The account of only the past seventeen years is given, as the three preceding volumes of this History relate in detail the pioneer work and the gains made previous to 1884. Unfortunately it is inevitable in a recital of this kind that many names should be omitted which are quite as worthy of mention as those that find place, for in some instances the records are imperfectly kept and in others the list is so long as to forbid reproduction.[151] It has been necessary to bar compliments in order to avoid unjust discrimination and to meet the demands of limited space. To posterity the work is of more importance than the workers, and those who have engaged in the efforts to improve the condition of women necessarily have had to possess a spirit of self-abnegation and self-sacrifice which neither expected nor desired personal rewards.

The subject of Organization in most of the States is treated in the briefest possible manner, the intention being merely to show that in every State and Territory there has been some attempt to gather into a working force the scattered individuals who believe in the justice of woman suffrage and wish to obtain it. More extended mention of course is due to the older States, where there has been continuous organized work for many years, and where the societies have remained intact and held their regular meetings in spite of such defeats and discouragements as never have had to be faced by any other cause. It is most difficult to form and maintain an association which has not a concrete object to labor for, and when a campaign for an amendment is not actually in progress, the suffrage in the distant future appears largely as an abstraction. The early days of the movement necessarily had to be given to creating the sentiment which would later be organized, and it is only within the past decade that the time has seemed ripe for systematic effort in this direction. The lack of effective organization has been a serious but unavoidable weakness which henceforth will be remedied as speedily and thoroughly as possible.

It is a favorite argument of the opponents of woman suffrage that the many gains of various kinds have not been due to the efforts of women themselves. Under the head of Legislative Action will be found the dates and figures to prove that, year after year, in almost every State, women have gone to the Legislatures with appeals for every concession which has been granted and many more which have been refused. The bills presented by the Woman's Christian Temperance Union have not been specifically included because they are fully recorded in the publications of that body, and because this volume is confined almost exclusively to the one subject of enfranchisement. While the Suffrage Associations have directed their legislative efforts principally to secure action for this purpose, individual members have joined the W. C. T. U. innumerable times in its attempts to obtain other bills of advantage to women and children, and in some instances this has been done officially by the associations.

Among various measures in which the two organizations have united may be mentioned the raising of the "age of protection" for girls; the securing of women physicians in all institutions where women and children are confined, and women on the boards of all such; women city physicians; matrons at jails and station houses; better conditions for working women; the abolition of child-labor; industrial schools for girls. Measures which have been especially championed by the W. S. A., but which the W. C. T. U. has aided officially or individually, have been those asking for every form of suffrage; equal property laws for wives; the opening of all educational institutions to women; their admission to all professions and occupations; the repeal of laws barring them from office; the enactment of laws giving father and mother equal guardianship of children.[152]

The W. C. T. U. alone has secured temperance measures of many kinds, including a law in every State requiring scientific temperance instruction in the public schools; in many States curfew laws, and statutes prohibiting the sale of cigarettes and of liquor on or near fair grounds, Soldiers' Homes and school-houses, and preventing gambling devices, immoral exhibits, etc. The Federation of Women's Clubs has obtained laws for free traveling libraries and has united with other organizations in various States in efforts for equal guardianship of children, school suffrage, women on school and library boards and the abolishing of child labor. Other associations have joined in one or more of the above lines of work and have had independent measures of their own, such as prison reform, social purity, the assistance of different races—as the negro and the Indian—village improvement, kindergartens, public playgrounds, etc.

It would not be possible to draw a distinct line dividing the legislative work of one association from the others, except that it may be said the suffrage societies have made the franchise their chief point, believing it to be the power with which the rest could be gained, and the temperance unions have made their principal attack upon the liquor traffic, considering it the greatest evil. The objects of the various bodies are indicated in the last chapter of this volume on Organizations of Women, but whatever these may be, if they include any direct, practical work their promoters usually find themselves at the door of the Legislature asking for help. Here they get their first lesson in the imperative necessity of possessing a vote, and seeing their measures fail because asked for by a disfranchised class, to whom the legislators are in no way indebted, they frequently become ardent advocates of suffrage for women.

As it would be wholly impossible in the small space which can be allowed to include an account of all the legislative work done by women, mention is made principally of that for the franchise. While the successes have been few compared to the number of bills presented, the record is valuable as indicating that determined and persistent effort will not be relaxed until it is granted in every State.

Under the head of Legislation is related also the attempts to get from Constitutional Conventions an amendment striking out the word "male" as a qualification for suffrage. It includes, besides, graphic accounts of the campaigns made in behalf of such amendments when submitted to the voters by the Legislatures. Those who have not closely followed these events doubtless will be surprised to learn the amount of effort which has been expended by women to obtain the franchise. It is infinitely greater than has been put forth for this purpose by all other classes combined, since the Revolutionary War was fought to secure to every citizen the right of individual representation.

The Laws regarding women as here given are in no sense of the word a "brief," but merely present the facts in the language of a layman and in the simplest and most concise form. Those relating to property are in the nature of a curiosity. An attorney in San Francisco who was asked for information as to the laws in general for women in California, answered that to give in full those of property alone would require as much space as could be granted in the History for the entire chapter. It is not possible to make in these introductory paragraphs an adequate digest of these laws in various States. They are not precisely the same in any two of the forty-nine States and Territories, and they offer a striking illustration of the attempts of law-makers, during the last few decades, to rectify in a measure the legal outrages of the past, and of their inability in the present state of their development to grant absolute justice. That must await the lawmakers of the future, and probably the time when women shall have a part in selecting them.

All that can be claimed for the statutes quoted herein is that they are as nearly correct as it has been possible to make them. With but one or two exceptions, the Attorney-Generals in every State have been most courteous and obliging when appealed to for assistance. The laws for women, however, have been so taken from and added to, so torn to pieces and patched up, that the best lawyers in many States say frankly that they do not know just what they are at the present time. Legislatures and code revision committees are continually tinkering at them and every year witnesses some changes in most of the States.[153] A very thorough abstract of the laws, made in 1886 by Miss Lelia J. Robinson, LL. B., a member of the bar in Massachusetts, was of almost no use in the compilation for this volume because of the endless alterations since that time. The Legal Status of Women, a condensed resume issued in 1897 by the National Suffrage Association, has been covered thickly with pencil marks during the preparation of this summary, as the reports received from different States have shown the changes effected in the few years which have since elapsed. A new book, Woman and the Law, prepared by a lecturer on political science in one of our largest universities and published in 1901, was hailed with joy, but was found to include a number of laws which had been repealed within the past four or five years and to omit some very important ones which had been enacted during this time, as well as to contain frequent mistakes in regard to others.

These instances show the impossibility of an absolutely authentic presentation of the laws for women in their constantly changing condition. Although it was the intention to close this History with 1900, in several States, notably Massachusetts, Connecticut, New York, Illinois and Wisconsin, laws have been passed since that date of sufficient importance to demand a place. During the two years of its preparation the entire codes of property laws for women in Massachusetts and Virginia have been revolutionized.

An amusing part of a difficult task has been the reluctance of men to admit the existence of laws which are conspicuously unjust to women, the admission being frequently accompanied by the statement that it is the intention to change them at an early date, or that it would only be necessary to call the attention of the Legislature to them in order to secure their repeal. Even women themselves in States where the statutes especially discriminate against them, have written that these must not be published unless those from all the others are given. Whether this is due to State pride or personal humiliation is not clearly evident.

The one encouraging feature is that in almost every State decided progress is shown since 1848, when in New York and Pennsylvania the first change was made in the English Common Law which then everywhere prevailed, and which did not permit a married woman to hold property, to buy or sell, to sue or be sued, to make a contract or a will, to carry on business in her own name, to possess the wages she earned, or to have her children in case of divorce. An examination of the laws in the following chapters will show that the wife now may own and control her separate property in three-fourths of the States, and in the other fourth only one Northern State is included. In every State a married woman may make a will, but can dispose only of her separate property. In about two-thirds of the States she possesses her earnings. In the great majority she may make contracts and bring suit. The property rights of unmarried women always have been nearly the same as those of unmarried men, but the Common Law declared that "by marriage husband and wife are one person in law and the legal existence of the wife is merged in that of the husband. He is her baron or lord, bound to supply her with shelter, food, clothing and medicine, and is entitled to her earnings and the use and custody of her person, which he may seize wherever he may find it." (Blackstone, I, 442.)[154]

In his Commentaries, after enumerating some of the disabilities of woman under these laws, Blackstone calmly argues that the most of them were really intended for her benefit, "so great a favorite is the female sex with the law of England." He strikes here the keynote of even the special statutes which have superseded the Common Law in the various States, all have been "intended for her benefit," man alone being the judge of what she needed and careful while providing it to retain within himself the exclusive power of law-making. It has been gradually dawning upon him, however, that, as a human being like himself, her needs are very similar to his own, and where he has failed to see it she has reminded him of it as she has slowly learned this fact herself. The laws show an awakening conscience on the part of men and a tardy but continuous advance toward justice to women, although there is yet very much to be desired. For instance, in reading the laws regarding the inheritance of separate property, which in a number of States is now made the same for widow and widower, the first thought will be, "These are absolutely just." But a little investigation will show that the separate property of either is what he or she possesses at marriage or receives afterwards by gift or inheritance, while all that is acquired during marriage by the joint earnings of the two belongs to the husband. In many States the law now provides that if the wife engages in business as a sole trader or goes outside the home to work, her earnings belong to her, but all the proceeds of her labor within the household are still the sole and separate property of the husband. The Common Law on this point, which never has been changed in a single State,[155] makes the services of the wife belong to the husband, and in return she is legally entitled only to food, shelter and clothes, and these of such quality and quantity as the husband dictates. She can not dispose by will of any of the property acquired during marriage, nor has she any control of it during the husband's lifetime.

These facts should be borne in mind when reading the laws which declare that husband and wife have the same power to dispose of separate property. Comparatively few women in this country have property when married, especially if young at the time, and the same is true of the majority of men, but afterwards the woman may never hope to accumulate any, as the joint earnings of the marriage partnership belong exclusively to the husband, and the duties of the average household prevent the wife from engaging in outside work. However, in order that she might not be left absolutely penniless after years of labor, the Common Law provided that she should be entitled to "dower," i. e., the possession, for her lifetime, of one-third of all the real estate of which her husband was possessed in fee simple during the marriage. That is, she should receive the life-use of one-third of any realty she might have brought into the marriage and one-third of all they had earned together. But if the husband had converted these into cash, bonds, stocks or other personal property, she could legally claim nothing. He had "curtesy," i. e., the life-use of all her real estate, (sometimes dependent on the birth of children, sometimes not), and usually the whole of her personal estate absolutely.

Curtesy has now been abolished in over one-half the States. The law of dower still exists in more than one-half, but special statutes in regard to personal property and the wife's separate estate have been made so liberal that in comparatively few States is she left in the helpless condition of olden times. In about one-half of them she takes from one-third to the whole (if there are no children) of both real and personal estate absolutely; but in all of them it is only at the death of the husband that she has any share or control of the joint accumulations except such as he chooses to allow. At the death of the wife all of these belong legally to the husband and she can not secure to her children or her parents any part of the property which she has helped to earn. Space forbids going into a discussion of the general upheaval which follows the death of the husband, the inventories which must be taken, the divisions which must be made, generally resulting in the breaking up of the home; while at the death of the wife all passes peacefully into the possession of the husband and there is no scattering of the family unless he wishes it. A general but necessarily superficial statement of the property laws will be found in connection with each State in the following chapters, and they represent a complete legal revolution during the past half century.

Fathers and mothers are given equal guardianship of children in the District of Columbia and nine States—Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Kansas, Maine, Massachusetts, Nebraska, New York and Washington. (See Pennsylvania.) In all others the father has the sole custody and control of the persons, education, earnings and estates of minor children. Where this right is abused the mother can obtain custody only by applying for separation or divorce or proving in court the unfitness of the father. In a number of States the father may by will appoint a guardian even of a child unborn, to the exclusion of the mother. In others the widow is legally entitled to the guardianship but forfeits it by marrying again. Others do not permit a widow to appoint by will a guardian for her children. Tennessee and Louisiana offer examples of the English and French codes in this respect.

Although the father is the sole guardian and entitled to the services of the children, and although the joint earnings of the marriage belong exclusively to him, and in a number of States he is declared in the statutes to be the "head of the family," in many of them the mother is held to be equally liable for its support. Her separate property may be taken for this purpose and she is also required to contribute by her labor. In such cases the husband decides what constitutes "necessities" and the wife must pay for what he orders. A recent decision of the Illinois courts compelled a wife to pay for the clothes of an able-bodied husband. In most but not all of the States the husband, if competent, is punished for failure to support his family. The punishment consists in a fine, the State thus taking from the family what money he may possess; or confinement in prison, where he is boarded and lodged while the family is in nowise relieved.

It has not been deemed necessary to consider at length the subject of divorce, except to mention the laws of the few States which discriminate against women. South Carolina is the only one which does not grant divorce; New York the only one which makes adultery the sole cause. In the remainder the causes have a wider range, but in all the records show that the vast majority of divorces are granted to wives. The following list is taken from the New York Sun (1902) and corresponds with information gathered from other sources:

Habitual drunkenness, in all except eight States. Wilful desertion, generally. Felony, in all except three. Cruelty, and intolerable cruelty, in all except five. Failure by the husband to provide, in twenty. Fraud and fraudulent contract, in nine. Absence without being heard from, for different periods, in six. Ungovernable temper, in two. Insupportably cruel treatment, outrages and excesses, in six. Indignities rendering life burdensome, in six. Attempt to murder other party, in three.

Insanity or idiocy at time of marriage, in six. Insanity lasting ten years, in Washington; incurable insanity, in North Dakota, Florida and Idaho.

Husband notoriously immoral before marriage, unknown to wife, in West Virginia. [Pregnancy of wife before marriage, unknown to husband, in many States]. Fugitive from justice, in Virginia. Gross misbehavior or wickedness, in Rhode Island. Any gross neglect of duty, in Kansas and Ohio. Refusal of wife to remove into the State, in Tennessee. Mental incapacity at time of marriage, in Georgia. Three years with any religious society that believes the marriage relation unlawful, in Massachusetts; and joining any such sect, in New Hampshire. When parties can not live in peace and union, in Utah. Vagrancy of the husband, in Missouri and Wyoming. Excesses, in Texas. Where wife by cruel and barbarous treatment renders condition of husband intolerable, in Pennsylvania.

By reference to the History of Woman Suffrage, Vol. I, pp. 482, 717, 745 and following, it will be seen that the resolutions favoring divorce for habitual drunkenness offered in the first women's conventions, during the early '50's, almost disrupted the meetings, and caused press and pulpit throughout the country to thunder denunciations, but half a century later such laws exist in thirty-seven of the forty-five States and meet with general approval. It is frequently charged that the granting of woman suffrage has been followed by laws for free divorce, but an examination of the statutes will show that exactly the same causes obtain in the States where women do not vote as in those where they do; that there has not been the slightest change in the latter since the franchise was given them; and that in Wyoming, where it has been exercised since 1869, there is the smallest percentage of divorce in proportion to the population of any State in the Union. The three places which are so largely utilized by outsiders who wish a speedy divorce, because only a ninety days' residence is required, are North and South Dakota and Oklahoma, in neither of which have women any suffrage except for school trustees.

The "age of consent or protection" for girls, i. e., the age when they are declared to have sufficient understanding to consent to intercourse, and above which they can claim no legal protection, was fixed at ten years by the Common Law. No action was taken by any State to advance the age up to which they might be protected until 1864, when Oregon raised it to fourteen years. No other State followed this example until 1882, when Wyoming made it fourteen. In 1885 Nebraska added two years making it twelve. At this date women commenced to besiege the Legislatures in all parts of the country, and there was a general movement from that time forward to have the age of protection increased, but in almost every instance where this has been accomplished, the penalty for violation of the law has been reduced, and now in thirteen States no minimum penalty is named. The age still remains at ten years in Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, North and South Carolina. In Kentucky, Louisiana, Tennessee and West Virginia the age is twelve years, but in Tennessee it is only a "misdemeanor" between twelve and sixteen. (For the recent efforts of women in Georgia and Florida to have the age advanced, and their failure, see the chapters on those States.) In Delaware the Common Law age of ten years was reduced to seven by the Legislature in 1871, and no protection was afforded to infants over seven until 1889 when the age was raised to fifteen, but the crime was declared to be only a "misdemeanor."

Women who have "all the rights they want," and men who insist that "the laws are framed for the best interests of women," are recommended to make a study of those presented herewith.

Under the head of Suffrage it is stated whether women possess any form of it and, if so, in what it consists. The story of the four States where they have the complete franchise—Wyoming, Colorado, Utah and Idaho—naturally is most interesting, as it describes just how this was obtained and gives considerable information on points which are not fully understood by the general public. The chapter on Kansas doubtless will come next in interest, as there women have had the Municipal ballot since 1887. It is frequently said in criticism that women have School Suffrage in twenty-six States and Territories, including the five mentioned above, but they do not make use of it in large numbers. What this fragmentary suffrage includes, the restrictions thrown around it and the obstacles placed in its way, are described in the chapters of those States and Territories where it prevails—Arizona, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Michigan, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Dakota, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin.

It will be seen that in New York women tax-payers in villages, and in Louisiana and Montana all tax-paying women, may vote on questions submitted for taxation, and an account is given of the first use which women made of this privilege in Louisiana in 1899. In Iowa all women may vote on the issuing of bonds. In Mississippi they have the merest form of a franchise on a few matters connected with country schools and the running at large of stock. In Arkansas they may sign a petition against liquor selling within certain limits and their names count for as much as men's. After a careful study of the situation the wonder will not be that women do not exercise more largely these grudgingly-given and closely-restricted privileges, but that in many States they think it worth while to exercise them at all. In the four, however, where they have the Full Suffrage, and in Kansas where they have the Municipal, the official figures which have been carefully tabulated will demonstrate beyond further controversy that where they possess exactly the same electoral rights as men they use them in even a larger proportion. These statistics answer conclusively the question, "Do women want to vote?"

The information as to Office-Holding is necessarily somewhat desultory as there is no record in any State of the women in office. This is true even of those pertaining to the schools, and in very few cases does the State Superintendent of Public Instruction know how many women are serving as county superintendents and members of school boards. The information on these points contained in the State chapters was secured principally through personal investigation and by an extended correspondence, and while it is believed to be entirely correct so far as it goes, it does not by any means include the total number of offices filled by women. Imperfect as is the list it will be a surprise to those who look upon office-holding as the natural prerogative of man. A stock objection to woman suffrage is that women will be wanting the offices. An examination of the reports here submitted will disclose the surprising fact that in a number of States where women do not vote they are filling as many offices as in those where they have the full franchise. Probably the majority of State constitutions declare that the offices must be held by electors, but where this proviso is not made, women have been elected and appointed to various offices and so far as can be learned have given general satisfaction.[156]

The necessity for matrons at police stations and jails, and for women physicians in all institutions where women and children are confined, is too evident to need any argument in its favor, and yet it is only within the past ten years that they have been thus employed to any extent and even now they are found in only a small fraction of such institutions. The objection to these matrons on the part of the police force has been strenuous, and yet, almost without exception, after they have gained a foothold, the police officers testify that they do not understand how the department got on without them. It ought to be equally evident that there should be women on the boards of all institutions which care for women and children, but, although in most instances these positions have no salary, there is the most violent opposition to giving women a place, and the concession has had to be wrung from Legislatures in the few States where it has been obtained. The right of women and their value to school offices is now partly conceded in about half the States. Women librarians also have met with some favor. As to offices in general, most of which carry either salary or patronage or both, they will continue to be regarded as belonging entirely to voters and as perquisites of party managers with which to reward political service, although all of them are proportionately supported by women tax-payers.

As regards Occupations, the census of 1900 shows 3,230,642 women engaged in wage-earning employments, exclusive of domestic service, and the question of their admittance to practically all such may be regarded as settled, but it has not been gained without a contest. Women, however, are still barred from the best-paying positions and are usually compelled to accept unequal wages for equal work. This is partly due to disfranchisement and partly to economic causes and can be remedied only by time. In many of the States of which it is said, "No profession is forbidden to women," the test has not been made, and until some woman attempts to be a minister, physician, lawyer or notary public it can not be known whether she will encounter a statutory prohibition.

The department of Education presents the most satisfactory condition. The battle for co-education, which means simply a chance for women to have the best advantages which exist, has been bitterly fought. A guerilla warfare is still maintained against it, but the contest is so nearly finished as to warrant no fears as to the future. Every State University but those of Georgia, Louisiana, North Carolina and Virginia, is open to women on exactly the same terms as to men (with the exception of some departments of Pennsylvania). They have full admission to Chicago and Leland Stanford Universities, two of the largest in the United States. They may enter the post-graduate department of Yale and receive its degrees. Harvard and Princeton are still entirely closed to them, as are a number of the smaller of the old, established Eastern universities, but this is largely compensated by the great Woman's Colleges of the East—Bryn Mawr, Wellesley, Smith and Vassar—which accommodate nearly 4,000 students. The Medical Department of Johns Hopkins, and Medical, Theological, Law and Dental Colleges in all parts of the country, admit women to their full courses. This is true also of Agricultural Colleges and of Technical Institutes such as Drexel and Pratt. There is now no lack of opportunity for them to obtain the highest education, either along the line of general culture or specialized work.[157]

The details of the following chapters will show that the civil, legal, industrial and educational rights of women are so far secured as to give full assurance that they will be absolute in the near future. The political rights are further off, for reasons which are presented in the introduction to this volume, but the yielding of all the others is proof sufficient that the spirit of our institutions will eventually find its fullest expression in perfect equality of rights for all the people.

FOOTNOTES:

[151] The names of newspapers which have supported this cause are not given, partly for these reasons and partly because on this question they reflect simply the personal views of the editors, and a change of management may cause a complete reversal of their attitude toward woman suffrage.

[152] A reading of these chapters will show that the suffrage societies have started many progressive movements and then turned them over to other organizations of women, believing they would thrive better if freed from the effects of the prejudice against woman suffrage and everything connected with it.

[153] Notwithstanding these efforts, the very statutes which are intended to be fair to women are continually found to be defective, and whenever any doubt arises as to their construction the Common Law must prevail, which in all cases is unjust to women. An example of this kind will be found in the chapter on New York, showing that it was held in 1901 that a wife's wages belonged to her husband, although it was supposed that these had been secured to her beyond all question by a special statute of 1860.

[154] For abstract of the Common Law in regard to women see History of Woman Suffrage, Vol. III, p. 961.

[155] A few of the States were formed under the Spanish or French code instead of the English Common Law, but neither was more favorable to women.

[156] No mention is made of women postmasters as these are found in all States. The first were appointed by President Grant during his first term of office, 1868-1872.

[157] In the various States under the head of Education, Roman Catholic colleges and universities are not considered, as they are nowhere co-educational.

The public school statistics are taken from the reports for 1898-9 of the U. S. Commissioner of Education.



CHAPTER XXV.

ALABAMA.[158]

Actual work for woman suffrage in Alabama began in 1890, at the time the constitutional convention of Mississippi was in session. The editor of the New Decatur Advertiser opened his columns to all matter on the question and thus aroused local interest, which in 1892 culminated in the formation in that town of the first suffrage club in the State, with seven charter members. The women who thus faced a most conservative public sentiment were Mesdames Harvey Lewis, F. E. Jenkins, E. G. Robb, A. R. Rose, B. E. Moore, Lucy A. Gould and Ellen Stephens Hildreth.

Before the close of the year a second club was formed in Verbena by Miss Frances A. Griffin, who has since become noted as a public speaker for this cause. Others were soon established through the efforts of Mesdames Minnie Hardy Gist, Bessie Vaughn, M. C. Arter, W. J. Sibert and Miss B. M. Haley.

In 1892 and 1893 the Woman's Column, published in Boston, was sent by the National Association to 1,500 teachers, ministers, school superintendents, editors, legislators and other prominent people, the names being furnished by Mrs. Hildreth. A State organization was effected in 1893, with Mrs. Hildreth, president, and Miss Griffin, secretary.

In 1895 Miss Susan B. Anthony, president of the National Association, and Mrs. Carrie Chapman Catt, chairman of its organization committee, who were making a southern tour, were asked by the New Decatur Club to include that city in their itinerary. They were also invited by Mrs. Alberta Taylor to address her society at Huntsville. These visits of the great leader and her eloquent assistant aroused much interest, but the financial depression prevented active work.

Mrs. Virginia Clay Clopton was elected State president in 1896; Mrs. Annie D. Shelby, Mrs. Milton Hume and Mrs. Taylor were made vice-presidents; Mrs. Laura McCullough and Mrs. Amelia Dilliard, recording secretaries; Mrs. Hildreth, corresponding secretary; and Mrs. E. E. Greenleaf, treasurer. Mrs. Clopton represented the association at the Tennessee Centennial in 1898. Opposition is so great that it has been deemed wise to do nothing more than distribute literature and present the arguments in the press.

A State convention was held at Huntsville, Oct. 1, 1900, Mrs. Taylor presiding. Mrs. Clopton being obliged to resign, Miss Griffin was made president. Mrs. Hume and Mrs. Robert Cunningham were chosen vice-presidents; Mrs. Greenleaf, treasurer; Miss Julia Tutweiler, State organizer.

LEGISLATIVE ACTION AND LAWS: In January, 1893, through the influence of the suffrage association, Senator J. W. Inzer presented a bill to amend the State constitution so as to permit women to vote on municipal questions and prohibitory liquor enactments. It never was reported from the Judiciary Committee.

In 1895, at the desire of the New Decatur Club, Representative Osceola Kyle introduced a bill raising the "age of protection" for girls from ten to fourteen years, and a similar one was offered for the Woman's Christian Temperance Union. Although these efforts were not successful then, public attention was drawn to the subject, and at the next session, in 1897, the age was raised to fourteen years with a penalty of death or imprisonment for not less than ten years in the penitentiary.

Previous to 1886 legislation and public sentiment in Alabama were of the most conservative kind, but at the Constitutional Convention held that year changes in the statutes were made which gave to women many rights and privileges not before possessed. Dower but not curtesy obtains. If there are no lineal descendants, and the estate is solvent, the widow takes one-half of the real estate for life, but if the estate is insolvent, one-third only. If there are lineal descendants, then the dower right is one-third, whether the estate is solvent or not. If a husband die without a will, his widow, if there are no children, is entitled to all of his personal property; if there is but one child, she is entitled to one-half; if there are more than one and not more than four children, then she is entitled to one child's portion. A homestead to the value of $2,000 is exempt to her from all creditors and no will can deprive her of it, unless she has signed a mortgage on it. If a wife die without a will, her husband is entitled to one-half of her personal property, whether there are children or not, and to the life use of all her real estate.

A wife may will her property to whom she pleases, excluding her husband from all share. He can do this with his property, but can not impair her dower rights. She can not sell her real estate without his written consent, but can sell her personal property without it. He can mortgage or sell his real estate, except the homestead, and can dispose of his personal property, without her consent.

A married woman may be agent, guardian or administrator. She may acquire and hold separate property not liable for the debts of her husband, though necessaries for the family can be a liability. Her bank deposit is her own, and her earnings can not be taken by her husband or his creditors. A wife can not become surety for her husband. Property purchased with her money will be returned to her upon application to the court.

A wife may engage in business with her husband's written consent. If she does so without it she incurs no penalty, but it is necessary in order that her creditors may recover their money. She must sue and be sued and make contracts jointly with the husband.

If a woman commit a crime in partnership with her husband (except murder or treason) she can not be punished; nor, if she commit a crime in his presence, can he testify against her.

Common law marriage is valid and the legal age for a girl is fourteen years.

The father is the guardian of the minor children, and at his death may appoint a guardian to the exclusion of the mother. If this is not done she becomes the legal guardian of the girls till they are eighteen, of the boys till fourteen.

Alabama is one of the few States which do not by law require the husband to support the family.

The convicted father of an illegitimate child must pay to the Probate Court for its support not exceeding $50 yearly for ten years, and must give $1,000 bond for this purpose. Failing to do this, judgment is rendered for not more than $625 and he is sentenced to hard labor for the county for one year.

It is a criminal offense to use foul language to or in the hearing of a woman, or by rude behavior to annoy her in any public place; or to take a woman of notorious character to any public place of resort for respectable women and men. Slander against a woman's character is heavily punished; a seducer is sent to the penitentiary if his victim previously has been chaste. Procurers may be sentenced to the penitentiary.

The "age of protection for girls" is 14 years, and the penalty is death or imprisonment in the penitentiary from ten years to life.

SUFFRAGE: Women have no form of suffrage.[159]

OFFICE HOLDING: Women are not eligible to any elective office. They act as enrolling clerks in the Legislature. Two women, whose fathers died while holding the position, were made registrars in chancery. Women can not serve as notaries public.

There are no women trustees on the board of any State institution, although the charitable and benevolent work is almost entirely in the hands of women. A man is superintendent of the Girls' Industrial School and the entire board is composed of men. Limited State aid is extended to a number of institutions founded and controlled by women, including the Boys' Industrial Farm.

OCCUPATIONS: Women are legally prohibited from acting as lawyers, physicians or ministers. They are not allowed to engage in mining.

EDUCATION: All educational institutions admit women. The State Polytechnic at Auburn was the pioneer, offering to women in 1892 every course, technical, scientific and agricultural. The State University at Tuscaloosa opened its doors to them in 1896. Two scholarships for girls are maintained here, one by the ladies of Montgomery and one by those of Birmingham. In 1900, out of a class of 178 boys and 23 girls, two boys and four girls took the highest honors.

The State Industrial School for Girls, at Montevallo, was established in 1896. There are two co-educational Normal Schools at Florence and Troy.

The colored men and women have excellent advantages in several Normal Schools and Colleges. The Tuskegee Normal and Industrial Institute, under the presidency of Booker T. Washington, has a national reputation. Colored children have also their full share of public schools.

There are in the public schools 2,262 men and 5,041 women teachers. The average monthly salary of the men is $32; of the women, $25.35.

* * * * *

The most progressive movement in the State is that of the Federation of Women's Clubs, formed in 1895, and including at present fifty-eight clubs. Its work has been extremely practical in the line of education and philanthropy. The most important achievement is the Boys' Industrial Farm, located at East Lake near Birmingham. This is managed by a board of women and has a charter which secures its control to women, even if it become entirely a State institution. The club women have for three years sustained five scholarships for girls, two at Tuscaloosa and three at Montevallo. They have organized also a free traveling library, and in four cities free kindergartens.

In conclusion it may be noted that the strength of the woman movement in the State has been wonderfully developed in all directions during the last five years.

FOOTNOTES:

[158] The History is indebted for this chapter to Mrs. Ellen Stephens Hildreth of New Decatur, the first president of the State Woman Suffrage Association.

[159] In the Constitutional Convention of 1901, an amendment providing that any woman paying taxes on $500 worth of property might vote on all bond propositions was adopted with great enthusiasm, but the next day, under the influence of the argument that "it would be an entering wedge for full suffrage," it was reconsidered and voted down. U. S. Senator John T. Morgan urged this amendment. The new constitution did contain a clause, however, providing that if a wife paid taxes on $500 worth of property her husband should be entitled to this vote.



CHAPTER XXVI.

ARIZONA.[160]

The Territory having elected delegates to a convention to be held in Phoenix in August and September, 1891, to prepare a constitution for Statehood, Henry B. Blackwell and Lucy Stone of Massachusetts sent Mrs. Laura M. Johns of Kansas to Arizona in August to endeavor to secure a clause in this constitution granting suffrage to women. She was received in Tucson by Mr. and Mrs. Hughes, editors and proprietors of an influential daily paper, who gave every possible assistance.

Mrs. Johns soon went to Phoenix, where the convention was in session, and followed up a previous correspondence with the delegates by personal interviews. She found a powerful champion in ex-Attorney-General William Herring, chairman of the committee which had the question of woman suffrage in charge. When she asked permission to address this committee it set an early date and suggested that it might be pleasanter for the ladies if the hearing should be held in a private residence. Accordingly Mrs. E. D. Garlick, formerly of Winfield, Kansas, opened her parlor, invited a number of ladies who were interested and the committee met with them and listened courteously to their plea for the ballot. A favorable report was presented to the convention and General Herring, Mrs. Johns, Mrs. Hughes and others spoke eloquently in favor of its acceptance. The measure was lost by three votes.

So much interest had been manifested that a Territorial Suffrage Association was formed, with Mrs. Hughes as president and Mrs. Garlick as corresponding secretary. Mrs. Johns intended to organize the Territory but was suddenly called home by a death in her family.

Four years later, in 1895, while she was working in New Mexico for the National Association, she was requested by Mrs. Carrie Chapman Catt, chairman of its organization committee, to speak at the annual convention in Phoenix; and on the way she held preliminary meetings at Tucson, Tempe and other places.

In January, 1896, Mrs. Hughes, whose husband was now Governor, went to the convention of the National Association in Washington to interest that body in Arizona, which it was then expected would soon enter Statehood. She made a strong appeal, assuring the delegates that the pioneer men of the Territory were willing to confer the suffrage on the women who had braved the early hardships with them, and saying:

It is of the most vital importance that our women be enfranchised before the election of delegates to the approaching constitutional convention, as the Congressional enabling act provides that all persons qualified as voters under the Territorial law shall be qualified to vote for delegates to this convention and for the ratification or rejection of the same.

If our women are enfranchised before the enabling act is passed, then Arizona is safe and no power can prevent them from being accorded their rights in the constitution, and if their rights are not conceded they will see to it that the constitution fails of ratification.

In March the National Association sent Mrs. Johns again into the Territory and she remained until May. In company with Mrs. Hughes she made a successful tour through the Salt River Valley, receiving generous hospitality, addressing large audiences and forming local clubs. The two ladies then crossed the Territory to Yuma, speaking at various points on the way, and went from there to Prescott. Governor Hughes himself spoke at the meetings held in Clifton. Mrs. Johns then went to the Northern counties. Altogether most of the towns were visited, and while the distances were great and the difficulties numerous, the meetings were well attended and earnest advocates were found even in small mining camps among the mountains.

Mrs. Johns returned in the winter of 1897 and addressed the Legislature in behalf of a bill for woman suffrage but no action was taken. Among the friends and workers not elsewhere mentioned were the Hon. and Mrs. George P. Blair, ex-Mayor Gustavus Hoff, C. R. Drake, John T. Hughes; the other officers of the suffrage association were Mrs. C. T. Hayden, vice-president; Mrs. R. G. Phillips, corresponding secretary; Mrs. Lillian Collins, recording secretary; Mrs. Mary E. Hall, treasurer.

In the winter of 1899 the time seemed propitious for a vigorous movement, and Mrs. Chapman Catt and Miss Mary G. Hay spent a month at Phoenix during the legislative session. Every possible effort was made, there seemed to be a remarkable sentiment in favor of woman suffrage among the better classes and it looked as if it would be granted. The final result is thus described in Mrs. Chapman Catt's report to the national convention the following April:

Our bill went through the House by an unprecedented majority, 10 yeas, 5 nays, and then, as in Oklahoma, the remonstrants concentrated their opposition upon the Council. Here, as there, the working opponents were the saloon-keepers, with the difference that in Arizona they are often the proprietors of a gambling den and house of prostitution in connection with the saloons, and thus the opposition was more bitter and intolerant because it was believed greater damage would result from the votes of women. Every member of the Council received letters or telegrams from the leading proprietors of such resorts, threatening political ruin if he failed to vote against the measure. It was well known that money was contributed from these same sources. Here, as in Oklahoma, a majority were pledged to support the bill, but here, too, they played a filibustering game which prevented its coming to final vote. Pledges made to women are not usually counted as binding, but these pledges, as in Oklahoma, were made to men who were political co-workers. They did not deem it prudent to break these pledges by an open vote against the bill, but they held that they were not violated when they kept the matter from coming to a vote. The opposition was led by the proprietor of the largest and richest saloon in the Territory.

I have never found anywhere, however, so many strong, determined, able men, anxious to espouse our cause as in Arizona. The general sentiment is overwhelmingly in our favor. At one time three prominent men were in Phoenix to do what they could for the suffrage bill, each of whom had traveled four hundred miles for this express purpose. Governor N. O. Murphy recommended woman suffrage in his message and did all that was possible to assist its passage. The press is favorable, the intelligent and moral citizens are eager for it, but the vicious elements, as everywhere, are opposed. For a month the question was bitterly contested, but its foes prevented a vote. So again a campaign, which was sure of victory had each man voted his conviction, ended in crime and bribery won the day. The pay of legislators in the Territories is very small, and the most desirable men can not afford to serve. In consequence there drifts into every Legislature enough men of unprincipled character to make a balance of power. It may interest you to know that in both Territories we were told that all such legislation is controlled by bribery, and that our measure could be put through in a twinkling by "a little money judiciously distributed," but to such suggestions we replied that what the suffragists had won they had won honestly and we would postpone further advances till they could come in the same way. In the future years of strife over this question there will be many hands stained with guilt, but they will be those of the remonstrants and not ours. Though crime prevented the victory, yet we were abundantly assured of the lasting results of the campaign.

LAWS: Curtesy and dower were abolished by Territorial legislation, but in 1887 Congress passed an act granting a widow dower in all the Territories. If either husband or wife die without a will, leaving descendants, out of the separate property of either the survivor has one-third of the personal and a life use of one-third of the real estate. If there are no descendants, the survivor has all of the personal and a life use of one-half the real estate; if there are neither descendants nor father nor mother of the decedent, the survivor has the whole estate. The community property goes entirely to the survivor if there are no descendants, otherwise one-half goes to the survivor, in either case charged with the community debts. If the widow has a maintenance derived from her own property equal to $2,000, the whole property so set apart, other than her half of the homestead, must go to the minor children. If the homestead was selected from the community property it vests absolutely in the survivor. If selected from the separate property of either, it vests in that one or his heirs. It can not exceed $5,000 in value.

Married women have the exclusive control of their separate property; it is not liable for the debts or obligations of the husband; it may be mortgaged, sold or disposed of by will without his consent. The same privileges are extended to husbands.

A married woman may sue and be sued and make contracts in her own name as regards her separate property, but she must sue jointly with her husband for personal injuries, and damages recovered are community property and in his control.

If a married woman desire to become a sole trader she must file a certificate in the registry of deeds setting forth the nature and place of business. She can not become a sole trader if the original capital invested exceeds $10,000 unless she takes oath that the surplus did not come from any funds of the husband. If the wife is not a sole trader her wages are community property and belong to the husband while she is living with him.

The father is the legal guardian of the minor children. At his death the mother becomes guardian so long as she remains unmarried, provided she is a suitable person.

If the husband fails to support his wife, she may contract debts for necessaries on his credit, and for such debts she and her husband must be sued jointly and if he is not financially responsible her separate property may be taken.

The "age of protection" for girls was raised from 10 to 14 years in 1887, and to 18 in 1895. The penalty is confinement in the penitentiary for life or for not less than five years.

SUFFRAGE: Since 1887 every person, male or female, twenty-one years old, who is the parent or guardian of a child of school age residing in the district, or has paid Territorial or county school tax, exclusive of poll-tax, during the preceding year, is eligible to the office of school trustee and entitled to vote for this officer at any School District election. This includes all cities and towns in the Territory.

OFFICE HOLDING: Women may legally serve as school trustees, court commissioners, clerks of court, official stenographers, deputies and clerks in Territorial, county and municipal offices, and notaries public. Very few, however, are filling any of these offices.

Governor L. C. Hughes held that women were qualified to sit on any State Board and appointed one on the board of the State Normal School and one assistant superintendent of the Insane Asylum. None have since been appointed. There are no women physicians in any public institutions, and no police matrons at any jail or station-house.

OCCUPATIONS: No profession or occupation is legally forbidden to women.

EDUCATION: The State University is co-educational. In the public schools there are 122 men and 257 women teachers. The average monthly salary of the men is $73.23; of the women, $63.17.

FOOTNOTES:

[160] The History is indebted to Mrs. L. C. Hughes of Tucson, former president of the Territorial Woman Suffrage Association, and to Mrs. Laura M. Johns of Kansas for material used in this chapter.



CHAPTER XXVII.

ARKANSAS.[161]

In 1885 the first woman suffrage association in Arkansas was formed at Eureka Springs by Miss Phoebe W. Couzins and Mrs. Lizzie D. Fyler, who was made president. Miss Susan B. Anthony lectured in February, 1889, in Helena, Fort Smith and Little Rock, at the last place introduced by Gov. James B. Eagle. On Sunday afternoon she spoke at a temperance meeting in this city, to a large audience that manifested every evidence of approval although she advocated woman suffrage. These were the first addresses on woman's enfranchisement given in the State.

No regularly constituted State suffrage convention ever has been held, but at the close of the annual Woman's Christian Temperance Union convention it is customary for the members of this body who favor the ballot for woman to meet and elect the usual officers for that branch of the work.

For fifteen years before her death in 1899, Mrs. Clara A. McDiarmid was a leader, was president of the association and represented the State at the national conventions. Dr. Ida J. Brooks is an earnest worker, and valuable assistance has been given by Mrs. Fannie L. Chunn and Mrs. Bernie Babcock.

In 1896 Mrs. Lida A. Meriwether of Tennessee gave twelve lectures under the auspices of the National Association. Miss Frances A. Griffin of Alabama also spoke here on this subject.

Not even this brief history of the suffrage movement would be complete without a mention of the Woman's Chronicle, established in 1888 by Catherine Campbell Cunningham, Mary Burt Brooks and Haryot Holt Cahoon. Mrs. Brooks was principal of the Forest Grove School, and Miss Cunningham a teacher in the public schools of Little Rock, but every week for five years this bright, newsy paper appeared on time. It was devoted to the general interests of women, with a strong advocacy of their enfranchisement. During the General Assembly it was laid each Saturday morning on the desk of every legislator. Charles E. Cunningham encouraged and sustained his daughter in her work.

LEGISLATIVE ACTION AND LAWS: The only bill for woman suffrage was that championed in the Senate by J. P. H. Russ, in 1891, "An act to give white women the right to vote and hold office, and all other rights the same as are accorded to male citizens." This unconstitutional measure passed third reading, but it is not surprising that it received only four affirmative votes; fourteen voted against it and fourteen refrained from voting.

In 1895 the law recognizing insanity after marriage as a ground for divorce was repealed.

This year a law was passed requiring the councils of all first-class cities to elect a police matron to look after woman prisoners.

Dower exists but not curtesy, unless the wife dies intestate and there has been issue born alive. If there are children the wife is entitled to one-third of the real property for her life and one-third of the personal property absolutely. If there are no children living she takes in fee simple one-half of the real estate where it is a new acquisition and not an inheritance, and one-half of the personal estate absolutely as against the collateral heirs; but as against creditors she takes one-third of the real estate in fee simple and one-third of the personal property absolutely. If either the husband or the wife die without a will and there are neither father, mother, nor their descendants, nor any paternal or maternal kindred capable of inheriting, the whole estate, both real and personal, goes to the surviving wife or husband.

The wife may sell or transfer her separate real estate without the consent of the husband. He can do the same with his real estate but can not impair her dower. A transfer of the homestead requires the joint signature.

A married woman as sole trader may engage in business on her own account and have the profits free from the interference of her husband, but if she is simply working for wages he may sue for her earnings and his receipt will bind her.

The father is the legal guardian of the children, having custody of their persons and property, but "no man shall bind his child to apprenticeship or service, or part with the control of such child, or create any testamentary guardianship therefor, unless the mother shall in writing signify her consent thereto." At the father's death the mother may be guardian of the persons of the children but not of their property unless derived from her.

There is no law requiring the husband to support his family.

The "age of protection" for girls was raised from 12 to 16 years in 1893, with a penalty of imprisonment in the penitentiary not less than five years nor more than twenty-one. In 1899 the minimum penalty was reduced to one year.

SUFFRAGE: Women have no form of suffrage except under the Three-Mile Law. This provides that, on petition of a majority of the inhabitants living within three miles of any church or school, the court shall make it illegal for liquor to be sold within this limit for two years. The law never has been utilized in the larger cities, but has been tried in numerous small towns and hundreds of outlying districts, where it has borne the test bravely, ruling out completely the public drink-houses. Wherever it has been put into force, women have been a strong factor, giving their own signatures in its favor and in many instances making house to house canvasses to obtain signers.

OFFICE HOLDING: Women are not eligible for any elective office. For twenty-five years, however, they have held clerkships in both branches of the General Assembly. In 1899 a bill to disqualify them from holding these was defeated in the Lower House by a considerable majority. But this same Legislature did not hesitate to declare women not qualified to serve as notaries public, which they had been doing for several years.

There are police matrons in Little Rock and Hot Springs.

For one year the "visiting committee" appointed by the School Board was composed of three men and two women. The latter made a written report, but the innovation was not repeated.

OCCUPATIONS: Women are not permitted to practice law. No other profession or occupation is legally forbidden.

EDUCATION: All of the universities and colleges are coeducational, even the Law and Medical Departments of the State University being open to women.

In the public schools there are 4,515 men and 2,558 women teachers. The average monthly salary of the men is $49.22, of the women, $35.52.

FOOTNOTES:

[161] The History is indebted for the material for this chapter to Miss Catherine Campbell Cunningham of Little Rock, one of the earliest suffrage workers in the State.



CHAPTER XXVIII.

CALIFORNIA.[162]

The first woman suffrage meeting on the Pacific Coast was held in San Francisco in May, 1869, and a State association was formed in January, 1870. From that date meetings were held regularly and a committee of women did faithful work at the Legislature every session, securing many changes in the laws to the advantage of women.[163]

At the annual meeting of the association in San Francisco in December, 1884, Mrs. Laura De Force Gordon succeeded Mrs. Clara S. Foltz as president and held the office for the next ten years. During this time she attended a number of national suffrage conventions in Washington and delivered addresses in many parts of the United States.

In the political campaign of 1888 Mrs. Gordon and Mrs. Foltz were employed as speakers by the Democratic Central Committee, and Miss Addie L. Ballou by the Republican. The Populist and the Labor parties selected women as delegates to their State conventions and placed them on their tickets for various offices. Mrs. Lillie Devereux Blake of New York and Mrs. Marilla M. Ricker of New Hampshire visited the Pacific Coast and gave very acceptable lectures to the suffrage societies.

In 1889 Mrs. Ellen Clark Sargent and Mrs. Sarah Knox Goodrich each subscribed $100 to send Mrs. Gordon to Washington Territory to aid the women there in securing the adoption of a suffrage amendment to the State constitution. She canvassed the State, contributing her services. The next year, through the efforts of these two ladies and their own contributions, over $1,000 were sent to South Dakota to assist the women in a similar attempt.

Suffrage meetings for various purposes were held in 1890, the largest being a grand rally at Metropolitan Temple, July 4, to celebrate the admission of Wyoming as a State with full suffrage for women, at which there were addresses by the Hon. T. V. Cator, the Rev. C. W. Wendte, James K. Barry, the Hon. P. Reddy, the Hon. Charles Summer, Mrs. Gordon and others. This year the State Grange and the Farmers' Alliance cordially indorsed woman suffrage at their conventions. The annual suffrage meeting was held in Washington Hall, San Francisco, September 26. Mrs. Gordon was appointed a committee to select her own assistants and have full charge of the legislative work during the winter.

In 1891 practically every organization of either men or women seemed to be permeated with the agitation for woman suffrage. Among the most effective speakers and writers were Mrs. Charlotte Perkins Stetson, Mrs. Sarah B. Cooper, Miss Agnes Manning, Miss Ina D. Coolbrith, Mme. A. L. Sorbier, Mrs. E. O. Smith and Mrs. Sara A. T. Lemmon.[164]

Many informal business meetings were held during the next two years in Mrs. Gordon's law office. The adoption of equal suffrage by Colorado in 1893 inspired the California women to renewed effort. An Equal Rights League was formed of experienced suffrage workers. This was followed by the Young Woman's Suffrage Club, Miss Fannie Lemme, president, which became very popular. The Political Equality Club of Alameda County was organized in April. The Portia Law Club, Mrs. Foltz, dean, occupied a prominent place. The Woman's Federation also was an active society.

In 1893 the Trans-Mississippi Congress met in San Francisco with five regularly accredited women delegates in attendance. A woman suffrage resolution was presented for their indorsement and eloquently advocated by Mrs. Mary Lynde Craig. It was bitterly contested but finally passed by 251 yeas, 211 nays, amidst cheers and the waving of hats.

In 1894 was held the great Midwinter Fair, and the Woman's Congress Auxiliary became an intellectual focus for gifted women. It culminated in the brilliant convocation which was in session in Golden Gate Hall, San Francisco, for a week in May. Its promoters were Mrs. John Vance Cheney, Mrs. Horace Davis, Mrs. Cooper, Miss Hattie Cooper, Mrs. Mary S. Sperry, Mrs. Lovell White, Mrs. William A. Keith, Mrs. Tupper Wilkes, Mrs. Alice Moore McComas, Mrs. Gordon and others. Mrs. Irving M. Scott, president of Sorosis, received the Congress socially in her elegant home. A large reception was given also at the magnificent country residence of Mrs. Frank M. Smith in East Oakland.

The Congress was followed by a mass meeting under the auspices of the suffrage societies. The hall would scarcely hold the audiences, which were especially distinguished by the large number of men, and noted men were also among the speakers. The venerable Alfred Cridge of the Single Tax League created much interest by a practical illustration of proportional representation, the candidates for president and vice-president being Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony, the women doing the voting. Letters of regret at inability to be present but expressing sympathy with the object of the meeting were received from Gov. James H. Budd, President David Starr Jordan of Leland Stanford University, U. S. Senator Perkins, Supreme Judge McFarland, Judge James G. Maguire and others.

This year the State Association elected as its president Mrs. Nellie Holbrook Blinn, who had been an ardent worker in the cause for a number of years and a prominent speaker for the Republican party. Mrs. Annie K. Bidwell was made vice-president; Mrs. Hester A. Harland, recording secretary; Mrs. Emily Pitt Stevens, corresponding secretary; Mrs. Emma Gregory, treasurer. Meetings were held every fortnight in St. George's Hall. In a short time General Warfield, proprietor of the California Hotel, offered the society the use of its parlors, which was gladly accepted.

In August a reception was given in honor of the National Press Association, then holding a convention in San Francisco, at which addresses were made by Mayor Adolph Sutro, the Hon. Samuel Shortridge and others. During the autumn a number of large and enthusiastic meetings were held.

In May, 1895, Miss Susan B. Anthony and the Rev. Anna Howard Shaw, president and vice-president of the National Association, arrived in San Francisco in response to a cordial invitation to assist in the Woman's Congress which opened on the 20th. No meetings ever held were more beautiful and inspiring than these, presided over by Mrs. Cooper.[165] The best speakers in the State, men and women, participated and every possible honor, public and social, was conferred upon the two Eastern guests.

After the congress they accepted invitations to speak in San Jose, Los Angeles, Pasadena, Riverside, Pomona and San Diego. The audiences everywhere were large and cordial and their pathway was literally strewn with flowers. They returned to San Francisco and again addressed great audiences in that city and Oakland. Miss Shaw accepted the invitation of the executive committee to be one of the orators at the Fourth of July celebration in Woodward's Pavilion.

On July 2, 3, these ladies met with the State Suffrage Convention in Golden Gate Hall. Under their wise counsel a board of officers was elected which proved acceptable to all the members of the association,[166] and a constitution was adopted which eliminated the causes of past contentions.

The State was now thoroughly aroused over the submission by the Legislature the preceding winter of an amendment conferring Full Suffrage on women, which was to be voted on the next year. Auxiliary societies were reported from Oakland, San Jose, Stockton, Los Angeles, Fresno and other places and 300 new members were enrolled. The big hall was crowded at the evening meetings and addresses were made by Mrs. Sargent, the new president, Miss Anthony, Miss Shaw, Mrs. Cooper, Mrs. Craig, Mrs. Blinn and others.

The officers elected at this time continued through all the long and trying campaign of 1896, which is described further on. The amendment was defeated at the election of November 3. The State convention was called for November 5, 6, in order that the Eastern women might be present, as they were to leave on the 7th. A magnificent farewell meeting was held on the first evening in Metropolitan Temple, which was crowded from pit to dome. The Call declared, "It was more like the ratification of a victory than a rally after defeat;" and at the close of the convention said: "It furnished during its entire sessions an example of pluck and patience such as should forever quiet the calumny that women do not know how to govern themselves—that they become hysterical in the face of defeat."

The committee[167] reported a set of strong, courageous resolutions which were adopted with cheers. The last one declared: "While we accept the verdict of the election we do not regard it as final, but believing that our cause is just and must prevail, we will enter at once on a vigorous campaign which will end only when the ballot is placed in the hands of California women."

A systematic plan of work was adopted and, as Mrs. Sargent was about to leave for a year abroad, Mrs. Mary Wood Swift was elected president. Mrs. Goodrich and Mrs. Sargent were made honorary presidents. Twelve hundred dollars were raised to pay all outstanding campaign debts, and the convention closed with a good-bye reception to Miss Anthony, Miss Shaw, Mrs. Carrie Chapman Catt and the other ladies from the East.

The annual State meeting of 1897 was held in San Francisco, October 5, 6, with able addresses by the Rev. E. S. Chapman, Albert H. Elliott, a San Francisco attorney, Doctors Beecher and Bushnell, representing the women in their profession, Mrs. E. O. Smith and many others. Mrs. Swift was re-elected president and continued to serve until 1900.

The convention of 1898 also was held in San Francisco, October 4-6, and was made a jubilee meeting to celebrate the calling of the First Woman's Rights Convention in 1848.

In 1899 the annual State meeting, held in San Francisco November 7, 8, was greatly stimulated by the presence of Mrs. Chapman Catt, chairman of the national organization committee, and Miss Mary G. Hay, its secretary. Active societies were reported in many counties and a large amount of work done by the press committee of fourteen members, Mrs. Mary L. Wakeman Curtis, chairman. It was announced that the Susan B. Anthony Club would hold a public meeting in the audience room of the Century Club, February 15, to celebrate that lady's eightieth birthday, at which President Jordan and Albert H. Elliott would be the orators. Addresses were given by Miss Sarah Severance, Mrs. Julia S. Sanborn, Mrs. Mary McHenry (Wm. A.) Keith, Mrs. Smith, Miss Selina Solomons and Miss Clara M. Schlingheyde.

On the evening of November 9 the convention was transferred to Oakland and every seat in the large Unitarian church was filled. Mrs. Chapman Catt was the speaker, introduced by the Rev. J. K. McLean. Mrs. Baldwin, president of the Alameda County society, Mrs. Swift and other prominent women occupied the beautifully decorated platform. During the afternoon a reception had been given in the artistic home of Mrs. Emma Shafter Howard.

The convention for 1900 was held in San Francisco as usual, December 14, 15. Mrs. Annie R. Wood was elected president.[168]

One of the largest auxiliary societies is that of Alameda County with a dozen branches. The presidents have been the Rev. J. K. McLean, Mrs. M. S. Haight, Mrs. Alice M. Stocker, Mrs. Isabel A. Baldwin, Mrs. H. J. D. Chapman and Mrs. Frances A. Williamson.[169]

The San Jose Club was formed for campaign work, Nov. 14, 1895, with fifty-four charter members. It has continued to hold weekly meetings under the presidency of Dr. Alida C. Avery.[170] There are a number of other efficient clubs in Northern California.

LEGISLATIVE ACTION: As early as 1868, and for many years afterwards, Mrs. Laura De Force Gordon addressed the Legislature in behalf of political rights for women, and from then until the present time there have been few sessions which have not had the question brought before them. A large number of legislators, lawyers and leading women have contended that the constitution of the State is so worded that it is within the power of the Legislature to confer the full franchise by statute, but bills for this purpose always have been defeated by a majority who hold that this can be done legally only by an amendment to the constitution adopted by the electors. Mrs. Nellie Holbrook Blinn has spent many winters at Sacramento in the interest of suffrage bills, and Mrs. Clara S. Foltz has frequently made legal arguments before joint committees. Beginning with 1891 Mrs. Sturtevant Peet, president of the State Woman's Christian Temperance Union, has remained through every legislative session representing that organization, with bills for temperance measures, suffrage and other matters of especial interest to women. During all of these years the suffrage bills before the Legislature have been reinforced by great petitions and hundreds of personal letters from the women of Southern California.

In 1889 Miss Sarah M. Severance, State Superintendent of Franchise for the W. C. T. U., went to Sacramento with a large petition asking for School Suffrage. Mrs. Gordon, a practicing lawyer, already had prepared three bills asking for Municipal and School Suffrage including the right to hold every educational office. All were reported favorably from the Senate committee. The first was passed, reconsidered and although again receiving a majority vote, had not the constitutional two-thirds. The School Suffrage Bill passed by 24 ayes, 7 noes. In the Assembly it received 36 ayes, 22 noes, not the required majority.

In 1891 a bill was presented to enfranchise women by statute. It was championed by Senators McGowan, Dargie and Simpson of the northern, and Carpenter and McComas of the southern part of the State. On February 7 a hearing was granted by the Judiciary Committee, and Mrs. Gordon gave a strong legal argument which was presented to the members as a "brief;" and addresses were made by Miss Severance, Mrs. Addie L. Ballou and Mrs. Emily Pitt Stevens. Before the vote was taken in the Legislature Mrs. Sturtevant Peet presented the great petition of the W. C. T. U. containing 15,000 names, and many were offered by senators from various counties. Individual appeals were sent by Mrs. Ellen Clark Sargent, Mrs. Sarah Knox Goodrich, Dr. Alida C. Avery, Mrs. E. O. Smith and many other well-known women. The bill passed the Senate by 21 ayes, 17 noes. It had been delayed so long, however, that it was too late to reach the Assembly.

In 1894 the State Republican Convention adopted a plank as follows: "Believing that taxation without representation is against the principles of the Government we favor the extension of the right of suffrage to all citizens of the United States, both men and women."

The Legislature of 1895 was strongly Republican and the time seemed to be highly propitious for securing woman suffrage. To this end a number of influential women visited Sacramento. The first bill presented called for enfranchisement by special statute and was introduced and championed in the Assembly by Judge E. V. Spencer. On the afternoon of January 24 Mrs. Blinn and Mrs. Foltz addressed the Senate Judiciary Committee, and in the evening a mass meeting took place in the Court House, which the Judiciary and Elections Committees of the Senate and House attended in a body, as did also a large number of the members. Mrs. Gordon made the leading address and Mrs. Foltz the closing speech. Another meeting, held in the Assembly Chamber February 8, was addressed by Mrs. E. V. Spencer, Mrs. Blinn, Miss Laura Tilden, a lawyer, Mrs. Gordon and Mrs. Peet. Great assistance also was rendered by Mrs. Annie K. Bidwell, Mme. A. L. Sorbier, Dr. Lillian Lomax and Mrs. Jennie Phelps Purvis.

The bill came to a vote in the Assembly February 11 and passed. A defect was then discovered in the title and it was voted on again February 19, receiving 46 ayes, 29 noes. In the Senate it met with many vicissitudes which need not be recounted, as it eventually failed to pass. This was largely because the members did not believe it would be constitutional.

This question being settled, Senators McGowan of Eureka, and Bulla of Los Angeles, Assemblyman Spencer of Lassen, and others championed a resolution to amend the constitution by striking out the word "male" from the suffrage clause. This was adopted in March, 1895, by a two-thirds majority of both Houses, and signed by Gov. James H. Budd. The story of the campaign which was made to secure the adoption of this amendment is related hereafter. It was defeated by the voters.

Although the experienced national officers told the California women that it would be many years before they would be able to secure another bill they did not believe it, but went to the Legislature of 1897 full of hope that an amendment would be submitted again and they could make another campaign while their organizations were intact and public sentiment aroused. Mrs. Mary Wood Swift, Mrs. Mary S. Sperry and Mme. A. L. Sorbier spent much of the winter in Sacramento, and enough members were pledged to pass the bill. When it was acted upon, however, while it received a majority in both Houses, it lacked seven votes in the Assembly and one in the Senate of the necessary two-thirds.[171]

In 1899 Representative W. S. Mellick of Los Angeles introduced a bill giving women the right to vote for school trustees, and at elections for school bonds or tax levy. It passed the Assembly with only one dissenting vote, and the Senate by a majority of six. Gov. Henry T. Gage refused to sign it on the old ground of unconstitutionality.

CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT CAMPAIGN: The action of the Legislature of 1895 in submitting an amendment to the voters, instead of conferring the franchise by statute, was somewhat of a disappointment to the women as it precipitated a campaign which would come at the same time as that for President of the United States, and for which there was not sufficient organization. They were very much at sea for a while but in the spring of 1895 Miss Susan B. Anthony and the Rev. Anna Howard Shaw, president and vice-president of the National Association, came to California to the Woman's Congress, and while here, having had much experience, helped them plan their work and gave every possible encouragement. In the autumn Miss Shaw returned and held meetings throughout the State, managed by Miss Harriet Cooper. The next year, at the urgent request of the State Association, Miss Anthony and Miss Shaw came back and remained from the first of March until after the election in November, rendering all the assistance within their power in the longest and hardest campaign ever made for a woman suffrage amendment. An amendment committee had been appointed at the last annual convention and out of this and the State officers a Campaign Committee[172] was formed and, in addition, a State Central Committee was organized.

Mrs. Sargent opened her handsome home for headquarters the first three months, and for eight months she and her daughter, Dr. Elizabeth C. Sargent, gave every hour to this work, entertaining as guests Miss Anthony, Miss Shaw and other workers and contributing large sums of money. In February, Dr. Sargent and Miss Shaw's secretary, Lucy E. Anthony, arranged a series of two days' conventions in every county in the State. Miss Harriet May Mills and Miss Mary G. Hay of New York, experienced organizers, were invited to California to manage these conventions and remained throughout the campaign.[173] The Rev. Miss Shaw and Miss Elizabeth Upham Yates of Maine were the speakers. The audiences were large and cordial, clubs were formed and the meetings more than paid expenses.

On Sunday, May 3, the San Francisco Call, the leading Republican paper, under the management of Charles M. Shortridge, came out with flaming headlines declaring for woman suffrage, and several hundred copies were sent to the State Republican convention which met in Sacramento the following Tuesday. A number of prominent women went to this convention, as it was considered very important that it should repeat its indorsement of the previous year. The delegation consisted of Miss Anthony, Miss Shaw, Mrs. Sargent, State president, Mrs. Mary Wood Swift, Mrs. Sarah Knox Goodrich, Mrs. Mary S. Sperry, Mrs. Ida Husted Harper and Miss Mary G. Hay, members of the campaign committee. Miss Anthony and Miss Shaw addressed the Committee on Resolutions, and the next day a plank declaring for the amendment was adopted by the big convention with only one dissenting voice.

On May 12 most of these ladies attended the Populist Convention in Sacramento. They were received with cheers, escorted to front seats, invited to address the convention and the plank was unanimously adopted. From here a part of them went to the Prohibition Convention in Stockton, meeting a most cordial reception and a similar result. The Socialist Labor and the National parties also indorsed the amendment.

There was little hope for the indorsement of the Democratic Convention, but the ladies, reinforced by Mrs. Sarah B. and Miss Harriet Cooper, Mrs. Henry Krebs, Jr., Mrs. Alice M. Stocker and Mrs. E. O. Smith attended it on June 16. They were permitted to address the Resolutions Committee and present a petition signed by about 40,000 men and women of the State asking for the amendment, but it was laid on the table almost before they had left the room.[174]

A minority report was at once prepared by Charles Wesley Reed and signed by himself, William H. Alford, chairman of the committee, and two other members, but it was prevented from coming before the convention by order of its chairman, Frank Gould of San Joaquin County. After the platform had been adopted Miss Anthony and Miss Shaw were invited to address the convention, which they did to such effect that when they had finished the minority report was demanded. It was too late for this but, in spite of the efforts of John P. Irish and W. W. Foote of Alameda County,[175] and others, the original resolution declaring for an amendment was brought to a vote, receiving 149 ayes, 420 noes, more than one-fourth the whole number.

The women opened their campaign a few days later with an immense ratification meeting in Metropolitan Temple. All of the political parties were represented by prominent men who made strong suffrage speeches, Congressman James G. Maguire speaking for the fraction of the Democratic party. Most of the ladies who had attended the conventions made addresses and there was the greatest enthusiasm. Miss Anthony was invited to speak at the ratification meeting of each of the political parties and was most cordially received. No suffrage campaign ever commenced so full of promise.