When the present Board came into office, Iowa was in campaign and but a few months remained for work. In January I met with the State Board and we counselled together concerning the needs of the campaign; later I met with it on three different occasions and gave one month to speaking in the State. The National Board contributed $5,000 to the campaign from the legacy of Mary J. Coggeshall of Iowa and gave one organizer from January 1 until the vote was taken. It also sent speakers and workers toward the end of the campaign. The various States contributed generously through the national treasury.
The campaign came up splendidly at the last. Men, I believe, supported it more earnestly than they have done in other States. One of the best press bureaus any State has had, under the direction of Mrs. Rose Lawless Geyer, was at work for some months. The able president, Miss Flora Dunlap, gave all her time and ability. There were many brilliant forays which were truly effective, but nothing could overcome a weakness which has appeared in every campaign and that is the inability of newly-formed, untrained committees to put speakers and workers to the best use. It will be the case in every campaign that, near the end, weak spots must be reinforced by outside experienced workers. Another difficulty was that money-raising was left to the close of the campaign when all the efforts of workers were demanded by other duties. This has been the trouble in most States. The lesson we must learn is that at the beginning a money-raising plan must be formed and carried out and pledges must be made to cover the major portion of the cost before the real campaign is begun. Toward the close there are many things which ought to be done but are left undone for want of money. State committees grow timid because they do not see the money in sight and naturally trim their budgets to the point which renders defeat inevitable.
Iowa, like every other State, showed opposition from the "wets," tricks of politicians and the rounding up of every drunkard and outcast to vote against the amendment. The unprecedented result was that 35,000 more votes were cast on the suffrage proposition than on the Governor. This could only have been brought about by inducements of some sort which were made to the lowest elements of the population. This story differs in coloring and detail with each campaign but varies little as to general fact. It must be borne in mind and our campaigns must be so good that these purchasable and controllable elements will be outvoted.
A number of men worked against the amendment in Iowa and men are working at this time in South Dakota and West Virginia. Who employs or pays these men we have never been able to discover. Their ordinary method is to secure strictly private meetings of men only, where they spread the basest of untruths. All past campaigns point to the necessity of waging those of the future with a distinct understanding that the worst elements of the population will be lined up by this unscrupulous, well-supported, combined opposition of men and of women. The women appeal to the respectable elements of the community; the men make little pretense in this direction. There is a sure alliance between the two.
The first public session was held Thursday afternoon and the delegates looked forward with keen enjoyment to the "three-cornered debate" on what had become a paramount question. Mrs. Catt was in the chair. Each leader was to have ten minutes and her second five minutes to speak in the affirmative only; when the six had presented their arguments there was to be free discussion from the floor, and, after all who had wished had spoken, each leader would have ten minutes to answer the opposition to her point of view. The program was as follows:
Shall the National American Woman Suffrage Association drop work on the Federal Amendment and confine its activities to State legislation? Leader, Miss Laura Clay, Kentucky; second, Miss Kate Gordon, Louisiana.
Shall the National American Woman Suffrage Association drop work for State Referenda and concentrate on the Federal Amendment? Leader, Mrs. Ida Husted Harper, New York; second, Mrs. Glendower Evans, Massachusetts.
Shall the present policy of the National American Woman Suffrage Association to work for woman suffrage "by appropriate National and State legislation" be continued? Leader, Mrs. Raymond Brown, New York; second, Miss Florence Allen, Ohio.
The alternative amendments to the constitution will then be put: I. To strike out the words "National and." II. To strike out the words "and State." If both are lost, the constitution will remain as it is and the National American Woman Suffrage Association will stand pledged to both Federal and State campaigns.
The speakers presented their arguments with great earnestness; the discussion was vigorously carried on and the rebuttals were made with much spirit. By request the honorary president, Dr. Shaw, who was sitting on the platform, closed the debate and she strongly urged that there should be no change in the policy of the association. The convention voted overwhelmingly in favor of continuing to work for both National and State constitutional amendments, nearly all of the southern delegates joining in this vote. Mrs. Harper then rose to a question of personal privilege and said that she should consider it a great calamity for the association to discontinue its work for State amendments and that she only took the opposite side at the urgent request of Mrs. Catt, with the promise that she should be permitted to make this explanation. Mrs. Evans made a similar statement and the audience, which had been mystified by their position, had a hearty laugh. This debate and the vote of the convention restored the association to its position of standing for the original Federal Suffrage Amendment and working for amendments of State constitutions as a means to this end.