Volume II Part 110 (1/2)

It was proposed that the Convention should adjourn by singing the doxology, ”Praise G.o.d from whom all blessings flow.” The great audience rose and joined as with one voice in singing the grand centuries-old doxology, and then adjourned, many urging that the Convention should hold over another day.

In the autumn of 1871 the American Woman Suffrage a.s.sociation held conventions at Philadelphia, Was.h.i.+ngton, Baltimore, and Pittsburgh. The annual meeting in Philadelphia was held in National Hall, and presided over by Mrs. Tracy Cutler, who made the opening address. The number of the delegates to this Convention was sixty-two, representing fourteen States.

Mrs. LUCY STONE, Chairman of the Executive Committee, read her report, in which, among other things, she said--Pet.i.tions from each of our auxiliary State societies, asking for the ballot, were sent to their respective State Legislatures, and a hearing granted whenever it was asked. This is a great gain upon some previous years, when, as once in Rhode Island, our pet.i.tions were referred to ”a committee on burial grounds.”

The following letter was read from WILLIAM LLOYD GARRISON:

BOSTON, November 18, 1871.

DEAR MR. BLACKWELL--Lest some persons might be disappointed at my non-attendance, I regretted to see myself positively announced among the speakers at the annual meeting of the American Woman Suffrage a.s.sociation, to be held at Philadelphia next week. I certainly desired and hoped to be present, even to the last moment; but circ.u.mstances oblige me to remain at home, and I can do no more (and a.s.suredly no less) than to send a word of cheer by letter. Though I was careful not to commit myself as to my personal presence at the meeting, I am willing to be everywhere known as committed to the cause of Woman Suffrage, with all my understanding, heart, and soul. I regard its claims to be as reasonable, just, and valid as any ever presented in behalf of any portion of the human race, suffering from the exercise of usurped powers. Until it can be shown that women have not, by nature and destiny, the same common rights and interests as men--have not as much at stake in all matters pertaining to an impartial administration of government as men--are not held to the same allegiance as men--and are not made amenable to the same penal laws, even to the extent of being hanged, as men--their right to the ballot, and to an equal partic.i.p.ation in all munic.i.p.al, judicial, and legislative proceedings can not be sensibly denied. The mere statement of the case is its strongest argument, furnis.h.i.+ng as it does a self-evident proposition. It is a disgrace to our democratic professions that there is yet a portion--ay, one half of our population, legally discrowned and outraged on account of a natural and necessary distinction of s.e.x, which alters nothing in regard to moral obligations and duties, or to political rights and privileges, in the courts of justice and common sense.

It is amazing to see what insulting flings are made, what ridiculous things are uttered, in derogation of the claim of women to an equal voice in making and administering the laws of the land, in quarters where we had a right to look for perfect courtesy, fair treatment, and an intelligent understanding; to say nothing of the nonsense and ribaldry proceeding from haunts of vice and ”lewd fellows of the baser sort.” But what great reformatory movement was ever treated any better at the outset? Still, it requires a large stock of patience to be calm under such trying provocations; and the consideration that, after all, they are indispensable to the success of the righteous object sought, can alone impart serenity.

What is the question? Not whether many or few women are demanding political enfranchis.e.m.e.nt; not whether the marriage inst.i.tution, as now regulated, is right or wrong; not whether this woman, or that, advocates ”free love,” so called, or anything else; not whether a wife will continue to be true to her marriage vows, or a mother faithful to her maternal instincts; not whether the cradle will be rocked, the pot boiled, and household affairs dutifully looked after; not whether women are better or worse than men; not whether they will vote wisely or foolishly, if allowed the ballot. These and a thousand similarly absurd issues are but mockeries. The one question to be settled is, shall the principles and doctrines of the Declaration of Independence be reduced to practice, so that taxation and representation shall go hand in hand, and the grand truth be made practically, as well as theoretically valid, that all are equally endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, and that all governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed?

Yours for equal rights, WM. LLOYD GARRISON.

Letters were also read from George W. Julian, Frances D. Gage, and Oliver Johnson. The Committee on Business then reported the resolutions,[191] which were unanimously adopted, after a short speech by Col. T. W. Higginson.

Mrs. JULIA WARD HOWE referred to the organization of the a.s.sociation and the necessity for it. We had felt that existing a.s.sociations had failed to represent the methods and convictions which belonged to our way of thinking. No right of a free society is more valuable than the right of free a.s.sociation, in virtue of which those who are able and willing to work can choose their own fellow-workers and adopt the center of activity which best corresponds with their feeling and with their homes. The experience of two years has confirmed our opinion of the propriety of the measures then adopted. We made no attempt to cajole or allure those who did not belong to us.

I am sure that as our work in common has gone on we have grown in good-will. We are fighting our battle still, but do not see our victory yet. We are not opposing men and women, but the enemies of men and women--ignorance, prejudice, and injustice. Many people bring into a new movement the whole intensity and unreason of their personal desires and discontents, and the train of progress must carry all this luggage along with it. Woman suffrage means equality in and out of marriage.

Mrs. Howe referred to the fact that women had been educated not to depend upon themselves, and drew a graphic picture of their condition should the tide of prosperity ebb from under them.

Remember, too, I pray you, that power to do ill can not be denied without including the power to do good. The question as to whether men, in case that women should vote, would be less polite to women, was touched upon. The speaker said, ”that if ladies wish to retain this deference, they certainly pay a dear price for it.” The speaker was opposed to arguing that the right of woman suffrage was guaranteed in the XIV. and XV. Amendments. I go further back and find the spirit of all liberality in every liberal clause, and the spirit of all freedom.

ROBERT DALE OWEN followed, and said woman suffrage was the only means of rectifying the injustice of the laws. His attention was first called to the value of suffrage when he endeavored to get a modification of the property laws for married women in 1836. As a member of the Indiana Legislature, he tried three successive years in vain to obtain for wives a right to their own earnings.

He was fifteen years in effecting it. When the law was pa.s.sed securing married women in their earnings, one of his fellow-members solemnly warned him that homes would be broken up and family happiness ruined, and that for all this unmeasured misery he would hereafter be held responsible. But the law still stood upon the statute book of Indiana, and homes were not destroyed.

The Rev. Mrs. CELIA BURLEIGH was the next speaker. She pictured, in a witty, epigrammatic manner, the progress of freedom in womankind. The picture drawn was of an Asiatic seraglio, where the spirit of revolution crept in, and the ladies commenced their incendiarism by walking abroad, and then followed up the direful uns.e.xing of themselves by gradually removing the inviolable veil first from one eye and then the other--and last and most horrible of all--from the nose. But it made her none the less lovely.

Mr. EDWARD M. DAVIS then spoke briefly, and was followed by Mrs.

LUCRETIA MOTT, who gave some interesting reminiscences of the contempt for women manifested by the World's Convention in 1840, from which women delegates were excluded, and of which William Lloyd Garrison, in consequence, refused to become a member.

The President, Mrs. CUTLER, said: It seems clear to me that the XIV. and XV. Amendments recognize our rights. The XIV. Amendment was pa.s.sed in the interest of a special cla.s.s, but we must not forget that the pa.s.sage of a general law for a particular cla.s.s also guarantees whatever rights can be found to come under that same general idea. [Applause.] First, we have the definition of citizens.h.i.+p, which applies to us fairly and squarely under the phrase all ”persons.” Then comes the right to vote. Some say it is not a right but a privilege. I maintain the contrary. I say it is an inalienable right. You can not maintain a republican form of government and deny to half the population its right to vote.

This may not be settled to-day or to-morrow, but the truth, like a mighty rock, stands there impregnable against all a.s.sault. We do not need to be in too much haste. Let the matter be sifted thoroughly. I do not object, therefore, to the phraseology of the resolution.

Mr. CHARLES BURLEIGH said: I have never yet been able to see that the right of voting is secured legally to women under any instrument which is recognized as having the force of law. A republican form of government does not mean universal suffrage.

We know that the framers of the Const.i.tution never dreamed that the idea of a republic would include even all the males of the country. If this is not a correct idea I answer that when you make an affirmation you must accept that affirmation as the makers of it understood it. I hold we have no right to go to any use of legal quibbling in the matter. If we stand on simple right, let us stand there; if on const.i.tutional authority, we have no right to warp that authority. So with the question of citizens.h.i.+p. It does not imply a voice in the government, by any means, to be a citizen.

Mr. BLACKWELL, on behalf of the Business Committee, offered some resolutions.[192]

Dr. H. T. CHILD spoke upon the second resolution. As a peace man and as a temperance man he was in favor of the resolution.

Colonel HIGGINSON said: If the resolution that has just been read commits this body to the peace, temperance, or any other movement, I would oppose it. Every great moral movement must stand by itself. Napoleon said that the next worse thing to a bad general was two good generals. I do not oppose it as an intemperate man, nor as a war man, for I served too long in the army not to wish for peace. I simply want my wife to vote, and how she votes can be dictated by her conscience. I don't believe in hitching the woman question to anything. Emerson said if you want to succeed you must hitch your wagon to a star, but two stars will only cause confusion.

Mr. EDWARD M. DAVIS opposed the temperance, etc., resolutions. We had better not, he said, pa.s.s anything but suffrage on this platform.

Mrs. GOUGH said the resolution did not indorse the peace and temperance movements. It simply opens up a channel of education.

Woman needs the growth and development coming from the exercise of higher powers than she now possesses. The resolutions were then unanimously adopted.

At the afternoon session the officers for the next year were elected. The presidency was accorded to Mrs. Lucy Stone. The speakers at this meeting were Dr. Stone, of Michigan; Mrs. Lillie Devereux Blake, of New York; John Cameron, of Delaware; John Ritchie, of Kansas; Mrs. Margaret V. Longley, Mrs. M. W. Coggins, Miss Matilda Hindman, Mrs. Cutler, Miss Mary Grew, Mrs. Lucas, sister of John Bright, and others.