Sherry, the famous restaurateur, placed one of his handsomest rooms at the disposal of the ladies and, for many weeks, one or more of them might always be found there ready to receive signatures to the petitions. The New York World expressed the situation in a strong article, saying in part:
Within the month there has been a sudden and altogether unexpected outbreak of the woman suffrage movement in New York.... Some one gave a signal and from all parts of the State rose the cry for the enfranchisement of women. It is not hard to discover the original cause which set on foot the insurrection—for in a certain sense it is an insurrection. It was an appeal which appeared in the latter part of February and was signed by many eminent men and women. Here were nearly twoscore of names, as widely known and honorable as any in this State—names of people of the highest social standing, not because of extravagant display or fashionable raiment, but because of distinction in intellect, in philanthropy and in the history of the State. The reason of the coming of the petition just at this time was, of course, plain. The meeting of the Constitutional Convention would be the one chance of the woman suffragists in twenty years....
It will be noticed that these women are in Mr. McAllister's Four Hundred, but not of it. They do not go in for frivolity. They go in for charity, for working among the masses, for elevating standards of living and morals in the slums of the city. They have awakened to the fact of the other half, and of how that other half lives, and they have expressed their indignation over the small salaries paid women for doing men's work; over the dishonest men in political places, put there because they could vote and control the votes of a number of saloon loungers; over the wretched lot of the woman school teacher, ill-paid and neglected because useless on election day.
And to go back a little further, the most of these society women are the products of that higher education which the pioneer suffragists made possible. They are women of wide reading, of independent thought, of much self-reliance. They began to wonder why they could not vote, when the sloping-shouldered, sloping-skulled youths who proposed to marry them, or had married them, had that right and did not exercise it and showed no information and no concern as to the rottenness of the local government.... The upper class of women are enlisted. Woman suffrage is the one interesting subject of discussion in the whole fashionable quarter.
This campaign brought also another surprise. In all the forty years of suffrage work, one of the stumbling-blocks had been the utter apathy of women themselves, who took no interest either for or against, but now they seemed to be aroused all along the line. In Albany a small body of women calling themselves "Remonstrants" suddenly sprung into existence. For a number of years there had been a handful of women in Massachusetts under that title, but this was the first appearance of the species in New York. They seemed to be fathered by Bishop William Croswell Doane, and mothered by Mrs. John V. L. Pruyn. Seven men and a number of women were present at the first meeting in that lady's parlor, and they formed an organization to counteract the vicious efforts of those women who were asking for political freedom. Evidently under the direction of her spiritual adviser, Mrs. Pruyn submitted a set of resolutions, which were adopted, begging the Constitutional Convention "not to strike out the word 'male';" setting forth "that suffrage was not a natural right; that there was no reason why this privilege should be extended to women; that no taxation without representation did not mean that every citizen should vote; that universal suffrage was a mistake; that the possession of the suffrage would take women into conflicts for which they were wholly unfitted; and that it would rudely disturb the strong and growing spirit of chivalry." Another branch was formed in Brooklyn with Mrs. Lyman Abbott at its head and the Outlook at its back, edited by Rev. Lyman Abbott. A society appeared in New York at about the same time and opened headquarters at the Waldorf. There was also an "Anti" club at Utica.[95]
The Democrat and Chronicle published a long interview with Miss Anthony in regard to these "Remonstrants," from which the following is an extract:
"This opposition movement is not the work of women," she said, "although it has that appearance. There was held in Albany yesterday afternoon a meeting at which resolutions condemning our work were adopted. Listen to the names of the women who were present. Do you see that they are all Mrs. John and Mrs. George and Mrs. William this and that? There is not a woman's first name in the whole list, and I do not see a Miss, either. This goes to show that the women are simply put forward by their husbands.
"Another point: These men who are stirring up the opposition would not only deny the right of women to vote but would qualify the word 'male' as it now stands in the constitution. They say in so many words in their resolutions that the right of suffrage is already extended to too many men; and they pay a doubtful compliment to the intelligence of their mothers, wives and sisters by adding that the class of undesirable voters would be swelled by giving the ballot to women. These are men of wealth who would confine the exercise of the right of suffrage to their own class—in fact would make this government an aristocracy."
These new organizations seemed to be abundantly supplied with money, but though they were able to pay for the work of circulating petitions, which with the suffrage advocates had to be a labor of love, they secured only 15,000 signatures. The petitions asking for a suffrage amendment received 332,148 individual signatures, including the 36,000 collected by the W. C. T. U. In addition to these the New York Federation of Labor sent in a memorial representing 140,000; the Labor Reform Conference, 70,000; several Trades Unions, 1,396; Granges, 50,000; total, 593,544. Added to these were petitions from a number of societies, making in round numbers about 600,000. It had been impossible, for several reasons, to make a thorough canvass, and this was especially true of New York and Brooklyn, containing half the population of the State; and yet there were over one-half as many signers as there were voters in the entire State.
The Constitutional Convention assembled in Albany, May 8, and elected Joseph H. Choate, of New York City, president. Although only a few months previous he had expressed himself favorable to woman suffrage, all his influence in the convention was used against it. Mr. Choate, according to universal opinion, accepted this office with the expectation that it would lead to his nomination as governor of the State, and he had no intention of offending the power behind the gubernatorial chair. The amendment was doomed from the moment of his election. His first move was to appoint a committee to have charge of all suffrage amendments, and on this committee of seventeen he placed twelve men, carefully selected, because they were known to be strongly opposed to woman suffrage. He appointed as chairman a man who could be depended on to hesitate at no means which would secure its defeat.[96] In all his efforts to kill the amendment beyond hope of resurrection, Mr. Choate was actively supported by his first lieutenant, Hon. Elihu Root, also of New York City.
Having ruined all the chances of the amendment, President Choate then announced that every courtesy and consideration would be extended to the ladies having it in charge. Miss Anthony was invited to address the suffrage committee May 24, and the hearing was held in the Assembly room of the Capitol. Not only the committee but most of the delegates were in their seats and a large audience was present. This was said to be one of her best efforts and she seemed to have almost the complete sympathy of her audience. She spoke for three-quarters of an hour, and then urged that those opposed should state their reasons and give her an opportunity to answer them. Although there were twelve men on the committee who even then intended to bring in an adverse report, and ninety-eight delegates who afterwards voted against it, not one could be persuaded to rise and present his objections. It was said by many that if the vote could have been taken at that moment, no power could have prevented a majority in favor.
The women of New York City were accorded a hearing May 31, and it was on this occasion, with the petitions of the 600,000 stacked on a table in front of her, that Dr. Mary Putnam Jacobi made that masterly speech which ranks as a classic. Miss Margaret Livingstone Chanler, in a beautiful address, also spoke in behalf of the "Sherry contingent." The regular New York City League was ably represented by Lillie Devereux Blake and Harriet A. Keyser. The platform was filled with the distinguished women of the State, Miss Anthony, Mrs. Greenleaf and Dr. Jacobi occupying the central position.