Any States not desiring to work for the Federal Amendment may remain members of the National Association provided they do not work actively against it.

Dr. Shaw presided over the last evening session of the convention and three of the strongest speeches during the convention were made by the Hon. Herbert Parsons, New York member of the Republican National Committee; Mrs. Deborah Knox Livingston (Me.), Superintendent of Franchise of the National Woman's Christian Temperance Union, and Raymond Robins, a national leader of progressive thought. The convention ended with a mass meeting Sunday afternoon in the New Nixon Theater with Mrs. Catt presiding. Rabbi Henry M. Fisher of Atlantic City gave the invocation and inspiring addresses were made by Mrs. David F. Simpson (Minn.) and the Rev. Effie McCollum Jones (Ia.). Dr. Shaw closed her address with a beautiful delineation of Americanism, saying at its close:

What is Americanism? Every one has a different answer. Some people say it is never to submit to the dictation of a King. Others say Americanism is the pride of liberty and the defence of an insult to the flag with their gore. When some half-developed person tramples on that flag, we should be ready to pour out the blood of the nation, they say. But do we not sit in silence when that flag waves over living conditions which should be an insult to all patriotism? Why do we care more about our flag than any other flag? Why, when we have been travelling and seeing others, does the sight of the American flag bring tears to our eyes and warmth to our hearts? Is it not because it is a symbol of the hopes and aspirations of the men and women of the whole world? They say Americanism is the love of liberty, but men died for that and women gave their lives for it thousands of years before America was known. Others say it is the love of justice but the whole world is filled with that, no one country loves it more than another. Human love, sacrifice and sympathy have been manifested in the history of the world since the beginning of time. The American sees in Americanism just what he wants to see. He looks over the world and finds every good thing and calls it his own—justice, liberty, humanity, patriotism. It is not Americanism but humanism. There is only one thing we can claim in higher degree than the other nations—opportunity is the word which means true Americanism.

The anti-suffragists have said that when women have the vote they will have less time for charity and philanthropy. They are right—when we have the vote there will be less need for charity and philanthropy. The highest ideal of a republic is not a long bread line nor a soup kitchen but such opportunity that the people can buy their own bread and make their own soup. Opportunity must be for all, men and women alike, and the peoples of every nationality. Americanism does not mean militarism. The greatest need of Americans is not military preparedness nor changed economic conditions but a baptism of the spirit, higher religious ideals, deeper tolerance and sympathy. The human heart must be in accord with the Divine heart if America is to mean more than other countries, and, if we are to be what our mothers and fathers aspired to be, we must all be a part of the Government.

At 5 o'clock Mrs. Catt spoke the closing words and declared the convention adjourned.

FOOTNOTES:

[104] Call: Our cause has been endorsed in the platforms of every political party. In order to determine how most expeditiously to press these newly won advantages to final victory this convention is called. Women workers in every rank of life and in every branch of service in increasing numbers are appealing for relief from the political handicap of disfranchisement.... Unmistakably the crisis of our movement has been reached. A significant and startling fact is urging American women to increased activity in their campaign for the vote. Across our borders three large Canadian provinces have granted universal suffrage to their women within the year. In every thinking American woman's mind the question is revolving: Had our forefathers tolerated the oppressions of autocratic George the Third and remained under the British flag would the women of the United States today, like their Canadian sisters, have found their political emancipation under the more democratic George the Fifth? American men are neither lacking in national pride nor approval of democracy and must in support of their convictions hasten the enfranchisement of women. To plan for the final steps which will lead to the inevitable establishment of nation-wide suffrage for the women of our land is the specific purpose of the Atlantic City Convention.

Anna Howard Shaw, Honorary President.
Carrie Chapman Catt, President.
Jennie Bradley Roessing, First Vice-President.
Katharine Dexter McCormick, Second Vice-President.
Esther G. Ogden, Third Vice-President.
Hannah J. Patterson, Corresponding Secretary.
Mary Foulke Morrison, Recording Secretary.
Emma Winner Rogers, Treasurer.
Helen Guthrie Miller, } Auditors.
Pattie Ruffner Jacobs,

[105] On June 1, a short time before the meeting of Republican and Democratic National Conventions, twenty-nine members of the Lower House of Congress from States where women vote, who wished the conventions to put woman suffrage in their platforms, had a hearing before the House Judiciary Committee. The Representatives, both Democratic and Republican, who made brief arguments for the Federal Amendment were: Ariz., Carl Hayden; Cal., Denver S. Church, Charles H. Randall, William Kettner, John E. Raker; Colo., Benjamin C. Hilliard, Edward Keating, Edward T. Taylor; Ills., James T. McDermott, Adolph J. Sabath, James McAndrews, Frank H. Buchanan, Thomas Gallagher, Clyde H. Tavenner, Claudius U. Stone, Henry T. Rainey, Martin D. Foster, William Elza Williams (a member of the Judiciary Committee); Kans., Joseph Taggart (also a member), Dudley Doolittle, Guy T. Helvering, John R. Connelly, Jouett Shouse, William A. Ayres; Mont., John M. Evans, Tom Stout; Utah, James H. Mays; Wash., C. C. Dill.

Judge Raker acted as chairman and the remarkably strong presentation called out many questions from the anti-suffrage members of the Judiciary Committee.