Volume III Part 84 (1/2)
Willard--Social Science a.s.sociation--Art Union--International Congress at Paris--Jane Graham Jones--Moline a.s.sociation.
Illinois, one of the Central States in our vast country, stretching over five and a half degrees of lat.i.tude, was admitted to the Union in 1818. Its chief city, Chicago, extending for miles round the southern sh.o.r.es of Lake Michigan, is the great commercial center of the boundless West. We may get some idea of the magnitude of her commerce from the fact that the receipts and s.h.i.+pment of flour, grain and cattle from that port alone in 1872 were valued at $370,000,000.
When the battles with the Indians were finally ended, the population of the State rapidly increased, and in 1880 the census gave 1,586,523 males and 1,491,348 females. In the school statistics we find about the same proportionate number of women and girls as teachers and scholars in the public schools and in all the honest walks of life; while men and boys in the criminal ranks are out of all proportion. For example, in the state-prison at Joliet there were, in 1873, 1,321 criminals; fifteen only were women. And yet the more virtuous, educated, self-governed part of the population, that shared equally the hards.h.i.+ps of the early days, and by industry and self-sacrifice helped to build up that great State, is still denied the civil and political rights declared by the const.i.tution to belong to every citizen of the commonwealth.
The trials and triumphs of the women of Illinois are vividly portrayed in the following records sent us by Elizabeth Boynton Harbert, Ph. D.:
His biographer a.s.serts that Bernini, the celebrated Florentine artist, architect, painter and poet, once gave a public opera in Rome, for which he painted the scenes, composed the music, wrote the poem, carved the statues, invented the engines, and built the theater. Because of his versatile talents the man Bernini has pa.s.sed into history. Of almost equal versatility were the women of the equal-rights movement, since in many instances their names appear and reappear in the records we have consulted as authors, editors, journalists, lecturers, teachers, physicians, lawyers, ordained ministers and home-makers; and in many localities a woman, to be eligible for the lyceum, was expected to be statesmanlike as Elizabeth Cady Stanton, executive as Susan B.
Anthony, spiritual as Lucretia Mott, eloquent as Anna d.i.c.kinson, graceful as Celia Burleigh, fascinating as Paulina Wright Davis; a social queen, very domestic, a skillful musician, an excellent cook, very young, and the mother of at least six children; even then she was not ent.i.tled to the rights, privileges and immunities of an American citizen. So ”the divine rights of the people” became the watchword of thoughtful men and women of the Prairie State, and at the dawn of the second half of the present century many caught the echoes of that historic convention at Seneca Falls and insisted that the fundamental principles of our government should be applied to all the citizens of the United States.
In view of the fearless heroism and steady adherence to principle of many comparatively unknown lives, the historian is painfully conscious of the meagerness of the record, as compared with the amount of labor that must necessarily have been performed. In almost every city, village and school district some earnest man or woman has been quietly waging the great moral battle that will eventually make us free; and while it would be a labor of love to recognize every one who has wrought for freedom, doubtless many names worthy of mention may unintentionally be omitted.
The earliest account of specific work that we have been able to trace is an address delivered in Earlville by A. J. Grover, esq., in 1855, who from that time until the present has been an able champion of the const.i.tutional rights of women. As a result of his efforts, and the discussion that followed, a society was formed, of which Mrs. Susan Hoxie Richardson (a cousin of Susan B. Anthony) was elected president, and Mrs. Octavia Grover secretary. This, we believe, was the first suffrage society in Illinois. Its influence was increased by the fact that, during two years of Mr. Grover's editorial control, the Earlville _Transcript_ was a fearless champion of equal rights. While that band of pioneers was actively at work, Prudence Crandall, who was mobbed and imprisoned in Connecticut for teaching a school for colored girls, was actively engaged in Mendota, in the same county. A few years later, lectures were delivered[351] on the subject of equal rights for women in different parts of the State.
Copies of two of the early appeals have been secured. One by A.
J. Grover, published in pamphlet form, was extensively circulated; the other by Mrs. Catharine V. Waite, appeared in the Earlville _Transcript_. Both of these doc.u.ments are yellowed with age, but the arguments presented are as logical as the more recent utterances of our most radical champions. There is a tradition of a convention at Galesburg some years later, but we have failed to find any accurate data. During the interim between these dates and that never-to-be-forgotten April day in 1861, but little agitation of this great subject can be traced, and during the six years subsequent to that time we witness all previously defined boundaries of spheres brushed away like cobwebs, when women, north and south, were obliged to fill the places made vacant by our civil war. An adequate record of the work accomplished during those eventful years by Illinois women, notably among them being Mary A. Livermore and Jane C. Hoge, lies before us in a bound volume of the paper published under the auspices of the Northwestern Sanitary Fair, edited by the Hon.
Andrew Shuman. This little journal was called the _Voice of the Fair_, a prophetic name, as really through the medium of these sanitary fairs were the voices of the _fair_ all potent, and through their patriotic services to our soldiery did the women of the United States first discover their talent for managing and administering great enterprises. In his first editorial Lieutenant-Governor Shuman says:
On motion of Mrs. Elizabeth A. Loomis, it was decided to open the fair on February 22, 1865, Was.h.i.+ngton's birthday, and to continue it till March 4, the presidential inauguration day. A committee, consisting of Mrs. H. H.
Hoge, Mrs. D. P. Livermore and Mrs. E. W. Blatchford for the commission, and Mrs. O. E. Hosmer, Mrs. C. P. d.i.c.kinson and Mr. L. B. Bryan for the Home, was appointed as executive.
This was the little cloud, scarcely larger than a man's hand, which grew till it almost encircled the heavens, spreading into every corner of our broad land, and including every department of industry in its ample details.
The undertaking was herculean, and on the grand occasion of the opening of the fair, although we do not find any account of women sharing in the honors of the day, yet they were vouchsafed honorable mention in the following terms by the governor of the State: ”I do not know how to praise women, but I can say nothing so good as our late president once said on a similar occasion, 'G.o.d bless the women of America.' They have been our faithful allies during this fearful war. They have toiled steadily by our side, with the most enduring constancy through the frightful contest.” Amid the first impulses of genuine grat.i.tude men recognized what at present they seem to forget, that by inheritance and patriotic service woman has an equal right with man to a share in the rights and privileges of this government.
In the winter of 1860 Hannah Tracy Cutler, M. D., and Mrs.
Frances D. Gage made a canva.s.s of the interior and western parts of the State, procuring signatures to pet.i.tions asking for equality before the law, and especially for the right of married women to earn and hold and dispose of property the same as a _feme-sole_. Also, that property acquired before marriage, or that may afterward accrue to a married woman by gift, devise, descent or deed, may be held, controlled and disposed of by herself where it had not been intentionally converted to common property by her consent. In response to a request for data on this point, Mrs. Cutler writes:
At the close of our campaign we were summoned to Ohio to a.s.sist in the canva.s.s in that State. Returning to Illinois, I learned that no action had been taken on our pet.i.tions.
The member to whom we had consigned them, and who had promised to act in our behalf, had found no convenient opportunity. I at once repaired to Springfield, and, on inquiry, was told that it was now too late in the session--that members were so busy that no one could be induced to draft a bill for an act granting such laws as we desired. I found one member ready to a.s.sist to the full measure of his ability--Mr. Pickett of Rock Island. By his encouragement I went to the State library and there drew up a bill giving women, during coverture, certain personal and property rights. Mr. Pickett presented our pet.i.tions, got a special committee, took my bill before it, got a favorable report, and a law was pa.s.sed to that effect. Some decisions occurred under this law. I think, however, that in a codification a year or two after, this law was left out, I know not by what authority, and some years later Mrs.
Livermore, Mrs. Bradwell and others presented the matter afresh, and succeeded in procuring again a similar enactment. The winter following I presented pet.i.tions for the right of guardians.h.i.+p; also, I asked that for estates not exceeding $5,000 the widow should not be required to take out letters of administration, but should be permitted to continue in possession, the same as the husband on the decease of the wife, the property subject to the same liabilities for the payment of debts and the maintenance of children as before the decease of the husband. I made this small claim for the relief of many wives whose husbands had gone into the army, leaving them with all the responsibility; and there seemed no sufficient reason for disturbing and distributing either the family or the estate, when the husband exchanged the battle-field for the ”sleep that knows no waking.” This pet.i.tion, asking for these reasonable and righteous laws, was, by motion of Colonel Mack, in a spirit of burlesque, referred to the Committee on Internal Navigation, and a burlesque report was made in open Senate, too indecent to be entered on the records. The grave and reverend seigniors, on this, indulged in a hearty guffaw, hugely enjoyed by his honor Lieutenant-Governor Hoffman, and, to this day, no further action has been taken to give the wife and mother this small modic.u.m of justice, though many of the senators at that time promised the question an early consideration.
On Sat.u.r.day, October 3, 1868, a genuine sensation was produced by the appearance of the Chicago _Legal News_, edited by Mrs. Myra Bradwell. At this day it is impossible to realize with what supreme astonishment this journal was received. Neither can we estimate its influence upon the subsequent legislation of the State. Looking through its files we find that no opportunity was lost for exposing all laws unjust to woman, or for noting each indication of progress throughout the world. Under date of October 31, 1868, a short article in regard to the ”Citizens.h.i.+p of Women” reads thus:
The act of congress provides that any alien, being a free white person, may become a citizen of the United States.
While congress was very careful to limit this great privilege of citizens.h.i.+p to the free white person, it made no distinction or limitation whatever on account of s.e.x.
Under this statute it has been held that a married woman may be naturalized and become a citizen of the United States, and that, too, without the consent of her husband. A woman may be a citizen of the United States, be subject to the laws, own property, and be compelled to pay taxes to support a government she has no voice in administering or vote in electing its officers.
In the same issue of the _News_ we meet with an earnest appeal for the prompt pa.s.sage of a law conferring upon woman a right to her earnings. When we realize that one of the Supreme Judges soon after this a.s.sured Mrs. Bradwell that she was editing a paper that no lawyer could afford to do without, we shall understand how important a part this journal has played in the courts. In the sixth number of the _News_ we find the attention of the legal fraternity called to the fact that in the reign of James I. it was held in the cases of _Coats vs. Lyall_ and _Holt vs. Lyall_, tried in Westminster Hall, that a single woman, if a freeholder, had the right to vote for a parliament man; and in the reign of Queen Elizabeth, Lady Packington, in right of property held by her, did actually vote for a return of two burgesses to parliament for the borough of Aylesburg; and in the time of Charles I., Mrs. Copley voted, in right of her property, for the return of a burgess for Gratton. The subject of their return was brought before parliament, and amended by joining other persons with Mrs. Copley in the right of returning burgesses for Gratton.
Women have actually sat and voted in the English parliament.
In 1868, Sorosis, a woman's club, was organized in Chicago, with Mrs. Delia Waterman president, and soon after several periodicals were established; _The Chicago Sorosis_, with Mrs. Mary L.
Walker, Cynthia Leonard and Agnes L. Knowlton, editors; _The Inland Monthly_, Mrs. Charlotte Clark, editor and publisher; and _The Agitator_, with Mary A. Livermore and Mary L. Walker editors. Though all were short-lived, they serve to show woman's ambition in the direction of journalism.
In 1868 there was a decided ”awakening” on the question of woman suffrage in central Illinois. In the town of Elmwood, Peoria county, the question drew large audiences to lyceum discussions, and was argued in school, church and caucus. The conservatives became alarmed, and announced their determination to ”nip the innovation in the bud.” A spirited editorial in the New York _Independent_ was based upon the following facts, given by request of some of the disfranchised women:
Rev. W. G. Pierce was the pastor of the Elmwood Congregational Church. A large majority of the members were women, and there was no discrimination against them in the church manual. The pastor and two or three members decided that a change of rules was needed. A church meeting was held in March, 1868, at which the number in attendance was very small, owing to some irregularities in issuing the call. The suffrage question was brought up by the pastor, and the talk soon became so insulting that the women present felt compelled to leave the house. The manual was then amended so as to exclude women from voting ”in matters pertaining to the welfare of the church,” and making a two-thirds vote of adult males necessary to any change thereafter. This was carried by five yeas to one nay--only six votes out of a members.h.i.+p of 210! The church was taken by surprise, and there was no little excitement when the fact became known next day. A vigorous protest and a call for reconsideration was quickly signed by nearly a hundred members and sent to the pastor. The meeting was not called for weeks, and when at last it was secured, he, as moderator, ruled reconsideration out, on the ground that there was an error in the announcement of the business (by himself!) from the pulpit. At a later meeting a vote on reconsideration was reached, and enough of the male adult minority were in attendance to make the vote stand 19 to 17, not two-thirds of the male adult element voting for reconsideration.
The contention now became bitter, and twenty-eight of the more intelligent and earnest members withdrew and asked for letters to other churches. Such of the ”adult males” as ”tarried by the altar,” refused to give the outgoing members the usual letters, to join in a mutual council on an equal footing, or to discipline the seceders. The latter called an ex-parte council, composed of such men as Dr. Bascom, of Princeton; Dr. Edward Beecher, of Galesburg; Dr. Haven, of Evanston; Dr. C. D. Helmer, of Chicago, and others. This council gave the desired letters, but advised reconciliation. Among the seceders, Mrs. Huldah Joy, an educated and intensely religious woman, was one of the most active and earnest, her husband, F. R. Joy, and her daughters, also doing good service. Mrs. H. E.
Sunderland,[352] another woman of culture, and Mrs. Mary Ann Cone and Mrs. S. R. Murray were faithful, brave and earnest.
The church, which previous to the secession, was strong and flouris.h.i.+ng, became an inharmonious organization, and has never rallied from the effects of that unjust action.
At a meeting held in Chicago, in the autumn of 1868, a resolution was offered to the effect that ”a State a.s.sociation be formed, having for its object the advocacy of universal suffrage.” Among the many interesting facts connected with the ”rise and progress”