but by those gentle influences designed by the Creator to soften and subdue man’s ruder nature.
(Signed) CLARA T. LEONARD.

Issued by the Massachusetts Association Opposed to the Further Extension of Suffrage to Women.
Pamphlets and leaflets may be obtained from the Secretary, Room 615, Kensington Building, 687 Boylston Street, Boston, Mass.
#

Transcript

The Connecticut Association Opposed to Woman Suffrage, 1913. Grace Markham anti-suffrage correspondence, 1912-1916. MS 100682.
Connecticut Historical Society.

THE CONNECTICUT ASSOCIATION OPPOSED TO WOMAN SUFFRAGE

Hartford, April 2, 1913.
Dear Sir:
Nine thousand women from all over the State have already organized to oppose Woman Suffrage and respectfully ask you not to force the ballot upon them against their will. They ask you to consider that:
The vast majority of Connecticut women are opposed to Woman Suffrage. Only about 4 per cent. are requesting it.
The vote means active politics, and women are physically and temperamentally unfitted for the stress and strain of political activity.
Women exert more influence for good as non-partisans, than they could possibly do if they had votes.
Women are already exempt from many of the burdens, while enjoying all of the benefits of citizenship. They are specially protected by law as to property, working hours, etc. They do not need the vote, and they do not want it.
We respectfully urge you not to give suffrage your endorsement, for that is what an affirmative vote would mean under the constitution. We feel that you, our representatives, are competent to decide this question here and now.
Very respectfully,
THE CONNECTICUT ASSOCIATION OPPOSED TO WOMAN SUFFRAGE
#

Transcript

[Handwritten entry]

Second Annual Meeting of the Conn. Woman Suffrage Association .

The second annual meeting was held in Music Hall, Hartford, October 4th [1871] commencing at half past ten in the morning. John Hooker, Esq[uire]. presided, & opened the meeting with prayer. He then read the following

Report of the Treasurer
Receipts during the year $726,08
Disbursements 255,08
Balance in Treasury 471,00
There is however, a bill for printing tracts to come due in January next, of $1,491,07
Applying balance in Treasury 471,00
there will be left to be raised $1,020,07
Of this Mrs. Gov[overnor]. Jewell has pledged $300,00
leaving to be raised
The bill at the printers is for 720,07
121,000 tracts printed $1,586,12
Posters 3,50
1000 Petitions 9.00
2000 Circulars 13.90
Expressage 28.55
1,641,07
Already paid out 150.00
1,491,07

Donations during the year in small sums $33,00
From profits on meetings held 46,30
From sale of tracts 74,78
In donations above $10

Mrs. Lita1 Barney Sayles $20.00
Mrs. Esther Jewell 12.00
Mrs. Lucy R. Elmes 40.00
An unknown giver 150,00
Cheney2 Brothers 350,00

572,00
$726,08

Hartford, Oct. 4th, 1871
John Hooker
Treasurer

An amendment to the 5th Article of the Constitution was then adopted so that it now reads as follows:
Article V.

The annual meeting of the Association shall be held at any time during the fall of the year, the Executive Committee to appoint the time & place & give notice of the same. Special meetings may be called at any time by the Executive Committee, upon reasonable notice in the public papers.
It was then voted that the Executive Committee shall have power to add to the number of Vice Presidents from time to time as they may think best -- & that so far as it can be done, at least one Vice President shall be appointed from each county.
Mrs. I.B. Hooker than addressed the meeting, congratulating those present on the encouraging aspects of the cause.
The following Resolution were then read by the Chairman: [Newspaper clipping attached to notebook]

1 Pronounced: LEE - Tuh
2 Pronounced: CHAY - nee

Resolutions

Resolved, That the present aspect of the woman suffrage movement is extremely encouraging. We have only to refer to the able and exhaustive report of a minority of the judiciary committee of the House of Representatives in favor of the right of women to vote under the present constitution of the United States; to the recent decision of Chief Justice Howe of Wyoming, and of Judge Underwood of the United States district court of Virginia to the same effect; and to the great number of leading men in congress and in both the political parties, which have no vital issues between them, we have reason to hope that the right of women to vote will soon be conceded and that their votes will be counted in the election of the next president.
Resolved, That it is the duty of all the women of Connecticut who believe in their present constitutional right to the suffrage, to vote at the next state election, having complied with all legal prequisites[sic]3.
Resolved, That it is the duty of the men of Connecticut to assist women in the discharge of this new duty by every means in their power.
Resolved, That we recommend to and urge upon all men in the state in favor of woman suffrage, to withhold their votes from every candidate for office who is not known to be in favor of the enfranchisement of women, and to labor for the election of such candidates of whatever party otherwise unobjectionable as shall be in favor of the equal political rights of all citizens.
Resolved, That the claim made by some of the opponents of woman suffrage, that the marriage relation will in some way become impaired if women are enfranchised, is not only unjust, so far as it attributes a desire for such a result to any considerable number of the advocates of woman suffrage but is utterly unphilosophical and absurd. The hearts of women will always be in their homes. The best condition of the marriage relation is, and always will be, more important to the happiness of women to than that of men and women have the right to vote they will vote down overwhelmingly every attempt by legislation to degrade that relation or to render it in any manner insecure, or open the door to any allowed violation of its dignities and sanctities. They may also be relied upon

3 We believe the word should be "Prerequisites"

to condemn with equal emphasis, the attempt, which has so many advocates among men, to license prostitution in our cities.
Resolved, That we renew, therefore, the resolution passed unanimously two years ago by the convention at which this association was formed--"That in advocating the opening to women this larger sphere, we do not undervalue her relations as a wife and mother, than which none can be more worthy of a true woman's love and pride; but it is only by a full development of her faculties and a wide range for her thought that she can become a true companion of an intelligent husband, and the wise and inspiring educator of her children."
Resolved, That inasmuch as the Constitution of this Association limits its object to the one matter of the securing to the women of the state the right to vote, we renew our purpose therein declared to limit the operations of the Association to that one object, without turning aside either to endorse or repudiate any views on other questions of social reform which may be held by those who in good faith and genuine earnestness co-operate with us in this special work. All such questions we have no doubt will be met by the women of the country when they come to vote upon them, with an intelligent and earnest interest, and in the spirit of the highest purity and Christian morality.

[Handwritten entry]

The Resolutions were then left to be voted on at the afternoon session.

John Hooker, Esq. next addressed the meeting, speaking of the encouraging aspects of the cause as viewed in the light of the recent interpretations to the 14th & 15th Amendments to the Constitution. The argument that women are entitled to vote under these amendments, was presented in a clear light & with forcible logic.
Mrs. Campbell of Mass[achusetts] here addressed the meeting in a very pleasing & sensible manner.
Mrs. Anna M. Middlebrook then spoke briefly & the meeting adjourned till the afternoon.

Afternoon.

The meeting was opened at 2 1/2 o'clock, Mr. John Hooker, Chairman. The Committee on Nominations presented the following list of officers who were for the ensuing year:
[Newspaper clipping]
President. -- Mrs. I. B. Booker, Hartford.
Vice Presidents--Rev. Dr. Joseph Cummings, Middletown; Rev. Dr. N.J. Burton, Hartford; Rev. C.M. Wines, Hartford; Rev. W.L. Gage, Hartford; Timothy Allyn, Esq., Hartford; John Hooker, Esq., Hartford; Charles Cheney, Esq., South Manchester; Ward Cheney, Esq., South Manchester; Rev. W.W. Belden, Bristol; Rev. J.B. Cleveland, Bloomfield; Hon. H.H. Starkweather, Norwith4 [sic]; John Rice, Esq., Farmington; Dr.
E.B. Lyon, New Britain.
Secretary. -- Frances Ellen Burr, Hartford. Treasurer. -- John Hooker, Esq., Hartford.
Executive Committees.--Rev. Olympia Brown, Bridgeport; Mrs. Anna M. Middlebrook, Bridgeport; Mrs. Lit Barney Sayles, Dayville; Charles Atwater, New Haven; Mrs. Lucy Elmes, Derby; Mrs. Virginia Smith, Hartford, Mrs. J.G. Parsons, Hartford. [Handwritten addition] Hon. Ja[me]s Gallagher

[Handwritten entry]
The Resolutions of the morning were then read again & offered for discussion & vote.
It was announced that the Rev[erand]. Olympia Brown was unavoidably detained from the meeting.
Mrs. Anna M. Middlebrook of Bridgeport then took the floor & made a strong argument for woman suffrage under the two last amendments to the Constitution. She also gave an outline of the plan proposed & drawn up by herself some months ago -- a plan in which the woman suffragists of the state pledge themselves to work actively for the election of such nominees of either political party as will pledge themselves to support woman suffrage -- the balance of political power in this state being so evenly adjusted that the few votes required in each town to turn it either way can be secured to the party supporting woman suffragists.

4 This should be Norwich

Mrs. Middlebrook said she had the names of some fifty gentlemen ready to pledge themselves in this manner.
Mrs. Campbell of Massachusetts next spoke. A question being handed in from the audience asking whether the vote would not make women masculine, Mrs. Campbell replied that it would tend to elevate them & tone them up to higher standards, from the fact that it educates & enlightens those who possess it -- at least that is the general tendency of it.
The Rev. C.M. Wines of the Fourth Congregational Church was here introduced, & made a most interesting address. He claimed that a question of right was a question of duty, & that it was now no longer a question of woman's right to vote, but had passed on to the higher plane where men have the right to demand that they vote. It is no longer a question of what we want but of what the citizen needs. The true welfare of the country requires that women be enlisted in its concerns.
Quite a number of questions were handed in from the audience during the afternoon, & a good deal of interesting discussion ensued.
The Resolutions previously read, were adopted, & the meeting adjourned till evening.

Evening
The meeting was opened at half past seven, Mrs. Hooker presiding. Miss F.E. Burr the Secretary, read her report, which stated that the list of members had been gradually increased to between three hundred & four hundred names. Only a small number had complied with the amendment made to the Constitution last year, requiring the annual payment of a dollar. It was suggested that dimes as well as dollars were acceptable. It stated that 121,000 tracts had been printed & a good part of them circulated in different parts of the state, leaving about 30,000 on hand at present. 71 towns have been supplied, leaving a majority still unprovided for, as we have no friends in those towns to circulate them -- or at least have no addresses of friends there. The tracts were all sent free of charge. A number of meetings had been held during the fall & winter with decided success, especially the one in Bridgeport, under the charge of the Rev. Olympia Brown. Nearly a thousand petitions for suffrage have seen sent into the Legislature by the Association since its organization two years ago, but without any perceptible effect on the legislators, -- a result that was probably expected, at least by a good many. No one had reason to expect any other result. We might with a little more confidence expect an appeal for justice to

penetrate the integuments5 of the mummies in the Catacombs of Egypt than the hide-bound consciences of the enclave of mummies that alternate between Hartford & New Haven. Those of Cairo are preferable to those of Connecticut, for more tolerable are the dead who are dead to everything on earth than those who are dead only to justice.
The early settlers of Conn[ecticut]. proclaimed that the colony should be governed by the laws of God until they had time to make better; but they never had time.
The report spoke of the police force in this city, rotten from top to bottom, & of the need of women's vote to put better men in these offices. When thieves are set to catch thieves, disgraceful compromises are apt to be made.
The Secretary read a letter from the President of the Women's Club in Washington, giving an encouraging account of the work they are doing there, where they are taking prostitutes by the hand & helping them to live better lives.
Mrs. Hooker then spoke, & in the course of her remarks read a letter from a New Britain gentleman in relation to a discussion on woman suffrage in a debating club in that town, where Elihu6 Burritt7 had taken part & spoken favorably of it. Mrs. H. then urged the women to sign the women's pledge in the large book of the National Association.
Mr. John Hooker next addressed the meeting, repeating by request, but at greater length, his morning argument on the right of women to vote under the 14th & 15th Amendments to the Constitution.
Mrs. Middlebrook then gave a more elaborate presentation of her plan of working for the election of those men who will support woman suffrage.
At a late hour the Rev. Mr. Wines was noticed by the audience & was called out, & made a neat little speech.
The meeting then adjourned sine die8.
Frances Ellen Burr
Secretary.

5 Pronounced: in-TEG-yuh-muhnts
6 Pronounced: EL - la- huu
7 Pronounced: Burr - it
8 Pronounced: SIN-ay DEE-ay

Transcript

[Handwritten text]

Fourth Annual Meeting of the Conn[ecticut] Woman Suffrage Association

The Fourth Annual Meeting was held in New Haven, December 11th, 1873. The morning business meeting was held in Hoadley's1 Building, & two public meetings were held--afternoon & evening--in Loomis's Hall. The following letter to the Hartford Times gives a pretty full report of the proceedings:

[Newspaper clipping inserted into the minute book] Connecticut Woman Suffrage Meeting
Correspondence of The Hartford Times New Haven, Dec. 11th, 1873
The fourth annual meeting of the Connecticut Woman Suffrage Association was held in this city to-day. A business meeting was held in the morning at Hoadley's building, opposite the post-office, and an afternoon and evening meeting in Loomis Hall. At the business meeting, the following officers were elected for the ensuing year:--
President: Isabella B. Hooker, Hartford
Vice Presidents: Charles Atwater, New Haven; Mrs. Esther E. Jewell, Hartford; Mrs.
Rosella E. Buckingham, South Glastonbury; Ralph H. Park, New Haven; Alfred W. Phelps, New Haven; John Hooker, Hartford; Rev[erend]. C.E. Stowe, Hartford; Charles and Ward Cheney2, South Manchester; Mrs. Lita Barney Sayles, Killingly; Thomas M. Waller, New London; Mrs. Lucy Elmes, Derby; George A. Hickox, Litchfield; Timothy Allyn, Hartford; Rev. N.J. Burton, Hartford; Rev. C.M. Wines, Hartford; Mrs. Anna M. Middlebrook, Bridgeport; Hon[orable]. H.H. Starkweather, Norwich; Rev. J.B. Cleveland, Bloomfield; Rev. Dr. Joseph Cummings, Middletown; Rev. W.W. Belden, Bristol; John Rice, Esq[uire]., Farmington; Dr. E.B. Lyon, New Britain.
Secretary: Frances Ellen Burr, Hartford.

1 Pronounced: HODE - lee
2 Pronounced: CHAY - nee

Treasurer: John H. Hooker, Hartford.
Executive Committee, Rev. Olympia Brown, chairman, Bridgeport; Mrs. Hannah M. Comstock, New Haven; Miss Abby H. Smith, Glastonbury; Hon. James Galla[g]her, New Haven; Mrs. J.E. Welch, New Haven; Mrs. J.G. Parsons, Hartford; Dr. J.S. Morrell, New Haven; Mrs. A.E. Reed, Hartford.
The report of the treasurer, Mr. John Hooker, was then read. Mr. Hooker's report was omitted at the last annual meeting, as he was traveling in Europe at the time, therefore this report goes back and covers the three years he has held the office:
Received during that time in sums of less than $25.00. $ 298.27
In sums of $25 and over, as follows:
1870, Nov. 21, an anonymous friend..................................................................... 50.00
1871, March 31, the same person ......................................................................... 100.00
1871, Sept. 30, Cheney Bro[ther]s., Hartford........................................................ 350.00
1871, Dec. 26, the Misses Smith, Glastonbury...................................................... 25.00
1871, Dec. 30, Mrs. J.G. Parsons, Hartford............................................................ 55.00
1871, Dec. 30, Mrs. Gov[overnor]. Jewell............................................................. 100.00
1872, Jan. 4, T.M. Allyn, Hartford......................................................................... 50.00
1872, Jan. 8, Miss Esther Pratt, Hartford................................................................ 50.00
1872, Feb. 14, W[illia]m. B. Smith, Hartford......................................................... 50.00
1872, Feb. 22, Cha[rle]s. Atwater, New Haven...................................................... 50.00
1872, April 7, Mrs. I.B. Hooker.............................................................................. 100.00
1872, May 23, Wm. B. Smith, Hartford…............................................................. 50.00
1873, April 9, Chas. Atwater, New Haven............................................................. 50.00
1873, June 5, Cheney Bros., Hartford........... ........................................................ 300.00
1873, June 7, Mrs. Gov. Jewell, Hartford.............................................................. 200.00
$1,848.27
Paid out as follows:
For rent of hall Nov. 15, 1870.............................................................................. 12.00
For rent of hall Oct. 4, 1871............................................................................ 20.00
Postage stamps................................................................................................. 59.04
Sundry small items........................................................................................... 45.04

Tracts printed. $1,848.27
Balance in treasury........................................................................................... $ 28.42
JOHN HOOKER, Treasurer
Hartford, Dec. 10, 1873.
General discussion followed, and plans of work for the ensuing year were discussed, and at 1 o'clock all hands adjourned to an adjoining room and sat down to a fine collation provided by the New Haven city association for all friends attending from out of town.
New Haven has a wide-awake suffrage association, auxiliary to the State organization. Their headquarters are in Hoadley Block, where they hold weekly meetings through the year, at which essays are read and general discussion held. Quite a number of gentlemen attend and enter into the discussion, and are as much interested as the ladies. In fact, there are more gentleman speakers at these meetings, I am told, than ladies. Several young men, members of the Dwight Debating Club, have joined the association, and enter into the weekly discussions with fluent tongues. The Hon. Charles Atwater is president of the New Haven association, which owes much of its success to his liberal purse, and that of the Hon. James Gallagher.

The afternoon meeting at Loomis Hall was opened with prayer by the Rev. Olympia Brown of Bridgeport. Miss Brown was married last spring, but hasn't changed her name. She says she and her husband agreed before they were married that they should hold onto their own names; in fact, she wouldn't have married without such an agreement. I asked her if Mr. Willis (her husband) didn't wish to change his name to Brown. She said, "Oh, no; he would be simple if he did, Willis being a much prettier name; besides had his name been Higginbottom he would have preferred to retain it, considering it was his own, and the one he had always been known by."I asked her if no one ever called her Mrs.
Willis?" She said, "Oh, yes; sometimes they did; but she didn't wage any special war on that, any more than if they had called her some little pet name that never belonged to her." And so it is, John Henry Willis and the Rev. Olympia Brown; and he attends to his grocery business, and she preaches to her congregation of saints and sinners every Sunday; and they keep a snug little house down in Bridgeport on "Golden Hill"; and the name on their door is "Olympia Brown"--that partner in this matrimonial firm, being the

better know of the two. Had it been the reverse, John Henry's name would have probably greeted the passersby on Golden Hill.
Mrs. Hooker presided at the meeting, and opened the proceedings by reading a couple of letters--one from the Rev. Celia Burleigh3, who is now resting and recruiting at a health establishment up in Danielsonville, New York; and the other from the Hon.
Thomas M. Waller of New London. Perhaps your readers may be interested in reading the views on woman suffrage of a prominent politician like Mr. Waller. It is as follows:--

LETTER FROM THE HON. THOMAS M. WALLER.
New London, December 10, 1873.
Mrs. Isabella B. Hooker: Dear Madam--I have been absent from home several days. I found your letter awaiting me on my return yesterday.
I shall not be able to be present at your meeting to-morrow; I have an engagement in court. I hope to read a full report of all your proceedings, and to obtain a copy in print of your husband's opinion of the Hunt decision to which you allude.
I feel complimented of course by your suggestion of my acceptance of some office in your organization, but I do not think it wise in your organization to put into office any person who suffers the reputation of being a politician, whether he be big or little, good or bad, and I fear that, notwithstanding all my efforts to the contrary, I am getting such a reputation.
I do not decline your offer of office out of a politician's fear of being identified with a movement so far wholly successful. I am in favor of women voting if they want to, and in favor of giving them an opportunity to show their desire to do so, or not to do so, by giving them the right to do so. I am in favor of the agitation in which you are engaged. It has done good, and it will continue to do good. If women never reach the ballot box they will still, in every State in the Union, be indebted to such agitators as you are for the enactment of wholesome, sensible and humane laws, recognizing the rights of women to their property, their children and themselves.
I am in favor of increasing the responsibilities of women, as well as their privileges, and was the author of the law enacted in 1872, allowing married women to make

3 Pronounced: BURR-LEE

contracts for the benefit of themselves, their families and their estate, and MAKING them responsible for such contracts. Experience has proven the law to have been a wise one. I was the author of the law passed at the same time, making a married woman personally responsible for any tort she might commit, and exempting her poor husband from responsibility for it. Before that law a married women could slander her neighbor, or commit trespass upon her neighbor's land, and her husband would have to pay the bills of damage, but now the woman who slanders must take care of herself. Her husband's property is no longer liable to be swept away by a slander suit his wife has brought upon him. By increasing the responsibility of woman you increase her dignity. No! I do not decline to be an officer in your organization for any other reason than that I am satisfied I can be of more service to your cause in the future if I do not appear as a champion of in conventions, and other such places where you have no need of champions except the for dress parade, and will be with you in every movement you make, but I want to be always, "where I can do the most good."
Truly yours, Tho[ma]s. M. Waller

Mrs. Burleigh's letter spoke of her hearty sympathy with the work and her regrets at not being able to attend the meeting, and of her high appreciation of Miss Anthony's services, who, more than any other person except her (Mrs. Burleigh's) husband, had been instrumental in bringing her into her public work.
After reading the letters, Mrs. Hooker spoke of the case of the Misses Smith, of Glastonbury, who have recently refused to pay their taxes, and referred to the fact that the speech of one of them, published in the Courant, of your city, a few ago, has been widely copied and commented on by the press in various parts of the country. She predicted that the step these women have taken will inaugurate a second Boston "tea-party," and carry these women down to history.
The secretary of the association then read the following report: SECRETARY'S REPORT.
We have gained one decided advantage since our last annual meeting. At that time, woman suffragists everywhere were blowing trumpets for Grant and the Republican party. The bursting of that little bubble has not proved in vain. It is an ill-wind that blows

nobody good; and the particular good blown to [illegible] cause of Republican treachery, is the opening of many eyes. It is no small victory to learn on just what ground we stand-- just how the land lies and how to operate our forces in future. It is the worst kind of defeat to be pledged to a party which uses you only for its own ends and then kicks you over as soon as those ends are gained. Political parties of all kinds are treacherous-- Republican or Democratic. They work for party and not for principle. The Republican party has besmirched itself with false promises and treachery. In Massachusetts, they met and resolved that they were the high-toned party of all progress and morality, or something to that effect. But this didn't make it so. There's a wide difference between a fact and a resolution. As one of our latter-day poets says: "You may resolute till the cows come home," but it doesn't alter anything. At present, there's no party of progress; and as to a live issue, it would require a powerful magnifying-glass to discover one in either party. The woman question has got to be the next issue, whether politicians favor it or not; and very few do favor it. It is better to look at these things as they are than to inflate ourselves with vain hopes. Our only hope lies in the justice of our cause and in the fact that the right will prevail in spite of opponents. We are having fresh proof all the time that this cause has to contend against more fearful odds than any other since the world was made. In all other forms of slavery, the victims, when once started in the work of liberation, have worked for it unitedly, heart and soul. I believe this is the only one which has furnished instances of its victims clinging to it, and event petitioning to have it continued. But there's a cause for this, or rather many causes, and they do not lie on the surface; but the most prominent one is the demoralizing effect of this most insidious form of slavery, which so enwraps and permeates its victims that it becomes almost a second nature, and stupefies like an anodyne, and blinds one to all honest, upright ideas of freedom. A member of the German parliament not long ago, gave his definition of the term "liberty of the press," which he called "a freedom tempered by the gallows." The liberty of women might be called a freedom tempered by disfranchisement. Woman's mission is submission, according to the popular verdict. One of the objects of our association is to reverse that judgement [sic]--to form a basis of operation for the women of the State who realize their degraded political status, to take some steps towards bettering it. United we stand; divided we fall. One woman alone can do nothing. It is in

concerted action our hope lies. In round numbers, there are 100,000 women in this State. Deducting foreigners and those not sufficiently enlightened to appreciate the question, and those who are sufficiently enlightened, but who from prejudice or fear of ridicule will pay no attention to it, we ought to have at least 15,000 or less than one sixth of the women of the State, to support our cause and make our association a grand success. It is not difficult to see how easily we could work our way on to victory with 15,000 earnest women to back us up, and each paying a small yearly tax to keep the association in working order. Many of the 15,000 might not be able to pay $1 a year--some would be able to pay more than that--but here isn't a woman on Connecticut soil so utterly God- forsaken and impoverished, that she can't raise ten cents a year for our cause. I'm speaking of women outside of pauper house, of course. With 15,000 members, each paying her tax according to her means, we should have a revenue of $8 or $10,000 a year. With this sum, Suitable headquarters could be maintained at Hartford on New Haven, and an intelligent, competent woman paid a respectable salary to devote her whole time to the cause--keeping up an active correspondence with all parts of the State--visiting different parts of the State as occasion required--sending out tracts and other documents, holding correspondence with friends of the cause in all parts of the world, and keeping herself thoroughly posted, and with statistics systematically arranged and ready at a moment's warning. A woman, in short, ever on the alert, like a sentinel at his post of duty. With such a sentinel on our watch towers, we could take ten steps forward where now we take but one. This is not a castle in the air. It is merely a moderate estimate of our possibilities founded on actually existing material for success, but now lying useless and unutilized in all parts of the State. A woman in Windham county, thoroughly in sympathy with our cause--another at the other end of the State in Fairfield county, and so on through the State, are of no use to the cause so long as they are shut up to themselves, and cut off from all communication with active workers. But the same woman, who, although in sympathy with us, was before as dead as Julius Caesar, immediately becomes a living, active force as soon as she lets her whereabouts and sympathies be known to those who are working for what she was before only dreaming about. What our State Suffrage Association needs most to-day --next to money, which is always foremost--is the exact post-office address of every woman in the State, and man too, who favors woman

suffrage. This is absolutely necessary to any effective work. We have on our books between 300 and 400 names, the greater part of which were written there by the persons themselves at the time of the organization of the society in 1869; but two-thirds of these names are without the least indication as to where their owners are to be reached, so that in sending out documents we have to calculate on half or two-thirds being dead waste, for directing to Hartford, hit or miss, where no address is given, it doubtless generally proves a "miss," as the person is just as likely to be at the other end of the State. One suffragist with a post-office address is worth a dozen without any. If one Society could have competent canvassers in every town in the State to find out just who and where our friends are, and to solicit new memberships, and then have this followed up by communications and documents from head-quarters, so as to clinch our friends and helpers and hold them to us, we should have a live, flourishing association, where now we are somewhat lacking in vigor. Members who never hear from the association they have joined, are apt to lose interest in it. We have many such on our books, but the fault is their own, though unintentionally so. It is impossible to write to those who have no local habitation.
It is four years since our society was organized. Very few who attended the brilliant and crowded meetings in the Opera House at Hartford on the 28th and 29th of October '69, will ever forget the interest and enthusiasm there manifested at the first woman suffrage association ever organized in Connecticut. This good old Commonwealth never heard better speaking than was heard at those two days' meetings, from some of the best speakers in the land. I will go farther and say that she never heard so good. The music of the Hutchinson's and the sweeter music of eloquent tongues pleading justice for women, were really inspiring. One lady, at the close of an enthusiastic session, said to me, "Why, I should think you'd all been taking wine!" I told her we had and a better kind than comes from grapes. Well that was the opening of the suffrage movement in Connecticut. Of course you're all aware that to Mrs. Hooker our thanks is due for that convention. The honor of the first woman suffrage meeting ever held in Connecticut, belongs to Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton, if I'm not mistaken. If any was ever held previous to that, I've never heard of it. They held it in Allyn Hall in the winter of '67 I think. So the woman

suffrage movement in this State is of very recent date, comparatively speaking, meetings and conventions having been held in other parts of the country ever since 1848.
Our association started of [sic] with two or three hundred members; and a hundred more or so, have been added since. About a hundred thousand tracts have been distributed gratuitously through the State. But henceforth, if the association issue tracts, a fair price will probably be charged for them, as gratuities on so large a scale are apt to be rather disastrous, financially speaking, unless the organization have a full treasury to draw from. Some twelve or fifteen auxiliary societies have been formed in different parts of the State within the last two years. Of these, the most important is the New Haven City Association. In fact, New Haven has, within a year or two, become the centre of activity of the woman suffrage movement in the State. [The secretary here read the report of Mr. Barber, Sec. of the New Haven Society.]
This report shows that New Haven in alive, whoever or whatever else may be dead. However, we indications of life in various parts of the State and country. Last March, eighteen ladies were registered in Willimantic. A Democratic politician, in a letter from Willimantic to a Hartford paper at that time, wrote: "Whatever we may think of the policy or propriety of female suffrage, we think that the bungling and broad amendments which have, within the past two years, been made to the organic law of the land, permit them to exercise the privilege if they demand it. If the law is doubtful, which is all its opponents can claim, then that doubt should certainly be given in favor of the applicants for this high privilege of citizenship. If, to enfranchise the "ignorant negroes", the 14th amendment to the Constitution has been made broad enough to include intelligent white women, it is no fault of the Windham county Democratic and Liberal board of selectmen, who administer the law in the light of that amendment, if they admit to suffrage those intelligent white women who, under the State law, as citizens under the United States Constitution, are qualified to be made electors. Hurrah! for the ladies! God bless them; we heartily welcome them in the ranks of suffragans if they will only help us stamp out corruption in the official places of nation and state. We shall first appoint you, ladies, as a committee to look after the bar-rooms for the two days preceding and during election day, to see if the grand scheme of debauchery practiced last November by the

Republicans, can be stopped. Then we have other duties for you, and of which we will acquaint you in due time."
Coming from an active politician, this letter struck me as one of significant straws of the day.
Eighteen or twenty women have been registered in Hartford the past year or two; and they have registered, or been trying to register, in various parts of this State, as well as other States, under the new amendment to the Constitution. Nine tax paying women of Hartford, last year, sent in a protest with their taxes; and two ladies of property--the Misses Smith, of Glastonbury, in this State,--have within the past few weeks, utterly refused to pay taxes. The tax collector has called two or three times on them lately, but has left empty handed every time. Considering that they pay more than any other person, man or woman, in their district, toward the support of their town government, it is hardly to be wondered that they have at last taken a stand and declined to increase the town revenues any further, so long as they are denied a voice in the government. The money that the town gets from them now has got to be taken by force, either in selling off their estate piece-meal or in whatever way the town-officers may deem best. And what a pleasing little duty for the officers of the law to perform! In performing it, they virtually have to say to these women: "It will do no good for you to resist; we'll have your money, and you can't help yourselves. We'll skin you clean of your possession, if need be; we'll go to the farthest extreme of the law, a take our money forcibly if we cannot get it peaceably; but have it we will, to carry on our government, but you shall have no part of voice in it. It your money we're after; we will compel you to support a government that kicks you out of its councils."
It would seem that any man with a reasonable sense of justice would refuse to do the dirty job of forcing money from a disfranchised class to support the very power that disfranchises them. Verily women occupy the position of the slave who supports his master--and of the spaniel that fawns and licks the hand that deals the blow. Women have the same ground for refusing any further contributions toward the support of this government that our ancestors had for refusing to support the government of Great Britain. Should all women, or a large number of them, refuse to pay taxes on the same principle, a rebellion might be inaugurated to some purpose. Make this forcible collecting

of money from the disfranchised a general thing--put it on a large scale--and it holds up the law and its officers to the scorn of the world.
But our cause will work its slow and devious way, gaining ground inch by inch, rather than by any wholesale, startling victory. Women are to-day voting in all the municipal boroughs of Great Britain--voting for everything but members of Parliament. And the charge that women would not vote at all if they were allowed an opportunity, doesn't seem to apply to them any more than to men. The London Examiner, not long ago, called attention to the fact that out of every thousand men on the register, 564 went to the polls. A very slight difference, especially when we consider that women are new to the business. The friends of woman suffrage in England seem to be quite as wide awake as in this country. In 1870, the "Woman's Disabilities bill" had 91 votes in the House of Commons; in 1871, it had 151; in 1872, 143; and this year, 155--the largest vote given in favor. Last year there were sent into the House of Commons 843 petitions signed by 355,801 persons in favor of the bill. And a few months ago a memorial, signed by 11,500 women on the subject of this bill, was sent in to Mr. Disraeli4, who, in his reply, says he hopes that Parliament will soon abolish the anomaly that the Parliamentary franchise attached to a property qualification shall not be exercised by women. Florence Nightingale, Harriet Martineau5, Frances Power Cobb, Lady Anna Gore Langton, and many other distinguished women, were among the signers of this memorial. In this country, a straw significant of women's advance is found in the organization of the Granges--the movement in the interest of the Western farmers--a movement that within the past year or two has swept like wildfire through the West; 100,000 women are members of this order in different States. They are admitted to all the privileges of the Granges, on the same footing as men; and no one can become a member without the consecration of woman's hands. This order, thought started with the intention of letting politics severely alone, is fast getting into them, as recent elections at the West show. It is a secret society, started five years ago, unheralded and unknown, in a very modest manner, in an out-of-the-way place in Minnesota, the idea originating from a feeble society of Scotch farmers in North Carolina. But it is only within the past year or two that

4 Pronounced: Diz - RAIL - ee
5 Pronounced: Mar - TIN - oh

it has taken on such a wonderful growth as to surprise the world. It is making itself feared by all parties, who are trying to court its favor. A hundred thousand women in such an organization as this, ought to wield an influence for the benefit of their own sex. What a power that would be, were they all to unite for one single purpose--the enfranchisement of women. Perhaps events will take a turn that way some day, and the agricultural granges become woman suffrage granges as well. If women are to be members of such great organizations, they will have to secure the ballot to keep pace with their brother members and with the times, and also to maintain a proper self-respect, as well as the respect of others.
We are rapidly approaching our nation's centenary. Shall the joy-bells of '76 peal out with one half the nation still in subjection? This would be firing guns and blowing trumpets for only a partial victory. And those women who are forming a "Woman's Centennial Association" to help on the great celebration do little realize how degrading is the work they are doing--blowing trumpets for the power that keeps them in subjections. They had far better turn about--form an association of women to mourn in sackcloth and ashes and mark in a fitting manner the hundredth of a nation which calls itself a republic and keeps one half its people in subjection. Better muffle the bells and put the flags at half-mast, than fire guns of rejoicing over a half-slave nation.
When Jacob Bright's bill was under discussion in the British Parliament a year or two ago, a member rose and said it was an attempt to alter the laws of creation, and turn the world upside down. If women have such a tremendous reserve force as this, that with the ballott [sic] in their hands they can turn the world upside down, it is time this force were put to some account. Certainly the creator never intended it to lie idle.
In similar vein to this member of Parliament, a gentleman said to me not long ago, that if women were enfranchised, it would let hell loose on earth; and added: "Suppose a woman possesing [sic] the power of the ballot, were to belong to one political party and her husband to another--what would be the result?" This startling conundrum reminded me of the Lord Mayor's to Anne Askew. Come centuries ago, during a fierce conflict between Protestants and Papists, there was a young woman in London by the name of Anne Askew, who was strongly suspected of Protestant leanings, but there couldn't be found the least possible pretext for convicting her. So the Lord Mayor of London had her

summoned before him, and supposed a case, in order to have her commit herself. Said he, "Ann Askew, suppose a mouse were to eat some of the consecrated bread of the communion, what would become of that mouse?" "Nay, my Lord," said she, "but you say what would become of that mouse." "I say that mouse would be eternally damned, " thundered the Lord Mayor of London. "Alack, poor mouse!" was her only reply. To these suppositious cases in regard to women, we can only reply, "Alack, poor woman!"
Frances Ellen Burr, Secretary.
Hartford, Dec. 10, 1873.
Mrs. Hooker then delivered an able address. After congratulating the friends on the progress of the work, she said:
"Permit me to make a few suggestions. 1. We should organize political clubs in every town in our State, after the model of those now forming in Massachusetts, under the following articles of association: "We, the undersigned residents of ---, in the State of ---, of all political parties, believing that Woman Suffrage is a vital political issue, do hereby organize ourselves into a Woman Suffrage Political Club, for the purpose of forwarding the movement morally and politically by helping to elect the friends of Suffrage to the Legislature and to Congress, and by helping to defeat its opponents." The last clause is the emphatic one, and with but a moderate degree of work in every town, the members of these clubs could easily control the elections in our evenly balanced little State. Already many such clubs are formed in Massachusetts, those in Worcester6 and North Brookfield containing the names of, and calling out earnest speeches from such men as Hon. George [Illegible] Hoar and Hon. Amasa7 Walker.
2. We should have an efficient man or woman of capacity, energy and faithfulness to act as our agent from this time till our annual spring eleccion [sic] in organizing these clubs, and furnish him or her with all necessary tracts and printed documents to further the work, and should raise at once the funds necessary for this purpose and to pay the expenses of public speakers whom we may think best from time to time to employ to assist in arousing public attention.

6 Pronounced: WUU - stah
7 Pronounced: AM - ah - see

My friends who are here to-day, will you not do this--at least will you not start a subscription paper that shall be worth a thousand dollars to us before the first day of April next? And will you not purchase of our Secretary, Miss Burr, 788 Main [S]treet, Hartford, our own tracts, for private reading and distribution, at ten cents apiece, or twenty dollars a thousand, that in this way, also, funds may be raised. We have heretofore given these tracts to any who would use them, but if now we could sell the remaining ones on hand, quite a little sum might be raised.
Mrs. Hooker then gave a resume of the progress of the woman suffrage cause, in this country and in Europe, and closed as follows:
Permit me, then, in closing, dear friends, to call your attention to another "tendency" of the day, from which, in my judgment, more is to be hoped than from all other sources combined. I mean the tendency of political parties to want votes, and especially of new parties struggling into existence through the disintegration of old and corrupt organizations. We see daily tokens of the bewilderment and desperation of teese [sic] now superannuated parties, tottering over their yawning graves, and hardly notice that the young giant Reform has already sprung into existence, declaring for "Liberty, Equality and Fraternity"--a Liberty that shall be without license, and Equality without reservation, and a Fraternity founded upon the golden rule: "Whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them."
When the true Jeffersonian party of the coming century shall have found its heaven- appointed leader it will march to certain victory, and, emblazoning on its standard the magnificent declaration of the great author of our Magna Charta, "That governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed," will inaugurate the reign of perfect justice over the whole earth; and may God speed the day.["]

Mrs. Hooker's address was frequently and heartily applauded. At its close Miss Annie
E. Hinman, of West Winsted, read a bright and spicy address, the audience testifying their enjoyment of it by frequent applause. The whole of it would be well worth printing, but I will quote but one short sentence for lack of time. "The man without some feminine qualities is a brute; and a woman without some masculine qualities, is a baby, fit only to be dressed up in laces for a show and a plaything."

Susan B. Anthony then spoke a few minutes, and was followed by Mr. Ralph H. Park of New Haven, who made an excellent ten minute speech, when the meeting adjourned till evening. The members of the association and friends from out of town, repaired to Hoadly's Block and refreshed themselves with the bountiful good things there spread for them. At half past six, a meeting of the new executive committee was called by Miss Brown the chairman, and plans were discussed for forming political clubs and raising money to employ speakers to canvass the State. At 8 o'clock the evening meeting at Loomis Hall was opened by some inspiriting music from a Bridgeport Glee Club who had volunteered their services for the occasion. After the singing, Mr. F.S. Root, a student at the Yale Law School, a young man of twenty, made a speech that would have done credit to many an older one. It was bright and vigorous and delivered with an easy grace. This young man shows talent that will make him known to the world at some future day. At the conclusion of his speech, the glee club sang "The Golden Age," then Mrs. Hooker read a paper by Mr. Hooker, giving his views as a lawyer, of Miss Anthony's trial and conviction. Mr. Hooker's letter is too long to incorporate in this report, but it will not spoil by waiting for another day. It is a paper carefully prepared and well worth reading. Many of your readers will be interested in it. After reading it, Mrs. Hooker introduced Miss Anthony herself, who came to tell the story of her trial and conviction. She said that Mr. Hooker's letter had taken the wind out of her sails, completely--that he had stated the case so thoroughly and so well, she thought she had better sit down, as there was nothing for her to say. But the audience preferred to have her go on, and soon found that no wind had been taken out of her sails; but as she went on, she took considerable out of the sails of Judge Hunt and the authorities who put her under trial and conviction. Her speech was too long to give in this report. I will give only a brief abstract. She said:

MISS ANTHONY'S SPEECH
What first induced to me register was a notice I read in a Rochester paper, which ran thus:--"Register now! To-day and to-morrow will be your last chance. If you were not allowed to vote, you would fight for the right and face death for it. Register now!" What citizen who loved his country, could resist such an appeal as that? Certainly I was not the

citizen to resist, for I love my country. I went immediately to the registrar's office and asked them to put my name down. One of them said, "I guess not Miss Anthony; you're a woman." I read to him the 14th and 15th amendments, and argued the point for a few minutes. He finally said he didn't see why that didn't include women as well as men, and he put my name down. A democrat present said the arguments for including women in these amendments, were unanswerable. Somebody put it in one of the papers that I had registered, and immediately over 50 women in Rochester rushed to the registrar's office. In one or two wards, their names were taken, but in none except the 8th did they receive their votes on election day. After registering, I began to doubt about their receiving my vote, and so went in search of a lawyer to help me out in case of the denial of my right. I consulted several, but found they would not answer my purpose at all, till at length I went to the Hon. Henry Selden8, who proved just the lawyer I wanted. Well I voted. As Charles Sumner says, "everything before the war was interpreted against library, and since the war, everything in favor of it." However, this doesn't apply to women yet. After I had voted, United States Commissioner Storrs sent word that he wanted to see me. But I didn't respond to the invitation; I decided that the officials should work their way in this matter without much assistance from me. Then Marshal Kinney came and said Commissioner Storrs wanted to arrest me. I said, "Is that the usual way of doing these things--to go to the people and tell them they must go and get themselves arrested?" [Laughter.] Finally he said he had a warrant in his pocket. I said I would like to see it. He showed it. But as he still didn't take any steps to arrest me, and making preparation to leave, I said I didn't think it proper when United States officials had criminals in charge, to go off and leave them. I finally went along with him to the Commissioner's office, and he paid my fare down the street car. I said I was glad to have Uncle Sam pay my expenses for once. They telegraphed for the United States District Attorney at Lockport. After consultation among the officials, the other women who had voted were brought down, and the Commissioner required bail of $500 each. I determined to have a writ of habeas corpus, and refused to pay the $500. The place where we voted was a dirty barber's shop, with a pane of glass broken out, through which the ballot had to be thrust. I took the oath, and all the papers said I swore that I was a male citizen. Was questioned as

8 Pronounced: Sel - dun

to bribery. George T. Lord is said to have $30,000 afloat in Rochester for bribing purposes. Better question men on the bribery business. It was not till February [obscured] I learned that if brought in guilty, I should have to pay the entire costs of the trial, which includes the fees of the hangers-on always found in United States courts. I never knew much about U.S. Circuit Courts before. They are filled with these hangers-on, who spend their time at the dirty job of hunting up the peccadilloes and shortcomings of people in order to get the fee for arresting them. When women come into power, if they don't clean out United States Circuit Courts, it will be because they have forgotten the mysteries of house-cleaning. I spoke in twenty-eight places in Monroe county while my trial was impending, so as to get the ear of every one of my possible jurors. It was announced in some of the papers that it was illegal for me to go about speaking for the purpose of influencing my jurors in that way. But free speech is not quite abolished in this country. The case was postponed to the Circuit Court of Canandaigua9 in June, Judge Hunt presiding. Everybody knew why it was postponed. I at once resolved to speak in Ontario county; and during twenty days I made twenty-two speeches, Sundays and all, for one of the duties imposed by my religious creed is the sacred duty of upholding the liberty of human beings. I was not allowed to be a witness in my case, though my counsel earnestly urged this point. The only thing the Judge had a right to question me on was whether I voted for a member of Congress, and that was the very thing he refused to have brought into the proceedings. The Judge said to me, "You voted as a woman, did you not?" I replied, "May it please your Honor, no sir! I voted as a United States citizen." We sat one afternoon and part of the next day, and then the judge said he should record a verdict of guilty. My counsel wanted the case to go to a jury, but the Judge refused. Then my counsel appealed for a new trial, but in vain. The whole thing was arranged by the party in power to shirk the responsibilities of this woman suffrage question. The Judge's opinion was all written beforehand. The Republican party is in the same condition in regard to this question as it was in regard to the negroes at the close of the war. When this farce of a trial was brought to a close, the Judge asked if the prisoner had anything to say. I said I have many things to say. I said, you have violated every fundamental principle of this government." The Judge said, "The prisoner will sit down. We cannot listen to

9 Pronounced: cannon - DAY - gwa

arguments." I said, "Though the laws are made by men, and interpreted by men, I claim the right to a word in my own defense when put on trial by this government." "Sit down! Sit down! The prisoner will sit down!" repeated and reiterated the Judge. "But Judge, you called for my reasons why I should not be pronounced guilty," said I. And for 15 or 20 minutes I fought it out, the Judge in the meanwhile ordering me to sit down. Then he said, "The prisoner will pay 100 dollars fine, and the costs of the trial. Then I said, "I have some debts which I intend to pay, but this outrageous, unjust penalty, I declare to you I will never pay."
"The prisoner will sit down!" said the Judge. To go back to the animus of this prosecution, it has been a republican maneuver from the first. I have always been a republican myself, but for the bad deeds of this party, I have no excuse.
Miss Anthony spoke till nearly half past 9, the audience paying the closest attention, and frequently applauded. After she had concluded, Mr. Gallagher rose in the audience, and asked her where she was meanwhile after her sentence had been pronounced--how was it that she came off apparently scott free? She replied that the Judge refused to commit her like any other criminal. He evidently didn't care whether the prisoner paid the penalty or not, so long as he got himself out of this rediculous [sic] trial and got it hushed up.
[signed in pen below]
Frances Ellen Burr
Secretary.