After just twenty years' experience of woman suffrage no man in this convention was found in opposition to it, but to the surprise of the members, one delegate, A. C. Campbell of Laramie, proposed to amend this section by making it a separate article to be voted upon apart from the rest of the constitution. He supported his amendment by a long speech in which he said that he himself should vote in favor of the article and, from his observations throughout the Territory, he believed two-thirds or more of the people would do the same, but he thought they ought to have a chance to express themselves; that "they were going to have a pretty tough time anyhow getting into the Union, and if they put in a proposition of this kind without giving those persons who were opposed to woman suffrage a chance to express themselves, they would vote against the whole constitution."
The other members of the convention looked upon this as a scheme of the opponents, and Mr. Campbell had no support to his proposition. On the contrary, the most eloquent addresses were made by George W. Baxter, Henry A. Coffeen, C. W. Holden, Asbury B. Conaway, Melville C. Brown, Charles H. Burritt and John W. Hoyt demanding that the suffrage clause should stand in the constitution regardless of consequences. Space will permit only the keynote of these courageous speeches.[473]
Mr. Baxter: ... I defend this because it is right, because it is fair, because it is just.... I shall ever regard as a distinguished honor my membership in this convention, which, for the first time in the history of all this broad land, rising above the prejudice and injustice of the past, will incorporate into the fundamental law of the State a provision that shall secure to every citizen within her borders not only the protection of the courts, but the absolute and equal enjoyment of every right and privilege guaranteed under the law to any other citizen.
Mr. Coffeen: ... The question, as I take it, is already settled in the hearts and minds and judgments of the people of our glorious State proposed-to-be, and shall we stand here to-day and debate over it when every element of justice and right and equality is in its favor; when not one iota of weight of argument has been brought against it; when every word that can be said is in favor of continuing the good results of woman suffrage, which we have experienced for twenty years?... I shall not go into the policy or propriety of submitting such a proposition as this now before us to the people of this Territory....
Mr. Holden: I do not desire at this time to offer any reason why the right to vote should be granted to women; that is not the question before us. The question is, shall we secure that right by fundamental law? The proposition now under consideration is, shall we leave it to the people of Wyoming to say whether or not the privilege of voting shall be secured to women? Now, Mr. Chairman, I believe that I voice the wishes of my constituency when I say that rather than surrender the right which the women of this Territory have so long enjoyed—and which they have used not only with credit to themselves but with profit to the country in which they live—I say that rather than surrender that right we will remain in a Territorial condition throughout the endless cycles of time.
Mr. Conaway: ... The sentiment of this convention, and I believe of the people whom we represent, is so nearly unanimous that extended discussion, it seems to me, would be a waste of time.... If it were proposed to submit to a vote of the people whether the property of the gentleman from Laramie should be taken from him, or my property should be taken from me and given to somebody else, there would be no difference of opinion upon it. In Wyoming this right of our women has been recognized, has been enjoyed; there are such things in law as vested rights, and the decisions of our courts are unanimous that it is not within the power of the Legislature ever to take away from any person his rights or his property and to confer them upon another, and that is what this clause proposes to do, to submit to a vote whether we shall take away from one-half of our citizens—and, as my friend has well stated, the better half—a certain right, and increase the rights of the other half by so doing....
Mr. Brown: I was a member of that second Legislature which tried to disfranchise women.... From that day to the present no man in the Legislature of Wyoming has been heard to lift his voice against woman suffrage. It has become one of the fundamental laws of the land, and to raise any question about it at this time is as improper, in my judgment, as to raise a question as to any other fundamental right guaranteed to any citizen in this Territory. I would sooner think, Mr. Chairman, of submitting to the people of Wyoming a separate and distinct proposition as to whether a male citizen of the Territory shall be entitled to vote....
Mr. Hoyt: ... For twenty years the women of this Territory have taken part with the men in its government, and have exercised this right of suffrage equally with them, and we are all proud of the results. No man in Wyoming ever has dared to say that woman suffrage is a failure. There has been no disturbance of the domestic relations, there has been no diminution of the social order, there has been no lessening of the dignity which characterizes the exercise of the elective franchise; there have been, on the contrary, an improvement of the social order, better laws, better officials, a higher civilization. Why, then, this extraordinary proposition that, after so many years, having exercised with us the right of suffrage since the foundation of this Territorial government, women are now to be singled out, to be set aside, and the question submitted to a vote as to whether they shall have a continuance of the rights which have been given to them by unanimous consent, and which they have exercised wisely and properly and, as my friend says, with profit to the whole Territory? This is indeed an extraordinary proposition, to submit to a vote the continuance of a vested right. I will not impugn the motives of the gentleman who makes it, but I demand as a matter of justice that it shall be voted down by an overwhelming majority, and I would that he had never presented it.... We are told that if we put this clause into our constitution as a fundamental law, we shall fail to secure its approval by the people of Wyoming and its acceptance by the Congress of the United States; but if it should so prove that the adoption of this provision to protect the rights of the women should work against our admission, then I agree with my friend, Mr. Holden, that we will remain out of the Union until a sentiment of justice shall prevail....
Mr. Burritt: ... Mr. Campbell destroyed any argument that he made in favor of this amendment by saying, first, that woman suffrage as a principle is right; second, that he would vote for it if presented to the people. And he further said that he was not afraid, in defending the right of petition, to come before this convention and indorse this proposition to be separately voted upon, even if it cost him the ladies' vote or the votes of any other class. That certainly is very courageous on the part of the gentleman from Laramie.... But I will say this much in addition, which he did not say, that, as a member of this convention and believing the right of suffrage to be a vested right, of which it would be wrong and wicked for us to attempt to deprive women, I have also the courage to rise above the single constituent that I have in Johnson County who is opposed to woman suffrage (and I know but one) and to rise above the majority even of its citizens if I knew they were opposed, and I am sure that this convention and this State have as much courage as I have. Believing that woman suffrage is right, I am sure that this convention has the courage to go before Congress and say that if they will not let us in with this plank in our State constitution we will stay out forever.... I stand upon the platform of justice, and I advocate the continuance of the right of women to vote and hold office and enjoy equally with men all civil, religious and political privileges, and that this right be incorporated as a part of the fundamental law of the State....
The woman suffrage clause was retained as a part of the constitution, which was adopted by more than a three-fourths majority of the popular vote.
A bill to provide for the admission of Wyoming as a State was introduced into the House of Representatives on Dec. 18, 1889, and later was favorably reported from the Committee on Territories by Charles S. Baker of New York. A minority report was presented by William M. Springer of Illinois, consisting of twenty-three pages, two devoted to various other reasons for non-admission and twenty-one to objections because of the woman suffrage article.
As it was supposed that the new State would be Republican, a bitter fight was waged by the Democrats, using the provision for woman suffrage as a club. The bill was grandly championed by Joseph M. Carey, delegate from the Territory (afterward United States senator) who defended the suffrage clause with the same courage and ability as all the others in the constitution.[474]
The principal speech in opposition was by Joseph E. Washington of Tennessee, who said in part:
My chief objection to the admission of Wyoming is the suffrage article in the constitution. I am unalterably opposed to female suffrage in any form. It can only result in the end in unsexing and degrading the womanhood of America. It is emphatically a reform against nature.... I have no doubt that in Wyoming to-day women vote in as many [different] precincts as they can reach on horseback or on foot after changing their frocks and bustles.... Tennessee has not yet adopted any of these new-fangled ideas, not that we are lacking in respect for true and exalted womanhood.[475]
William C. Oates of Alabama also delivered a long speech in opposition, of which the following is a specimen paragraph:
I like a woman who is a woman and appreciates the sphere to which God and the Bible have assigned her. I do not like a man-woman. She may be intelligent and full of learning, but when she assumes the performance of the duties and functions assigned by nature to man, she becomes rough and tough and can no longer be the object of affection.