There were petitions this year from many different organizations representing a vast aggregate membership. On June 9 a bill to allow women to be notaries public was defeated in the Senate by 10 yeas, 12 nays.
1895.—On January 30 a great hearing was held in old Representatives' Hall at the State House, with floor, aisles and galleries crowded to the utmost capacity. Senator Alpheus M. Eldridge presided and Mrs. Livermore, as president of the State Association, conducted the hearing for the five organizations that appeared as petitioners. Addresses were made by Lady Henry Somerset, Mrs. Howe, Mr. Blackwell, Profs. Hayes and Webster of Wellesley College, Mrs. Fessenden, Mrs. Trask Hill, Mrs. Emily McLaughlin, Mrs. Boland, John Dean, F. C. Nash, Frank H. Foster, chairman of the legislative committee of the American Federation of Labor for Massachusetts, James F. Norton, the representative of 10,000 Good Templars.
No opposing petitions had been sent in but Thomas Russell appeared as attorney for the remonstrants and said: "Believing as they do that the proper place for women is not in public urging or remonstrating against legislation before public gatherings, but rather in the home, the hospital, the school, the public institution where sin and suffering are to be found and to be alleviated, they have not themselves appeared before you"—but had sent him.[319] Representative Roe said that the lawyer who had spoken for the remonstrants at the hearing of 1894 had received $500 for his services, and asked Mr. Russell if he appeared in the same capacity. He answered that no compensation had been promised him, and that he did not mean to accept any. He added: "I represent no organization, anything more than an informal gathering of ladies, and as for the numbers I can not state. But I do not come here basing my claim to be heard on the numbers of those who have asked me to appear. It is the justice of the cause which I speak upon that entitles me to a hearing, as it would if there were no one but myself."
Later twelve remonstrances were sent in, signed by 748 women. For suffrage there were 210 petitions from 186 towns and cities representing 133,111 individuals, men and women.
The opposition, alarmed by the large affirmative vote of 1894, this year put forth unprecedented efforts. Daily papers were paid for publishing voluminous letters against suffrage—sometimes of four columns—and an active and unscrupulous lobby worked against the bill. For the first time in history an anti-suffrage association was formed within the Legislature itself. Representatives Dallinger, Humphrey, Bancroft of Clinton, Eddy of New Bedford, and others, organized themselves into a society, elected a chairman and secretary and worked strenuously and systematically, making a thorough canvass of the House and pledging as many members as possible to vote "No."
The suffragists made the mistake of devoting their attention mainly to the Senate, where it was expected that the bill would come up first, and where it was believed that the main difficulty would be, but on March 5 the Municipal Suffrage Bill was brought up in the House. Every inch of space was crowded with spectators. After much discussion the bill was defeated by 137 yeas, 97 nays.
On March 13 a bill to raise the "age of protection" for girls from 16 to 18 years was defeated by 108 yeas, 55 nays.
On May 17 Senator Wellman's bill for a "mock referendum" was adopted by the Legislature. It proposed to take a vote of the men and women of the State on the question "Is it expedient that Municipal Suffrage should be extended to women?"
The Mock Referendum: This is called by the advocates of equal rights a "mock referendum" because it was to have no legal validity and was to give the women nothing even if it should be carried in their favor. The Woman's Journal said:
Two years ago an amendment was added to the Municipal Suffrage Bill providing that it should become law when ratified by a vote of the majority of the men and women of the State. Nearly every opponent in the House voted against the bill after that amendment had been incorporated, showing clearly that they were not willing to let women have suffrage even if a majority of the men and women of the State should vote for it. It was then believed that such action would be constitutional. The Supreme Court afterwards gave its opinion that Municipal Suffrage could not be extended by a popular vote of either the men or the women, or both, but must be extended, if at all, by the Legislature. Following that decision, the opponents have become clamorous for a popular vote.