Part 22
“Now, in view of this disfranchisement of one-half the people of this country, their social and religious degradation; in view of the unjust laws mentioned, and because women do feel themselves aggrieved, oppressed and fraudulently deprived of their most sacred rights, we insist that they have immediate admission to all the rights and privileges which belong to them as citizens of the United States.”
Of course, this declaration, modeled after the immortal Declaration of 1776, did not fail to create a sensation everywhere. Other conventions were held in Rochester and Syracuse, N.Y., and in Salem, Ohio. They brought to the front a number of wonderful women, whose names were henceforth connected with this movement, first among them =Susan B. Anthony=, =Lucy Stone=, =Paulina Wright Davis= and =Anna Howard Shaw=. In October, 1850, the =First National Woman’s Rights Convention= was held at Worcester, Mass. Attended by delegates from nine states it was distinguished by addresses and papers of the highest character, which filled the audiences with enthusiasm. A National Committee was formed, under whose management conventions were held annually in various cities. An account of the convention, written by =Mrs. John Stuart Mill=, in the “Westminster Review,” London, marked the beginning of the movement for woman suffrage in Great Britain. But in spite of all efforts and agitation, progress was but slow. The first result was not gained before 1861, when Kansas granted school suffrage to women, a step that was not followed by other states for many years afterwards.
How averse the stronger sex was to grant women suffrage became evident, when in 1868 the 14th and 15th amendments to the Constitution of the United States were adopted. These amendments abolished slavery and gave the freed negroes of the South all privileges of citizenship, including the right to vote. Section 1 of the 15th amendment reads:
“The right of citizens to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States, or by any State, on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.”
As the advocates of woman suffrage were American citizens, they held themselves entitled to the same rights as granted to the negroes. But their demands to be registered as legal voters were denied by the registrars of elections. Now the women appealed to the courts, to see if their claim would be sustained by invoking the aid of those constitutional amendments above cited. But the uniform decision in each court was that these amendments had in no way changed or abridged the right of each State to restrict suffrage to =males=, and that they applied only to the men of color and to existing rights and privileges. An appeal to the Supreme Court resulted in the decision that this body was in accordance with the decisions of the State courts.
To test the application of the 14th and 15th amendments to the Constitution =Susan B. Anthony=,—who in 1860 with others had been successful in securing the passage of an Act of the New York Legislation, giving to married women the possession of their earnings, as well as the guardianship of their children,—cast in 1872 ballots at the State and Congressional elections in New York. Miss Anthony was indicted and in 1873 found guilty of criminal offense against the United States for knowingly voting for congressmen without having a lawful right to vote, which offense was punishable, under Act of Congress, by a heavy fine or imprisonment. Fined $100 for illegal voting, Miss Anthony declared that she would never pay the penalty, and in fact it has never been collected.
Undaunted by the decision of the Court, Miss Anthony in 1875 proposed the following amendment to Article 1 of the Constitution:
“Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on =account of sex=.
“Section 2. Congress shall have power by appropriate legislation to enforce the provisions of this article.”
This resolution was introduced by Senator Sargent of California in 1878, but was rejected several times. In 1887 it secured in the Senate only 14 affirmative to 34 negative votes.
But several years before the indictment of Miss Anthony woman suffrage had already won its first victory, in the Territory of Wyoming. The Organic Act for the regulation of the Territorial governments provides that at the first election in any Territory male citizens of the age of twenty-one years shall vote, but
“at all subsequent elections the qualifications of voters and for holding office shall be such as may be prescribed by the legislative assembly of each Territory.”
Under this act the first legislative assembly of Wyoming, in 1869, granted women the right to vote and to hold office upon the same terms as men. An effort made in 1871, to repeal this statute, failed, and to the men of Wyoming belongs the honor, of having been first to recognize the rights of women.
A further gain was made when the Republican National Convention of 1872 and 1876 resolved that “the honest demands” of women for additional rights should be treated with respectful consideration.
Of still greater importance was the organization of two national Woman Suffrage Associations, the one with headquarters in New York, the other in Boston. A union of these two bodies was effected in 1890 under the title of “=The National American Woman Suffrage Association=.”
Mrs. Stanton was elected president of the new organization. When in 1892 she resigned from her office because of advancing age, she was followed by Miss Anthony, who in 1900 resigned at the age of 80. Her successors were =Miss Anna Howard Shaw= and =Mrs. Carrie Chapman Catt=.
Under the able leadership of these brilliant women victory was now followed by victory. Up to 1914 Colorado, Idaho, Washington, California, Arizona, Kansas, Oregon, Nevada, Utah and Montana had joined the ranks of Woman Suffrage States; also the Territory of Alaska.
To these Western regions the Eastern and Southern States formed a strange contrast, as so far the suffragists had been unable to conquer one of them. For this surprising fact I fail to find any other explanation but that the Western men are much more conscious of a great historical truth, which the men in the East and South seem to have almost forgotten, namely: =that to the women the founding of real culture in America is due. Having heroically shared with their husbands all hardships and dangers, having gone with them on their hazardous journeys into the wilderness, even on their long voyages across the prairies and Rocky Mountains to far Oregon and California, the women provided the first permanent homes and filled them with comfort, sunshine and happiness. In recognition of these facts the Western men granted their partners only a well deserved tribute of gratitude.=
In many places the men expressed their respect for the gentler sex by electing women to important public offices, and in almost all cases these positions have been filled to the fullest satisfaction.
* * * * *
The steady progress of woman suffrage in the United States was followed by the women of other countries with intense interest, especially by those of Great Britain and Australia. Encouraged to like activity, they demonstrated with convincing clearness the injustice of the legislatures toward women and thus prepared the way for a similar movement in favor of woman suffrage. The result was that the English government in 1869 adopted the Municipal Reform Act, which permits women to vote in all municipal elections. An Act of 1870 gave them the school vote. The Act of 1888 made them voters for the county councils. An Act of 1894 abolished in all departments of local government the qualification of sex.
New Zealand, one of the most progressive of all countries, went even farther. The women there were granted suffrage in 1893 on the same basis with men. A similar step was taken in the following year by South Australia. And when in 1901 the Commonwealth of Australia was formed by the federation of the six provinces, or states, of New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland, South Australia, Western Australia and Tasmania, one of the first steps was to give all women full national suffrage.
In the countries of continental Europe the evolution of local women’s organizations to State- and National Unions had been the same as in the United States and in England. But the majority of these societies remained conservative in regard to woman suffrage. Germany since 1813 has had the “=Vaterlaendische Frauenverein=” (Patriotic Women’s League), a union of wonderful helpers for suffering humanity, both in peace and in war. Since 1865 a “General Association of German Women” tried to secure new rights for women, both along political and economic lines. A “=Society for Woman Suffrage=” was not formed before 1902. But only two years later the “=International Suffrage Alliance=” was formed in Berlin, with =Mrs. Carrie Chapman Catt=, of New York, as president. The progressive movement in Germany took largely the form of educational and industrial training. And the women shared the national belief that education precedes every good, and that for their legal and political protection from injustice they might rely upon their male relatives.
In certain districts of Germany, Austria, Denmark, Hungary and Russia women who owned property, were permitted to cast their votes on various communal matters, either by proxy or in person. In Belgium, the Netherlands, France, Italy, Switzerland, Roumania and Bulgaria women had no political rights whatever, but were permitted to vote for certain state boards—educational, philanthropic, correctional and industrial. In France, women as a rule showed little sympathy with suffrage, retaining their racial instinct that they might accomplish more through social influence, personal suasion and the special charms of their sex than by working openly through the ballot.
In Switzerland few women had the courage to seek emancipation, as those who favored the movement were looked upon as disreputable persons without regard for social laws. In Portugal and Spain women remained absolutely indifferent. Sweden had given women the right to vote in all elections, except for representatives, while Finland and Norway in 1906 and 1907 granted full suffrage rights and eligibility to women upon exceedingly generous terms.
Since the beginning of the 20th Century the Modern Woman’s Rights Movement has also caused significant changes in the status of the women of the Balkan States, and of the countries of the Orient and the Far East. Restrictions and obstacles, placed on woman by tradition and religious rules, have been abolished. Many Mohammedan women for instance appear to-day on the streets without veils, a thing that no prominent woman could do formerly. The establishment of girls’ schools, woman’s colleges, universities, woman clubs and journals mark likewise the progress of the movement. And in Servia, Bulgaria, Greece, Turkey, Egypt and Japan exist federations of women’s clubs, which can be regarded as political organizations.
Thus, at the beginning of the memorable year of 1914 woman throughout the civilized world had gained various degrees of freedom in the exercise of her political rights.
WHY WOMEN WANT AND NEED THE VOTE.
Few questions have been so universally and intensely discussed as the right and expediency of Woman Suffrage. Its opponents assert that the true woman needs no governing authority conferred upon her by law. While discussing this question one “gentleman” said “that the highest evidence of respect that man could exhibit toward woman, and the noblest service he could perform for her, were to vote =Nay= to the proposition that would take from her the diadem of pearls, the talisman of faith, hope and love, by which all other requests are won from men, and substitute for it the iron crown of authority.”
The chief arguments brought forward against woman suffrage are: that the majority of the women never desired it, because they were already represented by their husbands, fathers and brothers; that there were already too many voters, and that by admitting women to suffrage the whole machinery and cost of voting would be doubled without changing the result; that women would not have time to perform their political duties without neglecting their higher duties at home; that women were too emotional and sentimental to be entrusted with the ballot; that women would cease to vote after the novelty had worn off; that the introduction of women into political life would increase its bitterness, and would abolish chivalry with its refining influence on men; that the franchise, in a large majority of instances, would be exercised under the influence of priests, parsons, and ministers, under the power of religious prejudice, and that religious feuds would affect political life much more than under present circumstances. And finally it has been asserted that woman suffrage would place a new and terrible strain upon family relations as the introduction of political disputes into domestic life would lead to quarrels and divorce.
These arguments were answered in an editorial of the “New York American” of October 6, 1912, as follows:
“The ballot is the weapon that men use in defending their rights. It is the voice with which men express their opinions, their wishes, as to law, in the more settled civilization where the ballot is the recognized power. Little by little the mass of the people—that is to say, of the men—have got the ballot. Originally there was no ballot. Savage tribes held disorganized meetings, and shouted their opinions. The loudest shouters won, and the man who could hit the hardest led the others. Little by little the big man formed his own opinions, alone reached his own decisions, and the others had nothing to say. The expression of opinion was confined to one, or to a few leaders, gathered under a chief, or, where religion ruled, opinion was controlled by the priests in the old temples making up their minds what would be good =for them=, and forcing their will on ignorant people. For many centuries the kings, the nobles and the priests ruled—and the people had nothing to say. =Men and women alike were without the vote.=
“Little by little, the men got the vote, and now, in civilized countries, universal suffrage became the rule, =as regards men=. The women were shut out because men always have had the idea that voting was in some way connected with fighting. Their thoughts went back to the old savage mob shouting its determination to attack and kill—leaving the women at home. And the ignoring of women persists, although little by little the voting power has been used, not to make war, =but to prevent war=.
“Now, in every country calling itself civilized, the chief use of the ballot is to express ideas of peace—justice. The ballot that was once the expression of man’s fighting quality is now the expression of his =better nature=, and for that reason it is time to give that ballot to the better half of the human race, to the women that have civilized it.
“Supporters of women suffrage are, and for many years have been, the best men in the country. Men that are unselfish, just, scorning ridicule, and proud to vindicate the rights of their own mothers and sisters, have long demanded votes for women. The women that have worked and fought for the suffrage have been, beyond all comparison, the best women of this and other countries. Humorists used to talk of “short-haired women and long-haired men” as the advocates of woman suffrage. That is a foolish and false division. The women with good foreheads, earnest, gentle and dignified faces have been the advocates of votes for women. The women with low foreheads, plastered with hair, the women with their faces painted, the women with a hundred thoughts for dress and no thought for anything else, have been the opponents of women suffrage. And the men, brutal, conceited, looking upon woman as a piece of property, created for man’s pleasure or for his service, have been the men that opposed suffrage. Another class opposed to woman suffrage is the most dangerous class of all. That is the class that would keep in ignorance women, and men, too, if it could. Those that prey upon the ignorance and superstition of women are anxious that women shall know as little as possible. They do not want the women to vote, =for voting means thinking, and thinking means freedom=. Wherever women have voted they have bettered conditions.”—
Lecky in his valuable book “Democracy and Liberty” writes on page 547: “It has been gravely alleged that the whole character of the female sex would be revolutionized, or at least seriously impaired, if they were brought by the suffrage into public life. There is perhaps no subject in which exaggerations so enormous and so grotesque may be found in the writings of considerable men. Considered in itself, the process of voting is now merely that of marking once in several years a ballot-paper in a quiet room, and it may be easily accomplished in five minutes. And can it reasonably be said that the time or thought which an average male elector bestows on the formation of his political opinions is such as to interfere in any appreciable degree with the currents of his thoughts, with the tendencies of his character or life? Men wrote on this subject as if public life and interests formed the main occupation of an ordinary voter. It is said that domestic life should be the one sphere of woman. Very many women—especially those to whom the vote would be conceded—have no domestic, or but few domestic duties to attend to, and are compelled, if they are not wholly frivolous or wholly apathic, to seek spheres of useful activity beyond their homes. Even a full domestic life is scarcely more absorbing to a woman than professional life to a man. Scarcely any woman is so engrossed in it that she cannot bestow on public affairs an amount of time and intelligence equal to that which is bestowed on it by thousands of masculine voters. Nothing can be more fantastic than to argue as if electors were a select body, mainly occupied with political studies and public interests.
“Women form a great section of the community, and they have many special interests. The opening to them of employments, professions and endowments; the regulation of their labor; questions of women’s property and succession; the punishment of crimes against women; female education; laws relating to marriage, guardianship, and divorce, may all be cited; and in the great drink question they are even more interested than men, for though they are the more sober sex, they are also the sex which suffers most from the consequences of intemperance. With such a catalogue of special interests it is impossible to say that they have not a claim to representation.”—
Among the arguments in favor of woman suffrage the most important are the following: As women are citizens of a Government =of= the people, =by= the people, and =for= the people, and =as women are people=, who wish to do their civic duty, it is unfair that they should be governed by laws in the making of which they have no voice. As women are equally concerned with men in good and bad government, and equally responsible for civic righteousness, and as they must obey the laws just as men do, they should vote equally with men.
If it is true that “taxation without representation is tyranny” then tax-paying women who support the government by paying taxes, should have the right to vote to elect such representatives, who protect them against unjust taxation.
Working women need the ballot to regulate the conditions under which they work. Millions of women are wage-earners and their health is often endangered by bad working conditions and sweat-shop methods that can only be remedied by legislation.
Business women need the ballot to secure for themselves a fair opportunity in their business, and to protect themselves against adverse legislation.
Mothers and housekeepers need the vote to regulate the moral and sanitary conditions under which their families must live. Women are forever told that their place is in the home. But what do men expect of them in the home? Merely to stay there is not enough. They are a failure unless they do certain things for the home. They must minister, as far as their means allow, to the health and welfare, moral as well as physical, of their family, and especially of the children. They, more than anybody else, are held responsible for what becomes of the children. Women are responsible for the cleanliness of the house, for the wholesomeness of the food, for their children’s health and morals. But mothers cannot control these things, if the neighbors are allowed to live in filth, if dealers are permitted to sell poor or adulterated food, if the plumbing in the house is unsanitary, if garbage accumulates and the halls and stairs are left dirty. They can take every care to avoid fire, but if the house has been badly built, if the fire-escapes are insufficient or not fire-proof, they cannot guard their children from the horrors of being maimed or killed by fire. They can open the windows to give the children the air that we are told is so necessary. But if the air is laden with infection and contagious diseases, they cannot protect the children from this danger. They can send the children out for air and exercise, but if the conditions that surround them in the streets are immoral and degrading, they cannot protect them from these influences. Women alone cannot make these things right. But the City administration can do it. The administration is elected by the people, to protect the interests of the people. As men hold women responsible for the conditions under which the children live, the women should have something to say about the city’s housekeeping, even if they must introduce an occasional house-cleaning.
What enormous influence women are able to exert in vital questions has been demonstrated in the =Temperance Movement=; which originated in the United States. Since the beginning of the colonization of the Western Hemisphere Americans have been heavy consumers of rum, whiskey, and other intoxicating liquors. “Everybody drank, and on all occasions,” says a writer who has left us a pen picture of these bibulous days. Drunkenness and all the evils resulting from it increased with the gradual development of the “saloon” and the habit of “treating,” two institutions peculiar to America and almost unknown in Europe.
For generations the women were the greatest sufferers from the intemperance of the men, because many husbands came home besotted, their faculties benumbed to an unconsciousness of their own degradation, with wages gone, and employment forfeited. The purer and gentler the wife in such case, the more intense her suffering. So it was but natural, that when the first “=Anti-Spirits Association=” was formed in 1808 in Greenfield, Saratoga County, New York, several women should join it. The movement made rapid progress, and in 1826 the “=American Temperance Society=” was founded. In 1829 and 1830 similar associations were started in Ireland and England; and in 1846 the first “=World’s Temperance Convention=” was held at London. In 1873 women became a real force in the field when the women inhabitants of Hillsborough, a small town in Ohio, started what became known as “The Women’s Crusade.”