Part 18

Almost hidden from sight in the deep recesses of a window might have been seen Nellie Hutchinson, of the New York _Tribune_, her piquant face and tangled hair as saucy and as refreshing as ever, and not far removed from her was seen another pretty ornament of the press, in the person of Mrs. McChane, of the Philadelphia _Inquirer_. But, arranged in a row behind Mrs. Woodhull were a number of women whose voices have been heard throughout the length and breadth of the land. At the head of the class stood Mrs. Beecher Hooker--her soft, fleecy curls tied down with orthodox precision; the curling feathers of blue harmonizing with her peachy complexion. Her elegantly fitting coat was embroidered with steel beads, but this had nothing to do with the suffrage question. Susan B. Anthony snuggled beside her, clad in a smart new dress of black silk, with velveteen overskirt and fancy basque. Her spectacles clung to her nose, and she had that longing, hope-deferred look which humanity always wears when it has been centered for half a century upon a single idea. Then came Paulina Davis, her face surmounted by her beautiful snowy curls; then Mrs. Josephine S. Griffing, the noblest woman in the land. Rev. Olympia Brown appeared modestly as the “Wall Street firm,” for both the members were present, and distinguished from the other women in the room by dress and other characteristics. The firm of Woodhull & Claflin are clad precisely alike, and call each other “sister.” Their costume consists in what Miss Kate Stanton pronounces a “business suit, because they are strictly business women.” These costumes are made of blue naval cloth, skimp in the skirt. The basque or jacket has masculine coat-tails behind, but the steeple-crowned hats are the towering triumph of the most picturesque outfit. The high sugar-loaf hat has a brigandish dash to it, and the clipped hair underneath seems to have nipped all the feminine element originally possessed by this flourishing “firm.” Mrs. Woodhull arose and stood before the tribunal. She is a medium-sized woman, with a sharp nose, and thin lips which closed tightly over her white teeth. She apologized for any hesitancy in her manner, because it was the first time in her life that she had attempted public speaking. She then read her printed memorial:

The memorial of Victoria Woodhull to the Honorable the Senate and the House of Representatives, United States of America, in Congress assembled, respectfully showeth:

That she was born in the State of Ohio, and is above the age of twenty-one years; that she has resided in the State of New York during the past three years; that she is still a resident thereof, and that she is a citizen of the United States as declared by the fourteenth article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

That since the adoption of the fifteenth article of amendment to the Constitution neither the State of New York nor any other State, nor any Territory, has passed any law to abridge any citizen of the United States to vote, as established by said articles, neither on account of sex or otherwise.

That, nevertheless, the right to vote is denied to women citizens of the United States by the operation of election laws in the several States and Territories, which laws were enacted prior to the adoption of the said fifteenth article, and which article is inconsistent with the Constitution as amended, and therefore are void and of no effect; but, which, being still invoked by the said States and Territories, render the Constitution inoperative as regards the right of women citizens to vote.

And whereas article six, section second, declares “That this Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof, and all treaties made or which shall be made under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and all judges in every State shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution and laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.”

And whereas no distinction between citizens is made in the Constitution of the United States on account of sex, but the fourteenth article of amendments to it provides that “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges and immunities of the citizens of the United States nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

And whereas Congress has power to make laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution all powers vested by the Constitution in the Government of the United States, and to make or alter all regulations in relation to holding elections for Senators and Representatives, and especially to enforce by appropriate legislation the provisions of the fourteenth article.

And whereas the continuance of the enforcement of said local election laws, denying and abridging the right of citizens to vote on account of sex, is a grievance to your memorialists and to various other persons, citizens of the United States, being women.

Therefore your memorialists would most respectfully petition your honorable bodies to make such laws as in the wisdom of Congress shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the right vested by the Constitution in the citizens of the United States to vote without regard to sex.

And your memorialists will ever pray.

VICTORIA C. WOODHULL.

NEW YORK CITY, _December 19, 1870_.

After Mrs. Woodhull had finished her memorial, Miss Susan B. Anthony took the floor and told the committee that she had hurried as fast as railroad and speed would allow her from Kansas, last winter, at this time, in order to get a petition before this body, but after all she was glad that Wall Street had spoken.

Mrs. Beecher Hooker now arose and said that after the subject had been presented to her in this light she had immediately written to Myra Bradwell, who was practicing law in Chicago, for a judicial opinion. She had also invited Mrs. Bradwell to come to this convention and plead the case. Mrs. Bradwell declined on the plea of ill-health, but at the same time she sent a written opinion of the judge of the Superior Court and had presented this to Mr. Riddle, one of the ablest lawyers in the country, and, at her request, Mr. Riddle would now address the committee.

Mr. Riddle arose and said he meant to say nothing save what would bear upon the case; however, he meant to say strongly what he intensely felt, and whoever would take the pains to examine the Constitution which he held in his hands would not attempt to gainsay the facts contained therein. The right of suffrage is a natural right. The right of self-government pertains to all alike, the right to be exercised as all other rights. The right to dress is a natural right, and the right to consume food no matter how artificially prepared is another. What was necessary to bring the negro race to the enjoyment of their natural rights? It was simply to remove obstructions. Legislation can regulate the franchise but not prohibit it. Those who were content for women to vote must do it in one of two ways--either get rid of the word “male” or define the meaning of citizenship. A gifted woman has just given us an argument that can not be refuted. This change has been wrought by an amendment to the Constitution.

The speaker was interrupted by Mr. Cook, of Illinois, asking: “What clause of the Constitution would give us the right to allow Mrs. Woodhull the exercise of suffrage in New York?”

Mr. Riddle replied: “All persons who live under the Constitution are citizens of the United States; those who framed it meant citizenship. We have no half citizens.”

Mrs. Hooker arose and said this term “citizen” had not been fully defined.

Mr. Riddle proceeded to say: “If you look into the dictionaries, you will find it means an inhabitant of a city who is allowed the enjoyment of political rights. The fourteenth amendment claims that all born within the jurisdiction of the United States are citizens, and it also says no State shall make laws to abridge the privileges of citizenship. What does privilege or immunity mean? It means that New York shall not do anything to abridge the privileges.”

The speaker was again interrupted by Mr. Eldridge, of Wisconsin, asking, “Do you claim by this prohibition that the natural rights of infants must not be interfered with, as well as idiots, who must come under the law as you interpret it?”

Mrs. Hooker answered, “That State may say when I may exercise it, but not whether I may do so.”

Mrs. Hooker’s lawyer then proceeded to read from law books some very substantial authority, but the writer could not see its application to the case. He then said two citizens of two different States had a law-suit. Delaware set out to know whether she had the right to rake the oyster beds of New Jersey. In this suit the meaning of “citizen” was thoroughly and carefully discussed, but Mr. Riddle did not let us know whether the Jersey oyster beds were raked. The eloquent speaker went on to say that the right of self-government was older than any amendment to the Constitution. The right of suffrage already exists, but it is not for Congress to define the full meaning of the Constitution. The married woman’s fate is one of servitude. Her identity is lost in that of her husband. She is his servant, and as such only is known to the law. If Mrs. Riddle were killed by an accident on the railway, I could only recover damages for my servant. But, gentlemen, I leave the case in your hands after defining the word “citizen.” It is the natural person rounded and finished with political rights.

Mrs. Hooker arose and said that it was not of so much consequence when the right came. For her part she would not allow men to vote until they were twenty-five years old. The one great power that keeps a government alive is personal responsibility and personal liberty. She had heard people say that we could run our national machine alone; but here comes the foreigner with his ignorance and his ways so different from ours. When he first comes he expects to be equal with the first in the country, but he sees his neighbor living in a fine house, unaccustomed to labor, and the spirit of hatred is engendered. But at the polls, at least one day in the year, he is equal to the greatest man in the whole land, and it makes a man of him. It teaches him to think that he is helping to frame the laws under which we live. I used to think a man should be here ten or twenty years in order to understand our institutions, but now I would give him the ballot as soon as his naturalization papers could be made out; and, gentlemen, when you limit manhood, you cut your own throats. When, with God’s aid, the oak ribs were put in the _Mayflower_, he knew what was to be the result.

Miss Anthony then arose and said few women have persecuted Congress as she had done, and she was glad that new, fresh voices were heard to-day. “But, gentlemen, I entreat you to take this matter up in Congress. You have let a petition, presented by the Honorable Mr. Julian, last winter, come to its death. When I went to Illinois last year I told the people not to return Mr. Trumbull, for he had allowed the same thing to take place in the Senate. I ask you, gentlemen, to report this matter, so that I can lay off my armor, for I am tired of fighting. If Mr. Riddle had presented his argument in favor you would not hesitate about your course. No woman has a fault to find with the old Constitution. I begged you not to put the word ‘male’ into the amendment. I hurried from Kansas as fast as the locomotive would bring me, but all in vain. I think that is General Butler I see sitting before me, though I never saw him before. I wish, General, you would say ‘contraband’ for us. But, gentlemen, bring in a report of some kind, either for or against; don’t let the matter die a natural death here. Make it imperative that every man in the House must show whether he is for or against it.”

Mrs. Hooker caught the last refrain as Miss Anthony sat down and said: “Pledge yourselves, gentlemen, that we should have a hearing in Congress;” but the gentlemen did not pledge themselves, and the meeting between Mrs. Woodhull and her Co-workers and the Judiciary Committee came to an end.

Mrs. General Farnsworth, wife of the member from Illinois, and Mrs. Ely, of New Hampshire, represented the Congressional element of the House, but the Senatorial dames were unfortunately detained elsewhere.

OLIVIA.

SPREADING THE LIGHT.

WOMAN’S RIGHTS DISCUSSED BY MESDAMES HOOKER, BLAKE, ANTHONY, AND OTHERS.

WASHINGTON, _January 12, 1871_.

After the Judiciary Committee meeting adjournment, the leader of the woman suffrage movement visited the Senate to hear Senator Sumner on the San Domingo muddle; but two hours later found Lincoln Hall invaded, and the inevitable ball set in motion, which Susan B. Anthony says never shall rest until woman is in the possession of every right, both foreign and domestic. The sweet liquid voice of Mrs. Hooker called the meeting to order, and the divine Olympia Brown prayed as only a woman can pray when she is thoroughly in earnest.

Mrs. Paulina Davis was on the platform, one of the most queenly women in the court of intellect, and as beautiful and as exquisite as a winter landscape. This woman is the possessor of great wealth, the highest social position, and, to use her own words to describe her: “I care very little for dress; my tastes are very simple. But this movement is very expensive. Last summer I paid the whole expense of a convention in New York City. It cost me five hundred dollars. I don’t mind that, because in this way I think I am doing the greatest good.”

Susan B. Anthony was in her place, for what would a woman suffrage convention be worth without Susan to give it flavor? And then she is so patient and irrepressible, and has such a wholesome antipathy to men.

Miss Lillie Peckham represented the youth and audacity of Wisconsin, and Miss Kate Stanton the beauty and fire of her illustrious name. The people who had assembled to listen, proved, by personal inspection, to have grown higher in the social scale than those attending last year. Women were present who unmistakably were the heads of families--comely matrons who had left the pot boiling at home. Butterflies spread their wings there in the same way as they would attend any other place of amusement, but the wives and daughters of Congressmen for some reason stayed away.

After the prayer, Mrs. Hooker introduced Mrs. Victoria C. Woodhull, who commenced to say that she was not in the habit of speaking in public meetings--a fact which her manner instantly proved. Although it would seem that a Wall-street experience would fit a woman to face the worst, yet Mrs. Woodhull’s heart went pit-a-pat, and the blood rose and fell from her cheek as fortunes go up and down on ‘change. Mrs. Woodhull read anew her petition to the Judiciary Committee, and this being her solitary ewe lamb, after its presentation there was nothing left to do, and she quietly took a back seat.

Mrs. Devereaux Blake, of New York, was then introduced--a medium-sized woman, rather pretty than otherwise, and very carefully done up in handsome, fashionable clothes. Mrs. Blake, however, had nothing new to offer on the question under discussion. She rehashed the subject of women carrying arms, and proved by the old argument this was not a necessity; and then she told us of women’s sacrifices, and how, in extremest dilemma, they had sacrificed their hair. She said a woman’s life was love, and for this reason it was a great wrong to deprive her of that she loved best.

After other weighty arguments of this kind this speaker melted away to give place to Miss Lillie Peckham, of Wisconsin. This young woman did not attempt the difficult task of striking out a new path, but contentedly ambled along over the old highway; but, nevertheless, she had a very interesting, parrot-like way of expressing herself, and very wonderful, because so difficult to imitate.

As the hour of adjournment drew near, Susan B. Anthony came forward and talked “business.” Oh, the inimitable, the delectable Susan; the woman with a peculiar relish which one has to learn to love; the woman of whom a very small piece goes a great way; the musk among drugs; the acid in the Chemist’s laboratory! Susan has finished and the meeting ends.

The evening session of the woman suffrage convention met at the Congregational Church on Tenth street. Before the hour appointed, there was quite a gathering at the church, and the notables, as fast as they arrived, took their seats on the platform. With those assembled on the topmost round of expectation, the coming woman was seen marching up the aisle, wearing the jolly form of Senator Pomeroy. In the modest aspect of this distinguished man, one could see the embryo of the first female President; and Senator Nye following close behind showed that he meant to come in for the second best time on record. All the lights of the morning were on the platform except Tennie Claflin of the Wall-street firm. Miss Claflin must be one of the most charming little brigands in Wall street, else her peaked hat and chubby face tell a wrong story. Her merry brown eyes twinkle like the peepers of Santa Claus or old Nick; and worst of all she keeps her mouth shut, and this proves the brewing of mischief. Tennie looks like one of the women in the picture of the “Merry Wives of Windsor,” and she seems to be the one above all others fitted to sustain her position in Wall street.

Senator Nye arose to open the meeting. He said he had yielded to the pressing invitation of a woman on the platform to preside at the meeting, and had given a reluctant consent. He had never seen a good reason why the mothers of voters should not vote. One thing is certain, as mothers are elevated, so are the children; as women are degraded, the rule holds the same. But he felt that he was out of place in presiding over a meeting of ladies; that he was more in the habit of being presided over by them.

He then introduced Miss Kate Stanton, of Rhode Island, as one of the fairest daughters of the State. Senator Nye added that she had undertaken to work in a field where strong men often fail, but he trusted, in her case, that she would meet with success. Miss Stanton then came forward, half hesitating, her eyes brilliant with excitement and true carnation in her cheek. This was the second time in her life that she had faced an audience, and the ordeal was quite as much as she could bear. She commenced reading her lecture, and when she became accustomed to her own voice she glided along gracefully, as only a truly gifted woman can. Miss Stanton will be one of the stars in the lecture field if she speaks equally well on other subjects as the one at present under discussion. She has a remarkably clear, fine voice, a most pleasing personal presence, an unusually cultivated mind, and the true vim of a young American woman. It is true she did not give us any new ideas about woman suffrage, but she treated the subject in a natural, girlish way; and if sentiment predominated, it seemed a halo around her head, for young people are romantic, and when they are otherwise, the gloss of youth has gone forever. Miss Stanton’s great point in her so-called argument may be summed up in a few words. The laws made by man are fractional. The woman must be added to make the unit.

After Miss Stanton’s logic was finished, Senator Nye introduced Mr. Riddle. The lawyer went over exactly the same ground traversed in the morning before the Judiciary Committee. It is true he enlarged here, cropped off there, but it was the same thing altogether. He commenced by asserting that women were as broadly and deeply citizens as the men of this nation. That the right of government is a natural right. The right to govern is inherent in the people. That there is no right to be conferred, for there is nothing to confer; and that all who stand in the way would have to get out or else get crushed. Mr. Riddle did not make his case clear, and the audience yawned in his presence for applause.

After he had finished, Mrs. Hooker arose and said she did not agree with Mr. Riddle in his denunciation of men; that women equally were to blame for the state of things. “A great many women say they do not wish the ballot, but I can prove to them that they do wish to vote. There are three vital questions equally dear to every woman’s heart: First, there is temperance. Are women indifferent to this? Then, there is education. Are not all women interested in the manner it shall be brought about, whether it shall be secular or religious, or whether education shall be compulsory or otherwise? And there is a third, of most absorbing interest, and this is chastity. The Bible says, ‘The wages of sin is death.’ Sin is sin, no matter who is the sinner. In England, a country governed by a queen, has been the battle-ground of great strife. It has attempted on behalf of the military to pass laws that should make the passage of vice easy, and the wages of sin not death. By some secret iniquity these laws passed Parliament, and then the attempt was made to include the cities with the military, but such women as Harriet Martineau and Florence Nightingale, as well as those belonging to royal families, went to work to prevent this great wrong. Petitions were gotten up, signed by thousands of the workingmen’s wives and daughters, and these petitions were brought to the feet of Parliament and they have, for a time at least, prevented the wrong. France sends word to England that her downfall in a great measure is owing to her social crimes. This subject is now being agitated in our own country. St. Louis and Cincinnati are shaking with doubts. Would you, women of America, have the passage to iniquity and sin made easy for your husbands and sons? These are the great questions upon you which we are obliged to think and speak.” When Mrs. Hooker finished, a kind of awe took possession of her hearers; and whilst this woman dwelt upon this last subject she spoke with all the force of a Beecher and with the purity and delicacy of an angel.

OLIVIA.

AN OPPOSING PETITION.

SIGNATURES OF NOTABLE LADIES AGAINST GRANTING THE BALLOT TO WOMEN.

WASHINGTON, _January 13, 1871_.

A bitter contest is going on in Washington between the women who do want their rights and those who do not. The following petition has been handed into the Senate, signed by a thousand of our countrywomen.

THE PETITION AGAINST WOMAN SUFFRAGE.

To the Congress of the United States, protesting against an extension of woman suffrage:

We, the undersigned, do hereby appeal to your honorable body, and desire respectfully to enter our protest against an extension of suffrage to woman; and in the firm belief that our petition represents the sober conviction of the majority of the women of the country. Although we shrink from the notoriety of the public eye, yet we are too deeply and painfully impressed by the grave perils which threaten our peace and happiness in these proposed changes in our civil and political rights to longer remain silent.

Because the Holy Scripture inculcates a different and for us a higher sphere, apart from public life.

Because as women we find a full measure of duties, cares and responsibilities devolving upon us, and we are therefore unwilling to bear other and heavier burdens, and those unsuited to our physical organization.

Because we hold that an extension of suffrage would be adverse to the interests of the workingwomen of the country, with whom we heartily sympathize.