Volume IV Part 102 (1/2)
Besides those already named, others who have been foremost in every plan to forward equality for women are Giles B. and Catharine A. F.
Stebbins, Sara Philleo Skinner, Lila E. Bliss, H. Margaret Downs, Delisle P. Holmes, Wesley Emery, Brent Harding, Smith G. Ketcham and John Wesley Knaggs; among the younger women, Florence Jenkins Spalding and Edith Frances Hall.
LEGISLATIVE ACTION: Prior to 1885 the charters of twelve cities made inoperative the early State law which gave School Suffrage to women.
By appealing to the Legislature of that year the charters of Grand Rapids and Bay City were so amended that the right to vote at school meetings was conferred upon women.
The new State a.s.sociation organized in 1884 adopted as its princ.i.p.al plan of work a bill which had been drawn by the Hon. Samuel Fowler and introduced in the Legislature of 1883, to grant Munic.i.p.al Suffrage to women.
In 1885 this bill was presented in the Senate by John W. Belknap, a strong supporter. Independent of the State a.s.sociation, Theodore G.
Houk introduced in the House a joint resolution to strike the word ”male” from the const.i.tution. The Joint Judiciary Committees granted a hearing to the friends of woman suffrage in February. The Munic.i.p.al Bill came to a vote in the Senate on May 21, which resulted in 14 ayes, 15 noes, but was not acted upon in the House. The Houk joint resolution pa.s.sed the House by 81 ayes, 10 noes, but was not brought up in the Senate.
In 1887 the Munic.i.p.al Suffrage Bill was again taken up, being introduced simultaneously in both Houses, in the lower by Henry Watson, in the upper by Charles J. Monroe, both staunch friends. A hearing was had before the Senate Judiciary and the House Committee on Elections in March. Miss Frances E. Willard aided the suffragists by a brief address. On April 12 the House committee reported in favor of striking out all after the enacting clause, thus completely obliterating the bill, which report was accepted by a vote of 50 ayes, 33 noes. The Senate Bill was not considered.
In 1889 the Munic.i.p.al Suffrage Bill was introduced in the Senate by Arthur D. Gilmore and in the House by Dr. James B. F. Curtis. It was referred to the Judiciary Committees, and at their request the hearing was had before the entire Legislature during the annual convention of the State E. S. A. No outside lecturers were invited, because the friends of the measure were met by a strongly-expressed wish that the women of Michigan should speak for themselves. Short speeches were made by May Stocking Knaggs, Catharine A. F. Stebbins, Emily B.
Ketcham, Lucy F. Andrews, Elizabeth Eaglesfield, Frances Riddle Stafford, Harriet A. Cook, Mrs. R. M. Kellogg, Phebe B. Whitfield and Mary B. Clay of Kentucky who was then residing in the State. Mrs.
Clara Bewick Colby being present, she was invited to make the closing remarks.
Just before this hearing the bevy of officers and speakers pa.s.sing through the corridor on their way to the House were warned by Joseph Greusel, a friendly journalist, that a circular of protest had been placed upon the desk of each member. This was headed: ”Ma.s.sachusetts Remonstrants against Woman Suffrage, to the Members of the Michigan Legislature;” and contained the familiar array of misrepresentations.
With the co-operation of Lucy Stone, a reply was printed immediately after the convention and likewise distributed in the Legislature.
The House Bill remained under the judicious guardians.h.i.+p of Dr.
Curtis. The chairman of the legislative committee, Mrs. Knaggs, was in constant attendance and secured valuable information on the practical working of Munic.i.p.al Suffrage from Gov. Lyman U. Humphrey, Attorney-General Simeon B. Bradford, ex-Attorney-General L. B. Kellogg and Laura M. Johns, all of Kansas. The Hon. Charles B. Waite of Chicago prepared by request an exhaustive legal opinion on The Power of the Legislature of Michigan in Reference to Munic.i.p.al Suffrage. The Judiciary Committee--John V. B. Goodrich, Russell R. Pealer, Byron S.
Waite, Norris J. Brown, Oliver S. Smith, Thomas C. Taylor, James A.
Randall--gave a unanimous report in favor of the bill, which included this opinion and the Kansas reports. Senator Thomas W. Palmer, who had been appointed Minister to Spain, went to Lansing on the very eve of leaving this country and, in an address to the joint Houses of the Legislature, made a strong plea for the measure.
As the day fixed for the consideration of the bill approached, the suffrage committee found itself confronted by an arrangement, quietly made by the opponents, to have an address delivered in Representative Hall by a Mrs. Mary Livermore, who had been holding parlor meetings in Detroit for pay and speaking against woman suffrage; and the false report was industriously circulated that this was the great suffragist of like name, who had discarded her lifelong convictions and gone over to the enemy.
The bill was considered May 15, 1889. By the courtesy of J. B.
Mulliken, general manager of the D. L. and N. R. R., a special train which carried a large delegation of women was sent from Detroit. Some came from other parts of the State and the societies of Lansing were well represented. The galleries were filled and the floor of the House was lined with interested women. After a largely favorable discussion the vote was taken, resulting in 58 yeas, 34 noes. The bill was immediately dispatched to the Senate. That body lost no time, but at once brought the measure under consideration and after a brief discussion it was defeated by one vote--11 ayes, 12 noes.[335]
That evening Mrs. Livermore gave her belated dissertation and, upon motion, was followed by Adele Hazlitt, who with great courtesy slew her weak arguments.
At this session the charters of East Saginaw and Detroit were amended to give women of those cities the school ballot; the former through the efforts of Representative Rowland Connor.[336]
In 1891 the Munic.i.p.al Suffrage Bill was again presented to the Legislature, in the House by Samuel Miller and in the Senate by Alfred Milnes, both champions of the measure. The State suffrage convention was in session at the capital February 10-12, and the Legislature gave a joint hearing in Representative Hall to its speakers, all Michigan women. The Senate Bill was taken up March 25, discussed and lost by 14 ayes, 12 noes. It was then tabled and taken up again May 13, receiving 14 ayes, 15 noes. Just prior to this consideration of the bill ninety-five pet.i.tions in its favor, representing eighty-eight towns and bearing several thousand signatures, were presented.
This discussion was the most trying of all during the ten years of effort to secure Munic.i.p.al Suffrage, owing to the character of the chief opponent, Senator Frank Smith, who represented the basest elements of Detroit. Knowing his illiteracy, the reporters had expected much sport by sending his speech to the papers in full, but in the interests of decency they refrained from publis.h.i.+ng it. Women came down from the galleries white with anger and disgust, and avowed that if they never had wanted the ballot before they wanted it now.
The suffrage committee received many friendly courtesies from Lieut.-Gov. John Strong, besides a substantial gift of money. When asked for the use of the Senate Chamber for one evening of the convention he said: ”Certainly; your money helped to build the State House. You have as much right to it as any of us.”
In March, 1893, the bill was introduced by Henry Wirt Newkirk in the House and Samuel W. Hopkins in the Senate. Both were lawyers of distinguished ability, and among the most earnest advocates the measure ever had. The State suffrage convention was in session while it was being considered. The Rev. Anna Howard Shaw and the Rev.
Caroline Bartlett made addresses before the Legislature, the latter speaking on Woman's Legitimate and Illegitimate Work in Politics.
These speeches took the place of the customary committee hearing. The evening before the bill was voted on Miss Anthony addressed the Legislature with her customary ac.u.men and force.
The measure had been made the special order for 2:30 P. M. the next day. The House a.s.sembled at 2 o'clock. Following the roll-call the usual order was the presentation of pet.i.tions. At this time a member in the rear, at a sufficient distance from the Speaker's desk to give impressiveness to what would follow, rose and presented ”A pet.i.tion from the people of Chippewa County in favor of the Munic.i.p.al Woman Suffrage Bill.” A page sprang forward and taking the doc.u.ment, which was prepared upon paper of an extra size and ornamented with long streamers of red and green ribbons, ran with it to the clerk's desk, and that officer proceeded to read it at length, including a long list of signatures which comprised Patrick O'Shea, Annie Rooney, Spotted Tail, etc. This pet.i.tion was followed by two others of similar character, bearing Indian names of such significance as the wit of the opposition could invent. After this dignified prelude the House discussed the measure at length, and defeated it by a vote of 38 ayes, 39 noes. A reconsideration was moved and the bill tabled.
This Munic.i.p.al Suffrage Bill was taken up again in May and pa.s.sed the House on the 19th with an educational amendment: ”Women who are able to read the const.i.tution of Michigan in the English language.” The vote was 57 ayes, 25 noes. On May 25 it was considered in the Senate and, after a vigorous battle, was carried by a vote of 18 ayes, 11 noes. Gov. John T. Rich affixed his signature May 27, and apparent victory was won after ten years of effort. Representative Newkirk and Senator Hopkins received the heartfelt grat.i.tude of those for whom they had given their ardent labors, and local societies held jubilee meetings. The newspapers of the State were unanimous in expressing welcome to the new cla.s.s of voters.