THE HUNDRED YEARS’ BATTLE FOR WOMAN SUFFRAGE.
“If particular care and attention are not paid to the ladies, we are determined to foment a rebellion, and will not hold ourselves bound to obey any laws in which we have no voice or representation.”—This was the warning directed by Mrs. John Adams in March, 1776, to her husband while he was attending the Continental Congress, assembled in Philadelphia to consider the Declaration of Independence.
When this document was framed and adopted without recognizing the rights of women, Mrs. Adams and a number of other women, deeply indignant, made good the threat of Mrs. Adams and opened that most remarkable warfare, which has lasted for more than a hundred years and may be called “Woman’s Battle for Suffrage.”
That they were deeply disappointed by the inattention of Congress, may be inferred from a letter by Hannah Lee, the sister of General Lee, in which she asks her brother to demand from Congress suffrage for women, as otherwise they would not pay any taxes. The same request was made by various other prominent women, who pointed to the fact that, while their husbands and sons had fought for the inherent rights of men, they had likewise fought for the rights of women. But as at that time American women were not organized their demands failed to make the necessary impression and remained unheeded. Besides, the majority of American women receiving only a very limited education, took little interest in the question, because of their ignorance of its importance. Thus, the subject of woman’s rights and suffrage dragged on until women had discovered, that there is strength in numbers, in federation, and that federation is the preliminary requirement to make victory possible.
The evolution of women’s clubs during the 19th Century is one of the most striking and most important phenomena in woman’s history. The movement began with the sewing or spinning circles of long ago, and made a great stride when the custom was initiated of some members reading while the others sewed. Later on these circles evolved into reading-clubs, which again developed into literary societies and associations for public improvement, aiming at the establishment of public schools and libraries, the erection of hospitals, orphan asylums, the sanitation of the streets, and other public works.
Such women’s clubs were not even afraid to tackle such most difficult problems as the abolition of slavery, which, at the end of the 18th and the beginning of the 19th Century, became the burning question of the time. The hot discussion of this problem split the population of the United States into two hostile factions, of which the South with its partisans in the North made desperate efforts to prevent the free expression of opinion respecting the institution of slavery. In the slave States even the Christian churches used their influence in favor of the maintenance of slavery.
Among the first and strongest advocates of abolition were Sarah and Angelina Grimke, the daughters of a family of Salzburgers, who during the 18th Century had immigrated into South Carolina and Georgia. Shocked by the inhuman treatment and cruelties inflicted upon the slaves all round, and suffering intensely from the stand taken by their own relatives, the sisters resolved to fight these abuses.
While visiting Philadelphia, Sarah came under the influence of the Quakers, and read the strong protest against slavery, which Pastorius and the settlers of Germantown in 1688 had directed to the Quaker meeting. Returning to her home, Sarah besought her relatives to free their slaves. Failing in this effort, she left her home, joined the Quaker society of the “Friends” in Philadelphia, and in 1835 directed an “Appeal to the Christian Women of the South,” imploring them to become active on behalf of the slaves. This pamphlet aroused such a profound sensation wherever it was read, that when some time afterward Miss Grimke expressed a desire to visit her former home, the mayor of Charleston called upon her mother and informed her that the police had been instructed to prevent her daughter’s landing when the steamer should come into port. He also would see to it that she might not communicate with any person, by letter or otherwise, and that, if she should elude the vigilance of the police and go ashore, she was to be arrested and imprisoned until the return of the vessel. As threats of personal violence were also made, Miss Grimke abandoned her visit, but published soon afterward “An Epistle to the Clergy of the Southern States,” and, at the same time, began to address meetings in Pennsylvania as well as in the New England States, in order to rouse the dormant moral sense of the hearers to protest against the colossal sin of the nation. She was assisted by her sister Angelina and such eloquent speakers as Lucretia Mott, Elizabeth Stanton, William Lloyd Garrison and others. These agitators finally created such a stir, that the conservatives and opponents of abolition decided that they must be silenced. Quite often their meetings were disturbed by mobs; halls were refused them, and violence was threatened. The General Association of Congregational Ministers of Massachusetts passed a resolution censuring the Grimke sisters, and issued a pastoral letter containing a tirade against “female preachers.” But in spite of all efforts, public sentiment in the North in favor of abolition steadily grew, until it became evident that the question could not be settled without an armed conflict.
At a gathering of abolitionists, held on July 19th, 1848, at the home of Mrs. Elizabeth Cady Stanton in Seneca, N.Y., the question of women’s rights was eagerly discussed. Mrs. Stanton, the daughter of a lawyer, had found by frequent visits to her father’s office that according to the then existing laws, which had been adopted from England, married women had no right of disposal over their own inherited property, their own income, or their own children, no matter how unfit, degraded, and cruel their husbands might be. There was even no redress for corporal punishment which the husbands might inflict on their wives.
ELIZABETH CADY STANTON.
Another woman, present at the gathering, was Lucretia Mott, a Quaker teacher. It had been her experience, that female teachers, having paid for their education just as much as the males, obtained, when teaching, only half of the compensation granted to male teachers.
But the indignation of the two women over the inferior position of woman had been especially excited while attending the World’s Anti-Slavery Convention, held in 1840 at London. Both women, together with Mrs. Wendell Phillips, had been appointed delegates by the abolitionists of America, and as they were able speakers, much had been expected from their eloquence. But when the women submitted their credentials, they discovered that the English abolitionists had not reformed their antiquated views of male predominance and would not admit any woman as delegate nor on the platform. When the question was submitted to vote, the women were excluded by a large majority. This flat refusal to recognize woman’s right to an equal participation in all social, political, and religious affairs brought what is termed “the Woman Question” into greater prominence than ever before. The gathering in the Wesleyan chapel, at Seneca Falls, N.Y., Mrs. Stanton’s home, is known as the First Woman’s Rights Convention. Held on the 19th and 20th of July, 1848, it was attended by 68 women and 38 men. The simultaneous discussion of the subject of slavery and the natural rights of man had as their logical consequence, on the part of women, the demand of a privilege exercised in many cases by persons far below them in intelligence and education. They asserted that many of their number were taxpayers, that all were interested in good government, and that it would be unjust for women of intelligence to be deprived of a vote while ignorant negroes could have a voice in the government. Furthermore they asserted that the participation of women would have a purifying effect on politics.
At the close of the second day the convention adopted the following:
Declaration of Sentiments.
“The history of mankind is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations on the part of man toward woman, having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over her. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world.
“He has never permitted her to exercise her inalienable right to the elective franchise.
“He has compelled her to submit to laws in the formation of which she had no voice.
“He has withheld from her rights which are given to the most ignorant and degraded men—both natives and foreigners.
“Having deprived her of this first right of a citizen, the elective franchise, thereby leaving her without representation in the halls of legislation, he has oppressed her on all sides.
“He has made her, if married, in the eye of the law, civilly dead.
“He has taken from her all right in property, even to the wages she earns.
“He has so framed the laws of divorce as to what shall be the proper causes, and, in case of separation, to whom the guardianship of the children shall be given, as to be wholly regardless of the happiness of women—the law in all cases going upon a false supposition of the supremacy of man, and giving all power into his hands.
“After depriving her of all rights as a married woman, if single and the owner of property, he has taxed her to support a government which recognizes her only when her property can be made profitable to it.
“He has monopolized nearly all the profitable employments, and from those she is permitted to follow she receives but a scanty remuneration. He closes against her all the avenues of wealth and distinction which he considers most honorable to himself. As a teacher of theology, medicine, or law, she is not known.
“He allows her in church, as well as state, but a subordinate position, claiming Apostolic authority for her exclusion from the ministry and, with some exceptions, from any public participation in the affairs of the church.
“He has created a false public sentiment by giving to the world a different code of morals for men and women, by which moral delinquencies which exclude women from society are not only tolerated but deemed of little account in man.
“He has usurped the prerogative of Jehovah himself, claiming it as his right to assign for her a sphere of action, when that belongs to her conscience and God.
“He has endeavored, in every way that he could, to destroy her confidence in her own powers, to lessen her self-respect, and to make her willing to lead a dependent and abject life.
“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.
SUSAN B. ANTHONY.
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.
DR. ANNA HOWARD SHAW.
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.
CARRIE CHAPMAN CATT.
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.
