This is a modern-English version of The Life and Work of Susan B. Anthony (Volume 1 of 2): Including Public Addresses, Her Own Letters and Many From Her Contemporaries During Fifty Years, originally written by Harper, Ida Husted.
It has been thoroughly updated, including changes to sentence structure, words, spelling,
and grammar—to ensure clarity for contemporary readers, while preserving the original spirit and nuance. If
you click on a paragraph, you will see the original text that we modified, and you can toggle between the two versions.
Scroll to the bottom of this page and you will find a free ePUB download link for this book.
THE LIFE AND WORK
OF
SUSAN B. ANTHONY
INCLUDING PUBLIC ADDRESSES, HER OWN LETTERS AND MANY FROM HER CONTEMPORARIES DURING FIFTY YEARS
BY
IDA HUSTED HARPER
A Story of the evolution of the Status of Woman
IN TWO VOLUMES
VOLUME I
ILLUSTRATED WITH PORTRAITS, PICTURES OF HOMES, ETC.
INDIANAPOLIS AND KANSAS CITY
THE BOWEN-MERRILL COMPANY
1899
TO WOMAN, FOR WHOSE FREEDOM
SUSAN B. ANTHONY
HAS GIVEN FIFTY YEARS OF NOBLE ENDEAVOR
THIS BOOK IS DEDICATED
PREFACE.
A biography written during the lifetime of the subject is unusual, but to the friends of Miss Anthony it seemed especially desirable because the reform in which she and her contemporaries have been engaged has not been given a deserved place in the pages of history, and the accounts must be gleaned very largely from unpublished records and personal recollections. The wisdom of this course often has been apparent in the preparation of these volumes. In recalling how many times an entirely different interpretation of letters, scenes and actions would have been made from that which Miss Anthony declared to be the true one, the author must confess that hereafter all biographies will be read by her with a certain amount of skepticism—a doubt whether the historian has drawn correct conclusions from apparent premises, and a disbelief that one individual can state accurately the motives which influenced another.
A biography written while the subject is still alive is rare, but for Miss Anthony's friends, it felt especially important because the reform she and her peers were involved in hasn’t received a fair representation in history books. Much of the information needs to be gathered from unpublished documents and personal memories. The necessity of this approach has often been clear in putting these volumes together. Reflecting on how many times a completely different interpretation of letters, events, and actions could have emerged from what Miss Anthony insisted was the truth, the author admits that from now on, she will read all biographies with some skepticism—questioning whether historians have drawn the right conclusions from seemingly obvious evidence, and doubting that one person can accurately describe the motives that influenced another.
Most persons who have attained sufficient prominence to make a record of their lives valuable are too busy to prepare an autobiography, but there is only one other way to go down to posterity correctly represented, and that is to have some one else write the history while the hero still lives. If we admit this self-evident proposition, then the question is presented, should it be published during his lifetime? A reason analogous to that which justifies the writing, demands also the publication, in order that denials or attacks may be met by the person who, above all others, is best qualified to defend the original statement. It seems a pity, too, that he should be deprived of knowing what the press and the people think of the story of his life, since there is no assurance that he will meet the book-reviewers in the next world.
Most people who have become prominent enough for their life stories to be valuable are usually too busy to write an autobiography, but there’s only one other way to be accurately represented in history, and that’s to have someone else write the story while the subject is still alive. If we accept this obvious idea, then the question arises: should it be published while he’s still living? The reason that supports writing it also supports publishing it, so that any denials or attacks can be addressed by the person who is best equipped to defend the original narrative. It also seems unfortunate that he should miss out on knowing what the press and the public think of his life story, especially since there’s no guarantee he’ll encounter book reviewers in the afterlife.
These volumes may claim the merit of truthfully describing the principal events of Miss Anthony's life and presenting her opinions on the various matters considered. She has objected to the eulogies, but the writer holds that, as these are not the expressions of a partial biographer but the spontaneous tributes of individuals and newspapers, no rule of good taste is violated in giving them a place. It is only justice that, since the abuse and ridicule of early years are fully depicted, esteem and praise should have equal prominence; and surely every one will read with pleasure the proof that the world's scorn and repudiation have been changed to respect and approval. Many letters of women have been used to disprove the assertion so often made, that women themselves do not properly estimate the labors of Miss Anthony in their behalf. It can not be expected that the masses should understand or appreciate her work, but the written evidence herein submitted will demonstrate that the women of each decade most prominent in intellectual ability, in philanthropy, in reform, those who represent the intelligence and progress of the age, have granted to it the most cordial and thorough recognition.
These volumes accurately describe the main events of Miss Anthony's life and share her views on various topics. She has expressed reluctance about the praises given to her, but the writer believes that since these are not biased words from a personal biographer but genuine tributes from individuals and newspapers, it’s appropriate to include them. It’s only fair that, as the criticism and mockery of her earlier years are thoroughly covered, the respect and admiration should also be highlighted. Surely, everyone will enjoy seeing how the world's disdain has transformed into respect and approval. Many letters from women have been included to counter the claim that women don't fully recognize Miss Anthony's efforts on their behalf. While it’s unrealistic to expect everyone to grasp or value her work, the written evidence presented here will show that the notable women of each decade—those with intellectual prowess, philanthropic efforts, and reformative actions—who embody the intelligence and progress of the time, have given her their sincere and complete recognition.
There has not been the slightest attempt at rhetorical display, but only an endeavor to tell in plain, simple language the story of the life and work of one who was born into the simplicity and straightforwardness of the Society of Friends and never departed from them. The constant aim has been to condense, but it has not been an easy task to crowd into limited space the history of nearly eighty busy, eventful years, comprising a revolution in social and legal customs. If the reader discover some things omitted which to him seem vital, or others mentioned which appear unimportant, it is hoped he will attribute them to an error of judgment rather than to an intention to minimize or magnify unduly any person or action.
There hasn't been any effort to show off with fancy language, but just a genuine attempt to share the story of the life and work of someone who was born into the simplicity and honesty of the Society of Friends and never strayed from those values. The main goal has been to condense the content, but fitting nearly eighty busy, eventful years—covering a revolution in social and legal customs—into a limited space has been quite a challenge. If readers notice some things left out that seem important to them, or others included that seem trivial, it is hoped they will see it as a judgment error rather than an attempt to downplay or overemphasize anyone or anything.
The fact should be kept in mind that this is not a history of woman suffrage, except in so far as Miss Anthony herself has been directly connected with it. A number of women have made valuable contributions to this movement whose lives have not come in contact with hers, therefore they have not been mentioned in these pages, which have been devoted almost exclusively to her personal labors and associations. Many of those even who have been her warm and faithful friends have had to be omitted for want of space. No one can know the regret this has caused, or the conscientious effort which has been made to render exact justice to Miss Anthony's co-workers. It was so difficult for her to select the few pictures for which room could be spared that she was strongly tempted to exclude all. Personal controversies have been omitted, in the belief that nothing could be gained which would justify handing them down to future generations. Where differences have existed in regard to matters of a public nature, only so much of them has been given as might serve for an object lesson on future occasions.
It should be noted that this is not a history of women's suffrage, except for the parts where Miss Anthony was directly involved. Many women have made important contributions to this movement, but since their lives did not intersect with hers, they aren’t mentioned here. The focus has been almost entirely on her personal efforts and connections. Unfortunately, even some of her close and loyal friends had to be left out due to space constraints. No one can understand the regret this has caused or the sincere effort that has gone into giving fair credit to Miss Anthony's collaborators. It was quite challenging for her to pick just a few images to include, leading her to seriously consider leaving them all out. Personal disputes have been excluded, based on the belief that nothing would be gained by passing them on to future generations. In cases where there were public disagreements, only enough detail was provided to serve as a lesson for the future.
In preparing these volumes over 20,000 letters have been read and, whenever possible, some of them used to tell the story, especially those written by Miss Anthony herself, as her own language seemed preferable to that of any other, but only a comparatively small number of the latter could be obtained. She kept copies of a few important official letters, and friends in various parts of the country kindly sent those in their possession. Every letter quoted in these volumes was copied from the original, hence there can be no question of authenticity. The autographs reproduced in fac-simile were clipped from letters written to Miss Anthony. Her diaries of over fifty years have furnished an invaluable record. The strict financial accounts of all moneys received and spent, frequently have supplied a date or incident when every other source had failed. A mine of information was found in her full set of scrap-books, beginning with 1850; the History of Woman Suffrage; almost complete files of Garrison's Liberator, the Anti-Slavery Standard, and woman's rights papers—Lily, Una, Revolution, Ballot-Box, Woman's Journal, Woman's Tribune. The reader easily can perceive the difficulty of condensation, with Miss Anthony's own history so closely interwoven with the periods and the objects represented by all these authorities.
In preparing these volumes, over 20,000 letters have been read, and whenever possible, some of them have been used to tell the story, especially those written by Miss Anthony herself, as her own words seemed better than anyone else's, though only a relatively small number of those could be obtained. She kept copies of a few important official letters, and friends from various parts of the country kindly sent their letters as well. Every letter quoted in these volumes was copied from the original, so there’s no question about their authenticity. The signatures reproduced in facsimile were taken from letters written to Miss Anthony. Her diaries spanning over fifty years have provided an invaluable record. The detailed financial accounts of all money received and spent often provided a date or incident when every other source had failed. A wealth of information was found in her complete set of scrapbooks, starting from 1850; the History of Woman Suffrage; almost complete files of Garrison's Liberator, the Anti-Slavery Standard, and women's rights publications—Lily, Una, Revolution, Ballot-Box, Woman's Journal, and Woman's Tribune. The reader can easily see the challenge of condensation, with Miss Anthony's own history so intricately woven with the periods and topics represented by all these sources.
The intent of this work has been to trace briefly the evolution of a life and a condition. The transition of the young Quaker girl, afraid of the sound of her own voice, into the reformer, orator and statesman, is no more wonderful than the change in the status of woman, effected so largely through her exertions. At the beginning she was a chattel in the eye of the law; shut out from all advantages of higher education and opportunities in the industrial world; an utter dependent on man; occupying a subordinate position in the church; restrained to the narrowest limits along social lines; an absolute nonentity in politics. Today American women are envied by those of all other nations, and stand comparatively free individuals, with the exception of political disabilities.
The purpose of this work has been to briefly outline the evolution of a life and a situation. The journey of the young Quaker girl, who was afraid to lift her voice, into a reformer, speaker, and statesman is just as remarkable as the transformation in women's status, largely achieved through her efforts. In the beginning, she was viewed as property under the law; excluded from the benefits of higher education and opportunities in the workforce; completely dependent on men; occupying a lower status in the church; limited to the strictest social confines; and a total nonentity in politics. Today, American women are envied by those in other countries and are relatively free individuals, with the exception of political restrictions.
During the fifty years which have wrought this revolution, just one woman in all the world has given every day of her time, every dollar of her money, every power of her being, to secure this result. She was impelled to this work by no personal grievance, but solely through a deep sense of the injustice which, on every side, she saw perpetrated against her sex, and which she determined to combat. Never for one short hour has the cause of woman been forgotten or put aside for any other object. Never a single tie has been formed, either of affection or business, which would interfere with this supreme purpose. Never a speech has been given, a trip taken, a visit made, a letter written, in all this half-century, that has not been done directly in the interest of this one object. There has been no thought of personal comfort, advancement or glory; the self-abnegation, the self-sacrifice, have been absolute—they have been unparalleled.
During the fifty years that have brought about this revolution, only one woman in the entire world has dedicated every day of her time, every dollar of her money, and every ounce of her energy to achieve this result. She was driven to this work not by any personal grievance, but solely by a profound sense of the injustice she witnessed against her gender everywhere, and she was determined to fight back. Not for a single moment has the cause of women been neglected or set aside for anything else. Not a single relationship, whether personal or professional, has been formed that could interfere with this ultimate goal. Throughout this half-century, every speech made, every trip taken, every visit conducted, and every letter written has been done directly in support of this singular objective. There has been no consideration of personal comfort, advancement, or glory; the selflessness and self-sacrifice have been complete—they have been unmatched.
There has been no desire to emphasize the hardships and unpleasant features, but only to picture in the fewest possible words the many consecutive years of unremitting toil, begun amidst conditions which now seem almost incredible, and continued with sublime courage in the face of calumny and persecution such as can not be imagined by the women of today. Nothing has been concealed or mitigated. In those years of constant aggression, when every step was an experiment, there must have been mistakes, but the story would be incomplete if they were left untold. No effort has been made to portray a perfect character, but only that of a woman who dared take the blows and bear the scorn that other women might be free. Future generations will read these pages through tears, and will wonder what manner of people those were who not only permitted this woman to labor for humanity fifty years, almost unaided, but also compelled her to beg or earn the money with which to carry on her work. If certain opinions shall be found herein which the world is not ready to accept, let it be remembered that, as Miss Anthony was in advance of public sentiment in the past, she may be equally so in the present, and that the radicalism which we reject today may be the conservatism at which we will wonder tomorrow.
There’s no intention to highlight the difficulties and unpleasant aspects, but rather to briefly illustrate the many years of relentless effort, starting under conditions that now seem almost unbelievable, and continuing with remarkable courage in the face of slander and persecution that today’s women can hardly imagine. Nothing has been hidden or softened. In those years of constant struggle, when every action was a trial, mistakes were inevitable, but the narrative wouldn’t be complete if they were left out. There’s no attempt to present a flawless character, just that of a woman who bravely took the blows and endured the scorn so that other women could be free. Future generations will read these pages with tears and will wonder what kind of people allowed this woman to work for humanity for fifty years, almost alone, while also forcing her to beg or find the funds to continue her work. If some views expressed here are ones the world isn’t ready to accept, remember that, just as Miss Anthony was ahead of public opinion in the past, she might be equally so today, and the ideas we dismiss now could very well become the beliefs we'll look back on with amazement tomorrow.
Those who follow the story of this life will confirm the assertion that every girl who now enjoys a college education; every woman who has the chance of earning an honest living in whatever sphere she chooses; every wife who is protected by law in the possession of her person and her property; every mother who is blessed with the custody and control of her own children—owes these sacred privileges to Susan B. Anthony beyond all others. This biography goes to the public with the earnest hope that it may carry to every man a conviction of his imperative duty to secure for women the same freedom which he himself enjoys; and that it may impress upon every woman a solemn obligation to complete the great work of this noble pioneer.
Those who follow the journey of this life will confirm that every girl who now has a college education; every woman who can earn a fair living in whatever field she chooses; every wife who is legally protected in her rights to her body and her property; every mother who has the joy of raising and caring for her own children—owes these vital rights to Susan B. Anthony more than anyone else. This biography is presented to the public with the sincere hope that it inspires every man to recognize his duty to ensure that women have the same freedom he enjoys; and that it reminds every woman of her important responsibility to continue the significant work of this remarkable pioneer.
TABLE OF CONTENTS.
VOL. I.
CHAPTER I.
CHAPTER 1.
ANCESTRY, HOME AND CHILDHOOD. (1550-1826.), 1-15
ANCESTRY, HOME, AND CHILDHOOD. (1550-1826.), __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__-15
Berkshire Hills; noted persons born there; Anthony and Read genealogy; military record; religious beliefs; education; marriage of father and mother of Susan B. Anthony; her birth and childhood; characteristics of mother; first factory built.
Berkshire Hills; notable individuals born there; Anthony and Read family history; military background; religious views; education; marriage of Susan B. Anthony's parents; her birth and early years; traits of her mother; the first factory built.
CHAPTER II
CHAPTER 2
GIRLHOOD AND SCHOOL LIFE. (1826-1838.), 17-31
Girlhood and School Life (1826-1838), __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__-31
Removal to Battenville, N.Y.; manufacturing business; temperance and labor questions; new house; Susan's factory experience; Quaker discipline; the home school; first teaching; boarding-school life; Susan's letters and journals.
Removal to Battenville, N.Y.; manufacturing business; issues of temperance and labor; new house; Susan's experience in the factory; Quaker discipline; the home school; first teaching experience; boarding school life; Susan's letters and journals.
CHAPTER III.
CHAPTER 3.
FINANCIAL CRASH—THE TEACHER. (1838-1845.), 33-46
FINANCIAL CRASH—THE TEACHER. (1838-1845.), __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__-46
The panic; father's letters; teaching at Union Village; the home sacrificed; life at Center Falls; more Quaker discipline; teaching at New Rochelle; Miss Anthony's letters on slavery, temperance, medical practice, Van Buren, etc.; teaching at Center Falls, Cambridge and Fort Edward; proposals of marriage; removal to Rochester, N. Y.
The panic; dad's letters; teaching at Union Village; the house sacrificed; life at Center Falls; more Quaker discipline; teaching at New Rochelle; Miss Anthony's letters on slavery, temperance, medical practice, Van Buren, etc.; teaching at Center Falls, Cambridge, and Fort Edward; marriage proposals; moving to Rochester, NY.
CHAPTER IV.
CHAPTER 4.
THE FARM HOME—END OP TEACHING. (1845-1850.), 47-55
THE FARM HOME—END OF TEACHING. (1845-1850.), 47-55
Journey to Rochester; the farm home and life; teaching in Canajoharie; a devotee of fashion; death of Cousin Margaret; weary of the school-room; early temperance work; first public address; return home; end of teaching.
Journey to Rochester; the farm home and life; teaching in Canajoharie; a fashion enthusiast; death of Cousin Margaret; tired of the classroom; early temperance efforts; first public speech; return home; end of teaching.
CHAPTER V.
CHAPTER 5.
ENTRANCE INTO PUBLIC LIFE. (1850-1852.), 57-80
Entering Public Life. (1850-1852.), __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__-80
Conditions leading to a public career; her home the center of reformers; temperance festival; first meeting with the Fosters, Mrs. Stanton, Mrs. Bloomer, Lucy Stone, Wm. Lloyd Garrison, Horace Greeley; women silenced in men's temperance meeting at Albany, hold one of their own; advice from Greeley and Mrs. Stanton; first Woman's State Temperance Convention; men's State Temperance Convention in Syracuse rejects women delegates; Rev. Samuel J. May and Rev. Luther Lee stand by the women; Miss Anthony as temperance agent; her appeal to women; attends her first Woman's Rights Convention at Syracuse; criticises decollete dress; letters and speeches of Stanton, Mayo, Stone, Brown, Nichols, Rose, Gage, Gerrit Smith, etc.; Bible controversy; vicious comment of Syracuse Star, N.Y. Herald, Rev. Byron Sunderland, etc.; platform of Human Rights.
Conditions leading to a public career; her home became the center of reformers; temperance festival; first meeting with the Fosters, Mrs. Stanton, Mrs. Bloomer, Lucy Stone, Wm. Lloyd Garrison, and Horace Greeley; women were silenced at men's temperance meeting in Albany, so they held one of their own; advice from Greeley and Mrs. Stanton; first Woman's State Temperance Convention; men's State Temperance Convention in Syracuse rejected women delegates; Rev. Samuel J. May and Rev. Luther Lee supported the women; Miss Anthony served as a temperance agent; her appeal to women; attended her first Woman's Rights Convention in Syracuse; criticized décolleté dress; letters and speeches of Stanton, Mayo, Stone, Brown, Nichols, Rose, Gage, Gerrit Smith, etc.; Bible controversy; vicious comments from Syracuse Star, N.Y. Herald, Rev. Byron Sunderland, etc.; platform of Human Rights.
CHAPTER VI.
CHAPTER 6.
TEMPERANCE AND TEACHERS' CONVENTIONS. (1852-1853.), 81-105
Temperance and Teachers' Conferences. (1852-1853.), __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__-105
Women's first appearance before Albany Legislature; Miss Anthony, Rev. Antoinette Brown and Mrs. Bloomer speak in New York and Brooklyn by invitation of S.P. Townsend and make tour of State; attack of Utica Telegraph; phrenological chart; visit at Greeley's; women insulted and rejected at temperance meeting in Brick Church, New York; abusive speeches of Wood, Chambers, Barstow and others; Greeley's defense; attack of N.Y. Commercial-Advertiser, Sun, Organ and Courier; first annual meeting Women's State Temperance Society; letters from Gerrit Smith and Neal Dow; right of Divorce; men control meeting; Mrs. Stanton and Miss Anthony withdraw from Society; Samuel F. Gary declines to attend Temperance Convention; characteristic advice from Greeley; Miss Anthony attends State Teachers' Convention and raises a commotion; Professor Davies' speech; disgraceful scene at World's Temperance Convention in New York; Woman's Rights Convention mobbed; Cleveland Convention; Miss Anthony and Rev. W.H. Channing call Woman's Rights Convention in Rochester.
Women's first appearance before the Albany Legislature; Miss Anthony, Rev. Antoinette Brown, and Mrs. Bloomer speak in New York and Brooklyn at the invitation of S.P. Townsend and tour the state; criticism from the Utica Telegraph; phrenological chart; visit with Greeley; women insulted and turned away at a temperance meeting at Brick Church, New York; abusive speeches by Wood, Chambers, Barstow, and others; Greeley's defense; attacks from the N.Y. Commercial-Advertiser, Sun, Organ, and Courier; first annual meeting of the Women's State Temperance Society; letters from Gerrit Smith and Neal Dow; right to divorce; men control the meeting; Mrs. Stanton and Miss Anthony withdraw from the Society; Samuel F. Gary declines to attend the Temperance Convention; characteristic advice from Greeley; Miss Anthony attends the State Teachers' Convention and creates a stir; Professor Davies' speech; disgraceful scene at the World's Temperance Convention in New York; Woman's Rights Convention is mobbed; Cleveland Convention; Miss Anthony and Rev. W.H. Channing call the Woman's Rights Convention in Rochester.
CHAPTER VII.
CHAPTER 7.
PETITIONS—BLOOMERS—LECTURES. (1854.), 107-122
PETITIONS—BLOOMERS—LECTURES. (1854.), __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__-122
Development of character; securing petitions for better laws; Woman's Rights Convention at Albany; ridiculous report of Representative Burnett; Miss Anthony's speech; canvassing the State and raising the funds; history of the Bloomer Costume, with interesting letters; lecture trip to Washington; opinions on slavery; hard experiences; conventions at Saratoga and Philadelphia; preparing to canvass New York State.
Development of character; securing petitions for better laws; Women's Rights Convention in Albany; absurd report by Representative Burnett; Miss Anthony's speech; campaigning across the State and raising funds; history of the Bloomer Costume, including interesting letters; lecture tour to Washington; views on slavery; tough experiences; conventions in Saratoga and Philadelphia; getting ready to campaign in New York State.
CHAPTER VIII.
CHAPTER 8.
FIRST COUNTY CANVASS—THE WATER CURE. (1855.), 123-136
FIRST COUNTY CANVASS—THE WATER CURE. (1855.), 123-136
Winter canvass of New York; extract from Rondout Courier; letter from Greeley on Woman Suffrage; another proposal; applying the "water cure;" hot meal for husbands, cold bite for wives; marriages of Lucy Stone and Antoinette Brown; speaking at birthplace; Saratoga Convention; goes to Worcester Hydropathic Institute; her letters from Boston and Worcester; first Republican meeting; treatment at "water cure;" letter from Dr. Rogers on marriage; takes out life insurance.
Winter canvass of New York; excerpt from Rondout Courier; letter from Greeley on Women's Suffrage; another suggestion; using the "water cure"; hot meals for husbands, cold snacks for wives; marriages of Lucy Stone and Antoinette Brown; speaking at her birthplace; Saratoga Convention; visits Worcester Hydropathic Institute; her letters from Boston and Worcester; first Republican meeting; treatment at "water cure"; letter from Dr. Rogers about marriage; takes out life insurance.
CHAPTER IX.
CHAPTER 9.
ADVANCE ALONG ALL LINES. (1856.), 137-148
MOVE FORWARD ON ALL FRONTS. (1856.), __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__-148
Invited to act as agent for American Anti-Slavery Society; second canvass of New York; her letters describing hardships of journey, position of wives, etc.; Senator Foote's insolent report on petitions; advice to a wife; preparing speech on Co-Education; its reception in Troy; letter from Mary L. Booth on injustice to women teachers; meeting at Saratoga; the raid at Osawatomie; letter to brother Merritt regarding it; pathetic letter from Mary L. Booth; Greeley provoked; Gerrit Smith on woman's dress; New York Convention; words of confidence from Anti-Slavery Committee.
Invited to act as an agent for the American Anti-Slavery Society; second campaign in New York; her letters detailing the challenges of the journey, the situation of wives, etc.; Senator Foote's rude report on the petitions; advice to a wife; preparing a speech on Co-Education; its reception in Troy; a letter from Mary L. Booth about the unfair treatment of women teachers; a meeting in Saratoga; the raid at Osawatomie; a letter to brother Merritt about it; a moving letter from Mary L. Booth; Greeley annoyed; Gerrit Smith on women's clothing; New York Convention; encouraging words from the Anti-Slavery Committee.
CHAPTER X.
CHAPTER 10.
CAMPAIGNING WITH THE GARRISONIANS. (1857-1858.), 149-166
Campaigning with the Garrisonians. (1857-1858.), __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__-166
Political conditions; Miss Anthony's band of speakers; Abolition meetings; Remond's speech; letter from Garrison; notes of her speeches; Maria Weston Chapman; lecture trip to Maine; stormy State Teachers' Convention at Binghamton; Mrs. Stanton's comment; letter of Miss Anthony on family affection: the "raspberry experiment;" the "good old times;" "health food cranks;" New York Convention in hands of mob; stirring up teachers at Lockport; mass meeting at Rochester in opposition to capital punishment; gift of Francis Jackson.
Political situation; Miss Anthony's group of speakers; abolition meetings; Remond's speech; letter from Garrison; notes from her speeches; Maria Weston Chapman; lecture tour in Maine; tumultuous State Teachers' Convention in Binghamton; Mrs. Stanton's remark; letter from Miss Anthony about family affection: the "raspberry experiment;" the "good old days;" "health food enthusiasts;" New York Convention taken over by a mob; motivating teachers in Lockport; mass meeting in Rochester against capital punishment; gift from Francis Jackson.
CHAPTER XI.
CHAPTER 11.
Scheme for Free Church; letter from Geo. Wm. Curtis on Woman's Rights; Miss Anthony's letters on pecuniary independence, denial of human rights, woman's individuality; criticism of Curtis; six weeks' legislative work in Albany; convention in New York under difficulties; extract from Tribune; Memorial to Legislatures; lecturing at New York watering places; journey on boat to Poughkeepsie; anecdote of waiter at hotel; incident of Quaker meeting in Easton; married women too busy to help in fall canvass; letter of Rev. Thomas K. Beecher; incident at Gerrit Smith's—the Solitude of Self; John Brown meeting; letters regarding it from Pillsbury and Mrs. Stanton; Hovey Legacy; correspondence with Judge Ormond, of Alabama; "We are your enemies!"
Scheme for Free Church; letter from Geo. Wm. Curtis on Women's Rights; Miss Anthony's letters on financial independence, denial of human rights, women's individuality; criticism of Curtis; six weeks of legislative work in Albany; convention in New York despite challenges; excerpt from Tribune; Memorial to Legislatures; speaking at New York vacation spots; journey by boat to Poughkeepsie; story of a waiter at a hotel; incident at a Quaker meeting in Easton; married women too busy to help with the fall canvass; letter from Rev. Thomas K. Beecher; incident at Gerrit Smith's—The Solitude of Self; John Brown meeting; letters about it from Pillsbury and Mrs. Stanton; Hovey Legacy; correspondence with Judge Ormond of Alabama; "We are your enemies!"
CHAPTER XII.
CHAPTER 12.
RIFT IN COMMON LAW—DIVORCE QUESTION. (1860.), 185-205
RIFT IN COMMON LAW—DIVORCE QUESTION. (1860.), 185-205
Early Woman's Rights meetings not Suffrage conventions; Legal Status of Woman outlined by David Dudley Field; Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton as co-workers and writers; Tilton's description of the two; before the N.Y. Legislature; Married Woman's Property Law; woman's debt to Susan B. Anthony; Emerson on Lyceum Bureau; letters from Mary S. Anthony on injustice to school-teachers; Beecher's lecture on Woman's Rights; convention at Cooper Institute; Mrs. Stanton on Divorce; Phillips' objections; Mrs. Dall's proper convention in Boston; battle renewed at Progressive Friends' meeting; Miss Anthony's home duties; letter from her birthplace; Anti-Slavery depository at Albany; Agricultural address at Dundee; Miss Anthony's defiance of the law giving child to father.
Early Women’s Rights meetings, not Suffrage conventions; Legal Status of Women outlined by David Dudley Field; Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton as collaborators and writers; Tilton’s description of the two; before the New York Legislature; Married Women’s Property Law; women’s debt to Susan B. Anthony; Emerson on the Lyceum Bureau; letters from Mary S. Anthony about injustice to school teachers; Beecher’s lecture on Women’s Rights; convention at Cooper Institute; Mrs. Stanton on Divorce; Phillips’ objections; Mrs. Dall’s appropriate convention in Boston; battle renewed at Progressive Friends’ meeting; Miss Anthony’s home responsibilities; letter from her hometown; Anti-Slavery depository at Albany; Agricultural address at Dundee; Miss Anthony’s defiance of the law giving custody to the father.
CHAPTER XIII.
CHAPTER 13.
MOB EXPERIENCE—CIVIL WAR. (1861-1862.), 207-224
MOB EXPERIENCE—CIVIL WAR. (1861-1862.), __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__-224
Difference between Republicans and Abolitionists; Miss Anthony arranges series of Garrisonian meetings; mobbed in every city from Buffalo to Albany; Mayor Thacher preserves the peace at State capital; last Woman's Rights Convention before the War; Miss Anthony's views on motherhood; Phillips declares for War; letters on this subject from Beriah Green and Miss Anthony; opinion on "Adam Bede;" letter on Rosa Bonheur and Harriet Hosmer; N.Y. Legislature repeals laws recently enacted for women; letters from Anna Dickinson and Greeley on the War; Miss Anthony's opinion of private schools; attends her last Teacher's Convention; in the Anti-Slavery lecture field; death of father.
Difference between Republicans and Abolitionists; Miss Anthony organizes a series of Garrisonian meetings; faced with mobs in every city from Buffalo to Albany; Mayor Thacher maintains peace at the State capital; the last Woman's Rights Convention before the War; Miss Anthony's thoughts on motherhood; Phillips supports the War; letters on this topic from Beriah Green and Miss Anthony; thoughts on "Adam Bede;" letter about Rosa Bonheur and Harriet Hosmer; New York Legislature cancels recently passed laws for women; letters from Anna Dickinson and Greeley regarding the War; Miss Anthony's views on private schools; attends her final Teacher's Convention; active in the Anti-Slavery lecture scene; father's death.
CHAPTER XIV.
CHAPTER 14.
WOMEN'S NATIONAL LOYAL LEAGUE. (1863-1864.), 225-240
WOMEN'S NATIONAL LOYAL LEAGUE (1863-1864), __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__-240
Disbelief that the War would lead to Woman Suffrage; letters from Tilton on Proclamation and Henry B. Stanton on condition of country; Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton issue appeal to women to form National Loyal League; organization in Church of the Puritans; Miss Anthony's speech; they prepare eloquent Address to President Lincoln; headquarters opened in Cooper Institute; petitions and letters sent out by Miss Anthony; description of draft riots; letters regarding her father and the sale of the home; lively note from Tilton; raising money for League; almost 400,000 names secured; Sumner presents petitions in Senate; letter from Sumner; merry letter from Phillips; first anniversary of the League; Amendment XIII submitted by Congress; closing of League headquarters; failure of the government to recognize its distinguished women.
Disbelief that the War would lead to women's right to vote; letters from Tilton about the Proclamation and Henry B. Stanton about the state of the country; Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton call on women to form a National Loyal League; organization in the Church of the Puritans; Miss Anthony's speech; they prepare an eloquent address to President Lincoln; headquarters opened at Cooper Institute; petitions and letters sent out by Miss Anthony; a description of the draft riots; letters about her father and the sale of their home; a lively note from Tilton; raising funds for the League; nearly 400,000 signatures collected; Sumner presents the petitions in the Senate; a letter from Sumner; a cheerful letter from Phillips; the first anniversary of the League; Amendment XIII submitted by Congress; closing of the League's headquarters; the government's failure to acknowledge its distinguished women.
CHAPTER XV.
CHAPTER 15.
MALE IN THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION. (1865.), 241-253
MALE IN THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION. (1865.), 241-253
Death of niece Ann Eliza McLean; letters on the loss of loved ones; trip to Kansas; work among refugees and in brother's newspaper office; appeals to return to the East; letters on division in Anti-Slavery Society; Ottumwa speech on Reconstruction; an unpleasant night; address to colored people at Leavenworth; Republicans object to a mention of Woman Suffrage; Miss Anthony learns of motion for Amendment to Federal Constitution to disfranchise on account of Sex, and immediately starts eastward; confers with Mrs. Stanton and they issue appeal to women of country to protest against proposed Fourteenth Amendment; Miss Anthony holds meetings at Concord, Westchester and many other places; N.Y. Independent supports women's demands.
Death of niece Ann Eliza McLean; letters about losing loved ones; trip to Kansas; work with refugees and in her brother's newspaper office; appeals to return to the East; letters regarding the division in the Anti-Slavery Society; speech in Ottumwa on Reconstruction; an uncomfortable night; address to Black people in Leavenworth; Republicans oppose mentioning Woman Suffrage; Miss Anthony learns about a motion to amend the Federal Constitution to disenfranchise based on sex, and immediately heads east; meets with Mrs. Stanton and together they issue an appeal to the women of the country to protest against the proposed Fourteenth Amendment; Miss Anthony holds meetings in Concord, Westchester, and many other places; N.Y. Independent supports women's demands.
CHAPTER XVI.
CHAPTER 16.
THE NEGRO'S HOUR. (1866.), 255-270
THE BLACK'S HOUR. (1866.), __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__-270
Reconstruction period; Anti-Slavery Society declines coalition with Woman's Rights Society; Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton issue strong call for the reassembling in New York of Woman's Rights forces; Robert Purvis and Anna Dickinson approve; convention meets in Dr. Cheever's church; Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton present ringing Address to Congress; Miss Anthony's speech for union of the two organizations; Equal Rights Association formed; controversy of Phillips, Tilton, Anthony, Stanton in Standard office; Standard's offer of space rejected; Miss Anthony's speech at Equal Rights meeting in Albany; abusive article from N.Y. World; mass meetings held and petitions circulated to have women included in Fourteenth Amendment; Republicans refuse to recognize their claims; Democrats favor them to defeat the negroes; Miss Anthony complains of Standard's treatment; words from friends and foes.
Reconstruction period; Anti-Slavery Society declines partnership with Woman's Rights Society; Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton make a strong call for the reassembly of Woman's Rights activists in New York; Robert Purvis and Anna Dickinson support this; the convention meets in Dr. Cheever's church; Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton present a powerful address to Congress; Miss Anthony speaks for the union of the two organizations; Equal Rights Association formed; controversy involving Phillips, Tilton, Anthony, and Stanton at the Standard office; Standard's offer of space turned down; Miss Anthony's speech at the Equal Rights meeting in Albany; harsh article from N.Y. World; mass meetings held and petitions circulated to include women in the Fourteenth Amendment; Republicans refuse to acknowledge their claims; Democrats support them to undermine the rights of Black citizens; Miss Anthony voices her concerns about the Standard's treatment; comments from both supporters and critics.
CHAPTER XVII.
CHAPTER 17.
CAMPAIGNS IN NEW YORK AND KANSAS. (1867.), 271-294
CAMPAIGNS IN NEW YORK AND KANSAS. (1867.), 271-294
Canvass of New York to secure Woman Suffrage Amendment to new State Constitution; scurrilous comment of Buffalo Commercial; praise of Troy Times; Miss Anthony rebukes selfish woman; always assumes the drudgery; Beecher can not work in organizations; Lucy Stone's letters from Kansas on action of Republicans; Beecher's speech in New York on Woman Suffrage; Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton prepare Memorial to Congress; Miss Anthony and Greeley break lances at Albany; Curtis stands by the women; Mrs. Greeley's petition used to checkmate her husband; Anna Dickinson's indignation; Kansas Republican Committee fights Woman Suffrage; Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton go to Kansas; hardships of the campaign; Mrs. Starrett's description of Miss Anthony; negroes oppose woman suffrage; George Francis Train comes to the rescue; Suffrage Amendment defeated; Leavenworth Commercial pays tribute; Miss Anthony, Mrs. Stanton and Mr. Train make lecture tour from Omaha to Boston; persecution by former friends.
Canvass of New York to secure the Woman Suffrage Amendment to the new State Constitution; harsh comments from the Buffalo Commercial; praise from the Troy Times; Miss Anthony criticizes selfish women; always takes on the hard work; Beecher can't function in organizations; Lucy Stone's letters from Kansas about the Republicans' actions; Beecher's speech in New York on Woman Suffrage; Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton prepare a Memorial to Congress; Miss Anthony and Greeley clash in Albany; Curtis supports the women; Mrs. Greeley's petition is used to counter her husband; Anna Dickinson's outrage; Kansas Republican Committee opposes Woman Suffrage; Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton head to Kansas; challenges of the campaign; Mrs. Starrett's description of Miss Anthony; African Americans oppose woman suffrage; George Francis Train comes to the rescue; Suffrage Amendment fails; Leavenworth Commercial pays tribute; Miss Anthony, Mrs. Stanton, and Mr. Train embark on a lecture tour from Omaha to Boston; persecution by former friends.
CHAPTER XVIII.
CHAPTER 18.
ESTABLISHING THE REVOLUTION. (1868.), 295-311
ESTABLISHING THE REVOLUTION. (1868.), __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__-311
Mr. Train and David M. Melliss furnish funds for starting Woman Suffrage newspaper, The Revolution; comments of press; Mr. Train in Dublin jail; Mrs. Stanton defends The Revolution; how women were sacrificed; bright description of paper and editors; Equal Rights Association divided between claims of woman and negro; Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton delegates to Democratic National Convention at Tammany Hall; their reception; Miss Anthony represents Workingwomen's Association at National Labor Congress in New York; her suffrage resolution rejected; her advice to women typesetters; sad case of Hester Vaughan; S. C. Pomeroy and George W. Julian present Woman Suffrage Amendments in Senate and House of Representatives.
Mr. Train and David M. Melliss provide funding to launch the women's suffrage newspaper, The Revolution; comments from the press; Mr. Train is in a Dublin jail; Mrs. Stanton defends The Revolution; how women were overlooked; an engaging description of the newspaper and its editors; the Equal Rights Association is divided between the issues of women's rights and those of African Americans; Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton serve as delegates to the Democratic National Convention at Tammany Hall; their reception; Miss Anthony represents the Workingwomen's Association at the National Labor Congress in New York; her suffrage resolution is rejected; her advice to women typesetters; the unfortunate case of Hester Vaughan; S. C. Pomeroy and George W. Julian present the Woman Suffrage Amendments in the Senate and House of Representatives.
CHAPTER XIX.
CHAPTER 19.
AMENDMENT XV—FOUNDING OF NATIONAL SOCIETY. (1869.), 313-336
AMENDMENT XV—FOUNDING OF NATIONAL SOCIETY. (1869.), 313-336
First National Convention in Washington; colored men object to Woman Suffrage; first hearing before Congressional Committee; descriptive letter from Grace Greenwood; Miss Anthony arraigns Republicans at Chicago; Mrs. Livermore's tribute to Miss Anthony; speech at N.Y. Press Club on woman's "proposing;" Fifteenth Amendment submitted; criticism by The Revolution; Train withdraws from paper; Woman's Bureau; letters from Mrs. Livermore, Anna Dickinson, Gail Hamilton; stormy session of Equal Rights Association; Miss Anthony's speech against Amendment XV; William Winter defends her; discussion of "free love" resolution; Equal Rights platform too broad; founding of National Woman Suffrage Association; forming of American Woman Suffrage Association; Miss Anthony secures testimonial for Mrs. Rose; conventions at Saratoga and Newport; Miss Anthony protests against paying taxes; Mr. and Mrs. Minor claim woman's right to vote under Fourteenth Amendment; Miss Anthony speaks at Dayton, O., on laws for married women; Mrs. Hooker's description of her; Miss Anthony's speech at Hartford Convention; anecdote of Beecher; Mrs. Hooker's account; letters from Dr. Kate Jackson and Sarah Pugh; division in suffrage ranks.
First National Convention in Washington; Black men protest Woman Suffrage; first hearing before Congressional Committee; descriptive letter from Grace Greenwood; Miss Anthony criticizes Republicans in Chicago; Mrs. Livermore pays tribute to Miss Anthony; speech at N.Y. Press Club on women's "proposing"; Fifteenth Amendment introduced; criticism from The Revolution; Train leaves the paper; Woman's Bureau; letters from Mrs. Livermore, Anna Dickinson, Gail Hamilton; heated session of Equal Rights Association; Miss Anthony's speech against Amendment XV; William Winter defends her; discussion of "free love" resolution; Equal Rights platform too broad; founding of National Woman Suffrage Association; creation of American Woman Suffrage Association; Miss Anthony gets a testimonial for Mrs. Rose; conventions in Saratoga and Newport; Miss Anthony protests paying taxes; Mr. and Mrs. Minor assert woman's right to vote under the Fourteenth Amendment; Miss Anthony speaks in Dayton, O., about laws for married women; Mrs. Hooker's description of her; Miss Anthony's speech at Hartford Convention; anecdote about Beecher; Mrs. Hooker's account; letters from Dr. Kate Jackson and Sarah Pugh; division in suffrage movement.
CHAPTER XX.
CHAPTER XX.
FIFTIETH BIRTHDAY—END OF EQUAL RIGHTS SOCIETY. (1870.), 337-350
FIFTIETH BIRTHDAY—END OF EQUAL RIGHTS SOCIETY. (1870.), 337-350
Washington Convention; Miss Anthony's speech on striking "male" from District of Columbia Bill; descriptions by Mrs. Fannie Howland, Hearth and Home, Mrs. Hooker, Mary Clemmer; Fiftieth Birthday celebration and comments of N.Y. Press; Phoebe Gary's poem; Miss Anthony's letter to mother; begins with Lyceum Bureau; Robert G. Ingersoll comes to her assistance; attack by Detroit Free Press; tribute of Chicago Legal News; efforts to unite the two National Suffrage organizations; Union Suffrage Society formed; end of Equal Rights Association.
Washington Convention; Miss Anthony's speech on removing "male" from the District of Columbia Bill; accounts by Mrs. Fannie Howland, Hearth and Home, Mrs. Hooker, Mary Clemmer; celebration of the Fiftieth Birthday and remarks from the N.Y. Press; Phoebe Gary's poem; Miss Anthony's letter to her mother; starts with the Lyceum Bureau; Robert G. Ingersoll steps in to help; criticism from the Detroit Free Press; tribute from the Chicago Legal News; attempts to unify the two National Suffrage organizations; Union Suffrage Society established; conclusion of the Equal Rights Association.
CHAPTER XXI.
CHAPTER 21.
END OF REVOLUTION—STATUS OF WOMAN SUFFRAGE. (1870.), 351-370
END OF REVOLUTION—STATUS OF WOMAN SUFFRAGE. (1870.), 351-370
McFarland-Richardson trial; letter from Catharine Beecher on Divorce; financial struggle; touching letters; Mrs. Hooker offers to help; Alice and Phoebe Gary; prospectus of The Revolution; giving up of the paper; Miss Anthony's letter regarding it; in the lecture field; the little Professor; Miss Anthony's strong summing-up of the Status of Woman Suffrage; rejected by National Labor Congress in Philadelphia; attack of Utica Herald; Second Decade Meeting in New York; Mrs. Davis' History of the Movement for Twenty Years; death of nephew Thomas King McLean; meeting with Phillips.
McFarland-Richardson trial; letter from Catharine Beecher about Divorce; financial struggles; heartfelt letters; Mrs. Hooker offers her assistance; Alice and Phoebe Gary; prospectus for The Revolution; discontinuation of the paper; Miss Anthony's letter about it; in the lecture circuit; the little Professor; Miss Anthony's powerful summary of the Status of Woman Suffrage; rejected by the National Labor Congress in Philadelphia; criticism from the Utica Herald; Second Decade Meeting in New York; Mrs. Davis' History of the Movement for Twenty Years; loss of nephew Thomas King McLean; meeting with Phillips.
CHAPTER XXII.
CHAPTER 22.
MRS. HOOKER'S CONVENTION—THE LECTURE FIELD. (1871.), 371-385
MRS. HOOKER'S CONVENTION—THE LECTURE FIELD. (1871.), 371-385
Mrs. Hooker undertakes Washington Convention; amusing letters from Anthony, Stanton, Hooker, Wright; first appearance of Mrs. Woodhull; accounts by Philadelphia Press, Washington Daily Patriot and National Republican; resolution by Miss Anthony claiming right to vote under Fourteenth Amendment; Declaration signed by 80,000 women; Catharine Beecher and Mrs. Woodhull; Mrs. Stanton rebukes men who object to Mrs. Woodhull; hard life of a lecturer; Mrs. Griffing, Mrs. Stanton, Mrs. Hooker on political party attitude; Phoebe Couzins pleads for the National Association; Mrs. Woodhull at New York May Anniversary; charge of "free love" refuted; forcible letter from Miss Anthony declaring for one Moral Standard.
Mrs. Hooker takes on the Washington Convention; entertaining letters from Anthony, Stanton, Hooker, Wright; first appearance of Mrs. Woodhull; reports by the Philadelphia Press, Washington Daily Patriot, and National Republican; resolution by Miss Anthony asserting the right to vote under the Fourteenth Amendment; Declaration signed by 80,000 women; Catharine Beecher and Mrs. Woodhull; Mrs. Stanton criticizes men who oppose Mrs. Woodhull; challenging life of a lecturer; Mrs. Griffing, Mrs. Stanton, and Mrs. Hooker discuss political party attitudes; Phoebe Couzins advocates for the National Association; Mrs. Woodhull at the New York May Anniversary; accusations of "free love" refuted; powerful letter from Miss Anthony calling for a single Moral Standard.
CHAPTER XXIII.
CHAPTER 23.
Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton cross the continent; newspaper comment; Miss Anthony's letters from Salt Lake City; hostile treatment by San Francisco press; description of trip to Yosemite; journey by boat to Oregon; her letters on lecture experiences in Oregon and Washington; ridicule of Portland Bulletin; misrepresentation of Territorial Despatch; "cards" in papers of British Columbia; account of stage ride back to San Francisco; banquet at Grand Hotel; journey eastward with Sargent family; snowbound among the Rockies.
Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton travel across the country; media coverage; Miss Anthony's letters from Salt Lake City; negative treatment by the San Francisco press; description of the trip to Yosemite; boat journey to Oregon; her letters about lecture experiences in Oregon and Washington; mockery by the Portland Bulletin; misrepresentation by the Territorial Despatch; “ads” in the newspapers of British Columbia; account of the stagecoach ride back to San Francisco; banquet at the Grand Hotel; journey east with the Sargent family; snowed in among the Rockies.
CHAPTER XXIV.
CHAPTER 24.
REPUBLICAN SPLINTER—MISS ANTHONY VOTES. (1872.), 409-429
REPUBLICAN SPLINTER—MISS ANTHONY VOTES. (1872), __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__-429
National Convention declares women enfranchised under Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments; Miss Anthony sustains this position before Senate Judiciary Committee; friends in Rochester present testimonial; she reads in Woodhull and Claflin's Weekly call to form New Party under auspices of National Suffrage Association; her indignant remonstrance; hastens to New York and prevents coalition; Liberal Republican Convention at Cincinnati refuses to adopt Suffrage resolution; Miss Anthony's comment; Republican Convention at Philadelphia makes first mention of Woman; Mr. Blackwell's and Miss Anthony's letters regarding this; Democratic Convention at Baltimore ignores Woman; Hon. John Cochran tells how not to do it; Miss Anthony and Mrs. Gage urge women to support Republican ticket; Miss Anthony states her Political Position; her delight and Mrs. Stanton's doubts; letter from Henry Wilson; Republican Committee summons her to Washington; she arranges series of Republican rallies; sustains party only on Suffrage plank; Miss Anthony Votes; newspaper comment; she is arrested; examination before U.S. Commissioner; Judge Henry R. Selden and Hon. John Van Voorhis undertake her case; Rochester Express defends her; letter on case from Benjamin F. Butler.
National Convention declares women enfranchised under the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments; Miss Anthony stands firm on this in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee; friends in Rochester present a testimonial; she reads a call in Woodhull and Claflin's Weekly to form a New Party under the leadership of the National Suffrage Association; her passionate protest; she rushes to New York and stops a coalition; the Liberal Republican Convention in Cincinnati refuses to adopt a Suffrage resolution; Miss Anthony's remarks; the Republican Convention in Philadelphia makes the first mention of women; letters from Mr. Blackwell and Miss Anthony about this; the Democratic Convention in Baltimore overlooks women; Hon. John Cochran explains how not to approach it; Miss Anthony and Mrs. Gage encourage women to support the Republican ticket; Miss Anthony expresses her political stance; her enjoyment and Mrs. Stanton's concerns; a letter from Henry Wilson; the Republican Committee calls her to Washington; she organizes a series of Republican rallies; she only supports the party based on the Suffrage plank; Miss Anthony votes; newspaper coverage; she is arrested; examination before U.S. Commissioner; Judge Henry R. Selden and Hon. John Van Voorhis take on her case; Rochester Express defends her; a letter regarding the case from Benjamin F. Butler.
CHAPTER XXV.
CHAPTER 25.
TRIAL FOR VOTING UNDER FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT. (1873.), 431-448
TRIAL FOR VOTING UNDER FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT. (1873.), 431-448
Miss Anthony's speech at Washington Convention; she appears before U.S. District-Judge at Albany and bail is increased to $1,000; addresses State Constitutional Commission; indicted by grand jury; becomes unconscious on lecture platform at Ft. Wayne; votes again; call for Twenty-fifth Suffrage Anniversary; Miss Anthony delivers her great Constitutional Argument in twenty-nine post office districts in Monroe Co.; District-Attorney moves her trial to another county; she speaks at twenty-one places and Mrs. Gage at sixteen in that county; Rochester Union and Advertiser condemns her; trial opens at Canandaigua; masterly argument of Judge Selden; Justice Ward Hunt delivers Written Opinion without leaving bench; declines to submit case to Jury or to allow it to be polled; refuses new trial; spirited encounter between Miss Anthony and Judge; newspaper comment; trial of Inspectors; Judge refuses to allow Counsel to address Jury; opinion of Mr. Van Voorhis; contributions sent to Miss Anthony by friends; death of sister Guelma McLean; Miss Anthony's letter of grief to mother; generous gift of Anson Lapham.
Miss Anthony's speech at the Washington Convention; she appears before the U.S. District Judge in Albany, and her bail is raised to $1,000; she addresses the State Constitutional Commission; she is indicted by a grand jury; she becomes unconscious on the lecture platform in Fort Wayne; she votes again; there’s a call for the Twenty-fifth Suffrage Anniversary; Miss Anthony presents her powerful Constitutional Argument in twenty-nine post office districts in Monroe County; the District Attorney moves her trial to another county; she speaks at twenty-one locations and Mrs. Gage at sixteen in that county; the Rochester Union and Advertiser criticizes her; the trial begins in Canandaigua; a masterful argument from Judge Selden; Justice Ward Hunt delivers a Written Opinion without leaving the bench; he declines to submit the case to the jury or to allow it to be polled; he refuses a new trial; a spirited argument between Miss Anthony and the Judge; newspaper commentary; the trial of Inspectors; the Judge refuses to let Counsel address the jury; the opinion of Mr. Van Voorhis; contributions sent to Miss Anthony by friends; the death of her sister Guelma McLean; Miss Anthony's letter of grief to her mother; a generous gift from Anson Lapham.
CHAPTER XXVI.
CHAPTER 26.
NO CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO JURY OR FRANCHISE. (1874.), 449-465
NO CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO JURY OR VOTE. (1874.), 449-465
Appeal to Congress to remit fine and declare Right to Trial by Jury; report from House Committee for and against, by Butler and Tremaine; from Senate Committee for and against, by Carpenter and Edmunds; pardon of Inspectors by President Grant; Supreme Court decision in suit of Virginia L. Minor against Inspectors for refusing her vote; Representative Butler and Senator Lapham on Woman Suffrage; President Grant's opinion; letter of Judge A.G. Riddle on chief obstacles; death of Sumner; Miss Anthony's speech and letter on Women's Temperance Crusade; lying telegram and N.Y. Herald's truthful report of convention; letter by Miss Anthony, "honesty best policy;" suffrage campaign in Michigan; Beecher-Tilton case.
Appeal to Congress to cancel the fine and confirm the Right to Trial by Jury; report from the House Committee for and against, by Butler and Tremaine; from the Senate Committee for and against, by Carpenter and Edmunds; pardon of Inspectors by President Grant; Supreme Court decision in the case of Virginia L. Minor against Inspectors for denying her vote; Representative Butler and Senator Lapham on Women's Suffrage; President Grant's viewpoint; letter from Judge A.G. Riddle on major challenges; death of Sumner; Miss Anthony's speech and letter on the Women's Temperance Crusade; misleading telegram and the New York Herald's accurate report of the convention; letter from Miss Anthony, "honesty is the best policy;" suffrage campaign in Michigan; Beecher-Tilton case.
CHAPTER XXVII.
CHAPTER 27.
REVOLUTION DEBT PAID—WOMEN'S FOURTH OF JULY. (1875-1876.), 467-482
REVOLUTION DEBT PAID—WOMEN'S FOURTH OF JULY. (1875-1876.), 467-482
Miss Anthony's annual struggle to hold Washington Convention; speech in Chicago on Social Purity; comment of St. Louis Democrat and other papers; hard lecture tour in Iowa; shooting of brother Daniel R.; Revolution debt paid; commendation of press; Centennial Resolutions at Washington Convention; establishing Centennial headquarters at Philadelphia; Republicans again recognize Woman in National platform; Miss Anthony and others present Woman's Declaration of Independence at Centennial celebration; eloquent description; History of Woman Suffrage begun; writes articles for Johnson's Encyclopedia.
Miss Anthony's yearly effort to organize the Washington Convention; speech in Chicago about Social Purity; remarks from the St. Louis Democrat and other newspapers; challenging lecture tour in Iowa; shooting of her brother Daniel R.; Revolution debt settled; praise from the press; Centennial Resolutions at the Washington Convention; setting up Centennial headquarters in Philadelphia; Republicans once more acknowledging Women in the National platform; Miss Anthony and others presenting the Woman's Declaration of Independence at the Centennial celebration; powerful description; History of Woman Suffrage initiated; writes articles for Johnson's Encyclopedia.
CHAPTER XXVIII.
CHAPTER 28.
COLORADO CAMPAIGN—POLITICAL ATTITUDE. (1877-1878.), 483-498
COLORADO CAMPAIGN—POLITICAL VIEWS. (1877-1878.), __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__-498
Advocates of Woman Suffrage compelled to return to former policy of demanding Sixteenth Amendment to Federal Constitution; letters from Garrison and Phillips on this subject; descriptions by Mary Clemmer and Washington papers of presenting Suffrage petitions in Congress; Lyceum Bureau circular with comment of Forney; death of sister Hannah Mosher; friendship of Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton; tribute of Annie McDowell; campaigning in Colorado; speaking in saloons; writing "Homes of Single Women" in Denver; prayer-meeting in Capitol at Washington; Miss Anthony urged not to miss another National Convention; Thirtieth Suffrage Anniversary at Rochester; letter from J.H. Hayford relative to Woman Suffrage in Wyoming; Miss Anthony defines her attitude in regard to Political Parties.
Advocates for women's suffrage had to revert to their previous strategy of pushing for the Sixteenth Amendment to the Federal Constitution; letters from Garrison and Phillips on this topic; accounts by Mary Clemmer and newspapers in Washington about presenting suffrage petitions in Congress; a Lyceum Bureau flyer with Forney's comments; the death of sister Hannah Mosher; the friendship between Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton; a tribute from Annie McDowell; campaigning in Colorado; speaking in bars; writing "Homes of Single Women" in Denver; a prayer meeting at the Capitol in Washington; Miss Anthony was urged not to miss another National Convention; the Thirtieth Suffrage Anniversary in Rochester; a letter from J.H. Hayford about women’s suffrage in Wyoming; Miss Anthony explains her stance on political parties.
CHAPTER XXIX.
CHAPTER 29.
CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE REPORTS—COMMENT. (1879-1880.), 499-513
CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE REPORTS—COMMENT. (1879-1880.), __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__-513
Vigorous resolutions at National Convention; Senator Morton's position on Woman Suffrage; Senator Wadleigh scored by Mary Clemmer; first favorable Senate Committee report; advance in public sentiment; extracts from Indiana papers; bitter attacks of Richmond (Ky.) Herald and Grand Rapids (Mich.) Times; interview in Chicago Tribune on Woman's need of ballot for Temperance legislation; convention in St. Louis and Miss Anthony's response to floral offering; death of Wm. Lloyd Garrison; desire for a woman's paper; new workers; Washington Convention; hospitality of Riggs House; death of mother.
Vigorous resolutions at the National Convention; Senator Morton's stance on women's suffrage; Senator Wadleigh criticized by Mary Clemmer; first positive Senate Committee report; progress in public opinion; excerpts from Indiana newspapers; harsh criticism from the Richmond (Ky.) Herald and Grand Rapids (Mich.) Times; interview in the Chicago Tribune discussing women's need for the ballot for temperance legislation; convention in St. Louis and Miss Anthony's reaction to the floral tribute; death of William Lloyd Garrison; interest in a women's publication; new activists; Washington Convention; hospitality at the Riggs House; death of a mother.
LIST OF AUTOGRAPHS.
- ANTHONY, SUSAN B.VOL. I.
- ANTHONY, HUMPHREY130
- ANTHONY, DANIEL24
- ANTHONY, LUCY READ25
- ANTHONY, COLONEL D.R.786
- ANTHONY, MARY S.760
- ANTHONY, SENATOR HENRY B.614
- A. BRONSON ALCOTT510
- AVERY, RACHEL FOSTER814
- BARTON, CLARA689
- BEECHER, HENRY WARD277
- BIGGS, CAROLINE ASHURST554
- BLACKWELL, ALICE STONE630
- BLACKWELL, REV. ANTOINETTE BROWN180
- BLACKWELL, DR. ELIZABETH239
- BLAIR, SENATOR HENRY W.606
- BLAKE, LILLIE DEVEREUX761
- BLOOMER, AMELIA114
- BOOTH, MARY L.615
- BRIGHT, URSULA M.563
- BROWN, SENATOR B. GRATZ266
- BROWNE, THOMAS M., M.C.591
- BUTLER, GENERAL BENJAMIN F.429
- BUTLER, JOSEPHINE E.576
- CAREY, SENATOR JOSEPH M.769
- CARY, ALICE358
- CARY, PHOEBE359
- CATT, CARRIE CHAPMAN780
- CHANNING, REV. WILLIAM HENRY105
- CHAPIN, REV. E.H.172
- CHAPMAN, MARIA WESTON 154
- CHEEVER, REV. GEORGE B.182
- CHILD, LYDIA MARIA276
- CLAY, LAURA807
- CLEMMER, MARY340
- COBBE, FRANCES POWER577
- COBDEN, JANE565
- COLBY, CLARA BEWICK671
- COOPER, SARAH B.828
- CURTIS, GEORGE WILLIAM168
- DAVIS, PAULINA WRIGHT 481
- DICKINSON, ANNA E.221
- DIGGS, ANNIE L.795
- DOLPH, SENATOR J.N.619
- DOUGLASS, FREDERICK215
- DOW, NEAL94
- EMERSON, RALPH WALDO 251
- FAWCETT, MILLICENT GARRETT578
- FIELD, KATE756
- FORNEY, COLONEL JOHN W.487
- FOSTER, ABBY KELLY63
- FOSTER, STEPHEN S.138
- FOULKE, HON. WM. DUDLEY675
- FROTHINGHAM, REV. O.B.322
- GAGE, MATILDA JOSLYN531
- GARFIELD, PRESIDENT JAMES A.522
- GARRISON, WM. LLOYD153
- GIBBONS, ABBY HOPPER 202
- GOODRICH, SARAH KNOX888
- GRANT, MRS. U.S.858
- GREELEY, HORACE97
- GREENWOOD, GRACE315
- HAMILTON, GAIL322
- HARPER, IDA HUSTEDix
- HEARST, PHOEBE A.889
- HOAR, SENATOR GEORGE F.502
- HOOKER, ISABELLA BEECHER374
- HOSMER, HARRIET656
- HOWELL, MARY SEYMOUR692
- JACOBI, DR. MARY PUTNAM768
- JACKSON, FRANCIS166
- JULIAN, GEORGE W., M.C.311
- KELLEY, WILLIAM D., M.C.647
- KING, REV. THOMAS STARR191
- LAPHAM, SENATOR ELBRIDGE G.455
- LOGAN, MRS. JOHN A.670
- LOZIER, DR. CLEMENCE S.436
- LUCAS, MARGARET BRIGHT578
- MARTINEAU, HARRIET571
- McCULLOCH, SECRETARY HUGH705
- McLAREN, PRISCILLA BRIGHT564
- MERRICK, CAROLINE E.608
- MINOR, VIRGINIA L.454
- MITCHELL, MARIA635
- MORTON, SENATOR OLIVER P.500
- MOTT, LUCRETIA268
- NICHOL, ELIZABETH PEASE,568
- OWEN, ROBERT DALE,235
- PALMER, BERTHA HONORÉ,749
- PALMER, SENATOR THOMAS W.,593
- PARKER, REV. THEODORE,132
- PHILLIPS, WENDELL,174
- PILLSBURY, PARKER,181
- POMEROY, SENATOR S.C.,310
- POST, AMY,412
- PURVIS, HARRIET,526
- PURVIS, ROBERT,258
- REED, SPEAKER THOMAS B.,669
- RIDDLE, JUDGE A.G.,456
- ROSE, ERNESTINE L.,194
- SARGENT, SENATOR A.A.,406
- SARGENT, ELLEN CLARK,864
- SEWALL, MAY WRIGHT,746
- SHAW, REV. ANNA HOWARD,688
- SIMPSON, BISHOP MATTHEW,588
- SMITH, GERRIT,93
- SOMERSET, LADY HENRY,747
- SPOFFORD, JANE H,512
- STANFORD, JANE L.,830
- STANFORD, SENATOR LELAND,851
- STANTON, ELIZABETH CADY,278
- STEVENS, THADDEUS,250
- STONE, LUCINDA HINSDALE,379
- STONE, LUCY,112
- SUMNER, CHARLES,236
- SWIFT, MARY WOOD,893
- TAYLOR, EZRA B., M.C.,700
- TAYLOR, HELEN,565
- TAYLOR, MENTIA (MRS. PETER),554
- THOMPSON, GEORGE, M.P.,233
- TILTON, THEODORE,218
- TODD, ISABELLA M.S.,572
- TRAIN, GEORGE FRANCIS,290
- TYNG, REV. STEPHEN H.,233
- UPTON, HARRIET TAYLOR,700
- WADE, SENATOR BENJAMIN F.,266
- WALLACE, ZERELDA G.,632
- WARREN, SENATOR FRANCIS E.,716
- WHITE, SENATOR JOHN D.,543
- WHITING, LILIAN,673
- WHITTIER, JOHN GREENLEAF,669
- WILLARD, FRANCES E.,775
- WILSON, VICE-PRESIDENT HENRY,421
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.
- VOL. I.
- SUSAN B. ANTHONY, at the age of 76 Frontispiece.
- "THE OLD HIVE," birthplace of father of SUSAN B. ANTHONY 4
- HOME OF LUCY READ, mother of SUSAN B. ANTHONY 6
- WEST END OF KITCHEN IN OLD HOMESTEAD 8
- BIRTHPLACE OF SUSAN B. ANTHONY 12
- TEMPORARY HOME AT BATTENVILLE, N.Y. 18
- THE BATTENVILLE HOME 24
- HOME AT CENTER FALLS, N. Y. 36
- SUSAN B. ANTHONY at the age of 28 50
- AUNT HANNAH, the Quaker preacher 58
- SUSAN B. ANTHONY at the age of 32 86
- HUMPHREY ANTHONY at the age of 95 130
- SUSAN B. ANTHONY at the age of 36 144
- THE FARM-HOME NEAR ROCHESTER 160
- ERNESTINE L. ROSE 194
- FATHER AND MOTHER OF SUSAN B. ANTHONY 222
- LUCRETIA MOTT 268
- ELIZABETH CADY STANTON 278
- SUSAN B. ANTHONY at the age of 48 302
- SUSAN B. ANTHONY at the age of 50, from photograph by Sarony 342
- ISABELLA BEECHER HOOKER 374
- DR. CLEMENCE S. LOZIER 436
- VIRGINIA L. MINOR 454
- JANE H. SPOFFORD 512
CHAPTER I.
ANCESTRY, HOME AND CHILDHOOD.
1550-1826.
Among the Berkshire Hills of Massachusetts is a very beautiful place in which to be born. It is famed in song and story for the loveliness of its scenery and the purity of its air. It has no lofty peaks, no great canyons, no mighty rivers, but it is diversified in the most picturesque manner by the long line of Green Mountains, whose lower ranges bear the musical name of "Berkshire Hills;" by rushing streams tumbling through rocky gorges and making up in impetuosity what they lack in size; by noble forests, gently undulating meadows, quaint farmhouses, old bridges and bits of roadway which are a never-ending delight to the artist. Writers, too, have found inspiration here and many exquisite descriptions in prose and verse commemorate the beauties of this region.
Among the Berkshire Hills of Massachusetts is a beautiful place to be born. It's well-known in songs and stories for its lovely scenery and clean air. It doesn't have tall peaks, massive canyons, or huge rivers, but it's incredibly picturesque with the long line of the Green Mountains, whose lower ranges have the melodic name "Berkshire Hills;" with rushing streams that tumble through rocky gorges, making up for their small size with their energy; with magnificent forests, gently rolling meadows, charming farmhouses, old bridges, and sections of road that continuously inspire artists. Writers have also found inspiration here, and many beautiful descriptions in prose and poetry celebrate the wonders of this region.
Catharine Maria Sedgwick, the first woman in America to make a literary reputation on two continents, was born at Stockbridge, and her stories and sketches were located here. That old seat of learning, Williams College, is situated among these foothills. In his summer home at Pittsfield, Longfellow wrote "The Old Clock on the Stairs"; at Stockbridge, Hawthorne builded his "House of the Seven Gables"; and Lydia Sigourney poetically told of "Stockbridge Bowl" with "Its foot of stone and rim of green." It was at Lenox that Henry Ward Beecher created "Norwood" and "Star Papers." Here Charlotte Cushman and Fanny Kemble came for many summers to rest and find new life. Harriet Hosmer had her first dreams of fame at the Sedgwick school. The Goodale sisters, Elaine and 002 Dora, were born upon one of these mountainsides and both embalmed its memory in their poems. Dora lovingly sings:
Catharine Maria Sedgwick, the first woman in America to gain a literary reputation on two continents, was born in Stockbridge, where her stories and sketches were set. Williams College, that historic place of learning, is located among these foothills. In his summer home in Pittsfield, Longfellow wrote "The Old Clock on the Stairs"; in Stockbridge, Hawthorne built his "House of the Seven Gables"; and Lydia Sigourney poetically described "Stockbridge Bowl" with "Its foot of stone and rim of green." It was in Lenox that Henry Ward Beecher created "Norwood" and "Star Papers." Here, Charlotte Cushman and Fanny Kemble spent many summers to relax and recharge. Harriet Hosmer had her first aspirations of fame at the Sedgwick school. The Goodale sisters, Elaine and 002 Dora, were born on one of these mountainsides and both immortalized its memory in their poems. Dora lovingly sings:
Dear Berkshire, dear birthplace, the hills are thy towers,
Dear Berkshire, dear birthplace, the hills are your towers,
Those lofty fringed summits of granite and pine;
Those high, fringed peaks of granite and pine;
No valley's green lap is so spangled with flowers,
No valley's green expanse is so covered with flowers,
No stream of the wildwood so crystal as thine.
No stream in the forest is as clear as yours.
Say where do the March winds such treasures uncover,
Say, where do the March winds uncover such treasures?
Such maple and arrowwood burn in the fall,
Such maple and arrowwood burn in the fall,
As up the blue peaks where the thunder-gods hover
As up the blue peaks where the thunder gods hover
In cloud-curtained Berkshire who cradled us all?
In cloud-covered Berkshire, who took care of all of us?
Henry Ward Beecher said:
Henry Ward Beecher stated:
This county of valleys, lakes and mountains is yet to be as celebrated as the lake district of England and the hill country of Palestine.... Here is such a valley as the ocean would be if, when its waves were running tumultuous and high, it were suddenly transformed and solidified.... The endless variety never ceases to astonish and please.... It is indeed like some choice companion, of rich heart and genial imagination, never twice alike in mood, in conversation, in radiant sobriety or half-bright sadness; bold, tender, deep, various.
This region of valleys, lakes, and mountains hasn’t received the recognition that England’s Lake District or the hilly regions of Palestine have. Picture a valley that feels like the ocean when the waves are rough and high, suddenly solidified. The endless variety here is always unexpected and enjoyable. It really feels like a beloved friend, filled with warmth and creativity, never consistent in mood or conversation, shifting between vibrant happiness and gentle sadness; bold, gentle, deep, and diverse.
One has but to come into the midst of these hills to fall a victim to their fascination, while to those who were born among them there is no spot on earth so beautiful or so beloved. They have sent forth generations of men and women, whose fame is as imperishable as the marble and granite which form their everlasting foundations. Among the noted men who have gone out from the Berkshire region are William Cullen Bryant, Cyrus W. Field and brothers, Jonathan Edwards, Mark and Albert Hopkins, Senator Henry L. Dawes, Governor Edwin D. Morgan, of New York, George F. Root, the musical composer, Governor George N. Briggs, of Massachusetts, Governor and Senator Francis E. Warren, of Wyoming, the Deweys, the Barnards, a list too long for quoting. Oliver Wendell Holmes, whose grandfather was a Berkshire man, wrote:
One only needs to step into these hills to be captivated by their charm, and for those who grew up here, there’s no place on earth more beautiful or cherished. They have given rise to generations of men and women, whose legacies are as lasting as the marble and granite that form their eternal foundations. Among the distinguished individuals from the Berkshire region are William Cullen Bryant, Cyrus W. Field and his brothers, Jonathan Edwards, Mark and Albert Hopkins, Senator Henry L. Dawes, Governor Edwin D. Morgan of New York, musical composer George F. Root, Governor George N. Briggs of Massachusetts, Governor and Senator Francis E. Warren of Wyoming, the Deweys, the Barnards, and an extensive list too long to quote. Oliver Wendell Holmes, whose grandfather hailed from Berkshire, wrote:
Berkshire has produced a race which, for independent thought, daring schemes and achievements that have had world-wide consequences, has not been surpassed. We claim, also, that more of those first things that draw the chariot of progress forward so that people can see that it has moved, have been planned and executed by the inhabitants of the 950 square miles that constitute 003 the territory of Berkshire than can be credited to any other tract of equal extent in the United States.
Berkshire has created a community that stands out for its independent thinking, bold ideas, and achievements that have a global impact. We also claim that more of the vital innovations that drive progress forward—making it clear that progress is happening—have been developed and executed by the people living in the 950 square miles of 003 the Berkshire region than in any other area of the same size in the United States.
Of late years the world of wealth and fashion has invaded the Berkshire country and there are no more magnificent summer homes than those of Lenox, Stockbridge, Great Barrington and the neighboring towns.
Recently, the world of wealth and fashion has taken over the Berkshire area, and there are no summer homes more magnificent than those in Lenox, Stockbridge, Great Barrington, and the surrounding towns.
The first of the Anthony family of whom there is any record was William, born in Cologne, Germany, who came to England during the reign of Edward the Sixth and was made Chief Graver of the Royal Mint and Master of the Scales, holding this office through the reigns of Edward and Mary and part of that of Elizabeth. His crest and coat of arms are entered in the royal enumeration. His son Derrick was the father of Dr. Francis Anthony, born in London, 1550. According to the Biographia Britannica, he was graduated at Cambridge with the degree of Master of Arts and became a learned physician and chemist. Although a man of high character and generous impulses, he was intolerant of restraint and in continual conflict with the College of Physicians. He died in his seventy-fourth year, and was buried in the church of St. Bartholomew the Great, where his handsome monument still remains. He left a daughter and two sons, both of the latter distinguished physicians. From John, the elder, sprung the American branch of the family. His son, John, Jr., born in Hempstead, England, sailed to America in the ship Hercules, from that port, April 16, 1634, when he was twenty-seven years old. He settled in Portsmouth, R.I., and became a land-owner, an innkeeper and an office-holder. His five children who survived infancy left forty-three children. One of these forty-three, Abraham, had thirteen children, and his son William fourteen, his son, William, Jr., four, his son David nine.
The first recorded member of the Anthony family was William, born in Cologne, Germany. He came to England during the reign of Edward VI and was appointed Chief Graver of the Royal Mint and Master of the Scales, holding this position through the reigns of Edward, Mary, and part of Elizabeth's reign. His crest and coat of arms are included in the royal records. His son Derrick was the father of Dr. Francis Anthony, who was born in London in 1550. According to the Biographia Britannica, he graduated from Cambridge with a Master of Arts degree and became a well-respected physician and chemist. Although he was a man of high character and generous nature, he struggled with authority and was often in conflict with the College of Physicians. He died at the age of seventy-four and was buried in the church of St. Bartholomew the Great, where his impressive monument still stands. He left behind a daughter and two sons, both of whom were notable physicians. The elder son, John, established the American branch of the family. His son, John Jr., was born in Hempstead, England, and sailed to America on the ship Hercules from that port on April 16, 1634, when he was twenty-seven. He settled in Portsmouth, R.I., where he became a landowner, innkeeper, and held various offices. His five children who survived infancy went on to have a total of forty-three grandchildren. One of these, Abraham, had thirteen children, and his son William had fourteen, followed by William Jr. with four, and David with nine.
It was just before the beginning of the Revolution that this David Anthony, with his wife, Judith Hicks, moved from Dartmouth, Mass., to Berkshire and settled near Adams at the foot of Greylock, the highest peak in the mountain range. This was considered the extreme West, as little was known of all that lay beyond. They brought two children with them 004 and seven more were born here in the shadow of the mountains. Humphrey, the second son, born at Dartmouth, February 2, 1770, married Hannah Lapham, who was born near Adams (then called East Hoosac), November 11, 1773; and here, also, January 27, 1794, was born the first of their nine children, Daniel, father of Susan B. Anthony.
It was just before the start of the Revolution when David Anthony and his wife, Judith Hicks, moved from Dartmouth, Mass., to Berkshire, settling near Adams at the base of Greylock, the tallest peak in the mountain range. This area was seen as the far West, as very little was known about what lay beyond it. They brought two children with them 004, and seven more were born here in the shadow of the mountains. Humphrey, their second son, was born in Dartmouth on February 2, 1770, and later married Hannah Lapham, who was born near Adams (then known as East Hoosac) on November 11, 1773. Here, on January 27, 1794, their first of nine children, Daniel, was born, who became the father of Susan B. Anthony.
On the maternal side the grandfather, Daniel Read, was born at Rehobeth, Mass., and said to be a lineal descendant and entitled to the coat of arms of Sir Brianus de Rede, A.D. 1075; but he had too much of the sturdy New England spirit to feel any special interest in the pomp and pride of heraldry, and the family tree he prized most was found in the grand old grove which shaded his own dooryard. Susannah Richardson, his wife, was born at Scituate, Mass., and her family were among the most wealthy and respected of that locality during the eighteenth century. Both Reads and Richardsons removed to Cheshire, Mass., before 1770, and Daniel and Susannah were married there. It was but a few months after this marriage when the first gun was fired at Lexington and the whole country was ablaze with excitement. At the close of the sermon, on a bright spring morning, the old minister, his voice trembling with patriotic fervor, asked every man who was ready to enlist in the Continental army to stand forth, and Daniel Read was the first to step out into the aisle of the little meeting-house. Leaving the girl-bride he entered the service and soon became conspicuous for his bravery. He was one of the memorable expedition against Quebec under Arnold, in 1775, and of the party commanded by Ethan Allen at the capture of Ticonderoga. He was among that brave band from Cheshire (Stafford's Hill) who fought under Colonel Stafford at Bennington. On the 19th of October, 1780, he took part in the fatal fight of Stone Arabia, under Col. John Brown, and served with honor throughout the war. It was several years after peace had been declared and he had returned home and settled down to the quiet life of a New England farmer that, December 2, 1793, was born Lucy, the mother of Susan B. Anthony.
On the maternal side, the grandfather, Daniel Read, was born in Rehobeth, Mass., and is said to be a direct descendant entitled to the coat of arms of Sir Brianus de Rede, A.D. 1075. However, he had too much of the strong New England spirit to care about the pomp and pride of heraldry, and the family tree he valued most was the grand old grove that shaded his own yard. His wife, Susannah Richardson, was born in Scituate, Mass., and her family was among the wealthiest and most respected in that area during the 18th century. The Reads and Richardsons moved to Cheshire, Mass., before 1770, where Daniel and Susannah got married. Just a few months after their wedding, the first gun was fired at Lexington, and the whole country was filled with excitement. At the end of a sermon on a bright spring morning, the old minister, his voice shaking with patriotic fervor, asked every man ready to enlist in the Continental army to stand up, and Daniel Read was the first to step into the aisle of the small meeting house. Leaving his young bride, he joined the service and quickly became known for his bravery. He was part of the memorable expedition against Quebec under Arnold in 1775 and was in the group led by Ethan Allen during the capture of Ticonderoga. He fought with that brave group from Cheshire (Stafford's Hill) under Colonel Stafford at Bennington. On October 19, 1780, he participated in the deadly battle of Stone Arabia under Col. John Brown and served with honor throughout the war. Several years after peace was declared and he returned home to live a quiet life as a New England farmer, Lucy, the mother of Susan B. Anthony, was born on December 2, 1793.

THE "OLD HIVE," ADAMS, MASS.
The "Old Hive," Adams, MA.
Daniel Read was a member of the Massachusetts Legislature 005 in 1814 and was elected to various public offices. He was a Whig in politics and adhered always to staunch republican principles, but rose above partisanship and was universally respected. Daniel and Susannah were thrifty New England Puritans, leading members of the Baptist denomination and parishioners of the widely known Elder Leland. The cooking for Sunday always was done on Saturday, and the greater part of every Sunday, regardless of weather, was spent at church. They and their children sat through a service of two hours in the morning, ate a generous lunch at the noon intermission, and were ready for another two hours' sermon in the afternoon, through all the heat of summer and the terrible cold of New England winter.
Daniel Read was a member of the Massachusetts Legislature 005 in 1814 and was elected to various public offices. He was a Whig politically and always held strong republican principles, but he rose above partisanship and was universally respected. Daniel and Susannah were practical New England Puritans, prominent members of the Baptist denomination and parishioners of the well-known Elder Leland. They always prepared the cooking for Sunday on Saturday, and most of every Sunday, no matter the weather, was spent at church. They and their children attended a two-hour service in the morning, enjoyed a hearty lunch during the noon break, and were ready for another two-hour sermon in the afternoon, enduring both the heat of summer and the bitter cold of New England winters.
Susannah Read remained always a devout and consistent Baptist, but Daniel became, in later years, a thorough Universalist. Murray, the founder of this church in England, had come to the Colonies before the Revolutionary War, and by the close of the century the Universalists were organized as a sect, holding general conventions and sending itinerants among the people in the villages and country. Some of these doubtless had penetrated to Adams and converted Daniel Read, who was always liberal in his belief. He was an inveterate reader and pored over a vast amount of theological discussion which attracted so much attention in his day. The family moved from Cheshire to a suburb of Adams called Bowen's Corners. Near their house was the tavern, its proprietor known to all the people roundabout as "Uncle Sam" Bowen. He and Daniel Read never wearied in setting forth the merits of "free salvation." They were the only two persons in all that section of the country who did not believe in a literal hell. It was the common sentiment then that only those disbelieved in endless punishment who had reason to be afraid of it, and, since both these men were exemplary in every other respect, it was impossible for their friends to understand their aberration. Susannah Read, in the language of that time, "wore the skin off her knees," praying night and day that God would bring her husband back into the fold, but her prayers never were 006 answered. Every Sunday regularly he accompanied her to church, and faithfully contributed to the support of the preacher, but he died, at the ripe old age of eighty-four, firm in his Universalist faith.
Susannah Read remained a devoted and consistent Baptist, but Daniel became a dedicated Universalist in his later years. Murray, who started this church in England, came to the Colonies before the Revolutionary War, and by the end of the century, the Universalists had formed as a group, holding general conventions and sending preachers out to villages and rural areas. Some of these definitely reached Adams and influenced Daniel Read, who always had a liberal mindset in his beliefs. He was an avid reader and studied a vast range of theological debates that gained a lot of attention in his time. The family moved from Cheshire to a suburb of Adams called Bowen's Corners. Near their home was a tavern run by a man known to everyone as "Uncle Sam" Bowen. He and Daniel Read tirelessly promoted the idea of "free salvation." They were the only two people in the area who didn’t believe in a literal hell. At that time, it was commonly thought that only those who feared endless punishment disbelieved in it, and since both men were exemplary in other ways, their friends found their views perplexing. Susannah Read, in the lingo of her time, "wore the skin off her knees," praying day and night for God to bring her husband back to the fold, but her prayers were never 006 answered. Every Sunday, he faithfully went with her to church and contributed to the preacher’s support, but he died at the age of eighty-four, firmly committed to his Universalist faith.
Susannah was the care-taker of the family and looked after the farm, inheriting the Richardson energy and thrift. Daniel was genial, good-natured and very intelligent, but his health being impaired from army service, he was willing she should take the lead in business matters. The farm was one of only a hundred acres, but was carefully and economically managed and, at their death, the Reads left about $10,000, which was then considered a snug little fortune. Lucy, one of seven children, was born into a home of peace and comfort and had a happy and uneventful childhood. She attended the district school, was a fair writer and speller and, like her father very fond of reading. She learned to cook and sew, make butter and cheese, spin and weave, and was very domestic in all her tastes. The Reads and Anthonys were near neighbors, and although differing widely in religious belief, a subject of much prominence in those days, they were on terms of intimate friendship even before the ties were made still closer by marriage between the two families.
Susannah was the caretaker of the family and managed the farm, inheriting the Richardson's work ethic and frugality. Daniel was friendly, easygoing, and very smart, but due to health issues from his army service, he was fine with her taking charge of the business matters. The farm was only a hundred acres, but it was run efficiently and economically. When they passed away, the Reads left behind about $10,000, which was considered a nice little nest egg back then. Lucy, one of seven children, grew up in a peaceful and comfortable home, enjoying a happy and uneventful childhood. She went to the local school, was a decent writer and speller, and, like her father, had a strong love for reading. She learned to cook and sew, make butter and cheese, spin and weave, and had very domestic tastes overall. The Reads and Anthonys were close neighbors, and despite having very different religious beliefs—which were a big deal back then—they maintained a close friendship even before the two families became even more connected through marriage.
Both Anthonys and Laphams were Quakers as far back as the sect was in existence. Both were families of wealth and influence, and when Humphrey and Hannah were married she received from her parents a house and thirty acres of land, which were entailed on her children. Silver spoons are still in the family, which were part of her dowry more than a century ago. Hannah Lapham Anthony was a most saintly woman and, because of her beautiful religious character was made an elder and given an exalted position on the "high seat."[1]
Both the Anthonys and the Laphams had been Quakers since the sect was established. Both families were wealthy and influential, and when Humphrey and Hannah got married, her parents gifted her a house and thirty acres of land, which would pass down to her children. The silver spoons that belong to the family, part of her dowry over a hundred years ago, are still in use today. Hannah Lapham Anthony was a truly virtuous woman, and because of her remarkable religious character, she was appointed an elder and given a special place on the "high seat."[1]

HOME OF LUCY READ, ADAMS, MASS.
HOME OF LUCY READ, ADAMS, MASS.
She was a very handsome brunette and was noted for the beauty and elegance of her Quaker attire, her bonnets always being made in New York. Humphrey never attained the "high seat;" he was too worldly. His ambition was constantly to add more to his broad acres, to take a bigger drove 007 of cattle to Boston than any of his neighbors, and to get a higher price for his own than any other Berkshire cheese would bring. He had a number of farms and a hundred cows, while his wife made the best cheese and was the finest housekeeper in all that part of the country. The fame of her coffee and biscuits, apple dumplings and chicken dinners, spread far and wide. Their kitchen was forty feet long. One end was used for the dining-room, with the table seating twenty persons, and in the other were the sink and the "penstock," which brought water from a clear, cold spring high up in the mountains. Here also were the huge fire-place, the big brick oven and the large pantry. Then there were the spacious "keeping" or sitting-room, with the mother's bedroom opening out of it, the great weaving-room with its wheels and loom, and two bed-rooms for the "help" down stairs, while above were the children's sleeping-rooms. Opening out of the kitchen was a room containing the cheese press and the big "arch" kettle, and near by was a two-story building where the cheese was stored. Up in the grove was the saw-mill, and at the foot of the hill was the blacksmith shop, where nails were made, horses shod, wagons and farm implements mended and, later, scythes manufactured. On all the farms were fine orchards of apples, plums, pears, cherries and quinces, among which stood long rows of beehives with their wealth of honey.
She was a striking brunette, known for the beauty and elegance of her Quaker attire, with bonnets always made in New York. Humphrey never achieved the "high seat;" he was too worldly. His ambition was to constantly expand his vast acres, take a bigger herd 007 of cattle to Boston than any of his neighbors, and get a higher price for his cheese than anyone else could. He owned several farms and a hundred cows, while his wife made the best cheese and was the finest housekeeper in the area. Her coffee, biscuits, apple dumplings, and chicken dinners were famous far and wide. Their kitchen was forty feet long. One end served as the dining room, with a table that seated twenty, while the other end housed the sink and the "penstock," which brought water from a clear, cold spring high up in the mountains. It also featured a huge fireplace, a large brick oven, and a spacious pantry. There was a large "keeping" or sitting room, with the mother's bedroom leading off it, a great weaving room filled with wheels and a loom, and two bedrooms for the "help" downstairs, while the children's sleeping rooms were upstairs. Connected to the kitchen was a room containing the cheese press and the large "arch" kettle, and nearby was a two-story building where the cheese was stored. Up in the grove was the sawmill, and at the bottom of the hill was the blacksmith shop, where nails were made, horses were shod, wagons and farm implements were repaired, and later, scythes were manufactured. All the farms had beautiful orchards of apples, plums, pears, cherries, and quinces, among which stood long rows of beehives filled with honey.
Here Daniel, father of Susan B. Anthony, grew to manhood in the midst of comfort and abundance and in an atmosphere of harmony and love. The Anthonys were broad and liberal in religious ideas, and in 1826, when bitter dissensions regarding the divinity of Christ arose among the Quakers, they followed Elias Hicks and were henceforth known as "Hicksite Friends." This controversy divided many families, and on account of it the orthodox brother, Elihu Anthony, insisted on removing their aged father to his home in Saratoga, N.Y., to the great grief of Humphrey, who claimed that the old gentleman was too childish to know whether he was orthodox or Hicksite and ought not to be taken to "a new country" in his declining years Hannah Anthony 008 was ambitious for her children and insisted that they should be placed where they might have better educational facilities than in the little school at home. Humphrey thought the boys could manage a farm and the girls weave good cloth and make fine cheese without a boarding-school education. He finally yielded, however, and Daniel and two daughters were sent to the "Nine Partners," that famous Quaker boarding-school in Dutchess county, N.Y. At the end of a year, Daniel, who was about nineteen, had made such rapid progress that he was appointed teacher. The quaint certificate given him by his associate teachers is still in existence and reads:
Here, Daniel, the father of Susan B. Anthony, grew up in comfort and abundance, surrounded by harmony and love. The Anthonys had broad and liberal religious views, and in 1826, when there were heated disagreements about the divinity of Christ among the Quakers, they followed Elias Hicks and became known as "Hicksite Friends." This controversy split many families, and because of it, the orthodox brother, Elihu Anthony, insisted on moving their elderly father to his home in Saratoga, N.Y., which greatly distressed Humphrey. He argued that their father was too frail to understand whether he was orthodox or Hicksite and shouldn’t be taken to "a new country" in his old age. Hannah Anthony was ambitious for her children and insisted they should be placed where they could receive better educational opportunities than at the small school at home. Humphrey believed the boys could run a farm and the girls could weave good cloth and make fine cheese without a boarding-school education. However, he eventually gave in, and Daniel and two daughters were sent to the "Nine Partners," that well-known Quaker boarding school in Dutchess County, N.Y. By the end of a year, Daniel, who was about nineteen, had made such rapid progress that he was appointed as a teacher. The unique certificate given to him by his fellow teachers still exists and reads:
This may apprize the friends & relatives of D. Anthony, that, during his residence with us, he has been an affectionate consort, excellent, consistant in the School, of steady deportment and conversation, being an example for us to follow when we are separated. We sincerely wish his preservation in all things laudable and believe we can with propriety hereunto set our names.
This is to inform the friends and family of D. Anthony that, during his time with us, he has been a supportive partner, performed excellently and consistently in school, and exhibited steady behavior and conversation, serving as a role model for us to follow when we are apart. We truly wish him success in all his commendable endeavors and believe it is fitting to add our names here.
Elihu Marshall, Charles Clement, John Taber, Stephen Willitz, Henry Cox, Frederick A. Underhill, William Seamen.
Elihu Marshall, Charles Clement, John Taber, Stephen Willitz, Henry Cox, Frederick A. Underhill, William Seamen.
There is a still more highly valued testimonial from the principal, the noble and dignified Richard F. Mott, who was held in loving reverence by all the distinguished Quaker families that confided their sons and daughters to his wise and tender care:
There is an even more highly regarded endorsement from the principal, the honorable and esteemed Richard F. Mott, who was held in deep respect by all the prominent Quaker families that entrusted their sons and daughters to his thoughtful and compassionate guidance:
Daniel Anthony has been an assistant here & we can aprise his friends that he has faithfully discharged his duty in that particular, has been a very agreeable companion & his conduct remarkably correct & exemplary, which, joined to his pleasant & obliging disposition, has gained him our esteem & affection.
Daniel Anthony has served as an assistant here, and we want to let his friends know that he has responsibly carried out his duties in that role, been a great friend, and his conduct has been notably appropriate and exemplary. His friendly and helpful demeanor has earned him our respect and affection.
We sincerely wish his prosperity, spiritually & temporally, & shall gratefully remember him and his services.
We genuinely wish him success, both spiritually and materially, and we will always appreciate him and his contributions.
On behalf of the sitting-room circle, R.F. MOTT.
On behalf of the living room group, R.F. MOTT.
Boarding School, 4 M., 1 D., 1814.
Boarding School, 4 M., 1 D., 1814.
The profession of teacher did not appeal to hard-headed Humphrey Anthony, and when Daniel came back with his brain full of ambitious projects and with a thorough distaste for farming, and his sisters, with many airs and graces and a feeling of superiority over the girls in the neighborhood, Father Anthony declared that no more children of his should 009 go away to boarding-school. The fact that young Daniel was skilled in mechanics and mathematics, able to superintend intelligently all the work on the farm and to make a finer scythe than any man in the shop, did not modify the father's opinion. When John, the next boy, was old enough and the mother began to urge that he be sent to school, the father offered him his choice to go or to stay at home and work that year for $100. This was a large sum for those days, it out-weighed the mother's arguments, John remained at home and regretted it all the rest of his life.
The teaching profession didn’t appeal to practical Humphrey Anthony, and when Daniel returned filled with ambitious ideas and a strong dislike for farming, along with his sisters who carried themselves with airs and felt superior to the local girls, Father Anthony decided that none of his children would go away to boarding school anymore. The fact that young Daniel was good at mechanics and math, capable of managing all the farm work intelligently and crafting a better scythe than anyone in the shop, didn’t change the father’s mind. When John, the next son, was old enough and their mother started pushing for him to be sent to school, the father gave him the option to either go or stay home and work that year for $100. That was a significant amount of money back then, which outweighed the mother’s arguments, so John stayed home and regretted it for the rest of his life.

WEST END OF KITCHEN IN OLD HOMESTEAD.
WEST END OF KITCHEN IN OLD HOMESTEAD.
The Anthony and Read farms were adjoining a mile east of Adams, and lay upon the first level or "bench" of the Green mountains. From their door-yards the ascent of the mountains began, and only the Hoosac in a deep ravine separated them from the base of "Old Greylock." The crops were raised on the "intervale" and the cattle pastured on the mountain side. Adams was then a sleepy New England village, and the Hoosac was a lovely stream, whose waters were used for the flocks and for the grist and saw-mills; but in later years the village became a manufacturing center and the banks of the pretty river were lined for miles with great factories.
The Anthony and Read farms were next to each other, about a mile east of Adams, situated on the first level or "bench" of the Green Mountains. From their yards, the climb up the mountains began, and only the Hoosac River in a deep ravine separated them from the base of "Old Greylock." They grew crops in the "intervale" and let their cattle graze on the mountainside. At that time, Adams was a quiet New England village, and the Hoosac was a beautiful stream, with its waters used for livestock and powering the grist and sawmills; however, in later years, the village transformed into a manufacturing hub, and the banks of the lovely river were lined for miles with large factories.
In early times wealthy Quakers had a school in their home or door-yard for their own children. Those of the neighborhood were allowed to attend at a certain price, and in this way undesirable pupils could be kept out. At the Anthony residence this little school-house stood beneath a great weeping willow beside the front gate, and among the pupils was Lucy Read. She was the playmate of the sisters, and young Dan was the torment of their lives, jumping out at them from unexpected corners, eavesdropping to learn their little secrets and harassing them in ways common to boys of all generations, and she never hesitated to inform him that he was "the hatefullest fellow she ever knew." When Daniel returned from boarding-school with all the prestige of several years' absence, and was made master of the little home-school, one of his pupils was this same Lucy Read, now a tall, beautiful girl with glossy brown hair, large blue eyes and a fine complexion, the belle of 010 the neighborhood. The inevitable happened, childish feuds were forgotten, and teacher and pupil decided to become husband and wife. Then arose a formidable difficulty. The Anthonys were Quakers, the Reads were Baptists, and a Quaker was not permitted to "marry out of meeting." Love laughed at rules and restrictions eighty years ago, just as it does to-day, and Daniel refused to let the Society come between him and the woman of his choice, but Lucy had many misgivings. Thanks to her father's ideas she had been brought up in a most liberal manner, allowed to attend parties, dance and wear pretty clothes to her heart's content, and it was a serious question with her whether she could give up all these and adopt the plain and severe habits of the Quakers. She had a marvelous voice, and, as she sang over her spinning-wheel, often wished that she might "go into a ten-acre lot with the bars down" so that she could let her voice out to its full capacity. The Quakers did not approve of singing, and that pleasure also would have to be relinquished. That the husband could give up his religious forms and accept those of the wife never had been imagined.
In the past, wealthy Quakers had a school in their home or yard for their own children. Local kids were allowed to attend for a set fee, which helped exclude undesirable students. At the Anthony home, this little schoolhouse was situated under a large weeping willow near the front gate, and among the students was Lucy Read. She was the playmate of the Anthony sisters, while young Dan was a constant source of annoyance for them, jumping out from hidden spots, eavesdropping to discover their secrets, and teasing them in the typical ways boys have done for generations. She never held back from telling him he was "the most annoying boy she ever knew." When Daniel returned from boarding school with the reputation that came from several years away, he became the teacher at the little home school, and one of his students was now the same Lucy Read, a tall, beautiful girl with shiny brown hair, big blue eyes, and a flawless complexion, the star of 010 the neighborhood. Inevitably, childhood rivalries faded, and teacher and student decided to become a married couple. Then a significant challenge arose. The Anthonys were Quakers, and the Reads were Baptists, and a Quaker wasn’t supposed to "marry out of meeting." Love defied rules and restrictions eighty years ago, just like it does today, and Daniel refused to let the Society come between him and the woman he loved, but Lucy had many doubts. Influenced by her father's views, she had been raised very liberally, allowed to attend parties, dance, and wear pretty clothes as much as she wanted, and she seriously questioned whether she could give up all this and adopt the plain, strict lifestyle of the Quakers. She had an incredible singing voice, and while she sang at her spinning wheel, she often wished she could "run free in a ten-acre field," letting her voice soar fully. The Quakers didn't approve of singing, so that joy would also have to be sacrificed. The idea that the husband could abandon his religious practices to adopt those of the wife had never even crossed anyone's mind.
Love finally triumphed, and the young couple were married July 13, 1817. A few nights before the wedding Lucy went to a party and danced till four o'clock in the morning, while Friend Daniel sat bolt upright against the wall and counted the days which should usher in a new dispensation. A committee was sent at once to deal with Daniel, and Lucy always declared he told them he "was sorry he married her," but he would say, "No, my dear, I said I was sorry that in order to marry the woman I loved best, I had to violate a rule of the religious society I revered most." The matter was carefully talked over by the elders, and as he had said he was sorry he had to violate the rule, and as the family was one of much influence, and as he was their most highly educated and cultivated member, it was unanimously decided not to turn him out of meeting.[2] Lucy learned to love the Friends' religion 011 and often said she was a much more consistent Quaker than her husband, but she never became a member of the Society, declaring she was "not good enough." She did not use the "plain language," though she always insisted that her husband should do so in addressing her; nor did she adopt the Quaker costume, but she dressed simply and wore little "cottage" straw bonnets with strings tied demurely under her chin and later had them made of handsome shirred silk, the full white cap-ruche showing inside. She sang no more except lullabies to the babies when they came, and then the Quaker relatives would laugh and ask her why she did it. Her long married life was very happy, notwithstanding its many hardships, and she never regretted accepting her Quaker lover.
Love finally won out, and the young couple got married on July 13, 1817. A few nights before the wedding, Lucy went to a party and danced until four in the morning, while Friend Daniel sat straight up against the wall, counting down the days until a new chapter began. A committee was quickly formed to discuss Daniel, and Lucy always claimed he told them he "was sorry he married her," but he insisted, "No, my dear, I said I was sorry that to marry the woman I loved most, I had to break a rule of the religious society I cherished the most." The elders carefully discussed the issue, and since he expressed regret for having to break the rule, and since the family was very influential, and he was their most educated and cultured member, they unanimously decided not to expel him from meetings.[2] Lucy grew to love the Friends' religion 011 and often remarked that she was a much more consistent Quaker than her husband, but she never joined the Society, claiming she was "not good enough." She didn’t use "plain language," although she always insisted that her husband should use it when speaking to her; nor did she adopt the Quaker dress, but she dressed simply and wore small "cottage" straw bonnets with strings tied modestly under her chin, later having them made from lovely shirred silk, with a full white cap-ruche visible inside. She sang no more except lullabies to the babies when they arrived, and then her Quaker relatives would laugh and ask her why she did it. Her long married life was very happy, despite its many challenges, and she never regretted choosing her Quaker lover.
The previous summer Daniel had helped his father prepare the lumber and build a large two-story addition to his house, and in return he gave to his son the lumber for a new home, on a beautiful tract of ground presented to the young couple by Father Read adjoining his own. While this was being built they lived at the Read homestead, and the loom was kept busy preparing the housekeeping outfit. In those days this was made of linen, bleached and spun and woven by the women of the household. Cotton was just coming into use, and Lucy Anthony was considered very fortunate because she could have a few sheets and pillow-cases which were half cotton.
Last summer, Daniel had helped his dad prepare the wood and build a big two-story addition to their house. In return, his dad gave him the lumber to build a new home on a beautiful piece of land that Father Read gifted to the young couple next to his own property. While the new house was being built, they lived at the Read family home, and the loom was busy making their household items. Back then, these were made of linen, which was bleached, spun, and woven by the women in the family. Cotton was just starting to become popular, and Lucy Anthony was considered very lucky because she could have a few sheets and pillowcases made of half cotton.
The manufacture of cotton becoming a prominent industry in New England at this time, the alert mind of Daniel Anthony conceived the idea of building a factory and using the waters of Tophet brook and of a rapid little stream which flowed through the Read farm. This was done, and proved a success from the beginning. A document is still in existence by which "D. Read agrees to let D. Anthony have as much water from the brook on his farm as will run through a hole six inches in diameter." This was conveyed by an aqueduct, made from hollow logs, to the factory where it turned the over-shot wheel and furnished power to the twenty-six looms. The factory hands for the most part came down from the Green 012 mountain regions, glad of an opportunity never before enjoyed of earning wages and supporting themselves. They were girls of respectability, and, as was the custom then, boarded with the families of the mill-owners. Those of the Anthony factory were divided between the wife and Hannah Anthony Hoxie, a married sister. Lucy Anthony soon became acquainted with the stern realities of life. Her third baby was born when the first was three years and two months old. That summer she boarded eleven factory hands, who roomed in her house, and she did all the cooking, washing and ironing, with no help except that of a thirteen-year-old girl, who went to school and did "chores" night and morning. The cooking for the family of sixteen was done on the hearth in front of the fire-place and in a big brick oven at the side. Daniel Anthony was a generous man, loved his wife and was well able to hire help, but such a thing was not thought of at that time. No matter how heavy the work, the woman of the household was expected to do it, and probably would have been the first to resent the idea that assistance was needed.
The production of cotton became a major industry in New England during this time, and Daniel Anthony had the idea to build a factory that would use the waters of Tophet Brook and a small fast-flowing stream that ran through the Read farm. He followed through with this plan, and it was successful right from the start. There’s still a document that shows "D. Read agrees to let D. Anthony have as much water from the brook on his farm as will run through a hole six inches in diameter." This water was carried by an aqueduct made of hollow logs to the factory, where it powered the over-shot wheel supplying energy to the twenty-six looms. Most of the factory workers came down from the Green Mountain region, excited about a chance they had never had before to earn wages and support themselves. They were respectable young women, and, as was common at the time, they boarded with the families of the mill owners. In the Anthony factory, they were mainly divided between Daniel's wife and Hannah Anthony Hoxie, a married sister. Lucy Anthony quickly learned about the tough realities of life. She had her third baby when the first was just three years and two months old. That summer, she hosted eleven factory workers in her home, doing all the cooking, washing, and ironing herself, with help only from a thirteen-year-old girl who attended school and did "chores" in the morning and at night. Cooking for a family of sixteen was done on the hearth in front of the fireplace and in a large brick oven at the side. Daniel Anthony was a generous man who loved his wife and could afford to hire help, but that wasn’t something that was considered at the time. Regardless of how difficult the workload was, the woman of the household was expected to handle it, and likely would have been the first to resist the notion that help was necessary.
During the first seventeen years of this marriage eight children were born. One died at birth and one at the age of two years. The eldest, born July 1, 1818, was named for the wife of William Penn, who married a member of the Anthony family, Gulielma Penn, which was contracted to Guelma. Susan was the second child, born February 15, 1820, and named for an aunt, Susan Anthony Brownell. She herself adopted the initial "B" when older, but never claimed or liked the full name.[3]
During the first seventeen years of this marriage, eight children were born. One died at birth, and another at the age of two. The eldest, born on July 1, 1818, was named after the wife of William Penn, who married someone from the Anthony family, Gulielma Penn, which was shortened to Guelma. Susan was the second child, born on February 15, 1820, and named after her aunt, Susan Anthony Brownell. As she got older, she adopted the initial "B," but she never claimed or liked her full name.[3]

BIRTHPLACE OF SUSAN B. ANTHONY, ADAMS, MASS. (BORN IN ROOM SHADED BY TREE.)
BIRTHPLACE OF SUSAN B. ANTHONY, ADAMS, MASS. (BORN IN A ROOM SHADY DUE TO A TREE.)
Lucy Read Anthony was of a very timid and reticent disposition and painfully modest and shrinking. Before the birth of every child she was overwhelmed with embarrassment and humiliation, secluded herself from the outside world and would 013 not speak of the expected little one even to her mother. That mother would assist her overburdened daughter by making the necessary garments, take them to her home and lay them carefully away in a drawer, but no word of acknowledgment ever passed between them. This was characteristic of those olden times, when there were seldom any confidences between mothers and daughters in regard to the deepest and most sacred concerns of life, which were looked upon as subjects to be rigidly tabooed. Susan came into the world in a cold, dreary season. The event was looked forward to with dread by the mother, but when the little one arrived she received a warm and loving welcome. She was born into a staid and quiet but very comfortable home, where great respect and affection existed between father and mother.
Lucy Read Anthony was very shy and reserved, and incredibly modest. Before the birth of each child, she felt overwhelmed with embarrassment and humiliation, isolating herself from the outside world and would 013 not even mention the expected baby to her own mother. Her mother would help her daughter by making the necessary clothes, bringing them to her home, and carefully putting them away in a drawer, but they never exchanged a word of acknowledgment about it. This was typical for those times when discussions between mothers and daughters about life’s most personal and sacred matters were considered strictly off-limits. Susan was born during a cold, dreary season. The mother dreaded the arrival, but when the baby finally came, she was welcomed with warmth and love. Susan entered a stable, quiet, but very comfortable home, where there was great respect and affection between her parents.
William Cullen Bryant, whose birth-place was but twenty miles distant, wrote of this immediate locality:
William Cullen Bryant, who was born just twenty miles away, wrote about this area:
I stand upon my native hills again,
I’m back on my home hills again,
Broad, round and green, that in the summer sky,
Broad, round, and green, that in the summer sky,
With garniture of waving grass and grain,
With decoration of swaying grass and crops,
Orchards and beechen forests, basking lie;
Orchards and beech forests lie basking;
While deep the sunless glens are scooped between,
While deep, the shadowy valleys are carved out between,
Where brawl o'er shallow beds the streams unseen.
Where streams fight over shallow beds, but you can't see them.
Each night in early childhood she watched the sun set behind the great dome of "Old Greylock," that noble mountain-peak so famed in the literature of Berkshire, from whose lofty summit one looks across four States. "It lifts its head like a glorified martyr," said Beecher, and Julia Taft Bayne wrote:
Each evening during her early years, she watched the sun set behind the impressive dome of "Old Greylock," that majestic mountain peak celebrated in Berkshire's literature, from whose high summit one can see across four states. "It raises its head like a glorified martyr," said Beecher, and Julia Taft Bayne wrote:
Come here where Greylock rolls
Come here where Greylock flows
Itself toward heaven; in these deep silences,
Itself toward heaven; in these deep silences,
World-worn and fretted souls,
World-weary and anxious souls,
Bathe and be clean.
Wash up and stay clean.
To the child's idea its top was very close against the sky, and its memory and inspiration remained with her through life.
To the child, its peak felt really close to the sky, and that memory and inspiration stayed with her for life.
Susan was very intelligent and precocious. At the age of three she was sent to the grandmother's to remain during the advent of the fourth baby at home, and while there was taught 014 to spell and read. Her memory was phenomenal, and she had an insatiable ambition, especially for learning the things considered beyond a girl's capacity.
Susan was very smart and ahead of her age. At three years old, she was sent to her grandmother's house while her mother had the fourth baby at home. While there, she was taught 014 to spell and read. Her memory was amazing, and she had an unquenchable thirst for knowledge, especially for learning things that were thought to be beyond what a girl could handle.
The mother was most charitable, always finding time amidst her own family cares to go among the sick and poor of the neighborhood. One of Susan's childish grievances, which she always remembered, was that the "Sunday-go-to-meeting" dresses of the three little Anthony girls were lent to the children of a poor family to wear at the funeral of their mother, while she and her sisters had to wear their old ones. She thought these were good enough to lend. She had no toys or dolls except of home manufacture, but her rag baby and set of broken dishes afforded just as much happiness as children nowadays get from a roomful of imported playthings.
The mother was very generous, always taking time out from her own family responsibilities to help the sick and poor in the neighborhood. One of Susan's childhood complaints, which she always remembered, was that the "Sunday-best" dresses of the three little Anthony girls were given to the children of a poor family to wear at their mother's funeral, while she and her sisters had to wear their old clothes. She thought those dresses were nice enough to share. She had no toys or dolls except for handmade ones, but her rag doll and set of broken dishes brought her just as much joy as kids today get from a room full of fancy toys.
To go to school the children had to pass Grandmother Read's, and they were always careful to start early enough to stop there for a fresh cheese curd and a drink of "coffee," made by browning crusts of rye and Indian bread, pouring hot water over them and sweetening with maple sugar. Then in the evening they would stop again for some of the left-over, cold boiled dinner, which was served on a great pewter platter, a big piece of pork or beef in the center and, piled all round, potatoes, cabbage, turnips, beets, carrots, etc. The story runs that, when the mother remonstrated with the children for bothering the grandmother for what they could have at home, Susan replied, "Why, grandma's potato peelings are better than your boiled dinners." The Anthonys and Reads used white flour and real coffee on state occasions, but very few families could afford such luxuries.
To get to school, the kids had to pass by Grandmother Read's place, and they always made sure to leave early enough to stop there for some fresh cheese curd and a drink of "coffee," which was made by browning crusts of rye and Indian bread, pouring hot water over them, and sweetening with maple sugar. In the evening, they'd stop by again for some of the leftover cold boiled dinner, which was served on a big pewter platter with a large piece of pork or beef in the middle and surrounded by potatoes, cabbage, turnips, beets, carrots, and other vegetables. The story goes that when the mother scolded the kids for bothering Grandma for food they could have at home, Susan replied, "Well, Grandma's potato peelings are better than your boiled dinners." The Anthonys and Reads used white flour and real coffee on special occasions, but very few families could afford such luxuries.
One of the recollections of Grandmother Anthony's house is of the little closet under the parlor stairs, where was set the tub of maple sugar, and, while the elders were chatting over neighborhood affairs, the children would gather like bees around this tub and have a feast. Always when they left, they were loaded down with apples, doughnuts, caraway cakes and other toothsome things which little ones love. Along the edges of the pantry shelves hung rows of shining pewter 015 porringers, and the pride of the children's lives was to eat "cider toast" out of them. This was made by toasting a big loaf of brown bread before the fire, peeling off the outside, toasting it again, and finally pouring over these crusts hot sweetened water and cider. The dish, however, which was relished above all others was "hasty pudding," cooked slowly for hours, then heaped upon a platter in a great cone, the center scooped out and filled with sweet, fresh butter and honey or maple syrup.
One of my memories of Grandmother Anthony's house is the little closet under the parlor stairs, where the tub of maple sugar was kept. While the adults chatted about neighborhood news, the children would gather around this tub like bees and have a feast. When they left, they were always loaded up with apples, doughnuts, caraway cakes, and other treats that kids love. Along the edges of the pantry shelves hung rows of shiny pewter 015 bowls, and the best part for the kids was eating "cider toast" from them. This was made by toasting a big loaf of brown bread by the fire, peeling off the crust, toasting it again, and then pouring hot sweetened water and cider over the crusts. However, the dish that everyone enjoyed the most was "hasty pudding," which was cooked slowly for hours, then piled on a platter in a big cone shape, with the center scooped out and filled with sweet, fresh butter and honey or maple syrup.
In those days every sideboard was liberally supplied with rum, brandy and gin, and every man drank more or less, even the elders and preachers. When the farmers came down the mountain road with their loads of wood or lumber, they always stopped at Grandfather Read's for a slice of bread and cheese and a drink of hard cider, but the elders and preachers were regaled with something stronger. This was the custom, and criticism would have been considered fanatical.
In those days, every sideboard was stocked with rum, brandy, and gin, and every man drank more or less, even the elders and preachers. When the farmers came down the mountain road with their loads of wood or lumber, they always stopped at Grandfather Read's for a slice of bread and cheese and a drink of hard cider, but the elders and preachers were treated to something stronger. This was the custom, and any criticism would have been seen as extreme.
The little factory nourished and produced many yards of excellent cotton cloth. A store was opened in one corner of the house to supply the wants of the employes and neighbors, and the Anthonys enjoyed a plenty and prosperity somewhat unusual where small incomes and close economy were the rule.
The small factory produced a lot of high-quality cotton fabric. A shop was set up in one corner of the house to meet the needs of the workers and neighbors, and the Anthonys experienced a level of abundance and success that was quite rare in an environment where small incomes and tight budgets were the norm.
CHAPTER II.
GIRLHOOD AND SCHOOL-LIFE.
1826—1838.
By 1826, Daniel Anthony had become so well-known for business management that he received an offer from Judge John McLean, of Battenville, Washington county, N.Y., who already had built a factory there, to go into cotton manufacturing on an extensive scale, the judge to furnish capital, Mr. Anthony executive ability. There was much opposition from the two older families to having their children go so far away (forty-four miles) and Lucy Anthony's heart was almost broken at the thought of leaving her aged father and mother, but Daniel was too good a financier to lose such an opportunity. So on a warm, bright July morning the goods were started and the judge and his grandson, Aaron McLean, came with a big green wagon and two fine horses to take the family to Battenville. Young Aaron little thought as he lifted the eight-year-old Guelma into the wagon that he was taking with him his future wife. The new home was in a pretty village nestled among the hills on the Battenkill. The first year the Anthonys lived in part of Judge McLean's house, where were two slaves not yet manumitted, and the children saw negroes for the first time and were dreadfully frightened. Afterwards the family moved into an old but comfortable story-and-a-half house where they remained several years.
By 1826, Daniel Anthony had become so well-known for business management that he received an offer from Judge John McLean of Battenville, Washington County, N.Y., who had already built a factory there, to go into large-scale cotton manufacturing, with the judge providing the capital and Mr. Anthony supplying the executive skills. There was a lot of resistance from the two older families about having their children move so far away (forty-four miles), and Lucy Anthony's heart was nearly broken at the thought of leaving her elderly parents. But Daniel was too savvy as a financier to pass up such an opportunity. So on a warm, bright July morning, the move began, and the judge along with his grandson, Aaron McLean, arrived with a big green wagon and two fine horses to take the family to Battenville. Young Aaron had no idea when he lifted the eight-year-old Guelma into the wagon that he was taking his future wife with him. The new home was in a lovely village tucked away among the hills along the Battenkill. For the first year, the Anthonys lived in part of Judge McLean's house, where there were two slaves who had not yet been freed, and the children saw Black people for the first time and were very frightened. Later, the family moved into an old but comfortable story-and-a-half house where they stayed for several years.
Meanwhile a great deal of expensive machinery had been put into the factory and a large brick store erected. For a long time Daniel Anthony had been very much interested in the temperance cause. At Adams he had sold liquor, like 018 every other merchant, but when a man was found by the roadside frozen to death with an empty jug which told the story, although Mr. Anthony had not sold him the rum, he resolved, as this was only one of many distressing cases, to sell no more. He was the first in that locality to put intoxicating liquors out of his store.
Meanwhile, a lot of expensive machinery had been installed in the factory, and a large brick store had been built. For a long time, Daniel Anthony had been very interested in the temperance movement. At Adams, he had sold liquor, like 018 every other merchant, but when a man was found frozen to death by the roadside with an empty jug that told the story, even though Mr. Anthony had not sold him the rum, he decided, as this was just one of many heartbreaking cases, to stop selling it altogether. He was the first in that area to remove intoxicating liquors from his store.
He had not thought to discuss this question with Judge McLean when their contract was made, and had gone to Troy and selected goods for the store. The judge looked on while they were being unloaded and finally asked, "Why, Anthony, where are the rum barrels?" "There aren't any," he answered. "You don't expect to keep store without rum, do you? If you don't 'treat,' nobody will trade with you," said the judge. "Well, then I'll close the store," was the reply. It was opened; the farmers would come in, look around, peer behind the counter, finally go down cellar and make a search, and then declare they would not trade at a temperance store; but, as they found here the best goods and lowest prices, with square dealing, they could not afford to go elsewhere and the store soon enjoyed a large business.
He hadn’t thought to talk about this with Judge McLean when they made their agreement, and he went to Troy to pick out goods for the store. The judge watched while they were being unloaded and finally asked, “Hey, Anthony, where are the rum barrels?” “There aren’t any,” he replied. “You don’t expect to run a store without rum, do you? If you don’t ‘treat,’ nobody will want to trade with you,” said the judge. “Well, then I’ll just close the store,” was the response. It was opened; the farmers would come in, look around, peek behind the counter, eventually go down to the cellar and search, then declare they wouldn’t trade at a temperance store; but since they found the best goods and the lowest prices with fair deals, they couldn’t afford to shop anywhere else, and the store quickly became very busy.
When it was decided to build a number of tenement houses, the judge said, "The men will not come to the 'raising' unless they can have their gin." "Then the houses will not be raised," replied Mr. Anthony, and sent out the invitations. His wife made great quantities of lemonade, "training-day" gingerbread, doughnuts and the best of tea and coffee. Everybody came, things went off finely, not an accident during the day and all went home sober, having learned, for the first time, that there could be a house-raising without liquor.
When they decided to build several apartment buildings, the judge said, "The guys won't show up for the 'raising' unless they get their drinks." "Then the houses won't be raised," Mr. Anthony replied, and sent out the invites. His wife prepared lots of lemonade, "training-day" gingerbread, doughnuts, and the best tea and coffee. Everyone showed up, everything went smoothly, there were no accidents that day, and everyone went home sober, realizing for the first time that a house-raising could happen without alcohol.

TEMPORARY HOME OF THE ANTHONYS, BATTENVILLE, N.Y., 1826 FROM A PHOTOGRAPH TAKEN IN 1897. SUSAN AND MERRITT IN FOREGROUND.
TEMPORARY HOME OF THE ANTHONYS, BATTENVILLE, N.Y., 1826 FROM A PHOTOGRAPH TAKEN IN 1897. SUSAN AND MERRITT IN FOREGROUND.
But the battle had to be fought continually. A saw-mill and a grist-mill were built and no man was employed who drank to excess. The tavern keeper, who had expected to reap a rich harvest from the factory, was very indignant at the temperance regulations. He put every temptation in the way of the mill-hands, but Daniel Anthony remained firm. Among his papers are found several letters of repentance and pledges from his men who had fallen from grace and wanted 019 another trial. He organized a temperance society, composed almost entirely of his men and women employes. The pledge, as was the custom, required "total abstinence from distilled liquor," but allowed wine and cider. He also established an evening school for them, many never having had any chance for an education, and it became unpopular not to attend. This was in session also a few hours on Sunday. It was taught by Mr. Anthony himself or his own family teacher without expense to the pupils. Everything about the factory was conducted with perfect system and order. Each man had a little garden around his house. Mr. Anthony looked upon his employes as his family and their mental and moral culture as a duty. Even thus early he was so strong an opponent of slavery that he made every effort to get cotton for his mills which was not produced by slave labor.
But the battle had to be fought constantly. A sawmill and a gristmill were built, and no one was hired who drank excessively. The tavern owner, who had expected to profit greatly from the factory, was very upset about the temperance rules. He tried to tempt the mill workers in every way, but Daniel Anthony stood firm. Among his papers are several letters of regret and pledges from his men who had slipped up and wanted 019 another chance. He organized a temperance society made up almost entirely of his men and women employees. The pledge, as was the custom, required "total abstinence from distilled liquor," but allowed wine and cider. He also created an evening school for them, many of whom had never had a chance at an education, and it became shameful not to attend. This school also held a few hours of sessions on Sunday. It was taught by Mr. Anthony himself or his family’s teacher at no cost to the students. Everything about the factory was run with perfect order and system. Each worker had a small garden around their house. Mr. Anthony saw his employees as his family and believed that their mental and moral development was his responsibility. Even this early on, he was such a strong opponent of slavery that he made every effort to source cotton for his mills that wasn’t produced by slave labor.
The only persons ever allowed to smoke or drink intoxicants in the Anthony home were Quaker preachers. The house was half-way between Danby, Vt., and Easton, N.Y., where the Quarterly Meetings were held and the preachers and elders stopped there on their way. In a closet under the stairs were a case of clay pipes, a paper of tobacco and demijohns of excellent gin and brandy, from which the "high seat" brothers were permitted to help themselves. It is not surprising to find in the annals that a dozen or more would drop in to get one of Mrs. Anthony's good dinners and the refreshments above mentioned.
The only people ever allowed to smoke or drink in the Anthony home were Quaker preachers. The house was located halfway between Danby, VT, and Easton, NY, where the Quarterly Meetings took place, and the preachers and elders would stop there on their way. In a closet under the stairs were a case of clay pipes, a pack of tobacco, and demijohns of excellent gin and brandy, from which the "high seat" brothers could help themselves. It’s not surprising to see in the records that a dozen or more would drop by for one of Mrs. Anthony's delicious dinners and the refreshments mentioned above.
In the spring of 1832 a brick-kiln was burned in preparation for the new house. Mrs. Anthony boarded ten or twelve brick-makers and some of the factory hands, with no help but that of her daughters Guelma, Susan and Hannah, aged fourteen, twelve and ten. When the new baby came, these three little girls did all the work, cooking the food and carrying it four or five steps up from the kitchen to the mother's room to let her see if it were nicely prepared and if the dinner-pails for the men were properly packed.
In the spring of 1832, a brick kiln was fired up in preparation for the new house. Mrs. Anthony provided boarding for ten or twelve brickmakers and some factory workers, with no help other than from her daughters Guelma, Susan, and Hannah, who were fourteen, twelve, and ten years old. When the new baby arrived, these three girls took care of everything, cooking the meals and carrying them just a few steps from the kitchen to their mother's room to show her if everything was well prepared and check if the men’s lunch pails were packed correctly.
Soon after this, Mr. Anthony remarked that one of the "spoolers" was ill and there was no one to do her work. Susan 020 and Hannah had spent many hours watching the factory girls, and at once raised a clamor to take the place of the sick "spooler." The mother objected, but the father, who always encouraged his children in their independent ideas, interceded and finally they were allowed to draw straws to decide which should go, the winner to divide her wages with the loser. The lot fell to Susan, who worked faithfully every day for two weeks and received full wages, $3. Hannah, with her $1.50, bought a green bead bag, then considered the crowning glory of a girl's wardrobe. Susan purchased half a dozen pale-blue coffee cups and saucers, which she had heard her mother wish for, and presented them to her with a happy heart.
Soon after this, Mr. Anthony mentioned that one of the "spoolers" was sick and there was no one to fill in for her. Susan 020 and Hannah had spent a lot of time watching the factory girls, and immediately started making noise about wanting to take the sick "spooler’s" place. Their mother was against it, but their father, who always supported his kids' independent ideas, stepped in and eventually they were allowed to draw straws to see who would go, with the winner promising to share her wages with the loser. The luck fell to Susan, who worked diligently every day for two weeks and earned full wages, $3. Hannah, with her $1.50, bought a green bead bag, which she considered the ultimate accessory for a girl’s wardrobe. Susan bought six light blue coffee cups and saucers that she knew her mother wanted, and happily gave them to her as a present.
The next summer the house was built, the finest in that part of the country, a two-and-a-half-story brick with fifteen rooms and all the conveniences then known. Quakers never celebrate Christmas, but the Anthonys, having lived now for seven years in a Presbyterian neighborhood, decided to give the children a Christmas party in the new home. The walls had a beautiful hard finish, the woodwork was tinted light green and the new flag-bottomed chairs were painted black. Between the rough boots of the country youths and the chairs pushed or tipped against the wall, both woodwork and plastering were almost ruined, and the new house carried a lasting reminder of the festivities.
The following summer, the house was built, the finest in that area of the country, a two-and-a-half-story brick structure with fifteen rooms and all the modern conveniences. Quakers don’t celebrate Christmas, but the Anthonys, having lived in a Presbyterian neighborhood for seven years, decided to throw a Christmas party for the kids in their new home. The walls had a beautiful hard finish, the woodwork was painted light green, and the new black-painted chairs had flag bottoms. Between the rough boots of the local young men and the chairs pushed or tipped against the wall, both the woodwork and plaster were nearly ruined, leaving the new house with a lasting reminder of the celebrations.
About this time Daniel Anthony was again brought under Quaker criticism. On one of his journeys to New York he had bought a camlet cloak with a big cape, as affording the best protection for the long, cold rides he had to take. The Friends declared this to be "out of plainness" and insisted that he leave off the cape and cease wearing a brightly colored handkerchief about his neck and ears. Daniel, who was beginning to be rather restive under these restraints, refused to comply, but, as he was a valuable member, it was finally decided here also to condone his offense.
About this time, Daniel Anthony faced criticism from the Quakers again. On one of his trips to New York, he purchased a camlet cloak with a large cape, which provided the best protection for the long, cold rides he had to make. The Friends said this was "out of plainness" and insisted he remove the cape and stop wearing a brightly colored handkerchief around his neck and ears. Daniel, who was becoming increasingly frustrated with these constraints, refused to comply, but since he was a valuable member, it was ultimately decided to overlook his offense.
Through all those years Lucy Anthony went to Quaker meeting with her husband. After public services were over, 021 however, and the shutters pulled up between the men's and the women's sides of the house for business meeting, she was rigidly barred out. She would take her children and walk about in the grave-yard outside while she waited for Daniel, but, as the graves were all in a row without even a headstone to distinguish them, this was not a very interesting pastime and the wait was long and tedious. When the little girls went with the father they also were shut out of the executive session where such momentous questions were discussed as, "Are Friends careful to keep themselves and their children from attending places of diversion?" "Are Friends careful to refrain from tale-bearing and detraction?" "Are Friends careful to send their children to school, and all children in their employ?"
For many years, Lucy Anthony attended Quaker meetings with her husband. Once the public services ended, 021 however, and the shutters were drawn between the men's and women's sections for the business meeting, she was strictly excluded. She would take her children and stroll around the graveyard outside while waiting for Daniel, but since the graves were all lined up without even a headstone to tell them apart, this wasn’t a very engaging way to pass the time, and the wait felt long and dull. When the little girls accompanied their father, they too were shut out from the executive session where important issues were discussed, such as, "Are Friends careful to keep themselves and their children from attending places of diversion?" "Are Friends careful to refrain from gossip and slander?" "Are Friends careful to send their children to school, and all children in their care?"
One cold day, the mother being detained at home, ten-year-old Susan received permission to go with her father. When the business meeting began, she curled up quietly in a corner by the stove, thinking to escape detection, but was spied out by one of the elders, a woman with green spectacles, who tip-toed down from the "high seat" and said, "Is thee a member?" "No, but my father is," replied Susan. "That will not do, thee will have to go out." "My mother told me to stay in." "Thy mother doesn't manage things here." "But my father told me to stay in." "Neither thy father nor thy mother can say what thee shall do here; thee will have to go out;" and taking the child by the arm she led her into the cold vestibule. After remaining there until almost frozen, Susan decided to go to the nearest neighbor's. When she opened the gate a big dog sprung fiercely upon her. Her screams brought out the family and she was taken into the house, where it was found the only injury was a large piece bitten out of the new Scotch plaid cloak which she had gone to meeting on purpose to exhibit. The affair created considerable excitement, Mr. and Mrs. Anthony were very indignant, and it ended in the father's making a "request" that his children be made members of the Society, which was done.
One cold day, with her mother stuck at home, ten-year-old Susan got permission to go with her dad. When the business meeting started, she curled up quietly in a corner by the stove, hoping to go unnoticed, but one of the elders, a woman with green glasses, spotted her. She tiptoed down from the "high seat" and said, "Are you a member?" "No, but my dad is," Susan replied. "That won’t work, you’ll need to leave." "My mom told me to stay in." "Your mom doesn't run things here." "But my dad told me to stay in." "Neither your dad nor your mom can decide what you do here; you have to go out," and taking the child by the arm, she led her into the cold vestibule. After being there until almost frozen, Susan decided to go to the nearest neighbor’s house. When she opened the gate, a big dog suddenly lunged at her. Her screams brought the family outside, and she was taken into the house, where they discovered the only damage was a large chunk taken out of the new plaid cloak she had worn to the meeting to show off. The incident caused quite a stir, Mr. and Mrs. Anthony were very upset, and it ended with the father making a "request" for his children to become members of the Society, which was granted.
Daniel Anthony was by nature a broad, progressive man, 022 and his family were not brought up according to the strictest and narrowest requirements of Quaker doctrine; while his wife, remembering the liberal teachings of her Universalist father and her own girlish love of youthful pastimes, went still further in making life pleasant for the children. Through her influence the daughters secured many a pretty article of wearing apparel, and, when there was a party whose hours were later than the father approved, the mother managed to have them spend the night with girls in the neighborhood.
Daniel Anthony was a broad-minded, progressive man, 022 and his family wasn't raised according to the strictest Quaker beliefs. His wife, remembering her liberal Universalist father's teachings and her own youthful love for fun, went even further to make life enjoyable for their kids. Thanks to her influence, the daughters got plenty of nice clothes, and when there was a party that ran later than their father liked, their mother found a way for them to spend the night with friends in the neighborhood.
When the family first moved to Battenville the children went to the little old-fashioned district school taught by a man in winter and a woman in summer. None of the men could teach Susan "long division" or understand why a girl should insist upon learning it. One of the women maintained discipline by means of her corset-board used as a ferule. As soon as Mr. Anthony finished the brick store he set apart one room upstairs for a private school, employed the best teachers to be had and admitted only such children as he wished to associate with his own. When the new house was built a large room was devoted to school purposes. This was the first in that neighborhood to have a separate seat for each pupil, and, although only a stool without a back, it was a vast improvement on the long bench running around the wall, the same height for big and little. The girls were taught sewing as carefully as reading and spelling, and Susan was noted for her skill with the needle. A sampler is still in existence which she made at the age of eleven, a fine specimen of needle-work with the family record surrounded by a wreath of strawberries all carefully wrought in crewels. There is also a bedquilt, the pieces sewed together with the fine "over-and-over" stitch, and there are ruffles hemmed with stitches so tiny they scarcely can be distinguished. An early teacher was a cousin, Nancy Howe,[4] who was followed by another cousin, Sarah Anthony, 023 a graduate of Rensselaer Quaker boarding-school. Among the teachers was Mary Perkins, just graduated from Miss Grant's seminary at Ipswich, Mass., and a pupil of Mary Lyon, founder of Mt. Holyoke. She was their first fashionably educated teacher and taught them to recite poems in concert, introduced school books with pictures, little black illustrations of Old Dog Tray, Mary and Her Lamb, etc., and gave them their first idea of calisthenics. She loved music, and wished to attend the village singing-school. Lucy Anthony sympathized with this desire and interceded for her, but Daniel decided it would be setting a bad example to the children and they would be wanting to sing.[5]
When the family first moved to Battenville, the kids attended the small, old-fashioned district school taught by a man in the winter and a woman in the summer. None of the men could teach Susan "long division" or understand why a girl would want to learn it. One of the women maintained discipline with her corset board, which she used as a ruler. As soon as Mr. Anthony finished building the brick store, he set aside one room upstairs for a private school, hired the best teachers available, and admitted only the children he wanted to associate with. When the new house was built, a large room was dedicated to school purposes. This was the first in the neighborhood to have a separate seat for each student; although it was just a stool without a back, it was a huge improvement over the long bench that ran around the wall, which was the same height for both big and small kids. The girls were taught sewing as carefully as reading and spelling, and Susan was known for her skills with the needle. A sampler she made at the age of eleven still exists; it’s a beautiful piece of needlework with the family record surrounded by a wreath of strawberries, all carefully crafted in crewel. There’s also a bed quilt, with pieces sewn together using the fine "over-and-over" stitch, and ruffles hemmed with stitches so small they can hardly be seen. One of the early teachers was her cousin, Nancy Howe,[4] followed by another cousin, Sarah Anthony, 023, who graduated from Rensselaer Quaker boarding school. Among the teachers was Mary Perkins, who had just graduated from Miss Grant's seminary in Ipswich, Mass., and was a student of Mary Lyon, the founder of Mt. Holyoke. She was their first properly educated teacher, and she taught them to recite poems together, introduced schoolbooks with pictures, such as little black illustrations of Old Dog Tray, Mary and Her Lamb, etc., and gave them their first exposure to calisthenics. She loved music and wanted to attend the village singing school. Lucy Anthony supported this desire and advocated for her, but Daniel decided it would set a bad example for the kids, making them want to sing.[5]
Into this commodious home Lucy Anthony brought her aged father and mother, and carefully tended them until the death of both within the same year, aged eighty-four. In May, 1834, came the first great sorrow, the death of little Eliza, aged two years, and the mother was heart-broken. Her life was centered in her children, and she could not be reconciled to giving up even one. After her own death, nearly fifty years later, in her box of most sacredly guarded keepsakes, was found a little faded pink dress of the dear child's which many times had been moistened with the mother's tears.
Into this spacious home, Lucy Anthony welcomed her elderly parents and took care of them until they both passed away within the same year, at the age of eighty-four. In May 1834, the first great tragedy struck with the death of little Eliza, who was only two years old, leaving her mother heartbroken. Her life revolved around her children, and she couldn't accept losing even one of them. After her own death nearly fifty years later, a little faded pink dress belonging to her cherished child was discovered in her box of precious keepsakes, having often been dampened by the mother's tears.
The children continued to attend this private school, and as Guelma and Susan reached the age of fifteen, each in turn was installed as teacher in summer when there were only young pupils. The factory now was at the height of prosperity; there was only one larger in all that part of the country, and Daniel Anthony was looked upon as a wealthy man. He was much criticised for allowing his daughters to teach, as in those days no woman worked for wages except from pressing necessity; but he was far enough in advance of his time to believe that every girl should be trained to self-support. In 1837, writing 024 to Guelma at boarding-school, he urges her to accept the offer of the principal to remain through the winter as an assistant:
The children continued to go to this private school, and when Guelma and Susan turned fifteen, each took turns as teachers during the summer when there were only younger students. The factory was now thriving; there was only one larger in the whole area, and Daniel Anthony was seen as a wealthy man. He faced a lot of criticism for letting his daughters teach, since back then, no woman worked for pay unless absolutely necessary. Still, he was ahead of his time, believing that every girl should be prepared to support herself. In 1837, while writing 024 to Guelma at boarding school, he encouraged her to accept the principal's offer to stay through the winter as an assistant:
I am fully of the belief that shouldst thou never teach school a single day afterwards, thou wouldst ever feel to justify thy course.... Thou wouldst seem to me to be laying the foundation for thy far greater usefulness. Thy remaining through the winter, must, however, be left solely to thyself, as it would be of little avail for thee to stay and not be contented. Thy home, Guelma, is just the same as when thou left it, and shouldst thou decide to spend the winter months away, we will try to keep it the same until thy return in the spring. Let me know if thou canst be content to remain away a few months longer from thy mother's kitchen.
I really believe that even if you never teach again, you'll always feel good about your decision. It seems like you're creating a foundation for something much more valuable. However, whether you stay through the winter is completely up to you, because staying won’t help if you’re not happy. Your home, Guelma, is just as you left it, and if you decide to spend the winter away, we’ll do our best to keep it just as it is until you come back in the spring. Let me know if you can manage to stay away from your mother's kitchen for a few more months.

Daniel Anthony
Daniel Anthony
In the winter of 1837, at the age of seventeen, Susan taught in the family of Doris and Huldah Deliverge, at Easton, a few miles from Battenville, for $1 a week and board. The next summer she taught a district school at the neighboring village, Reid's Corners, for $1.50 a week and "boarded round," and proud was she to earn what was then considered excellent wages for a woman. In the fall she joined Guelma at boarding-school. The little circular, yellow with age, reads:
In the winter of 1837, at seventeen, Susan taught in the family of Doris and Huldah Deliverge in Easton, just a few miles from Battenville, for $1 a week plus meals. The following summer, she taught at a local school in Reid's Corners for $1.50 a week and "boarded around," feeling proud to earn what was then seen as great pay for a woman. In the fall, she joined Guelma at boarding school. The small circular, yellowed with age, reads:
DEBORAH MOULSON, having obtained an agreeable location in the pleasant village of Hamilton, in the vicinity of Philadelphia, intends, with the assistance of competent Teachers, to open immediately a Seminary for Females....
DEBORAH MOULSON has discovered a lovely location in the quaint village of Hamilton, near Philadelphia, and intends to soon open a girls' school with the assistance of qualified teachers....
Terms, $125 per annum, for boarding and tuition....
Cost: $125 a year for boarding and tuition....
The inculcation of the principles of Humility, Morality and a love of Virtue, will receive particular attention.
The curriculum will mainly emphasize the principles of humility, morality, and a love of virtue.

THE BATTENVILLE HOME, BUILT IN 1833. FROM A PHOTOGRAPH TAKEN IN 1897
THE BATTENVILLE HOME, BUILT IN 1833. FROM A PHOTOGRAPH TAKEN IN 1897
This was Susan's first long absence from home, and her letters and journals give a good idea of the thoughts and feelings of a girl at boarding-school in those days. She developed then the "letter-writing habit," which has clung to her through life. The letters of that time were laborious affairs, often 025 consuming days in the writing, commencing even to children, "Respected Daughter," or "Son," and rarely exceeding one or two pages. They were written with a quill pen on foolscap paper, and almost wholly devoted to the weather and the sickness in the family. The amount of the latter would be appalling to modern households. The women's letters were written in infinitesimal characters, it being considered unladylike to write a large hand. The Anthonys were exceptional letter-writers. It cost eighteen cents to send a letter, but Daniel Anthony was postmaster at Battenville, and his family had free use of the mails. If he had had postage to pay on all of homesick Susan's epistles it would have cost him a good round sum. The rules of the school required these to be written on the slate, submitted to the teacher and then carefully copied by the pupil, so it is not unusual to find that a letter was five or six days in preparation. For the same reason it is impossible to tell how much sincerity there is in the frequent references to the "dear teacher" and the "most excellent school." The "stilted" style of Susan's letters is most amusing.[6] A few extracts will illustrate:
This was Susan's first long absence from home, and her letters and journals provide a clear glimpse into the thoughts and feelings of a girl in boarding school back then. During this time, she developed the "letter-writing habit," which stayed with her throughout her life. Writing letters was a laborious task, often taking days to complete. They would start with addresses like "Respected Daughter" or "Son," and rarely exceeded one or two pages. The letters were penned with a quill on foolscap paper, mainly discussing the weather and any illnesses in the family. The frequency of the latter would be shocking to today's families. Women wrote in tiny letters, as it was deemed unladylike to use a larger handwriting. The Anthonys stood out as exceptional letter-writers. Sending a letter cost eighteen cents, but Daniel Anthony was the postmaster in Battenville, so his family could mail letters for free. If he had to pay postage on all of homesick Susan's letters, it would have added up to quite a bit. The school rules required letters to be written on a slate, reviewed by the teacher, and then carefully copied by the student, so it was not unusual for a letter to take five or six days to prepare. For the same reason, it's hard to gauge the sincerity behind the frequent mentions of the "dear teacher" and the "most excellent school." The "stilted" style of Susan's letters is quite amusing.[6] Here are a few excerpts to illustrate:
I regret that Brothers and Sisters have not the privilege of attending a school better adapted to their improvement, both in Science and Morality; surely a District School (unless they have recently reformed) is not an appropriate place for the cultivation of the latter, although in the former they may make some partial progress. Deborah has not determined to relinquish this school, although she has not yet ascertained whether the income from it will be equal to the expenditures; but if it should continue I shall have a wish for Hannah and Mary to attend; as I think another one can not be named so agreeable on all accounts as is Deborah Moulson's at Hamilton.
I regret that the Brothers and Sisters don't have the opportunity to attend a school that's better suited for their development in both Science and Morality. A District School (unless it has changed recently) is definitely not the right atmosphere for promoting the latter, although they might make some minimal progress in the former. Deborah hasn’t decided to leave this school yet, even though she hasn't figured out if the income will cover the costs. However, if it remains open, I would like Hannah and Mary to attend because I believe there isn't a better option than Deborah Moulson's school in Hamilton.

Lucy Anthony
Lucy Anthony
One may imagine that Susan got several credit marks when her teacher corrected this on the slate. The lecturer on philosophy and science came up from Philadelphia, and Susan tells her parents that "he is quite an interesting man," and that "his lecture on Philosophy was far more entertaining than I had dared to anticipate." Of the science lecture she says:
One might think that Susan received a lot of credit when her teacher corrected this on the board. The lecturer on philosophy and science came from Philadelphia, and Susan tells her parents that "he is a really interesting guy," and that "his lecture on Philosophy was way more entertaining than I expected." About the science lecture, she says:
He had a microscope through which we had the pleasure of viewing the dust from the wings of a butterfly, each minute particle of which appeared as large as a common fly. He mentioned several very interesting circumstances; but I must defer particularizing them until I can have the privilege of verbally communicating them to my dear friends at Battenville. Guelma joins with me in wishing love distributed to all.
He had a microscope that allowed us to see the dust from a butterfly's wings, with each tiny particle appearing as large as a regular fly. He shared several fascinating details, but I’ll need to hold off discussing them until I can chat with my dear friends in Battenville. Guelma and I both send our love to everyone.
Again she writes:
Once more, she writes:
Beloved Parents: The second Seventh day of my short stay in Hamilton arrives and finds me scarcely capable of informing you how the intervening moments have been employed; but I hope they have not passed without some improvement. Indeed, we should all improve, perceptibly too, were we to attend to the instructions which are here given, for the advancement both of moral and literary pursuits. May I improve in both; but it is far easier for us to perceive where others should reform, than to observe and correct our own imperfections, while perhaps our failings are completely disgusting in the sight of others. I find it very difficult leaving off old habits so as to have a vacuum for the formation of those which are new and more advantageous.
Dear Parents, It’s now the second Saturday since I arrived in Hamilton, and I can hardly explain how I’ve spent my time since my last letter; but I hope it hasn’t gone by without some personal growth. In fact, we would all see clear benefits if we paid attention to the advice here for improving our morals and literary skills. I want to grow in both areas; however, it’s much easier to notice where others need to improve than to recognize and correct our own shortcomings, which can be really off-putting. I struggle to break old habits and make room for the development of new and better ones.
My letter will be short this week and I can assign no other cause than that my ideas do not freely flow. The difference in weather is quite material between this and our northern clime. Snow commenced falling about 12 o'clock to-day and continued till evening; but, Father, it was not such a storm as the one in which we travelled during the second day of our journey to the beautiful and sequestered shades of Hamilton. The cause of my neglecting to write last week was not the absence of this mind from home, but that it is obliged to occupy every moment in studies.
This letter will be short because my thoughts aren’t flowing easily this week. The weather difference between here and our home up north is quite obvious. It started snowing around noon today and continued until evening; but, Dad, it wasn’t as bad as the storm we dealt with on the second day of our trip to the beautiful, isolated area of Hamilton. The reason I didn’t write last week wasn’t because my mind was elsewhere, but because I had to dedicate all my time to studying.
A fire in Philadelphia gives her an opportunity for this bit of description:
A fire in Philadelphia gives her a chance for this description:
I was requested, 5th day evening last, about 7 o'clock, by one of the scholars, to step out and view the Aurora Borealis, which she said was extremely brilliant and beautiful. When there I looked towards the north, but discovered no light, and then to the zenith, which was indeed very magnificent; "but," said I, "that does not look like the Aurora, it is more like the light from a fire," and upon investigation we found it so to be. The 027 light appeared in the east, we walked in that direction, when we beheld the flames bursting forth in stupendous grandeur. Not a bell was heard, all was calm, with the exception of the minds of some of the scholars whose parents resided in the city. The scene indeed would have been to the eye extremely pleasing, were it not for the reflection that some of our fellow-beings were about being deprived of a home, and perhaps lives also. We learned a few minutes after witnessing this phenomena that the fire was occasioned by the conflagration of a large board yard near Market Street Bridge.
On the evening of the 5th, around 7 PM, one of the students asked me to step outside to see the Northern Lights, which she said were very bright and beautiful. When I got there, I looked north but saw no light, then looked up, which was actually quite amazing; "but," I said, "that doesn't look like the Northern Lights, it looks more like the light from a fire," and upon checking, we confirmed it was true. The 027 light appeared in the east, so we walked that way and saw the flames erupting in stunning beauty. There was complete silence, everything was calm, except for the worried thoughts of some students whose parents lived in the city. The scene would have been beautiful if it weren't for the realization that some of our fellow humans were about to lose their homes, and possibly their lives as well. We found out a few minutes after seeing this that the fire was caused by a large lumber yard burning near Market Street Bridge.
After many affectionate messages, she says:
After a lot of sweet messages, she says:
I have not had but one real homesick fit and that was one week from the night Father left us. I felt then as if I were taking leave of him again; in fact the tears have come into my eyes as I write that last sentence; but do not suppose I carry a gloomy countenance all the time, far be it from that, yet oft I think seriously of home and the endearing ties which bind us together. Father, we will look at the sentiments, and not the Orthography and Grammar of thy letters, in which I did discover some errors.
I only felt truly homesick once, and that was a week after Dad left us. At that moment, it felt like I was saying goodbye to him again; I even got teary-eyed as I wrote that last sentence. But don’t assume I walk around looking sad all the time—that’s not the case at all. Still, I often ponder home and the loving bonds that keep us connected. Dad, let’s concentrate on the emotions in your letters, not the spelling and grammar, even though I did catch some errors.
She frequently admits that her sister admonishes her, "Susan, thee writes too much; thee should learn to be concise," but she delights in letter-writing and says:
She often admits that her sister tells her, "Susan, you write too much; you should learn to be concise," but she enjoys writing letters and says:
Most of the girls are taking a walk this First day afternoon, but I did not feel like enjoying myself by accompanying them as well as in holding sweet communion in writing with those inestimable friends I so dearly love, and arranging those thoughts in a manner congenial to our feelings.... The query naturally arises, at least to the thoughtful mind, How has our time since the last Annual revolution of the Earth been employed? Have our minds become improved from passing occurences, or do they remain in that dormant-like state which so often degrades the human soul?
Most of the girls are going for a walk this afternoon, but I didn't feel like joining them for fun. Instead, I wanted to have a meaningful time writing to my dear friends that I love so much and organizing my thoughts in a way that captures our feelings. It raises a question, at least for those who ponder it: How have we spent our time since the last trip around the sun? Have we grown mentally through our experiences, or do we remain stuck in that place that often drags down the human spirit?
She comes down from her lofty heights far enough to add, "It would have afforded us the greatest pleasure imaginable to have dined on that Goose in company with you on New Year's day." It is Susan's diary, however, which affords the most satisfactory glimpses of her true character, serious, devotional, deeply conscientious and strong in affection:
She comes down from her high perch long enough to add, "It would have given us the greatest pleasure imaginable to have dined on that Goose with you on New Year's Day." However, it's Susan's diary that offers the most satisfying insights into her true character—serious, devoted, deeply conscientious, and strong in affection:
Five weeks have been spent in Hamilton and to what purpose? Has my mind advanced either in Virtue or Literature? I fear that every moment has not been profitably spent. O, may this careless mind be more watchful in the future! O, may the many warnings which we every day receive, tend to make me more attentive to what is right!
I've spent five weeks in Hamilton, but for what purpose? Has my mind made any real progress in virtue or learning? I fear that not every moment has been spent wisely. Oh, how I wish this careless mind would be more focused in the future! Oh, may the many warnings we receive each day inspire me to pay closer attention to what is right!
We were cautioned by our dear Teacher to-day to beware of self-esteem and of all signs that would indicate an untruth. We were referred to the condition of Ananias and Sapphira, who intended to deceive the Apostle. Would that I were wholly free from that same Evil Spirit which tempted those persons in ancient times. The Spirit of Truth must have dominion in the mind in order to attain a state of happiness.
Our dear Teacher warned us today to be cautious of arrogance and any signs of dishonesty. We were reminded of the story of Ananias and Sapphira, who tried to deceive the Apostle. I wish I could be completely free from that same Evil Spirit that tempted those people ages ago. The Spirit of Truth must have control over the mind to achieve true happiness.
Resolves and resolves fill up my time. I resolve at night to do better on the morrow, and when the morrow comes and I mingle with my companions all the resolutions are obliterated.... In the afternoon of Seventh day Deborah accompanied the scholars to Town and visited the Academy of Arts and Sciences; beautiful indeed was the sight. Nature, how bounteous and varied are thy works! On beholding the splendid scene I was ready to exclaim, "O, Miracle of Miracles," with the celebrated Naturalist when speaking of the metamorphoses of insects.
Resolutions and commitments fill my time. I tell myself at night that I’ll do better the next day, but when tomorrow comes and I'm hanging out with my friends, all those promises disappear... On Saturday afternoon, Deborah took the students downtown to visit the Academy of Arts and Sciences; it was really a beautiful sight. Nature, how generous and diverse are your creations! As I soaked in the breathtaking view, I felt like shouting, "Oh, Miracle of Miracles," just like the well-known naturalist did when discussing the transformations of insects.
Her eyes troubled her then, as all through life, and in grieving over it she says: "Often does their non-conformance mortify this frail heart when attempting to read in class.... I arose at half-past five this morning. [January 15.] I find it so much more advantageous." But the next day she sleeps till half-past six and laments the fact.
Her eyes bothered her then, just like they always had, and while reflecting on it, she says: "Their non-conformance often frustrates my fragile heart when I try to read in class.... I got up at 5:30 this morning. [January 15.] I find it so much more beneficial." But the next day, she sleeps until 6:30 and regrets it.
Received a severe reproof from Deborah this evening on account of the listlessness which prevailed in the school, also the immorality of some of the pupils' minds. O, that I could feel perfectly clear of all the deviations which have been enumerated. O, Morality, that I could say I possessed thy charms! O, the happiness of an innocent mind, would that I could say mine was so, but it is too far from it. I think so much of my resolutions to do better that even my dreams are filled with these desires.
This evening, Deborah gave me a serious talk about the low energy at school and the unethical thoughts some students have. I really wish I could be free from all the mistakes pointed out! Oh, Morality, if only I could claim to have your qualities! The happiness of having a pure mind—if only I could say mine was like that, but it's too far off. I'm so focused on my goals for improvement that even my dreams are filled with these ambitions.
The sin thus bitterly bewailed consisted in neglecting to use "thee" and "thou" in addressing her schoolmates. She would wake up in the night and mourn over it. One would judge from Deborah's continual lectures that the school was made up of a lot of desperately wicked girls sent her to be reformed, instead of a band of demure and saintly little Quaker maidens. On the 31st Susan writes:
The sin she lamented so much was not using "thee" and "thou" when talking to her classmates. She would wake up in the middle of the night and grieve over it. One might think from Deborah's constant lectures that the school was filled with a bunch of irredeemably bad girls sent there to be fixed, rather than a group of modest and angelic little Quaker girls. On the 31st, Susan writes:
Our class has not recited in Philosophy, Chemistry or Physiology, nor have we read, since the 20th of this month, for the reason of there being such a departure among the scholars from the paths of rectitude.
Our class hasn’t discussed Philosophy, Chemistry, or Physiology, and we haven’t read anything since the 20th of this month, because there’s been a lot of distraction among the students from the right path.
Later she records that a new teacher has arrived "to relieve Deborah of some of her bodily labors," that "he is a stern-looking man," and that she was "somewhat mortified that she could not give him the desired definition of compendiums."
Later she notes that a new teacher has arrived "to help relieve Deborah of some of her physical tasks," that "he is a stern-looking man," and that she was "a bit embarrassed that she couldn't provide him with the proper definition of compendiums."
The woman who sells molasses candy has been here, but when she leaves she does not carry the confusion with her which she causes.... Deborah requested eight of us larger girls to remain last evening, for the purpose of reproving us. The cause was the levity and mirthfulness which were displayed on Third day of the week previous. She compared us to Judas Iscariot, who betrayed his master with a kiss. She said there were those amongst us who would surely have to suffer deep affliction for not attending to the manifestations of truth within.—I have been guilty of much levity and nonsensical conversation and have also permitted thoughts to occupy my mind which should have been far distant, but I do not consider myself as having committed any wilful offence. Perhaps the reason I can not see my own defects is because my heart is hardened. O, may it become more and more refined until nothing shall remain but perfect purity.
The woman selling molasses candy has been here, but when she leaves, she doesn’t take the confusion she causes with her.... Deborah asked eight of us older girls to stay last night to scold us. The reason was the lightheartedness and laughter we displayed on last week’s Third Day. She compared us to Judas Iscariot, who betrayed his master with a kiss. She said some of us would have to endure serious suffering for ignoring the truths inside. —I’ve been guilty of being too silly and getting involved in pointless conversations, and I’ve also let my mind wander to thoughts that should have been far away, but I don’t see myself as having done anything intentionally wrong. Maybe the reason I can’t recognize my own faults is that my heart is hardened. Oh, may it become more refined until nothing remains but perfect purity.
2nd mo. 11th day.—First day evening Deborah came down and sat with us. In a few moments she called for her Bible, and in a short time she read, "Jesus wept;" and then, after a long pause, she said, "There are those present who, if they do not attend to what has been said to them, will have their strings shortened, even as short as this verse." This she said after having inquired on what subject Abraham Loire preached in the morning and none of us was able to tell.
February 11th.—On Sunday evening, Deborah came down and sat with us. After a few moments, she asked for her Bible, and soon she read, "Jesus wept;" then, after a long pause, she said, "There are people here who, if they don't pay attention to what they’ve been told, will have their strings cut short, just like this verse." She said this after asking what topic Abraham Loire preached about in the morning, and none of us could tell.
2nd mo. 12th day.—Deborah came down in the afternoon to examine our writing. She looked at M.'s and gave her a severe reproof; she then looked at C.'s and said nothing. I, thinking I had improved very much, offered mine for her to examine. She took it and pointed out some of the best words as those which were not well written, and then she asked me the rule for dotting an i, and I acknowledged that I did not know. She then said it was no wonder she had undergone so much distress in mind and body, and that her time had been devoted to us in vain. This was like an Electrical shock to me. I rushed upstairs to my room where, without restraint, I could give vent to my tears. She said the same as that I had been the cause of the great obstruction in the school. If I am such a vile sinner, I would that I might feel it myself. Indeed I do consider myself such a bad creature that I can not see any who seems worse.—And we had a new scholar to witness this scene!
February 12th.—Deborah came down in the afternoon to review our writing. She looked at M.'s work and gave her a harsh reprimand; then she looked at C.'s work and said nothing. Thinking I had improved a lot, I offered mine for her to review. She took it and pointed out some of the best words as being poorly written, and then she asked me the rule for dotting an i, and I admitted that I didn’t know. She then said it was no surprise that she had experienced so much distress in mind and body, and that her time had been wasted on us. This hit me like an electric shock. I rushed upstairs to my room where I could cry freely. She said that I had been the cause of the major disruption in the school. If I am such a terrible person, I wish I could feel that myself. I really do think I’m so bad that I can’t see anyone who seems worse.—And we had a new student to witness this scene!
Think of causing all this anguish and humiliation to a young girl because she did not know the rule for dotting an i!
Think about making a young girl suffer so much and feel so ashamed just because she didn't know how to dot an i!
2nd mo. 15th day.—This day I call myself eighteen. It seems impossible that I can be so old, and even at this age I find myself possessed of no more 030 knowledge than I ought to have had at twelve. Dr. Allen, a Phrenologist, gave us a short lecture this morning and examined a few heads, mine among them. He described only the good organs and said nothing of the bad. I should like to know the whole truth.
February 15th.—Today I turn eighteen. It’s hard to believe I’m this old, and even at this age, I feel like I don’t know much more than I did at twelve. Dr. Allen, a phrenologist, gave us a short talk this morning and examined a few heads, including mine. He only focused on the positive traits and didn’t mention any of the negatives. I would really like to know the whole truth.
Susan relates with a good deal of satisfaction that she has written a letter to a schoolmate at home, without putting it on the slate for the teacher to see. A few days later Deborah sends for her. She "went down with cheerfulness," but what was her astonishment to see Deborah with the intercepted letter open in her hand! Susan closes her account of the interview by saying, "Little did I think, when I was writing that letter, that I was committing such an enormous crime."
Susan happily shares that she wrote a letter to a classmate back home without letting the teacher see it on the slate. A few days later, Deborah calls for her. She "went down feeling cheerful," but she was shocked to see Deborah holding the intercepted letter open in her hand! Susan finishes her story about the meeting by saying, "I never thought, while writing that letter, that I was committing such a huge crime."
Learning that a young friend had married a widower with six children, she comments in her diary, "I should think any female would rather live and die an old maid." She has a cold and cough for which Deborah gives her a "Carthartick," followed by some "Laudanum in a silver spoon." "The beautiful spring weather," she says, "inhales me with fresh vigor." She sees some spiderwebs in the schoolroom and, her domestic habits asserting themselves, gets a broom and mounts the desks to sweep them down, "little thinking of the mortification and tears it was to occasion." Finally she steps upon Deborah's desk and breaks the hinges on the lid. That personage is informed by an assistant teacher and arrives on the scene:
Learning that a young friend had married a widower with six kids, she writes in her diary, "I would think any woman would prefer to live and die a single lady." She has a cold and cough for which Deborah gives her a "Carthartick," followed by some "Laudanum in a silver spoon." "The beautiful spring weather," she says, "fills me with fresh energy." She notices some spiderwebs in the classroom and, with her domestic instincts kicking in, grabs a broom and climbs up on the desks to sweep them away, "not realizing how embarrassing and upsetting it would turn out to be." Finally, she steps onto Deborah's desk and breaks the hinges on the lid. Deborah is informed by an assistant teacher and arrives at the scene:
"Deborah, I have broken your desk." She appeared not to notice me, walked over, examined the desk and asked the teacher who broke it. "What! Susan Anthony step on my desk! I would not have set a child upon it," she said, and much more which I can not write. "How came you to step on it?" she asked, but I was too full to speak and rushed from the room in tears. That evening, after we read in the Testament, she said that where there was no desire for moral improvement there would be no improvement in reading. There was one by the side of her who had not desired moral improvement and had made no advancement in Literature.
"Deborah, I broke your desk." She didn't seem to notice me, walked over, checked the desk, and asked the teacher who broke it. "What! Susan Anthony stepped on my desk! I wouldn’t have let a kid on it," she said, along with a lot more that I can’t write down. "How did you end up stepping on it?" she asked, but I was too upset to answer and rushed out of the room in tears. That evening, after we read from the Testament, she said that without a desire for moral improvement, there won’t be any progress in reading. There was someone next to her who didn’t want to improve morally and hadn’t made any progress in Literature.
This deliberate cruelty to one whose heart was bursting with sorrow and regret! "Never will this day be forgotten," says the diary. In speaking of this incident Miss Anthony said: "Not once, in all the sixty years that have passed, has the 031 thought of that day come to my mind without making me turn cold and sick at heart."
This intentional cruelty toward someone whose heart was full of sorrow and regret! "I will never forget this day," says the diary. Reflecting on this incident, Miss Anthony stated, "Not once in all the sixty years that have passed has the 031 memory of that day come to my mind without making me feel cold and sick at heart."
On one occasion when a composition had been severely criticised, Susan blazed forth the inquiry why she always was censured and her sister praised. "Because," was the reply, "thy sister Guelma does the best she is capable of, but thou dost not. Thou hast greater abilities and I demand of thee the best of thy capacity." Throughout this little record are continual expressions of the pain of separation from the dear home, of keen disappointment if the expected letter fails to come, and most affectionate references to the beloved parents, brothers and sisters. Even the austere Deborah is mentioned always with respect and kindness for, notwithstanding her frequent censure, she inspired the girls with love and reverence.
On one occasion when a piece had been heavily criticized, Susan erupted with the question of why she was always criticized while her sister was praised. "Because," came the response, "your sister Guelma does the best she can, but you don't. You have greater abilities, and I expect the best from you." Throughout this small record, there are constant expressions of the pain of being away from home, deep disappointment when the expected letter doesn’t arrive, and lots of loving mentions of the cherished parents, brothers, and sisters. Even the strict Deborah is always referred to with respect and kindness because, despite her frequent criticism, she inspired the girls with love and admiration.
Subsequent events show that this lady was failing rapidly with consumption. Among the old letters, one from an assistant teacher to Daniel Anthony, dated 1839, a year after Susan left school, says: "The tender chord that so long confined our beloved Deborah to this world was broken on the 25th day of the 4th month, and we trust her happy spirit took its flight to realms of eternal felicity." Deborah Moulson was a cultured and estimable woman, but she represented the spirit of that age toward childhood, one of chilling severity and constant repression, when reproof was as liberally administered as praise was conscientiously withheld.
Subsequent events show that this woman was quickly declining from tuberculosis. Among the old letters, one from an assistant teacher to Daniel Anthony, dated 1839, a year after Susan left school, says: "The tender bond that had kept our beloved Deborah in this world was broken on the 25th day of the 4th month, and we trust her happy spirit ascended to realms of eternal joy." Deborah Moulson was an educated and admirable woman, but she embodied the attitudes of that time towards childhood, which were marked by harshness and constant repression, where criticism was given freely while praise was rarely offered.
[4] Sixty-five years later, this cousin, Nancy Howe Clark, aged eighty-seven, wrote Miss Anthony:
[4] Sixty-five years later, this cousin, Nancy Howe Clark, now eighty-seven, wrote to Miss Anthony:
"The year I spent at your father's was the happiest of my whole long life. How well I remember the sweet voices saying 'Cousin Nancy,' and the affectionate way in which I was received by your dear father and mother. It had never been my fortune before to live in a household with an educated man at its head, and I felt a little shy of your father but soon found there was no occasion. Although it was a period of great financial depression, he always found time to be social and kindly in his family. He seemed to have an eye for everything, his business, the school and every good work. I considered your father and mother a model husband and wife and found it hard to leave such a loving home."
"The year I spent at your dad's was the happiest of my entire life. I can still hear the sweet voices calling out 'Cousin Nancy,' and I remember how warmly I was welcomed by your wonderful mom and dad. I had never before lived in a home with an educated man at the helm, and I felt a bit nervous around your dad at first, but I quickly realized there was no need to be. Even during a time of serious financial struggle, he always took the time to be friendly and caring with his family. He seemed to keep an eye on everything—his business, the school, and all the good things happening around him. I saw your mom and dad as the perfect couple and found it really hard to leave such a loving home."
CHAPTER III.
FINANCIAL CRASH—THE TEACHER.
1838—1845.
The prosperous days of the Anthonys were drawing to a close. All manufacturing industries of the country were in a ruinous state. The unsound condition of the banks with their depreciated and fluctuating currency had created financial chaos. Overproduction of cotton goods on a credit basis, inordinate speculation, reduction of duties on importations, produced the inevitable result, and the commercial world began to totter on its foundations. The final ruin is foreshadowed in the letters of Daniel Anthony. In one to his brother September 2, 1837, he says:
The good times for the Anthonys were coming to an end. All the manufacturing industries in the country were in a disastrous state. The shaky condition of the banks, with their devalued and unstable currency, had caused financial chaos. Overproduction of cotton goods based on credit, excessive speculation, and lower import duties led to the inevitable consequences, causing the commercial landscape to begin to wobble. The eventual downfall is hinted at in the letters of Daniel Anthony. In one to his brother on September 2, 1837, he writes:
I am going next week on a tour of the eastern cities and when I return shall be prepared to face the situation. My goods at present will not sell for the actual cost of manufacturing. Van Buren's message has just made its appearance. It is opposed to banks and may operate unfavorably to business, but how it can be worse I don't know.
I'm taking a trip to the eastern cities next week, and when I return, I'll be prepared to handle the situation. At the moment, my products aren’t even selling for the cost to produce them. Van Buren's message has just been released. It’s against banks and could harm business, but honestly, I don’t see how things could get any worse.
He writes from Washington to his wife, September 11:
He writes to his wife from Washington on September 11:
I arrived last evening—came in R. Road cars from Baltimore, 39 miles, in two hours, over a barren and almost uncultivated tract of country. The public buildings and one street called Pennsylvania Avenue are all that are worth mention in this place.... As a specimen of some of the big finery in the town, I will name one room in Martin's [Van Buren's] house, 90 ft. by 42, the furniture of which cost $22,000.... Our Congressmen are some like other folks, they look out first for themselves. They have spent most of this day in debating whether they shall be paid in specie.... There are Black Folks in abundance here, but they don't act as if they were even under the pressure of hard times, much less the cruelties that we hear of slaves having to bear.
I arrived last night—traveled by rail from Baltimore, 39 miles, in two hours, through a dry and mostly unused area. The public buildings and one street called Pennsylvania Avenue are pretty much the only notable things in this place... To highlight some of the luxury around, there's a room in Martin's [Van Buren's] house, 90 ft. by 42, and the furniture in that room costs $22,000.... Our Congress members are just like anyone else; they mainly look out for themselves. They've spent most of the day debating whether they should be paid in specie.... There are a lot of Black people here, but they don’t seem to be struggling, let alone dealing with the cruelty we hear about slaves facing.
From New York he writes his brother:
From New York, he writes to his brother:
Such times in everything that pertains to business never were known in this land before. To-day I have passed through Pine street and have not seen one single box or bale of goods of any kind whatever. Last year at this time a person could scarcely go through the street without clambering over goods of all descriptions. A truck cart loaded with merchandise is now a rare object. A bale of goods can not be sold at any price. The countenances of all our best business men are stretched out in a perpendicular direction and when the times will let them come back into human shape not even the wisest pretend to guess. Those that are out of all speculative and ever-changing business may consider themselves in a Paradismal state.
We've never seen times like this in business in this country before. Today, I walked down Pine Street and didn’t see a single box or bale of goods. Last year around this time, you could barely walk without tripping over all sorts of merchandise. A truck full of products is now a rare sight. You can’t sell a bale of goods for any price. The top business people look stressed and exhausted, and no one knows when things will return to normal. Those who are out of speculative and ever-changing businesses might as well think of themselves as being in paradise.
In the spring of 1838 he writes to Guelma and Susan, at that time twenty and eighteen years of age, to know if they feel that they possibly can go alone from Philadelphia to New York, where he will join them and bring them home; but evidently they decide they can not, for Susan's journal speaks of "the happy moment when they run to the gate to meet him." On the journey he tells them that his business is ruined, they can not return to school and will have to give up their beautiful and beloved new home. In recalling those times Miss Anthony says that never in all her long life did she see such agony as her father passed through during the dreadful days which followed. All that he had accumulated in a lifetime of hard work and careful planning was swept away, and there was scarcely a spot of solid ground upon which he could plant his feet to begin the struggle once more.
In the spring of 1838, he writes to Guelma and Susan, who are then twenty and eighteen years old, to see if they feel they can travel alone from Philadelphia to New York, where he will meet them and take them home. But clearly, they decide they can't, as Susan's journal mentions "the happy moment when they run to the gate to meet him." During the trip, he tells them that his business is destroyed, they can't return to school, and they will have to give up their beautiful and cherished new home. Reflecting on those days, Miss Anthony says that she never witnessed such agony as her father endured during the terrible days that followed. Everything he had built over a lifetime of hard work and careful planning was taken away, and there was hardly a solid place for him to stand to start the fight again.
In her diary, speaking of an aunt who sympathizes with them and says it will be hard to give up going with the people they have been accustomed to, Susan observes, "I do not think that losing our property will cause us ever to mingle with low company." She is now somewhat uncertain about taking up teaching permanently, fearing she will "lose the habit of using the plain language;" but May 22, 1838, she writes at Union Village, now Greenwich:
In her diary, talking about an aunt who feels for them and says it will be tough to stop hanging out with the people they've been used to, Susan notes, "I don't think that losing our property will ever make us mix with low-class people." She's now a bit unsure about committing to teaching long-term, worried that she'll "lose the habit of using plain language;" but on May 22, 1838, she writes from Union Village, now Greenwich:
On last evening, which was First day, I again left my home to mingle with strangers, which seems to be my sad lot. Separation was rendered more trying on account of the embarrassing condition of our business affairs. I found my school small and quite disorderly. O, may my patience hold out to persevere without intermission.
Last night, which was Sunday, I left home again to hang out with strangers, which seems to be my unfortunate situation. The parting was even harder because of the awkward state of our business dealings. I found out that my school is small and pretty chaotic. Oh, I hope my patience holds out so I can keep going without a break.
In the summer of 1838 the factory, store, home and much of the furniture had to be given up to the creditors. Not an article was spared from the inventory. All the mother's wedding presents, the furniture and the silver spoons given her by her parents, the wearing apparel of the family, even the flour, tea, coffee and sugar, the children's school books, the Bible and the dictionary, were carefully noted. On this list, still in existence, are "underclothes of wife and daughters," "spectacles of Mr. and Mrs. Anthony," "pocket-knives of boys," "scraps of old iron"—and the law took all except the bare necessities. In this hour of extremity the guardian angel appeared in the person of Joshua Read, a brother of Mrs. Anthony, from Palatine Bridge, N.Y., who bid in all which the family desired to keep and restored to them their possessions, making himself their lenient creditor.
In the summer of 1838, the factory, store, home, and most of the furniture had to be surrendered to the creditors. Nothing was left untouched in the inventory. All of the mother's wedding gifts, the furniture, and the silver spoons given to her by her parents, the family’s clothing, even the flour, tea, coffee, and sugar, the children's school books, the Bible, and the dictionary, were all carefully listed. On this existing list are "the underclothes of wife and daughters," "Mr. and Mrs. Anthony's spectacles," "the boys' pocket-knives," "scraps of old iron"—and the law took everything except for the bare essentials. In this time of crisis, their guardian angel appeared in the form of Joshua Read, a brother of Mrs. Anthony, from Palatine Bridge, N.Y., who purchased everything the family wanted to keep and returned their belongings, becoming their lenient creditor.
The winter of 1839 Susan attended the home school, taught by Daniel Wright, a fine scholar and remarkably successful teacher. This ended her school days, and in her journal she says: "I probably shall never go to school again, and all the advancement which I hereafter make must be by my own exertions."
The winter of 1839, Susan attended the home school taught by Daniel Wright, a great scholar and an exceptionally successful teacher. This marked the end of her formal schooling, and in her journal she wrote: "I probably will never go to school again, and any progress I make from now on will have to be through my own efforts."
In March, 1839, the family moved to Hardscrabble, a small village two miles further down the Battenkill. They went on a cold, blustering day, and one may imagine the feelings of Daniel and Lucy Anthony and their older children as they turned away from their big factory, their handsome home and the friends they had learned to love. Mrs. Anthony's heart was overflowing with sorrow, for in less than five years she had lost by death her little daughter, her father and mother, and now was swept away her home hallowed by their beloved memories.
In March 1839, the family moved to Hardscrabble, a small village two miles further down the Battenkill. They left on a cold, blustery day, and one can only imagine the emotions of Daniel and Lucy Anthony and their older children as they turned away from their large factory, their beautiful home, and the friends they had come to cherish. Mrs. Anthony was overwhelmed with sadness because, in less than five years, she had lost her little daughter, her father, and her mother, and now she was losing the home filled with their beloved memories.
In his prosperous days Daniel Anthony had built a satinet factory and a grist-mill at Hardscrabble and, although these were mortgaged heavily, he hoped to weather the financial storm and through them to build up again his fallen fortunes. The family were soon comfortably established in a large house which had been a hotel or tavern in the days when lumber 036 was cut in the Green mountains and floated down the river, an immense building, sixty feet square, with wide hall and broad piazza. They did not keep a hotel, but people were in the habit of stopping here, as it was a half-way house to Troy, and they found themselves obliged to entertain a number of travelers.
In his successful years, Daniel Anthony built a satinet factory and a grist mill in Hardscrabble. Even though they were heavily mortgaged, he hoped to get through the financial difficulties and use them to rebuild his lost wealth. The family soon settled into a large house that had once been a hotel or tavern during the time when lumber 036 was cut in the Green Mountains and floated down the river. It was a massive structure, sixty feet square, with a spacious hall and wide porch. They didn’t run a hotel, but since it was a halfway point to Troy, they often found themselves having to host various travelers.
Those were busy days for the family. Susan's journal contains many entries such as, "Did a large washing to-day.... Spent to-day at the spinning-wheel.... Baked 21 loaves of bread.... Wove three yards of carpet yesterday.... Got my quilt out of the frame last 5th day.... The new saw-mill has just been raised; we had 20 men to supper on 6th day, and 12 on 7th day." But there were quilting-bees and apple-parings and sleighing parties and many good times, for the elastic temperament of youth rallies quickly from grief and misfortune. Susan went to Presbyterian church one Sunday, and the gray-robed Quaker thus writes:
Those were busy days for the family. Susan's journal has many entries like, "Did a big laundry today.... Spent today at the spinning wheel.... Baked 21 loaves of bread.... Wove three yards of carpet yesterday.... Took my quilt out of the frame last Thursday.... The new sawmill has just been built; we had 20 men over for dinner on Friday, and 12 on Saturday." But there were quilting bees, apple peelings, sleigh rides, and a lot of good times, because the youthful spirit quickly bounces back from sadness and challenges. Susan went to a Presbyterian church one Sunday, and the gray-robed Quaker writes:
To see them partake of the Lord's supper, as they call it, was indeed a solemn sight, but the dress of the communicants bespeaks nothing but vanity of heart—curls, bows and artificials displayed in profusion about most of them. They say they can dress in the fashion without fixing their hearts on their costume, but surely if their hearts were not vain and worldly, their dress would not be.
Watching them participate in what they refer to as the Lord's Supper was indeed a solemn experience, but the way the attendees dressed revealed nothing but vanity—many of them wore plenty of curls, bows, and fake accessories. They argue that they can dress fashionably without being obsessed with their looks, but if their hearts weren't vain and materialistic, their outfits wouldn't be either.
The attic in this old house was finished off for a ball-room; it was said that great numbers of junk bottles had been laid under the floor to give especially nice tone to the fiddles. The young people of the village came to Daniel Anthony for permission to hold their dancing-school here but, with true Quaker spirit, he refused. Finally the committee came again and said: "You have taught us that we must not drink or go about places where liquor is sold. The only other dancing-hall in town is in a disreputable tavern, and if we can not come here we shall be obliged to go there." So Mr. Anthony called a council of his wife and elder daughters. The mother, remembering her own youth and also having a tender solicitude for the moral welfare of the young people, advised that they should have the hall. Mr. Anthony at last agreed on 037 condition that his own daughters should not dance. So they came, and Susan, Guelma and Hannah sat against the wall and watched, longing to join them but never doing it. They danced every two weeks all winter; Mrs. Anthony gave them some simple refreshments, they went home early, there was no drinking and all was orderly and pleasant.
The attic in this old house was turned into a ballroom; it was said that a lot of junk bottles had been placed under the floor to give a nice sound to the fiddles. The young people in the village asked Daniel Anthony for permission to hold their dance classes here, but in true Quaker fashion, he refused. Eventually, the committee came back and said: "You've taught us that we shouldn't drink or go to places where liquor is sold. The only other dance hall in town is in a shady tavern, and if we can't come here, we’ll have to go there." So, Mr. Anthony called a meeting with his wife and older daughters. The mother, remembering her own youth and feeling concerned for the moral well-being of the young people, suggested they should be allowed to use the hall. Mr. Anthony finally agreed on 037 condition that his daughters wouldn't dance. So, they came, and Susan, Guelma, and Hannah sat against the wall and watched, wishing they could join but never did. They danced every two weeks all winter; Mrs. Anthony provided some simple snacks, they went home early, there was no drinking, and everything was orderly and pleasant.

THE HOME AT CENTER FALLS, N. Y., BUILT IN 1810. THE PORCH LONG SINCE FALLEN AWAY. FROM A PHOTOGRAPH TAKEN IN 1897. SUSAN, DANIEL, MARY, AND MERRITT IN FOREGROUND.
THE HOME IN CENTER FALLS, N.Y., BUILT IN 1810. THE PORCH HAS LONG SINCE COLLAPSED. FROM A PHOTOGRAPH TAKEN IN 1897. SUSAN, DANIEL, MARY, AND MERRITT IN THE FRONT.
The Quakers at once had Daniel Anthony up before the committee, there was a long discussion, and finally they read him out of meeting "because he kept a place of amusement in his house." Reuben Baker, one of the old Quakers, said: "It is with great sorrow we have to disown friend Anthony, for he has been one of the most exemplary members in the Society, but we can not condone such an offense as allowing a dancing-school in his house."
The Quakers immediately brought Daniel Anthony before the committee. There was a lengthy discussion, and in the end, they excluded him from the meeting "because he had a place for entertainment in his home." Reuben Baker, an elder Quaker, said: "It is with great sadness that we must disown our friend Anthony, for he has been one of the most admirable members of the Society, but we cannot accept such an offense as allowing a dance school in his home."
Mr. Anthony felt this very keenly. He said: "For one of the best acts of my life I have been turned out of the best religious society in the world;" but he had kept his wife, his cloak and his ideas of right, and was justified by his conscience. He continued to attend Quaker meeting but grew more liberal with every passing year and, long before his death, had lost every vestige of bigotry and believed in complete personal, mental and spiritual freedom. In early life he had steadfastly refused to pay the United States taxes because he would not give tribute to a government which believed in war. When the collector came he would lay down his purse, saying, "I shall not voluntarily pay these taxes; if thee wants to rifle my pocket-book, thee can do so." But he lived to do all in his power to support the Union in its struggle for the abolition of slavery and, although too old to go to the front himself, his two sons enlisted at the very beginning of the war.
Mr. Anthony felt this deeply. He said, "For one of the best things I've done, I've been kicked out of the best religious group in the world." But he kept his wife, his coat, and his sense of right and wrong, feeling justified by his conscience. He continued attending Quaker meetings but became more open-minded with each year, and long before he died, he had shed all remnants of bigotry and embraced complete personal, mental, and spiritual freedom. In his younger days, he steadfastly refused to pay U.S. taxes because he didn't want to support a government that endorsed war. When the tax collector came, he would put down his purse and say, "I’m not going to pay these taxes willingly; if you want to search my wallet, go ahead." Yet, he lived to do everything he could to support the Union in its fight for the abolition of slavery, and although he was too old to fight himself, his two sons enlisted at the very start of the war.
Mr. Anthony had the name Hardscrabble changed to Center Falls, and was made postmaster. Susan and Hannah secured schools, and Daniel R., then not sixteen, went into the mill with his father. Susan had several schools offered her and finally accepted one at New Rochelle. She went down the Hudson by the steamboat American Eagle, her father going with her as far as Troy. She speaks in her journal of several 038 Louisiana slaveholders being on board, the discussion which took place in the evening and her horror at hearing them uphold the institution of slavery. The pages of this little book show that this question and those of religion and temperance were the principal subjects of conversation in these days. One entry reads: "Spent the evening at Mr. Burdick's and had a good visit with them, our chief topic being the future state." Then she comments: "Be the future what it may, our happiness in the present is far more complete if we live an upright life." From the time she was seventeen is constantly expressed a detestation of slavery and intemperance. Her life from the beginning seems to have had a serious purpose. When asked, during the writing of this biography, why her journals were not full of "beaux," as most girls' were, she replied: "There were plenty of them, but I never could bring myself to put anything about them on paper." There are many references to their calling, escorting her to parties, etc., but scarcely any expression of her sentiments toward them. One, of whom she says: "He is a most noble-hearted fellow; I have respected him highly since our first acquaintance," goes to see a rival, and she writes: "He is at ——'s this evening. O, may he know that in me he has found a spirit congenial with his own, and not suffer the glare of beauty to attract both eye and heart."
Mr. Anthony changed the name Hardscrabble to Center Falls and became the postmaster. Susan and Hannah got teaching jobs, and Daniel R., who was still under sixteen, started working in the mill with his father. Susan received several job offers and eventually accepted one in New Rochelle. She traveled down the Hudson River on the steamboat American Eagle, with her father accompanying her as far as Troy. In her journal, she mentions that several Louisiana slaveholders were on board, recounting the discussion that took place in the evening and her horror at hearing them support the institution of slavery. The pages of her little book show that conversations during that time mainly revolved around topics like slavery, religion, and temperance. One entry reads: "Spent the evening at Mr. Burdick's and had a good visit with them, our main topic being the future state." She then adds: "No matter what the future holds, our happiness in the present is much greater if we live an upright life." From the time she was seventeen, she consistently expressed her strong opposition to slavery and substance abuse. Her life seems to have been driven by a serious purpose from the start. When asked during the writing of this biography why her journals weren't filled with mentions of "beaux," like most girls' were, she replied, "There were plenty of them, but I never could bring myself to write anything about them." There are many references to them asking her to parties and such, but hardly any expression of her feelings toward them. One, whom she describes as "a most noble-hearted fellow; I have respected him highly since our first acquaintance," goes to visit a rival, and she writes: "He is at ——'s this evening. Oh, may he realize that he has found a spirit that resonates with his own in me, and not be swayed by the allure of beauty."
Again she says: "Last night I dreamed of being married, queerly enough, too, for it seemed as if I had married a Presbyterian priest, whom I never before had seen. I thought I repented thoroughly before the day had passed and my mind was much troubled." This modest Quaker maiden writes of receiving a newspaper from a young man: "Its contents were none of the most polite; a piece of poetry on Love and one called 'Ridin' on a Rail,' and numerous little stories and things equally as bad. What he means I can not tell, but silence will be the best rebuke." Another who comes a-wooing she describes as "a real soft-headed old bachelor," and remarks: "These old bachelors are perfect nuisances to society." A friend marries a man of rather feeble intellect, and she 039 comments: "Tis strange, 'tis passing strange, that a girl possessed of common sense should be willing to marry a lunatic—but so it is."
Again she says: "Last night I dreamed about getting married, oddly enough, to a Presbyterian priest I had never seen before. I thought I really regretted it before the day was over, and my mind was quite troubled." This modest Quaker girl writes about receiving a newspaper from a young man: "Its content was not very polite; there was a piece of poetry about love, one called 'Ridin' on a Rail,' and lots of little stories that were just as bad. I can't figure out what he means, but silence will be the best response." Another man who comes to court her she describes as "a real simple-minded old bachelor," and comments: "These old bachelors are a complete nuisance to society." A friend marries a man with rather limited intelligence, and she 039 comments: "It's strange, it's really strange, that a girl with common sense would want to marry someone who's not all there—but that's how it is."
Miss Anthony went to New Rochelle as assistant in Eunice Kenyon's boarding-school, but the principal being ill most of the time, she has to take entire charge, and the responsibility seems to weigh heavily on the nineteen-year-old girl. She speaks also of watching night after night, with only such rest as she gets lying on the floor. She gives some idea of the medical treatment of those days: "The Doctor came and gave her a dose of calomel and bled her freely, telling me not to faint as I held the bowl. Her arm commenced bleeding in the night and she lost so much blood she fainted. Next day the Doctor came, applied a blister and gave her another dose of calomel."
Miss Anthony went to New Rochelle to work as an assistant at Eunice Kenyon's boarding school, but since the principal was sick most of the time, she had to take full charge, and the responsibility seemed to weigh heavily on the nineteen-year-old girl. She also mentions staying up night after night, getting only a little rest while lying on the floor. She describes the medical treatment back then: "The doctor came and gave her a dose of calomel and bled her a lot, telling me not to faint while I held the bowl. Her arm started bleeding during the night, and she lost so much blood that she fainted. The next day the doctor came, applied a blister, and gave her another dose of calomel."
She meets some colored girls from the school at Oneida and writes home: "A strict Presbyterian school it is, but they eat, walk and associate with the white people. O, what a happy state of things is this, to see these poor, degraded sons of Afric privileged to walk by our side." On Sunday she hears Stephen Archer, the great Quaker preacher, who was at the head of a large Friends' boarding-school at Tarrytown, and says:
She meets some girls of color from the school at Oneida and writes home: "It's a strict Presbyterian school, but they eat, walk, and hang out with white people. Oh, what a wonderful thing it is to see these poor, degraded sons of Africa allowed to walk beside us." On Sunday, she listens to Stephen Archer, the renowned Quaker preacher who ran a large Friends' boarding school in Tarrytown, and says:
He is a much younger man than I expected to see, and wears a sweet smile on his face.... The people about here are anti-Abolitionist and anti-everything else that's good. The Friends raised quite a fuss about a colored man sitting in the meeting-house, and some left on account of it. The man was rich, well-dressed and very polite, but still the pretended meek followers of Christ could not worship their God and have this sable companion with them. What a lack of Christianity is this! There are three colored girls here who have been in the habit of attending Friends' meeting where they have lived, but here they are not allowed to sit even on the back seat. One long-faced elder dusted off a seat in the gallery and told them to sit there. Their father was freed by his master and left $60,000, and these girls are educated and refined.
He’s much younger than I expected, and he has a pleasant smile on his face. The people around here oppose Abolition and really anything positive. The Quakers made a big fuss about a Black man being in the meeting house, and some people left because of it. The man was wealthy, well-dressed, and very polite, yet the so-called humble followers of Christ couldn't worship their God with him present. What a lack of true Christianity this is! There are three Black girls here who used to attend Quaker meetings where they lived, but now they aren’t even allowed to sit in the back. One serious-faced elder cleared a spot in the gallery and told them to sit there. Their father was freed by his master and left behind $60,000, and these girls are educated and refined.
Aaron McLean, who is soon to marry her sister Guelma, writes in answer to this: "I am glad to hear that the people where your lot is cast for the present are sensible and reasonable on that exciting subject. I entreat you to be prudent in 040 your remarks and not attempt to 'niggerize' the good old Friends about you. Above all, let them know that you are about the only Abolitionist in this vicinity." This severe letter does not seem to have affected her very deeply for, on the next day after receiving it, she writes her parents: "Since school to-day I have had the unspeakable satisfaction of visiting four colored people and drinking tea with them. Their name is Turpin, and Theodore Wright of New York is their stepfather. To show this kind of people respect in this heathen land affords me a double pleasure." Mr. McLean evidently did not believe in woman preachers, for the radical Susan writes him:
Aaron McLean, who is about to marry her sister Guelma, responds: "I'm glad to hear that the people where you currently live are sensible and reasonable about that sensitive topic. I urge you to be careful in 040 what you say and not to try to 'niggerize' the good old Friends around you. Above all, make sure they know that you are pretty much the only Abolitionist in this area." This stern letter doesn’t seem to have impacted her much because, the day after receiving it, she writes to her parents: "Since school today, I’ve had the incredible satisfaction of visiting four Black people and having tea with them. Their last name is Turpin, and Theodore Wright from New York is their stepfather. Showing respect to this kind of people in this uncivilized land brings me double the joy." Mr. McLean clearly didn’t believe in women preachers, as the radical Susan writes to him:
I attended Rose street meeting in New York and heard the strongest sermon on "The Vices of the City," that has been preached in that house very lately. It was from Rachel Barker, of Dutchess county. I guess if you could hear her you would believe in a woman's preaching. What an absurd notion that women have not intellectual and moral faculties sufficient for anything but domestic concerns!
I went to a meeting on Rose Street in New York and heard an incredibly powerful sermon on "The Vices of the City" that was preached there recently. It was given by Rachel Barker from Dutchess County. I bet if you heard her, you’d believe in women preaching. What a ridiculous idea that women lack the intellectual and moral abilities to manage anything beyond household matters!
She does not hesitate to write to an uncle, Albert Dickinson, and reprove him for drinking ale and wine at Yearly Meeting time. It seems that then, as now, girls had a habit of writing on the first page of a sheet, next on the third, then vertically on a page, etc. Uncle Albert retorts:
She doesn’t think twice about writing to her uncle, Albert Dickinson, to scold him for drinking ale and wine during Yearly Meeting. Apparently, just like today, girls used to write on the first page of a sheet, then on the third, and sometimes even vertically on a page, etc. Uncle Albert responds:
Thy aunt Ann Eliza says to tell thee we are temperate drinkers and hope to remain so. We should think from the shape of thy letter that thou thyself hadst had a good horn from the contents of the cider barrel, a part being written one side up and a part the other way, and it would need some one in nearly the same predicament to keep track of it. We hope thy cranium will get straightened when the answer to this is penned, so that we may follow thy varied thoughts with less trouble. A little advice perhaps would be good on both sides, and they that give should be willing to receive. See to it that thou payest me down for this.
Your aunt Ann Eliza wants you to know that we drink in moderation and hope to keep it that way. From your letter, it looks like you might have had a little too much from the cider barrel since part of it is written one way and part another. Only someone who’s been in a similar situation could make sense of it all. We hope your head clears up by the time you write back so we can understand your mixed thoughts more easily. A little advice from both sides could be helpful, and those who give advice should be open to receiving it too. Just make sure you pay me for this.
This letter also gives an insight into the medical practice of the good old times. A niece, Cynthia, is being treated for the dropsy by "drinking copiously of a decoction made by charring wormwood in a close vessel and putting the ashes into brandy, and every night being subjected to a heavy sweat." It recommends plenty of blue pills and boneset for 041 the ague. Later, Susan writes of a friend who is "under the care of both Botanical and Apothecary doctors." For hardening of wax in the ear she sends an infallible prescription: "Moisten salt with vinegar and drop it in the ear every night for six weeks; said to be a certain cure."
This letter also gives a glimpse into medical practices from the past. A niece, Cynthia, is being treated for dropsy by "drinking plenty of a brew made by burning wormwood in a sealed container and mixing the ashes into brandy, and every night going through a heavy sweat." It suggests using lots of blue pills and boneset for 041 the fever. Later, Susan mentions a friend who is "under the care of both herbalists and pharmacists." For hardening wax in the ear, she shares a foolproof remedy: "Soak salt in vinegar and drop it in the ear every night for six weeks; it's said to be a guaranteed cure."
The staid and puritanical young woman is much disturbed at the enthusiastic reception given President Van Buren at New Rochelle, and writes home:
The serious and uptight young woman is quite upset about the warm welcome President Van Buren received in New Rochelle, and she writes back home:
We had quite a noise last Fifth day on the occasion of Martin's passing through this village. A band of splendid music was sent for from the city, and large crowds of people called to look at him as if he were a puppet show. Really one would have thought an angelic being had descended from heaven, to have heard and seen the commotion. The whole village was in an uproar. Here was a mother after her children to go and gaze upon the great man, and there was a teacher rushing with one child by the hand and half a dozen running after. Where was I? Why I, by mustering a little self-government, concluded to remain at home and suffer the President to pass along in peace. He was to dine at Washington Irving's, at Tarrytown, and then proceed to the Capitol.
Last Thursday was a real spectacle when Martin came through our village. A big band from the city was brought in, and huge crowds gathered to see him as if he were part of a puppet show. Seriously, you’d think an angel had come down from heaven with the way everyone was behaving. The whole village was in chaos. A mom rushed to get her kids to see the important man, and a teacher hurried along with one child by the hand while a bunch of others followed behind. As for me? I decided to stay home and let the President pass by in peace. He was supposed to have lunch at Washington Irving’s place in Tarrytown and then head to the Capitol.
Her extreme animosity is explained in a subsequent letter to Aaron McLean:
Her intense hostility is elaborated on in a later letter to Aaron McLean:
I regret to hear that the people of Battenville are possessed of so little sound sense as to go 20 miles to shake hands with the President at Saratoga Springs; merely to look at a human being who is possessed of nothing more than ordinary men and therefore should not be worshipped more than any mortal being, nor even so much as many in the humble walks of life who are devoted to their God. Let us look at his behavior and scan its effects on society. One day while in New York was spent in riding through the streets preceded by an extravagant number of military men and musicians, who were kept in exercise on that and succeeding days of the week until all were completely exhausted. On the next day, while he and his party were revelling in their tents on luxuries and the all-debasing Wine, many poor, dear children were crying for food and for water to allay their thirst. On Friday evening he attended Park Theater and on Monday Bowery Theater. Yes, he who is called by the majority as most capable of ruling this republic, may be seen in the Theater encouraging one of the most heinous crimes or practices with which our country is disgraced.[7] Yes, and afterwards we find him rioting at the Wine Table, the whole livelong night. Is it to be wondered that there are such vast numbers of our population who are the votaries of Vice and Dissipation? No, certainly not, and I do not believe there ever will be less of this wickedness while a man practising these abominable vices (in what is called a gentlemanly manner) is suffered to sit at the head of our Government.
I'm sorry to hear that the people of Battenville don't have the common sense to travel 20 miles just to shake hands with the President in Saratoga Springs; just to see someone who's just like anyone else and shouldn't be idolized more than any human being, or even more than many humble people who dedicate their lives to their faith. Let's look at his actions and their impact on society. One day in New York was spent riding through the streets, followed by a huge number of soldiers and musicians, who were on duty for that day and the days after until they were completely worn out. The next day, while he and his entourage enjoyed luxuries and excessive drinking, many poor children were crying for food and water to satisfy their thirst. On Friday night, he went to the Park Theater, and on Monday, the Bowery Theater. Yes, the one most people consider suitable to lead this republic was seen at the theater, promoting one of the most disgraceful practices that shame our country. Yes, and later, we find him partying at the wine table all night long. Should we be surprised that so many people are drawn to vice and excess? Certainly not, and I don’t believe there will ever be less of this wrongdoing while a man who indulges in these disgusting vices (in what is considered a gentlemanly manner) is allowed to lead our government.[7]
The future orator and reformer is plainly foreshadowed in this burst of indignation, to which Mr. McLean replies in part:
The future speaker and reformer is clearly hinted at in this outburst of anger, to which Mr. McLean responds in part:
I was agreeably disappointed in Van Buren's personal appearance. From what I had heard of him as a little, smooth, intriguing arch-magician, I expected his looks would bear that out but it was far to the contrary. He is quite old and gray, very grave and careworn. His dress was perfectly plain, not the least sign of jewelry save his watch seal which was solid gold. I saw him drink no wine, although there was plenty about him, nor did your father and mother who saw him dine at the United States Hotel. If you do not like him because he tastes wine, how can you like Henry Clay who drinks it freely? Mr. Webster drinks wine also. At a Whig festival got up in Boston in his honor, at which he and 1,200 other Whigs were present, there were drunk 2,300 bottles of champagne, two bottles to each man. Mr. Clay attended balls at the Springs. He had a slave with him to wait on him and hand him water to clear out his throat while he was speaking; and this while he was preaching liberty and declaring what a fine thing this freedom is!
I was pleasantly surprised by Van Buren's appearance. Based on what I had heard about him being a small, smooth, intriguing mastermind, I expected him to look the part, but it was actually quite the opposite. He is quite old and gray, very serious and worn out. His clothing was completely plain, with no jewelry except for his solid gold watch seal. I didn’t see him drink any wine, even though there was plenty available, and neither did your father and mother, who saw him dine at the United States Hotel. If you don’t like him because he drinks wine, how can you like Henry Clay, who drinks it freely? Mr. Webster drinks wine too. At a Whig festival held in Boston in his honor, where he and 1,200 other Whigs were present, they went through 2,300 bottles of champagne—two bottles for each person. Mr. Clay attended balls at the Springs. He had a slave with him to serve him and hand him water to clear his throat while he was speaking, all while he was preaching about liberty and declaring how great freedom is!
While at New Rochelle Susan becomes greatly interested in the culture of silk-worms, upon which the principal was experimenting. She writes home full descriptions and urges them to ascertain if black mulberry trees grow about there; she herself knew of one. She insists that the sisters can teach school and take care of the silk-worms at the same time, but evidently receives no encouragement as no more is heard of the project. She retains the keenest interest in every detail of the life at home. She sends some cherry stones to be planted because the cherries were the largest and best she ever ate. A box of shells is carefully gathered for brother Merritt, and sent with a grass linen handkerchief for sister Mary. She sends back her mother's shawl for fear she may need it more than herself. In the currant season she writes that nothing in the world would taste so good as one of mother's currant pies. She urges them to send her part of the family sewing to do outside of school hours. She frequently walks down to Long Island sound, a mile and a half away, and says at one time:
While in New Rochelle, Susan becomes really interested in silk-worm culture, which the principal is experimenting with. She writes home with detailed descriptions and encourages them to find out if there are any black mulberry trees nearby; she knows of one herself. She insists that the sisters can both teach school and take care of the silk-worms at the same time, but apparently, she doesn't get any support because nothing more is heard about the project. She maintains a strong interest in every detail of life back home. She sends some cherry pits to be planted because the cherries were the biggest and best she ever tasted. She carefully collects a box of shells for her brother Merritt and sends it with a grass linen handkerchief for her sister Mary. She returns her mother's shawl, worried that her mother might need it more than she does. During the currant season, she writes that nothing would taste as good as one of her mother's currant pies. She asks them to send her part of the family sewing to do outside of school hours. She often walks down to Long Island Sound, a mile and a half away, and at one point says:
The sun was passing toward the western horizon, and all seemed calm and tranquil save the restless wash of the waves against the beach. A gentle breeze from the water refreshed our tired bodies. To one unaccustomed to such scenes it was like a glimpse into another world. In the distance one could see the villages of Long Island, but I could think only of that village called home, and I longed every moment to be there.
The sun was setting over the west, and everything felt calm and peaceful except for the restless waves crashing on the shore. A gentle breeze from the water refreshed our tired bodies. For someone not used to this scenery, it felt like a glimpse into another world. In the distance, you could see the villages of Long Island, but all I could think about was the village I called home, and I longed to be there every moment.
Her school commenced May 23 and closed September 6, a term of fifteen weeks, for which she received $30, and she expresses her grief that, after having paid for necessary clothes and incidentals, she has only enough left to take her home. She reaches Center Falls in time to assist in the final preparations for the wedding, on September 19, 1839, of her sister Guelma to Aaron McLean, a prosperous merchant at Battenville.
Her school started on May 23 and ended on September 6, a term of fifteen weeks, for which she received $30. She expresses her disappointment that, after buying necessary clothes and other expenses, she only has enough left to get her home. She arrives in Center Falls just in time to help with the final preparations for her sister Guelma’s wedding to Aaron McLean, a successful merchant from Battenville, on September 19, 1839.
Susan's next school was in her home district at Center Falls, where she was very successful. One incident is on record in regard to the "bully" of the school. After having tried every persuasive method at her command to compel obedience, she proceeded to use the rod. He fought viciously, but she finally flogged him into complete submission and never had any further trouble with him or the other boys. She was, however, very tender-hearted toward children and animals.
Susan's next school was in her home district at Center Falls, where she did really well. There's one incident recorded about the "bully" of the school. After trying every persuasive tactic she could think of to get him to obey, she resorted to using the paddle. He fought fiercely, but she eventually beat him into total submission and never had any more issues with him or the other boys. However, she was very kind-hearted toward children and animals.
Among the outings enjoyed by the young people were excursions to neighboring villages. There were no railroads, but every young man owned his horse and buggy, and in pleasant weather a procession of twenty vehicles often might be seen, each containing a happy couple on their way to a supper and dance. On one occasion, according to the little diary, the night was so dark they did not dare risk the ten-mile drive home, as much of the road lay beside the river, so they continued the festivities till daylight. Once a party went to Saratoga Springs, and, to Miss Anthony's grief, her favorite young man invited another girl, and she had a long, dreary drive trying to be agreeable to one while her thought was with another. To add to the unpleasantness her escort took this opportunity to ask her to give up teaching and preside over a home for him.
Among the outings the young people enjoyed were trips to nearby villages. There were no railroads, but every young man had his own horse and buggy, and on nice days, a parade of twenty carriages could often be seen, each carrying a happy couple on their way to dinner and dancing. On one occasion, according to the little diary, the night was so dark that they didn’t dare risk the ten-mile drive home, since much of the road ran next to the river, so they kept the celebration going until morning. Once, a group went to Saratoga Springs, and, to Miss Anthony’s dismay, her favorite young man invited another girl, leaving her to have a long, dull drive trying to be pleasant to one while thinking about another. To make matters worse, her escort seized this opportunity to ask her to quit teaching and manage a home for him.
One winter was spent with relatives at Danby, Vt., and here, with the assistance of a cousin, Moses Vail, who was a teacher, she made a thorough study of algebra. Later, when visiting her irrepressible brother-in-law, Aaron McLean, she made some especially nice cream biscuits for supper, and he said, "I'd rather see a woman make such biscuits as these than 044 solve the knottiest problem in algebra." "There is no reason why she should not be able to do both," was the reply. There are many references in the old letters to "Susan's tip-top dinners."
One winter was spent with relatives in Danby, Vt., and during this time, with help from her cousin Moses Vail, who was a teacher, she thoroughly studied algebra. Later, while visiting her lively brother-in-law, Aaron McLean, she made some particularly delicious cream biscuits for dinner, and he said, "I’d rather see a woman make biscuits like these than 044 solve the toughest algebra problem." She replied, "There’s no reason why she can’t do both." There are many mentions in the old letters of "Susan's amazing dinners."
She taught one summer in Cambridge, and then, for two years, in the home of Lansing G. Taylor, at Fort Edward. Mrs. Taylor was the daughter of Judge Halsey Wing. The journals of that date either were abandoned or have been lost in the half century since then, and there is but one letter in existence written during this very pleasant period. In it, July 11, 1844, she says:
She taught one summer in Cambridge, and then spent two years at the home of Lansing G. Taylor in Fort Edward. Mrs. Taylor was the daughter of Judge Halsey Wing. The journals from that time have either been abandoned or lost over the past fifty years, and there’s only one letter that still exists from this enjoyable period. In it, dated July 11, 1844, she writes:
As the week draws toward its close my mind travels to the dear home roof. It seems to fly far hence to that loved father and mingle with his spirit while he is wandering in the wilds of Virginia, and it raises to the throne of grace an ardent wish for his safe return. Oh, that he may make no change of land except for the better! Then do my thoughts rest with my dear mother, toiling unremittingly through the long day and at eve, seated in her arm-chair, wrapt in solemn stillness, and later reclining on her lonely pillow. How often, when I am enjoying the sweet hour of twilight, do I think of the sadness that has so long o'ershadowed her brow, and ardently entreat the God of love and mercy to give her that peace which is found only in a resignation to his just and holy will. How numerous are our favors! We have a comfortable subsistence and health to relish it; but, more than this, we, as a family, are bound together by the strongest ties of affection that seem daily to grow stronger....
As the week wraps up, I can't help but think about my cherished home. It feels like I'm far from my dear father, who is out exploring the wilds of Virginia, and I send a heartfelt wish to the skies for his safe return. Oh, I hope he only moves to better places! My thoughts then drift to my beloved mother, who works tirelessly throughout the long day and, in the evening, settles into her armchair, lost in quiet reflection before resting on her lonely pillow. So often, during the gentle twilight, I think about the sadness that has weighed her down for so long, and I sincerely pray to the God of love and mercy to grant her the peace that comes from accepting His just and holy will. We have so many blessings! We have a stable life and good health to enjoy it; but even more than that, as a family, we are connected by the strongest bonds of love that seem to grow deeper every day....
I arose this morning at half-past four. Two ladies from Albany are visiting here, the beautiful Abigail Mott, a Friend and a thorough-going Abolitionist and reformer, and Mrs. Worthington, a strict Methodist. Mr. Taylor took eight of us to the Whig convention at Sandy Hill yesterday, and I attended my first political meeting. I enjoyed every moment of it.
I woke up this morning at 4:30. Two women from Albany are visiting: the lovely Abigail Mott, a Quaker and committed abolitionist and reformer, and Mrs. Worthington, a devout Methodist. Mr. Taylor took eight of us to the Whig convention in Sandy Hill yesterday, and I attended my first political meeting. I loved every minute of it.
She also relates how Miss Mott would come to her room and expound to her most beautifully the doctrine of Unitarianism, and then Mrs. Worthington would come and pray with her long and earnestly to counteract the pernicious effect of Miss Mott's heresies. While she was accustomed to the liberal theology of the Hicksite Quakers, this was the first time she ever had heard the more scholarly interpretation of the Unitarian church.
She also shares how Miss Mott would come to her room and beautifully explain the principles of Unitarianism, and then Mrs. Worthington would come and pray with her for a long time, earnestly trying to counteract the harmful effects of Miss Mott's beliefs. While she was used to the liberal theology of the Hicksite Quakers, this was the first time she had ever heard a more scholarly interpretation of the Unitarian church.
From 1840 to 1845 Susan and Hannah taught almost continuously, receiving only $2 or $2.50 a week and board, but 045 living with most rigid economy and giving the father all they could spare to help pay interest on the mortgage which rested on factory, mills and home. He gave his notes for every dollar and, years afterwards, when prosperity came, paid all of them with scrupulous exactness. It was in these early days of teaching that Miss Anthony saw with indignation the injustice practiced towards women. Repeatedly she would take a school which a male teacher had been obliged to give up because of inefficiency and, although she made a thorough success, would receive only one-fourth of his salary. It was the custom everywhere to pay men four times the wages of women for exactly the same amount of work, often not so well done.
From 1840 to 1845, Susan and Hannah taught almost nonstop, earning only $2 or $2.50 a week plus room and board. They lived with extreme frugality, giving their father everything they could spare to help pay the interest on the mortgage that covered the factory, mills, and home. He signed notes for every dollar and, years later, when things improved, paid all of them back with meticulous accuracy. It was during these early teaching days that Miss Anthony felt outraged by the unfair treatment of women. Time and again, she would take over a school that a male teacher had to leave because he was ineffective, and even though she achieved great success, she was paid only a quarter of his salary. Everywhere, it was customary to pay men four times the wages of women for exactly the same work, often done less effectively.
Mr. Anthony went into his mills and performed the manual labor. In partnership with Dr. Hiram Corliss he employed a number of men to cut timber, going into the woods in the depths of winter personally to superintend them. His wife would cook great quantities of provisions, bake bread and cake, pork and beans, boil hams and roast chickens, and go to the logging camp with him for a week at a time, and she used to say that notwithstanding all the labor and anxiety of those days they were among the happiest recollections of her life.
Mr. Anthony went into his mills and did the manual labor. In partnership with Dr. Hiram Corliss, he hired several men to cut timber, going into the woods in the middle of winter to supervise them personally. His wife would cook large amounts of food, bake bread and cakes, prepare pork and beans, boil hams, and roast chickens, and she would go to the logging camp with him for a week at a time. She often said that despite all the hard work and stress of those days, they were some of the happiest memories of her life.
At home the loom and spinning-wheel were never idle. The mill-hands were boarded, transient travelers cared for, and every possible effort made to enable the father to secure another foothold, but all in vain. The manufacturing business was dead, there was no building to call for lumber, people had no money, and, after a desperate struggle of five years, the end came and all was lost. Mr. Anthony then spent months in looking for a suitable location to begin life anew. He went to Virginia and to Michigan, but found nothing that suited him. He and his wife made a trip through New York, visiting a number of relatives on the way, and were persuaded to examine a farm for sale near Rochester. It proved to be more satisfactory than anything they had seen, and they decided to take it. Joshua Read who, during all these years, had carefully protected the portion which his sister, Mrs. Anthony, 046 had inherited from their father, took this to make the first payment on the farm.[8] They then returned to Center Falls and began preparations for what in those times was a long journey.
At home, the loom and spinning wheel were always busy. The mill workers were housed, passing travelers were looked after, and every possible effort was made to help the father regain his footing, but it was all in vain. The manufacturing business was failing, there were no buildings needing lumber, people had no money, and after a tough struggle of five years, it all came to an end and everything was lost. Mr. Anthony then spent months searching for a suitable place to start over. He visited Virginia and Michigan, but couldn't find anything that worked for him. He and his wife traveled through New York, stopping to see several relatives along the way, and were convinced to check out a farm for sale near Rochester. It turned out to be better than anything they had seen, and they decided to buy it. Joshua Read, who had carefully protected the share that his sister, Mrs. Anthony, 046 had inherited from their father, used that to make the first payment on the farm.[8] They then returned to Center Falls and started getting ready for what was, in those days, a long journey.
One warm day in the summer of 1845, several Quaker elders had stopped to dine at the Anthony home on their way to Quarterly Meeting. Hannah and Susan were in the large, cool parlor working on the wonderful quilt which was to be a part of Hannah's wedding outfit, when one of the elders, a wealthy widower from Vermont, asked Susan to get him a drink. He followed her out to the well and there made her an offer of marriage, which she promptly refused. He pictured his many acres, his fine home, his sixty cows, told her how much she looked like his first wife, begged her to take time to consider and he would stop on his way back to get her answer. She assured him that it would be entirely unnecessary, as she was going with her father and mother to their new home and did not want to marry. He could scarcely understand a woman who did not desire matrimony, but was finally persuaded to gather up his slighted affections and go on to Quarterly Meeting.
One warm day in the summer of 1845, several Quaker elders stopped by the Anthony home for a meal on their way to the Quarterly Meeting. Hannah and Susan were in the large, cool parlor working on a beautiful quilt that was part of Hannah's wedding trousseau when one of the elders, a wealthy widower from Vermont, asked Susan to fetch him a drink. He followed her out to the well and then proposed to her, which she immediately declined. He described his many acres, his nice home, and his sixty cows, pointed out how much she resembled his late wife, and urged her to think it over, promising to return for her answer. She assured him it wasn't necessary, as she was moving with her parents to their new home and had no desire to marry. He could hardly understand a woman who did not want to get married, but eventually agreed to collect his rejected feelings and head to the Quarterly Meeting.
On September 4, Hannah was married to Eugene Mosher, a merchant at Easton. Daniel R. was now clerking at Lenox, Mass., so there were only Susan, Mary and Merritt to go with the father and mother. All the relatives bade them good-by as if forever, and the leave-taking was very sorrowful, for it was the first permanent separation of the family.
On September 4, Hannah married Eugene Mosher, a merchant in Easton. Daniel R. was now working as a clerk in Lenox, Mass., so only Susan, Mary, and Merritt went with their parents. All the relatives said goodbye as if it were forever, and the farewell was really sad, as it was the family's first permanent separation.
CHAPTER IV.
THE FARM HOME—END OF TEACHING.
1845—1850.
On November 7, 1845, the parents and three children took the stage for Troy, and from there went by railroad to Palatine Bridge for a short visit to Joshua Read. The journey from here to Rochester was made by canal on a "line boat" instead of a "packet," because it was cheaper and because they wanted to be with their household goods. At Utica they found two cousins, Nancy and Melintha Howe, waiting for the packet to go west, but when they saw their relatives they gladly boarded the line boat. Mrs. Anthony did the cooking for the entire party, in the spotless little kitchen on the boat, and the young people, at least, had a merry journey.
On November 7, 1845, the parents and three kids took the stagecoach to Troy, and from there, they traveled by train to Palatine Bridge for a quick visit with Joshua Read. They continued their journey to Rochester via canal on a "line boat" instead of a "packet" because it was cheaper and they wanted to keep their household items with them. In Utica, they found two cousins, Nancy and Melintha Howe, waiting for the packet to head west, but when they spotted their relatives, they happily hopped on the line boat. Mrs. Anthony cooked for the whole group in the spotless little kitchen on the boat, and at least the younger ones had a fun trip.
The family arrived in Rochester late in the afternoon of November 14. They landed at Fitzhugh street and went to the National Hotel. The father had just ten dollars, and it was out of the question to remain there over night; so he took the old gray horse and the wagon off the boat, with a few necessary articles, and with his family started for the farm, three miles west of the city. The day was cold and cheerless, the roads were very muddy, and by the time they reached their destination it was quite dark. An old man and his daughter had been left in charge and had nothing in the way of food but cornmeal and milk. Mrs. Anthony made a kettle of mush which her husband pronounced "good enough for the queen." The only bed was occupied by Mr. and Mrs. Anthony, and the rest slept on the floor. Next day the household goods were brought from the city and all were soon busy putting the new home in order. That was a long and lonesome winter. The 048 closest neighbors were the DeGarmos, and there were a number of other Quaker families in the city. These called at once and performed every friendly office in their power, but the hearts of the exiles were very sad and home-sick. The cause of human freedom was then uppermost in many minds, and the Anthonys found here congenial spirits in their strong anti-slavery convictions, and numerous little "abolition" meetings were held during that winter at their home and in those of their new friends.
The family arrived in Rochester late in the afternoon on November 14. They got off at Fitzhugh Street and headed to the National Hotel. The father had only ten dollars, so staying there overnight was out of the question; instead, he took the old gray horse and wagon off the boat, along with a few essential items, and set out for the farm, three miles west of the city, with his family. The day was cold and dreary, the roads were very muddy, and by the time they reached their destination, it was pretty dark. An old man and his daughter were in charge but had nothing to eat except cornmeal and milk. Mrs. Anthony made a pot of mush that her husband said was "good enough for the queen." The only bed was taken by Mr. and Mrs. Anthony, while the rest slept on the floor. The next day, the household goods were brought from the city, and everyone quickly got busy setting up their new home. That winter was long and lonely. The closest neighbors were the DeGarmos, and there were a few other Quaker families in the city. They came to visit right away and did everything they could to help, but the exiles felt very sad and homesick. The cause of human freedom was a hot topic for many, and the Anthonys found like-minded individuals who shared their strong anti-slavery views. Numerous small "abolition" meetings were held at their home and those of their new friends during that winter.
When spring opened, the surroundings began to assume a more cheerful aspect. The farm was a very pretty one of thirty-two acres. The house stood on an elevation, the long walk that led up to it was lined on both sides with pinks, there were many roses and other flowers in the yard, and great numbers of peach, cherry and quince trees and currant and goose-berry bushes. The scenery was peaceful and pleasant, but they missed the rugged hills and dashing, picturesque streams of their eastern home. Back of the house were the barn, carriage-house and a small blacksmith shop. Mrs. Anthony used to say that her happiest hours were spent on Sunday mornings, when her husband would heat the little forge and mend the kitchen and farm utensils, while she sat knitting and talking with him, Quakers making no difference between Sunday and other days of the week. He had learned this kind of work in boyhood on his father's farm and always enjoyed the relaxation it afforded from the cares and worries which crowded upon him in later years.
When spring arrived, everything started to look happier. The farm was a beautiful thirty-two-acre property. The house was on a rise, and the long path leading up to it was bordered with pink flowers. There were many roses and other flowers in the yard, along with a lot of peach, cherry, and quince trees, as well as currant and gooseberry bushes. The scenery was calm and nice, but they missed the rugged hills and rushing, picturesque streams from their home in the east. Behind the house were the barn, carriage house, and a small blacksmith shop. Mrs. Anthony often said her happiest moments were on Sunday mornings when her husband would heat up the little forge and fix the kitchen and farm tools while she sat knitting and chatting with him, since Quakers don’t distinguish between Sunday and other days of the week. He had learned this type of work as a boy on his father's farm and always appreciated the break it provided from the stresses and concerns that piled up on him in later years.
Mr. Anthony put into his farm the energy and determination characteristic of the man. He rose early; he ploughed and sowed and reaped; he planted peach and apple orchards, and improved the property in many ways, but it was unprofitable work. It seemed very small to him after the broad acres of his early home, and he was accustomed to refer to it as his "sixpenny farm." His life had been too large and too much among men of the great business world to make it possible for him to be content with the existence of a farmer. While he retained his farm home, he very soon went into business in 049 Rochester, connecting himself with the New York Life Insurance Company, then just coming into prominence, and used to say he made money enough out of that to afford the luxury of keeping the farm. He was very successful, and continued with this company the remainder of his life.
Mr. Anthony poured his energy and determination into his farm, which was typical of him. He got up early, plowed, sowed, and reaped; he planted peach and apple orchards and improved the property in various ways, but it was unprofitable work. It felt very small to him compared to the vast lands of his early home, and he often referred to it as his "sixpenny farm." His life had been too big and spent among influential people in the business world for him to be satisfied with being a farmer. Although he held onto his farm home, he quickly ventured into business in 049 Rochester, teaming up with the New York Life Insurance Company, which was just starting to gain recognition. He used to say that he made enough money from that to enjoy the luxury of keeping the farm. He was very successful and stayed with this company for the rest of his life.
On April 25, 1846, Miss Anthony received this invitation:
On April 25, 1846, Miss Anthony got this invitation:
At a meeting of the Trustees of the Canajoharie Academy held this day, it was unanimously Resolved to offer you the Female Department upon the terms which have heretofore been offered to the teachers of that department, viz:—the tuition money of the female department less 12-1/2 per cent., the teachers collecting their tuition bills. Should these terms meet your views, please favor us with an answer by return mail. The next term commences on the first Monday of May proximo.
At a meeting of the Canajoharie Academy Trustees held today, it was unanimously decided to offer you the Female Department under the same terms previously given to the teachers in that department, which are: the tuition fees from the female department minus 12.5%, with the teachers responsible for collecting their tuition payments. If you agree to these terms, please let us know by replying to this email. The next term starts on the first Monday of May.
We are Very Respectfully Yours,
We are Very Respectfully Yours,
JOSHUA READ, LIVINGSTON SPEAKER, GEORGE G. JOHNSON.
JOSHUA READ, LIVINGSTON SPEAKER, GEORGE G. JOHNSON.
Miss Anthony accepted in a carefully worded and finely written letter, and arrived at the home of her uncle Joshua Saturday morning, May 2. He had lived many years at Palatine Bridge, just across the river, was school trustee, bank director, one of the owners of the turnpike, the toll bridge and the stage line, and also kept a hotel. His two daughters were well married, and Miss Anthony boarded with them during all of her three years' teaching in Canajoharie. She found her uncle very ill and being treated by the doctor "with calomel, opium and morphine." In a conversation he told her that "her success would depend largely upon thinking that she knew it all." Although there was now no postmaster in the family, letter postage had been reduced to five cents, and a voluminous correspondence is in existence covering the period from 1846 to 1849. The school commenced with forty boys and twenty-five girls, and the tuition was $5 per annum. The principal was Daniel B. Hagar, a man whom Miss Anthony always loved to remember, highly educated, a gentleman in deportment, kind, thoughtful, and always ready to help and encourage the young teacher.[9] 050
Miss Anthony accepted in a carefully worded and well-written letter and arrived at her uncle Joshua's house on Saturday morning, May 2. He had lived for many years at Palatine Bridge, right across the river, and was a school trustee, bank director, one of the owners of the turnpike, the toll bridge, and the stage line, and also ran a hotel. His two daughters were well married, and Miss Anthony boarded with them during her three years of teaching in Canajoharie. She found her uncle very ill and being treated by the doctor "with calomel, opium, and morphine." In a conversation, he told her that "her success would depend largely upon thinking that she knew it all." Although there was no postmaster in the family anymore, letter postage had been reduced to five cents, and there is a lot of correspondence existing covering the period from 1846 to 1849. The school started with forty boys and twenty-five girls, and the tuition was $5 per year. The principal was Daniel B. Hagar, a man whom Miss Anthony always loved to remember, highly educated, a gentleman in behavior, kind, thoughtful, and always ready to help and encourage the young teacher.[9] 050
Here Miss Anthony was for the first time entirely away from Quaker surroundings and influences, and her letters soon show the effects of environment. The "first month, second day," expressions are dropped and the "plain language" is wholly abandoned. She has more money now than ever before and is at liberty to use it for her own pleasure. A love of handsome clothes begins to develop. "I have a new pearl straw gypsy hat," she writes, "trimmed in white ribbon with fringe on one edge and a pink satin stripe on the other, with a few white roses and green leaves for inside trimming." The beaux hover around; a certain "Dominie," a widower with several children, is very attentive; another widower, a lawyer, visits the school so often as to set all the gossips in a flutter; a third is described as "very handsome, sleek as a ribbon and the most splendid black hair I ever looked at." She takes many drives with still another, "through a delightful country variegated with hill and valley, past fields of newly-mown grass, splendid forests and gently winding rivulets, with here and there a large patch of yellow pond lilies." In writing to a relative she urges her to break herself of "the miserable habit of borrowing trouble, which saps all the sweets of life." At another time she writes: "I have made up my mind that we can expect only a certain amount of comfort wherever we may be, and that it is the disposition of a person, more than the surroundings, that creates happiness."
Here Miss Anthony was, for the first time, completely away from Quaker surroundings and influences, and her letters quickly reflect the impact of her environment. The "first month, second day," phrases are dropped, and the "plain language" is completely abandoned. She has more money than ever before and is free to spend it on things she enjoys. She starts to develop a taste for stylish clothes. "I have a new pearl straw gypsy hat," she writes, "trimmed with white ribbon and fringe on one edge and a pink satin stripe on the other, along with a few white roses and green leaves for the inside." The men are attentive; a certain "Dominie," a widower with several kids, is particularly dedicated; another widower, a lawyer, visits the school so often that it sets all the gossips buzzing; a third man is described as "very handsome, sleek as a ribbon with the most gorgeous black hair I’ve ever seen." She goes on many drives with yet another suitor, "through a lovely countryside filled with hills and valleys, past fields of freshly cut grass, beautiful forests, and gently flowing streams, with patches of yellow pond lilies here and there." In a letter to a relative, she encourages her to break the "poor habit of borrowing trouble, which drains all the joy from life." At another point, she writes: "I've decided that we can expect only a certain amount of comfort wherever we are, and that it’s a person’s attitude, more than their environment, that creates happiness."
Her first quarterly examination, to be held in the presence of principal, trustees and parents, is a cause of great anxiety. She writes that her nerves were on fire and the blood was ready to burst from her face, and she slept none the night previous. She wore a new muslin gown, plaid in purple, white, blue and brown, two puffs around the skirt and on the sleeves at shoulders and wrists, white linen undersleeves and collarette; new blue prunella gaiters with patent-leather heels and tips; her cousin's watch with a gold chain and pencil. Her abundant hair was braided in four long braids, which cousin Margaret sewed together and wound around a big shell comb. Everybody said, "The schoolmarm looks beautiful," and 051 "many fears were expressed lest some one should be so smitten that the school would be deprived of a teacher." The pupils acquitted themselves with flying colors, and the teacher then went to spend her vacation with her married sisters at Easton and Battenville. They had "long talks and good laughs and cries together," but she writes her parents that if they will make one visit to this old home they will go back to Rochester thoroughly satisfied with the new one.
Her first quarterly exam, which will take place in front of the principal, trustees, and parents, is causing her a lot of stress. She writes that her nerves felt like they were on fire and her face was burning, and she didn’t sleep at all the night before. She wore a new muslin dress, plaid in purple, white, blue, and brown, with two puffs around the skirt and on the sleeves at the shoulders and wrists, along with white linen undersleeves and a collar; new blue prunella gaiters with patent leather heels and tips; and her cousin's watch with a gold chain and pencil. Her thick hair was braided into four long braids, which cousin Margaret stitched together and wrapped around a large shell comb. Everyone said, "The teacher looks beautiful," and 051 "many people worried that someone might be so enchanted that the school would lose a teacher." The students performed exceptionally well, and then the teacher went to spend her vacation with her married sisters in Easton and Battenville. They had "long talks and good laughs and cries together," but she told her parents that if they made one visit to this old home, they would return to Rochester completely satisfied with the new one.

SUSAN B. ANTHONY. AT THE AGE OF 28, FROM A DAGUERREOTYPE.
SUSAN B. ANTHONY. AT 28 YEARS OLD, FROM A DAGUERREOTYPE.
For the winter she buys a broche shawl for $22.50, a gray fox muff for $8, a $5.50 white ribbed-silk hat, "which makes the villagers stare," and a plum-colored merino dress at $2 a yard, "which everybody admits to be the sweetest thing entirely;" and she wonders if her sisters "do not feel rather sad because they are married and can not have nice clothes." Miss Anthony may be said to have been at this time at the height of her fashionable career.
For the winter, she buys a brooch shawl for $22.50, a gray fox muff for $8, a $5.50 white ribbed-silk hat, "which makes the villagers stare," and a plum-colored merino dress at $2 a yard, "which everyone agrees is the sweetest thing ever;" and she wonders if her sisters "feel a bit sad because they are married and can’t wear nice clothes." Miss Anthony can be said to have been at the peak of her fashionable career at this time.
In the spring her pupils give an "exhibition" which far surpasses anything ever before seen in Canajoharie. She writes: "Can you begin to imagine my excitement? The nights seemed lengthened into days; the hopes, the fears that filled my mind are indescribable. Who ever thought that Susan Anthony could get up such an affair? I am sure I never did, but here I was; it was sink or swim, I made a bold effort and won the victory."[10]
In the spring, her students put on an "exhibition" that totally exceeded anything anyone had ever seen in Canajoharie. She wrote: "Can you even imagine how excited I was? The nights felt like they stretched into days; the hopes and fears filling my mind are beyond words. Who would have thought that Susan Anthony could pull off an event like this? I certainly didn't, but there I was; it was do or die, and I made a bold effort and came out on top."[10]
In June she attends her first circus, "Sands, Lent & Co., Proprietors." About this time she writes of being invited to a military ball and says: "My fancy for attending dances is fully satiated. I certainly shall not attend another unless I can have a total abstinence man to accompany me, and not one whose highest delight is to make a fool of himself." She says in this letter: "The town election has just been held and the good people elected a distiller for supervisor and a rumseller for justice of the peace."
In June, she goes to her first circus, "Sands, Lent & Co., Proprietors." Around this time, she writes about being invited to a military ball and says: "I'm completely satisfied with my desire to go to dances. I definitely won't go to another unless I can bring someone who doesn’t drink and not someone whose greatest joy is to embarrass himself." In this letter, she mentions: "The town election just took place, and the good people elected a distiller as supervisor and a rumseller as justice of the peace."
In 1848 she shows the first signs of growing tired of teaching and wonders if she is to follow it for a lifetime. She says: "I don't know whether I am weary of well-doing, but oh, if 052 I could only unstring my bow for a few short months, I think I could take up my work with renewed vigor." She is very homesick, after the two years' absence, and so makes a visit to Rochester in August. For this she gets "a drab silk bonnet shirred inside with pink, and her blue lawn and her brown silk made over, half low-necked." She has "a beautiful green delaine and a black braise [barége] which are very becoming." She wants a fancy hat, a $15 pin and $30 mantilla, every one of which she resolves to deny herself, but afterwards writes: "There is not a mantilla in town like mine."
In 1848, she starts to show signs of getting tired of teaching and wonders if this is what she’ll be doing for the rest of her life. She says: "I don't know if I'm just exhausted from doing good work, but oh, if 052 I could take a break for just a few months, I think I could return to my work with renewed energy." After being away for two years, she's really homesick, so she decides to visit Rochester in August. For this trip, she gets "a drab silk bonnet with pink shirring on the inside, and her blue lawn and brown silk dress altered to be half low-necked." She has "a beautiful green delaine and a black braise [barége] that look very flattering." She wants to buy a fancy hat, a $15 pin, and a $30 mantilla, each of which she promises herself to skip, but later writes: "There isn't a mantilla in town that compares to mine."
In March, 1849, her beloved cousin Margaret, with whom she has been living for the past two years, gives birth to a child and she remains with her through the ordeal. In a letter to her mother immediately afterwards, she expresses the opinion that there are some drawbacks to marriage which make a woman quite content to remain single. She quotes a little bit of domestic life: "Joseph had a headache the other day and Margaret remarked that she had had one for weeks. 'Oh,' said the husband, 'mine is the real headache, genuine pain, yours is a sort of natural consequence.'" For seven weeks she is at Margaret's bedside every moment when out of school, and also superintends the house and looks after the children. There are a nurse and a girl in the kitchen, but the invalid will eat no food which Cousin Susan does not prepare; there is no touch so light and gentle as hers; her very presence gives rest and strength. At the end of this time Margaret dies, leaving four little children. Susan's grief is as intense as if she had lost a sister, and she decides to remain no longer in Canajoharie. She writes: "I seem to shrink from my daily tasks; energy and stimulus are wanting; I have no courage. A great weariness has come over me." In all the letters of the past ten years there has not been one note of discontent or discouragement, but now she is growing tired of the treadmill. At this time the California fever was at its height, hundreds of young men were starting westward, and she writes: "Oh, if I were but a man so that I could go!" 053
In March 1849, her dear cousin Margaret, with whom she had been living for the past two years, gives birth to a child, and she stays with her throughout the difficult time. In a letter to her mother right after, she shares her thoughts on the downsides of marriage that can make a woman feel perfectly fine with staying single. She recounts a snippet of everyday life: "Joseph had a headache the other day, and Margaret commented that she had one for weeks. 'Oh,' said the husband, 'mine is the real headache, genuine pain; yours is just a natural consequence.'" For seven weeks, she stays by Margaret's side any moment she’s not at school, also managing the household and taking care of the children. There’s a nurse and a girl in the kitchen, but the sick woman refuses to eat anything that Cousin Susan doesn’t cook; no one else can provide the gentle touch that she can. Just her presence brings rest and strength. After this time, Margaret passes away, leaving behind four small children. Susan's grief is as deep as if she had lost a sister, and she decides it’s time to leave Canajoharie. She writes, "I find myself avoiding my daily tasks; I lack energy and motivation; I have no courage. A great weariness has settled over me." In all her letters over the past ten years, there hasn’t been a single note of discontent or discouragement, but now she feels exhausted from the mundane routine. At this time, the California gold rush was at its peak, and hundreds of young men were heading west. She writes, "Oh, if only I were a man so that I could go!" 053
Soon after coming to Canajoharie Miss Anthony joined the society of the Daughters of Temperance and was made secretary. Her heart and soul were enlisted in this cause. She realized the immense task to be accomplished, and, even then, saw dimly the power that women might wield if they were properly organized and given full authority and sanction to work. As yet no women had spoken in public on this question, and they had just begun to organize societies among themselves, called Daughters' Unions, which were a sort of annex to the men's organizations, but they were strongly opposed by most women as being unladylike and entirely out of woman's sphere.
Soon after arriving in Canajoharie, Miss Anthony joined the Daughters of Temperance and became the secretary. She was deeply committed to this cause. She understood the huge task ahead and, even then, vaguely recognized the power that women could have if they organized properly and were given full authority to act. At that time, no women had spoken publicly on this issue, and they had just started to form their own groups called Daughters' Unions, which were like an extension of the men’s organizations. However, most women strongly opposed these groups, viewing them as unladylike and completely outside of a woman's role.
On March 1, 1849, the Daughters of Temperance gave a supper, to which were invited the people of the village, and the address of the evening was made by Miss Anthony. She thus describes the occasion in a letter:
On March 1, 1849, the Daughters of Temperance hosted a dinner and invited the villagers, and Miss Anthony gave the speech for the evening. She describes the event in a letter:
I was escorted into the hall by the Committee where were assembled about 200 people. The room was beautifully festooned with cedar and red flannel. On the south side was printed in large capitals of evergreen the name of "Susan B. Anthony!" I hardly knew how to conduct myself amidst so much kindly regard. They had an elegant supper. On the top of one pyramid loaf cake was a beautiful bouquet, which was handed to the gentleman who escorted me (Charlie Webster) and by him presented to me.
I was led into the hall by the Committee, where around 200 people were gathered. The room was beautifully decorated with cedar and red fabric. On the south side, the name "Susan B. Anthony!" was shown in large, green letters. I wasn’t sure how to act with so much warm attention. They served an elegant dinner. On one of the cake displays, there was a lovely bouquet, which was given to the gentleman who escorted me (Charlie Webster) and then presented to me.
The paper is interesting as the first platform utterance of a woman destined to become one of the noted speakers of the century. While it gives no especial promise of the oratorical ability which later developed, it illustrates the courage of the woman who dared read an address in public, when to do so provoked the severest criticism. The following extracts are taken verbatim from the original MS.:
The paper is interesting as the first public statement from a woman who would become one of the renowned speakers of the century. While it doesn't particularly show the oratorical skills that would later emerge, it highlights the bravery of the woman who had the courage to deliver a speech in public when doing so attracted harsh criticism. The following excerpts are taken word-for-word from the original manuscript:
Welcome, Gentlemen and Ladies, to this, our Hall of Temperance. We feel that the cause we have espoused is a common cause, in which you, with us, are deeply interested. We would that some means were devised, by which our Brothers and Sons shall no longer be allured from the right by the corrupting influence of the fashionable sippings of wine and brandy, those sure destroyers of Mental and Moral Worth, and by which our Sisters and Daughters shall no longer be exposed to the vile arts of the gentlemanly-appearing, gallant, but really half-inebriated seducer. Our motive is to ask of you counsel in the formation, and co-operation in the carrying-out of plans which may produce a radical change in our Moral Atmosphere.... 054
Welcome, everyone, to our Hall of Temperance. We believe that the mission we’ve embraced is a shared mission, one in which you, along with us, are deeply committed. We wish there were ways to ensure that our Brothers and Sons are no longer tempted away from the right path by the corrupting influence of trendy drinks like wine and brandy, which are bound to undermine Mental and Moral Worth, and that our Sisters and Daughters are no longer exposed to the deceitful charms of men who may seem gentlemanly but are really just half-drunk seducers. Our goal is to seek your input in developing and collaborating on strategies that could lead to a meaningful change in our Moral Atmosphere... 054
But to the question, what good our Union has done? Though our Order has been strongly opposed by ladies professing a desire to see the Moral condition of our race elevated, and though we still behold some of our thoughtless female friends whirling in the giddy dance, with intoxicated partners at their side and, more than this, see them accompany their reeling companions to some secluded nook and there quaff with them from that Virtue-destroying cup, yet may we not hope that an influence, though now unseen, unfelt, has gone forth, which shall tell upon the future, which shall convince us that our weekly resort to these meetings has not been in vain, and which shall cause the friends of humanity to admire and respect—nay, venerate—this now-despised little band of Daughters of Temperance?...
But let’s address the question: what good has our Union achieved? Although our Order has faced strong opposition from women who claim to want to improve the moral conditions of our community, and despite still seeing some of our carefree female friends dancing wildly with drunken partners beside them, and worse, watching them follow their stumbling companions to some quiet spot to drink from that damaging cup, can we not hope that an unseen and unrecognized influence has begun to emerge that will affect the future? This influence should reassure us that our weekly meetings have not been in vain and will inspire humanity to admire and respect—indeed, to venerate—this currently scorned little group of Daughters of Temperance?
We count it no waste of time to go forth through our streets, thus proclaiming our desire for the advancement of our great cause. You, with us, no doubt, feel that Intemperance is the blighting mildew of all our social connections; you would be most happy to speed on the time when no Wife shall watch with trembling heart and tearful eye the slow, but sure descent of her idolized Companion down to the loathsome haunts of drunkenness; you would hasten the day when no Mother shall have to mourn over a darling son as she sees him launch his bark on the circling waves of the mighty whirlpool.
We don’t see it as a waste of time to walk through our streets, emphasizing our desire for the advancement of our important cause. Like us, you surely believe that addiction is the destructive force behind all our social connections; you would be very happy to hasten the day when no wife has to watch, with a trembling heart and tearful eyes, as her beloved partner falls into the shameful depths of alcoholism; you would want to bring about a day when no mother has to mourn the loss of her precious son while she watches him set sail on the turbulent waves of that powerful whirlpool.
How is this great change to be wrought, who are to urge on this vast work of reform? Shall it not be women, who are most aggrieved by the foul destroyer's inroads? Most certainly. Then arises the question, how are we to accomplish the end desired? I answer, not by confining our influence to our own home circle, not by centering all our benevolent feelings upon our own kindred, not by caring naught for the culture of any minds, save those of our own darlings. No, no; the gratification of the selfish impulses alone, can never produce a desirable change in the Moral aspect of Society....
How will this significant change happen, and who will drive this massive reform? Shouldn’t it be women, who are the most affected by these destructive forces? Absolutely. So the question is, how are we going to achieve the desired outcome? I say, not by limiting our influence to just our own families, not by focusing all our caring feelings only on our relatives, not by neglecting the education of any minds except those of our own children. No, no; just satisfying our selfish impulses alone can never bring about a positive change in the moral state of society...
It is generally conceded that it is our sex that fashions the Social and Moral State of Society. We do not presume that females possess unbounded power in abolishing the evil customs of the day; but we do believe that were they en masse to discountenance the use of wine and brandy as beverages at both their public and private parties, not one of the opposite Sex, who has any claim to the title of gentleman, would so insult them as to come into their presence after having quaffed of that foul destroyer of all true delicacy and refinement.
It is widely acknowledged that our gender shapes the social and moral fabric of society. We don’t think that women have unlimited power to eliminate the harmful customs of the time; however, we believe that if they collectively rejected wine and brandy as drinks at their social and private gatherings, not a single man worthy of the title would have the nerve to approach them after consuming that hideous destroyer of all true delicacy and refinement.
I am not aware that we have any inebriate females among us, but have we not those, who are fallen from Virtue, and who claim our efforts for their reform, equally with the inebriate? And while we feel it our duty to extend the hand of sympathy and love to those who are wanderers from the path of Temperance, should we not also be zealous in reclaiming those poor, deluded ones, who have been robbed of their most precious Gem, Virtue, and whom we blush to think belong to our Sex?
I’m not aware of any drunk women among us, but don’t we have some who have lost their way from Virtue and deserve our help to get back on track, just like those dealing with alcohol issues? While we feel it’s our duty to offer sympathy and love to those straying from the path of Temperance, shouldn’t we also strive to help those unfortunate, misguided individuals who have lost their most valuable treasure, Virtue, and who we’re embarrassed to think are part of our gender?
Now, Ladies, all we would do is to do all in our power, both individually and collectively, to harmonize and happify our Social system. We ask of you candidly and seriously to investigate the Matter, and decide for yourselves whether the object of our Union be not on the side of right, and if it be, then one and all, for the sake of erring humanity, come forward and speed on the 055 right. If you come to the conclusion that the end we wish to attain is right, but are not satisfied with the plan adopted, then I ask of you to devise means by which this great good may be more speedily accomplished, and you shall find us ready with both heart and hand to co-operate with you. In my humble opinion, all that is needed to produce a complete Temperance and Social reform in this age of Moral Suasion, is for our Sex to cast their United influences into the balance.
Now, ladies, all we want to do is to do everything in our power, both individually and together, to improve and elevate our social system. We ask you honestly and seriously to reflect on this matter and decide for yourselves whether the purpose of our union is just, and if it is, then let us all step forward, for the sake of humanity, and speed on the 055 right. If you conclude that the goal we want to achieve is correct, but you're not satisfied with the plan we’ve adopted, then I urge you to come up with alternative ways to achieve this great good more quickly, and you will find us ready to support you wholeheartedly. In my humble opinion, all that’s needed to bring about complete temperance and social reform in this era of moral persuasion is for our gender to unite and put their collective influence into action.
Ladies! there is no Neutral position for us to assume. If we sustain not this noble enterprise, both by precept and example, then is our influence on the side of Intemperance. If we say we love the Cause, and then sit down at our ease, surely does our action speak the lie. And now permit me once more to beg of you to lend your aid to this great Cause, the Cause of God and all Mankind.
Ladies! There is no neutral stance for us to take. If we don’t support this noble mission, both through our words and our actions, then our influence favors Intemperance. If we claim to love the Cause but then relax and do nothing, our actions contradict our words. So, I ask you once again to lend your support to this great Cause, the Cause of God and all of Humanity.
The next day on the streets, so the letters say, everybody was exclaiming, "Miss Anthony is the smartest woman who ever has been in Canajoharie." Soon afterwards the school closed and, after spending the summer visiting eastern relatives and friends, Miss Anthony returned to Rochester in the autumn of 1849. The thing she remembers most vividly is how she reveled in fruit. All the young orchards her father had planted were now bearing, including a thousand peach trees, and for the first time in her life she had all the peaches she wanted, and "lived on them for a month."
The next day on the streets, as the letters say, everyone was saying, "Miss Anthony is the smartest woman who has ever been in Canajoharie." Soon after, the school closed, and after spending the summer visiting relatives and friends in the East, Miss Anthony returned to Rochester in the fall of 1849. What she remembers most vividly is how much she enjoyed the fruit. All the young orchards her father had planted were now producing, including a thousand peach trees, and for the first time in her life, she had all the peaches she wanted, and "lived on them for a month."
The years of 1850 and 1851 Daniel Anthony conducted his insurance business in Syracuse and Susan remained at home, taking entire charge of the farm, superintending the planting of the crops, the harvesting and the selling. She also did most of the housework, as her mother was in delicate health, her sister was teaching school and both brothers were away. In the winter of 1852, she went into a school in Rochester as supply for three months. She found, however, that her taste for teaching was entirely gone, her work was without inspiration, her interest and sympathy had become enlisted in other things. She longed to take an active part in the two great reforms of temperance and anti-slavery, which now were absorbing public attention; she could not endure the narrow and confining life of the school-room, and so, in the spring, she abandoned teaching forever, after an experience of fifteen years.
In 1850 and 1851, Daniel Anthony ran his insurance business in Syracuse while Susan stayed at home, managing the farm completely. She oversaw planting crops, harvesting, and selling them. She also handled most of the housework since her mother was in poor health, her sister was teaching, and both brothers were away. In the winter of 1852, she took a supply teaching position in Rochester for three months. However, she discovered that her passion for teaching had faded completely; her work felt uninspired, and her interest had shifted to other matters. She yearned to engage in the two major reforms of temperance and anti-slavery that were capturing public interest. She could no longer tolerate the restrictive life of the classroom, and in the spring, she left teaching for good after fifteen years.
CHAPTER V.
ENTRANCE INTO PUBLIC LIFE.
1850—1852.
Ill the conditions were such as to make it most natural for Miss Anthony, when she reached the age of maturity, to adopt a public career and go actively into reform work, and especially to enter upon that contest to secure equal rights for those of her own sex, which she was to wage unceasingly for half a century. Her father's mother and sister were "high seat" Quakers, the latter a famous preacher. Her mother's cousin, Betsey Dunnell White, of Stafford's Hill, was noted as the only woman in that locality who could "talk politics," and the men used to come from far and near to get her opinion on the political situation. She was brought up in a society which recognizes the equality of the sexes and encourages women in public speaking. In her own home the father believed in giving sons and daughters the same advantages, and in preparing the latter as well as the former for self-support. The daughters were taught business principles, and invested with responsibility at an early age. Two of them married, and the third was of a quiet and retiring disposition; but in Susan he saw ability of a high order and that same courage, persistence and aggressiveness which entered into his own character, enabling him to make his way in the business world and rally from his losses and defeats. He encouraged her desire to go into the reforms which were demanding attention, gave her financial backing when necessary, moral support upon all occasions, and was ever her most interested friend and faithful ally. She received also the sympathy and assistance of her mother, who, 058 no matter how heavy the domestic burdens, or how precarious her own health, was never willing that she should take any time from her public work to give to the duties of home, although she frequently insisted upon doing so.
The circumstances were such that it felt completely natural for Miss Anthony, when she reached adulthood, to pursue a public career and actively engage in reform work, particularly the fight for equal rights for women, which she would relentlessly pursue for fifty years. Her father's mother and sister were "high seat" Quakers, with the latter being a well-known preacher. Her mother's cousin, Betsey Dunnell White, from Stafford's Hill, was famous as the only woman in the area who could "talk politics," attracting men from all around who sought her insight on political matters. She grew up in a community that valued gender equality and encouraged women to speak publicly. At home, her father believed in providing the same opportunities for both sons and daughters, preparing them all for financial independence. The daughters were taught business principles and were given responsibilities from a young age. Two of them got married, while the third was more reserved and shy; however, he recognized in Susan a high level of ability and the same courage, persistence, and determination that characterized his own nature, allowing him to succeed in business and recover from his setbacks. He supported her aspirations to engage in the pressing reforms, provided her with financial backing when needed, offered moral support at all times, and was always her most dedicated friend and loyal ally. She also received encouragement and help from her mother, who, 058 no matter how overwhelming the household responsibilities or how fragile her own health, never allowed Susan to take time away from her public efforts for home duties, despite often insisting on doing so herself.
During Miss Anthony's stay at Canajoharie she went often to Albany and there made the intimate acquaintance of Abigail Mott and her sister Lydia, whose names are now a blessed memory with the leaders of the abolition movement that still remain. Their modest home was a rallying center for the reformers of the day, and here Miss Anthony met many of the noted men and women with whom she was to become so closely associated in the future. She reached home in 1849 to find a hot-bed of discussion and fermentation. The first rift had been made in the old common law, which for centuries had held women in its iron grasp, by the passage, in April, 1848, of the Property Bill allowing a married woman to hold real estate in her own name in New York. Previous to this time all the property which a woman owned at marriage and all she might receive by gift or inheritance passed into the possession of the husband; the rents and profits belonged to him, and he could sell it during his lifetime or dispose of it by will at his death except her life interest in one-third of the real estate. The more thoughtful among women were beginning to ask why other unjust laws should not also be repealed, and the whole question of the rights of woman was thus opened.
During Miss Anthony's time in Canajoharie, she frequently traveled to Albany, where she formed a close friendship with Abigail Mott and her sister Lydia, whose names are still fondly remembered by the leaders of the ongoing abolition movement. Their humble home became a gathering place for the reformers of that era, and it was here that Miss Anthony met many notable men and women who would later become significant figures in her life. She returned home in 1849 to find a vibrant atmosphere filled with discussion and activity. A significant change had occurred in the old common law, which had for centuries held women in its tight grip, with the passage of the Property Bill in April 1848. This legislation allowed married women to own real estate in their own name in New York. Before this, any property a woman had at marriage, as well as any gifts or inheritances she received, automatically transferred to her husband. He would control the rents and profits, and had the authority to sell or will the property away upon his death, except for her life interest in one-third of the real estate. More thoughtful women were starting to question why other unjust laws shouldn't be repealed as well, thus opening up the entire conversation about women's rights.
In 1848, Spiritualism may be said to have had its birth, and the remarkable manifestations of the Fox sisters brought numbers of people to Rochester, where they had-removed as soon as they began to be widely known. This form of religious belief soon acquired a large following, causing much controversy and great excitement.
In 1848, Spiritualism can be considered to have started, and the amazing experiences of the Fox sisters drew many people to Rochester, where they had moved as soon as they became well-known. This type of religious belief quickly gained a large following, generating a lot of controversy and excitement.
The Society of Friends had divided on the slavery issue and Miss Anthony found her family attending the Unitarian church, which soon afterwards called William Henry Channing to its pulpit. Both he and Samuel J. May, the father of Unitarianism in Syracuse, became her steadfast friends and 059 never-failing support in all the great work which was developed in later years.
The Society of Friends split over the slavery issue, and Miss Anthony found her family going to the Unitarian church, which soon after welcomed William Henry Channing as its pastor. Both he and Samuel J. May, who was the pioneer of Unitarianism in Syracuse, became her loyal friends and 059 constant support in all the significant work that unfolded in the years to come.

AUNT HANNAH, THE QUAKER PREACHER. FROM A DAGUERREOTYPE.
AUNT HANNAH, THE QUAKER PREACHER. FROM A DAGUERREOTYPE.
In July, 1848, the first Woman's Rights Convention had been held in Seneca Falls and adjourned to meet in Rochester August 2. Miss Anthony's father, mother and sister Mary had attended and signed the declaration demanding equal rights for women, and she found them enthusiastic upon this subject and also over Mrs. Stanton, Lucretia Mott and other prominent women who had taken part. Her cousin, Sarah Anthony Burtis, had acted as secretary of the convention.
In July 1848, the first Women's Rights Convention was held in Seneca Falls and was set to reconvene in Rochester on August 2. Miss Anthony's father, mother, and sister Mary attended and signed the declaration demanding equal rights for women. She found them enthusiastic about this issue as well as about Mrs. Stanton, Lucretia Mott, and other prominent women who participated. Her cousin, Sarah Anthony Burtis, served as the secretary of the convention.
In 1849 Mrs. Mott published her admirable Discourse on Woman in answer to a lyceum lecture by Richard H. Dana ridiculing the idea of civil and political rights for women. In 1847 Frederick Douglass had brought his family to Rochester and established his paper, the North Star. As soon as Miss Anthony reached home she was taken by her father to call on Douglass, and this was the beginning of another friendship which was to last a lifetime.
In 1849, Mrs. Mott published her impressive Discourse on Woman in response to a lecture by Richard H. Dana that mocked the idea of civil and political rights for women. In 1847, Frederick Douglass brought his family to Rochester and started his newspaper, the North Star. As soon as Miss Anthony got home, her father took her to meet Douglass, marking the start of a lifelong friendship.
The year 1849 saw the whole country in a state of great unrest and excitement. Eighty thousand men had gone to California in search of gold. Telegraphs and railroads were being rapidly constructed, thus bringing widely separated localities into close communication. The unsettled condition of Europe and the famine in Ireland had turned toward America that tremendous tide of immigration which this year had risen to 300,000. The admission of Texas into the Union had precipitated the full force of the slavery question. Old parties were disintegrating and sectional lines becoming closely drawn. New territories were knocking at the door of the Union and the whole nation was in a ferment as to whether they should be slave or free. Threats of secession were heard in both the North and the South. A spirit of compromise finally prevailed and deferred the crisis for a decade, but the agitation and unrest continued to increase. The Abolitionists were still a handful of radicals, repudiated alike by the Free Soil Whigs and Free Soil Democrats. Slavery, as an institution, had not 060 yet become a political issue, but only its extension into the territories.
The year 1849 saw the whole country in a state of great unrest and excitement. Eighty thousand men had traveled to California in search of gold. Telegraphs and railroads were being rapidly built, connecting widely separated areas. The unstable situation in Europe and the famine in Ireland had caused a massive wave of immigration to America, which had risen to 300,000 this year. The admission of Texas into the Union had intensified the slavery debate. Old political parties were breaking apart, and regional divisions were becoming sharper. New territories were eager to join the Union, and the entire nation was in turmoil over whether they would allow slavery or not. Threats of secession were present in both the North and the South. A spirit of compromise ultimately took hold, delaying the crisis for a decade, but agitation and unrest continued to grow. The abolitionists were still a small group of radicals, rejected by both the Free Soil Whigs and Free Soil Democrats. Slavery, as an institution, had not 060 yet become a political issue, but only its spread into the territories.
Such, in brief, was the situation at the beginning of 1850. It was a period of grave apprehension on the part of older men and women, of intense aggressiveness with the younger, who were eager for action. It is not surprising then that an educated, self-reliant, public-spirited woman who had just reached thirty should chafe against the narrow limits of a school-room and rebel at giving her time and strength to the teaching of children, when all her mind and heart were drawn toward the great issues then filling the press and the platform and even finding their way into the pulpit. Miss Anthony's whole soul soon became absorbed in the thought, "What service can I render humanity; what can I do to help right the wrongs of society?" At this time the one and only field of public work into which women had dared venture, except in a few isolated cases, was that of temperance. Miss Anthony had brought her credentials from the Daughters' Union at Canajoharie and presented them at once to the society in Rochester; they were gladly accepted and she soon became a leader. In these days John B. Gough was delivering his magnificent lectures throughout the country, and Philip S. White, of South Carolina, was winning fame as a temperance orator.
At the start of 1850, the situation was pretty tense. Older men and women were feeling a lot of anxiety, while younger people were very aggressive and eager for action. So, it's not surprising that an educated, independent, community-focused woman who had just turned thirty would feel frustrated by the limitations of a classroom and resist spending her time and energy teaching kids when her mind and heart were focused on the significant issues that were all over the news and being discussed in public forums, even in churches. Miss Anthony quickly became consumed by the question, "What can I do to serve humanity; how can I help address society's wrongs?" At that time, the only area of public work that women had dared to enter—aside from a few exceptions—was temperance. Miss Anthony brought her credentials from the Daughters' Union in Canajoharie and presented them to the society in Rochester, where they were gladly accepted, and she soon took on a leadership role. Back then, John B. Gough was giving his inspiring lectures across the country, and Philip S. White from South Carolina was gaining recognition as a temperance speaker.
The year 1850 was for her one of transition. A new world opened out before her. The Anthony homestead was a favorite meeting place for liberal-spirited men and women. On Sunday especially, when the father could be at home, the house was filled and fifteen or twenty people used to gather around the hospitable board. Susan always superintended these Sunday dinners, and was divided between her anxiety to sustain her reputation as a superior cook and her desire not to lose a word of the conversation in the parlor. Garrison, Pillsbury, Phillips, Channing and other great reformers visited at this home, and many a Sunday the big wagon would be sent to the city for Frederick Douglass and his family to come out and spend the day. Here were gathered many times the Posts, Hallowells, DeGarmos, Willises, Burtises, Kedzies, Fishes, Curtises, 061 Stebbins, Asa Anthonys, all Quakers who had left the society on account of their anti-slavery principles and were leaders in the abolition and woman's rights movements. Every one of these Sunday meetings was equal to a convention. The leading events of the day were discussed in no uncertain tones. All were Garrisonians and believed in "immediate and unconditional emancipation." In 1850 the Fugitive Slave Law was passed and all the resources of the federal government were employed for its enforcement. Its provisions exasperated the Abolitionists to the highest degree. The house of Isaac and Amy Post was the rendezvous for runaway slaves, and each of these families that gathered on Sunday at the Anthony farm could have told where might be found at least one station on the "underground railroad."
The year 1850 was a time of change for her. A new world opened up before her. The Anthony home was a popular gathering place for open-minded men and women. Especially on Sundays, when her father was home, the house was packed, and about fifteen or twenty people would come together around the welcoming table. Susan always took charge of these Sunday dinners and felt torn between wanting to uphold her reputation as an excellent cook and not wanting to miss a single word of the conversation happening in the parlor. Garrison, Pillsbury, Phillips, Channing, and other notable reformers visited this home, and many Sundays, a large wagon was sent to the city to bring Frederick Douglass and his family out to spend the day. Many times, the Posts, Hallowells, DeGarmos, Willises, Burtises, Kedzies, Fishes, Curtises, 061 Stebbins, Asa Anthonys—Quakers who had left their society because of their anti-slavery beliefs and were leaders in the abolition and women's rights movements—would gather here. Each Sunday meeting was like a convention. The major events of the day were discussed candidly. Everyone was a Garrisonian and believed in "immediate and unconditional emancipation." In 1850, the Fugitive Slave Law was passed, and the federal government threw all its resources into enforcing it. Its provisions deeply angered the Abolitionists. The home of Isaac and Amy Post was the meeting place for runaway slaves, and each of these families that gathered on Sundays at the Anthony farm could have pointed out at least one stop on the "underground railroad."
Miss Anthony read with deep interest the reports of the woman's rights convention held at Worcester, Mass., October, 1850, which were published in the New York Tribune.[11] She sympathized fully with the demand for equal rights for women, but was not yet quite convinced that these included the suffrage. This, no doubt, was largely because Quaker men did not vote, thinking it wrong to support a government which believed in war. Even so progressive and public-spirited a man as Daniel Anthony, much as he was interested in all national affairs, never voted until 1860, when he became convinced it was only by force of arms that the question of slavery could be settled.
Miss Anthony read with great interest the reports of the women's rights convention held in Worcester, Massachusetts, in October 1850, which were published in the New York Tribune.[11] She fully supported the demand for equal rights for women but wasn't entirely convinced that this included the right to vote. This was likely because Quaker men did not vote, believing it was wrong to support a government that endorsed war. Even someone as progressive and civic-minded as Daniel Anthony, despite his strong interest in national issues, didn't vote until 1860 when he became convinced that the question of slavery could only be resolved through armed conflict.
In 1851, the License Law having been arbitrarily repealed a few years before, there was practically no regulation of the liquor business, nor was there any such public sentiment against intemperance as exists at the present day. Drunkenness was not looked upon as an especial disgrace and there had been little agitation of the question. The wife of a drunkard was completely at his mercy. He had the entire custody of the children, full control of anything she might earn, and the law did not recognize drunkenness as a cause for 062 divorce. Although woman was the greatest sufferer, she had not yet learned that she had even the poor right of protest. Oppressed by the weight of the injustice and tyranny of ages, she knew nothing except to suffer in silence; and so degraded was she by generations of slavish submission, that she possessed not even the moral courage to stand by those of her own sex who dared rebel and demand a new dispensation.
In 1851, after the License Law had been repealed a few years earlier, there was practically no regulation of the liquor industry, and public opinion was not as strongly against alcohol abuse as it is today. Drunkenness wasn't seen as a particularly shameful issue, and there had been little movement to address it. A drunkard's wife was completely at his mercy. He had full custody of the children, complete control over anything she might earn, and the law didn’t recognize drunkenness as a reason for 062 divorce. Although women were the biggest victims of this situation, they hadn’t yet realized they even had the right to protest. Burdened by years of injustice and oppression, they only knew how to suffer in silence; they were so degraded by generations of submission that they lacked the moral courage to support other women who dared to rebel and demand change.
The old Washingtonian Society of the first half of the nineteenth century, composed entirely of men, because reformed drunkards only could belong to it, was succeeded by the Sons of Temperance, and these had permitted the organization of subordinate lodges called Daughters of Temperance, which, as subsequent events will show, were entitled to no official recognition. It was in one of these, the only organized bodies of women known at this time,[12] that Miss Anthony first displayed that executive ability which was destined to make her famous. During 1851 she was very active in temperance work and organized a number of societies in surrounding towns. She instituted in Rochester a series of suppers and festivals to raise the funds which she at once saw were necessary before any efficient work could be done. An old invitation to one of these, dated February 21, 1851, and signed by Susan B. Anthony, chairman, reads: "The entertainment is intended to be of such a character as will meet the approbation of the wise and good; Supper, Songs, Toasts, Sentiments and short speeches will be the order of-the evening; $1 will admit a gentleman and a lady" A newpaper account says:
The old Washingtonian Society from the first half of the nineteenth century, made up entirely of men since only reformed alcoholics could join, was followed by the Sons of Temperance. They allowed the creation of smaller groups called Daughters of Temperance, which, as later events will reveal, weren't given any official recognition. It was in one of these groups, the only organized women's bodies known at that time,[12] that Miss Anthony first showcased her leadership skills that would eventually make her famous. In 1851, she was very active in temperance efforts and set up several societies in nearby towns. She started a series of dinners and festivals in Rochester to raise the funds she recognized were essential before any effective work could take place. An old invitation to one of these events, dated February 21, 1851, and signed by Susan B. Anthony, the chairperson, states: "The entertainment is intended to be of such a character as will meet the approval of the wise and good; Supper, Songs, Toasts, Sentiments and short speeches will be the order of the evening; $1 will admit a gentleman and a lady." A newspaper article reports:
The five long tables were loaded with a rich variety of provisions, tastefully decorated and arranged. Mayor Samuel Richardson presided at the supper table. After the repast was over, Miss Susan B. Anthony, Directress of the Festival and President of the Association, introduced these highly creditable sentiments, which were greatly applauded by the assemblage:
The five long tables were filled with a variety of delicious food, beautifully arranged and decorated. Mayor Samuel Richardson hosted the dinner. Once everyone finished eating, Miss Susan B. Anthony, the Festival Director and President of the Association, shared these inspiring sentiments, which received a lot of applause from the audience:
"The Women of Rochester—Powerful to fashion the customs of society, may they not fail to exercise that power for the speedy and total banishment of all that intoxicates from our domestic and social circles, and thus speed on the day when no young man, be he ever so genteelly dressed or of ever so 063 noble, origin, who pollutes his lips with the touch of the drunkard's cup, shall presume to seek the favor of any of our precious daughters.
"The Women of Rochester—Strong enough to influence the customs of society, may you not hesitate to use that strength to swiftly and completely remove all that intoxicates from our homes and social circles, and bring forth the day when no young man, no matter how well-dressed or of any noble background, who taints his lips with the drinker's cup, will dare to seek the favor of any of our cherished daughters."
"Our Cause—May each succeeding day add to its glory and every hour give fresh impetus to its progress...."
"Our Cause—May each passing day enhance its glory and every hour provide new momentum for its progress...."
Many other toasts were proposed which space forbids quoting, but the following by one of the gentlemen deserves a place:
Many other toasts were proposed that we can't quote because of space, but the following one by one of the gentlemen deserves a mention:
The Daughters—Our characters they elevate,
The Daughters—They uplift our characters,
Our manners they refine;
They refine our manners;
Without them we'd degenerate
Without them we'd decline.
To the level of the swine.
To the level of the pigs.
It is curious how willing men have been, through all the centuries, to admit that only the influence of women saves them from being brutes and how anxious to confine that influence to the narrowest possible limits.
It’s interesting how ready men have always been, throughout the ages, to acknowledge that only women’s influence keeps them from being savages, yet they are so eager to keep that influence as restricted as possible.

Abby K. Foster
Abby K. Foster
In the winter of 1851 Miss Anthony attended an anti-slavery meeting in Rochester, conducted by Stephen and Abby Kelly Foster. This was her first acquaintance with Mrs. Foster, who had been the most persecuted of all the women taking part in the anti-slavery struggle. She had been ridiculed, denounced and mobbed for years; and, for listening to her on Sunday, men and women had been expelled from church. Her strong and heroic spirit struck an answering spark in Miss Anthony's breast. She accompanied the Fosters for a week on their tour of meetings in adjoining counties, and was urged by them to go actively into this reform.
In the winter of 1851, Miss Anthony attended an anti-slavery meeting in Rochester, organized by Stephen and Abby Kelly Foster. This was her first introduction to Mrs. Foster, who had been one of the most persecuted women involved in the anti-slavery movement. She had faced ridicule, denunciation, and mob violence for years; and for listening to her on Sunday, men and women had been kicked out of church. Her strong and courageous spirit ignited a spark in Miss Anthony’s heart. She traveled with the Fosters for a week on their tour of meetings in nearby counties and was encouraged by them to get actively involved in this reform.
The following May she went to the Anti-Slavery Anniversary in Syracuse. This convention had been driven out of New York by Rynders' mob in 1850 and did not dare go back. On the way home she stopped at Seneca Falls, the guest of Mrs. Amelia Bloomer, to hear again Wm. Lloyd Garrison and George Thompson, the distinguished Abolitionist from England, who had stirred her nature to its depths. Here was fulfilled her long-cherished desire of seeing Elizabeth Cady 064 Stanton. Their meeting is best described in that lady's own words: "Walking home with the speakers, who were my guests, we met Mrs. Bloomer with Miss Anthony on the corner of the street waiting to greet us. There she stood with her good, earnest face and genial smile, dressed in gray delaine, hat and all the same color relieved with pale-blue ribbons, the perfection of neatness and sobriety. I liked her thoroughly from the beginning." Both Mrs. Stanton and Mrs. Bloomer on this occasion wore what is known as the Bloomer costume. In the summer Miss Anthony went to Seneca Falls to a meeting of those interested in founding the People's College. Horace Greeley, Lucy Stone and herself were entertained by Mrs. Stanton. The three women were determined it should be opened to girls as well as boys. Mr. Greeley begged them not to agitate the question, assuring them that he would have the constitution and by-laws so framed as to admit women on the same terms as men, and he did as he promised, making a spirited fight. Before the college was fairly started, however, it was merged into Cornell University.
The following May, she attended the Anti-Slavery Anniversary in Syracuse. This convention had been forced out of New York by Rynders' mob in 1850 and didn't dare return. On her way home, she stopped at Seneca Falls, staying with Mrs. Amelia Bloomer, to hear from Wm. Lloyd Garrison and George Thompson, the prominent Abolitionist from England, who had deeply inspired her. Here, she fulfilled her long-held desire to meet Elizabeth Cady 064 Stanton. Their meeting is best described in Elizabeth's own words: "Walking home with the speakers, who were my guests, we met Mrs. Bloomer with Miss Anthony on the corner of the street waiting to greet us. There she stood with her good, earnest face and friendly smile, dressed in gray delaine, hat and all, matching with pale-blue ribbons, the epitome of neatness and seriousness. I liked her completely from the start." Both Mrs. Stanton and Mrs. Bloomer wore what was known as the Bloomer costume on this occasion. In the summer, Miss Anthony went to Seneca Falls for a meeting about founding the People's College. Horace Greeley, Lucy Stone, and she were hosted by Mrs. Stanton. The three women were determined that it should admit girls as well as boys. Mr. Greeley urged them not to push the issue, assuring them he would structure the constitution and by-laws to allow women the same rights as men, and he did as he promised, putting up a strong fight. However, before the college officially opened, it was merged into Cornell University.
This was Miss Anthony's first meeting with Lucy Stone and may be called the commencement of her life-long friendship with Mrs. Stanton. These women who sat at the dinner-table that day were destined to be recorded in history for all time as the three central figures in the great movement for equal rights. There certainly was nothing formidable in the appearance of the trio: Miss Anthony a quiet, dignified Quaker girl; Mrs. Stanton a plump, jolly, youthful matron, scarcely five feet high; and Lucy Stone a petite, soft-voiced young woman who seemed better fitted for caresses than for the hard buffetings of the world.
This was Miss Anthony's first meeting with Lucy Stone and marked the beginning of her lifelong friendship with Mrs. Stanton. The women who gathered at the dinner table that day were destined to be remembered in history as the three key figures in the great movement for equal rights. There was certainly nothing intimidating about the trio: Miss Anthony was a quiet, dignified Quaker girl; Mrs. Stanton was a plump, cheerful, youthful matron, hardly five feet tall; and Lucy Stone was a petite, soft-voiced young woman who seemed more suited for affection than for the hardships of the world.
Miss Anthony's public life may be said to have fairly begun in 1852. The Sons of Temperance had announced a mass meeting of all the divisions in the state, to be held at Albany, and had invited the Daughters to send delegates. The Rochester union appointed Susan B. Anthony. Her credentials, with those of the other women delegates, were accepted and seats given them in the convention, but when Miss Anthony rose to 065 speak to a motion she was informed by the presiding officer that "the sisters were not invited there to speak but to listen and learn." She and three or four other ladies at once left the hall. The rest of the women had not the courage to follow, but called them "bold, meddlesome disturbers," and remained to bask in the approving smiles of the Sons. They sought advice of Lydia Mott, who said the proper thing was to hold a meeting of their own; so they secured the lecture-room of the Hudson street Presbyterian church, and then went to the office of the Evening Journal, edited by Thurlow Weed, to talk the situation over with him. He told them they had done exactly right, and in his paper that evening he announced their meeting and related their treatment by the men.
Miss Anthony's public life can be said to have really started in 1852. The Sons of Temperance had called for a mass meeting of all the divisions in the state, to be held in Albany, and invited the Daughters to send delegates. The Rochester union appointed Susan B. Anthony. Her credentials, along with those of the other women delegates, were accepted and they were given seats in the convention. However, when Miss Anthony stood up to 065 speak on a motion, the presiding officer informed her that "the sisters were not invited there to speak but to listen and learn." She and three or four other women immediately left the hall. The other women lacked the courage to follow, but called them "bold, meddlesome disturbers," and stayed to enjoy the approving smiles of the Sons. They sought advice from Lydia Mott, who said the right thing to do was hold a meeting of their own; so they secured the lecture room of the Hudson Street Presbyterian Church and then went to the office of the Evening Journal, edited by Thurlow Weed, to discuss the situation with him. He told them they had done exactly the right thing, and that evening in his paper, he announced their meeting and described how the men had treated them.
The night was cold and snowy. The little room was dark, the stove smoked and the pipe fell down during the exercises, but the women were sustained by their indignation and sense of justice and would not allow themselves to be discouraged. Rev. Samuel J. May, who was in the city attending the "Jerry Rescue" trials, seeing the notice of their meeting, came to offer his assistance, accompanied by David Wright, husband of Martha C. Wright and brother-in-law of Lucretia Mott. These two, with a reporter, were the only men present at this little assemblage of women who had decided that they could do something better for the cause of temperance than being seen and not heard.
The night was cold and snowy. The small room was dark, the stove was smoking, and the pipe fell down during the exercises, but the women were fueled by their anger and sense of justice and refused to let themselves be discouraged. Rev. Samuel J. May, who was in the city for the "Jerry Rescue" trials, noticed their meeting and came to offer his help, accompanied by David Wright, husband of Martha C. Wright and brother-in-law of Lucretia Mott. These two, along with a reporter, were the only men present at this small gathering of women who had decided they could do more for the temperance cause than just be seen and not heard.
Mr. May opened the meeting with prayer, and then showed them how to organize. Mary C. Vaughn, of Oswego, was made president; Miss Anthony, secretary; Lydia Mott, chairman of the business committee. Mrs. Vaughn gave an address. A letter had been received from Mrs. Stanton so radical that most of the ladies objected to having it read, but Miss Anthony took the responsibility. She read, also, letters from Clarina Howard Nichols and Amelia Bloomer, which had been intended for the Sons' meeting. Mrs. Lydia F. Fowler, who happened to be lecturing in Albany, spoke briefly, and Mr. May paid high tribute to the valuable work of women in temperance 066 and anti-slavery, declaring their influence as indispensable to the state and the church as to the home. Miss Anthony then said their treatment showed that the time had come for women to have an organization of their own; and the final outcome was the appointment of a committee, with herself as chairman, to call a Woman's State Temperance Convention.
Mr. May started the meeting with a prayer and then showed them how to get organized. Mary C. Vaughn from Oswego was elected as president, Miss Anthony became the secretary, and Lydia Mott was named chair of the business committee. Mrs. Vaughn delivered a speech. They received a letter from Mrs. Stanton that was so radical that most of the women didn’t want it read, but Miss Anthony took on the responsibility. She also read letters from Clarina Howard Nichols and Amelia Bloomer, which were meant for the Sons' meeting. Mrs. Lydia F. Fowler, who was giving a lecture in Albany, spoke briefly, and Mr. May praised the important work of women in the temperance and anti-slavery movements, stating that their influence was essential to the state and the church as well as to the home. Miss Anthony then pointed out that the way they were treated showed it was time for women to have their own organization; the final result was the formation of a committee, with her as chair, to set up a Woman's State Temperance Convention. 066
She at once wrote to all parts of the State urging the unions to send delegates, and received many encouraging replies. Horace Greeley wrote as follows:
She immediately wrote to all areas of the state urging the unions to send delegates and received many encouraging replies. Horace Greeley wrote the following:
I heartily approve the call of the Woman's Temperance Convention, and hope it may result in good. To this end I would venture to suggest:
I fully support the request from the Woman's Temperance Convention and hope it leads to positive results. With that in mind, I'd like to suggest:
1st. Hold an informal and private meeting before you attempt to meet in public. There select your officers, your business committees, etc., so that there shall be no jarring when you assemble in public.
1st. Have an informal and private meeting before attempting to meet in public. During that meeting, select your officers, business committees, etc., to avoid any conflicts when you gather publicly.
2d. Have your addresses and resolves carefully prepared beforehand. Make them very short and pointed. Have them in type so that they may appear promptly and simultaneously in the daily papers. If you will send us a copy of them the night before we will endeavor to print them with our proceedings of the meeting received by telegraph.
2nd. Prepare your addresses and resolutions in advance, keeping them very brief and straight to the point. Have them typed up so they can be published quickly and simultaneously in the daily newspapers. If you send us a copy the night before, we will try to print them alongside our meeting proceedings received by telegraph.
3d. Be sure that your strongest thinkers speak and that the weaker forbear, and that extraneous matters, so far as possible, are let alone.
3rd. Ensure that your best thinkers speak up while those who are less confident hold back, and try to avoid getting sidetracked by unrelated issues as much as possible.
It will be seen that by adopting these shrewd political methods there would not be much left for the convention proper to do except listen to the speeches, but it would be hard to compress into smaller space more sensible advice. Mrs. Nichols wrote her: "It is most invigorating to watch the development of a woman in the work for humanity: first, anxious for the cause and depressed with a sense of her own inability; next, partial success of timid efforts creating a hope; next, a faith; and then the fruition of complete self-devotion. Such will be your history." From Mrs. Stanton came cheering words: "I will gladly do all in my power to help you. Come and stay with me and I will write the best lecture I can for you. I have no doubt a little practice will make you an admirable speaker. Dress loosely, take a great deal of exercise, be particular about your diet and sleep enough. The body has great influence upon the mind. In your meetings, if attacked, be cool and good-natured, for if you are simple and truth-loving no 067 sophistry can confound you. As for my own address, if I am to be president it ought perhaps to be sent out with the stamp of the convention, but as anything from my pen is necessarily radical no one may wish to share with me the odium of what I may choose to say. If so, I am ready to stand alone. I never write to please any one. If I do please I am happy, but to proclaim my highest convictions of truth is always my sole object."
It will be clear that by using these smart political strategies, there won't be much left for the main convention to do except listen to the speeches, but it would be tough to fit more sensible advice into a smaller space. Mrs. Nichols wrote: "It's really uplifting to see a woman grow in her work for humanity: first, feeling anxious about the cause and down about her own limitations; next, a bit of success from hesitant efforts sparking some hope; then, developing faith; and finally, fully committing herself. That will be your journey." From Mrs. Stanton came encouraging words: "I’m more than happy to do everything I can to help you. Come stay with me and I’ll write the best lecture I can for you. I have no doubt that a little practice will make you a fantastic speaker. Dress comfortably, get a lot of exercise, pay attention to your diet, and get enough sleep. The body has a huge impact on the mind. In your meetings, if someone attacks you, stay calm and friendly, because if you are straightforward and love the truth, no 067 argument can confuse you. As for my own speech, if I'm to be president, it should probably be sent out with the convention’s seal, but since anything from me tends to be radical, no one might want to share the backlash from what I might say. If that's the case, I'm ready to stand on my own. I never write to please anyone. If I do make someone happy, that's great, but my only goal is to express my deepest convictions of truth."
After weeks of hard work, writing countless letters, taking numerous trips to various towns, and making almost without assistance all the necessary arrangements, the convention assembled in Corinthian Hall, Rochester, April 20, 1852. The morning audience was composed entirely of women, 500 being in attendance. Miss Anthony opened the meeting, read the call, which had been widely circulated, and in a clear, forcible manner set forth the object of the convention. The call urged the women to "meet together for devising such associated action as shall be necessary for the protection of their interests and of society at large, too long invaded and destroyed by legalized intemperance." It was signed by Daniel Anthony, William R. Hallowell and a number of well-known men and women, many of whom were present and took part in the discussions. Letters were read from distinguished persons and strong resolutions adopted, among them one thanking the New York Tribune for the kindness with which it had uniformly sustained women in their efforts for temperance. Elizabeth Cady Stanton was elected president; Mrs. Gerrit Smith, Mrs. E.C. Delavan, Antoinette L. Brown and nine others, vice-presidents; Susan B. Anthony and Amelia Bloomer, secretaries. In accepting the presidency, Mrs. Stanton made a powerful speech, certain parts of which acted as a bombshell not only at this meeting, but in press, pulpit and society. The two points which aroused most antagonism were:
After weeks of hard work, writing countless letters, making numerous trips to different towns, and handling almost all the necessary arrangements on her own, the convention gathered in Corinthian Hall, Rochester, on April 20, 1852. The morning audience consisted entirely of women, with 500 in attendance. Miss Anthony opened the meeting, read the widely circulated call, and clearly articulated the convention's purpose. The call urged women to "come together to devise the actions needed to protect their interests and society at large, which has been too long invaded and harmed by legalized intemperance." It was signed by Daniel Anthony, William R. Hallowell, and several well-known men and women, many of whom were present and engaged in the discussions. Letters from notable individuals were read, and strong resolutions were adopted, including one expressing gratitude to the New York Tribune for its consistent support of women's temperance efforts. Elizabeth Cady Stanton was elected president; Mrs. Gerrit Smith, Mrs. E.C. Delavan, Antoinette L. Brown, and nine others were chosen as vice-presidents; Susan B. Anthony and Amelia Bloomer served as secretaries. In her acceptance speech, Mrs. Stanton delivered a powerful address, with certain segments causing a stir not just at this meeting but also in the media, the pulpit, and society. The two points that generated the most backlash were:
1st. Let no woman remain in the relation of wife with a confirmed drunkard. Let no drunkard be the father of her children.... Let us petition our State government so to modify the laws affecting marriage and the custody of children, that the drunkard shall have no claims on wife or child.
1st. No woman should stay married to a confirmed alcoholic. No alcoholic should be a father to her children. Let's ask our state government to change the laws regarding marriage and child custody so that the alcoholic has no rights over the wife or children.
2d. Inasmuch as charity begins at home, let us withdraw our mite from all associations for sending the Gospel to the heathen across the ocean, for the 068 education of young men for the ministry, for the building up of a theological aristocracy and gorgeous temples to the unknown God, and devote ourselves to the poor and suffering around us. Let us feed and clothe the hungry and naked, gather children into schools and provide reading-rooms and decent homes for young men and women thrown alone upon the world. Good schools and homes, where the young could ever be surrounded by an atmosphere of purity and virtue, would do much more to prevent immorality and crime in our cities than all the churches in the land could ever possibly do toward the regeneration of the multitude sunk in poverty, ignorance and vice.
2nd. Since charity begins at home, let’s withdraw our support from all programs aimed at spreading the Gospel to people across the ocean, for the education of young men for the ministry, for creating a theological elite and impressive temples to an unknown God, and focus on the poor and suffering around us. Let's feed and clothe the hungry and homeless, gather children into schools, and provide reading rooms and decent homes for young men and women who find themselves alone in the world. Good schools and homes, where young people are always surrounded by an environment of purity and virtue, would do much more to prevent immorality and crime in our cities than all the churches in the land could ever hope to achieve in restoring those caught in poverty, ignorance, and vice.
The effect of such declarations on the conservatism of half a century ago hardly can be pictured. At this time the principal outlet for women's activities was through foreign missionary work, and even in this they were allowed no official responsibility. None of the many charitable organizations which are now almost wholly in the hands of women were in existence. In scarcely one State was drunkenness recognized as cause for divorce, and yet when Mrs. Stanton made these demands, the women throughout the country joined with the men in denouncing them. Only a few of the broader and more progressive, who were ahead of their age, sustained her. Among these were Miss Anthony, Ernestine L. Rose, Lucretia Mott, Lucy Stone, Frances D. Gage and Martha C. Wright.
The impact of such declarations on the conservatism of fifty years ago is hard to imagine. At that time, the main way for women to get involved was through foreign missionary work, and even there, they weren't given any official responsibilities. None of the numerous charitable organizations that are now mostly run by women existed. In barely any state was drunkenness considered a valid reason for divorce, and yet when Mrs. Stanton made these demands, women across the country joined men in criticizing them. Only a few of the more progressive individuals, who were ahead of their time, supported her. Among these were Miss Anthony, Ernestine L. Rose, Lucretia Mott, Lucy Stone, Frances D. Gage, and Martha C. Wright.
After six enthusiastic sessions and the forming of a strong organization, the convention adjourned. Thus the first Woman's State Temperance Society ever formed was due almost entirely to Susan B. Anthony, because of her courage in demanding independent action and her successful efforts in calling the convention which inaugurated it. The executive committee met in May and appointed her State agent, "with full power and authority to organize auxiliary societies, collect moneys, issue certificates of membership and do all things which she may judge necessary and expedient to promote the purposes for which our society has been organized."
After six engaging sessions and the establishment of a solid organization, the convention wrapped up. The first Women's State Temperance Society ever created was primarily thanks to Susan B. Anthony, due to her bravery in advocating for independent action and her successful work in organizing the convention that launched it. The executive committee gathered in May and appointed her as the State agent, "with full power and authority to organize local societies, raise funds, issue membership certificates, and do anything she deems necessary and appropriate to promote the goals for which our society was established."
The Men's State Temperance Society had issued an official call for a convention to be held at Syracuse in June, containing these words: "Temperance societies of every name are invited to send delegates." Acting upon this invitation, the executive committee of the Woman's State Temperance Society 069 appointed Gerrit Smith, Susan B. Anthony and Amelia Bloomer as delegates. Mr. Smith was not able to attend and, after their experience at Albany, there were serious doubts in the minds of the women whether they would be received. They were much encouraged, however, by the receipt of a letter from Rev. Samuel J. May, written June 14, saying: "The local committee are now in session. I have just read your letter to them, and every member has expressed himself in favor of receiving the delegates of the Woman's State Temperance Society, just as the delegates of any other society, and allowing them to take their own course, speak or not speak, as they choose."
The Men's State Temperance Society officially called for a convention to be held in Syracuse in June, stating, "Temperance societies of every name are invited to send delegates." Responding to this invitation, the executive committee of the Woman's State Temperance Society 069 appointed Gerrit Smith, Susan B. Anthony, and Amelia Bloomer as delegates. Mr. Smith was unable to attend, and after their experience in Albany, the women had serious doubts about whether they would be welcomed. However, they felt encouraged by receiving a letter from Rev. Samuel J. May, dated June 14, which said: "The local committee is currently in session. I just read your letter to them, and every member has expressed support for allowing the delegates of the Woman's State Temperance Society to be received just like delegates from any other society, permitting them to choose whether to speak or not."
Miss Anthony and Mrs. Bloomer went to Syracuse, and on the morning of the convention received a call from Mr. May. He came to inform them that their arrival had caused great excitement among the clergy, who comprised a large portion of the delegates and threatened to withdraw if the women were admitted. Their action had alarmed the other delegates, who feared a disturbance in the convention, and they had requested Mr. May, as probably having the most influence, to call upon the ladies and urge them not to ask for recognition. When they told him they should go to the meeting and present their credentials, he expressed great satisfaction and said that was just the decision he had hoped they would make. They quietly entered the hall and took seats with other ladies at one side of the platform. Immediately Rev. Mandeville, of Albany, turned his chair around with back to the audience and, facing them, attempted to stare them out of countenance. William H. Burleigh, secretary, read the annual report, which closed, "We hail the formation of the Woman's State Temperance Society as a valuable auxiliary." This precipitated the discussion. Rev. Mandeville sprung to his feet and moved to strike out the last sentence. His speech was filled with such venom and vulgarity as the foulest-mouthed politician would hesitate to utter. He denounced the Woman's State Temperance Society and all women publicly engaged in temperance work, declared the women delegates to be "a hybrid species, half 070 man and half woman, belonging to neither sex," and announced finally that if this sentence were not struck out he would dissolve his connection with the society.
Miss Anthony and Mrs. Bloomer went to Syracuse, and on the morning of the convention, they received a visit from Mr. May. He came to let them know that their arrival had caused quite a stir among the clergy, who made up a large portion of the delegates and threatened to withdraw if the women were allowed in. This alarmed the other delegates, who were worried about a disruption during the convention, and they asked Mr. May, likely having the most influence, to speak with the ladies and persuade them not to seek recognition. When they told him they planned to attend the meeting and present their credentials, he expressed great pleasure and said that was exactly the decision he hoped they would reach. They quietly entered the hall and took seats with other ladies on one side of the platform. Immediately, Rev. Mandeville from Albany turned his chair around so his back was to the audience and, facing them, tried to intimidate them with a stare. William H. Burleigh, the secretary, read the annual report, which ended with, "We welcome the formation of the Woman's State Temperance Society as a valuable ally." This sparked the discussion. Rev. Mandeville jumped to his feet and moved to remove the last sentence. His speech was filled with enough venom and vulgarity that even the foulest-mouthed politician would hesitate to speak such words. He condemned the Woman's State Temperance Society and all women involved in temperance work, declared the women delegates to be "a hybrid species, half man and half woman, belonging to neither sex," and finally announced that if this sentence wasn't removed, he would sever his ties with the society.
A heated debate followed. Mr. Havens, of New York, offered an amendment recognizing "the right of women to work in their proper sphere—the domestic circle." Rev. May, of the Unitarian church, Rev. Luther Lee, of the Wesleyan Methodist, Hon. A.N. Cole, a leading Whig politician, and several others, defended the rights of the women in the most eloquent manner, but were howled down. Miss Anthony made only one attempt to speak and that was to remind them that over 100,000 of the signers to a petition for a Maine Law, the previous winter, were women, but her voice was drowned by Rev. Fowler, of Utica, shouting, "Order! Order!" Herman Camp, of Trumansburg, the president, ruled that she was not a delegate and had no right to speak. Amid great confusion the question was put to vote and the decision of the chair sustained. As no delegates had yet been accredited, everybody in the house was allowed to vote, but the secretary, J.T. Hazen, announced that he did not count the votes of the women!
A heated debate followed. Mr. Havens from New York proposed an amendment acknowledging "the right of women to work in their rightful place—the home." Rev. May from the Unitarian church, Rev. Luther Lee from the Wesleyan Methodist, Hon. A.N. Cole, a prominent Whig politician, and several others passionately defended women's rights but were shouted down. Miss Anthony made only one attempt to speak, reminding them that over 100,000 of the signers for a petition supporting a Maine Law the previous winter were women, but her voice was drowned out by Rev. Fowler from Utica, yelling, "Order! Order!" Herman Camp from Trumansburg, the president, ruled that she wasn’t a delegate and had no right to speak. Amid a lot of chaos, the question was put to a vote, and the chair's decision was upheld. Since no delegates had been accredited yet, everyone in the room was allowed to vote, but the secretary, J.T. Hazen, announced that he would not count the votes of the women!
Rev. Luther Lee at once offered his church to the ladies for an evening meeting. They had a crowded house, fine speeches and good music, while the convention was practically deserted, not over fifty being present. After a masterly speech by Mr. May and stirring remarks from Mr. Lee, Mrs. Bloomer and others, Miss Anthony made the address of the evening, which she had prepared for the men's convention, a strong plea for the right of women to work and speak for temperance. Soon afterwards she wrote her father: "I feel there is a great work to be done which none but women can do. How I wish I could be daily associated with those whose ideas are in advance of my own, it would enable me to develop so much faster;" and then, notwithstanding all her rebuffs, she signed herself, "Yours cheerily."
Rev. Luther Lee immediately offered his church to the ladies for an evening meeting. They had a packed house, great speeches, and good music, while the convention was nearly empty, with only about fifty people present. After an impressive speech by Mr. May and inspiring comments from Mr. Lee, Mrs. Bloomer, and others, Miss Anthony gave the evening's main address, which she had originally prepared for the men's convention, making a strong case for women's right to work and speak for temperance. Shortly after, she wrote to her father: "I feel there is a great work to be done that only women can accomplish. How I wish I could be around daily with those whose ideas are beyond my own; it would help me grow so much faster;" and then, despite all her setbacks, she signed off with "Yours cheerily."
The anti-slavery convention this year was held in Rochester, and Miss Anthony had as a guest her dear friend, Lydia Mott, 071 and again met Garrison, Phillips, May, the Fosters, Pillsbury, Henry C. Wright and others of that glorious band who together had received the baptism of fire. Although intensely interested in the anti-slavery question she did not dare think she had the ability to take up that work, but she did resolve to give all her time and energy to the temperance cause. The summer of 1852 was spent in traveling throughout the State with Mrs. Vaughn, Mrs. Attilia Albro and Miss Emily Clark. They canvassed thirty counties, organizing societies and securing 28,000 signatures to a petition for the Maine Law. Miss Anthony sent out a strong appeal, saying:
The anti-slavery convention this year took place in Rochester, and Miss Anthony had her close friend, Lydia Mott, as a guest, 071 and she met again with Garrison, Phillips, May, the Fosters, Pillsbury, Henry C. Wright, and others from that incredible group who had experienced the harsh realities of their cause. While she was deeply passionate about the anti-slavery issue, she didn't believe she had the ability to engage in that fight. However, she decided to dedicate all her time and energy to the temperance movement. The summer of 1852 was spent traveling across the State with Mrs. Vaughn, Mrs. Attilia Albro, and Miss Emily Clark. They worked in thirty counties, setting up societies and gathering 28,000 signatures for a petition supporting the Maine Law. Miss Anthony sent out a powerful appeal, stating:
Women, and mothers in particular, should feel it their right and duty to extend their influence beyond the circumference of the home circle, and to say what circumstances shall surround children when they go forth from under the watchful guardianship of the mother's love; for certain it is that, if the customs and laws of society remain corrupt as they now are, the best and wisest of the mother's teachings will soon be counteracted....
Women, especially mothers, should feel it's their right and duty to extend their influence beyond the home and to shape the kind of environment children will face when they leave their mothers' loving care. It’s clear that if society's customs and laws stay as corrupt as they are now, even the best and most insightful teachings from mothers will be quickly undermined...
Woman has so long been accustomed to non-intervention with law-making, so long considered it man's business to regulate the liquor traffic, that it is with much cautiousness she receives the new doctrine which we preach; the doctrine that it is her right and duty to speak out against the traffic and all men and institutions that in any way sanction, sustain or countenance it; and, since she can not vote, to duly instruct her husband, son, father or brother how she would have him vote, and, if he longer continue to mis-represent her, take the right to march to the ballot-box and deposit a vote indicative of her highest ideas of practical temperance.
Women have been so accustomed to being excluded from law-making and have long believed that regulating the liquor trade is a man's responsibility that she now tentatively accepts the new idea we're promoting: that it is her right and duty to speak out against the liquor trade and against all men and institutions that support or tolerate it. And since she can't vote herself, she should properly inform her husband, son, father, or brother on how she thinks he should vote. If he continues to misrepresent her views, she has the right to go to the ballot box and cast a vote that reflects her strong beliefs about practical temperance.
It will be seen by this that already she had taken her stand on the right of woman to the franchise.
It can be seen from this that she had already taken her stand on a woman's right to vote.
While at Elmira she happened into a teachers' convention and heard Charles Anthony, of the Albany academy, a distant relative, make an address on "The Divine Ordinance of Corporal Punishment." It was a severe and cruel justification of the unlimited use of the rod, but, although more than three-fourths of the teachers present were women, not a word was uttered in protest. Throughout the proceedings not a woman's voice was heard, none was appointed on committees or voted on any question, and they were as completely ignored as so many outsiders. Miss Anthony made up her mind that here also was a work to be done, and that henceforth she would 072 attend the State teachers' conventions every year and demand for women all the privileges now monopolized by men.
While at Elmira, she stumbled into a teachers' convention and heard Charles Anthony from the Albany academy, who was a distant relative, give a speech on "The Divine Ordinance of Corporal Punishment." It was a harsh and cruel defense of the unrestricted use of corporal punishment, but even though more than three-fourths of the teachers present were women, not a single word was said in protest. Throughout the event, no woman's voice was heard, none were appointed to committees, and they didn't vote on any issues; they were completely overlooked like outsiders. Miss Anthony decided that there was work to be done here too, and from then on, she would 072 attend the State teachers' conventions every year and advocate for women to have all the rights that men currently held.
On September 8, 1852, she went to her first Woman's Rights Convention, which was held at Syracuse. She had read with avidity the accounts of the Ohio, Massachusetts, Indiana and Pennsylvania conventions, but this was her first opportunity of attending one. At the preliminary meeting, held the night before, she was made a member of the nominating committee with Paulina Wright Davis, of Providence, R.I., chairman. Mrs. Davis had come with the determination of putting in as president her dear friend Elizabeth Oakes Smith, a fashionable literary woman of Boston. Both attended the meeting and the convention in short-sleeved, low-necked white dresses, one with a pink, the other with a blue embroidered wool delaine sack with wide, flowing sleeves, which left both neck and arms exposed. At the committee meeting next morning, Quaker James Mott nominated Mrs. Smith for president, but Quaker Susan B. Anthony spoke out boldly and said that nobody who dressed as she did could represent the earnest, solid, hard-working women of the country for whom they were making the demand for equal rights. Mr. Mott said they must not expect all women to dress as plainly as the Friends; but she held her ground, and as all the committee agreed with her, though no one else had had the courage to speak, Mrs. Smith's name was voted down. This is but one instance of hundreds where Miss Anthony alone dared say what others only dared think, and thus through all the years made herself the target for criticism, blame and abuse. Others escaped through their cowardice; she suffered through her bravery.
On September 8, 1852, she attended her first Women's Rights Convention, held in Syracuse. She had eagerly read the reports from the conventions in Ohio, Massachusetts, Indiana, and Pennsylvania, but this was her first chance to be part of one. At the preliminary meeting the night before, she was appointed to the nominating committee alongside Paulina Wright Davis, who chaired the committee. Mrs. Davis aimed to nominate her close friend Elizabeth Oakes Smith, a well-known literary figure from Boston, as president. Both women showed up to the meeting and the convention in short-sleeved, low-necked white dresses—one in pink and the other in blue embroidered wool delaine gowns with wide, flowing sleeves, leaving their necks and arms bare. At the committee meeting the following morning, Quaker James Mott nominated Mrs. Smith for president, but Quaker Susan B. Anthony boldly argued that someone who dressed like her couldn’t represent the serious, hardworking women of the country who were demanding equal rights. Mr. Mott suggested they shouldn’t expect all women to dress as plainly as the Quakers; however, she stood firm, and since the entire committee agreed with her—though no one else had the courage to speak up—Mrs. Smith was not selected. This is just one of many instances where Miss Anthony alone dared to express what others only thought, making herself a target for criticism, blame, and abuse over the years. Others avoided the backlash through their cowardice; she faced it head-on due to her bravery.
Lucretia Mott was made president, and the Syracuse Standard said: "It was a singular spectacle to see this Quaker matron presiding over a convention with an ease, grace and dignity that might be envied by the most experienced legislator in the country."[13] Susan B. Anthony and Martha C. Wright were the secretaries. Delegates were present from Canada and eight 073 different States. Letters were received from Angelina Grimké Weld, William Henry Channing and others; Horace Greeley sent much good advice; Garrison wrote: "You have as noble an object in view, aye and as Christian a one too, as ever was advocated beneath the sun. Heaven bless all your proceedings." Rev. A.D. Mayo said in a long letter:
Lucretia Mott was elected president, and the Syracuse Standard commented: "It was truly a remarkable sight to see this Quaker woman leading a convention with an ease, grace, and dignity that even the most seasoned lawmakers in the country would envy."[13] Susan B. Anthony and Martha C. Wright served as the secretaries. Delegates attended from Canada and eight 073 different States. Letters were received from Angelina Grimké Weld, William Henry Channing, and others; Horace Greeley offered a lot of good advice; Garrison wrote: "You have as noble a goal in mind, and as Christian a one too, as ever was championed under the sun. May Heaven bless all your efforts." Rev. A.D. Mayo expressed in a lengthy letter:
I have never questioned what I believed to be the central principle of the reform in which you are engaged. I believe that every mature soul is responsible directly to God, not only for its faith and opinions, but for its details of life. The assertion that woman is responsible to man for her belief or conduct, in any other sense than man is responsible to woman, I reject, not as a believer in any theory of "woman's rights," but as a believer in that religion which knows neither male nor female in its imperative demand upon the individual conscience.
I have never doubted what I see as the fundamental principle of the reform you're part of. I believe that every adult is directly responsible to God, not just for their beliefs and opinions, but for every part of their life. I do not accept the idea that a woman should be held accountable to a man for her beliefs or actions in a way that a man isn't held accountable to a woman. This isn't because I support the concept of "women's rights," but because I practice a faith that treats men and women equally in its core demand for individual conscience.
George W. Johnson, of Buffalo, chairman of the State committee of the Liberty party, sent $10 and these vigorous sentiments: "Woman has, equally with man, the inalienable right to education, suffrage, office, property, professions, titles and honors—to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. False to our sex, as well as her own, and false to herself and her God, is the woman who approves, or who submits without resistance or protest, to the social and political wrongs imposed upon her in common with her sex throughout the world." Mrs. Stanton's letter, read with hearty approval by Miss Anthony, raised the usual breeze in the convention. She suggested three points:
George W. Johnson from Buffalo, chair of the State committee of the Liberty party, sent $10 along with these strong sentiments: "A woman has the same fundamental right to education, voting, office, property, careers, titles, and honors—as well as life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness—as a man does. A woman who accepts or goes along without any resistance or complaint to the social and political injustices placed upon her, like all women around the world, is betraying both her own sex and herself, as well as her God." Mrs. Stanton's letter, which Miss Anthony enthusiastically approved, stirred up the usual debate at the convention. She proposed three points:
Should not all women, living in States where they have the right to hold property, refuse to pay taxes so long as they are unrepresented in the government?... Man has pre-empted the most profitable branches of industry, and we demand a place at his side; to this end we need the same advantages of education, and we therefore claim that the best colleges of the country be opened to us.... In her present ignorance, woman's religion, instead of making her noble and free, by the wrong application of great principles of right and justice, has made her bondage but more certain and lasting, her degradation more helpless and complete.
Shouldn't all women in states where they can own property refuse to pay taxes as long as they don't have representation in government? Men have taken over the most profitable industries, and we deserve to be their equals; to do this, we need equal access to education, and so we demand that the best colleges in the country be available to us. In her current state of ignorance, women's beliefs, instead of making her noble and free, have incorrectly applied basic principles of right and justice, which has only made her oppression more certain and lasting, and her degradation more helpless and complete.
In the course of her argument Lucy Stone said:
In the middle of her argument, Lucy Stone said:
The claims we make at these conventions are self-evident truths. The second resolution affirms the right of human beings to their persons and earnings. Is 074 not that self-evident? Yet the common law, which regulates the relation of husband and wife, and is modified only in a few instances by the statutes, gives the "custody" of the wife's person to the husband, so that he has a right to her even against herself. It gives him her earnings, no matter with what weariness they have been acquired, or how greatly she may need them for herself or her children. It gives him a right to her personal property, which he may will entirely away from her, also the use of her real estate, and in some of the States married women, insane persons and idiots are ranked together as not fit to make a will; so that she is left with only one right, which she enjoys in common with the pauper, the right of maintenance. Indeed, when she has taken the sacred marriage vows, her legal existence ceases. And what is our position politically? The foreigner, the negro, the drunkard, all are entrusted with the ballot, all placed by men politically higher than their own mothers, wives, sisters and daughters! The woman who, seeing this, dares not maintain her rights is the one to hang her head and blush. We ask only for justice and equal rights—the right to vote, the right to our own earnings, equality before the law; these are the Gibraltar of our cause.
The claims we make at these conventions are clear truths. The second resolution states that everyone has the right to their own bodies and income. Isn’t that obvious? Yet, common law, which regulates the relationship between husband and wife and is only slightly altered by some laws, gives the "custody" of the wife's person to the husband. This means he has a claim on her, even against her will. It allows him to control her earnings, no matter how hard she worked for them or how much she needs them for herself or her children. It also grants him access to her personal belongings, which he can dispose of, along with the use of her real estate. In some states, married women, people with mental disabilities, and those considered incompetent are seen as unfit to create a will, leaving them with only one right, which they share with the less fortunate: the right to maintenance. In fact, when a woman takes the sacred marriage vows, her legal identity vanishes. So, what is our political status? Foreigners, Black individuals, and alcoholics all get the right to vote, while men view themselves as politically superior to their mothers, wives, sisters, and daughters! The woman who understands this but doesn’t advocate for her rights is the one who should feel ashamed. We only seek justice and equal rights—the right to vote, the right to our own earnings, and equality under the law; these are the pillars of our cause.
Rev. Antoinette Brown, the first woman ever ordained to preach, declared:
Rev. Antoinette Brown, the first woman ever ordained to preach, declared:
Man can not represent woman. They differ in their nature and relations. The law is wholly masculine; it is created and executed by man. The framers of all legal compacts are restricted to the masculine standpoint of observation, to the thoughts, feelings and biases of man. The law then can give us no representation as women, and therefore no impartial justice, even if the law-makers were honestly intent upon this, for we can be represented only by our peers.... When woman is tried for crime, her jury, her judges, her advocates, all are men; and yet there may have been temptations and various palliating circumstances connected with her peculiar nature as woman, such as man can not appreciate. Common justice demands that a part of the law-makers and law-executors should be of her own sex. In questions of marriage and divorce, affecting interests dearer than life, both parties in the compact are entitled to an equal voice.
A man can't truly represent a woman. They have different natures and relationships. The law is completely male-dominated; it's created and enforced by men. Those who draft legal documents are limited to a male viewpoint, including their thoughts, feelings, and biases. This means the law can't fairly represent us as women, and therefore can't provide unbiased justice, even if the lawmakers genuinely intend to do so, because we can only be represented by people like us... When a woman is on trial for a crime, her jury, judges, and advocates are all men; yet there may be emotions and various factors related to her unique experience as a woman that men won't understand. Basic justice requires that some of the lawmakers and enforcers should be women. In matters of marriage and divorce, which involve interests more valuable than life itself, both parties in the agreement deserve an equal voice.
Mrs. Nichols said in discussing the laws:
Mrs. Nichols said while talking about the laws:
If a wife is compelled to get a divorce on account of the infidelity of the husband, she forfeits all right to the property which they have earned together, while the husband, who is the offender, still retains the sole possession and control of the estate. She, the innocent party, goes out childless and portionless by decree of law, and he, the criminal, retains the home and children by favor of the game law. A drunkard takes his wife's clothing to pay his rum bills, and the court declares that the action is legal because the wife belongs to the husband.
If a wife has to get a divorce because her husband cheated, she loses all rights to the property they earned together, while the husband, who is at fault, retains full possession and control of the estate. The innocent spouse leaves without children or a share of the assets, while he, the one in the wrong, keeps the home and children due to the laws. A husband who drinks sells his wife’s clothes to pay for his bar tabs, and the court decides this is legal because the wife is seen as the husband’s property.
Hon. Gerrit Smith here made his first appearance upon the woman suffrage platform, although he had written many letters expressing sympathy and encouragement, and made a grand argument for woman's equality. He closed by saying: "All rights are held by a precarious tenure if this one right to the ballot be denied. When women are the constituents of men who make and administer the laws they will pay due consideration to woman's interests, and not before. The right of suffrage is the great right that guarantees all others." Here also was the first public appearance of Matilda Joslyn Gage, the youngest woman taking part in the convention, who read an excellent paper urging that daughters should be educated with sons, taught self-reliance and permitted some independent means of self-support. A fine address also was made by Paulina Wright Davis, who had managed and presided over the two conventions held in 1850 and 1851 at Worcester, Mass.[14]
Hon. Gerrit Smith made his first appearance on the women's suffrage platform here, even though he had written many letters expressing support and encouragement, and delivered a strong argument for women's equality. He concluded by stating: "All rights are at risk if the right to vote is denied. When women are represented by men who create and enforce the laws, they will consider women's interests, and not until then. The right to vote is the essential right that guarantees all others." This occasion also marked the first public appearance of Matilda Joslyn Gage, the youngest woman participating in the convention, who presented an impressive paper advocating for the education of daughters alongside sons, teaching them self-reliance, and providing opportunities for independent self-support. Paulina Wright Davis also delivered a great speech; she had organized and led the two conventions held in 1850 and 1851 in Worcester, Mass.[14]
The queen of the platform at this time was Ernestine L. Rose, a Jewess who had fled from Poland to escape religious persecution. She was beautiful and cultured, of liberal views and great oratorical powers. Her lectures on "The Science of Government" had attracted wide attention. Naturally, she took a prominent part in the early woman's rights meetings. On this occasion she presented and eloquently advocated the following resolution:
The star of the platform at this time was Ernestine L. Rose, a Jewish woman who had escaped from Poland to avoid religious persecution. She was beautiful, educated, had progressive views, and was a powerful speaker. Her talks on "The Science of Government" had gained a lot of attention. Unsurprisingly, she played a key role in the early women's rights meetings. On this occasion, she presented and passionately supported the following resolution:
We ask for our rights not as a gift of charity, but as an act of justice; for it is in accordance with the principles of republicanism that, as woman has to pay taxes to maintain government, she has a right to participate in the formation 076 and administration of it; that as she is amenable to the laws of her country, she is entitled to a voice in their enactment and to all the protective advantages they can bestow; that as she is as liable as man to all the vicissitudes of life, she ought to enjoy the same social rights and privileges. Any difference, therefore, in political, civil and social rights, on account of sex, is in direct violation of the principles of justice and humanity, and as such ought to be held up to the contempt and derision of every lover of human freedom.
We claim our rights not as a charitable gift, but as a matter of justice; because it aligns with the principles of republicanism that, since women pay taxes to support the government, they have the right to take part in its creation 076 and management; that because they are subject to the laws of their country, they deserve a say in making those laws and access to all the protective benefits those laws offer; that since they face the same life challenges as men, they should have the same social rights and privileges. Any differences in political, civil, and social rights based on gender are a clear violation of justice and humanity, and should be criticized and opposed by anyone who values human freedom.
During the debate Rev. Junius Hatch, a Congregational minister from Massachusetts, made a speech so coarse and vulgar that the president called him to order. As he paid no attention to her, the men in the audience choked him off with cries of "Sit down! Shut up!" His idea of woman's modesty was that she should cast her eyes down when meeting men, drop her veil when walking up the aisle of a church and keep her place at home. Miss Anthony arose and stated that Mr. Hatch himself was one of the young ministers who had been educated through the efforts of women, and she had always noticed those were the ones most anxious for women to keep silence in the churches. This finished Mr. Hatch.
During the debate, Rev. Junius Hatch, a Congregational minister from Massachusetts, gave a speech that was so crude and inappropriate that the president had to call him to order. Ignoring her, the men in the audience shouted him down with "Sit down! Shut up!" He believed that women's modesty meant they should lower their eyes when around men, cover their faces when walking down the church aisle, and stay at home. Miss Anthony stood up and pointed out that Mr. Hatch was one of the young ministers who had been educated thanks to the efforts of women, and she had always noticed that these were the ones most eager for women to be quiet in churches. That ended Mr. Hatch.
A young teacher by the name of Brigham also attempted to define the spheres of Mrs. Mott, Mrs. Stanton[15] and the other great advocates of woman's freedom and declared: "Women ought to be keepers at home and mind domestic concerns; he had no doubt the true object of this meeting was not so much to acquire any real or supposed rights as to make the speakers and actors conspicuous; he wished to urge upon them to claim nothing masculine for women, for even in animals the spheres were different. He had no objections to woman's voice being heard, but let her seek out the breathing-holes of perdition to do her work." Mr. Brigham was badly worsted in the argument which followed, and at the next session he sent in a protest, declaring he had not had "justice." He evidently did not see the satire of this complaint, since he himself had been loudest in his refusal to do justice to woman.
A young teacher named Brigham also tried to define the roles of Mrs. Mott, Mrs. Stanton[15], and other prominent advocates for women's freedom. He stated, "Women should be caretakers at home and focus on domestic issues; I have no doubt that the real goal of this meeting is not really to gain any actual or perceived rights but to make the speakers and performers stand out. I urge them to not claim anything masculine for women, as even in animals, roles are different. I have no issues with women being heard, but they should find the breathing holes of hell to do their work." Mr. Brigham was thoroughly overmatched in the subsequent debate, and at the next session, he submitted a protest, claiming he had not received "justice." It was clear he didn't recognize the irony in this complaint, as he had been the most vocal in denying justice to women.
A heated discussion was called out by a resolution offered by Rev. Antoinette L. Brown declaring that "the Bible recognizes 077 the rights, privileges and duties of woman as a public teacher, as in every way equal with those of man; that it enjoins upon her no subjection that is not enjoined upon him; and that it truly and practically recognizes neither male nor female in Christ Jesus." Mrs. Rose closed the discussion by saying:
A lively debate was sparked by a resolution put forward by Rev. Antoinette L. Brown stating that "the Bible acknowledges 077 the rights, privileges, and responsibilities of women as public teachers, equal to those of men in every way; that it imposes on her no restrictions that aren’t imposed on him; and that it genuinely and practically recognizes no distinction between male and female in Christ Jesus." Mrs. Rose wrapped up the discussion by saying:
I can not object to any one's interpreting the Bible as he or she thinks best; but I do object that such interpretation go forth as the doctrine of this convention, because it is a mere interpretation and not even the authority of the Book; it is the view of Miss Brown only, which is as good as that of any other minister, but that is all. For my part I reject both interpretations. Here we claim human rights and freedom, based upon the laws of humanity, and we require no written authority from Moses or Paul, because those laws and our claim are prior even to these two great men.
I can't disagree with anyone interpreting the Bible in their own way; however, I do have a problem with that interpretation being presented as the official belief of this convention, because it's just one viewpoint and not even the ultimate authority of the text. It only represents Miss Brown's perspective, which is as valid as any other minister's, but that’s all it is. As for me, I reject both interpretations. Here, we stand for human rights and freedom based on the principles of humanity, and we don't need any written authority from Moses or Paul, because those principles and our claims exist independently of these two important figures.
Miss Brown's resolution was not adopted. Susan B. Anthony spoke briefly but earnestly in behalf of the People's College and also of the Woman's State Temperance Society, for which she asked their endorsement. She then read the resolutions sent by Mrs. Stanton, all but one of which were adopted. The Syracuse Journal commented: "Miss Anthony has a capital voice and deserves to be made clerk of the Assembly." The Syracuse Standard said of this convention: "It was attended by not less than 2,000 persons. The discussions were characterized by a degree of ability that would do credit to any deliberative body." The Journal said: "No person can deny that there was a greater amount of talent in the woman's rights convention than has characterized any public gathering in this city during the last ten years, if ever before. The appearance of all the ladies was modest and unassuming, though prompt, energetic and confident. Business was brought forward, calmly deliberated upon and discussed with unanimity and in a spirit becoming true women, which would add an unknown dignity to the transactions of public associations of the 'lords.'" The Syracuse Star, however, took a different view:
Miss Brown's resolution wasn't accepted. Susan B. Anthony spoke briefly but passionately on behalf of the People's College and the Woman's State Temperance Society, asking for their support. She then read the resolutions sent by Mrs. Stanton, most of which were approved. The Syracuse Journal commented, "Miss Anthony has a great voice and should definitely be made the clerk of the Assembly." The Syracuse Standard reported on the convention: "It was attended by at least 2,000 people. The discussions displayed a level of skill that would be impressive in any deliberative body." The Journal noted, "No one can deny that there was more talent in the women's rights convention than in any public gathering in this city in the last decade, if not ever. The appearance of all the women was modest and unpretentious, yet prompt, energetic, and confident. Business was introduced, calmly considered, and discussed with agreement and in a manner befitting true women, which would add an unprecedented dignity to the activities of public associations of the 'lords.'" The Syracuse Star, however, saw things differently:
The women of the Tomfoolery Convention, now being held in this city, talk as fluently of the Bible and God's teachings in their speeches as if they 078 could draw an argument from inspiration in maintenance of their woman's rights stuff.... The poor creatures who take part in the silly rant of "brawling women" and Aunt Nancy men are most of them "ismizers" of the rankest stamp, Abolitionists of the most frantic and contemptible kind and Christian (?) sympathizers with such heretics as Wm. Lloyd Garrison, Parker Pillsbury, O.C. Burleigh and S.S. Foster. These men are all woman's righters and preachers of such damnable doctrines and accursed heresies as would make demons of the pit shudder to hear. We have selected a few appropriate passages from God's Bible for the consideration of the infuriated gang at the convention.
The women at the Tomfoolery Convention, happening in this city right now, talk about the Bible and God's teachings in their speeches as if they could use divine inspiration to back up their arguments for women's rights. The poor souls participating in the ridiculous shouting of "brawling women" and Aunt Nancy men are mostly the worst kind of "ismizers," frantic and contemptible Abolitionists, and supposed Christians who support heretics like Wm. Lloyd Garrison, Parker Pillsbury, O.C. Burleigh, and S.S. Foster. These men are all advocates for women's rights and promote such terrible beliefs and cursed heresies that would make demons in hell shudder. We've picked out a few relevant verses from God's Bible for the angry group at the convention to consider.
The New York Herald, under the elder Bennett, which from the beginning of the demand had been the inveterate foe of equal rights for women, contained the following editorial, September 12, 1852:
The New York Herald, under the elder Bennett, which had been a persistent opponent of equal rights for women since the start of the movement, published the following editorial on September 12, 1852:
The farce at Syracuse has been played out. We publish today the last act, in which it will be seen that the authority of the Bible, as a perfect rule of faith and practice for human beings, was voted down, and what are called the laws of nature set up instead of the Christian code. We have also a practical exhibition of the consequences that flow from woman leaving her true sphere, where she wields all her influence, and coming into public to discuss morals and politics with men. The scene in which Rev. Mr. Hatch violated the decorum of his cloth and was coarsely offensive to such ladies present as had not lost that modest "feminine element" on which he dwelt so forcibly, is the natural result of the conduct of the women themselves who, in the first place, invited discussion about sexes, and, in the second place, so broadly defined the difference between the male and the female as to be suggestive of anything but purity to the audience. The women of the convention have no right to complain, but for the sake of his clerical character, if no other motive influenced him, he ought not have followed so bad an example. His speech was sound and his argument conclusive, but his form of words was not in the best taste. The female orators were the aggressors, but to use his own language he ought not to have measured swords with a woman, especially when he regarded her ideas and expressions as bordering upon the obscene. But all this is the natural result of woman placing herself in a false position. As Rev. Mr. Hatch observed, if she ran with horses she must expect to be betted upon. The whole tendency of these conventions is by no means to increase the influence of woman, to elevate her condition or to command the respect of the other sex....
The farce at Syracuse has come to a close. Today, we present the final act, revealing that the authority of the Bible, seen as a perfect guide for faith and practice for humanity, was dismissed, and what are called the laws of nature were adopted instead of the Christian code. We also have a practical demonstration of the consequences of women stepping away from their true roles, where they hold all their influence, and entering public life to discuss morals and politics with men. The incident where Rev. Mr. Hatch ignored the expected decorum of his position and was overtly offensive to the modest ladies present is a direct result of the women's behavior, which first invited discussions about gender and then defined the differences between men and women in a way that suggested anything but purity to the audience. The women at the convention have no grounds for complaint, but out of respect for his clerical role, he should not have set such a poor example. His speech was solid and his argument persuasive, but his choice of words was in poor taste. The female speakers were the ones taking the lead, but in his own terms, he should not have engaged in a verbal clash with a woman, especially when he saw her ideas and expressions as bordering on the obscene. Yet, this is a natural outcome of women putting themselves in a compromised position. As Rev. Mr. Hatch pointed out, if she runs with the horses, she must expect to be bet on. The overall trend of these conventions certainly doesn't enhance women’s influence, elevate their status, or earn the respect of men...
How did woman first become subject to man, as she now is all over the world? By her nature, her sex, just as the negro is and always will be to the end of time, inferior to the white race and, therefore, doomed to subjection; but she is happier than she would be in any other condition, just because it is the law of her nature....
How did women end up being ruled by men, as they are everywhere today? It’s due to her nature, her gender, just like how some view Black people as inferior to white people and therefore destined for subjugation; yet she is happier than she would be in any other situation, simply because it aligns with her nature…
What do the leaders of the woman's rights convention want? They want to vote and to hustle with the rowdies at the polls. They want to be members 079 of Congress, and in the heat of debate subject themselves to coarse jests and indecent language like that of Rev. Mr. Hatch. They want to fill all other posts which men are ambitious to occupy, to be lawyers, doctors, captains of vessels and generals in the field. How funny it would sound in the newspapers that Lucy Stone, pleading a cause, took suddenly ill in the pains of parturition and perhaps gave birth to a fine bouncing boy in court! Or that Rev. Antoinette Brown was arrested in the pulpit in the middle of her sermon from the same cause, and presented a "pledge" to her husband and the congregation; or that Dr. Harriot K. Hunt, while attending a gentleman patient for a fit of the gout or fistula in ano found it necessary to send for a doctor, there and then, and to be delivered of a man or woman child—perhaps twins.[16] A similar event might happen on the floor of Congress, in a storm at sea or in the raging tempest of battle, and then what is to become of the woman legislator?
What do the leaders of the women's rights convention want? They want the right to vote and to mix with the rowdies at the polls. They want to be members 079 of Congress and, in the heat of debates, subject themselves to crude jokes and inappropriate comments like those of Rev. Mr. Hatch. They want to take on all the roles that men aspire to—being lawyers, doctors, ship captains, and generals in the field. How ridiculous would it sound in the newspapers if Lucy Stone, arguing a case, suddenly fell ill from labor and maybe gave birth to a healthy baby boy in court! Or if Rev. Antoinette Brown was arrested in the pulpit during her sermon for the same reason and presented a "pledge" to her husband and the congregation; or if Dr. Harriot K. Hunt, while treating a male patient for gout or a fistula, needed to call for a doctor right then and there, and delivered a baby—maybe even twins.[16] A similar scenario could occur on the floor of Congress, during a storm at sea, or in the midst of a fierce battle, and then what happens to the female legislator?
For months after this convention the discussions and controversies were kept up through press and pulpit. The clergymen in Syracuse and surrounding towns rang the changes on the cry of "infidel" as the surest way of neutralizing its influence. Rev. Byron Sunderland, a Congregational minister of Syracuse and afterwards chaplain of the United States Senate, preached a sermon on the "Bloomer Convention." Rev. Ashley, of St. Paul's Episcopal Church, Syracuse, also preached a sermon against equality for woman, which was put into pamphlet form and scattered throughout the State. It called forth many protests, some from the women of his own church. The clergymen selected the Star, the most disreputable paper in the city, for the publication of their articles. Rev. Sunderland was ably answered by Matilda Joslyn Gage over the signature of "M." and replied in the Star: "If the author should turn out to be a man, I should have no objection to point out his inaccuracies through your columns, but if the writer is a lady, why, really, I don't know what I shall do. If I thought she would consent to a personal interview, I should like to see her." Some man, signing himself "A Reader," having criticised him in a perfectly respectful manner for making the above distinction, the reverend gentleman replied to him through the Star: "His impertinence is quite characteristic. He probably knows as much about the Bible 080 as a wild ass' colt, and is requested at this time to keep a proper distance. When a body is trying to find out and pay attention to a lady, it is not good manners for 'A Reader' to be thrust in between us." In all the speeches and articles in favor of woman's rights there was not one which was not modest, temperate and dignified. Almost without exception those in opposition were vulgar, intemperate and abusive.
For months after this convention, discussions and controversies continued through the press and pulpits. The clergymen in Syracuse and nearby towns frequently called out "infidel" as the best way to undermine its impact. Rev. Byron Sunderland, a Congregational minister in Syracuse and later chaplain of the United States Senate, preached a sermon about the "Bloomer Convention." Rev. Ashley from St. Paul's Episcopal Church in Syracuse also delivered a sermon against women's equality, which was published as a pamphlet and distributed throughout the state. This provoked many protests, including from the women in his own church. The clergymen chose the Star, the most disreputable paper in the city, to publish their articles. Rev. Sunderland was effectively countered by Matilda Joslyn Gage under the name "M." and responded in the Star: "If the author turns out to be a man, I have no problem pointing out his inaccuracies through your columns, but if the writer is a woman, well, I really don’t know what I’ll do. If I thought she would agree to a personal interview, I’d like to meet her." A man who called himself "A Reader" respectfully criticized him for making that distinction, and the reverend responded through the Star: "His impertinence is quite typical. He probably knows as much about the Bible 080 as a wild ass's colt and is asked at this time to maintain a respectful distance. When someone is trying to pay attention to a lady, it’s rude for ‘A Reader’ to interrupt us." In all the speeches and articles advocating for women's rights, none were anything but modest, temperate, and dignified. Almost all of those opposing were vulgar, intemperate, and abusive.
No more brilliant galaxy of men and women ever assembled than at this Syracuse convention, and the great question of the rights of woman was discussed from every conceivable standpoint. Hundreds equally able have been held during the last half century, and these extensive quotations have been made simply to show that fifty years ago the whole broad platform of human rights was as clearly defined by the leading thinkers, and in as logical, comprehensive and dignified a manner, as it is today. There was as much opposition among the masses of both men and women against all that they advocated as exists today against their demand for the ballot, perhaps more; yet the close of the century finds practically all granted except the ballot; the full right to speak in public; nearly the same educational and industrial opportunities; in many States almost equal legal rights, and not one State now wholly under the English common law, which everywhere prevailed at that time. The prejudice against all these innovations is rapidly disappearing but it still lingers in regard to the yielding of the suffrage, except in the four States where this also has been given. In not one instance have these concessions been made in response to the "voice of the people," but only because of the continued agitation and unceasing efforts of a few of the more advanced and progressive thinkers of each generation.
There has never been a more remarkable gathering of men and women than at this Syracuse convention, where the important issue of women's rights was examined from every possible angle. Hundreds of equally capable conventions have been held over the past fifty years, and these extensive quotes are presented just to demonstrate that fifty years ago, the entire broad platform of human rights was defined as clearly by the leading thinkers, and in a logical, comprehensive, and dignified way, as it is today. There was just as much opposition from both men and women against everything they advocated as there is today against their demand for the vote, perhaps even more. Yet, as the century comes to a close, almost everything has been granted except the vote; the full right to speak in public; nearly the same educational and job opportunities; in many states, almost equal legal rights; and not a single state is now completely governed by English common law, which was the standard at that time. The bias against these innovations is quickly fading, although it still persists regarding voting rights, except in the four states where this has also been granted. In every case, these concessions were not made because of the "voice of the people," but only because of the ongoing activism and relentless efforts of a few of the more progressive thinkers of each generation.
CHAPTER VI.
TEMPERANCE AND TEACHERS' CONVENTIONS.
1852—1853.
Miss Anthony came away from the Syracuse convention thoroughly convinced that the right which woman needed above every other, the one indeed which would secure to her all others, was the right of suffrage. She saw that it was by the ballot men emphasized their opinions and enforced their demands; she realized that without it women exercised small influence upon law-makers and had no power to reward friends or punish enemies. A sense of the terrible helplessness of being utterly without representation came upon her with crushing force. The first great cause of the injustice which pressed upon women from every point was clearly revealed to her and she understood, as never before, that any class which is compelled to be legislated for by another class always must be at a disadvantage. She went home with these thoughts burning in her soul, and again took up her work for temperance, but much of her enthusiasm was gone. She felt that she was dealing with effects only and was shut out from all influence over causes. She still was loyal to her State society but the desire was growing strong for a larger field.
Miss Anthony left the Syracuse convention completely convinced that the most essential right for women, one that would guarantee all other rights, was the right to vote. She recognized that men used the ballot to express their opinions and enforce their demands; she understood that without it, women had minimal influence over lawmakers and couldn’t reward allies or hold adversaries accountable. A profound sense of helplessness from being entirely unrepresented hit her hard. The root cause of the injustices that women faced from all sides became clear to her, and she realized, more than ever, that any group forced to be represented by another group would always be at a disadvantage. She returned home with these thoughts consuming her, and while she resumed her work for temperance, much of her enthusiasm had faded. She felt like she was only addressing the symptoms and had no power over the underlying causes. She remained committed to her State society, but her desire for a broader impact was growing stronger.
In January, 1853, she arranged for a meeting to be held in Albany to secure a hearing before the Legislature and present petitions for a Maine Law. Lucy Stone, whom she urged to make an address, wrote: "I can't in conscience speak in favor of the Maine Law. It does not seem to me to be based upon sound philosophy. Such a law will not amount to much so long as there is not a temperance public sentiment behind 082 it. God bless your earnest and faithful spirit, Susan. I am glad the temperance cause has so devoted and judicious a friend." She then invited Rev. Antoinette Brown, who gave several reasons why she did not think best to deliver the address and concluded: "But there is a better way; you yourself must come to the rescue. You will read the appeal, you can fit the address to it and you will do it grandly. Don't hesitate but, in the name of everything noble, go forward and you shall have our warmest sympathy."
In January 1853, she organized a meeting in Albany to get a hearing before the Legislature and present petitions for a Maine Law. Lucy Stone, whom she urged to give a speech, wrote: "I can't in good conscience speak in favor of the Maine Law. It doesn't seem to be based on sound philosophy. Such a law won't mean much as long as there isn't a temperance public sentiment behind 082 it. God bless your earnest and dedicated spirit, Susan. I'm glad the temperance cause has such a devoted and sensible friend." She then invited Rev. Antoinette Brown, who gave several reasons why she thought it would be unwise to deliver the address and concluded: "But there's a better way; you yourself must come to the rescue. You will read the appeal, you can tailor the address to it, and you'll do it magnificently. Don't hesitate, but in the name of everything noble, move forward, and you will have our warmest support."
It was very hard to coax Miss Anthony into a speech in those days and she finally persuaded the Reverend Antoinette to make the address. There was a mass-meeting of all the temperance organizations in the State at Albany, January 21, and as the women made no attempt to take part in the men's meetings there was no disturbance. History is silent as to what the men did at that time, but the women held crowded sessions in the Baptist church, and in the Assembly chamber at night, Miss Anthony presiding, and a number of fine addresses were made. The rules were suspended one morning and the ladies invited to the speaker's desk. Mrs. Vaughn read Mrs. Stanton's eloquent appeal praying the Legislature to do one of two things: either give women a vote on this great evil of intemperance, or else truly represent them by enacting a Prohibitory Law. It was accompanied by the petition of 28,000 names which had been collected by a few women at immense labor and expense during the past year.
It was really difficult to get Miss Anthony to give a speech back then, so she eventually convinced Reverend Antoinette to take on the task. There was a mass meeting for all the temperance organizations in the state in Albany on January 21, and since the women didn’t try to join the men’s meetings, there were no disruptions. History doesn’t record what the men were doing at that time, but the women held crowded sessions at the Baptist church and in the Assembly chamber at night, with Miss Anthony presiding, and many great speeches were delivered. One morning, they decided to suspend the rules and invited the ladies to the speaker's desk. Mrs. Vaughn read Mrs. Stanton's powerful appeal urging the Legislature to do one of two things: either give women a vote on the major issue of intemperance or truly represent them by passing a Prohibitory Law. This was accompanied by a petition with 28,000 signatures, gathered by a few women at great effort and expense over the past year.
This was the first time in the history of New York that a body of women had appeared before the Legislature, and in their innocence they had full confidence that their request would be granted in a very short time.[17] While they were still in Albany their petition was discussed and a young member made a long speech against it, declared that women were "out of their sphere" circulating petitions and coming before the Legislature, and closed by saying, "Who are these asking 083 for a Maine Law? Nobody but women and children!" Miss Anthony then and there made a solemn resolve that it should be her life work to make a woman's name on a petition worth as much as a man's.
This was the first time in New York’s history that a group of women presented themselves before the Legislature, and in their naivety, they fully believed that their request would be approved quickly.[17] While they were still in Albany, their petition was debated, and a young member delivered a long speech against it, insisting that women were "out of their sphere" by circulating petitions and approaching the Legislature. He concluded by saying, "Who are these asking 083 for a Maine Law? Only women and children!" Miss Anthony then and there made a serious promise that it would be her life’s mission to make a woman’s name on a petition carry as much weight as a man's.
S.P. Townsend, who had made a fortune in the manufacture of sarsaparilla, happening to be at the Capitol, called upon the ladies and invited them to come to New York and hold a meeting, offering to advertise and entertain them. Miss Anthony, Mrs. Bloomer and Miss Brown accepted his invitation and were entertained at his elegant home, and also by Professor and Mrs. L.N. Fowler. He engaged Metropolitan Hall (where Jenny Lind sang) for February 7, and the ladies spoke to an audience of 3,000 at twenty-five cents admission. Mrs. Fowler presided, and on the platform were Horace Greeley, who made a strong address, Mrs. Greeley, Abby Hopper Gibbons and others. The Tribune and Post were very complimentary, saying it was the first time a woman had spoken within those walls and the meeting would compare favorably with any ever held in the building. After it was over Mr. Townsend divided the net proceeds among the three women. He also arranged for them to speak in Broadway Tabernacle and in Brooklyn Academy of Music, each of which was crowded to its capacity.
S.P. Townsend, who had made a fortune making sarsaparilla, happened to be at the Capitol and reached out to the ladies, inviting them to come to New York for a meeting, promising to promote and host them. Miss Anthony, Mrs. Bloomer, and Miss Brown accepted his invitation, enjoying their stay at his elegant home and also with Professor and Mrs. L.N. Fowler. He booked Metropolitan Hall (where Jenny Lind had performed) for February 7, and the ladies spoke to an audience of 3,000 with a ticket price of twenty-five cents. Mrs. Fowler presided over the event, and on the platform were Horace Greeley, who gave a strong speech, Mrs. Greeley, Abby Hopper Gibbons, and others. The Tribune and Post were very complimentary, noting it was the first time a woman had spoken in that venue and that the meeting would compare favorably with any held there before. After it concluded, Mr. Townsend distributed the net proceeds among the three women. He also arranged for them to speak at Broadway Tabernacle and Brooklyn Academy of Music, both of which were filled to capacity.
During March and April they made a successful tour of the principal cities in the State, Miss Anthony assuming the management and financial responsibility. They went to Sing Sing, Poughkeepsie, Hudson, Troy, Utica, Syracuse, Rochester, Buffalo and other places, greeted everywhere with large and attentive audiences attracted by the unusual spectacle of women speaking in public. They lectured chiefly on temperance, but asked incidentally for equal civil and political rights. While they received from most of the papers respectful treatment, they were sometimes viciously assailed. The Utica Evening Telegraph gave the following false and malicious report:
During March and April, they successfully toured the main cities in the state, with Miss Anthony taking charge of management and finances. They visited Sing Sing, Poughkeepsie, Hudson, Troy, Utica, Syracuse, Rochester, Buffalo, and other places, warmly welcomed everywhere by large and engaged audiences drawn by the rare sight of women speaking publicly. Their lectures mainly focused on temperance, but they also casually advocated for equal civil and political rights. While most newspapers treated them with respect, they were occasionally attacked viciously. The Utica Evening Telegraph published the following false and malicious report:
Miss SUSAN B. ANTHONY AND REV. A.L. BROWN ON THE STUMP.—Mechanics' Hall was tolerably well filled last evening by persons wishing to hear the 084 above-named ladies "spout" about temperance. Seven-eighths of the audience was composed of women, and there was noticeable an absence of all rank, fashion and wealth. The ladies proper of Utica don't seem desirous of giving countenance to the silly vagaries disseminated by these strong-minded women. We conceived a very unfavorable opinion of this Miss Anthony when she performed in this city on a former occasion, but we confess that, after listening attentively to her discourse last evening, we were inexpressibly disgusted with the impudence and impiety evinced in her lecture. Personally repulsive, she seems to be laboring under feelings of strong hatred towards male men, the effect, we presume, of jealousy and neglect. She spent some hour or so to show the evils endured by the mothers, wives and daughters of drunkards. She gravely announced that the evil is a great one, and that no remedy might hopefully be asked from licentious statesmen nor from ministers of the gospel, who are always well fed and clothed and don't care for oppressed women. Prominent among the remedies which she suggested for the evils which she alleges to exist, are complete enfranchisement of women, allowing them the run of the legislative halls, ballot-box, etc. With a degree of impiety which was both startling and disgusting, this shrewish maiden counseled the numerous wives and mothers present to separate from their husbands whenever they became intemperate, and particularly not to allow the said husbands to add another child to the family (probably no married advocate of woman's rights would have made this remark). Think of such advice given in public by one who claims to be a maiden lady!
Miss SUSAN B. ANTHONY AND REV. A.L. BROWN ON THE STUMP.—Mechanics' Hall was quite full last night with people eager to hear these two women discuss temperance. About 87.5% of the audience were women, and there was a clear absence of high status, fashion, and wealth. The respectable women of Utica seem uninterested in backing the misguided ideas promoted by these strong-minded women. We had a very negative view of Miss Anthony from her previous talk in this city, but we have to admit that after hearing her last night, we were utterly appalled by the boldness and irreverence of her lecture. She comes off as unappealing and seems to hold a strong grudge against men, likely stemming from jealousy and neglect. She spent roughly an hour talking about the struggles faced by the mothers, wives, and daughters of alcoholics. She firmly stated that the issue is serious and that no help can be expected from unethical politicians or well-fed ministers who overlook oppressed women. Among the solutions she suggested for the issues she claims exist are full voting rights for women, giving them access to legislative halls, ballot boxes, and so on. With a level of irreverence that was both shocking and offensive, this unpleasant young woman advised the many wives and mothers present to leave their husbands whenever they got drunk and particularly not to allow their husbands to have another child (probably no married advocate for women's rights would have made this remark). Can you imagine someone who claims to be single giving such advice publicly?
Miss Anthony may be a very respectable lady, but such conversation is certainly not calculated to enhance public regard for her.... She announced quite confidently that wives don't de facto love their husbands if they are dissipated. Everyday observation proves the utter falsity of this statement, and if there is one characteristic of the sex which more than another elevates and ennobles it, it is the persistency and intensity of woman's love for man. But what does Miss Anthony know of the thousand delights of married life; of the sweet stream of affection, of the golden ray of love which beams ever through life's ills? Bah! Of a like disgusting character was her advice to mothers about not using stimulants, even when prescribed by physicians, for the benefit of the young. What in the name of crying babies does Miss Anthony know about such matters?
Miss Anthony might be a respectable lady, but that kind of talk certainly doesn’t help her public image.... She confidently claimed that wives don’t truly love their husbands if they act irresponsibly. Daily life shows how completely false that is, and if there’s one trait of women that truly lifts them up, it’s the persistence and depth of their love for men. But what does Miss Anthony understand about the countless joys of married life, the flowing affection, or the bright light of love that shines through life’s challenges? Seriously! Her advice to mothers about avoiding stimulants, even when doctors prescribe them for their children, was just as misguided. What on earth does Miss Anthony know about such matters?
In our humble judgment, it is by no means complimentary to wives and mothers to be found present at such discourses, encouraging such untruthful and pernicious advice. If Miss Anthony's ideas were practically applied in the relations of life, women would sink from the social elevation they now hold and become the mere appendages of men. Miss Anthony concluded with a flourish of trumpets, that the woman's rights question could not be put down, that women's souls were beginning to expand, etc., after which she gathered her short skirts about her tight pants, sat down and wiped her spectacles.
In our view, it’s not flattering for wives and mothers to be involved in these discussions, endorsing such dishonest and harmful advice. If Miss Anthony's ideas were actually put into practice in daily life, women would lose the social status they currently enjoy and become mere appendages to men. Miss Anthony concluded with a dramatic statement, insisting that the women's rights movement couldn't be silenced, that women's spirits were beginning to rise, and so on, after which she adjusted her short skirts over her tight pants, sat down, and cleaned her glasses.
A letter written to Miss Anthony by her father during this tour shows that even thus early he recognized the utter inability 085 of women to effect great reforms without a vote: "I see notices of your meetings in multitudes of papers, all, with a few exceptions, in a rejoicing mood that woman at last has taken hold in earnest to aid in the reformation of the mighty evils of the day. Yet with all this 'rejoicing' probably not one of these papers would advocate placing the ballot in the hands of woman as the easiest, quickest and most efficient way of enabling her to secure not only this but other reforms. They are willing she should talk and pray and 'flock by herself in conventions and tramp up and down the State, footsore and weary, gathering petitions to be spurned by legislatures, but not willing to invest her with the only power that would do speedy and efficient work."
A letter written to Miss Anthony by her father during this tour shows that even back then he recognized the complete inability of women to make significant changes without the vote: "I see notices of your meetings in a lot of newspapers, most of which, with a few exceptions, are celebrating that women have finally stepped up to help tackle the serious issues of the time. Yet, despite all this 'celebration,' probably not one of these papers would support giving women the right to vote as the simplest, fastest, and most effective way for her to achieve not only this but other reforms. They are fine with her talking and praying and gathering in conventions and trudging up and down the state, exhausted and sore, collecting petitions that legislators will ignore, but they’re not willing to give her the only power that would create quick and effective change."
At this time interest in the study of phrenology was at its height and while Miss Anthony was in New York she had an examination made of her head by Nelson Sizer (with Fowler & Wells) who, blindfolded, gave the following character sketch:
At this time, interest in studying phrenology was at its peak, and while Miss Anthony was in New York, she had her head examined by Nelson Sizer (with Fowler & Wells), who, blindfolded, provided the following character sketch:
You have a finely organized constitution and a good degree of compactness and power. There is such a balance between the brain and the body that you are enabled to sustain mental effort with less exhaustion than most persons. You have an intensity of emotion and thought which makes your mind terse, sharp, spicy and clear. You always work with a will, a purpose and a straightforwardness of mental action. You seldom accomplish ends by indirect means or circuitous routes, but unfurl your banner, take your position and give fair warning of the course you intend to pursue. You are not naturally fond of combat, but when once fairly enlisted in a cause that has the sanction of your conscience and intellect, your firmness and ambition are such, combined with thoroughness and efficiency of disposition, that all you are in energy and talent is enlisted and concentrated in the one end in view.
You have a well-organized personality and a strong sense of focus and power. There's a good balance between your mind and body, which helps you manage mental tasks without getting as tired as most people do. Your emotions and thoughts are intense, making your mind clear, sharp, vibrant, and concise. You approach tasks with determination, purpose, and direct thinking. You rarely meet your goals through indirect methods; instead, you clearly define your position and openly communicate the path you plan to take. You're not naturally conflictual, but once you commit to a cause that resonates with your conscience and intellect, your strong will and ambition, combined with thoroughness and effectiveness, focus all your energy and talent on that single goal.
You are watchful but not timid, careful to have everything right and safe before you embark; but when times of difficulty and danger arrive, you meet them with coolness and intrepidity. You have more of the spirit of acquisition than of economy; you would rather make new things than patch the old. Your continuity is not large enough. You find it at times difficult to bring the whole strength of your mind to bear upon a subject and hold it there patiently in writing or speaking. You are apt to seize upon fugitive thoughts and wander, unless it be a subject on which you have so drilled your intellect as to become master of it.
You are alert but not afraid, ensuring everything is right and safe before you start; but when faced with challenges and danger, you handle them calmly and bravely. You have more of a drive to gain new things than to preserve what you have; you'd rather create something new than fix the old. Your focus can be shaky at times. Sometimes, you struggle to concentrate fully on a subject and maintain your attention there patiently while writing or speaking. You tend to latch onto fleeting thoughts and drift off unless it’s something you've studied enough to truly understand.
You have a full development of the social group. I judge that in the main you have your father's character and talents and your mother's temperament. You have the spirit of her nature, but the framework in the main is 086 like the father. You have large benevolence, not only in the direction of sympathy but of gratitude. You have frankness of character, even to sharpness, and you are obliged to bridle your tongue lest you speak more than is meet. You have mechanical ingenuity, the planning talent, and the minds of others are apt to be used as instruments to accomplish your objects. For instance, if you were a lawyer, you would arrange the testimony and the mode of argument in such a way that the best final result would be achieved. You judge correctly of the fitness and propriety, as well as of the power, of the means you have to be employed. You would plan a thing better than you could use the tools to make it. Your reasoning organs are gaining upon your perceptions. At fifteen your mind was devoted to facts and phenomena; of late years you have been thinking of principles and ideas. You are a keen critic, especially if you can put wit as a cracker on your whip; you can make people feel little and mean if they are so, and when you are vexed can say very sharp things.
You have a well-rounded social development. I believe you mostly inherit your father's character and talents and your mother's temperament. You embody her spirit, but the basic framework is primarily like your father's. You possess a strong sense of kindness, not just in sympathy but also in gratitude. You have a straightforward nature, sometimes to the point of being blunt, and you need to hold back to avoid saying more than is appropriate. You possess mechanical creativity and planning skills and often use the minds of others as tools to achieve your goals. For example, if you were a lawyer, you would organize testimony and arguments in a way that leads to the best outcomes. You accurately assess the suitability and appropriateness of the means at your disposal. You might come up with a better plan than you can effectively implement with the tools you have. Your reasoning skills surpass your perceptual abilities. At fifteen, your mind was focused on facts and phenomena; in recent years, you've begun to think about principles and concepts. You are a sharp critic, especially when you can inject some humor; you can make others feel small and insignificant if they are, and when you're upset, you can say very cutting things.
You are a good judge of character. You have a full development of language devoted rather to accuracy and definiteness of meaning than volubility; and yet I doubt not you talk fast when excited—that belongs to your temperament. Your intellect is active and your mind more naturally runs in the channel of intellect than of feeling. It seeks an intellectual development rather than to be developed through the affections merely. You have fair veneration and spirituality but are nothing remarkable in these respects. Your chief religious elements are conscience and benevolence; these are your working religious organs, and a religion that does not gratify them is to you "as sounding brass and a tinkling cymbal."
You have a strong sense of character. Your language is more focused on clarity and precision than on being chatty, but I imagine you get talkative when you’re excited—that's just your nature. Your mind is sharp, and you tend to think more logically than emotionally. You prefer intellectual growth over emotional connections. You have a fair amount of reverence and spirituality, though nothing particularly exceptional in those areas. The core aspects of your faith are your conscience and kindness; these drive your beliefs, and any religion that doesn’t fulfill them feels to you like "just noise."
Those who know Miss Anthony intimately will readily testify to the accuracy of this analysis. It seems remarkable in view of the fact that the examiner was in utter ignorance of the subject, and that, even if he had known her name, she had not, at the age of thirty-three, developed the characteristics which are now so familiar to the general public.
Those who know Miss Anthony well will attest to the accuracy of this analysis. It’s impressive considering the examiner had no knowledge of the subject, and that, even if he had known her name, she had not, at the age of thirty-three, developed the traits that are now so well-known to the public.

SUSAN B. ANTHONY. AT THE AGE OF 32, FROM A DAGUERREOTYPE.
SUSAN B. ANTHONY. AT AGE 32, FROM A DAGUERREOTYPE.
On this trip Miss Anthony was invited to spend an evening with Mr. and Mrs. Greeley and met for the first time Charles A. Dana, Alice and Phoebe Gary, Elizabeth F. Ellet, with a number of other literary men and women of New York. Mr. Greeley himself opened the door for them and sent them hunting through the house for a place to lay their wraps. After awhile Mrs. Greeley came down stairs with a baby in her arms. She had put her apron over its face and would not let the visitors look at it "because their magnetism might affect it unfavorably." During the evening she rang a bell and a man-servant came in. After a few words with her he retired 087 and presently brought in a big dish of cake, one of cheese and a pile of plates, set them on the table and went out. There was a long pause and Mr. Greeley said, "Well, mother, shall I serve the cake?" "Yes, if you want to." So he went over to the table, took a piece of cake and one of cheese in his fingers, putting them on a plate and carrying to each, until all were served. The guests nibbled at them as best they could and after a long time the man brought in a pitcher of lemonade and some glasses and left the room. Mr. Greeley again asked, "Well, mother, shall I serve the lemonade?" "Yes, if you want to," she replied, so he filled the glasses, carried to each separately, and then gathered them up one at a time, instead of all together on a waiter. Both Mr. and Mrs. Greeley were thoroughly cordial and hospitable, both intellectually great, but utterly without social graces. Yet the conversation at their receptions was so brilliant that the most elegantly served refreshments would have been an unwelcome interruption.
On this trip, Miss Anthony was invited to spend an evening with Mr. and Mrs. Greeley, where she met for the first time Charles A. Dana, Alice and Phoebe Gary, Elizabeth F. Ellet, and several other literary figures from New York. Mr. Greeley himself opened the door for them and sent them searching through the house for a place to put their coats. After a while, Mrs. Greeley came downstairs holding a baby. She had covered its face with her apron and wouldn’t let the visitors see it "because their energy might affect it negatively." During the evening, she rang a bell, and a male servant came in. After a brief conversation with her, he left and soon returned with a large dish of cake, a cheese dish, and a stack of plates, placing them on the table before exiting. There was a long pause, and Mr. Greeley said, "Well, mother, should I serve the cake?" "Yes, if you want to." So he moved to the table, took a piece of cake and some cheese with his fingers, placed them on a plate, and served each guest until everyone was taken care of. The guests nibbled at their treats as best as they could, and after some time, the servant came back with a pitcher of lemonade and some glasses, then left the room. Mr. Greeley again asked, "Well, mother, should I serve the lemonade?" "Yes, if you want to," she replied, so he filled the glasses, served each guest individually, and then collected them one by one instead of bringing them all together on a tray. Both Mr. and Mrs. Greeley were genuinely warm and welcoming, both intellectually brilliant, but completely lacking in social skills. However, the conversation at their gatherings was so engaging that the most elegantly presented refreshments would have been an unwelcome distraction.
At another time, when Miss Anthony was visiting them, she asked Mrs. Greeley if she would marry the same man again if she were single. "Yes," said she, "if I wanted a worthy father for my children, but for personal comfort I should prefer one who did not put his feet where I fell over them every time I went into the room, who knew how to eat, when to go to bed and how to wear his clothes."
At another time, when Miss Anthony was visiting them, she asked Mrs. Greeley if she would marry the same man again if she were single. "Yes," she said, "if I wanted a good father for my kids, but for my own comfort, I’d prefer someone who didn’t leave his shoes where I tripped over them every time I walked into the room, who knew how to eat properly, when to go to bed, and how to dress."
A World's Temperance Convention had been called to meet in New York September 6 and 7, 1853, and a preliminary meeting was held May 12 in Dr. Spring's old Brick Church on Franklin Square, where the Times building now stands. The call invited "all friends of temperance" to be present. After attending the Anti-Slavery Anniversary in New York, Miss Anthony and Emily Clark went as representatives of the New York Woman's Temperance Society, and Abby Kelly Foster and Lucy Stone were sent from Massachusetts. The meeting was organized with Hon. A.C. Barstow, mayor of Providence, chairman; Rev. R.C. Crampton, of New York, and Rev. George Duffield, of Pennsylvania, secretaries. It was opened with prayer, asking God's blessing on the proceedings about 088 to take place. A motion was made that all the gentlemen present be admitted as delegates. Dr. Trail, of New York City, moved that the word "ladies" be inserted, as there were delegates present from the Woman's State Temperance Society. The motion was carried, their credentials received, and every man and woman present became members of the convention. A business committee of one from each State was appointed and a motion was made that Susan B. Anthony, secretary of the Woman's Temperance Society, be added to the committee. This opened the battle with the opposition and one angry and abusive speech followed another. Abby Kelly Foster, the eloquent anti-slavery orator, tried to speak, but shouts of "order" drowned her voice and, after holding her position for ten minutes, she finally was howled down.
A World's Temperance Convention was scheduled to take place in New York on September 6 and 7, 1853, and a preliminary meeting was held on May 12 at Dr. Spring's old Brick Church on Franklin Square, where the Times building now stands. The invitation called for "all friends of temperance" to attend. After being at the Anti-Slavery Anniversary in New York, Miss Anthony and Emily Clark attended as representatives from the New York Woman's Temperance Society, while Abby Kelly Foster and Lucy Stone were sent from Massachusetts. The meeting was organized with Hon. A.C. Barstow, mayor of Providence, as chair; Rev. R.C. Crampton from New York, and Rev. George Duffield from Pennsylvania as secretaries. It began with a prayer asking for God's blessing on the proceedings about 088. A motion was made to allow all the gentlemen present to be recognized as delegates. Dr. Trail from New York City proposed that the word "ladies" be added since there were delegates from the Woman's State Temperance Society. The motion passed, their credentials were accepted, and everyone present, both men and women, became members of the convention. A business committee of one representative from each State was formed, and a motion was made to add Susan B. Anthony, secretary of the Woman's Temperance Society, to the committee. This sparked opposition, leading to a series of angry and hostile speeches. Abby Kelly Foster, the passionate anti-slavery speaker, attempted to address the crowd, but shouts of "order" drowned her out, and after trying for ten minutes, she was ultimately silenced.
Almost the entire convention was composed of ministers of the Gospel. Hon. Bradford R. Wood, of Albany, moved that, as there was a party present determined to introduce the question of woman's rights and run it into the ground, the convention adjourn sine die. He finally was persuaded to withdraw this and substitute a motion that a committee be appointed to decide who were members of the convention, although this had been settled at the opening of the meeting by the accepting of credentials. This committee consisted of Mr. Wood, Rev. John Chambers, a Presbyterian clergyman of Philadelphia, and Rev. Condit, of New Jersey. They were out fifteen minutes and reported that, as in their opinion the call for this meeting was not intended to include female delegates, and custom had not sanctioned the public action of women in similar situations, their credentials should be rejected. And this after they already had been accepted!
Almost the entire convention was made up of ministers of the Gospel. Hon. Bradford R. Wood from Albany suggested that, since there was a group present determined to push the issue of women's rights and run it into the ground, the convention should adjourn without a date to reconvene. Eventually, he was convinced to withdraw that motion and instead propose that a committee be formed to determine who were the members of the convention, even though this had already been clarified at the start of the meeting by accepting credentials. This committee included Mr. Wood, Rev. John Chambers, a Presbyterian minister from Philadelphia, and Rev. Condit from New Jersey. They were out for fifteen minutes and reported that, in their opinion, the call for this meeting was not meant to include female delegates, and since custom had not allowed public action by women in similar situations, their credentials should be rejected. And this was after they had already been accepted!
Rev. Thomas Wentworth Higginson, pastor of the Unitarian church in Worcester, Mass., at once resigned from the business committee and withdrew from the meeting, as did also the women delegates and such gentlemen, including several ministers, as thought the ladies had been unjustly treated. They met at Dr. Trail's office and decided to call a Whole World's Temperance Convention which should not exclude one-half the 089 world, and that the half which was doing the most effective work for temperance.
Rev. Thomas Wentworth Higginson, pastor of the Unitarian church in Worcester, Mass., immediately resigned from the business committee and left the meeting, along with the women delegates and a few men, including several ministers, who believed the women had been treated unfairly. They gathered at Dr. Trail's office and decided to organize a Whole World's Temperance Convention that would include everyone, particularly the half that was doing the most effective work for temperance.
After they left the Brick Church meeting there were many speeches made condemning the action of women in taking public part in any reforms, led by Rev. Fowler, of Utica, Rev. Hewitt, of Bridgeport, Conn., and Rev. Chambers. The last said he rejoiced that the women were gone, as they were "now rid of the scum of the convention." Mayor Barstow, who had threatened to resign rather than put the motion that Miss Anthony should be on the business committee, made a speech which the press declared too indecent to be reported. It must be remembered that this entire discussion was founded on the mere proposal to place Miss Anthony on a committee of a temperance meeting. Horace Greeley handled these men without gloves in an article in the Tribune beginning:
After they left the Brick Church meeting, many speeches were made condemning women for participating in any public reforms, led by Rev. Fowler from Utica, Rev. Hewitt from Bridgeport, Conn., and Rev. Chambers. The last one expressed his relief that the women were gone, saying they were "now rid of the scum of the convention." Mayor Barstow, who had threatened to resign rather than allow Miss Anthony to be on the business committee, gave a speech that the press deemed too indecent to report. It’s important to note that this entire discussion was based on the simple proposal to put Miss Anthony on a committee for a temperance meeting. Horace Greeley took these men to task in an article in the Tribune starting:
Rev. John! We have allowed you to be heard at full length; now you and your set will be silent and hear us. Very palpably your palaver about Mr. Higginson's motion is a dodge, a quirk, a most contemptible quibble, reluctant as we are to speak thus irreverently of the solemn utterances of a Doctor of Divinity. Right well do you know, reverend sir, that the particular form or time or fashion in which the question came up is utterly immaterial, and you interpose it only to throw dust in the eyes of the public. Suppose a woman had been nominated at the right time and in the right way, according to your understanding of punctilios, wouldn't the same resistance have been made and the same row got up? You know right well that there would. Then what is all your pettifogging about technicalities worth? The only question that anybody cares a button about is this, "Shall woman be allowed to participate in your World's Temperance Convention on a footing of perfect equality with man?" If yea, the whole dispute turns on nothing, and isn't worth six lines in the Tribune. But if it was and is the purpose of those for whom you pettifog to keep woman off the platform of that convention and deny her any part in its proceedings except as a spectator, what does all your talk about Higginson's untimeliness and the committee's amount to? Why not treat the subject with some show of honesty?
Rev. John! We've allowed you to speak at length; now you and your group will be quiet and listen to us. Clearly, your chatter about Mr. Higginson's motion is just a distraction, an excuse, a weak argument, and we really don’t want to be disrespectful to the serious words of a Doctor of Divinity. You know very well, Reverend sir, that the specific form, timing, or manner in which the issue was raised is completely irrelevant, and you mention it just to confuse the public. If a woman had been nominated at the right time and correctly, according to your understanding of the rules, wouldn’t there still have been the same pushback and uproar? You know there would have been. So, what is all your nitpicking about technicalities worth? The only question anyone cares about is, "Should women be allowed to participate in your World's Temperance Convention on equal terms with men?" If yes, then the whole argument is pointless and not worth a few lines in the Tribune. But if it is, and has always been, the goal of those you are trying to mislead to keep women off the platform of that convention and deny them any involvement except as spectators, then what does all your talk about Higginson's timing and the committee even mean? Why not approach the subject honestly?
The women and their friends held a grand rally in the Broadway Tabernacle the second day afterwards. Every foot of sitting and standing room was crowded, although there was an admission fee of a shilling. Miss Anthony presided and there was the strongest enthusiasm, but perfect order was 090 maintained. The following comment was made by the New York Commercial-Advertiser:
The women and their friends held a large rally at the Broadway Tabernacle two days later. Every bit of seating and standing space was packed, even though there was a ticket price of a shilling. Miss Anthony led the event, and there was a lot of enthusiasm, but complete order was 090 kept. The following comment was made by the New York Commercial-Advertiser:
THE BATTLE OF THE SEXES.—On Saturday evening the Broadway Tabernacle reverberated with the shrill, defiant notes of Miss Lucy Stone and her "sisters," who have thrown down the gauntlet to the male friends of temperance and declared not literally "war to the knife" but conflict with tongues.... Henceforth the women's rights ladies—including among them the misses, Lucy herself, Emily Clark, Susan B. Anthony, Antoinette Brown, some Harriets and Angelinas, Melissas and Hannahs, with a Fanny too (and more's the pity for it is a sweet name) and sundry matrons whose names are household words in newspapers—are to be in open hostility to the regularly constituted temperance agencies, under cover of association with whom they have contrived to augment their notoriety. The delegates at the Brick Church, who took the responsibility of knocking off these parasites, deserve the thanks of the temperance friends the Union through.... Such associations would mar any cause. Left to themselves such women must fall into contempt; they have used the temperance cause for a support long enough, and we are glad that the seeming alliance has been thus formally disowned by the temperance delegates.
THE BATTLE OF THE SEXES.—On Saturday evening, the Broadway Tabernacle was filled with the loud, defiant voices of Miss Lucy Stone and her "sisters," who have challenged the male supporters of temperance and announced not exactly "war to the knife" but a verbal battle. From now on, the women’s rights advocates—including Lucy herself, Emily Clark, Susan B. Anthony, Antoinette Brown, several Harriets and Angelinas, Melissas and Hannahs, and even a Fanny (which is unfortunate because it's a lovely name), along with various matronly figures whose names are well-known in newspapers—will be openly opposing the established temperance organizations, which have helped them gain fame. The delegates at the Brick Church, who initiated efforts to remove these opportunists, deserve recognition from temperance supporters across the country. Such associations would damage any cause. Left to their own devices, such women will inevitably be viewed poorly; they have leaned on the temperance movement for support long enough, and we are glad that the apparent partnership has now been officially rejected by the temperance delegates.
The New York Sun, Moses Beach, editor, said:
The New York Sun, edited by Moses Beach, stated:
The quiet duties of daughter, wife or mother are not congenial to those hermaphrodite spirits who thirst to win the title of champion of one sex and victor over the other. What is the love and submission of one manly heart to the woman whose ambition it is to sway the minds of multitudes as did a Demosthenes or a Cicero? What are the tender affections and childish prattle of the family circle, to women whose ears itch for the loud laugh and boisterous cheer of the public assembly?...
The traditional roles of daughter, wife, or mother don't fit those mixed spirits who want to be seen as champions of one gender and conquerors of the other. What does love and submission from one strong heart mean to a woman whose goal is to influence the masses like Demosthenes or Cicero? What do the tender emotions and trivial conversations of family life mean to women who desire the roaring laughter and enthusiastic applause of a public event?
Could a Christian man, cherishing a high regard for woman and for the proprieties of life feel that he was promoting woman's interests and the cause of temperance by being introduced to a temperance meeting by Miss Susan B. Anthony, her ungainly form rigged out in bloomer costume and provoking the thoughtless to laughter and ridicule by her very motions upon the platform? Would he feel that he was honoring the women of his country by accepting as their representatives women whom they must and do despise? Will any pretend to say that women, whose tongues have dishonored their God and their Savior, while uttering praise of infidels and infidel theories, are worthy to receive the suffrages of their Christian sisters?...
Could a Christian man, who values women and traditional norms, believe he was supporting women's interests and the temperance movement by attending a temperance meeting with Miss Susan B. Anthony, whose awkward appearance in a bloomer outfit invites laughter and mockery from onlookers with her very movements on stage? Would he think he was honoring the women of his country by accepting as their representatives those whom they must and do look down upon? Can anyone seriously argue that women, whose words have dishonored their God and Savior while praising infidels and their ideas, deserve the support of their Christian sisters?
We were much pleased with the remark made a few days since by one of the most distinguished as well as refined and polished men of the day on this very subject: "What are the rights which women seek, and have not?" said he; and answering his own question, he replied, "The right to do wrong! that alone is denied to them—that is the only right appropriated exclusively by men, and surely no true woman would seek to divide or participate in such a right."
We were very pleased with a comment made a few days ago by one of the most distinguished, refined, and cultured men of our time on this very subject: "What rights do women want that they don't already have?" he asked, then answered his own question, saying, "The right to do wrong! That's the only right that belongs solely to men, and surely no true woman would want to share or be part of such a right."
The Organ, the New York temperance paper, had this to say:
The Organ, the New York temperance newspaper, commented:
The harmony and pleasantness of the meeting were disturbed by an evidently preconcerted irruption of certain women, who have succeeded beyond doubt in acquiring notoriety, however much they may have failed in winning respect. The notorious Abby Kelly, the Miss Stone whose crusade against the Christian doctrine on the subject of marriage has shocked the better portion of society, and several other women in pantaloons were present insisting upon their right to share in the deliberations of the convention.
The nice vibe of the meeting was disrupted by the clearly planned entrance of several women who have definitely made a name for themselves, even if they haven't earned any respect. The notorious Abby Kelly, Miss Stone—who's caused an uproar with her campaign against Christian views on marriage—and a few other women in pants were there, insisting on their right to take part in the convention's discussions.
We wish our friends abroad to understand that the breeze got up here is nothing but an attempt to ride the woman's rights theory into respectability on the back of Temperance. And what absurd, infidel and licentious follies are not packed up under the general head of woman's rights, it would puzzle any one to say. While, however, we approve the act excluding the women at the Brick Church, we feel bound to say that we regretted what seemed to us an unnecessary acerbity on the part of some of the gentlemen opposing them. What a load of extraneous, foolish and crooked people and things the temperance cause has been burdened with during the years of its progress! To our mind this conspiracy of women to crush the cause by making it the bearer of their woman's rights absurdities, is the saddest of all the phenomena of the reform.
We want our friends abroad to know that the recent commotion here is just an attempt to make the women’s rights movement look respectable by linking it to the Temperance movement. It would be tough to list all the absurd, unfaithful, and immoral ideas that fall under the category of women’s rights. While we support the choice to exclude women at the Brick Church, we must express our disappointment at what we saw as unnecessary harshness from some of the men who opposed them. What a burden of unrelated, foolish, and deceitful people and issues the temperance movement has carried throughout its history! To us, this alliance of women trying to undermine the cause by using it as a platform for their ridiculous women’s rights agenda is the most concerning part of the whole reform.
The New York Courier, James Watson Webb, editor, gave its readers the following Sunday article:
The New York Courier, edited by James Watson Webb, published this Sunday article for its readers:
Anniversary week has the effect of bringing to New York many strange specimens of humanity, masculine and feminine. Antiquated and very homely females made themselves ridiculous by parading the streets in company with hen-pecked husbands, attenuated vegetarians, intemperate Abolitionists and sucking clergymen, who are afraid to say "no" to a strong-minded woman for fear of infringing upon her rights. Shameless as these females—we suppose they were females—looked, we should really have thought they would have blushed as they walked the streets to hear the half-suppressed laughter of their own sex and the remarks of men and boys. The Bloomers figured extensively in the anti-slavery amalgamation convention, and were rather looked up to, but their intemperate ideas would not be tolerated in the temperance meeting at the Brick Chapel....
Anniversary week brings a mix of interesting people, both men and women, to New York. Outdated and quite plain women embarrassed themselves by walking the streets with henpecked husbands, frail vegetarians, overly enthusiastic Abolitionists, and timid clergymen who were too afraid to say "no" to a strong-willed woman for fear of infringing on her rights. Despite how bold these women—presumably they were women—seemed, you’d think they would feel embarrassed walking around, hearing the barely hidden laughter from other women and comments from men and boys. The Bloomers were a noticeable presence at the anti-slavery convention and were somewhat admired, but their extreme views wouldn’t be accepted at the temperance meeting at the Brick Chapel...
A scene of the utmost confusion prevailed and there was a perfect warfare of tongues; but, singular to say, the women were compelled to hold their tongues and depart, followed by a number of male Betties and subdued husbands, wearing the apparel of manhood, but in reality emasculated by strong-minded women....
A complete chaotic scene broke out, with everyone arguing; however, strangely enough, the women were forced to be quiet and leave, followed by a group of submissive men and less assertive husbands, who dressed like real men but were actually dominated by strong-willed women....
So the Bloomers put their credentials in their breeches pockets and assembled at Dr. Trail's Cold Water Institute, where the men and Bloomers all took a bath and a drink together.
So the Bloomers tucked their credentials in their pants pockets and gathered at Dr. Trail's Cold Water Institute, where the men and Bloomers all took a bath and shared a drink together.
These sentiments were echoed by the newspapers, great and small, of the entire country. Not a word in regard to "women's rights" had been uttered at the Brick Church meeting except the right to have their credentials from regularly-organized temperance societies accepted, and the same privileges as other delegates granted. The continual reference to the "warfare of tongues" is rather amusing in face of the fact that no woman was allowed to speak and the talking was entirely monopolized by men. Is it a matter of surprise that only a very limited number of women had the courage to ally themselves with a movement which called down upon them and their families such an avalanche of ridicule and condemnation?
These feelings were echoed by newspapers, big and small, across the country. Not a single word about "women's rights" was mentioned at the Brick Church meeting, except for the right to have their credentials from properly organized temperance societies recognized and to receive the same privileges as other delegates. The constant mention of the "warfare of tongues" is rather amusing considering that no woman was allowed to speak and the discussion was completely dominated by men. Is it surprising that only a very small number of women had the bravery to join a movement that brought so much ridicule and condemnation upon them and their families?
Miss Anthony, on reaching home, immediately began active preparations for the first annual meeting of the Woman's State Temperance Society, which was to be held in Rochester. As usual she wrote hundreds of letters, raised the money, printed and circulated the call, looked after the advertising, engaged the speakers and took the whole responsibility. The convention assembled in Corinthian Hall, June 1, 1853, with a large attendance. Elizabeth Cady Stanton, the president, after stating that the society had over 2,000 members, and was in a most flourishing condition, said:
Miss Anthony, upon arriving home, quickly started getting ready for the first annual meeting of the Woman's State Temperance Society, which was set to take place in Rochester. As always, she wrote hundreds of letters, raised funds, printed and distributed the announcement, managed the advertising, booked the speakers, and took on all the responsibilities. The convention took place in Corinthian Hall on June 1, 1853, with a large turnout. Elizabeth Cady Stanton, the president, after noting that the society had over 2,000 members and was doing very well, said:
It has been objected that we do not confine ourselves to the subject of temperance, but talk too much about woman's rights, divorce and the church.... We have been obliged to preach woman's rights because many, instead of listening to what we had to say on temperance, have questioned the right of woman to speak on any subject. In courts of justice and legislative assemblies, if the right of any person to be there is questioned, all business waits until that point is settled. Now, it is not settled in the minds of the masses that woman has any right to stand on an even pedestal with man, look him in the face as an equal and rebuke the sins of her day and generation. Let it be clearly understood then that we are a Woman's Rights Society; that we believe it is woman's duty to speak whenever she feels the impression to do so; that it is her right to be present in all the councils of Church and State.
People have noted that we don't focus solely on the topic of temperance; instead, we often discuss women's rights, divorce, and the church. We’ve had to advocate for women's rights because many people, rather than hearing our message about temperance, have questioned whether women should speak on any topic. In courts and legislative settings, if someone's right to participate is challenged, all proceedings pause until that issue is sorted out. Even today, many people still struggle to accept that women have the right to stand shoulder to shoulder with men, look them in the eye as equals, and speak out against the injustices of their time. So let it be clear: we are a Women’s Rights Society; we believe that women have a duty to speak up whenever they feel they should, and it is their right to be included in all discussions in both the Church and the State.
Continuing, she took firm ground in favor of the right of a woman to be divorced from an habitual drunkard, a position which brought upon her a storm of censure from press, pulpit 093 and society. She was strongly supported, however, by the most prominent women of the day and received many letters of approval, among them one from Lucy Stone, saying: "On the divorce question, I am on your side, for the reason that drunkenness so depraves a man's system that he is not fit to be a father." Gerrit Smith wrote to the convention:
Continuing, she firmly stood up for a woman's right to divorce an habitual drunkard, a stance that brought her intense criticism from the media, religious leaders, and society. However, she was strongly backed by many of the most prominent women of the time and received numerous letters of support, including one from Lucy Stone, who said: "On the divorce issue, I stand with you because alcoholism so corrupts a man's character that he is unfit to be a father." Gerrit Smith wrote to the convention:
I know not why it is not as much the duty of your sex as of mine to establish newspapers, write books and hold public meetings for the promotion of the cause of temperance. The current idea that modesty should hold women back from such services is nonsense and wickedness. Female modesty! female delicacy! I would that I might never again hear such phrases. There is but one standard of modesty and delicacy for both men and women; and so long as different standards are tolerated, both sexes will be perverse and corrupt.... The Quakers are the best people I have ever known, the most serious and chaste and yet the most brave and resisting; but there are no other people who are so little concerned lest women get out of their sphere. None make so little difference between man and woman. Others appear to think that the happiness and safety of the world consist in magnifying the difference. But when reason and religion shall rule, there will be no difference between man and woman, in respect to the intellect, the heart or the manners.
I don’t get why it’s mainly men’s responsibility to start newspapers, write books, and organize public meetings for temperance. The notion that women should be held back by modesty from these roles is absurd and wrong. Female modesty! Female delicacy! I hope I never have to hear those phrases again. There should be one standard of modesty and delicacy for everyone; as long as we accept different standards, both men and women will remain flawed and corrupt. The Quakers are the best people I’ve ever met—serious, pure, yet brave and strong. They care the least about women stepping outside their typical roles. No other group distinguishes between men and women as little as they do. Others seem to think that the happiness and safety of the world depend on highlighting these differences. But when reason and religion take charge, there will be no difference between men and women in terms of intellect, feelings, or behavior.

Gerrit Smith
Gerrit Smith
A stirring letter was sent by Neal Dow, expressing his great pleasure that women were taking active and decided measures for the suppression of intemperance, and closing: "It is absurd, therefore, to argue that the community has no power to control this great evil; that any citizen has the right to inflict it upon society, or that society should hesitate to exercise its right and power of self-protection against it."
A powerful letter was sent by Neal Dow, sharing his excitement that women were actively and decisively working to combat alcoholism, and he concluded with: "It's ridiculous to claim that the community lacks the power to manage this significant issue; that any individual has the right to impose it on society, or that society should hesitate to exercise its right and ability to protect itself against it."
Many other letters were read from friends, among them Abby Kelly Foster, who said to Miss Anthony: "So far as separate organizations for women's action in the temperance cause are concerned, I consider you the center and soul, without whom nothing could have been done heretofore and I doubt whether anything would be done now." Strong addresses were made by Rev. Channing, Frederick Douglass, Lucy Stone, Mrs. Nichols, Antoinette Brown, Mrs. Bloomer and others. 094
Many other letters were read from friends, including Abby Kelly Foster, who told Miss Anthony: "When it comes to separate organizations for women's involvement in the temperance movement, I see you as the heart and soul, without whom nothing could have been accomplished in the past, and I’m not sure anything would happen now." Powerful speeches were delivered by Rev. Channing, Frederick Douglass, Lucy Stone, Mrs. Nichols, Antoinette Brown, Mrs. Bloomer, and others. 094
When this association was formed a clause was placed in the constitution allowing men to become members and to speak in all meetings but making them ineligible to office. There were two reasons for this: it was desired to throw the full responsibility on woman, compelling her to learn to preside and to think, speak and act for herself, which she never would do if men were present to perform these duties for her; and it was feared that, on account of long habit, men would soon take matters into their own hands and gain control of the society, possibly to the extent of forbidding women to speak at the meetings. Many of the ladies, however, objected to this clause, among them Antoinette Brown, who refused to join the society on account of it. So, yielding to the pressure, Mrs. Stanton, on this first anniversary, said "as this seemed to many a violation of men's rights, and as the women had now learned to stand alone, it might perhaps be safe to admit men to all the privileges of the society, hoping, however, that they would modestly permit woman to continue the work she had so successfully begun."
When this group was formed, a clause was added to the constitution that allowed men to join and speak at all meetings but kept them from holding office. There were two reasons for this: it was important to put the full responsibility on women, pushing them to learn to lead and to think, speak, and act independently, which they wouldn’t do if men were around to take care of those tasks for them; and there was a concern that, due to long-standing habits, men would quickly take control of the organization and might even go so far as to prevent women from speaking at meetings. However, many of the women, including Antoinette Brown, objected to this clause, and she refused to join the society because of it. So, in response to the pressure, Mrs. Stanton, on this first anniversary, said, “Since this seems to many a violation of men’s rights, and since the women have now learned to stand on their own, it might be safe to allow men to have all the privileges of the society, hoping, though, that they will humbly let women continue the work they have started so successfully.”

Neal Dow
Neal Dow
Miss Anthony, chairman of the committee on revising the 095 constitution, brought in a report in favor of admitting the men, which was vigorously discussed. Before the close of this meeting the serious mistake of such action was apparent. The men present monopolized the floor, tried to have the name changed to the People's League, insisted that the society should have nothing to do with any phase of woman's rights, and showed their hand so plainly that Miss Anthony at once took the alarm and in an indignant speech declared the men were trying to drive the women from their own society.
Miss Anthony, the chair of the committee on revising the 095 constitution, presented a report supporting the inclusion of men, which sparked vigorous discussion. By the end of the meeting, it was clear that this decision would be a serious mistake. The men present dominated the conversation, attempted to change the group's name to the People's League, insisted that the organization should steer clear of any issues related to women's rights, and revealed their intentions so clearly that Miss Anthony immediately became alarmed and delivered an indignant speech, stating that the men were trying to push the women out of their own organization.
There was a strong undercurrent of opposition to Mrs. Stanton on account of her radical views in regard to equal rights, divorce for drunkenness and the subjection of woman to Bible authority, but those opposing her being wholly inexperienced did not know how to prevent her re-election. As the majority of the men, for obvious reasons, agreed with them in wishing to get rid of Mrs. Stanton, they proceeded to teach them political tactics, got out a printed opposition ticket and defeated her for president by three votes. She was chosen vice-president but emphatically declined. Miss Anthony was almost unanimously re-elected secretary but refused to serve, stating that "the vote showed they would not accept the principle of woman's rights and, as she believed thoroughly in standing for the equality of woman, she could not act as officer of such a society; besides, Mrs. Vaughn, the newly elected president, had openly declared that 'principle must sometimes be sacrificed to expediency.' She herself would never admit this; her doctrine was, 'Do right, and leave the consequences with God.'" Frederick Douglass and a number of others urged her in the most earnest manner to remain, paying high tribute to her services and pointing out how much they were needed, but in vain.
There was a strong current of opposition to Mrs. Stanton because of her radical views on equal rights, divorce due to alcoholism, and the subjugation of women to Biblical authority. However, those opposing her were completely inexperienced and didn't know how to prevent her re-election. Most of the men, for obvious reasons, wanted to get rid of Mrs. Stanton, so they taught them political strategies, put together a printed opposition ticket, and defeated her for president by three votes. She was elected vice-president but firmly declined. Miss Anthony was almost unanimously re-elected as secretary but refused to serve, stating that "the vote showed they would not accept the principle of women's rights and, since she firmly believed in standing for the equality of women, she could not act as an officer of such a society; furthermore, Mrs. Vaughn, the newly elected president, had openly declared that 'principle must sometimes be sacrificed to expediency.' She herself would never agree to this; her belief was, 'Do right, and leave the consequences with God.'" Frederick Douglass and several others earnestly urged her to stay, paying high tribute to her contributions and highlighting how much they were needed, but it was in vain.
Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton at once severed all connection with the organization they had founded; it passed into the hands of a body of conservative women, who believed they could accomplish by prayer what these two knew never could be done except through legislation with a constituency of women behind it. The society had a precarious existence of 096 one or two years and finally went to pieces. There was not another strong, concerted movement of women in the cause of temperance for twenty years.[18] Miss Anthony, although a total abstainer all her life, was never again connected with a temperance organization. She has steadfastly held to the opinion that the vital work for women is to secure for themselves the ballot which, above all other agencies, will make them an effective power for dealing not only with this but with all moral questions.
Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton immediately cut all ties with the organization they had started; it fell into the hands of a group of conservative women, who believed they could achieve their goals through prayer, while the two women understood that real change could only come through legislation backed by a constituency of women. The society struggled to survive for just a year or two before finally falling apart. For twenty years, there was no strong, unified movement of women advocating for temperance. Miss Anthony, despite being a lifelong total abstainer, was never involved with a temperance organization again. She firmly believed that the essential work for women was to secure the right to vote, which would empower them to address not just this issue but all moral concerns effectively.
Relieved from her onerous duties in connection with the State society, she at once set about working up the Whole World's Temperance Convention in New York, for which she felt a personal responsibility. Many of those who had seceded from the Brick Church meeting, including Mr. Higginson himself, were beginning to doubt the propriety of holding a separate convention. Miss Anthony was strongly in favor of it and wrote Lucy Stone:
Relieved of her heavy responsibilities with the State society, she immediately started organizing the Whole World's Temperance Convention in New York, feeling a personal commitment to it. Many who had left the Brick Church meeting, including Mr. Higginson, were starting to question whether it was appropriate to hold a separate convention. Miss Anthony strongly supported it and wrote to Lucy Stone:
We have not the slightest reason for supposing that we shall be received at the World's Convention to be held September 5. The same men that controlled the Brick Church meeting are to be the leading spirits there. Not one of them, so far as I can learn, has expressed a regret that the women-delegates were excluded last May; how then can we entertain a hope that they will act differently in September? We may pretend to go in good faith but there will be no faith in us. If it is not too late I beg of you to see that the call is issued and for the very day that the Old Fogies hold their convention.
We have no reason to believe we’ll be welcomed at the World Convention on September 5. The same people who organized the Brick Church meeting will be in charge there. As far as I know, none of them have shown any remorse for excluding the women delegates last May, so why should we expect them to behave any differently in September? We might pretend to attend with good intentions, but there won’t be any trust in us. If it’s not too late, I urge you to ensure the call is made for the same day the Old Fogies hold their convention.
Lucy Stone agreed with her and, through their efforts, the committee were persuaded to send out the call. It was decided, however, to hold the meeting September 1 and 2, just before the other, and then, while the great crowds from all parts of the country were in the city, to have a regular Woman's Rights Convention on the same date as that of Rev. John Chambers et al. Miss Anthony received many cordial replies to her numerous letters, and some not so cordial. Samuel F. Gary wrote in his characteristic style: "You ask whether I will speak at a Whole World's Temperance Convention to be held in New York during the World's Fair. You 097 will have observed that my humble name is signed to a call for such a convention at that time and place, together with Chancellor Walworth's and others of like distinction. Providence favoring, it is my purpose to participate in the deliberations of that meeting and I see no sufficient reason for another convention having the same object in view." Possibly if Mr. Gary and "others of like distinction" had been refused permission to speak a word or even to serve on a committee, they might have been able to see "sufficient reason for another convention." Horace Greeley sent the following:
Lucy Stone agreed with her, and through their efforts, the committee was convinced to send out the invitation. It was decided to hold the meeting on September 1 and 2, just before the other event, and then, while the large crowds from all parts of the country were in the city, to have a proper Woman's Rights Convention on the same date as that of Rev. John Chambers and others. Miss Anthony received many warm replies to her numerous letters, and some that weren't so warm. Samuel F. Gary wrote in his typical style: "You ask whether I will speak at a Whole World's Temperance Convention to be held in New York during the World's Fair. You 097 will have noticed that my humble name is signed to a call for such a convention at that time and place, alongside Chancellor Walworth's and others of similar distinction. If Providence allows, I plan to participate in the discussions at that meeting, and I see no sufficient reason for another convention with the same goals." Perhaps if Mr. Gary and "others of similar distinction" had been denied the opportunity to speak or even to serve on a committee, they might have recognized "sufficient reason for another convention." Horace Greeley sent the following:
I may not be able to write you a long letter, as you request, but I will give you a little confidential advice. All I know on temperance (pretty nearly) I put into a tract which was long ago printed at the Organ office.... Now, as to tracts: Make it your first rule to Be Thorough. Most of our temperance tracts are too short and flimsy and not calculated to convince reasoning beings. Let each tract take up some one aspect of the question and exhaust it, none of your fly-away five or six pages but from twelve to thirty-two, the whole case presented in all its aspects and proved up. Nothing less than this will do much good.
I might not be able to write you a long letter like you wanted, but I’ll share some confidential advice. Everything I know about temperance (almost everything) I included in a pamphlet that was printed a long time ago at the Organ office.... Now, regarding pamphlets: Make it your first rule to be thorough. Most of our temperance pamphlets are too short and weak to convince rational people. Each pamphlet should explore one aspect of the issue and cover it completely—not just a quick five or six pages, but between twelve and thirty-two, presenting the entire case from all angles with solid evidence. Anything less won't have much impact.
Now as to church matters: The short and safe way is simply to set them aside. If those who have outgrown the church do not introduce the subject by treading on the old lady's corns, they can effectually resist all interposition of shibboleths by the followers of Pusey in all sects. Do not make the reform movement a pretext for assaulting the church. In short, the whole question with regard to the woman's movement is best solved by those engaged in it going quietly and effectively on with their work. That will soonest stop the mouths of gainsayers. "It does move, though," is the true answer to all cavils.
Now, about church matters: The easiest and safest approach is to simply ignore them. If those who have outgrown the church don’t create issues, they can effectively counter the old arguments from Pusey’s followers in every denomination. Don’t use the reform movement as an excuse to attack the church. Essentially, the best way to handle the women’s movement is for those involved to quietly and effectively continue their work. That will quickly silence the critics. “It does move, though,” is the best response to all objections.
I can't be at your convention, and Mrs. Greeley is overwhelmed with moving and babies.
I can't make it to your convention, and Mrs. Greeley is overwhelmed with moving and taking care of babies.

Horace Greeley
Horace Greeley
While Miss Anthony was thus engaged, the State Teachers' Convention was held in Corinthian Hall, Rochester, August 3, 1853, and true to her resolve made the year previous she put aside everything else in order to attend. According to the rules any one paying a dollar was entitled to all the rights and privileges of the convention; so she paid her dollar and took her seat. There were over 500 teachers in attendance, two-thirds at least being women. For two entire days Miss Anthony sat there, and during that time not a woman spoke; in all the deliberations there was not the slightest recognition of their presence, and they did not vote on any question, though all had paid the fee and were members of the association. In a letter describing the occasion Miss Anthony said: "My heart was filled with grief and indignation thus to seethe minority, simply because they were men, presuming that in them was vested all wisdom and knowledge; that they needed no aid, no counsel from the majority. And what was most humiliating of all was to look into the faces of those women and see that by far the larger proportion were perfectly satisfied with the position assigned them."
While Miss Anthony was busy, the State Teachers' Convention took place at Corinthian Hall in Rochester on August 3, 1853. True to her commitment from the previous year, she put everything aside to attend. According to the rules, anyone paying a dollar was entitled to all the rights and privileges of the convention, so she paid her dollar and took her seat. Over 500 teachers attended, with at least two-thirds being women. For two whole days, Miss Anthony sat there, and during that time, no woman spoke; throughout the discussions, there was no recognition of their presence, and they didn't vote on any issues, despite having all paid the fee and being members of the association. In a letter describing the event, Miss Anthony wrote: "My heart was filled with grief and indignation to see the minority, simply because they were men, assuming that all wisdom and knowledge rested with them; that they needed no help, no advice from the majority. What was most humiliating of all was looking into the faces of those women and seeing that a large number were perfectly satisfied with the position assigned to them."
Toward the close of the second day's session the subject under discussion was, "Why the profession of teacher is not as much respected as that of lawyer, doctor or minister?" After listening for several hours, Miss Anthony felt that the decisive moment had come and, rising in her seat, she said, "Mr. President." A bombshell would not have created greater commotion. For the first time in all history a woman's voice was heard in a teachers' convention. Every neck was craned and a profound hush fell upon the assembly. Charles Davies, LL. D., author of Davies' text books and professor of mathematics at West Point, was president. In full-dress costume with buff vest, blue coat and brass buttons, he was the Great Mogul. At length recovering from the shock of being thus addressed by a woman, he leaned forward and asked with satirical politeness, "What will the lady have?" "I wish to speak to the question under discussion," said Miss Anthony calmly, although her heart was beating a tattoo. Turning to the few 099 rows of men in front of him, for the women occupied the back seats, he inquired, "What is the pleasure of the convention?" "I move she shall be heard," said one man; this was seconded by another, and thus was precipitated a debate which lasted half an hour, although she had precisely the same right to speak as any man who was taking part in the discussion.
Toward the end of the second day's session, the discussion focused on "Why is the teaching profession not as respected as that of a lawyer, doctor, or minister?" After listening for several hours, Miss Anthony felt the moment to speak had arrived. Rising in her seat, she said, "Mr. President." It caused a stir—like a bombshell. For the first time in history, a woman’s voice echoed in a teachers' convention. Everyone leaned in, and a deep silence fell over the assembly. Charles Davies, LL. D., the author of Davies' textbooks and a professor of mathematics at West Point, was the president. Dressed formally in a buff vest, blue coat, and brass buttons, he looked quite impressive. Once he regained his composure after being addressed by a woman, he leaned forward and asked with feigned politeness, “What does the lady want?” “I wish to speak on the topic at hand," said Miss Anthony calmly, even though her heart was racing. Turning to the few 099 rows of men in front of him—since the women were seated in the back—he asked, "What does the convention want?" "I motion that she be heard," said one man, and another quickly seconded it. This sparked a debate that lasted half an hour, even though she had exactly the same right to speak as any man participating in the discussion.
She stood during all this time, fearing to lose the floor if she sat down. At last a vote was taken, men only voting, and it was carried in the affirmative by a small majority. Miss Anthony then said: "It seems to me you fail to comprehend the cause of the disrespect of which you complain. Do you not see that so long as society says woman has not brains enough to be a doctor, lawyer or minister, but has plenty to be a teacher, every man of you who condescends to teach, tacitly admits before all Israel and the sun that he has no more brains than a woman?"—and sat down. She had intended to draw the conclusion that the only way to place teaching upon a level with other professions was either to admit woman to them or exclude her from teaching, but her trembling limbs would sustain her no longer.
She stood the whole time, afraid she’d lose her chance to speak if she sat down. Finally, a vote was taken—only men could vote—and it passed by a narrow margin. Miss Anthony then said, "It seems to me you don’t understand the reason behind the disrespect you’re complaining about. Don’t you see that as long as society says women aren’t smart enough to be doctors, lawyers, or ministers, but are perfectly fine to be teachers, every man here who agrees to teach is basically admitting in front of everyone that he doesn’t have any more brains than a woman?"—and then she sat down. She meant to conclude that the only way to elevate teaching to the same level as other professions was either to allow women into those professions or to exclude them from teaching altogether, but her trembling legs couldn’t hold her up any longer.
The convention soon adjourned for the day and, as Miss Anthony went out of the hall, many of the women drew away from her and said audibly: "Did you ever see such a disgraceful performance?" "I never was so ashamed of my sex." But a few of them gathered about her and said: "You have taught us our lesson and hereafter we propose to make ourselves heard."
The convention wrapped up for the day, and as Miss Anthony left the hall, many of the women moved away from her, saying out loud, "Have you ever seen such a disgraceful performance?" "I’ve never been so ashamed of my gender." But a few of them gathered around her and said, "You've taught us our lesson, and from now on, we plan to make ourselves heard."
The next day, at the opening of the morning session, President Davies, who had evidently spent the night in preparing the greatest effort of his life, arose in all his majesty and was delivered of the following:
The next day, at the start of the morning session, President Davies, who clearly had spent the night preparing for the biggest moment of his life, stood up in all his grandeur and delivered the following:
I have been asked why no provisions have been made for female lecturers before this association and why ladies are not appointed on committees. I will answer: "Behold this beautiful hall! Mark well the pilaster, its pedestal, its shaft, its rich entablature, the crowning glory of this superb architecture, the different parts, each in its appropriate place, contributing to the strength, beauty and symmetry of the whole! Could I aid in bringing down this splendid entablature from its proud elevation and trailing it in the dust and dirt that surround the pedestal? No, never!"
I’ve been asked why there haven’t been any arrangements for female lecturers in this association and why women aren’t appointed to committees. I’ll respond: “Look at this beautiful hall! Notice the pilaster, its base, its shaft, its impressive entablature, the crowning detail of this amazing architecture. Each part has its role, adding to the strength, beauty, and balance of the whole! Could I help in bringing down this magnificent entablature from its proud height and dragging it through the dust and dirt around the base? No, never!”
To quote further from Miss Anthony's letter: "Many of the ladies readjusted their ribbons and laces and looked at each other as much as to say, 'Beautiful, perfectly beautiful!' But a few there were whose faces spoke scorn and utter contempt, and whose flashing eyes said: 'Such flattery as this adds insult to injury upon those of us who, equally qualified with men, are toiling side by side with them for one-half the salary. And this solely because of our sex!'"
To quote further from Miss Anthony's letter: "Many of the ladies readjusted their ribbons and laces and looked at each other as if to say, 'Beautiful, just beautiful!' But a few were there whose faces showed scorn and utter contempt, and whose flashing eyes said: 'This kind of flattery just adds insult to injury for those of us who, just as qualified as men, are working side by side with them for half the pay. And all because of our gender!'"
The women had no desire to pull down the building, entablature and all, about the head of the magnificent Davies, but some of them were aroused to the injustice with which they had so long been treated. To the astonishment of the professor and his following, these resolutions were presented by Mrs. Northrop, a teacher in the Rochester schools:
The women didn't want to tear down the entire building, including the entablature, on top of the impressive Davies, but some of them were stirred up by the unfairness they had endured for so long. To the surprise of the professor and his group, these decisions were presented by Mrs. Northrop, a teacher in the Rochester schools:
Resolved, That this association recognizes the right of female teachers to share in all the privileges and deliberations of this body.
Resolved, That this association recognizes the right of female teachers to take part in all the privileges and discussions of this group.
Resolved, That female teachers do not receive an adequate and sufficient compensation, and that, as salaries should be regulated only according to the amount of labor performed, this association will endeavor by judicious and efficient action to remove this existing evil.
Resolved, That female teachers are not receiving fair and adequate pay, and that salaries should be based solely on the amount of work performed; this association will implement thoughtful and effective strategies to address this ongoing issue.
An attempt was made to smother them, and when Mrs. Northrop asked why they had not been read, the president blandly replied that he regretted they could not be reached but other order of business preceded them. Mrs. Northrop, having found her voice, proceeded to speak strongly on the discrimination made against women in the matter of salaries, and was ably supported by her sister, Mrs. J.R. Vosburg. J. D. Fanning, of New York, recording secretary, asked that the resolutions be read, which was done. Miss Anthony then made a forcible speech in their favor and they were passed unanimously, to the utter amazement and discomfiture of President Davies.
An effort was made to silence them, and when Mrs. Northrop asked why they hadn't been addressed, the president casually replied that he regretted they couldn’t be considered yet because there were other matters to discuss first. Mrs. Northrop, finding her voice, spoke strongly about the discrimination against women regarding salaries, with solid support from her sister, Mrs. J.R. Vosburg. J. D. Fanning from New York, the recording secretary, requested that the resolutions be read, which they were. Miss Anthony then gave a powerful speech in their support, and they were approved unanimously, shocking and unsettling President Davies.
She went home well satisfied with her work, and completed preparations for the Whole World's Temperance Convention, which was held in New York, September 1 and 2. Her zeal is amusingly illustrated by her proposal to invite Victor Hugo and Harriet Martineau to speak. It was a splendid assemblage, 101 addressed by the leading men and women of the day, the large hall packed at every session, the audience sitting hour after hour, orderly but full of earnestness and enthusiasm. The New York Tribune said of it: "This has been the most spirited and able meeting on behalf of temperance that ever was held."
She went home feeling very satisfied with her work and finished getting ready for the Whole World's Temperance Convention, which took place in New York on September 1 and 2. Her enthusiasm is humorously shown by her suggestion to invite Victor Hugo and Harriet Martineau to speak. It was a fantastic gathering, 101 addressed by the leading figures of the time, with the large hall filled to capacity at every session, the audience sitting quietly for hours, yet full of seriousness and excitement. The New York Tribune remarked: "This has been the most spirited and capable meeting in support of temperance that has ever been held."
The men's convention has a different record. New York, in the month of September, 1853, was in a whirlwind of excitement. The first World's Fair of the United States was in progress and people had gathered from all parts of this and other countries. In order to reach these crowds, many conventions had been called to meet in this city, among them the two Temperance, the Anti-Slavery and the Woman's Rights. The Whole World's Temperance and the Anti-Slavery closed just in time for the opening of the World's Temperance and the Woman's Rights meetings. Rev. Antoinette Brown was appointed a delegate from two different societies to the World's Temperance Convention and, although they had every reason to believe that no woman would be received, it was decided to make the attempt in order to show their willingness to co-operate with the men's associations in temperance work.
The men's convention has a different record. New York, in September 1853, was buzzing with excitement. The first World's Fair in the United States was happening, and people had come from all over the country and beyond. To connect with these crowds, many conventions were scheduled in the city, including two Temperance conventions, the Anti-Slavery convention, and the Woman's Rights convention. The Whole World's Temperance and the Anti-Slavery conventions wrapped up just in time for the start of the World's Temperance and the Woman's Rights meetings. Rev. Antoinette Brown was chosen as a delegate from two different societies to attend the World's Temperance Convention, and even though they had every reason to think no woman would be welcomed, they decided to give it a shot to demonstrate their willingness to work together with the men's groups on temperance initiatives.
Wendell Phillips accompanied her to Metropolitan Hall, where she handed her credentials to the secretary and, after they were passed upon, the president, Neal Dow, informed her that she was a member of the convention. Later, when she arose to speak to a motion, he invited her to the platform and then pandemonium broke loose. There were cries of "order," "order," hisses, shouts of "she shall not speak," and above all the voice of Rev. John Chambers, who, pointing his finger at her, cried over and over, "Shame on the woman!" Miss Brown stood an hour and a half on the platform, in the midst of this bedlam, not because she was anxious to speak, but to establish the principle that an accredited delegate to a world's convention should not be denied the right of speech on account of sex; but she was finally compelled to leave the hall.
Wendell Phillips took her to Metropolitan Hall, where she gave her credentials to the secretary. After they were approved, the president, Neal Dow, informed her that she was now a member of the convention. Later, when she stood up to speak on a motion, he invited her to the platform, and then chaos erupted. There were shouts of "order," "order," boos, cries of "she shall not speak," and above all, the voice of Rev. John Chambers, who, pointing his finger at her, yelled repeatedly, "Shame on the woman!" Miss Brown stood on the platform for an hour and a half in the middle of this uproar, not because she was eager to speak, but to assert that an accredited delegate to a world convention should not be denied the right to speak because of her gender; however, she was ultimately forced to leave the hall.
Win. Lloyd Garrison said: "I have seen many tumultuous meetings in my day, but on no occasion have I ever seen anything 102 more disgraceful to our common humanity." Samuel F. Gary led in the opposition to Miss Brown, offering a resolution that "women be not allowed to speak," and afterwards declaring in his paper that he did it "because she tried to force the question of woman's rights upon the convention." To this Rev. William Henry Channing replied in a public address: "If any man says that, he lies. She stood there simply asking her privilege as a delegate." The New York Tribune said: "This convention has completed three of its four business sessions and the results may be summed up as follows: First day—Crowding a woman off the platform; second day—Gagging her; third day—Voting that she shall stay gagged. Having thus disposed of the main question, we presume the incidentals will be finished this morning."
Win. Lloyd Garrison said: "I've seen many chaotic meetings in my time, but I've never witnessed anything 102 more disgraceful to our shared humanity." Samuel F. Gary led the opposition to Miss Brown, proposing a resolution that "women should not be allowed to speak," and later stated in his paper that he did it "because she tried to force the issue of women's rights on the convention." In response, Rev. William Henry Channing spoke out in a public address: "If any man says that, he's lying. She stood there simply asking for her rights as a delegate." The New York Tribune reported: "This convention has completed three of its four business sessions, and the results can be summed up as follows: First day—Pushing a woman off the platform; second day—Silencing her; third day—Voting to keep her silenced. Having dealt with the main issue, we assume any side issues will be wrapped up this morning."
This was not an exaggerated statement, as practically nothing was done during the three days of the convention except to fight over the question of allowing Miss Brown, an accepted delegate, an ordained minister, a young, beautiful and modest woman, to stand upon their platform and speak on the subject of temperance. Miss Anthony was a witness to these proceedings, her Quaker blood rose to the boiling point and she registered anew a solemn vow within herself that she never would relax her efforts for one single day, if it took a lifetime, until woman had the right of speech on every platform in the land.
This wasn’t an overstatement, as almost nothing happened during the three days of the convention except for the argument about whether Miss Brown, a recognized delegate, an ordained minister, and a young, beautiful, and modest woman, could take the stage and speak about temperance. Miss Anthony witnessed these events, and her Quaker roots boiled over, leading her to renew a serious vow to never stop fighting, even if it took her a lifetime, until women had the right to speak on every platform in the country.
The mob which had begun with the anti-slavery and gathered strength at the temperance meeting, now turned its attention to the Woman's Rights Convention in Broadway Tabernacle. The president was that lovely Quaker, Lucretia Mott, and the speakers were among the greatest men and women in the nation: Wm. Lloyd Garrison, Wendell Phillips, Rev. Channing, Rev. John Pierpont, Mrs. Rose, Lucy Stone, Frances D. Gage, Miss Brown, Mrs. Nichols. In Miss Anthony's address she reviewed the action of the recent teachers' convention at Rochester and closed by saying: "A woman principal in that city receives $250, while a man principal, doing exactly the same work, receives $650. In this State there are 11,000 teachers and of these four-fifths are women. By the reports it will 103 be seen that of the annual State fund of $800,000, two-thirds are paid to men and one-third to women; that is to say, two-thirds are paid to one-fifth of the laborers, and the other four-fifths are paid with the remaining one-third of the fund!" This was the first appearance of Madame Mathilde Anneke, a highly-educated German of noble family, a political exile from Hungary, and a friend of Kossuth. That wonderful colored woman, Sojourner Truth, also was present.
The crowd that had started with the anti-slavery movement and gained momentum at the temperance meeting now shifted its focus to the Woman's Rights Convention at Broadway Tabernacle. The president was the lovely Quaker Lucretia Mott, and the speakers included some of the greatest figures in the nation: Wm. Lloyd Garrison, Wendell Phillips, Rev. Channing, Rev. John Pierpont, Mrs. Rose, Lucy Stone, Frances D. Gage, Miss Brown, and Mrs. Nichols. In Miss Anthony's speech, she reviewed the actions from the recent teachers' convention in Rochester and concluded by stating: "A woman principal in that city earns $250, while a male principal doing the exact same job earns $650. In this State, there are 11,000 teachers, and four-fifths of them are women. According to the reports, it will 103 show that of the annual State fund of $800,000, two-thirds go to men and one-third to women; in other words, two-thirds are paid to one-fifth of the workers, while the remaining four-fifths are compensated with the rest of the one-third of the fund!" This was the first appearance of Madame Mathilde Anneke, a well-educated German from a noble family, a political exile from Hungary, and a friend of Kossuth. The remarkable woman of color, Sojourner Truth, was also present.
The resolutions were, in effect, that "each human being should be the judge of his or her sphere and that human rights should be recognized." There never were, there never will be, grander speeches than those which were made on this occasion, and yet the entire convention was in the hands of a mob. The women, as well as the men, were greeted with cries of "shut up," "sit down," "get out," "bow-wow," "go it, Susan," and their voices drowned with hisses and cat-calls. The uproar was indescribable, with shouting, yelling, screaming, bellowing, stamping and every species of noise that could be made. Horace Greeley went down among the crowd and tried to quiet them. The police were appealed to in vain, and the meeting finally closed in the midst of tumult and confusion. The Tribune under the management of Greeley, and the Evening Post under that of William Cullen Bryant, condemned the rioters with the greatest severity, but the other leading dailies of New York sustained the mob spirit and made the ladies a target for ridicule and condemnation.
The resolutions were essentially that "everyone should have the right to judge their own sphere and that human rights should be acknowledged." There have never been, and there will never be, grander speeches than those given on this occasion, yet the whole convention was in the hands of a rowdy crowd. Both women and men were met with shouts of "shut up," "sit down," "get out," "bow-wow," "go for it, Susan," and their voices were drowned out by hisses and cat-calls. The noise was indescribable, filled with shouting, yelling, screaming, bellowing, stomping, and every kind of noise imaginable. Horace Greeley went down into the crowd to try and calm them. The police were called but to no effect, and the meeting eventually ended amid chaos and confusion. The Tribune, managed by Greeley, and the Evening Post, led by William Cullen Bryant, harshly condemned the rioters, but the other major newspapers in New York supported the mob mentality and targeted the women for mockery and scorn.
After leaving New York, Miss Anthony went to the Fourth National Woman's Rights Convention at Cleveland, O., which was one of the largest and most enthusiastic that had been held. It was attended by many noted people, among them Hon. Joshua R. Giddings, always a consistent advocate of woman's rights, and the proceedings were marked with perfect order and propriety. Miss Anthony was continued at the head of the finance committee, as it was found that no one could raise so much money. The three weeks following she traveled through the southern counties in New York and spoke in a number of villages. A year before she had gone 104 over the same ground and organized woman's temperance societies. She found that, with the exception of one at Elmira, none of these was in existence. The explanation in every instance was that they had no money to secure lecturers, or to do any practical work and, as all the members were wives and housekeepers, they were not in a position to earn any. Miss Anthony makes this entry in her journal:
After leaving New York, Miss Anthony attended the Fourth National Woman's Rights Convention in Cleveland, Ohio, which was one of the biggest and most enthusiastic gatherings yet. It was attended by many prominent individuals, including Hon. Joshua R. Giddings, who had always been a steadfast supporter of women's rights, and the event was conducted with complete order and respect. Miss Anthony was reappointed as the head of the finance committee, as it was recognized that no one was more capable of raising funds. In the following three weeks, she traveled through the southern counties of New York and spoke in several villages. A year earlier, she had covered the same areas and organized women's temperance societies. She discovered that, apart from one in Elmira, none of these societies were still active. The reason given in every case was that they lacked the funds to hire speakers or to carry out any practical work, and since all the members were wives and homemakers, they couldn’t generate any income. Miss Anthony noted this in her journal:
Thus as I passed from town to town was I made to feel the great evil of woman's utter dependence on man for the necessary means to aid reform movements. I never before took in so fully the grand idea of pecuniary independence. Woman must have a purse of her own, and how can this be so long as the law denies to the wife all right to both the individual and the joint earnings? Reflections like these convince me that there is no true freedom for woman without the possession of equal property rights, and that these can be obtained only through legislation. If this is so, then the sooner the demand is made, the sooner it will be granted. It must be done by petition, and this, too, of the very next legislature. How can the work be started? We must hold a convention and adopt some plan of united action.
As I traveled from town to town, I realized the major issue of women being completely dependent on men for the resources needed to support reform movements. I never truly grasped the strong idea of financial independence until now. Women need to earn their own money, but how can that happen as long as the law takes away wives' rights to both their personal and shared earnings? Thoughts like these make it clear to me that women can't really be free without equal property rights, which can only be secured through legislation. If that’s the case, the sooner we demand this, the sooner it will be granted. We need to advocate for it, and that should happen with the very next legislature. How do we start? We should organize a convention and come up with a plan for collective action.
With her, to think was always to act. She reached Rochester on the morning of election day, and went at once to the home of William and Mary Hallowell, that home whose doors never were closed to her, where for more than fifty years she was welcome day or night, where she always turned for advice, assistance and sympathy and ever found them in the fullest measure. She explained to them her idea of calling a meeting in Rochester for the specific purpose of starting a petition for more extended property rights to women. They encouraged the project, and she then turned toward her other Mecca, the home of Maria G. Porter. Three of the Porter sisters kept a private school in this city for thirty years, while the eldest, Maria, made a home for them and also took a select class of boarders. This was a literary center, she often invited Miss Anthony to meet her distinguished guests, and ever encouraged and sustained her public work. Mr. Channing was boarding here, and when Miss Anthony unfolded her plan, he exclaimed, "Capital! Capital!" and at once prepared an eloquent call for the convention. This meant for her the writing of letters to scores of influential people asking their signatures, 105 which were almost invariably given, and was followed by all the drudgery necessary for every meeting of this kind.
With her, thinking was always accompanied by action. She arrived in Rochester on election day morning and went straight to the home of William and Mary Hallowell, a place that had always welcomed her with open doors for over fifty years, day or night. It was here that she consistently sought advice, support, and understanding, and she always found it in abundance. She shared her plan to call a meeting in Rochester specifically to start a petition for broader property rights for women. They supported the idea, and she then headed to her other important destination, the home of Maria G. Porter. Three of the Porter sisters ran a private school in the city for thirty years, while the eldest, Maria, created a home for them and also hosted a select group of boarders. This place was a hub of literature; Maria frequently invited Miss Anthony to meet her distinguished guests and continuously encouraged and supported her public endeavors. Mr. Channing was staying there, and when Miss Anthony shared her plan, he exclaimed, "That's excellent! Excellent!" and immediately began drafting a compelling call for the convention. For her, this meant writing letters to numerous influential people asking for their signatures, 105 which were almost always granted, followed by all the tedious tasks required for organizing such meetings.

W.H. Channing
W.H. Channing
The convention opened Nov. 30 at Corinthian Hall, Rev. May presiding and Rev. Channing the leading spirit. Two forms of the petition were adopted, one for the just and equal rights of women in regard to wages and children; the other for the right of suffrage. Miss Anthony was appointed one of the lecturers, and also put in charge of the petitions. Sixty women began circulating these, and she herself canvassed her own city, lectured in a number of towns, and at the same time made arrangements for a State suffrage convention to be held in Albany February 14 and 15. At this time Parker Pillsbury wrote to Lydia Mott:
The convention started on November 30 at Corinthian Hall, with Rev. May leading and Rev. Channing being the driving force. They adopted two versions of the petition: one for the fair and equal rights of women concerning wages and children, and the other for the right to vote. Miss Anthony was designated as one of the speakers and was also put in charge of the petitions. Sixty women began distributing them, and she herself campaigned in her own city, gave talks in several towns, and simultaneously arranged for a State suffrage convention to take place in Albany on February 14 and 15. During this time, Parker Pillsbury wrote to Lydia Mott:
Is there work down among you for Susan to do? Any shirt-making, cooking, clerking, preaching or teaching, indeed any honest work, just to keep her out of idleness! She seems strangely unemployed—almost expiring for something to do, and I could not resist the inclination to appeal to you, as a person of particular leisure, that an effort be made in her behalf. At present she has only the Anti-Slavery cause for New York, the "Woman's Rights Movement" for the world, the Sunday evening lectures for Rochester and other lecturing of her own from Lake Erie to the "Old Man of Franconia mountains;" private cares and home affairs and the various et ceteras of womanity. These are about all so far as appears, to occupy her seven days of twenty-four hours each, as the weeks rain down to her from Eternal Skies. Do pity and procure work for her if it be possible!
Is there any work available for Susan? Any shirt-making, cooking, clerking, preaching, teaching, or any honest job to keep her occupied! She seems unusually idle—almost desperate for something to do, and I felt the need to reach out to you, as someone with spare time, to see if you could help her. Right now, she only has the Anti-Slavery cause in New York, the "Woman's Rights Movement" on a global scale, Sunday evening lectures in Rochester, and other speaking engagements from Lake Erie to the "Old Man of Franconia mountains," along with personal responsibilities and various aspects of womanhood. These seem to be all that fill her seven days, each with twenty-four hours, as the weeks go by. Please show some kindness and help find work for her if you can!
CHAPTER VII.
PETITIONS——BLOOMERS——LECTURES.
1854.
Considerable space has been given to detailed accounts of these early conventions to illustrate the prejudice which existed against woman's speaking in public, and the martyrdom suffered by the pioneers to secure the right of free speech for succeeding generations. From this time until the merging of all questions into the Civil War, such conventions were held every year, producing a great revolution of sentiment in the direction of an enlarged sphere for woman's activities and a modification of the legal and religious restraints that so long had held her in bondage. They have been fully described also in order to indicate some of the causes which operated in the development of the mind and character of Susan B. Anthony, transforming her by degrees from a, quiet, domestic Quaker maiden to a strong, courageous, uncompromising advocate of absolute equality of rights for woman. Brought into close association with the most advanced men and women of the age, seeing on every hand the injustice perpetrated against her sex and hearing the magnificent appeals for the liberty of every human being, her soul could not fail to respond; and having passed the age when women are apt to consecrate themselves to love and marriage, it was most natural that she should dedicate her services to the struggle for the freedom of woman. She did not realize then that this would reach through fifty years of exacting and unending toil, but even had she done so, who can doubt that she freely would have given up her life to the work? 108
A lot of attention has been given to detailed accounts of these early gatherings to show the bias against women speaking in public and the sacrifices made by the pioneers to secure the right to free speech for future generations. From that time until the Civil War brought everything together, these conventions were held every year, creating a major shift in attitudes towards expanding women's roles and changing the legal and religious restrictions that had kept them oppressed for so long. They've also been fully described to highlight some of the factors that shaped the mindset and character of Susan B. Anthony, gradually turning her from a quiet, domestic Quaker girl into a strong, courageous, and relentless advocate for complete equality for women. Surrounded by the most progressive men and women of her time, witnessing the injustice her gender faced and hearing powerful calls for the freedom of all people, she couldn’t help but feel compelled to act. Having moved past the age when women typically dedicate themselves to love and marriage, it was only natural for her to devote her efforts to the fight for women’s rights. She didn’t realize at the time that this commitment would extend over fifty years of demanding and unending work, but even if she had known, who would doubt she would have willingly given her life to the cause? 108
In the ten weeks before the State convention at Albany, 6,000 names were secured for the petition that married women should be entitled to the wages they earned and to the equal guardianship of their children, and 4,000 asking for the suffrage. Miss Anthony herself trudged from house to house during that stormy winter, many of the women slamming the door in her face with the statement that they "had all the rights they wanted;" although at this time an employer was bound by law to pay the wife's wages to the husband, and the father had the power to apprentice young children without the mother's consent, and even to dispose of them by will at his death. One minister, in Rochester, after looking her over carefully, said: "Miss Anthony, you are too fine a physical specimen of woman to be doing such work as this. You ought to marry and have children." Ignoring the insult, she replied in a dignified manner: "I think it a much wiser thing to secure for the thousands of mothers in this State the legal control of the children they now have, than to bring others into the world who would not belong to me after they were born."
In the ten weeks leading up to the State convention in Albany, 6,000 signatures were gathered for a petition demanding that married women should be entitled to their earned wages and to equal guardianship of their children, and 4,000 signatures were collected asking for the right to vote. Miss Anthony herself walked from house to house during that harsh winter, with many women slamming the door in her face, claiming they "had all the rights they wanted"; yet, at that time, a law required employers to pay a wife’s wages to her husband, and fathers could apprentice young children without the mother’s consent and even decide their future through a will. One minister in Rochester, after examining her closely, remarked, "Miss Anthony, you are too fine a physical specimen of woman to be doing such work as this. You ought to marry and have children." Ignoring the insult, she responded with dignity: "I think it is much wiser to secure for the thousands of mothers in this State the legal control of the children they already have, than to bring others into the world who would not belong to me after they were born."
The State convention met in Association Hall, Albany, February 14, 1854. Elizabeth Cady Stanton, president, delivered a magnificent address which Miss Anthony had printed and laid upon the desk of every member of the Legislature; she also circulated 50,000 of these pamphlets throughout the State. The convention had been called for two days, but so great was the interest aroused and so popular were the speakers in attendance that evening meetings were held for two weeks; the questions under consideration were taken up by the newspapers of Albany and the discussion spread through the press of the State, finding able defenders as well as bitter opponents. A peculiar illustration of the uncertain disposition of an audience was here given. While in other places women had been prevented from speaking, now they would not hear any but women, and whenever Mr. Channing or Mr. May attempted to speak he was at once cried down in a good-natured but effective manner. The women were greatly distressed at this, 109 as these men had been their strongest allies, their leaders, their educators; but their appeals to the audience to listen to masculine eloquence were made in vain.
The State convention met at Association Hall in Albany on February 14, 1854. Elizabeth Cady Stanton, the president, delivered an impressive speech that Miss Anthony had printed and placed on the desks of every member of the Legislature; she also distributed 50,000 of these pamphlets throughout the State. The convention was originally scheduled for two days, but due to the tremendous interest it generated and the popularity of the speakers, evening meetings were held for two weeks. The issues being discussed captured the attention of Albany's newspapers, and the debate spread through the State's press, attracting both strong supporters and harsh critics. A striking example of the audience's unpredictable mood was evident here. While in other places women had been silenced, here they would only listen to women, and whenever Mr. Channing or Mr. May tried to speak, they were immediately drowned out in a friendly but effective way. The women were deeply upset by this, 109 as these men had been their strongest allies, leaders, and educators; however, their pleas to the crowd to hear the men’s eloquence fell on deaf ears.
The petitions with their 10,000 names were presented in the Assembly, and strongly advocated by Mr. Peters, and Mr. D. P. Wood, of Onondaga county, but vehemently opposed by Mr. Burnett, of Essex. In his speech against the petition asking only that married women might possess their own wages and have equal guardianship of their children, he said:
The petitions with their 10,000 signatures were presented in the Assembly and were strongly supported by Mr. Peters and Mr. D. P. Wood from Onondaga County, but were fiercely opposed by Mr. Burnett from Essex. In his speech against the petition, which only requested that married women could keep their own earnings and have equal guardianship of their children, he said:
I hope before even this motion is put, gentlemen will be allowed to reflect upon the important question whether these individuals deserve any consideration at the hands of the Legislature. Whatever may be their pretensions or their sincerity, they do not appear satisfied with having unsexed themselves, but they desire to unsex every female in the land and to set the whole community ablaze with unhallowed fire. I trust, sir, the House may deliberate before we suffer them to cast their firebrand into our midst. True, as yet, there is nothing officially before us, but it is well known that the object of these unsexed women is to overthrow the most sacred of our institutions, to set at defiance the divine law which declares man and wife to be one, and establish on its ruins what will be in fact and in principle but a species of legalized adultery.
I hope that before this motion is even presented, gentlemen will take a moment to consider whether these individuals deserve any attention from the Legislature. Regardless of their claims or how sincere they may seem, they don’t seem satisfied with just removing their gender identity; they want to erase the gender identity of every woman in the country and cause chaos in the community. I trust, sir, that the House will think carefully before we let them stir trouble among us. It’s true that nothing official is in front of us yet, but it’s well known that the aim of these genderless women is to undermine our most sacred institutions, defy the divine law that states man and wife are one, and establish what would essentially be a form of legalized adultery on its remnants.
It is, therefore, a matter of duty, a duty to ourselves, to our consciences, to our constituents and to God, who is the source of all law and of all obligations, to reflect long and deliberately before we shall even seem to countenance a movement so unholy as this. Are we, sir, to give the least countenance to claims so preposterous, disgraceful and criminal as are embodied in this address? Are we to put the stamp of truth upon the libel here set forth, that men and women in the matrimonial relation are to be equal? We know that God created man as the representative of the race; that after his creation, his Creator took from his side the material for woman's creation; and that, by the institution of matrimony, woman was restored to the side of man, and they became one flesh and one being, he the head....
Thus, it is our duty—to ourselves, our conscience, our community, and to God, who is the foundation of all law and obligations—to think carefully and deeply before we even consider supporting a movement as wrong as this. Are we really going to support claims that are so absurd, disgraceful, and criminal as those presented in this address? Are we going to endorse the false idea that men and women in marriage are meant to be equal? We know that God created man as the representative of humanity; that after creating him, His Creator took material from his side to create woman; and that, through marriage, woman was returned to the side of man, making them one flesh and one being, with him as the head....
But we are now asked to have the ordinance of matrimony based on jealousy and distrust; and, as in Italy, so in this country, should this mischievous scheme be carried out to its legitimate results, we, instead of reposing safe confidence against assaults upon our honor in the love and affection of our wives, shall find ourselves obliged to close the approaches to those assaults by the padlock.
But now we are being asked to base marriage on jealousy and distrust; and, just like in Italy, if this harmful plan is allowed to fully unfold, instead of feeling secure and trusting in the love and affection of our wives, we will have to shut down those threats to our honor with a padlock.
The petitions were referred to a select committee of the Senate and the Assembly, which Miss Anthony addressed. The Albany Argus reported her speech as follows:
The petitions were sent to a special committee of the Senate and the Assembly, which Miss Anthony spoke to. The Albany Argus reported her speech like this:
Miss Anthony said that she appeared on behalf of the signers of the petitions 110 and tendered to the Legislature thanks for the courteous manner in which they had been received. They asked that husband and wife should be tenants in common of property, but with a partition upon the death of one; that a wife should be competent to discharge trusts and powers, the same as a single woman; that the statute in respect to married women's property should be made effectual, and the wife's property descend as though she had been unmarried; that married women should be entitled to execute letters testamentary and of administration; that they should have power to make contracts and transact business; that they should be entitled to their own earnings, subject to their proportionate liability for support of children; that post nuptial acquisitions should belong equally to husband and wife; that married women should stand on the same footing with single as parties or witnesses in legal proceedings; that they should be equal guardians of their minor children; that the homestead should be inviolable and inalienable for widows and their children; that laws in relation to divorce should be revised, and habitual drunkenness be made cause of absolute divorce; that the preference of males in descent of real estate should be abolished; that women should exercise the right of suffrage, be eligible to all offices, occupations and professions, entitled to act as jurors, eligible to employment in public offices; that a law should be passed extending the masculine designation in all statutes to females.
Miss Anthony said she was speaking for the people who signed the petitions 110 and thanked the Legislature for the respectful way they had been treated. They asked that husbands and wives should own property together, with it being divided when one partner dies; that a wife should be able to fulfill trusts and responsibilities just like a single woman; that laws regarding married women's property should be effective, allowing a wife's property to be inherited as if she were single; that married women should be allowed to write wills and manage estates; that they should have the right to make contracts and run businesses; that they should keep their own income while still being fairly responsible for supporting their children; that things acquired after marriage should belong equally to both partners; that married women should have the same legal status as single women in legal situations; that they should be co-guardians of their minor children; that the family home should be protected and should not be taken from widows and their children; that divorce laws should be reconsidered, with habitual drunkenness serving as grounds for absolute divorce; that the preference for males in inheriting property should be removed; that women should have the right to vote, be eligible for all positions and professions, serve on juries, and qualify for public office; and that a law should be passed to ensure that male terms in all statutes also apply to women.
The committee, James L. Angle, of Monroe county, chairman, presented a dignified and respectful report, denying the petition for suffrage but recommending that the laws be so changed as to allow the wife to collect and control her own earnings if the family were neglected by the husband, and to require the written consent of the mother to the apprenticeship of her children. The Legislature, however, refused to pass such a bill, as did all succeeding Legislatures until 1860.
The committee, led by James L. Angle from Monroe County, delivered a respectful report that rejected the petition for suffrage but suggested changing the laws to enable wives to earn and manage their own income if their husbands neglected the family, and to mandate that a mother’s written consent be required for her children’s apprenticeship. However, the Legislature declined to pass such a bill, as did all subsequent Legislatures until 1860.
There was nothing but to go to work again, for Miss Anthony and her co-laborers were determined not to relax their efforts until the obnoxious laws against women were repealed. It was at this rallying of the forces and renewing of the attack that Mr. Channing declared Miss Anthony to be "the Napoleon of the movement," a title so appropriate that it has clung to her to the present day. She had now thoroughly systematized the work in New York and was appointed general agent. It was decided to hold a series of conventions throughout the state for the purpose of rolling up mammoth petitions to present to the Legislature every session until they should be granted. Two strong appeals, one written by Mrs. Stanton and one by Mr. Channing, were widely circulated and a large 111 corps of able speakers was engaged. All this work the State committee assigned to Miss Anthony, but did not provide her with one dollar to pay expenses.
There was nothing to do but get back to work, because Miss Anthony and her team were determined not to give up until the unfair laws against women were repealed. At this gathering of forces and renewed effort, Mr. Channing called Miss Anthony "the Napoleon of the movement," a title so fitting that it has stuck with her to this day. She had now completely organized the work in New York and was appointed as the general agent. It was decided to hold a series of conventions across the state to gather massive petitions to present to the Legislature at each session until they were accepted. Two strong appeals, one written by Mrs. Stanton and one by Mr. Channing, were widely distributed, and a large 111 team of skilled speakers was recruited. All this work was assigned to Miss Anthony by the State committee, but they didn’t give her a single dollar to cover expenses.
For many years thereafter she canvassed the State annually; held meetings, organized societies and secured thousands of signatures, without any guaranteed fund. Not only did she give all her time and perform far greater labor than any other person engaged in this movement, but she also took the whole financial responsibility. The anxiety of this hardly can be imagined, but she was seldom discouraged, never daunted. Her father had repaid the few hundred dollars she had loaned him from her slender earnings as teacher in the days of his adversity, and these she used freely without expectation of replacing them. She never hesitated because she had not money but went boldly forward, trusting to collections and contributions to pay expenses. Sometimes she came out even, sometimes behind. In the latter case she sent at once to her father who supplied the necessary funds, which were repaid when there was a surplus. Had she waited to have the money in hand, had she feared to take the chances, her work never would have been done; and unless some one else had been developed who could and would assume the risk and manage the business part of the State campaigns, the progress of woman, slow as it has been, would have been still longer delayed. The one ruling characteristic of her life ever has been courage, moral and physical. There never have been hardships which she feared to endure, never scorn, ridicule or abuse which she did not dare face. While she might have risen to a high position and commanded a large salary as teacher, or have lived at home in restful comfort, she voluntarily chose the hardest field of work the world offered, one shadowed with obloquy, holding out no prospect of money or fame and no hope of success except through long and bitter conflict.
For many years after that, she campaigned across the state every year; held meetings, organized groups, and gathered thousands of signatures, all without any guaranteed funding. Not only did she dedicate all her time and put in way more effort than anyone else involved in this movement, but she also took on the entire financial responsibility. The stress of this is hard to imagine, but she was rarely discouraged and never intimidated. Her father had paid back the few hundred dollars she had lent him from her meager earnings as a teacher during his tough times, and she used that money freely without expecting to replace it. She never hesitated because she lacked funds; instead, she moved forward confidently, relying on donations and collections to cover costs. Sometimes she broke even, and other times she fell short. In those cases, she would immediately reach out to her father, who would provide the necessary funds, which she repaid when she had a surplus. Had she waited until she had the money, or been afraid to take risks, her work would have never been accomplished; and if no one else had stepped up to take on the risk and manage the financial side of the state campaigns, women's progress, as slow as it has been, would have been even further delayed. The defining trait of her life has always been courage, both moral and physical. She never shied away from hardships, nor did she back down from scorn, ridicule, or abuse. While she could have attained a high position and earned a good salary as a teacher, or stayed home in comfort, she consciously chose the toughest field of work available, one marked by disgrace, offering no promise of money or fame and no hope of success except through prolonged and difficult struggle.
Soon after the Albany convention Lucy Stone wrote: "God bless you, Susan dear, for the brave heart that will work on even in the midst of discouragement and lack of helpers. Everywhere I am telling people what your State is doing, and 112 it is worth a great deal to the cause. The example of positive action is what we need.... Does not Channing deserve the blessing of all the race for his fidelity to the cause of women? I believe he understands better than any others, unless it be Higginson and Phillips, just what we need. Give my love and best wishes to the household of faith." Channing, when she wanted him to preside at a meeting, answered facetiously: "Napoleon will not be surprised that a corporal of an awkward squad hesitates to appear in command where the general-in-chief is present."
Soon after the Albany convention, Lucy Stone wrote: "God bless you, dear Susan, for your brave heart that keeps working even when things get tough and helpers are few. Everywhere I go, I’m telling people what your state is doing, and 112 it means a lot to the cause. We need examples of positive action.... Doesn’t Channing deserve everyone’s gratitude for his commitment to the cause of women? I believe he understands our needs better than anyone else, except maybe Higginson and Phillips. Please send my love and best wishes to the community of believers." When she asked Channing to preside over a meeting, he jokingly replied, "Napoleon won’t be surprised that a corporal from an awkward squad hesitates to take command in front of the general-in-chief."

Lucy Stone
Lucy Stone
It was at the close of this Albany convention that Miss Anthony decided to abandon the Bloomer costume. The subject had been occupying her sleeping and waking hours for some time, and it was only after a long and agonizing struggle that she persuaded herself to take the step. In order to show how very serious a question this had been with the women, it will be necessary to go into a somewhat detailed account of this first movement toward dress reform.
It was at the end of this Albany convention that Miss Anthony decided to give up the Bloomer outfit. This decision had been on her mind both day and night for a while, and it took a long and tough internal battle for her to convince herself to make this change. To illustrate how significant this issue had been for the women, it’s important to provide a more detailed overview of this initial push for dress reform.
The costume consisted of a short skirt and a pair of Turkish trousers gathered at the ankle or hanging straight, and was made of ordinary dress materials. It was first introduced at the various "water cures" to relieve sick and delicate women, often rendered so by their unhealthful mode of dress, and was strongly recommended in the "water cure" journals. When women began to go into public work, they could not fail to recognize the disadvantages of the unyielding corsets, heavy, quilted and stiffly-starched petticoats, five or six worn at one time to hold out the long, voluminous dress skirts; and to feel that to be consistent they must give freedom to the body. The proprietors of the "water cures" were, for the most part, in touch with all reform movements and their hospitality was freely extended to those engaged in them. In this way the women had an opportunity to see the comfort which the patients enjoyed in their loose, short garments, and began to ask why they also should not adopt what seemed to them a rational dress. 113
The outfit consisted of a short skirt and a pair of Turkish trousers gathered at the ankle or hanging straight, made from regular dress materials. It was first introduced at various "water cures" to help sick and fragile women, often made so by their unhealthy fashion choices, and was highly recommended in "water cure" journals. As women began to engage in public work, they couldn’t ignore the drawbacks of tight corsets and heavy, quilted, and stiffly-starched petticoats—sometimes five or six worn at once to support the long, flowing dress skirts. They realized that in order to stay consistent, they needed to allow their bodies some freedom. The owners of the "water cures" were mostly connected to all reform movements, and their hospitality was generously offered to those involved in them. This way, women saw the comfort that patients enjoyed in their loose, short clothing, and began to question why they shouldn’t also adopt what seemed like a sensible style. 113
Hon. Gerrit Smith, of Peterboro, N.Y., the wealthy and influential reformer and philanthropist, became an earnest advocate of this costume, and his daughter, Elizabeth Smith Miller, a beautiful and fashionable woman, was the first to put it on. In Washington she wore it, made of the most elegant materials, during all her father's term in Congress. She was soon followed by his cousin, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, and with this social sanction it was adopted in 1851 and '52 by a small number, including Lucy Stone, Amelia Bloomer, Dr. Harriet Austin, Celia Burleigh, Charlotte Wilbour, the Grimké sisters, probably less than one hundred in the whole country. In order to be entirely relieved from the care of personal adornment, they also cut off their hair. Miss Anthony was the very last to adopt the style. In May, 1852, she wrote Lucy Stone that Mrs. Stanton had offered to make her a present of the costume, but she would not wear it. In December she wrote again, dating her letter from Mrs. Stanton's nursery, "Well, at last I am in short skirt and trousers!" At this time she also sacrificed her abundant brown tresses.
Hon. Gerrit Smith from Peterboro, N.Y., a wealthy and influential reformer and philanthropist, became a strong supporter of this outfit, and his daughter, Elizabeth Smith Miller, a beautiful and stylish woman, was the first to wear it. In Washington, she wore it made from the finest materials throughout her father's term in Congress. She was soon followed by her cousin, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, and with this social endorsement, it was adopted in 1851 and '52 by a small group, including Lucy Stone, Amelia Bloomer, Dr. Harriet Austin, Celia Burleigh, Charlotte Wilbour, and the Grimké sisters, probably fewer than one hundred people nationwide. To completely free themselves from the burden of personal decoration, they also cut their hair. Miss Anthony was the very last to embrace the style. In May 1852, she wrote to Lucy Stone that Mrs. Stanton had offered to gift her the outfit, but she declined to wear it. In December, she wrote again from Mrs. Stanton's nursery, saying, "Well, at last I am in short skirt and trousers!" At that time, she also let go of her thick brown hair.
The world was not ready for this innovation. There were no gymnasiums or bicycles to plead for the appropriateness of the costume and it was worn chiefly by women who preached doctrines for which the public was no better prepared than for dress reform. The outcry against it extended from one end of the country to the other; the press howled in derision, the pulpit hurled its anathemas and the rabble took up the refrain. On the streets of the larger cities the women were followed by mobs of men and boys, who jeered and yelled and did not hesitate to express their disapproval by throwing sticks and stones and giving three cheers and a tiger ending in the loudest of groans.[19] Sometimes these demonstrations became so violent 114 that the women were obliged to seek refuge in a store and, after the mob had grown tired of waiting and dispersed, they would slip out of the back door and find their way home through the alleys. Their husbands and children refused to be seen with them in public, and they were wholly ostracized by other women. Mrs. Bloomer was at this time publishing a paper called the Lily, which was the organ for the reforms of the day. Its columns were freely used to advocate the short dress, the paper thus became the target of attack and, because the costume had no distinctive name, it was christened with that of the editor, much to her grief. Later a substitute for the trousers was adopted, consisting of high shoes with buttoned gaiters fitting in the tops and extending up over the leg, and an effort was made to change the name to the "American costume," but the people would not have it and "Bloomer" it will remain for all time. An extract from one of her unpublished letters will show how all the women felt on this subject. After protesting against connecting it with the question of woman's rights, she says:
The world wasn't ready for this innovation. There were no gymnasiums or bicycles to argue for the acceptability of the outfit, and it was mostly worn by women who advocated for ideas that the public was no more ready to accept than they were for dress reform. The backlash against it stretched from one end of the country to the other; the media mocked it, religious leaders condemned it, and the public joined in. In the streets of larger cities, women were followed by groups of men and boys who jeered and shouted, openly showing their disapproval by throwing sticks and stones and giving three cheers that ended with loud groans. [19] Sometimes these protests became so intense 114 that the women had to seek safety in stores, and after the crowd got tired of waiting and dispersed, they would sneak out the back door and make their way home through alleys. Their husbands and children refused to be seen with them in public, leaving them completely ostracized by other women. At that time, Mrs. Bloomer was publishing a paper called the Lily, which advocated for the reforms of the day. Its pages were often used to promote the short dress, making the paper a target for criticism, and since the outfit didn’t have a specific name, it was named after the editor, much to her dismay. Later on, a substitute for the trousers was introduced, which featured high shoes with buttoned gaiters that fit over the leg, and there was an attempt to rename it the "American costume." But the public wouldn’t accept it, and it will forever be known as the "Bloomer." An excerpt from one of her unpublished letters illustrates how all the women felt about this issue. After expressing her frustration about it being linked to the women's rights movement, she says:
It is only one of our rights to dress comfortably. Many have put on the short dress who have never taken any part in the woman's rights movement and who have no idea they are going to be any less womanly by such a change. I feel no more like a man now than I did in long skirts, unless it be that enjoying more freedom and cutting off the fetters is to be like a man. I suppose in that respect we are more mannish, for we know that in dress, as in all things else, we have been and are slaves, while man in dress and all things else is free. I admit that we have "got on the pantaloons," but I deny that putting them on is going to make us any the less womanly or any the more masculine and immodest. On the contrary, I feel that if all of us were less slaves to fashion we would be nobler women, for both our bodies and minds are now rendered weak and useless from the unhealthy and barbarous style of dress adopted, and from the time and thought bestowed in making it attractive. A change is demanded and if I have been the means of calling the attention of the public to it and of leading only a few to disregard old customs and for once to think and act for themselves, I shall not trouble myself about the false imputations that may be cast upon me.
It's our right to dress comfortably. Many people wear short dresses who have never been part of the women's rights movement and don't realize they won't be any less feminine by doing so. I don’t feel any more like a man now than I did in long skirts, unless feeling more freedom and breaking away from restrictions is what being like a man means. In that sense, I guess we are more “mannish,” because we understand that in terms of clothing, just like in many other areas, we have been and continue to be restricted, while men enjoy freedom in their clothing and everything else. I acknowledge that we have “put on the pants,” but I deny that doing so makes us any less feminine or more masculine and immodest. On the contrary, I believe that if we were all less tied to fashion, we would be stronger women, as both our bodies and minds have become weak and ineffective due to the unhealthy and harsh styles we've adopted, along with the time and energy spent on making them look good. Change is necessary, and if I have succeeded in bringing public attention to this and inspiring even a few people to challenge outdated customs and think and act for themselves, I won’t let the false accusations against me get to me.

Amelia Bloomer
Amelia Bloomer
Mrs. Bloomer wore the costume eight years, but very few held out one-fourth of that time. With the exception of Gerrit 115 Smith, all the prominent men, Garrison, Phillips, Channing, May, were bitterly opposed to the short dress and tried to dissuade the women from wearing it by every argument in their power. The costume, however, was adopted as a matter of principle, and for it they suffered a martyrdom which would have made burning at the stake seem comfortable. It requires far more heroism to bear jibes and jeers for one's personal appearance than for one's opinions. No pen can describe what these women endured for the two or three years in which they tried to establish this principle, through such sacrifices as only a woman can understand. So long as they were upheld by the belief that they were giving strength to the cause they loved, they bravely submitted to the persecution, but when they realized that they were injuring instead of helping it, endurance reached its limit. Mrs. Stanton was the first to capitulate, and as she had tried to induce the others to wear the costume so she endeavored to persuade them to abandon it. She wrote to Miss Anthony and Lucy Stone: "I know what you must suffer in consenting to bow again to the tyranny of fashion, but I know also what you suffer among fashionable people in wearing the short dress; and so, not for the sake of the cause, nor for any sake but your own, take it off! We put it on for greater freedom, but what is physical freedom compared with mental bondage?" In agony of spirit as to whether the cause was helped or hindered by wearing it, and ready to put aside all personal feeling in the matter, Miss Anthony appealed to Lucy Stone, who answered:
Mrs. Bloomer wore the outfit for eight years, but very few lasted even a quarter of that time. Aside from Gerrit 115 Smith, all the leading figures like Garrison, Phillips, Channing, and May were strongly against the short dress and tried to convince the women to stop wearing it with every argument they could think of. Still, the outfit was adopted as a matter of principle, and those who wore it endured hardships that would have made being burned at the stake seem easy. It takes much more courage to endure ridicule about one's appearance than for one's beliefs. No words can capture what these women went through for the two or three years they fought to establish this principle, through sacrifices that only a woman could fully grasp. As long as they believed they were supporting the cause they cared about, they bravely faced the backlash. However, once they realized they were actually hurting it rather than helping, their endurance hit a breaking point. Mrs. Stanton was the first to give in, and since she had encouraged others to wear the outfit, she now tried to persuade them to take it off. She wrote to Miss Anthony and Lucy Stone: "I know what you must feel in agreeing to bend again to the pressure of fashion, but I also understand what you endure among fashionable folks while wearing the short dress; therefore, not for the sake of the cause, nor for any reason other than your own, take it off! We wore it for greater freedom, but what is physical freedom compared to mental confinement?" In deep distress over whether the cause was helped or harmed by wearing it, and ready to set aside all personal feelings on the matter, Miss Anthony reached out to Lucy Stone, who replied:
Now, Susan, it is all fudge for anybody to pretend that a cause which deserves to live is impeded by the length of your skirt. I know, from having tried through half the Union, that audiences listen and assent just as well to one who speaks truth in a short as in a long dress; but I am annoyed to death by people who recognize me by my clothes, and when I travel get a seat by me and bore me for a whole day with the stupidest stuff in the world. Then again, when I go to each new city a horde of boys pursue me and destroy all comfort. I have bought a nice new dress, which I have had a month, and it is not made because I can't decide whether to make it long or short. Not that I think any cause will suffer, but simply to save myself a great deal of annoyance and not feel when I am a guest in a family that they are mortified if other persons happen to come in. I was at Lucretia Mott's a few weeks 116 ago, and her daughters took up a regular labor with me to make me abandon the dress. They said they would not go in the street with me, and when Grace Greenwood called and others like her, I think it would have been a real relief to them if I had not been there. James and Lucretia defended me bravely.
Now, Susan, it's absurd for anyone to think that a worthy cause is held back by the length of your skirt. From my experience traveling across the country, I know that audiences pay attention and engage just as much with someone who speaks the truth, whether they're wearing a short dress or a long one. However, I’m really frustrated by people who identify me by my clothes. When I travel, they sit next to me and bore me for a whole day with the dullest conversations. Plus, when I arrive in a new city, a bunch of guys follows me around and ruins any chance for comfort. I've bought a beautiful new dress that I've had for a month, and I can't decide if I should make it long or short. Not that I think it will hurt any cause, but just to save myself from a lot of annoyance and to avoid feeling like, as a guest in someone's home, others will be embarrassed if new people drop by. A few weeks ago, I was at Lucretia Mott’s, and her daughters were adamant that I should give up the dress. They said they wouldn’t go out in public with me, and when Grace Greenwood and others like her visited, I could tell they would have been much more comfortable if I hadn’t been there. James and Lucretia bravely stood up for me.
This was received by Miss Anthony while at the Albany convention, and she wrote:
This was received by Miss Anthony while at the Albany convention, and she wrote:
Your letter caused a bursting of the floods, long pent up, and after a good cry I went straight to Mrs. Stanton and read it to her. She has had a most bitter experience in the short dress, and says she now feels a mental freedom among her friends that she has not known for two years past. If Lucy Stone, with all her power of eloquence, her loveliness of character, who wins all that hear the sound of her voice, can not bear the martyrdom of the dress, who can? Mrs. Stanton's parting words were, "Let the hem out of your dress to-day, before to-morrow night's meeting." I have not obeyed her but have been in the streets and printing offices all day long, had rude, vulgar men stare me out of countenance and heard them say as I opened the door, "There comes my Bloomer!" O, hated name! I have been compelled to attend to all the business here, as at Rochester. There every one knew me, knew my father and brother, and treated me accordingly, but here I am known only as one of the women who ape men—coarse brutal men! Oh, I can not, can not bear it any longer.
Your letter brought out so many feelings I had been keeping inside, and after I had a good cry, I went straight to Mrs. Stanton and read it to her. She has been through a really rough time with the short dress, and she says she now feels a sense of mental freedom among her friends that she hasn't experienced in two years. If Lucy Stone, with all her charm and wonderful character, who captures everyone’s attention, can’t handle the struggle of the dress, who can? Mrs. Stanton's final words were, "Let the hem out of your dress today, before tomorrow night's meeting." I haven’t taken her advice, but I’ve been out on the streets and in print shops all day, dealing with rude, crude men who leered at me and said as I walked in, "Here comes my Bloomer!" Oh, I hate that name! I've had to manage all the business here, just like in Rochester. There, everyone knew me, knew my father and brother, and treated me accordingly, but here, I’m seen only as one of those women trying to imitate men—brutish men! Oh, I can’t take it anymore.
To this Lucy Stone replied:
To this, Lucy Stone responded:
I am sure you are all worn out or you would not feel so intensely about the dress. I never shed a tear over it in my life or came within a thousand ages of martyrdom on account of it; and to be compelled to travel in rain and snow, mud and dirt, in a long dress would cost me more in every respect than the short dress ever did. I don't think I can abandon it, but I will have two skirts. I have this feeling: Women are in bondage; their clothes are a great hindrance to their engaging in any business which will make them pecuniarily independent, and since the soul of womanhood never can be queenly and noble so long as it must beg bread for its body, is it not better, even at the expense of a vast deal of annoyance, that they whose lives deserve respect and are greater than their garments should give an example by which woman may more easily work out her own emancipation?... It is a part of the "mint, anise and cumin," and the weightier matters of justice and truth occupy my thoughts more.
I know you’re all tired, otherwise you wouldn’t care so much about the dress. I’ve never cried over it or felt like a victim because of it, and traveling in the rain and snow, mud and dirt, in a long dress would cost me way more than a short dress ever would. I don’t think I can let it go, but I will have two skirts. I truly believe this: Women are trapped; their clothes hold them back from doing any work that could make them financially independent. Since a woman’s spirit can never truly be noble while it has to rely on others for its livelihood, isn’t it better, even if it’s a real hassle, for those whose lives deserve respect and are more than their clothing to set an example to help women achieve their own freedom? It’s part of the "mint, anise, and cumin," and my mind is more focused on the bigger issues of justice and truth.
She did abandon the costume, however, before the year was ended, as did most of the others. The establishment of gymnasiums and the encouragement of athletic sports among women eventually made a short dress an acknowledged necessity, 117 and the advent of the bicycle so thoroughly swept away the old prejudice that the word "Bloomers" no longer strikes terror to the heart, nor does the wearing of a short skirt ostracise a woman and destroy her good works. Miss Anthony wore hers a little over a year. It was not very different from the bicycle dress of the present day, the skirt reaching almost to the shoe tops and made of satin or heavy merino, and yet for years afterwards she was described as attending meetings in "the regulation bombazine Bloomers," and it was impossible to convince people to the contrary until they had seen her with their own eyes. She herself said in regard to it: "I felt the need of some such garments because I was obliged to be out every day in all kinds of weather, and also because I saw women ruined in health by tight lacing and the weight of their clothing; and I hoped to help establish the principle of rational dress. I found it a physical comfort but a mental crucifixion. It was an intellectual slavery; one never could get rid of thinking of herself, and the important thing is to forget self. The attention of my audience was fixed upon my clothes instead of my words. I learned the lesson then that to be successful a person must attempt but one reform. By urging two, both are injured, as the average mind can grasp and assimilate but one idea at a time. I have felt ever since that experience that if I wished my hearers to consider the suffrage question I must not present the temperance, the religious, the dress, or any other besides, but must confine myself to suffrage." With the exception of that one year, Miss Anthony always has been particular to follow, in a modified and conservative form, the prevailing styles, and has fought strenuously the repeated efforts to graft any kind of dress reform on the suffrage movement.
She did give up the costume before the year was over, as did most others. The establishment of gyms and the promotion of sports for women eventually made shorter dresses a clear necessity, 117 and the arrival of the bicycle completely changed the old attitudes, so that the term "Bloomers" no longer instills fear, nor does wearing a short skirt lead to a woman being ostracized or undermining her good works. Miss Anthony wore hers for a little over a year. It was not very different from today’s bicycle dress, with the skirt nearly reaching her shoes and made of satin or heavy merino. Yet for years after, she was still described as attending meetings in "the regulation bombazine Bloomers," and it was impossible to convince people otherwise until they saw her in person. She herself said about it: "I felt the need for some type of clothing because I had to be outside every day in all kinds of weather, and also because I saw women ruin their health with tight lacing and heavy clothing; and I hoped to help establish the idea of rational dress. I found it physically comfortable but mentally torturous. It was a form of intellectual slavery; one couldn’t stop thinking about herself, and the important thing is to forget oneself. My audience focused on my clothes instead of my words. I learned then that to be successful, a person should promote just one reform. By advocating two, both get hurt because the average mind can only grasp and process one idea at a time. Ever since that experience, I've felt that if I wanted my listeners to consider the suffrage issue, I should not bring up temperance, religion, dress, or anything else, but must stick to suffrage." Aside from that one year, Miss Anthony has always made it a point to follow, in a modified and conservative way, the current styles, and has fought strongly against repeated attempts to connect any kind of dress reform with the suffrage movement.
In March, 1854, after getting back into long skirts, Miss Anthony decided to go to Washington with Mrs. Rose, and see how the propaganda of equal rights would be received at the capital of the nation. This was her first visit to that city and she enjoyed it, but the meetings were not a financial success. Great prejudice existed against Mrs. Rose on account 118 of her alleged infidelity, there was no interest in the question of woman's rights, and Washington was not a good field for lectures of any sort, Congress furnishing all the oratory for which the public cared. The papers were kind about publishing notices, but with the exception of the Star, gave no reports. Chaplain Milburn refused to let them have the Representative chamber for a Sunday lecture, "because Mrs. Rose was not a member of any church." Miss Anthony replied that "our country stood for religious as well as civil liberty." He acknowledged the truth of this but still refused the use of the room. Then they applied to Professor Henry for permission to speak in the hall of the Smithsonian Institute, and he told them that "it was necessary to avoid the discussion of any exciting questions there, and it would disturb the harmony of feeling for a woman to speak, so he hoped they would not ask permission of the board of regents." They had several good audiences, however, while in the city, made many warm friends and were handsomely entertained at the home of Gerrit Smith, then in Congress.
In March 1854, after putting on long skirts again, Miss Anthony decided to go to Washington with Mrs. Rose to see how the equal rights movement would be received in the nation's capital. It was her first visit to the city, and she enjoyed it, but the meetings didn't turn out well financially. There was significant prejudice against Mrs. Rose due to her alleged infidelity, there was little interest in women's rights, and Washington wasn't a great venue for lectures of any kind, as Congress provided all the speeches the public wanted. The newspapers were kind enough to publish notices, but aside from the Star, they didn’t provide any reports. Chaplain Milburn denied them the use of the Representative chamber for a Sunday lecture, citing that "Mrs. Rose was not a member of any church." Miss Anthony responded that "our country stood for religious as well as civil liberty." He acknowledged this was true but still refused to let them use the room. They then approached Professor Henry for permission to speak in the hall of the Smithsonian Institute, but he told them that "it was necessary to avoid discussing any controversial topics there, and it would disrupt the harmony of feelings for a woman to speak, so he hoped they wouldn’t ask the board of regents." Despite this, they had several good audiences while in the city, made many warm friendships, and were graciously hosted by Gerrit Smith, who was then in Congress.
They went to Alexandria and to Baltimore, where they had much better houses, but everywhere were warned not to touch on the question of slavery. Miss Anthony was terribly disgusted with the general shiftlessness she saw about the hotels and boarding-houses, and was in a state of pent-up indignation to see on every hand the evils of slavery and not be allowed to lift her voice against them, but later writes in her journal: "This noon I ate my dinner without once asking myself, 'Are these human beings who minister to my wants slaves who can be bought and sold?' Yes, even I am growing accustomed to slavery; so much so that I cease to think of its accursed influence and calmly eat from the hands of the bondman without being mindful that he is such. O, Slavery, hateful thing that thou art thus to blunt the keen edge of conscience!" The landlord failing to have her called in time for the train, she complains:
They traveled to Alexandria and Baltimore, where the houses were much nicer, but everywhere they were warned not to bring up the issue of slavery. Miss Anthony was extremely frustrated with the general disorganization she noticed at the hotels and boarding houses, and felt a deep anger seeing the effects of slavery while being silenced. Later, she wrote in her journal: "This afternoon I had my dinner without once asking myself, 'Are these people taking care of me slaves who can be bought and sold?' Yes, even I am getting used to slavery; so much so that I stop thinking about its terrible effects and calmly accept food from a person who is enslaved without considering that they are. Oh, Slavery, you horrible thing, how you dull the sharpness of conscience!" When the landlord failed to summon her in time for the train, she complained:
There is no promptness, no order, no system down here. The institution of slavery is as ruinous to the white man as to the black.... Three northern servants, engineered by a Yankee boarding-house keeper, would do 119 more work than a dozen of these slaves. The free blacks, who receive wages, do no more than the others. Such is the effect of slavery upon labor. I can understand why northern men make the most exacting overseers; they require an amount of work from the slave equal to what they would from the paid white laborer of the north.
There's no punctuality, no organization, no system down here. Slavery harms white people just as much as it harms black people. Three northern workers, organized by a Yankee boarding-house owner, can accomplish 119 more than a dozen of these slaves. The free black workers, who are paid, don’t perform any better than the others. That's the effect of slavery on labor. I understand why northern men are such strict overseers; they expect the same amount of work from slaves that they would from paid white workers in the North.
From Baltimore Miss Anthony went to Philadelphia, where she found herself among friends, and as wherever two or three were gathered together in those days they always decided to hold a woman's rights meeting, James Mott sallied forth to arrange for one in the Quaker city, and she comments in her diary: "O, how good it seems to have some one take the burden off my shoulders!" They visited, made excursions, attended anti-slavery meetings and also spiritual seances, which were then attracting great attention. Of the many discussions which arose as to existence or non-existence after death, she writes: "The negative had reason on their side; not an argument could one of us bring, except an intuitive feeling that we should not cease to exist. If it be true that we die like the flower, what a delusion has the race suffered, what a vain dream is life!"
From Baltimore, Miss Anthony traveled to Philadelphia, where she was among friends, and since gatherings of two or three always led to organizing a women's rights meeting, James Mott went out to set one up in the Quaker city. She noted in her diary: "Oh, how nice it feels to have someone take the burden off my shoulders!" They visited, went on outings, attended anti-slavery meetings, and also spiritual seances, which were gaining a lot of attention at the time. Regarding the many discussions about whether there is life after death, she wrote: "The negative side had reason on their side; not one of us could present an argument, except for an intuitive feeling that we shouldn't cease to exist. If it's true that we die like flowers, what a delusion humanity has endured, what a vain dream is life!"
Miss Anthony went from here to New York, Brooklyn and Albany, and then to her old home at Battenville, stopping with relatives and friends at each place and speaking in the interest of the petitions. An example of the courage required to go into a strange town and arrange for a meeting may be given by an extract from one of many similar letters:
Miss Anthony traveled from here to New York, Brooklyn, and Albany, and then back to her hometown in Battenville, visiting relatives and friends at each stop while advocating for the petitions. An example of the bravery it took to enter an unfamiliar town and set up a meeting can be illustrated by an excerpt from one of many similar letters:
I speak in this village to-morrow night; had written a gentleman but he was away, so I had all the work to do myself. I first called on the Methodist minister to get his church. I stated my business and he asked: "What are you driving at? Do you want to vote and be President?" I answered that I did not personally aspire to the presidency, but when the nation decided a woman was most competent for that office, I would be willing she should fill it. "Well," said he, "if the Bible teaches anything, it is that women should be quiet keepers at home and not go gadding round the country;" and much more. In all my traveling, in short or long skirts, I have never been treated so contemptuously, so insultingly, as by this same wretch of a minister. He is void of the first spark of reverence for humanity, therefore must be equally so for God. Just now his pious church bell is ringing for prayer-meeting; I have half a mind to go, to see if he warns his flock to beware of my heresies. From him I went to the Wesleyan Methodist minister, and what a contrast! He thought I wanted the church for to-night and said: "We have our 120 prayer-meeting, but will adjourn it for you." This kindness made me so weak, the tears came in spite of me, and I explained the rowdy treatment of the other minister. I have had a varied experience ever since I left Easton. Verily, I am embarked in an unpopular cause and must be content to row up stream.
I’m speaking in this village tomorrow night; I reached out to a guy for help, but he was away, so I had to manage everything on my own. I first visited the Methodist minister to get access to his church. I explained what I needed, and he asked, “What are you getting at? Do you want to vote and be President?” I replied that I didn’t personally want the presidency, but if the nation decided a woman was the best fit for that role, I would support her. “Well,” he responded, “if the Bible teaches anything, it’s that women should be quiet and stay at home, not wandering around the country,” among other things. Throughout all my travels, whether in short or long skirts, I have never been treated with such contempt or insult as I was by this minister. He shows no respect for humanity, so he must also lack it for God. Right now, his church bell is ringing for prayer meeting; I almost want to go, just to see if he warns his congregation about my beliefs. After him, I visited the Wesleyan Methodist minister, and what a difference! He thought I wanted the church for tonight and said, “We have our 120 prayer meeting, but we’ll postpone it for you.” His kindness moved me so much that I nearly cried, and I shared what happened with the other minister. Ever since I left Easton, I’ve had quite a mix of experiences. Honestly, I’m engaged in an unpopular cause and need to be okay with going against the current.
In May she went to the great Anti-Slavery Anniversary in New York. In August she attended the State Teachers' Convention at Oswego. Victor M. Rice, of Buffalo, was president and accorded her every courtesy and encouragement. The question of woman's right to speak had been settled at the Rochester convention the previous year and never again was disputed, so she turned her attention to the right of women to hold office in the association and to fill the position of principal in the public schools, which called forth vigorous discussion. She secured the election of a woman as one of the vice-presidents. The Oswego press declared: "Miss Anthony made the speech of the convention; in grace of oratory and in spirit and style of thought it fully vindicated her claim to woman's right to speak in public. Her arguments were good, her speaking talents of the first order, and we hope that when men answer such pleas as she made, they will do it in a manly and generous spirit."
In May, she attended the big Anti-Slavery Anniversary in New York. In August, she participated in the State Teachers' Convention in Oswego. Victor M. Rice from Buffalo was the president and showed her great courtesy and support. The issue of women's right to speak had already been settled at the Rochester convention the year before and was no longer contested, so she focused on the right of women to hold office in the association and to become principals in public schools, which sparked lively discussions. She helped elect a woman as one of the vice-presidents. The Oswego press stated: "Miss Anthony delivered the best speech of the convention; in terms of eloquence and the spirit and style of her ideas, it truly validated her claim to women's right to speak in public. Her arguments were sound, her speaking skills were exceptional, and we hope that when men respond to such appeals as she made, they will do so in a respectful and generous manner."
She saw at this time that a Temperance and also an Anti-Nebraska Convention were to be held this month at Saratoga Springs, and at once conceived the idea of calling a woman's rights meeting for the same week. The time was short but she wrote urgent letters to Lucy Stone, Antoinette Brown, Ernestine Rose and Lucretia Mott. At the appointed time, every one failed to come. Each, supposing all the rest would be there, had allowed some other duty to keep her away. The meeting had been advertised and Miss Anthony was in despair. Judge William Hay, of Saratoga, always her faithful friend, had made the arrangements and he encouraged her to go ahead. In those days she had no faith in herself as a speaker. She was accustomed to raise the money, marshal the forces, then take the onerous position of secretary and let the orators come in and carry off all the glory. She spoke only when there was nobody else who could or would do so. In the present emergency she could utilize her one written speech and 121 she was fortunate enough to find at the hotel Matilda Joslyn Gage and Sarah Pellet, a graduate of Oberlin, who consented to help her out. St. Nicholas Hall was crowded at both sessions. Twenty-five cents admission was charged, many tracts were sold, she paid all expenses, gave each of her speakers $10 and had a small balance left. She needed it, for while at Saratoga her purse had been stolen with $15, all she possessed.
She noticed that a Temperance and an Anti-Nebraska Convention were happening this month in Saratoga Springs, and immediately thought of organizing a women's rights meeting for the same week. The time was tight, but she wrote urgent letters to Lucy Stone, Antoinette Brown, Ernestine Rose, and Lucretia Mott. When the time came, no one showed up. Each person, thinking the others would be there, let something else keep them away. The meeting had been publicized, and Miss Anthony was feeling hopeless. Judge William Hay, of Saratoga, always her loyal friend, had arranged things and encouraged her to move forward. Back then, she lacked confidence in her speaking abilities. She was used to raising the money, gathering the support, and then taking on the demanding role of secretary while the speakers got the spotlight. She only spoke if no one else was willing or able to do so. In this situation, she could use her one prepared speech, and luckily, at the hotel, she found Matilda Joslyn Gage and Sarah Pellet, a graduate of Oberlin, who agreed to assist her. St. Nicholas Hall was packed at both sessions. They charged twenty-five cents for admission, sold many tracts, covered all expenses, paid each of her speakers $10, and still had a small amount left over. She needed it because while in Saratoga, her purse, containing $15, which was all she had, had been stolen.
In 1854 the Missouri Compromise had been repealed, trouble in Kansas had reached its height, the Know Nothing party was at its zenith, the Whigs were demoralized and the Free Soilers were gaining the ascendency. This anti-Nebraska meeting at Saratoga may be said to have witnessed the birth of the Republican party. It possessed an additional interest for Miss Anthony, who attended all its sessions, from the fact that her brother, Daniel R., made on this occasion his first political speech. He had just returned from Kansas and could describe from personal observation the outrages perpetrated in that unhappy territory. After leaving Saratoga, Miss Anthony spoke in many places on the way to Rochester, among them Canajoharie, the scene of her last teaching. Her experience here is described in a letter home:
In 1854, the Missouri Compromise was repealed, tensions in Kansas reached a boiling point, the Know Nothing party was at its peak, the Whigs were in disarray, and the Free Soilers were gaining power. This anti-Nebraska meeting in Saratoga can be seen as the birth of the Republican party. It had special significance for Miss Anthony, who attended all its sessions, because her brother, Daniel R., gave his first political speech there. He had just returned from Kansas and could share firsthand accounts of the violence happening in that troubled area. After leaving Saratoga, Miss Anthony spoke in various places on her way to Rochester, including Canajoharie, where she last taught. She described her experience there in a letter home:
The trustees of the Methodist church said I could have it for my meeting, but the minister protested and put the key into his saintly pocket. Brown Stafford said to him, "Keep that key, if you dare! I guess Uncle Read and Uncle John Stafford and I have done enough to build and sustain that church to warrant us in having our say about it full as much as you, sir;" and he was compelled to give up the key. Uncle Read went to aunt and said: "I have not thought of going to an evening meeting in a long time, but I will go tonight if it kills me." So they went, also the very best of the folks from both sides of the river, and I seldom have spoken better. Uncle seemed very much pleased, and when Aunt Mary and the trustees urged me to take the school again, he said: "No, some one ought to go around and set the people thinking about the laws and it is Susan's work to do this."
The trustees of the Methodist church said I could use it for my meeting, but the minister disagreed and hid the key away. Brown Stafford told him, "Go ahead and keep that key if you want! I believe Uncle Read, Uncle John Stafford, and I have contributed enough to building and maintaining that church to have just as much say in this as you do, sir;" and he had no choice but to give up the key. Uncle Read went to Aunt and said, "I haven't thought about attending an evening meeting in ages, but I’ll go tonight even if it takes everything out of me.” So they went, along with the best folks from both sides of the river, and I rarely spoke better. Uncle seemed really happy, and when Aunt Mary and the trustees encouraged me to take up the school again, he said, "No, someone needs to go out and get the people thinking about the laws, and that’s Susan’s job."
Miss Anthony reached home, October 1, after seven months' constant travel and hard work, and on the 17th went to the National Woman's Rights Convention at Philadelphia and gave the report for New York. It was through her determined efforts, overcoming the objection that she was an atheist and declaring that every religion or none should have an equal right on their platform, that Mrs. Rose was made president. She 122 met here for the first time Anna and Adeline Thomson, Sarah Pugh and Mary Grew, and was the guest of James and Lucretia Mott, who entertained twenty-four visitors in their hospitable house during all the convention. This is the quaint invitation sent her by Mrs. Mott: "It will give us pleasure to have thy company at 338 Arch street, where we hope thou wilt make thy home. We shall of course be crowded, but we expect thee and shall prepare accordingly. We think such as thyself, devoted to good causes, should not have to seek a home." Wm. Lloyd Garrison sat at her right hand at table and Miss Anthony at her left. At the conclusion of each meal she had brought in to her a little cedar tub filled with hot water and washed the silver, glass and fine china, Miss Anthony drying them with the whitest of towels, while the brilliant conversation at the table went on uninterrupted.
Miss Anthony got home on October 1, after seven months of constant travel and hard work. On the 17th, she went to the National Woman's Rights Convention in Philadelphia and gave the report for New York. It was through her determined efforts, overcoming the objection that she was an atheist and stating that every religion or none should have an equal right on their platform, that Mrs. Rose was elected president. She 122 met Anna and Adeline Thomson, Sarah Pugh, and Mary Grew for the first time and was the guest of James and Lucretia Mott, who hosted twenty-four visitors in their welcoming home throughout the convention. This is the charming invitation Mrs. Mott sent her: "We would be delighted to have you at 338 Arch Street, where we hope you will make your home. Of course, we will be crowded, but we expect you and will prepare accordingly. We believe someone like you, devoted to good causes, should not have to look for a place to stay." Wm. Lloyd Garrison sat close to her at the table, with Miss Anthony on her left. After each meal, she had a little cedar tub filled with hot water brought to her to wash the silver, glass, and fine china, while Miss Anthony dried them with the whitest of towels, all while the lively conversation at the table continued uninterrupted.
At the close of 1854, Miss Anthony decided to make a thorough canvass of every county in New York in the interest of the petitions to the Legislature, a thing no woman ever had dreamed of doing. Most of the papers responded cordially to her request that they publish her notices. Mr. Greeley wrote: "I have your letter and your programme, friend Susan. I will publish the latter in all our editions, but return your dollars. To charge you full price would be too hard and I prefer not to take anything." As she had not a dollar of surplus left from her year's work she went in debt, with her father as security, for the hand-bills which she had printed to announce her meetings. These were folded and addressed by her brother Merritt and a young relative, Mary Luther, his future wife, and under the direction of her father were sent two weeks in advance to sheriff and postmaster, accompanied by a letter from Miss Anthony requesting that they be put up in a conspicuous place. She then wrote Wendell Phillips asking if any funds were available from the Philadelphia convention, and he replied "no," but sent a personal check for $50. With this money in her pocket, and without the promise of another dollar, she started out alone, at the beginning of winter, to canvass the great State of New York.
At the end of 1854, Miss Anthony decided to thoroughly canvass every county in New York to support the petitions to the Legislature, something no woman had ever dared to do before. Most newspapers gladly agreed to publish her notices. Mr. Greeley wrote: "I got your letter and your plan, friend Susan. I will publish the plan in all our editions, but I’m returning your money. Charging you full price would be too harsh, and I’d rather not take anything." Since she didn’t have any extra money left from her year’s work, she went into debt, with her father as a guarantor, for the flyers she had printed to announce her meetings. These were folded and addressed by her brother Merritt and a young relative, Mary Luther, who would become his wife, and under her father’s direction, were sent two weeks ahead to the sheriff and postmaster, along with a letter from Miss Anthony asking that they be displayed prominently. She then wrote to Wendell Phillips to see if there were any funds available from the Philadelphia convention, and he replied "no," but sent a personal check for $50. With that money in her pocket and no promise of another cent, she set out alone at the start of winter to canvass the vast State of New York.
[19] At the top of their voices they shouted such doggerel as this:
[19] They shouted at the top of their lungs things like this:
"Heigh ho,
"Heigh ho,"
Thro' sleet and snow,
Through sleet and snow,
Mrs. Bloomer's all the go.
Mrs. Bloomer is all the rage.
Twenty tailors take the stitches,
Twenty tailors make the stitches,
Plenty of women wear the breeches,
Plenty of women wear the pants,
Heigh ho,
Hey there,
Carrion crow!"
Carrion crow!
And this:
And this:
"Gibbery, gibbery gab,
"Gibberish, gibberish chatter,
The women had a confab
The women had a chat.
And demanded the rights
And demanded their rights
To wear the tights.
To wear the leggings.
Gibbery, gibbery gab."
Gibberish, gibberish talk.
CHAPTER VIII.
FIRST COUNTY CANVASS——THE WATER CURE.
1855.
Miss Anthony left home on Christmas Day, 1854, and held her first meeting at Mayville, Chautauqua Co., the afternoon and evening of the 26th. On her expense account is the item: "56 cents for four pounds of candles to light the courthouse." The weather was cold and damp and the audiences small, although people were present from eight towns, attracted by curiosity to hear a woman. At the evening session a "York shilling" admittance fee was charged. At Sherman, the next evening, there was a large audience and the diary says: "I never saw more enthusiasm on the subject; even the orthodox churches vied with each other as to which should open its doors."
Miss Anthony left home on Christmas Day, 1854, and held her first meeting in Mayville, Chautauqua County, on the afternoon and evening of the 26th. On her expense account, there's an item: "56 cents for four pounds of candles to light the courthouse." The weather was cold and damp, and the crowds were small, though people came from eight towns, curious to hear a woman speak. At the evening session, a "York shilling" admission fee was charged. The next evening in Sherman, there was a large audience, and the diary notes: "I never saw more enthusiasm on the subject; even the traditional churches competed with each other to see which would open its doors."
The plan adopted was to hold these meetings every other day, allowing for the journey from place to place; but whenever distances would permit, one was held on the intervening day. Occasionally Miss Anthony had the assistance of another speaker, but more than half the meetings were conducted with the little local help she could secure. In the afternoon she would read half of her one and only speech and try to form a society, but there was scarcely a woman to be found who would accept the presidency. In the evening she would read the other half, sell as many tracts as possible and secure names to the petitions. In almost every instance she found the sheriff had put up her posters, inserted notices in the papers, had them read in the churches and prepared the courthouse for her. From 124 only one of the sixty counties did she receive an insulting reply to her letters, and this was from Schoharie. The postmasters also pasted her hand-bills in a conspicuous place, and they were a source of much amusement and comment. Most of the towns never had been visited by a woman speaker, and wagon-loads of people would come from miles around to see the novelty. The audiences were cold but respectful and, as a rule, she was treated decently by the county papers. Occasionally a smart editor would get off the joke about her relationship to Mark Antony, which even then had become threadbare, and invariably the articles would begin, "While we do not agree with the theories which the lady advocates." Most of them, however, paid high tribute to her ability as a speaker and to the clearness, logic and force of her arguments. A quotation from the Rondout Courier will illustrate:
The plan was to hold these meetings every other day to allow for travel between locations, but whenever distances allowed, one would be held on the off day. Sometimes Miss Anthony had help from another speaker, but more than half of the meetings were run with just the local support she could manage. In the afternoon, she would read half of her sole speech and try to form a society, although there was hardly any woman willing to take on the presidency. In the evening, she would present the other half, sell as many pamphlets as possible, and gather signatures for the petitions. In almost every case, she found that the sheriff had put up her posters, placed notices in the newspapers, had them read in churches, and prepared the courthouse for her. From 124, only one of the sixty counties sent her an insulting reply to her letters, and that was from Schoharie. The postmasters also displayed her handbills prominently, which became a source of amusement and discussion. Most towns had never been visited by a woman speaker, and crowds would travel from miles around to see this rarity. The audiences were often cold but respectful, and generally, she was treated well by the county newspapers. Occasionally, a clever editor would make a joke about her connection to Mark Antony, which by then had become tired, and the articles would usually start with, "While we do not agree with the theories the lady advocates." Most, however, gave her high praise for her speaking skills and the clarity, logic, and strength of her arguments. A quote from the Rondout Courier will exemplify this:
At the appointed hour a lady, unattended and unheralded, quietly glided in and ascended the platform. She was as easy and self-possessed as a lady should always be when performing a plain duty, even under 600 curious eyes. Her situation would have been trying to a non-self-reliant woman, for there was no volunteer co-operator. The custodian of the hall, with his stereotyped stupidity, had dumped some tracts and papers on the platform. The unfriended Miss Anthony gathered them up composedly, placed them on a table disposedly, put her decorous shawl on one chair and a very exemplary bonnet on another, sat a moment, smoothed her hair discreetly, and then deliberately walked to the table and addressed the audience. She wore a becoming black silk dress, gracefully draped and made with a basque waist. She appears to be somewhere about the confines of the fourth luster in age, of pleasing rather than pretty features, decidedly expressive countenance, rich brown hair very effectively and not at all elaborately arranged, neither too tall nor too short, too plump nor too thin—in brief one of those juste milieu persons, the perfection of common sense physically exhibited. Miss Anthony's oratory is in keeping with all her belongings, her voice well modulated and musical, her enunciation distinct, her style earnest and impressive, her language pure and unexaggerated.
At the scheduled time, a woman, alone and unnoticed, quietly walked in and stepped onto the platform. She was composed and self-assured, just as a woman should be when fulfilling a simple duty, even with 600 curious eyes on her. Her situation would have been difficult for a less confident person since there was no one there to help her. The hall's custodian, showing his usual indifference, had carelessly tossed some pamphlets and papers onto the platform. Miss Anthony, without assistance, calmly picked them up, placed them neatly on a table, draped her modest shawl over one chair, and set her respectable bonnet on another. She sat for a moment, smoothed her hair discreetly, and then confidently approached the table to speak to the audience. She wore a flattering black silk dress, elegantly draped with a basque waist. She appeared to be in her early to mid-forties, with features that were more pleasing than pretty, a distinctly expressive face, and rich brown hair that was attractively styled but not overdone. She was neither too tall nor too short, not too plump nor too skinny—in summary, she had the perfect balance, embodying common sense. Miss Anthony's speaking style matched all her attributes; her voice was well-modulated and melodious, her enunciation clear, her tone sincere and impactful, and her language was straightforward and genuine.
Judging from other friendly notices this must be an accurate description of Miss Anthony at the age of thirty-five. The experiment of a woman on the platform was too new, however, and the doctrines she advocated too unpopular for it to be possible that she should receive fair treatment generally, and there were few papers which described her in as unprejudiced 125 a manner as the one quoted. A letter from her father during this trip said: "Would it not be wise to preserve the many and amusing observations by the different papers, that years hence, in your more solitary moments, you and maybe your children can look over the views of both the friends and opponents of the cause?" This was the beginning of the scrap books carefully kept up for nearly half a century.
Judging by other kind comments, this must be an accurate portrayal of Miss Anthony at age thirty-five. However, the idea of a woman speaking publicly was still so new, and the views she supported were so unpopular, that it was unlikely she would receive fair treatment overall, and there were few publications that presented her in as unbiased a way as the one quoted. A letter from her father during this trip said: "Wouldn’t it be smart to save all the interesting comments from different papers so that years later, in your quieter moments, you and maybe your kids can look back at the perspectives of both the supporters and opponents of the cause?" This was the start of the scrapbooks that were diligently maintained for nearly fifty years.
The journal for that year gives a detailed account of the hardships of this winter, one of the coldest and snowiest on record. Many towns were off the railroad and could be reached only by sleigh. After a long ride she would be put for the night into a room without a fire, and in the morning would have to break the ice in the pitcher to take that sponge bath from head to foot which she never omitted. All that she hoped from a financial standpoint was to pay the expenses of the trip, and had she desired fame or honor, she would not have sought it in these remote villages. The diary relates:
The journal for that year gives a detailed account of the hardships of that winter, one of the coldest and snowiest on record. Many towns were off the railroad and could only be reached by sleigh. After a long ride, she would be put for the night into a room without a fire, and in the morning, she would have to break the ice in the pitcher to take that sponge bath from head to toe, which she never skipped. All she hoped for financially was to cover the expenses of the trip, and if she wanted fame or recognition, she wouldn't have looked for it in these remote villages. The diary relates:
At Olean, not a church or schoolhouse could be obtained for the lecture and it would have had to be abandoned had not the landlord, Mr. Comstock, given the use of his dining-room....
In Olean, there wasn't a church or school available for the lecture, so it would have had to be canceled if the landlord, Mr. Comstock, hadn't offered his dining room for the event.
At Angelica, nine towns represented; crowded house, courtroom carpeted with sawdust. A young Methodist minister gave his name for the petition, but one of his wealthy parishioners told him he should leave the church unless it was withdrawn....
In Angelica, nine towns were represented; the house was full, and the courtroom floor was covered in sawdust. A young Methodist minister put his name on the petition, but one of his wealthy church members told him he should leave the church if he didn't withdraw it.
At Corning, none of the ministers would give the notice of our meeting, which so incensed some of the men that they went to the printing office, struck off handbills and had boys standing at the door of the churches as the people passed out. Who was responsible for the Sabbath breaking?...
In Corning, none of the ministers would announce our meeting, which made some of the men so angry that they went to the printing office, printed handbills, and had boys standing at the church doors as people came out. Who was truly responsible for breaking the Sabbath?
At Elmira, took tea at Mrs. Holbrook's with Rev. Thomas K. Beecher. His theology, as set forth that evening, is a dark and hopeless one. He sees no hope for the progress of the race, does not believe that education even will improve the species. I find great apathy wherever the clergy are opposed to the advancement of women.
In Elmira, I had tea at Mrs. Holbrook's with Rev. Thomas K. Beecher. His views on theology that evening were dark and bleak. He sees no future for the progression of humanity and believes that education can't even improve people. I've noticed a lot of indifference where the clergy oppose the advancement of women.
In February Miss Anthony suspended her canvass long enough to go to Albany to the State convention and present the petitions. In response to her request to be present Horace Greeley wrote: "You know already that I am thoroughly committed to the principle that woman shall decide for herself whether she shall have a voice and vote in legislation or shall 126 continue to be represented and legislated for exclusively by man. My own judgment is that woman's presence in the arena of politics would be useful and beneficent but I do not assume to judge for her. She must consider, determine and act for herself. Moreover, when she shall in earnest have resolved that her own welfare and that of the race will be promoted by her claiming a voice in the direction of civil government, as I think she ultimately will do, then the day of her emancipation will be very near. That day, I will hope yet to see."
In February, Miss Anthony paused her campaign long enough to go to Albany for the State convention and present the petitions. In response to her request to be there, Horace Greeley wrote: "You already know that I am completely committed to the idea that women should decide for themselves whether they want a voice and vote in legislation or will 126 continue to be represented and legislated for solely by men. I believe that having women in politics would be beneficial, but I don't presume to make that decision for them. They must think about it, decide, and act on their own. Furthermore, when women seriously resolve that their own well-being and that of future generations will be advanced by claiming a voice in civil governance, as I believe they ultimately will, then the day of their liberation will be very close. I still hope to see that day."
Her mission accomplished, Miss Anthony plunged again into the ice and snow of northern New York. At Albany a wealthy and cultured Quaker gentleman had been an attentive and interested listener, and when she took the stage a few days later at Lake George, she found not only that he was to be her fellow-passenger, but that he had a thick plank heated, which he asked permission to place under her feet. Whenever the stage stopped he had it re-heated, and in many ways added to the comfort of her journey. At the close of the next meeting to her surprise she found his fine sleigh waiting filled with robes and drawn by two spirited gray horses, and he himself drove her to his own beautiful home presided over by a sister, where she spent Sunday. In this same luxurious conveyance she was taken to several towns and, during one of these trips, was urged in the most earnest manner to give up the hard life she was leading and accept the ease and protection he could offer. But her heart made no response to this appeal while it did urge her strongly to continue in her chosen work.
Her mission accomplished, Miss Anthony plunged back into the ice and snow of northern New York. In Albany, a wealthy and cultured Quaker gentleman had been an attentive and interested listener, and when she took the stage a few days later at Lake George, she found not only that he was going to be her fellow passenger, but that he had a thick plank heated, which he asked to place under her feet. Whenever the stage stopped, he had it re-heated and in many ways made her journey more comfortable. At the end of the next meeting, to her surprise, she found his beautiful sleigh waiting, filled with blankets and drawn by two spirited gray horses, and he himself drove her to his lovely home, where his sister was in charge, and she spent Sunday. In this same luxurious sleigh, she was taken to several towns, and during one of these trips, he earnestly urged her to give up the hard life she was leading and accept the comfort and protection he could provide. But her heart did not respond to this appeal; instead, it strongly urged her to continue with her chosen work.
All through the Schroon Lake country the snow was over the fences and the weather bitterly cold. At Plattsburg, Miss Anthony was a guest at Judge Watson's. Before leaving Rochester she had had a pair of high boots made to protect her from the deep snows, which were so much heavier than she was accustomed to that they almost ruined her feet. She was at that time an ardent convert to the "water cure" theories and, after suffering tortures from one foot especially, she came home from the afternoon meeting, put it under the "penstock" 127 in the kitchen and let the cold water run over it till it was perfectly numb, then Crapped it up in flannels. That evening it did not hurt her a particle, and concluding that what was good for one foot must be good for two, she put both under the "penstock" till they were almost congealed. In the morning she scarcely could get out of bed, all the pain having settled in her back, but in spite of protests from the family she resumed her journey. All the way to Malone, she had to hold fast to the seat in front of her to relieve as much as possible the motion of the cars. She managed to conduct her afternoon and evening meetings, and then went on to Ogdensburg, where she stopped with a cousin. The next morning she hardly could move and the women of the family had to help her make her toilet. Nothing they could say would persuade her to remain; she was advertised to speak at Canton and proposed to do it if she were alive, so she was carried out, put into a sleigh and driven seventeen miles actually doubled up with her head on her knees. She finished the two meetings and then resolved on heroic measures. Arising at 4 A.M. she rode in a stage to within ten miles of Watertown, took the cars to that city and went to a hotel. Here she ordered the chambermaid to bring several buckets of ice water into her room and, sitting down in a tub, she had them poured on her back, then wrapping up in hot blankets went to bed. The next morning she was apparently well and held her meetings.
All across the Schroon Lake area, the snow piled up over the fences, and the weather was freezing. In Plattsburgh, Miss Anthony was staying at Judge Watson's home. Before leaving Rochester, she had a pair of tall boots made to keep her warm in the deep snow, which was much heavier than she was used to and nearly destroyed her feet. At that time, she was a passionate believer in the "water cure" methods, and after suffering a lot from one foot in particular, she returned home from the afternoon meeting, put it under the "penstock" 127 in the kitchen, and let cold water flow over it until it was completely numb, then wrapped it in flannels. That evening, it didn't hurt her at all, and thinking that what worked for one foot would work for both, she put both feet under the "penstock" until they were almost frozen. The next morning, she could barely get out of bed, as all the pain had settled in her back, but despite her family's objections, she continued her journey. All the way to Malone, she had to hold on to the seat in front of her to ease the motion of the train. She managed to lead her afternoon and evening meetings, then headed to Ogdensburg, where she stayed with a cousin. The next morning, she could hardly move, and the women in the family had to help her get ready. No amount of persuasion could convince her to stay; she was scheduled to speak in Canton and intended to do so, so she was carried out, placed in a sleigh, and driven seventeen miles, practically folded over with her head on her knees. She completed the two meetings and then decided to take drastic action. Waking up at 4 AM, she took a stagecoach within ten miles of Watertown, then took the train to that city and checked into a hotel. There, she instructed the chambermaid to bring several buckets of ice water into her room, and while sitting in a tub, had the water poured over her back, then wrapped herself in hot blankets and went to bed. The next morning, she seemed completely well and held her meetings.
At Auburn, Mrs. Stanton came over from Seneca Falls to assist and they were entertained by Martha C. Wright. As a usual thing Miss Anthony stopped at a hotel but after the first session some one in her audience would be so pleased with her that she was sure to be invited into a comfortable home for the rest of her stay. One cold spring day she was to speak at Riverhead, L.I. Reaching the courthouse, at 1 o'clock, she found it swept and garnished and a good fire but not a person in sight except the janitor; so she sat down and waited and finally one man after another dropped in, until there were perhaps a dozen. Not at all discouraged, she began her speech. Presently the door opened a little and she saw a woman's bonnet 128 peep in but it was quickly withdrawn. This was repeated a number of times but not one ventured in. Whether each woman saw her own husband and was afraid to enter, or whether she did not dare face the other women's husbands, there was not one in the audience. The men heard her through, bought her tracts and signed the petition. Having decided there was nothing dangerous about her, they came back in the evening, bringing their wives and neighbors.
At Auburn, Mrs. Stanton came from Seneca Falls to help, and they were hosted by Martha C. Wright. Usually, Miss Anthony stayed at a hotel, but after the first session, someone in the audience would be so impressed with her that she would be invited to a comfortable home for the rest of her stay. One chilly spring day, she was scheduled to speak at Riverhead, L.I. Arriving at the courthouse by 1 o'clock, she found it clean and warmed by a good fire, but there was no one around except the janitor. So, she sat down and waited until one by one, men started to come in, until there were about a dozen. Undeterred, she began her speech. Soon, the door opened slightly, and she saw a woman’s bonnet 128 peek in, but it quickly pulled back. This happened several times, but not a single woman ventured in. Whether each woman was worried about running into her own husband or felt intimidated by the other women’s husbands, there wasn’t a woman in the audience. The men listened to her all the way through, bought her pamphlets, and signed the petition. Realizing she was harmless, they returned in the evening with their wives and neighbors.
She closed her campaign May 1, having made a thorough canvass of fifty-four counties, during which she sold 20,000 pamphlets. The total receipts for the four months were $2,367, and the expenses were $2,291, leaving a balance of $76. Out of this she sent Mr. Phillips the $50 he had advanced, but he returned it saying he thought she had earned it.
She wrapped up her campaign on May 1, after thoroughly covering fifty-four counties, during which she sold 20,000 pamphlets. The total income for the four months was $2,367, and the expenses were $2,291, leaving a balance of $76. From this amount, she sent Mr. Phillips the $50 he had lent her, but he returned it, stating that he believed she had earned it.
The diary relates that it was the common practice in those days for the husband, upon coming to an eating station, to go in and get a hot dinner, while the wife sat in the car and ate a cold lunch. It tells of an old farmer who came with his wife to her lecture and went into the dining-room for the best meal the tavern afforded, while the wife sat in the parlor and nibbled a little food she had brought with her. Miss Anthony and her companions were the only women who dared go out when the train stopped, to walk up and down for air and exercise, and they were considered very bold for so doing.
The diary notes that it was common back then for husbands, when they arrived at a dining station, to go inside and grab a hot meal while their wives stayed in the car eating a cold lunch. It mentions an old farmer who accompanied his wife to her lecture and went into the dining room for the best meal the tavern had to offer, while his wife sat in the parlor snacking on some food she had brought with her. Miss Anthony and her friends were the only women who dared to step outside when the train stopped to stretch their legs and get some fresh air, and they were seen as very daring for doing so.
In 1855, to Miss Anthony's great regret, Lucy Stone and Antoinette Brown were married. Both were very active in the reforms of the day, and there was such a dearth of effective workers she felt that they could ill be spared. Their semi-apologetic letters and her half-sorrowful, half-indignant remonstrances are both amusing and pathetic. They assure her that marriage will make no difference with their work, that it will only give them more power and earnestness. She knew from observation that the married woman who attempts to do public work must neglect either it or home duties, and that the advent of children necessarily must compel the mother to withdraw practically from outside occupation. She was not opposed to 129 marriage per se, but she felt that such women as Lucy Stone and Antoinette Brown might make a sacrifice and consecrate themselves to the great needs of the world which were demanding the services of the ablest women.
In 1855, much to Miss Anthony's disappointment, Lucy Stone and Antoinette Brown got married. Both were very active in the reforms of the time, and there was such a shortage of effective workers that she felt they couldn’t be easily replaced. Their somewhat apologetic letters and her mix of sorrowful and indignant responses are both amusing and sad. They assured her that marriage wouldn’t change their work; instead, it would give them more power and dedication. From what she observed, she knew that a married woman trying to do public work inevitably had to neglect either that work or her home responsibilities, and the arrival of children would require the mother to pull back from outside commitments. She didn’t oppose marriage itself, but she believed that women like Lucy Stone and Antoinette Brown could make a sacrifice and dedicate themselves to the pressing needs of the world that required the talents of the most capable women.
In May Miss Anthony went as usual to the Anti-Slavery Anniversary. In regard to this her father wrote: "Were I in your place I should like to attend these anniversaries. The women are soon to have their rights and should there be any slavery left in the world after they are liberated, it should be your business to help clear it out." Very few of those who were actively engaged in the effort to secure equal rights for women had the slightest conception of the half century and more of long and steady work before them. To their minds the demand seemed so evident, so just and so forcible, that prejudice and opposition must yield in a short time and the foundation principles of the government be established in fact as well as in theory.
In May, Miss Anthony attended the Anti-Slavery Anniversary as usual. In relation to this, her father wrote: "If I were you, I would want to go to these anniversaries. Women are about to gain their rights, and if any slavery remains in the world after they are free, it should be your responsibility to help eliminate it." Very few people actively involved in the fight for women's equal rights understood the decades of hard work that lay ahead. They believed the demand was so clear, so fair, and so compelling that prejudice and opposition would quickly give way, and the foundational principles of the government would be established both in practice and in theory.
From New York she went to her birthplace, Adams, Mass., and spoke in the Baptist church. Just as she began, to her amazement, her Quaker grandfather eighty-five years old came up the aisle and sat down on the pulpit steps. While he had been very anxious that she should speak and that her lecture should be well advertised she had not expected him to be present, as he was not in the habit of entering an orthodox church. She stopped at once, gave him her hand and assisted him to a seat in the pulpit, where he listened with deep interest. When she finished he said: "Well, Susan, that is a smart talk thee has given us tonight."
From New York, she went back to her hometown, Adams, Mass., and spoke at the Baptist church. Just as she started, to her surprise, her 85-year-old Quaker grandfather walked up the aisle and sat down on the pulpit steps. Even though he had been very eager for her to speak and wanted her lecture to be well advertised, she hadn't expected him to be there since he usually didn't go into an orthodox church. She immediately stopped, shook his hand, and helped him to a seat on the pulpit, where he listened intently. When she finished, he said, "Well, Susan, that was an impressive talk you gave us tonight."
After Miss Anthony returned home, outraged nature asserted itself and at every moment the pain in her back was excruciating. She went to a doctor for the first time in her life and was given a fly-blister and some drugs to put in whiskey. The last two she threw away but applied the blister, which only increased her misery. She suffered terribly all summer but was busy every moment writing a new speech and sending out scores of letters for a second woman's rights convention which 130 had been called to meet at Saratoga in August. Most of the replies were favorable. T.W. Higginson wrote: "With great pleasure will I come to Saratoga Springs on August 15 and 16. It is a capital idea to have a convention there, coax in some curious fashionables and perhaps make those who come to scoff, remain to pray." Lucretia Mott sent a letter full of good cheer. From Mrs. Stanton, overwhelmed with the cares of many little children, came this pathetic message: "I can not go. I have so many drawbacks to all my efforts for women that every step is one of warfare, but there is a good time coming and I am strong and happy in hope. I long to see you, dear Susan, and hear of your wanderings."
After Miss Anthony got home, her body was in total rebellion, and the pain in her back was unbearable. For the first time in her life, she went to a doctor and was given a fly blister and some pills to mix with whiskey. She threw away the pills but used the blister, which only made her feel worse. She suffered a lot all summer but stayed busy every moment writing a new speech and sending out dozens of letters for a second women’s rights convention that 130 was set to take place in Saratoga in August. Most of the replies were positive. T.W. Higginson wrote: "I will happily come to Saratoga Springs on August 15 and 16. It’s a great idea to have a convention there, attracting some curious socialites and maybe even turning those who come to mock into supporters." Lucretia Mott sent a letter full of encouragement. From Mrs. Stanton, overwhelmed with the responsibilities of her small children, came this heartfelt message: "I can't go. I face so many obstacles to my efforts for women that every step feels like a battle, but a better time is coming, and I am hopeful and happy. I can’t wait to see you, dear Susan, and hear about your travels."
Paulina Wright Davis said, in discussing the convention; "I get almost discouraged with women. They will work for men, but a woman must ride in triumph over everything before they will give her a word of aid or cheer; they are ready enough to take advantage of every step gained, but not ready to help further steps. When will they be truer and nobler? Not in our day, but we must work on for future generations." Lucy Stone, enjoying her honeymoon at the Blackwell home near Cincinnati, wrote in a playful mood: "When, after reading your letter, I asked my husband if I might go to Saratoga, only think of it! He did not give me permission, but told me to ask Lucy Stone. I can't get him to govern me at all.... The Washington Union, noticing our marriage, said: 'We understand that Mr. Blackwell, who last fall assaulted a southern lady and stole her slave, has lately married Miss Lucy Stone. Justice, though sometimes tardy, never fails to overtake her victim.' They evidently think him well punished. With the old love and good will I am now and ever,
Paulina Wright Davis said, while discussing the convention, "I get almost discouraged with women. They will work for men, but a woman has to achieve so much before they’ll offer her any support or encouragement; they’re quick to benefit from every advancement made, but not willing to help with the next steps. When will they be more genuine and honorable? Not in our time, but we have to keep pushing for future generations." Lucy Stone, enjoying her honeymoon at the Blackwell home near Cincinnati, wrote lightheartedly: "When, after reading your letter, I asked my husband if I could go to Saratoga, can you believe it? He didn’t give me permission but told me to ask Lucy Stone. I can’t get him to control me at all... The Washington Union, commenting on our marriage, said: 'We understand that Mr. Blackwell, who last fall assaulted a southern lady and stole her slave, has recently married Miss Lucy Stone. Justice, although sometimes slow, never fails to catch up with its victim.' They clearly think he’s gotten what he deserves. With all my love and good wishes, I am now and always."
LUCY STONE (only)."
LUCY STONE (only).

H Anthony
H Anthony
On the way to Saratoga Miss Anthony stopped at Utica for the State Teachers' Convention and was appointed to read a paper at the next annual meeting on "Educating the Sexes Together." This action showed considerable advance in sentiment during the two years since this same body at Rochester debated for half an hour whether a woman should be allowed 131 to speak to a motion. She called the Woman's Rights Convention to order in Saratoga, August 15, 1855, and Martha C. Wright was made president. The brilliant array of speakers addressed cultured audiences gathered from all parts of the country at this fashionable resort. The newspapers were very complimentary; the Whig, however, declared, "The business of the convention was to advocate woman's right to do wrong." It was here that Mary L. Booth, afterwards for many years editor of Harper's Bazar, made her first public appearance, acting as secretary.
On her way to Saratoga, Miss Anthony stopped in Utica for the State Teachers' Convention, where she was invited to present a paper at the next annual meeting on "Educating the Sexes Together." This showed a significant shift in attitude over the past two years since this same group in Rochester debated for half an hour on whether a woman should be allowed 131 to speak on a motion. She called the Woman's Rights Convention to order in Saratoga on August 15, 1855, and Martha C. Wright was elected president. A talented lineup of speakers addressed well-educated audiences gathered from across the country at this popular resort. The newspapers were generally positive; however, the Whig stated, "The business of the convention was to advocate woman's right to do wrong." It was here that Mary L. Booth, who would later become the editor of Harper's Bazar for many years, made her first public appearance as secretary.
She decided to go for a while to the Worcester Hydropathic Institute conducted by her cousin, Dr. Seth Rogers, and she found here complete change and comparative rest, although occupying a great deal of her time in sending out tracts and petitions. Her account-books show the purchase of 600 one-cent stamps, each of which meant the addressing of an envelope with her own hand, and her letters to her father are full of directions for printing circulars, etc. She was, however, enabled to take some recreation, a thing almost unknown in her busy life. On September 18 she attended the Massachusetts Woman's Rights Convention, and wrote home:
She decided to spend some time at the Worcester Hydropathic Institute run by her cousin, Dr. Seth Rogers. There, she experienced a complete change and some relative rest, although she still spent a lot of her time sending out pamphlets and petitions. Her account books show that she bought 600 one-cent stamps, each of which meant she had to address an envelope by hand, and her letters to her father are filled with instructions for printing circulars, etc. However, she was able to take some time for herself, something almost unknown in her busy life. On September 18, she attended the Massachusetts Woman's Rights Convention and wrote home:
I went into Boston with Lucy Stone and stopped at Francis Jackson's, where we found Antoinette Brown and Ellen Blackwell, a pleasant company in that most hospitable home. As this was my first visit to Boston, Mr. Jackson took us to see the sights; and then we dined with his daughter, Eliza J. Eddy, returning in the afternoon. In the evening, we attended a reception at Garrison's, where we met several of the literati, and were most heartily welcomed by Mrs. Garrison, a noble, self-sacrificing woman, loving and loved, surrounded with healthy, happy children in that model home. Mr. Garrison was omnipresent, now talking with and introducing guests, now soothing some child to sleep, and now, with his wife, looking after the refreshments. There we met Caroline H. Dall, Elizabeth Peabody, Mrs. McCready, the Shakespearian reader, Caroline M. Severance, Dr. Harriot K. Hunt, Charles F. Hovey, Wendell Phillips, Sarah Pugh and others. Having worshipped these distinguished people afar off, it was a great satisfaction to meet them face to face.
I traveled to Boston with Lucy Stone and stopped by Francis Jackson's place, where we met Antoinette Brown and Ellen Blackwell, creating a pleasant atmosphere in that very welcoming home. Since it was my first time in Boston, Mr. Jackson took us sightseeing; afterward, we had dinner with his daughter, Eliza J. Eddy, and returned in the afternoon. In the evening, we attended a reception at Garrison's, where we encountered several writers and were greeted warmly by Mrs. Garrison, a wonderful, selfless woman who was loved and loving, surrounded by healthy, happy children in that perfect home. Mr. Garrison was everywhere, chatting with guests, soothing a child to sleep, and with his wife, managing the refreshments. There we met Caroline H. Dall, Elizabeth Peabody, Mrs. McCready, the Shakespearean reader, Caroline M. Severance, Dr. Harriot K. Hunt, Charles F. Hovey, Wendell Phillips, Sarah Pugh, and others. Having admired these distinguished individuals from a distance, it was a true pleasure to meet them in person.
Saturday morning, with Mr. and Mrs. Garrison and Sarah Pugh, I visited Mount Auburn. What a magnificent resting-place! We could not find Margaret Fuller's monument, which I regretted. I spent Sunday with Charles Lenox Remond at Salem, and we drove to Lynn with his matchless steeds to hear Theodore Parker preach a sermon which filled our souls. We discussed 132 its excellence at James Buffum's where we all dined. Monday Mr. Garrison escorted me to Charlestown; we stood on the very spot where Warren fell and mounted the interminable staircase to the top of Bunker Hill Monument. Then we called on Theodore Parker; found him up three nights of stairs in his library which covers that whole floor of his house; the room is lined with books to the very top—16,000 volumes—and there at a large table in the center of the apartment sat the great man himself. It really seemed audacious in me to be ushered into such a presence and on such a commonplace errand as to ask him to come to Rochester to speak in a course of lectures I am planning, but he received me with such kindness and simplicity that the awe I felt on entering was soon dissipated. I then called on Wendell Phillips in his sanctum for the same purpose. I have invited Ralph Waldo Emerson by letter and all three have promised to come. In the evening with Mr. Jackson's son James, Ellen Blackwell and I went to see Hamlet. In spite of my Quaker training, I find I enjoy all these worldly amusements intensely.
On Saturday morning, I visited Mount Auburn with Mr. and Mrs. Garrison and Sarah Pugh. What a beautiful resting place! Unfortunately, we couldn’t find Margaret Fuller’s monument, which I regretted. I spent Sunday with Charles Lenox Remond in Salem, and we took an incredible drive to Lynn to hear Theodore Parker give a sermon that lifted our spirits. We discussed its brilliance at James Buffum's during dinner. On Monday, Mr. Garrison took me to Charlestown; we stood right where Warren fell and climbed the endless staircase to the top of Bunker Hill Monument. Then we visited Theodore Parker, who had his library on the third floor, filling the entire floor of his house; the room was stacked with books all the way to the top—16,000 volumes—and at a large table in the center sat the great man himself. It felt quite brave for me to enter such a presence for what seemed like a simple request—to ask him to speak in a series of lectures I’m organizing in Rochester—but he welcomed me with such warmth and humility that my awe quickly faded. I then visited Wendell Phillips in his office for the same purpose. I’ve also invited Ralph Waldo Emerson by letter, and all three have agreed to come. In the evening, with Mr. Jackson's son James, Ellen Blackwell and I went to see Hamlet. Despite my Quaker upbringing, I find that I genuinely enjoy these worldly entertainments.
Returning to Worcester, I attended the Anti-Slavery Bazaar. I suppose there were many beautiful things exhibited, but I was so absorbed in the conversation of Mr. Higginson, Samuel May, Jr., Sarah Earle, cousin Seth Rogers and Stephen and Abby Foster, that I really forgot to take a survey of the tables. The next day Charles F. Hovey drove with me out to the home of the Fosters where we had a pleasant call.[20]
When I returned to Worcester, I went to the Anti-Slavery Bazaar. I suppose there were many beautiful things displayed, but I was so caught up in conversation with Mr. Higginson, Samuel May, Jr., Sarah Earle, cousin Seth Rogers, and Stephen and Abby Foster that I completely forgot to explore the tables. The next day, Charles F. Hovey drove with me to the Fosters’ home, where we had a nice visit.[20]

Theodore Parker
Theodore Parker
Miss Anthony visited a baby show but she considered it "a sad exhibition, unless it may be the crude and rude beginning of arousing an interest in the laws which govern the production of strong, healthy, beautiful children." She heard Mr. Higginson preach every Sunday, and of one sermon on the "Secret Springs of True Greatness" she writes home:
Miss Anthony visited a baby show, but she thought it was "a sad exhibition, unless it might be the rough and awkward start of sparking interest in the laws that govern the creation of strong, healthy, beautiful kids." She listened to Mr. Higginson preach every Sunday, and about one sermon on the "Secret Springs of True Greatness," she wrote home:
The minister read from the Book of Esdras in the Apocrypha. It is astonishing that such a beautiful and forcible exemplification of the governing principle of life should have been cast aside as doubtful by those who presumed to sit in judgment upon the revealed will of the Almighty. That they did fail to perceive in this the divine stamp, proves all the more conclusively to me that we, who have the experience of all past generations to enlighten our understanding and deepen our convictions, are infinitely more competent 133 to discern between the good and evil in that wonderful book than were any king-appointed councils of olden times.
The minister read from the Book of Esdras in the Apocrypha. It's incredible that such a beautiful and powerful illustration of life's guiding principle has been dismissed as questionable by those who believe they can judge the revealed will of the Almighty. Their inability to see the divine touch in this clearly shows me that we, who benefit from the insights of all past generations to improve our understanding and strengthen our beliefs, are much more capable 133 of telling the difference between good and evil in that remarkable book than any council appointed by kings in ancient times.
During Mr. Higginson's absence his place was filled by Rev. David A. Wasson, who was temporarily a resident of the "water cure." His sermons and his daily companionship were a revelation to Miss Anthony of a higher intellectual and spiritual life than she had known before, and she records in her diary: "It is plain to me now that it is not sitting under preaching that I dislike, but the fact that most of it is not of a stamp that my soul can respond to." While in Worcester she went to her first Republican meeting and heard John P. Hale. Her cousin escorted her to a seat on the platform and Mr. Hale gave her a cordial welcome. She was the only woman present, although several peeped in at the door but had not the courage to enter. She also heard Henry Wilson, Charles Sumner and Anson Burlingame, and writes: "Had the accident of birth given me place among the aristocracy of sex, I doubt not I should be an active, zealous advocate of Republicanism; unless, perchance, I had received that higher, holier light which would have lifted me to the sublime height where now stand Garrison, Phillips and all that small but noble band whose motto is 'No Union with Slaveholders.'"
During Mr. Higginson's absence, Rev. David A. Wasson, who was temporarily living at the "water cure," took his place. His sermons and daily companionship opened up a higher level of intellectual and spiritual life for Miss Anthony than she had experienced before, and she notes in her diary: "I realize now that it's not the act of listening to sermons that bothers me, but that most of them don't resonate with my soul." While in Worcester, she attended her first Republican meeting and heard John P. Hale speak. Her cousin took her to a seat on the platform, and Mr. Hale warmly welcomed her. She was the only woman there, although a few women peeked in at the door but lacked the courage to come inside. She also listened to Henry Wilson, Charles Sumner, and Anson Burlingame, and writes: "If I had been born into the upper class of my gender, I have no doubt I would be an active, passionate supporter of Republicanism; unless, perhaps, I had been given that higher, more sacred insight that would have elevated me to the noble heights where Garrison, Phillips, and all that small but noble group stand, whose motto is 'No Union with Slaveholders.'"
She was at this time becoming deeply interested in politics but had not dreamed that she herself ever would enter the ranks of political speakers. In October she complains of her restlessness and her anxiety to go home, but she is not strong and knows it would be impossible to keep up the treatment there, so she says: "Because of this, and because of my great desire to be able to do what now seems my life work, I have decided to stay awhile longer." But in this same letter she adds: "If Merritt is sick and needs me I will go to him at once. My waking and sleeping thoughts are with him." This young brother had insisted upon going West to seek his fortune and was taken ill in Iowa. At one time when he asked for some money he had saved, and his father, thinking he was too young to be trusted, did not let him have it, Miss Anthony wrote: "It is too bad to treat him like a child. Let 134 him make a blunder even; it will do much more to develop him than the judgment of father, mother and all the brothers and sisters. He ought to have the privilege, since it is clearly his right, to invest his money exactly as he pleases and I hope he will yet be trusted at least with his own funds."
She was becoming really interested in politics at this time but never imagined that she would become a political speaker herself. In October, she talks about feeling restless and anxious to go home, but she wasn't strong enough and knew it would be impossible to continue her treatment there. So she says, "Because of this, and my strong desire to do what now seems like my life's work, I've decided to stay a little longer." However, in the same letter, she adds, "If Merritt is sick and needs me, I will go to him right away. He's on my mind all the time." This younger brother had insisted on going West to find his fortune but fell ill in Iowa. At one point, when he asked for some of the money he had saved, their father, believing he was too young to handle it, didn’t give it to him. Miss Anthony wrote: "It’s too bad to treat him like a child. Let 134 him make a mistake; it will do much more to help him grow than the judgment of father, mother, and all the siblings combined. He should have the right to invest his money however he wishes, and I hope he’s trusted at least with his own funds."
To a woman who is publishing a paper and complains that her efforts are neither helped nor appreciated, she replies: "Every individual woman who launches into a work hitherto monopolized by men, must stand or fall in her own strength or weakness. Whatever we manufacture we must study to make it for the interest of the community to purchase. If we fail in this, we must improve the work.... Each of us individually has her own duties to perform and each of us alone must work out her life problem."
To a woman who is publishing a paper and feels like her efforts aren't being recognized or valued, she responds: "Every woman who takes on a task that has been dominated by men must rely on her own strength or shortcomings. Whatever we create, we need to make it appealing to the community so they want to buy it. If we don't succeed at this, we have to enhance our work... Each of us has our own responsibilities to fulfill, and we each must solve our own life challenges."
In October the National Woman's Rights Convention was held in Cincinnati but she was unable to attend. It was the only one she missed from 1852 until the breaking out of the war, when they were abandoned for a number of years, and she felt so distressed that she wrote to Rochester and persuaded her sister Mary to get leave of absence from school and go in her place. We know she has a very pretty bonnet this fall, for she says: "It is trimmed with dark green ribbon, striped with black and white, and for face trimming, lace and cherry and green flowers with the least speck of blue." She grieves because her married sisters never have time to write her, and says:
In October, the National Woman's Rights Convention took place in Cincinnati, but she couldn't attend. That was the only one she missed from 1852 until the start of the war, when they were paused for several years, and she felt so upset that she wrote to Rochester and convinced her sister Mary to take time off from school and go in her place. We know she has a really pretty bonnet this fall because she says, "It's trimmed with dark green ribbon, striped with black and white, and for face trimming, lace and cherry and green flowers with a hint of blue." She’s upset because her married sisters never have time to write to her, and she says:
But so it is; every wife and mother must devote herself wholly to home duties, washing and cleaning, baking and mending—these are the must be's; the culture of the soul, the enlargement of the faculties, the thought of anything or anybody beyond the home and family are the may be's. When society is rightly organized, the wife and mother will have time, wish and will to grow intellectually, and will know that the limits of her sphere, the extent of her duties, are prescribed only by the measure of her ability.
But that's the reality; every wife and mother has to fully commit to home responsibilities—like laundry, cleaning, cooking, and repairs—these are essential tasks. Personal growth, expanding her skills, and any thoughts about anything or anyone beyond home and family are just options. When society is organized properly, the wife and mother will have the time, desire, and motivation to grow intellectually and will realize that the limits of her role and her responsibilities are only defined by her own abilities.
Her daily treatment at the "water cure" is thus described: "First thing in the morning, dripping sheet; pack at 10 o'clock for forty-five minutes, come out of that and take a shower, followed by a sitz bath, with a pail of water at 75° 135 poured over the shoulders, after which dry sheet and then, brisk exercise. At 4 P.M. the programme repeated, and then again at 9 P.M. My day is so cut up with four baths, four dressings and undressings, four exercisings, one drive and three eatings, that I do not have time to put two thoughts together." Miss Anthony recovered her health, either as a result of the treatment or of the rest and the long rides which she took daily with her cousin as he made his round of visits. While he was indoors she sat in the chaise enjoying the sunshine and fresh air and reading some interesting book. The journal shows that during the fall she read Sartor Resartus, Consuelo, bits from Gerald Massey, Villette, Gaskell's Life of Charlotte Bronte, Corinne, and a number of other works. Dr. Rogers, the intimate friend of Thoreau and Emerson, was a cultured gentleman, liberal in his views, strong in his opinions, yet tender, sympathetic and companionable. Many of his beautiful letters to Miss Anthony have been preserved. In speaking of political cowardice and corruption, he says: "Were it not for the thunder and lightning of the Garrisonians to purify the moral atmosphere, we would all sink into perdition together." His love of liberty is thus expressed:
Her daily treatment at the "water cure" is described like this: "First thing in the morning, a dripping sheet; then a pack at 10 o'clock for forty-five minutes, followed by a shower, then a sitz bath, with a bucket of water at 75° 135 poured over my shoulders. After that, a dry sheet and then some brisk exercise. At 4 P.M., I repeat the same routine, and again at 9 P.M. My day is so filled with four baths, four dressings and undressings, four exercise sessions, one drive, and three meals that I hardly have time to collect my thoughts." Miss Anthony regained her health, either because of the treatment or due to the rest and the long rides she took daily with her cousin during his visits. While he was inside, she would sit in the chaise, enjoying the sunshine and fresh air while reading interesting books. The journal shows that during the fall she read Sartor Resartus, Consuelo, excerpts from Gerald Massey, Villette, Gaskell's Life of Charlotte Bronte, Corinne, and several other works. Dr. Rogers, a close friend of Thoreau and Emerson, was a cultured gentleman, open-minded in his views, strong in his opinions, yet kind, sympathetic, and easy to spend time with. Many of his beautiful letters to Miss Anthony have been preserved. When discussing political cowardice and corruption, he said: "If it weren’t for the thunder and lightning of the Garrisonians to cleanse the moral atmosphere, we would all sink into perdition together." His love for liberty is expressed like this:
I believe in the absolute freedom of every human being so long as the rights of others are left undisturbed. Conformity too often cuts down our stature and makes us Lilliputians, no longer units but unities. Help me to stand alone and I will help you to right the universe. Better, a thousand times better, that societies, friendships even, never were formed, that we all were Robinson Crusoes, than that the terrible tragedy of soul-annihilation through conformity be so conspicuous in the drama of human life. How many wives do you see who are not acting this tragedy? How many husbands who do not applaud? Hence degeneracy after marriage, more directly of the wife than the husband, but too often of both.
I believe in the absolute freedom of every individual, as long as everyone respects each other's rights. Conformity often limits our potential and makes us feel small, turning us into a group rather than individuals. Support me in standing apart, and I’ll help you improve the world. It's much better, a thousand times better, if societies and even friendships never existed, that we were all like Robinson Crusoe, than for the awful tragedy of losing one's spirit through conformity to be so clear in the story of human life. How many wives do you see who are living out this tragedy? How many husbands don’t encourage it? This results in a decline after marriage, impacting the wife more directly than the husband, but often both end up suffering.
As soon as Miss Anthony reached home, the last of November, she began preparing for another winter campaign in the interest of the petitions, and also for a course of lectures to be given in Rochester by the prominent men of the day. Lucy Stone wrote her at this time: "Your letter full of plans reaches me here. I wish I lived near enough to catch some of your magnetism. For the first time in my life I feel, day 136 after day, completely discouraged. When my Harry sent your letter to me he said, 'Susan wants you to write a tract, and I say, Amen.' When I go home I will see whether I have any faith in nay power to do it.... Susan, don't you lecture this winter on pain of my everlasting displeasure. I am going to retire from the field; and if you go to work too soon and kill yourself, the two wheelhorses will be gone and then the chariot will stop."
As soon as Miss Anthony got home at the end of November, she started getting ready for another winter campaign to support the petitions and for a series of lectures to be held in Rochester by prominent figures of the time. Lucy Stone wrote to her during this time: "Your letter full of plans has reached me here. I wish I lived close enough to catch some of your energy. For the first time in my life, I feel completely discouraged day after day. When my Harry sent me your letter, he said, 'Susan wants you to write a tract, and I say, Amen.' When I get home, I'll see if I still believe I have any ability to do it... Susan, please don’t lecture this winter or I will be forever upset with you. I am going to step back from everything; and if you start working too soon and end up exhausting yourself, then both of us will be gone and the whole effort will come to a halt."
Arguments were of no avail, however, when the field was waiting and the workers few, and while Miss Anthony was ever ready to excuse others, she never spared herself. She decided before starting to take out a policy in the New York Life Insurance Company. The medical certificate given on December 18, 1855, by Dr. Edward M. Moore, the leading surgeon of western New York, read as follows: "Height, 5 ft. 5 in.; figure, full; chest measure 38 in.; weight, 156 lbs.; complexion, fair; habits, healthy and active; nervous affections, none; character of respiration, clear, resonant, murmur perfect; heart, normal in rhythm and valvular sound; pulse 66 per minute; disease, none. The life is a very good one." And so it has proved to be, as she has paid her premiums for over forty years.[21]
Arguments were useless, though, when the field was waiting and there were few workers. While Miss Anthony was always quick to excuse others, she never made excuses for herself. Before starting, she decided to take out a policy with the New York Life Insurance Company. The medical certificate issued on December 18, 1855, by Dr. Edward M. Moore, the top surgeon in western New York, stated: "Height, 5 ft. 5 in.; body type, full; chest measurement 38 in.; weight, 156 lbs.; complexion, fair; habits, healthy and active; nervous issues, none; breathing quality, clear, resonant, murmur perfect; heart, normal rhythm and valve sound; pulse 66 per minute; disease, none. The life is a very good one." And it has turned out to be just that, as she has paid her premiums for over forty years.[21]
Just before she was ready to start on her long lecture tour in the interest of educational, civil and political rights for women, she received a letter, which was an entire surprise and added a new feature to the work to which she was devoting her time and energy.
Just before she was set to begin her long lecture tour advocating for educational, civil, and political rights for women, she received a letter that completely surprised her and introduced a new aspect to the work she was dedicating her time and energy to.
[21] The president of the company, John A. McCall, in a personal letter, written December 21, 1897, just forty-two years afterwards, says: "That you may be spared for many, many years to your numerous friends and admirers is the wish of this company and its officials."
[21] The president of the company, John A. McCall, in a personal letter dated December 21, 1897, just forty-two years later, says: "We hope you are around for many, many more years for all your friends and admirers."
CHAPTER IX.
ADVANCE ALONG ALL LINES.
1856.
The letter which Miss Anthony received with so much pleased surprise was from Samuel May, Jr., cousin of Rev. S.J. May. He was secretary of the American Anti-Slavery Society, which had its headquarters in Boston; Wm. Lloyd Garrison was its president, and among its officers were Wendell Phillips, Francis Jackson, Charles Hovey, Stephen and Abby Kelly Foster, Parker Pillsbury, Maria Weston Chapman, the most distinguished Abolitionists of the day. This letter read:
The letter that Miss Anthony received with great surprise was from Samuel May, Jr., cousin of Rev. S.J. May. He was the secretary of the American Anti-Slavery Society, which was based in Boston; Wm. Lloyd Garrison was its president, and among its officers were Wendell Phillips, Francis Jackson, Charles Hovey, Stephen and Abby Kelly Foster, Parker Pillsbury, Maria Weston Chapman, the most notable Abolitionists of the time. This letter said:
The executive committee of the American Anti-Slavery Society desire to engage you as an agent, for such time between now and the first of May next as you may be able to give. Will you let us know what your engagements are, and, if you can enter into this agency, when you will be ready to commence? The committee passed no vote as to compensation. We would like to be informed what would be acceptable. It is quite probable that your field of service at first would be western and central New York. An early answer will much oblige.
The executive committee of the American Anti-Slavery Society would like to invite you to join us as an agent for as long as you’re available between now and the beginning of May. Please let us know about your current commitments and, if you can take on this role, when you would be able to start. The committee hasn’t determined any compensation yet, so we’d like to understand what would be acceptable for you. Your primary area of work will probably be western and central New York. A quick response would be greatly appreciated.
A previous chapter has told how Miss Anthony longed to take part in anti-slavery work, and behold here was the coveted opportunity! And then to have such a recognition of her ability by this body of men and women, who represented the brains and conscience of this period of reforms, was the highest compliment she could receive. The salary, even though small, would relieve her from the pressing anxiety of making each day's work pay its own expenses, and while she should be laboring in a reform in which she was greatly interested, she could at the same time even more effectually advance the cause which lay nearest to her heart. But the woman's 138 rights meetings already announced by posters, what should be done in regard to them? She finally decided to hold them during January with Frances D. Gage, initiate her and then leave her to fill the remainder of the winter's engagements. So she accepted Mr. May's offer and at his request planned a route and arranged meetings for a number of speakers. Stephen S. Foster wrote, "I shall give myself entirely into your power, only stipulating for the liberty of speech."
A previous chapter talked about how Miss Anthony wanted to get involved in anti-slavery work, and now she had the opportunity she had been hoping for! Having her abilities recognized by this group of men and women, who represented the intelligence and conscience of this era of reforms, was the greatest compliment she could ask for. The salary, though modest, would take away her constant worry about covering daily expenses, and while she worked on a cause she was passionate about, she could also more effectively support the issue that meant the most to her. But what about the upcoming women’s rights meetings already announced on posters? She ultimately decided to hold them in January with Frances D. Gage, introduce her, and then let her handle the rest of the winter's events. So she accepted Mr. May's offer and at his request planned a route and organized meetings for several speakers. Stephen S. Foster wrote, "I will completely place myself in your hands, just asking for the freedom to speak."

Stephen S. Foster
Stephen S. Foster
Miss Anthony started with Mrs. Gage January 4, 1856. As many of their meetings were off the railroad, there was a hard siege ahead of them. The diary says: "January 8: Terribly cold and windy; only a dozen people in the hall; had a social chat with them and returned to our hotel. Lost more here at Dansville than we gained at Mount Morris. So goes the world.... January 9: Mercury 12° below zero but we took a sleigh for Nunda. Trains all blocked by snow and no mail for several days, yet we had a full house and good meeting." Extracts from one or two letters written home will give some idea of this perilous journey:
Miss Anthony began her journey with Mrs. Gage on January 4, 1856. Since many of their meetings were far from the railroad, they faced a tough challenge ahead. The diary notes: "January 8: It was extremely cold and windy; there were only about twelve people in the hall; we had a casual chat with them and then returned to our hotel. We lost more here in Dansville than we gained in Mount Morris. That's how life goes.... January 9: The temperature was 12° below zero, but we took a sleigh to Nunda. All the trains were blocked by snow and there was no mail for several days, yet we had a full house and a successful meeting." Some excerpts from a couple of letters written home will give a sense of this risky journey:
HALL'S CORNERS, January 11, 8-1/2 o'clock.
HALL'S CORNERS, January 11, 8:30 PM.
Just emerged from a long line of snowdrifts and stepped at this little country tavern, supped and am now roasting over a hot stove. Oh, oh, what an experience! No trains running and we have had a thirty-six mile ride in a sleigh. Once we seemed lost in a drift full fifteen feet deep. The driver went on ahead to a house, and there we sat shivering. When he returned we found he had gone over a fence into a field, so we had to dismount and plough through the snow after the sleigh; then we reseated ourselves, but oh, the poor horses!...
I just emerged from a long stretch of snowdrifts and stepped into this cozy country tavern, had dinner, and now I'm warming up by a hot stove. What an experience! There are no trains running, and we took a thirty-six-mile ride in a sleigh. At one point, we felt completely lost in a drift that was fifteen feet deep. The driver went ahead to a house, and we sat there shivering. When he returned, we realized he had gone over a fence into a field, so we had to get off and wade through the snow after the sleigh; then we sat down again, but oh, the poor horses!...
WENDTE'S STATION, January 14, 12-1/2 o'clock P. M.
WENDTE'S STATION, January 14, 12:30 PM.
Well, well, good folks at home, these surely are the times that try women's souls. After writing you last, the snows fell and the winds blew and the cars failed to go and come at their appointed hours. We could have reached Warsaw if the omnibus had had the energy to come for us. The train, however, got no farther than Warsaw, where it stuck in a snowdrift eleven feet deep and a hundred long, but we might have kept that engagement at least. Friday 139 morning we went to the station; no trains and no hope of any, but a man said he could get us to Attica in time for an evening meeting, so we agreed to pay him $5. He had a noble pair of greys and we floundered through the deepest snowbanks I ever saw, but at 7 o'clock were still fourteen miles from Attica.
Well, well, folks back home, these are certainly times that test women’s spirits. After I last wrote to you, the snow fell and the winds blew, and the cars couldn’t arrive or leave as scheduled. We could have reached Warsaw if the bus had bothered to come for us. The train, however, didn’t make it past Warsaw, where it got stuck in a snowdrift that was eleven feet deep and a hundred feet long, but at least we might have made that appointment. On Friday 139 morning, we went to the station; there were no trains and no hope of any, but a man said he could get us to Attica in time for an evening meeting, so we agreed to pay him $5. He had an impressive pair of grey horses, and we struggled through the deepest snowbanks I’ve ever seen, but by 7 o'clock, we were still fourteen miles from Attica.
We stopped at a little tavern where the landlady was not yet twenty and had a baby fifteen months old. Her supper dishes were not washed and her baby was crying, but she was equal to the occasion. She rocked the little thing to sleep, washed the dishes and got our supper; beautiful white bread, butter, cheese, pickles, apple and mince pie, and excellent peach preserves. She gave us her warm bedroom to sleep in, and on a row of pegs hung the loveliest embroidered petticoats and baby clothes, all the work of that young woman's fingers, while on a rack was her ironing perfectly done, wrought undersleeves, baby dresses, embroidered underwear, etc. She prepared a 6 o'clock breakfast for us, fried pork, mashed potatoes, mince pie, and for me, at my especial request, a plate of delicious baked sweet apples and a pitcher of rich milk. Now for the moral of this story: When we came to pay our bill, the dolt of a husband took the money and put it in his pocket. He had not lifted a hand to lighten that woman's burdens, but had sat and talked with the men in the bar room, not even caring for the baby, yet the law gives him the right to every dollar she earns, and when she needs two cents to buy a darning needle she has to ask him and explain what she wants it for.
We stopped at a small tavern where the landlady was barely twenty and had a baby who was fifteen months old. Her dinner dishes were still unwashed, and her baby was crying, but she handled it all gracefully. She rocked the little one to sleep, washed the dishes, and made our dinner—fresh white bread, butter, cheese, pickles, apple and mince pie, and some amazing peach preserves. She even offered us her warm bedroom to sleep in, and on a row of pegs, there were beautiful embroidered petticoats and baby clothes, all made by her, while neatly pressed items like undersleeves and baby dresses were on a rack. For breakfast at 6 o'clock, she made us fried pork, mashed potatoes, mince pie, and for me, at my special request, a plate of delicious baked sweet apples and a pitcher of rich milk. Now, for the moral of this story: When we went to settle the bill, the clueless husband took the money and stuffed it in his pocket. He hadn’t lifted a finger to help her with her work but had just sat around chatting with the men in the bar, completely ignoring the baby. Yet, the law gives him the right to every penny she earns, and when she needs two cents to buy a darning needle, she has to ask him and justify what she wants it for.
Here where I am writing is a similar case. The baby is very sick with the whooping cough; the wife has dinner to get for all the boarders, and no help; husband standing around with his hands in his pockets. She begs him to hold the baby for just ten minutes, but before the time is up he hands it back to her, saying, "Here, take this child, I'm tired." Yet when we left he was on hand to receive the money and we had to give it to him. We paid a man a dollar to take us to the station, and saw the train pull out while we were stuck in a snowdrift ten feet deep, with a dozen men trying to shovel a path for us; so we had to come back. In spite of this terrible weather, people drive eight and ten miles to our meetings.
Here where I’m writing, it’s a similar situation. The baby is really sick with whooping cough; the wife has to prepare dinner for all the boarders, and she has no help; her husband is just standing around with his hands in his pockets. She begs him to hold the baby for just ten minutes, but before the time is up, he hands it back to her, saying, "Here, take this child, I'm tired." Yet when we left, he was there to collect the money, and we had to give it to him. We paid a guy a dollar to take us to the station and saw the train leave while we were stuck in a snowdrift ten feet deep, with a dozen men trying to clear a path for us; so we had to come back. Despite this awful weather, people drive eight to ten miles to our meetings.
On January 20, Mrs. Gage was called home by illness in her family, leaving Miss Anthony to finish the campaign alone. This destroyed all plans for her work with the anti-slavery committee, as no inducement could have been offered which would cause her to abandon these woman's rights meetings after having advertised them. She requested Mr. May to release her and he did so, stipulating however that she should inform him as soon as she was at liberty. She begged various speakers to assist her but received no favorable replies. Lucy Stone wrote, "I wish you had a good husband; it is a great blessing." Her intense desire for help may be judged by a letter to Martha 140 C. Wright in regard to a meeting which had been announced for Auburn: "Mrs. Gage has gone; now, dear Mrs. Wright, won't you give an address? Be brave and make this beginning. You can speak so much better, so much more wisely, so much more everything than I can; do rejoice my heart by consenting. I wish I could see you tonight; I'm sure I could prevail upon you. Yours beseechingly." She got no aid from any quarter, and went on alone through the dreary winter. To those who were to advertise her meetings she said: "I should like a particular effort made to call out the teachers, seamstresses and wage-earning women generally. It is for them rather than for the wives and daughters of the rich that I labor."
On January 20, Mrs. Gage was called home due to a family illness, leaving Miss Anthony to finish the campaign on her own. This ruined all plans for her work with the anti-slavery committee, as nothing could convince her to abandon these women's rights meetings after having promoted them. She asked Mr. May to release her, and he did, but he requested that she inform him as soon as she was free. She reached out to various speakers for help but received no positive responses. Lucy Stone wrote, "I wish you had a good husband; it is a great blessing." Her strong desire for assistance can be seen in a letter to Martha 140 C. Wright regarding a meeting that had been scheduled for Auburn: "Mrs. Gage has gone; now, dear Mrs. Wright, could you please give an address? Be brave and make this start. You can speak so much better, so much more wisely, so much more of everything than I can; do make me happy by agreeing. I wish I could see you tonight; I'm sure I could persuade you. Yours pleadingly." She received no support from anywhere and continued alone through the bleak winter. To those who would promote her meetings, she said: "I would like a special effort to encourage teachers, seamstresses, and wage-earning women in general to attend. I work for them rather than for the wives and daughters of the wealthy."
In February she returned to Rochester to look after Mr. Garrison's lecture and entertained him at her home. As it had been decided not to hold a convention at Albany she took this opportunity to go there and present the petitions to the Legislature. They were referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee, Samuel G. Foote, chairman. Mr. Foote was a lawyer, prominent in society, the father of daughters, and yet reported as follows on the petition asking that a woman might control her wages and have the custody of her children:
In February, she went back to Rochester to oversee Mr. Garrison's lecture and hosted him at her home. Since it was decided not to hold a convention in Albany, she took this chance to go there and present the petitions to the Legislature. They were sent to the Senate Judiciary Committee, led by Samuel G. Foote. Mr. Foote was a well-known lawyer and prominent in society, a father of daughters, yet he reported as follows on the petition asking for a woman to have control over her wages and custody of her children:
The committee is composed of married and single gentlemen. The bachelors, with becoming diffidence, have left the subject pretty much to the married gentlemen. They have considered it with the aid of the light they have before them and the experience married life has given them. Thus aided, they are enabled to state that the ladies always have the best place and choicest titbit at the table. They have the best seat in the cars, carriages and sleighs; the warmest place in winter and the coolest in summer. They have their choice on which side of the bed they will lie, front or back. A lady's dress costs three times as much as that of a gentleman; and at the present time, with the prevailing fashion, one lady occupies three times as much space in the world as a gentleman. It has thus appeared to the married gentlemen of your committee, being a majority (the bachelors being silent for the reason mentioned, and also probably for the further reason that they are still suitors for the favors of the gentler sex) that if there is any inequality or oppression in the case, the gentlemen are the sufferers. They, however, have presented no petitions for redress, having doubtless made up their minds to yield to an inevitable destiny.
The committee includes both married and single men. The bachelors, feeling appropriately modest, have allowed the married men to take the lead on this issue. They’ve discussed it with the wisdom they’ve gained from their married experiences. With this support, they can confidently say that women always get the best spot and the tastiest food at the table. They have the best seats in cars, carriages, and sleighs; the warmest places in winter and the coolest in summer. They get to choose which side of the bed they want to sleep on, whether front or back. A woman’s dress costs three times as much as a man’s, and with current fashion trends, one woman takes up three times as much space as a man. Therefore, it has been the consensus of the married members of your committee, which holds the majority (the bachelors have stayed quiet for the aforementioned reasons and likely also because they are still pursuing women’s affections), that if there is any inequality or injustice here, the men are the ones who suffer. However, they haven't submitted any requests for change, likely having accepted their fate.
On the whole, the committee have concluded to recommend no measure, 141 except that they have observed several instances in which husband and wife have both signed the same petition. In such case, they would recommend the parties to apply for a law authorizing them to change dresses, so that the husband may wear petticoats, and the wife breeches, and thus indicate to their neighbors and the public the true relation in which they stand to each other.
Overall, the committee decided not to recommend any action, 141 except they noted several instances where both husband and wife signed the same petition. In such cases, they would suggest the couple seek a law allowing them to swap clothing, so the husband can wear skirts and the wife can wear pants, demonstrating their true relationship to their neighbors and the public.
The Albany Register said "this report was received with roars of laughter." Judge Hay, Lydia Mott and a number of Miss Anthony's friends wrote her not to be discouraged at this insult, but it may be imagined that she took up the work again with a heart filled with resentment and indignation. She had many peculiar experiences during her travels and had to listen to many a chapter of family history which was far from harmonious. On one occasion a friend was pouring into her ears an account of the utter uncongeniality between herself and husband, largely because he was wholly unappreciative of her higher thoughts and feelings. As an example she related that when they visited Niagara Falls and her soul was soaring into the seventh heaven of glory, majesty and sublimity, he exclaimed, "What a magnificent water power this would be, if utilized;" and that he did it on purpose to shock her sensibilities. Miss Anthony finally said: "Now, my dear, the trouble is you fail to recognize that your husband is so constituted that he sees the practical while you feel only the sentimental. He does not jar your feelings any more by his matter-of-fact comments than you jar his by flying off into the realms of poetry on every slight provocation." She then recalled a number of similar instances which the wife had detailed as illustrating the husband's cruelty, impressing upon her that they were born with different temperaments and neither had any right to condemn the other. At the end of this conversation, the woman, weeping, put her arms around Miss Anthony and said: "You have taught me to understand my husband better and love and respect him more than I had learned to do in all my long years of living with him."
The Albany Register said, "this report was met with roars of laughter." Judge Hay, Lydia Mott, and several of Miss Anthony's friends encouraged her not to be discouraged by this insult, but it’s likely she returned to her work with a heart filled with resentment and indignation. She had many unique experiences during her travels and listened to various accounts of family history that were far from harmonious. One time, a friend confided in her about the complete incompatibility between herself and her husband, primarily because he completely dismissed her deeper thoughts and feelings. As an example, she shared that when they visited Niagara Falls and her spirit was lifting in the beauty, greatness, and awe of it all, he remarked, "What a tremendous water power this could be if harnessed," doing it deliberately to shock her sensitivity. Miss Anthony finally responded, "Now, my dear, the issue is you don’t recognize that your husband is simply someone who focuses on the practical while you only feel the sentimental. His straightforward comments don’t hurt your feelings any more than your emotional reactions upset him when you drift off into the world of poetry at every little thing." She then recalled several similar instances that the wife had described as illustrating the husband's harshness, emphasizing that they were born with different temperaments and neither had the right to judge the other. By the end of their conversation, the woman, in tears, wrapped her arms around Miss Anthony and said, "You have helped me understand my husband better and love and respect him more than I ever did in all my years of living with him."
In March Garrison wrote, thanking her and her family for their generous hospitality, concluding, "Nowhere do I visit with more real satisfaction." He told her that he had had to 142 give up his lecture engagements on account of the heavy snows, but she had gone straight through with hers. She now closed her series of meetings and went home to arrange for Theodore Parker's lecture. Antoinette Brown Blackwell wrote her: "I hear a certain bachelor making a number of inquiries about Susan B. Anthony. This means that we shall look for another wedding in our sisternity before the year ends. Get a good husband, that's all, dear."
In March, Garrison wrote, thanking her and her family for their generous hospitality, wrapping up with, "Nowhere do I visit with more real satisfaction." He mentioned that he had to 142 cancel his lecture engagements due to the heavy snow, but she had carried on with hers just fine. She finished her series of meetings and went home to prepare for Theodore Parker's lecture. Antoinette Brown Blackwell wrote to her: "I hear a certain bachelor asking a lot of questions about Susan B. Anthony. This means we're likely to see another wedding in our sisterhood before the year is over. Just find a good husband, that’s all, dear."
On Miss Anthony's return from the May anti-slavery meeting in New York, she received a reminder from the president of the State Teachers' Association that she would be expected to read her paper on "Co-Education" before that body in August. This recollection had been keeping her awake nights for some time. It had been an easy thing to present a resolution or make a five-minute speech, but it was quite another to write an hour's lecture to be delivered before a most critical audience. As was always her custom in such a dilemma, she turned to Mrs. Stanton, who responded:
On Miss Anthony's return from the May anti-slavery meeting in New York, she got a reminder from the president of the State Teachers' Association that she would need to present her paper on "Co-Education" to that group in August. This reminder had been keeping her awake at night for quite a while. It was easy to propose a resolution or give a quick five-minute speech, but it was a whole different challenge to write an hour-long lecture for a very critical audience. As was her usual practice in situations like this, she turned to Mrs. Stanton, who replied:
Your servant is not dead but liveth. Imagine me, day in and day out, watching, bathing, dressing, nursing and promenading the precious contents of a little crib in the corner of my room. I pace up and down these two chambers of mine like a caged lioness, longing to bring nursing and housekeeping cares to a close. Come here and I will do what I can to help you with your address, if you will hold the baby and make the puddings. Let Antoinette and Lucy rest in peace and quietness thinking great thoughts. It is not well to be in the excitement of public life all the time, so do not keep stirring them up or mourning over their repose. You, too, must rest, Susan; let the world alone awhile. We can not bring about a moral revolution in a day or a year. Now that I have two daughters, I feel fresh strength to work for women. It is not in vain that in myself I feel all the wearisome care to which woman even in her best estate is subject.
Your servant is not dead but alive. Picture me, day in and day out, watching, bathing, dressing, nursing, and taking walks with the precious little one in the corner of my room. I pace back and forth in these two rooms like a caged lioness, eager to finish my nursing and housekeeping duties. Come here, and I'll do what I can to help you with your address if you’ll hold the baby and make the puddings. Let Antoinette and Lucy rest in peace and quiet, lost in their thoughts. It’s not healthy to be caught up in the excitement of public life all the time, so don’t disturb them or feel sad about their serenity. You need to rest too, Susan; take a break from the world for a while. We can't achieve a moral revolution in a day or even a year. Now that I have two daughters, I feel renewed strength to fight for women. It’s not pointless that I feel all the heavy burdens women carry, even when they’re at their best.
Together they ground out the address, taking turns at writing and baby tending, and then she went home. It seemed to her that in order to prove the absolute equality of woman with man she ought to present this as an oration instead of reading it as an essay; so she labored many weary hours to commit it to memory, pacing from one end of the house to the other, and when these confines became too small rushing out into the orchard, but all in vain. It was utterly impossible 143 for her, then or ever, to memorize the exact words of anything.
Together they exchanged the address, taking turns writing and looking after the baby, and then she went home. It occurred to her that to prove the total equality of women with men, she should present this as a speech instead of reading it as an essay; so she spent many exhausting hours trying to memorize it, pacing from one end of the house to the other, and when the space felt too small, she rushed out into the orchard, but all in vain. It was completely impossible 143 for her, now or ever, to memorize the exact words of anything.
The lecture, occupying an entire evening, was given before a large audience in Rand's Hall, Troy, and cordially received. At its close Mr. L. Hazeltine of New York, president of the association, took Miss Anthony by the hand, saying: "Madam, that was a splendid production and well delivered. I could not have asked for a single thing different either in matter or manner; but I would rather have followed my wife or daughter to Greenwood cemetery than to have had her stand here before this promiscuous audience and deliver that address." Superintendent Randall, of the city schools of New York, over-hearing the conversation, said: "Father Hazeltine, I fully agree with the first part of your remark but dissent entirely from the latter. I should be proud if I had a wife or daughter capable of either writing or reading that paper as Miss Anthony has done." She was invited by the Massachusetts teachers who were present to come to their State convention at Springfield and give the address, which she did. It was afterwards delivered at a number of teachers' institutes. Mary L. Booth had written her:
The lecture, taking up the whole evening, was held in front of a large audience at Rand's Hall in Troy and was warmly received. At the end, Mr. L. Hazeltine from New York, president of the association, shook Miss Anthony's hand and said, "Madam, that was a fantastic presentation and well executed. I couldn't have asked for anything different, either in content or delivery; however, I would prefer to have followed my wife or daughter to Greenwood Cemetery than to have her stand here in front of this mixed audience and give that speech." Superintendent Randall of the New York City schools, overhearing this conversation, added, "Father Hazeltine, I completely agree with the first part of your statement, but I completely disagree with the latter. I would be proud if I had a wife or daughter capable of either writing or delivering that paper as Miss Anthony has done." She was invited by the Massachusetts teachers present to come to their state convention in Springfield and give the address, which she did. It was later presented at several teachers' institutes. Mary L. Booth had written to her:
I am glad that you will represent us at the Troy gathering. You will bear with you the gratitude of very many teachers whose hearts are swelling with repressed indignation at the injustice which you expose, but who have not grown strong enough yet to give open utterance to words which would jeopardize the positions on which they depend for support. There is not a female principal in Brooklyn or New York whose salary exceeds the half of that of the male principals. Each female principal and assistant is required to attend the normal school under penalty of loss of position, while male teachers are excused from such attendance. There are plenty of indignation meetings among us.
I’m really happy you’ll be representing us at the Troy gathering. You’ll take with you the gratitude of many teachers who feel a lot of repressed anger about the injustice you’re bringing to light, but who haven’t found the courage to express their concerns openly without jeopardizing their jobs. There’s not a single female principal in Brooklyn or New York whose salary is more than half of what male principals make. Every female principal and assistant has to attend regular school or risk losing their job, while male teachers don’t have to go. There are a lot of outrage meetings happening among us.
In August Miss Anthony planned a meeting at Saratoga and, as on a previous occasion, every speaker failed her, nor could she find among the visitors one who could help her out. As she was not in the habit of giving up what she undertook, she went through the meeting alone, making the speeches herself. Her 144 faithful friend Judge Hay[22] came to her rescue with a donation of $20 and she was just able to pay expenses.
In August, Miss Anthony organized a meeting in Saratoga, but just like before, every speaker backed out, and she couldn't find anyone among the attendees to help. Since she wasn't one to give up on her commitments, she went through the meeting solo and delivered all the speeches herself. Her 144 loyal friend, Judge Hay[22], came to her aid with a $20 donation, allowing her to cover the expenses.
The public was not in a mood for woman's conventions. The presidential campaign was at its height, with three tickets in the field, and the troubles in Kansas were approaching a crisis. In September came the news of the raid at Osawatomie and that thirty out of the fifty settlers had been killed by the "border ruffians." This brought especial gloom to the Anthony homestead, as the dispatches also stated that the night before the encounter, John Brown had slept in the cabin of the young son Merritt, and for weeks they were unable to learn whether he were among the thirty who died or the twenty who lived. At last the welcome letters came which related how the coffee was just ready to be put on the table in the cabin when the sound of firing was heard, and how without waiting to drink it, John Brown and his little band rushed to the conflict. The old hero gave strict orders to Merritt not to leave the house, as he had been very ill, but as soon as they were out of sight he seized his gun, staggered down to the bank of the Marais du Cygne and was soon in the thick of the fight. When it was over he crawled on his hands and knees back to his cabin, where he lay ill for weeks, entirely alone and uncared for. A letter from Miss Anthony to this brother shows the tender, domestic side of her nature, which the public is seldom permitted to see:
The public wasn't really interested in women's conventions. The presidential campaign was in full swing, with three candidates in the race, and situation in Kansas was reaching a breaking point. In September, news broke about the raid at Osawatomie, where thirty out of fifty settlers were killed by the "border ruffians." This brought a particular sadness to the Anthony homestead, especially since the reports also mentioned that the night before the attack, John Brown had stayed in the cabin of young Merritt, and for weeks they couldn't find out if he was among the thirty who died or the twenty who survived. Finally, they received the good news about how the coffee was just about ready to be served in the cabin when the gunfire started, and without even finishing their drinks, John Brown and his small group rushed into battle. The old hero had specifically instructed Merritt to stay in the house since he had been very sick, but as soon as they were out of sight, he grabbed his gun, stumbled down to the banks of the Marais du Cygne, and quickly joined the fight. When it was over, he crawled back to his cabin on his hands and knees, where he remained ill for weeks, completely alone and without care. A letter from Miss Anthony to this brother shows the gentle, domestic side of her character that the public rarely gets to see:

SUSAN B. ANTHONY.
Susan B. Anthony.
How much rather would I have you at my side tonight than to think of your daring and enduring greater hardships even than our Revolutionary heroes. Words can not tell how often we think of you or how sadly we feel that the terrible crime of this nation against humanity is being avenged on the 145 heads of our sons and brothers.... Wednesday night, Mr. Mowry, who was in the battle, arrived in town. Like wild fire the news flew. D.R. was in pursuit of him when father reached his office. He thought you were not hurt. Mother said that night, "I can go to sleep now there is a hope that Merritt still lives;" but father said: "I suppose I shall sleep when nature is tired out, but the hope that my son has survived brings little solace to my soul while the cause of all this terrible wrong remains untouched."...
I would much rather have you with me tonight than think about your bravery and the difficulties you're facing, which are even greater than what our Revolutionary heroes endured. There are no words to describe how often we think about you or how sad we are that this nation's horrible crime against humanity is being avenged on the 145 heads of our sons and brothers... On Wednesday night, Mr. Mowry, who was in the battle, came to town. The news spread quickly. D.R. was pursuing him when Dad got to his office. He thought you were unhurt. Mom said that night, "I can sleep now that there's hope Merritt is still alive," but Dad replied, "I guess I’ll sleep only when I'm completely worn out, but the hope that my son has survived doesn’t give me much comfort as long as the reason for all this terrible wrong remains unresolved."...
Your fish pole never caught so luscious a basketful as it has this afternoon. I made a march through the peach orchard with pole in hand to fish down the soft Early Crawfords that had escaped even the keen eyes of father and mother when they made their last detour. As the pole reached to the top-most bough and down dropped the big, fat, golden, red-cheeked Crawfords, thought went away to the owner of the rod, how he in days gone by planted these little trees, pruned them and nursed them and now we were enjoying the fruits of his labor, while he, the dear boy, was away in the prairie wilds of Kansas. I thought of many things as I walked between the rows to spy out every ambushed, not enemy but friend of the palate. With the haul made I filled the china fruit dish and then hallooed for Mary L. and Ann Eliza to see what I had found, and down they came for a feast. I shall send Aaron and Guelma the nicest ones and how I wish my dearest brother could have some to cool his fevered throat.
Your fishing pole has never caught such an abundant basket as it did this afternoon. I walked through the peach orchard holding the pole, reaching for the soft Early Crawfords that my parents missed on their last visit. As the pole stretched to the highest branch and the big, plump, golden, red-cheeked Crawfords fell, I thought about the owner of the rod—how he planted these little trees, pruned them, and cared for them. Now we were enjoying the fruits of his labor while he, the dear boy, was away in the wilds of Kansas. I reflected on many things as I walked between the rows, looking for every hidden treat, not an enemy but something good to taste. With my catch, I filled the china fruit dish and then called for Mary L. and Ann Eliza to see what I had found, and they came running for a feast. I’ll send the best ones to Aaron and Guelma, and I really wish my dear brother could have some to ease his sore throat.
Evening.—Father brings the Democrat giving a list of killed, wounded and missing, and the name of our Merritt is not therein, but oh! the slain are sons, brothers and husbands of others as dearly loved and sadly mourned.
Evening.—Dad brings the newspaper with a list of the killed, wounded, and missing, and Merritt's name isn’t on it, but oh! the dead are sons, brothers, and husbands of others who are just as loved and deeply mourned.
Later.—Your letter is in to-day's Democrat, and the Evening Advertiser says there is "another letter from our dear brother in this morning's Shrieker for Freedom." The tirade is headed "Bleeding Kansas." The Advertiser, Union and American all ridicule the reports from Kansas, and even say your letters are gotten up in the Democrat office for political effect. I tell you, Merritt, we have "border ruffians" here at home—a little more refined in their way of outraging and torturing the lovers of freedom, but no less fiendish.
Later.—Your letter is in today’s Democrat, and the Evening Advertiser mentions there’s "another letter from our dear brother in this morning's Shrieker for Freedom." The piece is titled "Bleeding Kansas." The Advertiser, Union, and American all mock the reports from Kansas, even claiming your letters are made up in the Democrat office for political purposes. I’m telling you, Merritt, we have "border ruffians" here at home—just a bit more sophisticated in their methods of abusing and tormenting those who love freedom, but just as cruel.
Miss Anthony was busy through September and October securing speakers for the national convention. She still believed that her chief strength lay in her executive ability. Having written Lucy Stone that she could not and would not speak, the latter answered: "Why do you say the people won't listen to you, when you know you never made a speech that was not attentively heard? All you need is to cultivate your power of expression. Subjects are so clear to you that you can soon make them as clear to others." In response to an invitation to the Hutchinson family to sing at the convention, Asa wrote: "The time is coming, I hope, 146 when we can do something for the glorious cause which you are so nobly advocating." John added: "It would rejoice my heart to be at the convention and help along, with the one talent God has given me, the greatest reform ever attempted by lovers of the human race." Miss Anthony asked Mary L. Booth, at that time just beginning to attract attention by her fine translations, to speak at the coming convention and received this touching response:
Miss Anthony was busy throughout September and October organizing speakers for the national convention. She still believed that her main strength was her ability to lead. After telling Lucy Stone that she couldn't and wouldn't speak, Lucy replied: "Why do you think people won't listen to you when you know that you've never given a speech that wasn't listened to attentively? All you need to do is work on your ability to express yourself. The topics are clear to you, so you can quickly make them clear to others." In response to an invitation for the Hutchinson family to perform at the convention, Asa wrote: "I hope the time is coming, 146 when we can do something for the wonderful cause that you are so nobly advocating." John added: "It would make me so happy to be at the convention and contribute with the one talent God has given me to the greatest reform ever attempted by those who care about humanity." Miss Anthony asked Mary L. Booth, who was just starting to gain recognition for her excellent translations, to speak at the upcoming convention and received this heartfelt response:
The hope of yet aiding the cause is the polar star which guides all my efforts. If it were possible I would do this directly, but the fashion of the times has made me a dependant and home aid would scarcely be extended to me in this. I am trying to make myself independent. Fortune now promises favorable things. If I succeed, count on me. All that I can do, I will, to rescue my sex from the fetters which have chafed me so bitterly, from the evils of the giant system which makes woman everywhere a satellite. I have drank of the cup which is offered as the wine of woman's life, and have found the draught frothy and unsatisfactory. Now am I willing, if successful, to give all to purchase her a purer aliment. I have faith enough in the cause to move mountains, but if I speak at present I forfeit all claims on my home forever.
The hope of making a difference is what drives all my efforts. If I could, I would take action directly, but my current situation makes me reliant on others, and I doubt I'll get any support at home for this. I'm working towards becoming independent. It seems like fortune is smiling on me now. If I achieve my goals, you can count on me. I will do everything I can to release my gender from the limitations that have caused me so much pain, from the problems of the massive system that makes women everywhere behave like satellites. I've experienced the limited options offered as a woman's life and found them to be unfulfilling. Now, if I succeed, I’m ready to give everything to offer her better opportunities. I have enough faith in this cause to move mountains, but if I speak out now, I’ll lose all my ties to home forever.
Lucy Stone when appealed to with the intimation that she was losing interest in the work, replied: "Now that I occupy a legal position in which I can not even draw in my own name the money I have earned or give a valid receipt for it when it is drawn or make any contract, but am rated with fools, minors and madmen, and can not sign a legal document without being examined separately to see if it is by my own free will, and even the right to my own name questioned, do you think that, in the grip of such pincers, I am likely to grow remiss?... I am not at all sanguine of the success of the convention. However much I hope, or try to hope, the old doubt comes back. My only trust is in your great, indomitable perseverance and your power of work."
Lucy Stone, when confronted with the suggestion that she was losing interest in the work, replied: "Now that I hold a legal position where I can't even withdraw the money I've earned in my own name, give a proper receipt when it is withdrawn, or make any contracts, and I'm regarded as equal to fools, minors, and insane people, plus I can’t sign a legal document without being separately examined to ensure it's truly my decision, and even my right to my own name is questioned, do you really think that, under such pressure, I'm going to slack off? ... I'm not very optimistic about the success of the convention. No matter how much I hope or try to hope, the old doubts keep creeping back. My only confidence lies in your unwavering determination and your incredible work ethic."
That the answers were not always favorable and that the women constantly found themselves between two fires, the following letters will show. Horace Greeley, who heretofore had been so friendly, wrote:
That the answers weren't always positive and that the women often found themselves caught in a difficult situation, the following letters will show. Horace Greeley, who had previously been so supportive, wrote:
The only reason why I can not publish your notices in our news columns is that my political antagonists take advantage of such publications to make the 147 Tribune responsible for the anti-Bible, anti-Union, etc., doctrines, which your conventions generally put forth. I do not desire to interfere with your "free speech." I desire only to secure for myself the liberty of treating public questions in accordance with my own convictions, and not being made responsible for the adverse convictions of others. I can not, therefore, print this programme without being held responsible for it. If you advertise it, that is not in my department, nor under my control.[23]
The only reason I can't publish your announcements in our news sections is that my political rivals use those articles to blame the 147 Tribune for the anti-Bible, anti-Union, and other beliefs that your conventions typically support. I don't want to limit your "free speech." I just want to make sure I can discuss public issues based on my own beliefs without being held responsible for the opposing views of others. So, I can't print this program without being accountable for it. If you decide to advertise it, that's outside my control.[23]
From Gerrit Smith came these emphatic opinions:
From Gerrit Smith came these strong opinions:
You invite me to attend the woman's convention in New York. It will not be in my power to do so. You suggest that I write a letter in case I can not attend, but so peculiar and offensive are my views of the remedy for woman's wrongs, that a letter inculcating them would not be well received. Hence, I must not write it. I believe that poverty is the great curse of woman, and that she is powerless to assert her rights, because she is poor. Woman must go to work to get rid of her poverty, but that she can not do in her present disabling dress, and she seems determined not to cast it aside. She is unwilling to sacrifice grace and fashion, even to gain her rights; albeit, too, that this grace is an absurd conventionalism and that this fashion is infinite folly. Were woman to adopt a rational dress, a dress that would not hinder her from any employment, how quickly would she rise from her present degrading dependence on man! How quickly would the marriage contract be modified and made to recognize the equal rights of the parties to it! And how quickly would she gain access to the ballot-box.
You invited me to the women’s convention in New York, but I can’t attend. You suggested that I write a letter if I can’t make it, but my opinions on addressing women’s issues are so unconventional and controversial that a letter wouldn’t be welcomed. So, I won’t be sending one. I think poverty is a significant issue for women, and they can’t claim their rights because they’re poor. Women need to work to overcome their poverty, but they can’t do that in their current restrictive clothing, and it seems they’re determined to keep it. They’re not willing to sacrifice style and elegance, even for their rights, even though that style is completely arbitrary and the fashion is entirely silly. If women switched to more practical outfits—ones that wouldn’t limit them in any job—they would quickly rise above their current dependence on men! The marriage contract would promptly change to recognize the equal rights of everyone involved! And they would quickly gain access to the voting booth.
Thus one man refused to assist the cause because its advocates were too radical, and another because they were not radical enough; or, in other words, each wanted the women to be and to do according to his own ideas.
Thus one man refused to help the cause because its supporters were too extreme, and another because they weren't extreme enough; in other words, each wanted the women to act and be in line with his own beliefs.
The Seventh National Woman's Rights Convention met in the Broadway Tabernacle, New York, November 25 and 26. Lucy Stone presided and Wendell Phillips was one of the prominent speakers. The election was over, the mob spirit temporarily quieted, and the convention was not disturbed except when certain of the men attempted to make long speeches or introduce politics. The audience had come to hear women 148 plead their own cause and insisted that this should be the program.
The Seventh National Woman's Rights Convention took place at the Broadway Tabernacle in New York on November 25 and 26. Lucy Stone presided, and Wendell Phillips was one of the main speakers. The election was over, the mob mentality had calmed down for now, and the convention went uninterrupted except when some of the men tried to give long speeches or bring up politics. The audience was there to hear women 148 advocate for their own rights and insisted that this should be the focus of the event.
In this fall of 1856 Miss Anthony renewed her engagement with the anti-slavery committee, writing Mr. May: "I shall be very glad if I am able to render even the most humble service to this cause. Heaven knows there is need of earnest, effective radical workers. The heart sickens over the delusions of the recent campaign and turns achingly to the unconsidered whole question." The committee answered: "We put all New York into your control and want your name to all letters and your hand in all arrangements. We like your form of posters; by all means let 'No Union with Slaveholders' be conspicuous upon them." An extract from a letter received from Mr. May, the secretary, dated October 22, shows the estimate placed upon her services by the committee:
In the fall of 1856, Miss Anthony re-engaged with the anti-slavery committee, writing to Mr. May: "I will be very happy if I can provide even the smallest help to this cause. God knows there is a need for dedicated, effective radical workers. It pains the heart to see the illusions of the recent campaign and it longs for a serious look at the entire whole question." The committee responded: "We are putting all of New York in your hands and want your name on all letters and your involvement in all plans. We like your poster design; make sure 'No Union with Slaveholders' stands out on them." An excerpt from a letter received from Mr. May, the secretary, dated October 22, shows how much the committee valued her contributions:
The Anti-Slavery Society wants you in the field. I really think the efficiency and success of our operations in New York this winter will depend more on your personal attendance and direction than upon that of any other of our workers. We need your earnestness, your practical talent, your energy and perseverance to make these conventions successful. The public mind will be sore this winter, disappointment awaits vast numbers, dismay will overtake many. We want your cheerfulness, your spirit—in short, yourself.
The Anti-Slavery Society needs you actively involved. I truly believe that how effectively we perform in New York this winter depends more on your presence and leadership than on anyone else in our team. We need your commitment, hands-on skills, energy, and determination to ensure these conventions succeed. People will be feeling low this winter; many will experience disappointment and others will face distress. We want your positivity, your enthusiasm—in short, we want you.
[22] In 1854 Judge William Hay brought out a new edition of his romance, Isabel D'Avalos, the Maid of Seville, with a sequel, The Siege of Granada, dedicated as follows:
[22] In 1854, Judge William Hay released a new edition of his novel, Isabel D'Avalos, the Maid of Seville, along with a sequel, The Siege of Granada, dedicated as follows:
SUSAN B. ANTHONY
whose earnestness of purpose, honesty of intention,
unintermitted industry, indefatigable perseverance,
and extraordinary business-talent,
are surpassed only by the virtues which have illustrated her life,
devoted, like that of Dorothea Dix,
TO THE CAUSE OF HUMANITY.
In a letter to her he said: "I have placed in my will a bequest to you, the only person to whose care I would willingly entrust them, that at my death the manuscripts and plates of this work are to be your absolute property. I sincerely desire and faintly hope that you may derive some pecuniary benefit from them."
In a letter to her he said: "I have included a bequest for you in my will, the only person I would trust to take care of them. At my death, the manuscripts and plates of this work will be completely yours. I genuinely hope and somewhat expect that you might gain some financial benefit from them."
CHAPTER X.
CAMPAIGNING WITH THE GARRISONIANS.
1857—1858.
One scarcely could imagine a more unfavorable time than the winter of 1857 for a campaign under the Garrisonian banner of "No Union with Slaveholders." The anti-slavery forces were divided among themselves, but were slowly crystallizing into the Republican party. The triumph of the Democrats over Republicans, Know Nothings and Whigs at the recent presidential election had warned these diverse elements that it was only by uniting that they could hope to prevent the further extension of slavery. The "Dred Scott decision" by the Supreme Court of the United States, declaring "slaves to be not persons but property" and the Missouri Compromise to be unconstitutional and void, had roused a whirlwind of indignation throughout the Northern States. Those who were seeking to prevent the extension of slavery into the Territories were stigmatized by their opponents as traitors defying the Constitution. While this supported the claim of the Garrisonians that the Constitution did sanction slavery and protect the slaveholder, yet the majority of the anti-slavery people were not ready to accept the doctrine of "immediate and unconditional emancipation, even at the cost of a dissolution of the Union." The Republicans had polled so large a vote as to indicate that further extension of slavery could be prevented through that organization, and they were excessively hostile toward any element which threatened to antagonize or weaken it. Thus into whatever town Miss Anthony took her little 150 band, the backbone of the Garrison party, they had to encounter not only the hatred of the pro-slavery people, but also the enmity of this new and rapidly increasing Republican element, which at this time did not stand for the abolition of slavery, but simply for no further extension.
One could hardly imagine a worse time than the winter of 1857 for a campaign under the Garrisonian banner of "No Union with Slaveholders." The anti-slavery forces were divided among themselves but were gradually coming together into the Republican Party. The Democrats' victory over Republicans, Know Nothings, and Whigs in the recent presidential election had alerted these different groups that only by uniting could they hope to prevent the further spread of slavery. The "Dred Scott decision" by the Supreme Court of the United States, which stated that "slaves are not persons but property" and deemed the Missouri Compromise unconstitutional and void, had sparked a storm of outrage across the Northern States. Those trying to stop the spread of slavery into the Territories were labeled as traitors by their opponents for defying the Constitution. While this bolstered the Garrisonians' claim that the Constitution endorsed slavery and safeguarded slaveholders, most anti-slavery advocates were not ready to accept the idea of "immediate and unconditional emancipation, even if it meant breaking up the Union." The Republicans had garnered such significant support that it suggested they could block the further expansion of slavery through their organization, and they were extremely resistant to any faction that might threaten to weaken it. Thus, in whatever town Miss Anthony brought her small 150 group, the core of the Garrison party, they had to face not only the hostility of pro-slavery supporters but also the animosity of this new and rapidly growing Republican faction, which at this time did not advocate for the abolition of slavery but merely opposed its further expansion.
The first year of Mr. Buchanan's administration was marked by a severe and widespread financial stringency. A decade of unparalleled prosperity, with its resultant speculation and expansion of business, was followed by heavy losses, failures and panic. The whole year of 1857 was one continued struggle and vain effort to ward off the impending crisis. To make the situation still more trying the winter was one of great severity, so it is not surprising, accustomed though she was to hardships and disappointments, that Miss Anthony should have found this series of meetings the most disheartening experience of her life. She engaged Stephen and Abby Foster, Parker Pillsbury, Aaron M. Powell, Benjamin and Elizabeth Jones, Charles Remond and his sister Sarah, the last two educated and refined colored people; marked out routes, planned the meetings, kept three companies of speakers constantly employed, and spared herself no labor, no exposure, no annoyance. She found that envy, jealousy and other disagreeable traits were not confined to one sex, but that it required quite as much tact and judgment to deal with men as with women. She had the usual experience of a manager, speakers complaining of their routes, refusing to go where sent, falling ill at the most critical times, and continual fault-finding from the people who stayed at home and did nothing.
The first year of Mr. Buchanan's administration faced serious and widespread financial troubles. A decade of unmatched prosperity, along with rampant speculation and business expansion, led to significant losses, failures, and panic. The entire year of 1857 turned into a constant struggle and futile attempts to prevent the looming crisis. To make matters worse, the winter was particularly harsh, so it’s not surprising that, despite her familiarity with hardships and disappointments, Miss Anthony found this series of meetings to be the most discouraging experience of her life. She enlisted Stephen and Abby Foster, Parker Pillsbury, Aaron M. Powell, Benjamin and Elizabeth Jones, Charles Remond, and his sister Sarah—who were both educated and refined Black individuals; mapped out routes, organized the meetings, maintained three groups of speakers constantly busy, and spared no effort, exposure, or inconvenience. She discovered that envy, jealousy, and other unpleasant traits were not limited to one gender, and it took just as much tact and judgment to manage men as it did women. She had the typical experience of a manager: speakers complained about their routes, refused to go where they were assigned, fell ill at the most critical moments, and there was constant criticism from those who stayed home and did nothing.
She had been working for the public long enough to expect all this, but was distressed beyond measure because she could not make the meetings pay for themselves. For reasons already mentioned the audiences were small and collections still smaller. At her woman's rights lectures she had encountered indifference and ridicule; now she was met with open hostility. In every town a few friends rallied around and extended hospitality and support, but the ordeal was of that kind which leaves ineffaceable marks on the soul. For all this she 151 was paid $10 a week and expenses; not through any desire to be unjust, but because the committee were having a hard struggle to secure the necessary funds to carry on their vast work. Her last woman's rights campaign had left her in debt and she could not provide herself with a new wardrobe for this tour, but records in her diary at the beginning of winter: "A double-faced merino, which I bought at Canajoharie ten years ago, I have had colored dark green and a skirt made of it. I bought some green cloth to match for a basque, and it makes a handsome suit. With my Siberian squirrel cape I shall be very comfortable."
She had been in public service long enough to expect all this, but it upset her greatly that she couldn’t make the meetings financially viable. As previously mentioned, the audiences were small and the collections even smaller. At her women’s rights talks, she faced apathy and mockery; now, she was confronted with outright hostility. In every town, a few friends gathered around her, offering hospitality and support, but the experience was the kind that leaves lasting scars on the soul. For all this, she 151 was paid $10 a week and expenses; not due to any intention to be unfair, but because the committee was struggling to secure the funds necessary to continue their extensive work. Her last women’s rights campaign had left her in debt, so she couldn’t afford a new wardrobe for this tour, but she noted in her diary at the beginning of winter: "A double-faced merino, which I bought in Canajoharie ten years ago, I have had dyed dark green, and I made a skirt out of it. I bought some matching green cloth for a basque, and it makes a lovely suit. With my Siberian squirrel cape, I shall be very comfortable."
Lucy Stone wrote: "I know how you feel with all the burden of these conventions and it is not just that you should bear it. There is not a man in the whole anti-slavery ranks who could do it. I wish I could help you but I can not. You are one of those who are sufficient unto themselves and I thank God every day for you. Antoinette can not come because she is so busy with that baby!" From Mr. May came these comforting words: "We sympathize in all your trials and hope that fairer skies will be over your head before long. Garrison says, 'Give my love to Susan, and tell her I will do for her what I would hardly do for anybody else.' I hope from that he means to attend your Rochester and Syracuse conventions.... You must be dictator to all the agents in New York; when you say, 'Go,' they must go, or 'Come,' they must come, or 'Do this,' they must do it. I see no other way of getting along, and I am sure to your gentle and wholesome rule they will cheerfully defer. God bless you all; and if you don't get pay in money from your audiences, you will have the satisfaction of knowing you have given them the hard, solid truth as they never had it before."
Lucy Stone wrote: "I know how you feel with all the weight of these conventions, and it's not something you should have to handle alone. There's no man in the entire anti-slavery movement who could do it. I wish I could help you, but I can’t. You’re one of those people who are strong enough on your own, and I thank God every day for you. Antoinette can’t come because she’s so busy with that baby!" From Mr. May came these comforting words: "We sympathize with all your challenges and hope that brighter days will be ahead for you soon. Garrison says, 'Send my love to Susan and tell her I will do for her what I would hardly do for anyone else.' I hope that means he plans to attend your Rochester and Syracuse conventions.... You must be in charge of all the agents in New York; when you say, 'Go,' they must go, or 'Come,' they must come, or 'Do this,' they must do it. I see no other way to move forward, and I’m sure they will gladly follow your gentle and wise guidance. God bless you all; and even if you don’t get paid in money from your audiences, you’ll have the satisfaction of knowing you’ve given them the hard, solid truth like they’ve never heard before."
These meetings often took the form of debates between the speakers and the audience, and frequently lasted till midnight. Of one place Miss Anthony says in her diary, "All rich farmers, living in princely style, but no moral backbone;" at another time: "I spoke for an hour, but my heart fails me. Can it be that my stammering tongue ever will be loosed? I 152 am more and more dissatisfied with my efforts." The diary shows that they had many delightful visits among friends and many good times sandwiched between the disagreeable features of their trip, and that everywhere they roused the community to the highest pitch on the slavery question. She gives a description of one of these gatherings at Easton:
These meetings often turned into debates between the speakers and the audience, and often went on until midnight. In one entry, Miss Anthony writes in her diary, "All the wealthy farmers live like royalty, but they lack moral strength;" and at another time: "I spoke for an hour, but I feel overwhelmed. Will my stammering tongue ever be free? I 152 am growing more and more unhappy with my efforts." The diary reveals that they had many enjoyable visits among friends and plenty of good times interspersed with the unpleasant aspects of their journey, and that everywhere they stirred the community to a fever pitch about the slavery issue. She describes one of these gatherings in Easton:
That Sunday meeting was the most impressive I ever attended. Aaron and I had spoken, Charles Remond followed, picturing the contumely and opprobrium everywhere heaped upon the black man and all identified with him, the ostracism from social circles, etc. At the climax he exclaimed: "I have a fond and loving mother, as true and noble a woman as God ever made; but whenever she thinks of her absent son, it is that he is an outcast." He sank into his seat, overwhelmed with emotion, and wept like a child. In a moment, while sitting, he said: "Some may call this weak, but I should feel myself the less a man, if tears did not flow at a thought like that." The whole audience was in sympathy with him, all hearts were melted and many were sobbing. When sufficiently composed he rose and related, in a subdued and most impressive manner, his experience at the last village we visited where not one roof could be found to shelter him because he had a black face. At the close of his speech several men came up, handed us money and left the house because they could not bear any more, while others crowded around and assured him that their doors were open to him and his sister.
That Sunday meeting was the most impactful one I’ve ever been to. Aaron and I spoke first, and then Charles Remond took the floor, discussing the contempt and shame faced by Black people and anyone connected to them, along with the social exclusion they experience. At the high point of his speech, he exclaimed: "I have a loving and devoted mother, as true and noble a woman as God ever created; but whenever she thinks of her absent son, she feels that he is an outcast." He sank into his seat, overwhelmed with emotion, and cried like a child. After a moment, still seated, he said: "Some might see this as weakness, but I would feel less of a man if I didn’t shed tears about something like that." The entire audience felt for him; everyone was moved, and many were in tears. Once he regained his composure, he stood up and shared, in a soft and deeply touching manner, his experience in the last village we visited, where not a single roof could be found to shelter him because of his Black skin. At the end of his speech, several men approached us, handed us money, and left the room because they couldn’t bear to stay any longer, while others gathered around and assured him that their doors were open to him and his sister.
From the home of her dear friend Elizabeth Powell,[24] where she had gone for a few days' rest, she writes: "At Poughkeepsie, Parker Pillsbury spoke grandly for freedom. I never heard from the lips of man such deep thoughts and burning words. In the ages to come, the prophecies of these noble men and women will be read with the same wonder and veneration as those of Isaiah and Jeremiah inspire today. Now while the people worship the prophets of that time, they stone those of their own." Mr. Garrison wrote her:
From the home of her dear friend Elizabeth Powell,[24] where she had gone for a few days to relax, she writes: "At Poughkeepsie, Parker Pillsbury spoke powerfully for freedom. I’ve never heard such profound thoughts and passionate words from anyone. In the future, the messages of these noble men and women will be read with the same awe and respect as those of Isaiah and Jeremiah do today. While people honor the prophets of the past, they persecute their own." Mr. Garrison wrote to her:
I seize a moment to thank you for your letter giving an account of your anti-slavery meetings and those of the Friends of Progress. I am highly gratified to learn that the latter followed the example of the Progressive Friends at Longwood in favor of a dissolution of our blood-stained American Union. I meant to have sent to you in season some resolutions or "testimony" on the subject, but circumstances prevented. I felt perfectly satisfied however that all would go right with you and Aaron and Oliver Johnson present to enforce the true doctrine. You must have had a soul-refreshing time, even though there appear to have been present what Emerson calls 153 "The fleas of the convention."... On Wednesday, there was a great popular demonstration here to inaugurate the statue of Warren. Think of Mason, of Virginia, the author of the Fugitive Slave Bill, being one of the speakers on Bunker Hill!
I want to take a moment to thank you for your letter about your anti-slavery meetings and those of the Friends of Progress. I'm really glad to hear that the latter followed the example of the Progressive Friends at Longwood in supporting the idea of breaking away from our blood-stained American Union. I meant to send you some resolutions or "testimony" on the issue in time, but things got in the way. I felt completely confident that everything would go well with you and that Aaron and Oliver Johnson were there to uphold the true principles. You must have had a refreshing time, even though it sounds like there were some annoyances, what Emerson refers to as "the fleas of the convention."... On Wednesday, there was a big public event here to unveil the statue of Warren. Can you believe Mason from Virginia, the author of the Fugitive Slave Bill, was one of the speakers at Bunker Hill!

Wm. Lloyd Garrison
William Lloyd Garrison
On this great tour Miss Anthony became so thoroughly aroused that she could no longer confine herself to written addresses, which seemed cold and formal and utterly unresponsive to the inspiration of the moment. She threw them aside and used them thereafter only on rare occasions. Her speeches from that time were made from notes or headings and among those used during the winter of 1857 are the following:
On this great tour, Miss Anthony became so energized that she could no longer limit herself to written speeches, which felt cold, formal, and completely unresponsive to the inspiration of the moment. She set them aside and used them only on rare occasions after that. Her speeches from that point on were delivered from notes or outlines, and among those she used during the winter of 1857 are the following:
Object of meeting; to consider the fact of 4,000,000 slaves in a Christian and republican government.... Everybody is anti-slavery, ministers and brethren. There are sympathy, talk, prayers and resolutions in ecclesiastical and political assemblies. Emerson says "Good thoughts are no better than good dreams, unless they be executed;" so anti-slavery prayers, resolutions and speeches avail nothing without action.... Our mission is to deepen sympathy and convert it into right action; to show that the men and women of the North are slave-holders, those of the South slave-owners. The guilt rests on the North equally with the South, therefore our work is to rouse the sleeping consciences of the North.... No one is ignorant now. You recognize the facts which we present. We ask you to feel as if you, yourselves, were the slaves. The politician talks of slavery as he does of United States banks, tariff or any other commercial question. We demand the abolition of slavery because the slave is a human being, and because man should not hold property in his fellowman. The politician demands it because its existence produces poverty and discord in the nation and imposes taxes on free labor for its support, since the government is dominated by southern rule.... We preach revolution; the politicians reform. We say disobey every unjust law; the politician says obey them, and meanwhile labor constitutionally for repeal.
Purpose of the meeting: to reflect on the reality of 4,000,000 slaves in a Christian and democratic government. Everyone is against slavery, including ministers and community members. There’s sympathy, discussions, prayers, and resolutions in religious and political gatherings. Emerson says, "Good thoughts are useless if we don’t put them into action," so anti-slavery prayers, resolutions, and speeches are meaningless without action. Our goal is to deepen sympathy and turn it into meaningful action; to show that the people of the North are just as much responsible for slavery as those in the South. The guilt lies with the North just as much as with the South, so our mission is to awaken the dormant consciences of the North. No one is uninformed now. You recognize the facts we've presented. We urge you to empathize as if you were the slaves yourselves. Politicians talk about slavery like they do about U.S. banks, tariffs, or any other business issue. We demand the end of slavery because a slave is a human being, and no one should own another person. Politicians call for its abolition because its existence causes poverty and discord in the nation and forces taxes on free labor to support it, as the government is controlled by Southern interests. We advocate for revolution; politicians settle for reforms. We say to disobey every unjust law; the politician says to obey them while trying to work within the system to have them changed.
Accompaning these notes are many special incidents illustrating the evils of slavery. With Miss Anthony's strong, rich voice, her powerful command of language and her intensity of feeling in regard to her subject, it may be imagined that her speeches were eloquent appeals and roused to action both her friends and her enemies. Some meetings were successful 154 financially, others failures, and her report to the committee in the spring showed that she lacked $1,000 of having paid the total expenses, including salaries of speakers. A few of the committee were inclined to the opinion that meetings should not have been held in places where they would not pay, but that noble woman, Maria Weston Chapman, said: "My friends, if all you say is true, regarding this young woman's business enterprise, practical sagacity and platform ability, I think $1,000 expended in her education and development for this work is one of the best investments that possibly could have been made." At the unanimous request of the committee Miss Anthony remained in office and during the year canvassed the entire state with her speakers. Mr. May wrote: "We cheerfully pay your expenses and want to keep you at the head of the work."
Accompanying these notes are many specific incidents showing the harms of slavery. With Miss Anthony's strong, rich voice, her powerful use of language, and her intense passion for her cause, it’s easy to imagine that her speeches were powerful appeals that inspired both her supporters and her opponents to take action. Some meetings turned out to be financially successful 154, while others were failures, and her report to the committee in spring indicated that she was short $1,000 to cover all expenses, including speaker salaries. A few committee members thought that meetings should not take place in locations that wouldn't be profitable, but the noble Maria Weston Chapman said: "My friends, if everything you say about this young woman's business skills, practical wisdom, and speaking ability is true, then I believe that $1,000 spent on her education and growth for this work is one of the best investments that could possibly be made." At the unanimous request of the committee, Miss Anthony stayed in her position and spent the year canvassing the entire state with her speakers. Mr. May wrote: "We gladly cover your expenses and want to keep you leading this work."

M.W. Chapman
M.W. Chapman
In March she was invited to go to Bangor, Me., and speak on woman's rights, in a course which included Henry Wilson, Gough, Phillips, Beecher and other notables. For this she was paid $50 and expenses, the first large sum she had received for a lecture, and it gave her much hope and courage. While in Maine she spoke a number of times, going from point to point in sleigh or wagon through snow, slush and mud. The press was very complimentary.[25] 155
In March, she was invited to speak about women's rights in Bangor, Maine, alongside others like Henry Wilson, Gough, Phillips, Beecher, and other prominent figures. For this, she was paid $50 plus expenses, which was the first significant amount she had earned for a lecture, giving her a lot of hope and confidence. While in Maine, she gave several speeches, traveling from place to place by sleigh or wagon through snow, slush, and mud. The press had very positive things to say.[25] 155
In August Miss Anthony attended the State Teachers' Convention at Binghamton, and here created another commotion by introducing the following:
In August, Miss Anthony went to the State Teachers' Convention in Binghamton, where she sparked another stir by introducing the following:
Resolved, That the exclusion of colored youth from our public schools, academies, colleges and universities is the result of a wicked prejudice.
Resolved, That the exclusion of students of color from our public schools, academies, colleges, and universities is a result of harmful prejudice.
Resolved, That the expulsion of Miss Latimer from the normal school at Albany, when after six months of successful scholarship it was discovered that colored blood coursed in her veins, was mean and cruel.
Resolved, That expelling Miss Latimer from the normal school in Albany after six months of successful academic performance, simply because she was found to have African ancestry, was petty and cruel.
Resolved, That a flagrant outrage was perpetrated against the teachers and pupils of the colored schools of New York City, in that no provision was made for their attendance at the free concerts given to the public schools.
Resolved, That a shocking injustice was done to the teachers and students of the colored schools in New York City, as no arrangements were made for them to attend the free concerts offered to the public schools.
Resolved, That the recent exclusion of the graduates of the colored normal school of New York City, from the public diploma presentation at the Academy of Music, was a gross insult to their scholarship and their womanhood.
Resolved, That the recent exclusion of the graduates of the colored normal school of New York City from the public diploma presentation at the Academy of Music was a serious insult to their academic achievements and their womanhood.
Resolved, That all proscription from educational advantages and honors, on account of color, is in perfect harmony with the infamous decision of Judge Taney—"that black men have no rights which white men are bound to respect."
Resolved, That any exclusion from educational opportunities and recognition based on color is entirely consistent with the disgraceful ruling of Judge Taney—"that black people have no rights that white people are obligated to respect."
After considerable uproar these were referred to a select committee on which were placed two ladies, Mary L. Booth and Julia A. Wilbur, both strong supporters of Miss Anthony. The committee brought in a majority report in favor of the resolutions but this make-shift minority report was adopted: "In our opinion the colored children of the State should enjoy equal advantages of education with the white." Miss Anthony then proceeded to throw another bomb by presenting this resolution:
After a lot of commotion, these were sent to a special committee that included two women, Mary L. Booth and Julia A. Wilbur, both passionate supporters of Miss Anthony. The committee produced a majority report in support of the resolutions, but a temporary minority report was accepted: "We believe that the black children of the State should have the same educational opportunities as the white." Miss Anthony then made another bold move by presenting this resolution:
Since the true and harmonious development of the race demands that the sexes be associated together in every department of life; therefore
Since true and balanced progress for humanity depends on men and women working together in all areas of life, we therefore
Resolved, That it is the duty of all our schools, colleges and universities to open their doors to woman and to give her equal and identical educational advantages side by side with her brother man.
Resolve, That it is the duty of all our schools, colleges, and universities to welcome women and offer them equal educational opportunities alongside their male peers.
This opened the flood gates. Motions to lay on the table, to refer to a committee, etc., were voted down. A few strong speeches were made in favor, but most of them were in opposition and very bitter, insisting that "it was sought to uproot the theory and practice of the whole world." The antique Professor Davies was in his element. He declared: "Here is an attempt to introduce a vast social evil. I have been trying 156 for four years,[i.e. ever since Miss Anthony's first appearance at a teachers' convention] to escape this question, but if it has to come, let it be boldly met and disposed of. I am opposed to anything that has a tendency to impair the sensitive delicacy and purity of the female character or to remove the restraints of life. These resolutions are the first step in the school which seeks to abolish marriage, and behind this picture I see a monster of social deformity."
This opened the floodgates. Motions to table the discussion, refer it to a committee, and so on, were voted down. A few strong speeches were made in favor, but most were in opposition and extremely harsh, insisting that "this seeks to uproot the theory and practice of the entire world." The old Professor Davies was in his element. He stated: "This is an attempt to introduce a significant social evil. I have been trying 156 for four years, [i.e. ever since Miss Anthony's first appearance at a teachers' convention] to avoid this issue, but if it must come up, let's face it squarely and deal with it. I oppose anything that tends to damage the sensitive delicacy and purity of women's character or to remove the constraints of life. These resolutions are the first step in a movement that seeks to eliminate marriage, and behind this proposal, I see a monster of social deformity."
Another speaker, whose name is lost in oblivion, said in tones which would melt a heart of stone: "Shall an oak and a rose tree receive the same culture? Better to us is the clear, steady, softened, silvery moonlight of woman's quiet, unobtrusive influence, than the flashes of electricity showing that the true balance of nature is destroyed. Aye, better a thousand times is it than the glimmering ignus fatuus rising from decayed hopes and leading the deluded follower to those horrible quagmires of social existence—amalgamation and Mormonism."
Another speaker, whose name is forgotten, said in a voice that could soften the hardest heart: "Should an oak and a rose bush receive the same care? The calm, steady, gentle, silvery moonlight of a woman’s quiet, subtle influence is far better for us than the bursts of electricity that show nature's true balance is broken. Yes, it’s a thousand times better than the flickering will-o'-the-wisp rising from faded hopes and leading the misguided follower into the dreadful bogs of social life—amalgamation and Mormonism."
Prof. John W. Buckley, of Brooklyn, opposed the resolution in coarse and abusive language. State Superintendent of Public Instruction Henry H. Van Dyck demolished its last hope when he demanded with outstretched arm and pointed finger: "Do you mean to say you want the boys and girls to room side by side in dormitories? To educate them together can have but one result!"
Prof. John W. Buckley from Brooklyn strongly disagreed with the resolution, using rough and disrespectful language. State Superintendent of Public Instruction Henry H. Van Dyck crushed any remaining hope for it when he raised his arm and pointed his finger, saying: "Are you really saying you want boys and girls to share dorm rooms? Educating them together can only lead to one outcome!"
The Binghamton Daily Republican said: "Miss Anthony vindicated her resolutions with eloquence, force, spirit and dignity, and showed herself a match, at least, in debate for any member of the convention. She was equal if not identical. Whatever may be thought of her notions or sense of propriety in her bold and conspicuous position, personally, intellectually and socially speaking, there can be but one opinion as to her superior energy, ability and moral courage; and she may well be regarded as an evangel and heroine by her own sex."
The Binghamton Daily Republican said: "Miss Anthony defended her resolutions with eloquence, strength, passion, and dignity, proving she could hold her own in debate against any member of the convention. She was at least equal, if not identical. Regardless of opinions about her ideas or sense of propriety in her bold and visible stance, there is only one perspective on her remarkable energy, skill, and moral courage; she can rightfully be seen as a champion and heroine by her peers."
The woman who advocated co-education in those days was indeed in a "bold and conspicuous position." The resolutions were lost by a large majority. Even if every man present had 157 voted against them, there were enough women to have carried them had they voted in the affirmative. The Republican said: "If the lady members had voted so as to be heard we know not what would have been the result; but their voices, to say the least, have not been ordained by the Creator to be equal or identical with man's, and are drowned by his louder sounds." Mrs. Stanton's opinion can best be learned by an extract from a letter:
The woman who pushed for co-education back then was definitely in a "bold and noticeable position." The resolutions ended up failing by a wide margin. Even if every man there had 157 voted against them, there were enough women who could have passed them if they had voted in favor. The Republican stated: "If the female members had spoken up, we don't know what the outcome would have been; however, their voices, to put it mildly, have not been intended by the Creator to be equal to or the same as a man's, and are overpowered by his louder noises." Mrs. Stanton's viewpoint can best be understood through an excerpt from a letter:
I see by the papers that you have once more stirred that pool of intellectual stagnation, the educational convention. What an infernal set of fools those schoolmarms must be! Well, if in order to please men they wish to live on air, let them. The sooner the present generation of women dies out, the better. We have idiots enough in the world now without such women propagating any more.... The New York Times was really quite complimentary. Mr. Stanton brought every item he could find about you. "Well, my dear," he would say, "another notice of Susan. You stir up Susan, and she stirs the world." I was glad you went to torment those devils. I guess they will begin to think their time has come. I glory in your perseverance. O, Susan, I will do anything to help you on. You and I have a prospect of a good long life. We shall not be in our prime before fifty, and after that we shall be good for twenty years at least. If we do not make old Davies shake in his boots or turn in his grave, I am mistaken.
I see in the news that you’ve once again disrupted that stagnant pool of ideas at the education conference. What a ridiculous group those teachers must be! If they want to please men by living with nothing, that's their choice. The sooner this generation of women fades away, the better. We already have enough fools in the world without those women adding more kids to the mix.... The New York Times was actually pretty nice about it. Mr. Stanton included every mention he could find about you. "Well, my dear," he would say, "another mention of Susan. You provoke Susan, and she provokes the world." I’m glad you went to shake things up. I think they’re starting to feel like their time is running out. I’m proud of your determination. Oh, Susan, I will do anything to support you. You and I have the potential for a long life ahead. We won’t be at our best before fifty, and even after that, we’ll have at least another twenty years. If we don’t make old Davies nervous or cause him to roll in his grave, I’d be surprised.
The proceedings of the convention were published in full in the New York Tribune, and Miss Anthony received letters of commendation from Judge William Hay, Charles L. Reason, superintendent of the New York city colored schools, and many others. William Marvin, of Binghamton, wrote: "The sympathy of the people here, during the teachers' association, was decidedly with you. A vote from the audience would have carried any one of your resolutions."
The details of the convention were published in full in the New York Tribune, and Miss Anthony got letters of praise from Judge William Hay, Charles L. Reason, the superintendent of the New York City colored schools, and many others. William Marvin from Binghamton wrote: "The support from people here during the teachers' association was definitely with you. A vote from the audience would have passed any one of your resolutions."
In the autumn the anti-slavery meetings were resumed, and Miss Anthony was unsparing of herself and everybody else. Parker Pillsbury complained: "What a task-mistress our general agent is proving herself. I expect as soon as women get command, an end will have come to all our peace. We shall yet have societies for the protection of men's rights, in the cause of which many of us will have to be martyrs." Her brother, Daniel R., was sending frequent letters from Kansas containing graphic descriptions of the terrible condition of 158 affairs in that unhappy territory, and scathing denunciations of the treachery of northern "dough faces," thus fanning the fires of patriotism that glowed in her breast and filling her with renewed zeal for the cause to which she was giving her time and strength. During these days she wrote a cherished sister:
In the fall, the anti-slavery meetings started up again, and Miss Anthony gave her all, pushing herself and everyone around her. Parker Pillsbury complained, "What a tough taskmaster our general agent is proving to be. I expect that once women are in charge, we’ll lose all our peace. We'll soon have groups protecting men's rights, and many of us will end up being martyrs for that cause." Her brother, Daniel R., was sending frequent letters from Kansas that included vivid descriptions of the horrible situation in 158 and strong criticisms of the northern "doughfaces," which ignited the patriotism in her heart and filled her with renewed passion for the cause to which she was dedicating her time and energy. During this time, she wrote to a beloved sister:
Though words of love are seldom written or spoken by one of us to the other, there must ever remain the abiding faith that the heart still beats true and fond. Our family is now so widely separated that our enjoyment must consist in soul communing. Indeed, I almost believe in the power of affection to draw unto itself the yearning heart of the absent one. What the modern Spiritualist tells of feeling the presence of departed friends and enjoying their loving ministrations, I sometimes imagine to be true, not of the spirits of those gone hence, but of those still in the body who are separated from us. I often pass blessed moments in these sweet, silent communings.... Every day brings to me new conceptions of life and its duties, and it is my constant desire that I may be strong and fearless, baring my arm to the encounter and pressing cheerfully forward, though the way is rough and thorny.
Although we don't often say "I love you," we always believe that our hearts are true and loving. Our family is so spread out now that our happiness depends on our spiritual connections. I truly believe in the power of love to reach those we miss. Sometimes, I think the modern Spiritualists are right when they talk about feeling the presence of friends who've passed on and experiencing their loving support. This idea probably applies not just to those who are gone but also to those who are still alive but far away. I often cherish these quiet moments of connection. Each day teaches me new things about life and its responsibilities, and I always hope to be strong and brave, ready to face challenges and maintain a positive outlook, even when things get tough and painful.
I have just returned from the hardest three weeks' tour of anti-slavery meetings I have had yet, so cold and disheartening. The masses seem devoid of conscience and looking only for some new expedient to accomplish the desired good; but in every town there are some true spirits who walk in God's sunlight and do what is right, trusting results to the great Immutable Law.... I wish all the dear ones would write me more often. Though I am sure of their affection, yet when the soul is burdened and one is surrounded by strangers, a letter from a loved one brings healing to the spirit, and I need it more than I can tell.
I just returned from the toughest three weeks of anti-slavery meetings I've ever experienced. It was really cold and discouraging. The crowds seem to lack any sense of morality and are just looking for quick solutions to achieve their aims; yet in every town, there are genuine people who walk in God's light and do what's right, trusting the outcomes to the great Immutable Law.... I really wish my loved ones would write to me more often. Even though I know they care, when I'm feeling overwhelmed and surrounded by strangers, receiving a letter from someone I love truly lifts my spirits, and I need it more than I can say.
There is scarcely a letter to her own family, in the large number preserved, which does not express a longing for love and sympathy, a craving that no public career, no devotion to any cause, however absorbing, ever eradicates from the human soul.
There’s hardly a letter to her own family, in the many preserved, that doesn’t show a desire for love and support, a yearning that no public career or dedication to any cause, no matter how captivating, can ever completely remove from the human heart.
Although so fully occupied, Miss Anthony did not neglect the beloved cause of woman. This year, however, when she attempted to arrange for the annual convention, she found to her dismay that every one of the speakers whom she always depended upon was unable to be present because of maternal duties. Some were anticipating an event, others had very young infants, and the older women were kept at home by expected or recently arrived grandchildren. She was used to overcoming obstacles, but the conditions on this occasion were 159 too much for her and, with feelings which can not well be put into language, she was obliged to give up the national convention, the only one omitted from 1850 to 1861.
Although she was very busy, Miss Anthony didn’t forget about the important cause of women. This year, however, when she tried to organize the annual convention, she was dismayed to find that every speaker she usually relied on was unavailable because of their parenting responsibilities. Some were expecting a baby, others had very young children, and the older women were tied up at home with grandchildren who were either expected or had just arrived. She was accustomed to overcoming challenges, but the circumstances this time were 159 too much for her, and with feelings that are hard to express, she had to cancel the national convention, the only one skipped from 1850 to 1861.
Amidst the hard work and many disappointments of the year, there is one gleam of humor in what was known to the family as "Susan's raspberry experiment." During her wanderings she visited her friend Sarah Hallock who had made a great success of raspberry culture, selling 40,000 baskets during the season, and she did not see why she could not do quite as well. She unfolded her plan to her father, who supported her in that as in everything and gave her as much ground as she desired. While at home for a short time she had this underdrained and prepared, $100 worth of raspberry plants set out and staked; then went away and left the family to look after them. The father was in the city all day attending to business, the sister Mary teaching school, the mother was not well and there was no one else but the hired man, who knew nothing about the culture of raspberries and was otherwise occupied; so the bushes took their chances.
Amidst the hard work and many disappointments of the year, there is one bright spot of humor in what the family called "Susan's raspberry experiment." While exploring, she visited her friend Sarah Hallock, who was very successful in growing raspberries, selling 40,000 baskets during the season. Susan thought she could do just as well. She shared her plan with her father, who supported her as he did in everything, giving her as much space as she wanted. While home for a short time, she had the land drained and prepared, planted $100 worth of raspberry plants, and staked them; then she left her family to take care of them. Her father was in the city all day for business, her sister Mary was teaching school, their mother was not well, and the only other person around was the hired man, who knew nothing about growing raspberries and was busy with other tasks; so the bushes were left to fend for themselves.
The fame of the experiment, however, spread far and wide, the newspapers announced that Miss Anthony had bought a large farm and stocked it with raspberries; that she had abandoned the platform and taken up fruit culture. She received scores of letters asking information as to the best plants and most successful methods, others begging her not to give up public work, and many from friends who had no end of fun at her expense. The bushes grew and bore fruit enough to give the family a number of delicious meals. Then a very cold winter followed and there was no one to care for the tender plants. In December came a letter from the irrepressible brother-in-law, Aaron McLean: "As to your raspberry 'spec,' I regret to tell you it has 'gone up.' The poor, little, helpless things expired of a bad cold about two weeks since. Do you remember that text of Scripture, which says, 'She who by the plow would thrive, herself must either hold or drive'? It has cost you $200 to learn the truth of it." Her sister Mary wrote: "I hope, Susan, when you get a husband and 160 children, you will treat them better than you did your raspberry plants, and not leave them to their fate at the beginning of winter."
The news about the experiment spread everywhere. The newspapers reported that Miss Anthony had bought a big farm and filled it with raspberries, claiming she had given up her public speaking to focus on growing fruit. She got tons of letters asking about the best plants and successful methods, with others pleading for her to continue her public work, and many from friends who found the situation hilarious. The bushes thrived and produced enough fruit for the family to enjoy several delicious meals. Then, a harsh winter hit, and no one was there to care for the delicate plants. In December, she received a letter from her brother-in-law, Aaron McLean: "About your raspberry project, I’m sorry to say it has failed. The poor, little things died from a bad cold about two weeks ago. Remember that saying, 'She who would thrive by the plow must either hold or drive'? You’ve learned that the hard way at a cost of $200." Her sister Mary wrote: "I hope, Susan, when you have a husband and 160 children, you treat them better than you did your raspberry plants and don’t leave them to fend for themselves at the start of winter."
It was a deep regret to Miss Anthony that she could not give the necessary time and care to make this experiment a success, as she was anxious to encourage women to go into the pursuit of agriculture, horticulture, floriculture, anything which would take them out of doors. In a letter to Mr. Higginson she says: "The salvation of the race depends, in a great measure, upon rescuing women from their hothouse existence. Whether in kitchen, nursery or parlor, all alike are shut away from God's sunshine. Why did not your Caroline Plummer, of Salem, why do not all of our wealthy women leave money for industrial and agricultural schools for girls, instead of ever and always providing for boys alone?" This is one of the many instances where Miss Anthony foreshadowed reforms and improvements which have been fulfilled in the present generation.
Miss Anthony deeply regretted that she couldn't invest the necessary time and effort to make this experiment successful, as she was eager to encourage women to pursue agriculture, horticulture, floriculture—anything that would get them outside. In a letter to Mr. Higginson, she wrote: "The future of our race depends largely on rescuing women from their sheltered lives. Whether they're in the kitchen, nursery, or parlor, they are all shut away from God's sunlight. Why didn’t your Caroline Plummer from Salem—and why don’t all our wealthy women—leave money for industrial and agricultural schools for girls, rather than always just providing for boys?" This is one of many instances where Miss Anthony predicted reforms and improvements that have been realized in today’s generation.
In 1858 is presented same routine of unremitting work which characterized so many previous years. The winter was given up to anti-slavery meetings with their attendant hardships. Miss Anthony has great scorn for those who talk regretfully of the "good old days." She thinks one lecture season under the conditions which then existed would be an effectual cure to any longing for them one might have. The conveniences of modern life, bathrooms with plenty of hot water, toiletrooms, steam-heated houses, gas and hundreds of comforts so common at the present time that one scarcely can realize they have not always existed, were comparatively unknown. One of the greatest trials these travellers had to endure was the wretched cooking which was the rule and not exception among our much-praised foremothers. In one of the old diaries is this single ejaculation, "O, the crimes that are committed in the kitchens of this land!" In those days the housewife could not step around the corner and buy for two cents a cake of yeast which insured good bread, but the process of yeast-making was long and difficult and not well 161 understood by the average housekeeper, so a substitute was found in "salt risings," and a heavy indigestible mass generally resulted. White flour was little used and was of a poor quality. Baking powder was unknown and all forms of cakes and warm bread were made with sour milk and soda, easily ruined by too much or too little of the latter. In no particular did the table compare favorably with that of modern families.
In 1858, the same relentless work routine continued that had defined so many previous years. Winter was dedicated to anti-slavery meetings, which came with their own challenges. Miss Anthony holds great disdain for those who nostalgically reminisce about the "good old days." She believes that just one lecture season under the conditions of that time would completely cure any yearning for those days. The comforts of modern life—like bathrooms with plenty of hot water, toilets, steam-heated houses, gas, and countless other amenities that are so common today that we hardly realize they didn't always exist—were largely unknown. One of the toughest challenges these travelers faced was the terrible cooking that was the norm among our highly praised foremothers. One old diary contains this lament: "O, the crimes that are committed in the kitchens of this land!" Back then, housewives couldn't simply step around the corner and buy a two-cent cake of yeast that would guarantee good bread; the process of making yeast was long and challenging and not well understood by the average housekeeper. Instead, they relied on "salt risings," which typically resulted in a heavy, indigestible mass. White flour was rarely used and was of poor quality. Baking powder didn't exist, and all kinds of cakes and warm breads were made with sour milk and soda, which were easily spoiled by using too much or too little of the latter. In no way did their meals compare favorably to those of modern families.

THE FARM-HOME NEAR ROCHESTER, N.Y., 1845-65.
THE FARM-HOME NEAR ROCHESTER, N.Y., 1845-65.
The anti-slavery and woman's rights lecturers always accepted private hospitality when offered, for reasons of economy and, as many of the people who favored these reforms were seeking light in other directions also, they were very apt to find themselves the guests of "cranks" upon the food question and were thus made the subject of most of the experiments in vogue at that period. On one occasion Miss Anthony, Aaron Powell and Oliver Johnson were entertained by prominent and well-to-do people in a town near New York, who had not a mouthful for any of the three meals except nuts, apples and coarse bran stirred in water and baked. At the end of one day the men ignominiously fled and left her to stay over Sunday and hold the Monday meeting. She lived through it but on Tuesday started for New York and never stopped till she reached Delmonico's, where she revelled in a porterhouse steak and a pot of coffee.
The anti-slavery and women's rights speakers always took up offers of private hospitality, mainly for budget reasons. Since many supporters of these reforms were exploring various ideas, they often found themselves being hosted by "cranks" on dietary issues and became subjects of many popular experiments at the time. One time, Miss Anthony, Aaron Powell, and Oliver Johnson were hosted by wealthy and prominent people in a town near New York, who only served them nuts, apples, and baked coarse bran mixed with water for all three meals. By the end of one day, the men embarrassingly left, leaving her to stay over Sunday and lead the Monday meeting. She managed to get through it, but on Tuesday, she headed to New York and didn’t stop until she reached Delmonico's, where she indulged in a porterhouse steak and a pot of coffee.
During these winter meetings all of the men broke down physically and their letters were filled with complaints of their heads, their backs, their lungs, their throats and their eyes. Garrison wrote at one time: "I hope to be present at the meeting but I can not foresee what will be my spinal condition at that time, and I could not think of appearing as a 'Garrisonian Abolitionist' without a backbone." Miss Anthony never lost a day or missed an engagement, although it may be imagined that she had many hours of weariness when she would have been glad to drop the burden for a while. On March 17 she writes: "How happy I am to lay my head on my own home pillow once more after a long four months, scarcely stopping a second night under one roof." Mr. May 162 wrote in behalf of the committee: "We rejoice with you in the success of your meetings and in all your hopes for the upspringing of the good seed sown by the faithful joint labors of you and your gallant little band. We have made the following a committee of arrangements for the annual meeting: Garrison, Phillips, Quincy, Johnson and Susan B. Anthony."
During these winter meetings, all the men broke down physically and their letters were filled with complaints about their heads, backs, lungs, throats, and eyes. Garrison wrote at one point: "I hope to be at the meeting, but I can't predict what my spine will be like then, and I couldn't imagine showing up as a 'Garrisonian Abolitionist' without a backbone." Miss Anthony never missed a day or an appointment, even though it's likely she had many exhausting hours when she would have been glad to set the burden down for a bit. On March 17, she wrote: "How happy I am to lay my head on my own home pillow once again after a long four months, hardly spending a second night under one roof." Mr. May 162 wrote on behalf of the committee: "We celebrate your meetings' success and all your hopes for the growth of the good seed sown by your dedicated teamwork with your brave little group. We have appointed the following as the arrangements committee for the annual meeting: Garrison, Phillips, Quincy, Johnson, and Susan B. Anthony."
So she at once girded on her armor and began to prepare for the May anniversary and, being determined the National Woman's Rights Convention should not be omitted this year, she conducted also an extensive correspondence in regard to that. Referring to all this drudgery Lucy Stone urged: "Don't do it; quit common work such as a common worker could do; and don't mourn over us and our babies. We are growing workers. I know you are tired with your four months' work, but it is not half so hard as taking care of a child night and day. I shall not assume any responsibility for another convention till I have had my ten daughters." But Miss Anthony knew that this "common work," this hiring halls, raising money and advertising meetings was just what nobody else could or would do. She understood also that while the other women were at home "growing workers," somebody must be in the field looking after the harvest.
So she immediately put on her armor and started preparing for the May anniversary. Determined that the National Woman's Rights Convention shouldn’t be skipped this year, she also managed extensive correspondence about it. In response to all this hard work, Lucy Stone urged, “Don’t do it; stop doing the kind of work that anyone else could do; and don’t feel sorry for us and our babies. We are becoming workers. I know you’re tired from your four months of work, but it’s not nearly as tough as taking care of a child day and night. I won’t take on any responsibility for another convention until I’ve had my ten daughters.” But Miss Anthony realized that this “common work”—the tasks of booking venues, raising funds, and publicizing meetings—was exactly what no one else could or would do. She also understood that while other women were at home “growing workers,” someone needed to be in the field managing the harvest.
Abby Hutchinson, the only sister in the famous family of singers, wrote from their Jersey home, Dawnwood: "I want so much to help you; I have longed to do some good with my voice but public life wears me out very fast." Nevertheless she came and sang for them. Mrs. Stanton and Mrs. Brown Blackwell brought new babies into the world a few weeks before the convention, to Miss Anthony's usual discomfiture. She wrote to the latter: "Mrs. Stanton sends her love to you and says if you are going to have a large family, go right on and finish up as she has done. She has only devoted eighteen years out of the very heart of her existence to this great work. But I say, stop now."
Abby Hutchinson, the only sister in the well-known family of singers, wrote from their home in Jersey, Dawnwood: "I really want to help you; I've always wanted to do something good with my voice, but being in the public eye exhausts me quickly." Still, she came and sang for them. Mrs. Stanton and Mrs. Brown Blackwell had new babies a few weeks before the convention, much to Miss Anthony's usual annoyance. She wrote to the latter: "Mrs. Stanton sends her love to you and says if you're planning to have a big family, just go ahead and finish up like she has. She has dedicated eighteen years from the very core of her life to this important work. But I say, stop now."
The convention in Mozart Hall followed close upon the Anti-Slavery Anniversary, Miss Anthony presided and there were the usual distinguished speakers, Phillips, Pillsbury, Garrison, 163 Douglass, Higginson, Lucretia Mott, Mrs. Gage, Mrs. Rose, and, for the first time, George William Curtis spoke on the woman's rights platform. Notwithstanding this array of talent, the convention through all its six sessions was threatened with a mob, encouraged by the Herald and other New York papers. The disturbance at times was so great the speakers could not be heard, even Curtis was greeted with hisses and groans, but Miss Anthony stood at the helm unterrified through all and did not leave her post until the last feature of the program was completed and the convention adjourned. She was growing accustomed to mobs.
The convention in Mozart Hall closely followed the Anti-Slavery Anniversary, with Miss Anthony presiding and the usual distinguished speakers, including Phillips, Pillsbury, Garrison, 163 Douglass, Higginson, Lucretia Mott, Mrs. Gage, Mrs. Rose, and for the first time, George William Curtis spoke on the women's rights platform. Despite this impressive lineup, the convention faced threats from a mob, backed by the Herald and other New York papers, throughout its six sessions. At times, the disruption was so loud that speakers couldn't be heard; even Curtis faced hisses and groans. However, Miss Anthony remained fearless at the helm, not leaving her post until the last part of the program was completed and the convention was adjourned. She was becoming used to dealing with mobs.
In August, 1858, she attended the teachers' convention at Lockport. The sensational feature of this meeting was the reading by Professor Davies of the first cablegram from England, a message from the Queen to the President. The press reports show that she took a prominent part in the proceedings and possibly merited the name which some one gave her of "the thorn in the side of the convention." These annual gatherings were very largely in the nature of mutual admiration societies among the men, who consumed much of the time in complimenting each other and the rest of it in long-winded orations. During this one Miss Anthony arose and said that, as all members had the same right to speak, she would suggest that speeches should be limited so as to give each a chance. She made some of the men furious by stating that they spoke so low they could not be heard.
In August 1858, she attended the teachers' convention in Lockport. The standout moment of this meeting was when Professor Davies read the first cablegram from England, a message from the Queen to the President. The press reports indicate that she played a significant role in the proceedings and perhaps earned the nickname "the thorn in the side of the convention." These annual gatherings were mostly just mutual admiration societies for the men, who spent a lot of time complimenting each other and the rest of it in long-winded speeches. During this convention, Miss Anthony stood up and suggested that since all members had the same right to speak, they should limit speech lengths to give everyone a chance. She angered some of the men by pointing out that they spoke so quietly they could not be heard.
At another time she suggested that, as there were only a few hours left for the business of the convention, they should not be frittered away in trifling discussions, saying, "if she were a man she would be ashamed to consume the time in telling how much she loved women and in fulsome flattery of other men." She moved also that they set aside the proposed discussion on "The Effects of High Intellectual Culture on the Efficiency and Respectability of Manual Labor," and take up pressing questions. When one man was indulging in a lot of the senseless twaddle about his wife which many of them are fond of 164 introducing in their speeches, she called him to order saying that the kind of a wife he had, had nothing to do with the subject. She introduced again the resolution demanding equal pay for equal work without regard to sex. A friend wrote of this occasion: "She arraigned those assembled teachers for their misdemeanors as she would a class of schoolboys, in perfect unconsciousness that she was doing anything unusual. We women never can be sufficiently thankful to her for taking the hard blows and still harder criticisms, while we reaped the benefits."
At another time, she suggested that since there were only a few hours left for the convention's business, they shouldn’t waste them on trivial discussions. She said, "If I were a man, I would be embarrassed to waste time talking about how much I love women and flattering other men." She also proposed that they skip the planned discussion on "The Effects of High Intellectual Culture on the Efficiency and Respectability of Manual Labor" and focus on urgent issues instead. When a man started rambling on about his wife—something many of them like to include in their speeches—she interrupted him, stating that his type of wife had nothing to do with the topic at hand. She once again brought up the resolution demanding equal pay for equal work, regardless of gender. A friend wrote about this moment: "She addressed the assembled teachers for their missteps as if they were a group of schoolboys, completely unaware that she was doing anything out of the ordinary. We women can never be thankful enough to her for taking the harsh criticism while we enjoyed the benefits."
The press reports said: "Miss Anthony has gained in the estimation of the teachers' convention, and is now listened to with great attention." She gave her lecture on "Co-Education" to a crowded house of Lockport's prominent citizens, introduced by President George L. Farnham, of Syracuse, always her friend in those troublous days. By this time more than a score of the eminent educators of the day had become her steadfast friends, and they welcomed her to these conventions, aiding her efforts in every possible manner. Rev. Samuel J. May, who had delivered an address, upon his return home wrote: "You are a great girl, and I wish there were thousands more in the world like you. Some foolish old conventionalisms would be utterly routed, and the legal and social disabilities of women would not long be what they are." Miss Anthony herself, writing to Antoinette Blackwell, said: "I wish I had time to tell you of my Lockport experience; it was rich. I never felt so cool and self-possessed among the plannings and plottings of the few old fogies, and they never appeared so frantic with rage. They evidently felt that their reign of terror is about ended."
The press reported: "Miss Anthony has gained the respect of the teachers' convention and is now listened to with great attention." She delivered her lecture on "Co-Education" to a packed audience of Lockport's prominent citizens, introduced by President George L. Farnham of Syracuse, who has always been her ally during those challenging times. By this point, more than twenty of the leading educators of the day had become her loyal friends, and they welcomed her to these conventions, supporting her efforts in every possible way. Rev. Samuel J. May, who had given a speech, wrote upon returning home: "You are a remarkable woman, and I wish there were thousands more in the world like you. Some outdated conventions would be completely dismantled, and the legal and social issues facing women wouldn’t last long.” Miss Anthony herself, writing to Antoinette Blackwell, said: "I wish I had time to share my Lockport experience with you; it was incredible. I’ve never felt so calm and composed amid the schemes and plots of a few stubborn traditionalists, and they’ve never seemed so frantic with anger. They clearly realize that their reign of terror is coming to an end."
October, 1858, brought another crucial occasion. In Rochester, a young man, Ira Stout, had been condemned to be hung for murder. A number of persons strongly opposed to capital punishment believed this a suitable time to make a demonstration. It was not that they doubted the guilt of Stout, but they were opposed to the principle of what they termed judicial 165 murder. As the Anthonys and many of the leading Quaker families, Frederick Douglass and a number of Abolitionists shared in this opinion, it was not surprising that Miss Anthony undertook to get up the meeting. In a cold rain she made the round of the orthodox ministers but none would sign the call. The Universalist minister, Rev. J.H. Tuttle, agreed to be present and speak. She secured thirty or forty signatures, engaged the city hall and advertised extensively. The feeling against Stout was very strong and there was a determination among certain members of the community that this meeting should not be held. Huge placards were posted throughout the city, urging all opposed to the sentiments of the call to be out in force, a virtual invitation to the mob.
October 1858 brought another critical moment. In Rochester, a young man named Ira Stout had been sentenced to hang for murder. Many people who strongly opposed the death penalty saw this as the right time to make a statement. They didn't doubt Stout's guilt but were against what they called judicial 165 murder. Since Miss Anthony, the Anthonys, several leading Quaker families, Frederick Douglass, and some Abolitionists shared this view, it wasn't surprising that Miss Anthony took the initiative to organize the meeting. Despite the cold rain, she approached the local orthodox ministers, but none would agree to sign the call. The Universalist minister, Rev. J.H. Tuttle, agreed to attend and speak. She managed to gather thirty or forty signatures, booked the city hall, and promoted the event widely. The sentiment against Stout was very strong, and some community members were determined to prevent this meeting from happening. Large posters were put up around the city, urging anyone who opposed the meeting's message to show up, essentially sending out an invitation to a potential mob.
When the evening arrived, October 7, the hall was filled with a crowd of nearly 2,000, a large portion of whom only needed the word to break into a riot. Miss Anthony called the assemblage to order and Frederick Douglass was made chairman, but when he attempted to speak, his voice was drowned with groans and yells. Aaron M. Powell, William C. Bloss and others tried to make themselves heard but the mob had full sway. Miss Anthony was greeted with a perfect storm of hisses. Finally the demonstrations became so threatening that she and the other speakers were hurried out of the hall by a rear door, the meeting was broken up and the janitor turned out the lights. No attempt was made by the mayor or police to quell the disturbance and mob law reigned supreme.
When evening came on October 7, the hall was packed with nearly 2,000 people, many of whom just needed a signal to start a riot. Miss Anthony called the crowd to order, and Frederick Douglass was named chairman, but when he tried to speak, his voice was drowned out by groans and shouts. Aaron M. Powell, William C. Bloss, and others tried to get heard, but the mob was in charge. Miss Anthony was met with a complete barrage of hisses. Eventually, the situation escalated so much that she and the other speakers were rushed out of the hall through a back door, the meeting was broken up, and the janitor turned off the lights. Neither the mayor nor the police made any effort to stop the chaos, and mob rule was in full effect.
The brightest ray of sunshine in the closing days of 1858 was the following letter from Mr. Phillips: "I have had given me $5,000 for the woman's rights cause; to procure tracts on that subject, publish and circulate them, pay for lectures and secure such other agitation of the question as we deem fit and best to obtain equal civil and political position for women. The name of the giver of this generous fund I am not allowed to tell you. The only condition of the gift is that it is to remain in my keeping. You, Lucy Stone and myself are a committee of trustees to spend it wisely and 166 efficiently." The donor proved to be Francis Jackson, the staunch friend of the emancipation of woman as well as the negro.
The brightest ray of sunshine in the closing days of 1858 was the following letter from Mr. Phillips: "I've received $5,000 for the women's rights cause; to get materials on that topic, publish and distribute them, pay for lectures, and support any other efforts we think are necessary to achieve equal civil and political rights for women. I can't share the name of the generous donor. The only condition is that the money stays with me. You, Lucy Stone, and I are a committee of trustees to spend it wisely and 166 effectively." The donor turned out to be Francis Jackson, a strong supporter of both women's and African American emancipation.

Francis Jackson
Francis Jackson
[25] The Bangor Jeffersonian said: "Miss Anthony is far from being an impracticable enthusiast. Dignity, conscientiousness and regard for the highest welfare of her sex, are the impressions which one receives of her. Doubtless all (if any there were) who went to scoff, remained to pray for the success of the doctrine she advocated. Personally she is good-looking, of symmetrical figure and modest and ladylike demeanor."
[25] The Bangor Jeffersonian said: "Miss Anthony is definitely not an unrealistic dreamer. She gives off an impression of dignity, integrity, and a genuine concern for the well-being of women. It’s likely that those who came to mock ended up hoping for the success of the ideas she promoted. On a personal note, she is attractive, well-proportioned, and has a modest and feminine presence."
The Bangor Whig was equally favorable. The Ellsworth American said: "Her enunciation is very clear and remarkably distinct, yet there is nothing in it of the unfeminine character and tone which people had been led to expect from the usual criticisms of the press. The lecture itself, as an intellectual effort, was satisfactory as well to those who dissented as to those who sympathized with its positions and arguments. It was fruitful in ideas and suggestions and we doubt not many a woman, and man too, went home that night, with the germ of more active ideas in their heads than had gathered there for a twelvemonth before."
The Bangor Whig was just as positive. The Ellsworth American said: "Her speech is very clear and exceptionally distinct, yet there’s nothing in it that feels unfeminine, which is what people had been led to expect based on the usual media criticism. The lecture itself, as an intellectual effort, satisfied both those who disagreed with it and those who supported its views and arguments. It was full of ideas and suggestions, and we have no doubt that many women, and men too, went home that night with the spark of more active thoughts in their minds than they had collected in the past year.”
CHAPTER XI.
CONDITIONS PRIOR TO THE WAR.
1859.
Among Miss Anthony's many schemes for regenerating the world was one to have a Free church in Rochester, after the manner of Theodore Parker's in Boston, similar to an ethical society, where no doctrines should be preached and all should be welcome, contributing what they chose. This was in her mind for years, and at the beginning of 1859 she engaged Corinthian Hall for Sunday evenings, her good friend, William A. Reynolds, as usual making her a reduced rate; and here Antoinette Brown Blackwell and Parker Pillsbury each preached for a month. She tried to engage Mrs. Stanton for a year and also Aaron M. Powell, but the financial support was too uncertain and the project had to be abandoned. All her life, however, Miss Anthony cherished the hope of seeing this Free church established and sustained. She arranged a series of lectures for this winter. George William Curtis accepted her invitation in this characteristic letter:
Among Miss Anthony's many ideas for improving the world was one to establish a Free Church in Rochester, inspired by Theodore Parker's in Boston, similar to an ethical society where no doctrines would be preached and everyone would be welcome, contributing however much they wanted. She thought about this for years, and at the start of 1859, she booked Corinthian Hall for Sunday evenings, with her good friend, William A. Reynolds, giving her a discounted rate as usual; here, Antoinette Brown Blackwell and Parker Pillsbury each preached for a month. She tried to get Mrs. Stanton for a year, along with Aaron M. Powell, but the financial backing was too uncertain, and the project had to be dropped. However, Miss Anthony held on to the hope of one day seeing this Free Church established and run for her entire life. She organized a series of lectures for that winter. George William Curtis accepted her invitation in this characteristic letter:
I think of no title for your course, but why have any? Why not say simply, "A Course of Independent Lectures?" To call them woman's rights would damn them in advance, so strong is prejudice. The only one I have at all suited to your purpose is "Fair Play for Women."[26] I hate the words "woman's rights," nor do they properly describe my treatment of the question which, in my mind, is not one of sex but of humanity. My lecture is a plea for the recognition of the equal humanity of women and an assertion that 168 they have rights not as women but as human beings. In respect to terms, I leave it with you. I usually receive $50, but you will understand that I should prefer to pay the expenses myself rather than that you or any one interested should expend a penny; so if you can not justly give me anything, I shall be content.
I can’t come up with a title for your course, but why stress over it? How about just calling it "A Course of Independent Lectures?" Labeling them as women's rights would only invite negative biases, considering how strong prejudices are. The only title that seems suitable for your purpose is "Fair Play for Women."[26] I’m not a fan of the term "women's rights," and it doesn’t reflect my perspective on the issue. I see it not as a gender issue, but as a matter of humanity. My lecture is a call for acknowledging women as equal members of humanity and asserting that 168 they have rights not just as women but as human beings. As for the title, I’ll leave that decision to you. I usually get $50, but I’d rather cover my own expenses than have you or anyone else pay anything; so if you can’t reasonably give me anything, that’s totally fine.

George William Curtis
George W. Curtis
Miss Anthony always came out of these lecture courses in debt, but she would call upon her friends or borrow from sister or father enough to make up the deficit, and replace the loan out of her scanty earnings. She persisted in having them to educate the public on the progressive questions of the day. At this time the long, severe mental and physical strain of years began to be felt in her one weak spot, and the old trouble with her back asserted itself. From every quarter came urgent appeals for her assistance. At first she answered: "If New York calls a constitutional convention for next spring, this will be a capital winter to strike heavy blows for freedom and equality such as we shall not have for a long time to come. I am ready just as soon as the armies can be marshaled and equipped." But later she wrote:
Miss Anthony always came out of these lecture courses in debt, but she would ask her friends or borrow from her sister or father enough to cover the shortfall and pay them back from her modest earnings. She was determined to educate the public on the important issues of the day. During this time, the long, intense mental and physical stress of years started to take a toll on her one weak spot, and her old back problems returned. Urgent requests for her help came from everywhere. Initially, she responded: "If New York calls a constitutional convention for next spring, this will be a great winter to make significant strides for freedom and equality, which we won’t have another opportunity for in a long time. I'm ready as soon as we can mobilize and equip the forces." But later she wrote:
It is being forced upon me that nature orders me to stay quietly at home this winter and it may be that it is to enable me to get a greater literary culture than I possibly could, amidst the hurry and bustle of continual meetings. Somehow I can not philosophize away a shrinking from going into active work. I can not get up a particle of enthusiasm or faith in the success, either financial or spiritual, of another series of conventions. For the past five years I have gone through this routine and something within me keeps praying to be spared from more of it. There has been such a surfeit of lecturing, the people are tired of it. Then I never was so poor in purse and I fear to end another campaign with a heavy debt to still further encroach upon my small savings. I can not bear to make myself dependent upon relatives for the food I eat and the clothes I wear; I never have done it and hope I may never have to. Perhaps I may feel a renewed faith in myself and my work but the past years have brought me so much isolation and spiritual loneliness, although in the midst of crowds, that I confess to a longing to stay for awhile among my own people.
This winter, I'm being pushed to stay at home, which might help me develop a deeper understanding of literature than I could while constantly rushing to meetings. I can't shake this feeling of reluctance to engage in active work. I just can't feel excited or believe in the potential success—whether financial or spiritual—of another set of conventions. For the past five years, I've stuck to this routine, and something inside me keeps hoping to avoid more of it. There’s been such an overload of lectures that people are simply exhausted by them. Plus, I've never been this broke, and I'm afraid of finishing another campaign with a significant debt that would cut into my meager savings. I can’t bear the thought of depending on relatives for the food I eat and the clothes I wear; I've never done that and hope I never have to. Maybe I’ll find a renewed belief in myself and my work, but the last few years have brought me so much isolation and spiritual loneliness, even in crowds, that I admit I’m craving to stay for a while with my own people.
The commands of the physician were imperative that she should avoid all fatigue and nervous excitement, but her pen was not idle, and the time which she hoped to devote to the reading of many books was occupied in sending out letters, petitions, appeals and the various documents necessary to keep the work going. In answer to an invitation from the Friends of Human Progress she wrote:
The doctor's orders were clear: she needed to avoid all stress and excitement, but she didn’t let her pen rest. Instead of spending her time reading many books like she hoped, she was busy writing letters, petitions, appeals, and all the documents needed to keep things running. In response to an invitation from the Friends of Human Progress, she wrote:
To be esteemed worthy to speak for woman, for the slave, for humanity, is ever grateful to me, and I regret that I can not be with you at your annual gathering to get for myself a fresh baptism, a new and deeper faith. I would exhort all women to be discontented with their present condition and to assert their individuality of thought, word and action by the energetic doing of noble deeds. Idle wishes, vain repinings, loud-sounding declamations never can bring freedom to any human soul. What woman most needs is a true appreciation of her womanhood, a self-respect which shall scorn to eat the bread of dependence. Whoever consents to live by "the sweat of the brow" of another human being inevitably humiliates and degrades herself.... No genuine equality, no real freedom, no true manhood or womanhood can exist on any foundation save that of pecuniary independence. As a right over a man's subsistence is a power over his moral being, so a right over a woman's subsistence enslaves her will, degrades her pride and vitiates her whole moral nature.
I'm always thankful to be seen as someone worthy of speaking for women, the oppressed, and humanity. I regret that I can't be with you at your annual gathering to gain a fresh renewal and a deeper faith. I encourage all women to be unhappy with their current situation and to express their individuality in thought, word, and action by getting involved in meaningful actions. Empty wishes, pointless complaints, and loud speeches will never free any human soul. What women need most is a genuine appreciation of their womanhood and a self-respect that rejects dependence on others. Anyone who chooses to live off "the sweat of another's brow" ultimately humiliates and degrades herself. There can be no real equality, true freedom, or authentic manhood or womanhood without financial independence. Just as having a claim over a man's livelihood gives power over his moral being, having a claim over a woman's livelihood enslaves her will, undermines her pride, and corrupts her entire moral nature.
To her brother Daniel R., in Kansas, who was somewhat skeptical on the woman question, she sent this strong letter:
To her brother Daniel R. in Kansas, who was a bit skeptical about women's rights, she sent this powerful letter:
Even the smallest human right denied, is large. The fact that the ruling class withhold this right is prima facie evidence that they deem it of importance for good or for evil. In either case, therefore, the human being is outraged. It, perchance, may matter but little whether Kansas be governed by a constitution made by her bona fide settlers or by people of another State or by Congress; but for Kansas to be denied the right to make her own constitution and laws is an outrage not to be tolerated. So the constitution and laws of a State and nation may be just as considerate of woman's needs and wants as if framed by herself, yet for man to deny her the right to a voice in making and administering them, is paralleled only by the Lecompton usurpation. For any human being or class of human beings, whether black, white, male or female, tamely to submit to the denial of their right to self-government shows that the instinct of liberty has been blotted out.
Even the denial of the smallest human right is significant. The fact that those in power withhold this right clearly shows they consider it important, whether for good or for bad. In either case, a human being is offended. It might not matter much whether Kansas is governed by a constitution created by its original settlers, by people from another state, or by Congress; however, for Kansas to be denied the right to create its own constitution and laws is an injustice that cannot be accepted. Similarly, the constitution and laws of a state and nation may consider women's needs and desires just as well as if they were created by women themselves, yet for men to deny women a role in making and enforcing those laws is comparable only to the Lecompton usurpation. For any person or group of people, whether black, white, male, or female, to quietly accept the denial of their right to self-governance shows that their instinct for freedom has been extinguished.
You blunder on this question of woman's rights just where thousands of others do. You believe woman unlike man in her nature; that conditions of life which any man of spirit would sooner die than accept are not only endurable to woman but are needful to her fullest enjoyment. Make her position in church, State, marriage, your own; everywhere your equality ignored, 170 everywhere made to feel another empowered by law and time-honored custom to prescribe the privileges to be enjoyed and the duties to be discharged by you; and then if you can imagine yourself to be content and happy, judge your mother and sisters and all women to be.
You are missing the mark on this issue of women's rights just like thousands of others do. You think that women are fundamentally different from men; that conditions of life which any man of character would rather die than accept are not only tolerable for women but are necessary for their fullest happiness. Put yourself in her position in church, the government, marriage—everywhere your equality is overlooked, and everywhere you feel like another person is legally and traditionally empowered to dictate the privileges you can enjoy and the responsibilities you have to take on; and if you can envision yourself as content and happy in that scenario, then believe your mother, sisters, and all women feel the same way. 170
It was not because the three-penny tax on tea was so exorbitant that our Revolutionary fathers fought and died, but to establish the principle that such taxation was unjust. It is the same with this woman's revolution; though every law were as just to woman as to man, the principle that one class may usurp the power to legislate for another is unjust, and all who are now in the struggle from love of principle would still work on until the establishment of the grand and immutable truth, "All governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed."
It wasn't because the three-penny tax on tea was so outrageous that our Revolutionary forefathers fought and died, but to establish the principle that such taxation was unfair. The same goes for this women's revolution; even if every law were as fair to women as they are to men, the principle that one group can take the power to make laws for another is unjust. All those currently fighting for this cause out of a sense of principle would continue until the establishment of the fundamental truth, "All governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed."
She wrote Lydia Mott: "The new encyclopedia is just out and I notice in regard to Antoinette Brown Blackwell that it gives a full description of her work up to the time of her marriage, then says: 'She married Samuel Blackwell and lives near New York.' Not a word of the splendid work she has done on the platform and in the pulpit since. Thus does every married woman sink her individuality." This brought from Lydia a spirited answer:
She wrote to Lydia Mott: "The new encyclopedia just came out, and I see that about Antoinette Brown Blackwell, it includes a complete description of her work up until her marriage, then says: 'She married Samuel Blackwell and lives near New York.' Not a word about the amazing work she has done on stage and in the pulpit since. This is how every married woman loses her individuality." This prompted a lively response from Lydia:
For my part, when you speak of the individuality of one who is truly married being inevitably lost, I think you mistake. If there ever was any individuality it will remain. I don't believe it is necessary for development that the individual must always force itself upon us. We naturally fall into the habits and frequently the train of thought of those we love and I like the expression "we" rather than "I." I never feel that my interests and actions can be independent of the dear ones with whom I am surrounded. Even the one who seems to be most absorbed may, in reality, possess the strongest soul. This standing alone is not natural and therefore can not be right. I am sure one of these days you will view this matter from a different standpoint.
For me, when you say that someone’s individuality is inevitably lost in a true marriage, I think you’re wrong. If there was any individuality to begin with, it will remain. I don’t believe that personal growth means an individual always needs to assert themselves over others. We naturally pick up the habits and often the mindset of those we care about, and I prefer the concept of “we” to “I.” I never feel like my interests and actions can be separate from the people I love. Even the person who seems the most self-absorbed might actually have the strongest spirit. Being completely alone isn’t natural and therefore can’t be right. I’m sure that one day you’ll see this issue from a different angle.
Miss Anthony so far yielded as to reply: "Institutions, among them marriage, are justly chargeable with many social and individual ills but, after all, the whole man or woman will rise above them. I am sure my 'true woman' never will be crushed or dwarfed by them. Woman must take to her soul a purpose and then make circumstances conform to this purpose, instead of forever singing the refrain, 'if and if and if!'" But later when one woman failed to keep a lecture engagement because her husband wanted her to go somewhere 171 with him, and another because her husband was not willing she should leave home, she again poured out her sorrows to her friend:
Miss Anthony eventually replied, "Institutions, including marriage, are rightly blamed for many social and personal issues, but ultimately, the whole person will rise above them. I'm confident my 'true woman' will never be crushed or diminished by them. Women need to have a purpose in their hearts and then shape their circumstances to fit that purpose, instead of constantly singing the refrain, 'if and if and if!'" But later, when one woman missed a lecture engagement because her husband wanted her to go somewhere 171 with him, and another couldn’t go because her husband didn’t want her to leave home, she once again shared her troubles with her friend:
There is not one woman left who may be relied on, all have "first to please their husband," after which there is but little time or energy left to spend in any other direction. I am not complaining or despairing, but facts are stern realities. The twain become one flesh, the woman, "we"; henceforth she has no separate work, and how soon the last standing monuments (yourself and myself, Lydia), will lay down the individual "shovel and de hoe" and with proper zeal and spirit grasp those of some masculine hand, the mercies and the spirits only know. I declare to you that I distrust the power of any woman, even of myself, to withstand the mighty matrimonial maelstrom!
There isn’t a single woman left who can be relied upon; they all prioritize "pleasing their husband" first, leaving little time or energy for anything else. I’m not complaining or feeling hopeless, but the reality is tough. The two become one flesh, making the woman part of "we"; from then on, she has no separate role. How soon the last remaining examples (you and I, Lydia) will set aside our individual "shovel and hoe" and eagerly take up the tools of some man’s hand, only mercy and spirits know. I genuinely believe that I don’t have the power, nor does any woman, to resist the overwhelming pull of marriage!
But how did I get into this dissertation? If to you it seems morbid, pardon the pen-wandering. In the depths of my soul there is a continual denial of the self-annihilating spiritual or legal union of two human beings. Such union, in the very nature of things, must bring an end to the free action of one or the other, and it matters not to the individual whose freedom has thus departed whether it be the gentle rule of love or the iron hand of law which blotted out from the immortal being the individual soul-stamp of the Good Father. How I do wish those who know something of the real social needs of our age would rescue this greatest, deepest, highest question from the present unphilosophical, unspiritual discussers.
But how did I end up writing this dissertation? If it seems gloomy to you, I apologize for my wandering thoughts. Deep down, I constantly reject the idea of a self-destructive spiritual or legal bond between two people. Such a bond inevitably restricts the freedom of one person or the other, and it doesn’t matter to the person losing their freedom whether it’s the gentle influence of love or the strict enforcement of law that has erased the unique imprint of the Good Father from the immortal soul. I really wish those who understand the true social needs of our time would take this crucial question out of the hands of the current unphilosophical and unspiritual debaters.
As might be expected, the legacy of $5,000 brought not only a flood of requests from all parts of the country, but some division of opinion among those who had it in control. Miss Anthony would use all of it in the work of propaganda, lectures, conventions, tracts and newspaper articles. Lucy Stone wished to use part in suits to prove the unconstitutionality of the law which taxes women and refuses them representation. Antoinette Blackwell wanted a portion to establish a church where she could spread the doctrine of woman's rights along with the gospel. Most of the women lecturers and some of the men wished to be engaged immediately at a fixed salary. Miss Anthony writes for advice to Phillips, who replies: "Go ahead with your New York plan as sketched to me. I am willing to risk spending $1,000 on it. Never apologize as if you troubled me; it is my business as much as yours, and I am only sorry to be of so little help." Brief records in the little diary say: 172
As expected, the $5,000 legacy attracted a lot of requests from across the country and sparked some disagreements among those managing it. Miss Anthony wanted to use all of it for propaganda, speeches, conventions, pamphlets, and newspaper articles. Lucy Stone preferred to spend part of it on legal cases to challenge the constitutionality of the tax on women who lack representation. Antoinette Blackwell wanted a portion to create a church where she could promote women's rights alongside the gospel. Most of the female speakers and some of the men wanted to be hired right away with a set salary. Miss Anthony wrote to Phillips for advice, and he responded: "Go ahead with your New York plan as you outlined to me. I’m willing to risk spending $1,000 on it. Never apologize as if you’re bothering me; this is as much my business as yours, and I only wish I could be more helpful." Brief entries in the small diary say: 172
Sister Mary and I passed New Year's Day, 1859, most quietly and happily in the dear farm-home. Mother is in the East with sister Hannah, and father dined in the city with sister Guelma, who sent us a plate of her excellent turkey.... In the afternoon Mary and I drove to Frederick Douglass' and had a nice visit; stayed to tea and listened to a part of his new lecture on "Self-Made Men."... Father and Mary gone to their work in the city, and I am writing on my lecture "The True Woman." Ground out four commercial-note pages in five mortal hours, but they are strong.... Ten degrees below zero. Mother home; no writing today; all talk about the eastern folks.... Antoinette Blackwell preached here yesterday, and we have had a good visit together today. Just helped two fugitive slaves, perhaps genuine and perhaps not.... Went to the city to hear A.A. Willit's lecture on "A Plea for Home." Gives woman a place only in domestic life—sad failure.... Twenty letters written and mailed today. Took tea with the Hallowells. Am glad to learn that the money forwarded to the Anti-Slavery Bazar and lost was sent by a man instead of a woman.... Heard Bayard Taylor on "Life in Lapland." Hundreds could not gain admittance. Curtis lectured on "Fair Play for Women"; great success, but I feel that he has not yet been tried by fire. Afterwards visited with Curtis and Taylor, and Mr. Curtis said: "Rather than have a radical thinker like Mrs. Rose at your suffrage conventions, you would better give them up. With such speakers as Beecher, Phillips, Theodore Parker, Chapin, Tilton and myself advocating woman's cause, it can not fail."
Sister Mary and I spent New Year's Day, 1859, quietly and happily at our beloved farm home. Mom is on the East Coast with Sister Hannah, and Dad had dinner in the city with Sister Guelma, who sent us a plate of her amazing turkey. In the afternoon, Mary and I drove to Frederick Douglass' place and had a lovely visit; we stayed for tea and listened to part of his new lecture on "Self-Made Men." Dad and Mary are off to work in the city, and I'm working on my lecture titled "The True Woman." I wrote four pages of notes in five long hours, but they're solid. It's ten degrees below zero. Mom's back; no writing today—just catching up on all the news from the East. Antoinette Blackwell preached here yesterday, and we had a nice visit today. I just helped two runaway slaves—maybe they were genuine, maybe not. I went to the city to hear A.A. Willit's lecture titled "A Plea for Home." He only gives women a role in domestic life, which is a disappointing perspective. I wrote and mailed twenty letters today. Had tea with the Hallowells. I'm glad to hear that the money lost from the Anti-Slavery Bazaar was sent by a man instead of a woman. I listened to Bayard Taylor talk about "Life in Lapland." Hundreds were turned away. Curtis gave a lecture on "Fair Play for Women," which was very successful, but I feel he hasn't really faced any serious challenges yet. Afterwards, I spent time with Curtis and Taylor, and Mr. Curtis said, "Rather than have a radical thinker like Mrs. Rose at your suffrage conventions, you might as well give them up. With speakers like Beecher, Phillips, Theodore Parker, Chapin, Tilton, and me supporting women's rights, it can't fail."

E.H. Chapin
E.H. Chapin
Miss Anthony did not hesitate to criticise even Mr. Curtis, writing him in reference to his great lecture, "Democracy and Education": "When all the different classes of industrial claimants for a voice in the government were enumerated, there was not one which could be interpreted to represent womanhood. Hence only the few who know that with George William Curtis, the words 'man,' 'people,' 'citizens,' are not, as with the vast majority of lecturers, mere glittering generalities, can understand that his grand principles of democracy are intended to be applied to woman equally with man. I listen for the unthinking masses and pray that every earnest, manly spirit shall help make women free." In reply Mr. Curtis closed a long and cordial letter by saying: "Believe me that I have thought of the point you make but the greater statement must inevitably include the less." She 173 scribbled a comment on the back of this for her own satisfaction: "Men still the greater, women the less."
Miss Anthony didn’t hold back in criticizing Mr. Curtis, writing to him about his major lecture, "Democracy and Education": "When all the different groups of industrial claimants for a voice in government were listed, there wasn’t one that could be seen as representing women. So only the few who understand that for George William Curtis, the words 'man,' 'people,' 'citizens,' are not like they are for most lecturers—just empty slogans—can realize that his grand principles of democracy are meant to apply to women as much as to men. I listen for the unthinking masses and hope that every passionate, principled person will help make women free." In response, Mr. Curtis ended a long and friendly letter by saying: "Believe me, I have considered the point you make, but the broader statement must naturally encompass the narrower one." She 173 jotted down a remark on the back of this for her own peace of mind: "Men still the greater, women the less."
The last of January Miss Anthony went to Albany to attend the anti-slavery convention and remained six weeks during the legislative session to work in the interest of the women's petitions and the Personal Liberty Bill. This was a season of great enjoyment for her, notwithstanding much tramping about in the rain and snow and many discouraging experiences with the Legislature. She writes a friend: "Well, I am a member of the lobby but lacking the two most essential requisites, for I neither accept money nor have I any to pay out. Dr. Cheever speaks tonight in the Assembly chamber on 'The Guilt of the Slave Traffic and of the Legislation by which it is Supported.' I have been going about all day to collect enough to defray his expenses."
At the end of January, Miss Anthony went to Albany for the anti-slavery convention and stayed for six weeks during the legislative session to advocate for women's petitions and the Personal Liberty Bill. This was a time of great enjoyment for her, despite a lot of walking around in the rain and snow and many frustrating encounters with the Legislature. She wrote to a friend: "Well, I’m a member of the lobby, but I lack the two most essential things: I neither accept money nor have any to spend. Dr. Cheever is speaking tonight in the Assembly chamber on 'The Guilt of the Slave Traffic and the Legislation That Supports It.' I've been going around all day to gather enough money to cover his expenses."
Phillips, Garrison, Pillsbury and all the host were at the convention. They dined in Lydia Mott's simple little home and had a merry time. Between the meetings the party visited the Legislature, Geological Hall, Palmer's studio and other places of interest and managed to get a bit of holiday recreation. Miss Anthony stayed with her friend Miss Mott, visited Rev. Mayo, called often on Thurlow Weed, went to Troy to hear Beecher lecture on "The Burdens of Society," to Hudson to hear Phillips on "Toussaint L'Ouverture" and, whenever she could spare a day from her work with the Legislature, held woman's rights meetings in neighboring towns; thus every hour was filled to overflowing.
Phillips, Garrison, Pillsbury, and the whole group were at the convention. They had dinner at Lydia Mott's cozy little home and had a great time. Between meetings, the group visited the Legislature, Geological Hall, Palmer's studio, and other interesting places, managing to squeeze in some fun. Miss Anthony stayed with her friend Miss Mott, visited Rev. Mayo, frequently met with Thurlow Weed, went to Troy to hear Beecher speak on "The Burdens of Society," headed to Hudson to listen to Phillips on "Toussaint L'Ouverture," and whenever she could take a day off from her work with the Legislature, held women's rights meetings in nearby towns; thus, every hour was packed.
In March she finished her lecture, "The True Woman," and plunged into the preparations for the approaching woman's rights convention. She also indulged the love for gardening which her busy life so seldom permitted and, judging from her diary, must have given the hired men more attention than they ever received before or afterwards:
In March, she wrapped up her lecture, "The True Woman," and dove into getting ready for the upcoming women's rights convention. She also indulged her passion for gardening, which her hectic life rarely allowed. Judging by her diary, it seems she must have given the hired workers more attention than they ever got before or after:
Uncovered the strawberry and raspberry beds.... Worked with Simon building frames for the grape vines in the peach orchards.... Set out eighteen English black currants, twenty-two English gooseberries and Muscadine grape vines, also Lawton blackberries.... Worked in the 174 garden all day, then went to the city to hear Dr. Cheever; few there, but grand lecture. How he unmasked the church hypocrites!... Wrote reports of the lecture for Standard and Liberator, and helped father plan the new kitchen.... Finished setting out the apple trees and the 600 blackberry bushes, then took the 6 o'clock train for Seneca Falls. Hot and dusty, and I am very, very tired.
I uncovered the strawberry and raspberry beds.... Worked with Simon to build frames for the grapevines in the peach orchards.... Planted eighteen English black currants, twenty-two English gooseberries, and Muscadine grapevines, along with Lawton blackberries.... Spent the entire day working in the 174 garden, then went to the city to hear Dr. Cheever; there were only a few people, but his lecture was incredible. He really called out the hypocrites in the church!... Wrote reports of the lecture for the Standard and Liberator, and helped my dad plan the new kitchen.... Finished planting the apple trees and the 600 blackberry bushes, then took the 6 o'clock train to Seneca Falls. It was hot and dusty, and I am extremely, extremely tired.

Wendell Phillips
Wendell Phillips
She spoke in various towns all the way to New York where she arrived in time to attend the Anti-Slavery Anniversary and make final arrangements for the convention in Mozart Hall, May 12. She had written asking Lucretia Mott to preside, who answered, "I am sure there needs not a better presiding officer than thyself," but agreed to come. When the hour arrived the hall was so packed that it was impossible for Mrs. Mott to reach the platform and Miss Anthony was obliged to open the meeting. This convention, like several which preceded it, was greatly disturbed by noise and interruptions from the audience, until finally it was turned over to Wendell Phillips who "knew better than any one else how to play with and lash a mob and thrust what he wished to say into their long ears." At the end of his speech Miss Anthony immediately adjourned the convention, to prevent violent demonstrations. The Tribune said:
She spoke in various towns all the way to New York, where she arrived in time for the Anti-Slavery Anniversary and to finalize arrangements for the convention at Mozart Hall on May 12. She had written to Lucretia Mott, asking her to preside, and Mott responded, "I’m sure there isn’t a better presiding officer than you," but agreed to come. When the time came, the hall was so full that Mrs. Mott couldn't make it to the platform, and Miss Anthony had to open the meeting. This convention, like several before it, faced significant disturbances from the audience until it was handed over to Wendell Phillips, who "knew better than anyone how to handle a mob and get his points across." After his speech, Miss Anthony quickly adjourned the convention to prevent any violent reactions. The Tribune said:
The woman's rights meeting last night was well calculated to advance the cause that the reformers met to plead. The speakers were comparatively so 175 temperate, while sundry voters were so intemperate in demonstrating their folly, rudeness, ignorance and indecency, that almost any cause which the one pleaded and the other objected to would be likely to find favor with order-loving people. The presence of a single policeman might have preserved perfect order, saved the reputation of our city before crowds of strangers and given hundreds an opportunity to hear. Of course it being a meeting that women were to address, as "women have no rights in public which men are bound to maintain," there was no policeman present.
The women’s rights meeting last night was carefully organized to support the cause that the reformers were championing. The speakers were fairly composed, while some attendees acted completely out of line, displaying their foolishness, rudeness, ignorance, and indecency, making it likely that any cause the speakers backed would be approved by those who value order. If there had been even one police officer present, it could have ensured perfect order, protected our city’s reputation in front of many visitors, and allowed hundreds to listen. But since it was a meeting where women would be speaking, and “women have no rights in public that men are obligated to uphold,” there was no police officer present.
The disturbances at these conventions were not so much because the mob objected to the doctrine of woman's rights as that they were addressed by the leading anti-slavery speakers and therefore had to bear the odium attached to that hated cause.
The disruptions at these conventions weren't really because the crowd disagreed with the idea of women's rights, but because the main speakers were prominent anti-slavery advocates, and they had to endure the backlash that came with that unpopular movement.
A strong memorial, asking for equal social, civil and political rights for women and based on the guarantees of the Declaration of Independence, was prepared by a committee consisting of Miss Anthony, Mr. Phillips and seven others, to be presented to every legislature in the Union. By the time the legislatures met in 1860, political affairs had reached a crisis and the country was in a state of unrest and excitement which made it impossible to secure consideration for this or any other question outside the vital issues that were pressing, although it was presented in several States.
A powerful petition for equal social, civil, and political rights for women, rooted in the guarantees of the Declaration of Independence, was created by a committee that included Miss Anthony, Mr. Phillips, and seven others, to be submitted to every legislature across the Union. By the time the legislatures convened in 1860, political matters had reached a breaking point, and the country was filled with unrest and excitement, making it impossible to address this or any other issue beyond the urgent matters at hand, even though it was brought forward in several states.
Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton wrote an eloquent appeal to be circulated with the petitions to rouse public sentiment. Armed with this the former began correspondence with speakers in reference to a summer and fall campaign of the state. The diary shows that she actually found time to attend a picnic, but as she was called upon for a speech while there the day was not wholly wasted. There are also references to "moonlight rides," and one entry records: "Mr. —— walked home with me; marvelously attentive. What a pity such powers of intellect should lack the moral spine!"
Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton wrote a powerful appeal to share with the petitions to inspire public support. With this in hand, Miss Anthony started reaching out to speakers about a summer and fall campaign for the state. The diary indicates that she even managed to attend a picnic, but since she was asked to give a speech while there, the day wasn’t completely spent in leisure. There are also mentions of "moonlight rides," and one entry notes: "Mr. —— walked me home; incredibly attentive. What a shame such intelligence should lack moral integrity!"
Out of the Francis Jackson fund Mr. Phillips sent Miss Anthony $1,500 for her extensive campaign. She engaged speakers to come into New York in different months, and July 13 opened the series with Antoinette Blackwell at Niagara Falls. From here they made the round of the watering places, 176 Avon, Clifton, Trenton Falls, Sharon, Saratoga, Ballston Spa and Lake George, where persons of wealth and prominence were gathered from all parts of the Union. In some places they spoke in a grove to thousands of people; at others in hotel parlors, and everywhere met a friendly spirit and respectful treatment.
Out of the Francis Jackson fund, Mr. Phillips sent Miss Anthony $1,500 for her extensive campaign. She arranged for speakers to come to New York at different times, and on July 13, she kicked off the series with Antoinette Blackwell at Niagara Falls. From there, they toured various resorts, 176 including Avon, Clifton, Trenton Falls, Sharon, Saratoga, Ballston Spa, and Lake George, where wealthy and prominent individuals gathered from all over the country. In some places, they spoke in a grove to thousands of people; in others, in hotel parlors, and everywhere they encountered a welcoming atmosphere and respectful treatment.
Miss Anthony did not forget to go to Poughkeepsie this summer, and stir up the teachers at their annual meeting. Antoinette Blackwell says of this trip: "I shall always recollect our journey on the boat with two or three dozen teachers, and your walking the deck with one and another, talking about women and their rights, in school and out of school, in the most matter-of-fact way, although it was plainly evident that most of them would sooner have listened to a discussion on the rights of the Hottentots." The teacher who was her chief support at these conventions was Helen Philleo.[27] There were very few of them in those days who had the courage to help fight this battle for their own interests. At the last session she announced a woman's rights meeting and many remained to attend it.
Miss Anthony didn't forget to go to Poughkeepsie this summer and get the teachers riled up at their annual meeting. Antoinette Blackwell reflects on this trip: "I'll always remember our journey on the boat with a couple dozen teachers, and you walking the deck, chatting with one or another about women and their rights, both in school and out, in the most straightforward way, even though it was clear that most of them would rather listen to a discussion on the rights of the Hottentots." The teacher who supported her the most at these conventions was Helen Philleo.[27] Back then, very few had the courage to fight for their own interests. At the last session, she announced a women's rights meeting, and many stayed to attend.
After the summer resorts were closed the meetings were continued in the principal towns. Mrs. Blackwell thus describes an incident in the Fort William Henry hotel: "I remember a rich scene at the breakfast table. Aaron Powell was with us and the colored waiter pointedly offered him the bill of fare. Miss Anthony glanced at it and began to give her order, not to Powell in ladylike modesty, but promptly and energetically to the waiter. He turned a grandiloquent, deaf ear; Powell fidgeted and studied his newspaper; she persisted, determined that no man should come between her and her own order for coffee, cornbread and beefsteak. 'What do I understand is the full order, sir, for your party?' demanded the waiter, doggedly 177 and suggestively. Powell tried to repeat her wishes, but stumbled and stammered and grew red in the face. I put in a working oar to cover the undercurrent of laughter, while she, coolly unconscious of everything except that there was no occasion for a 'middleman,' since she was entirely competent to look after her own breakfast, repeated her order, and the waiter, looking intensely disgusted, concluded to bring something, right or wrong."
After the summer resorts closed, the meetings continued in the main towns. Mrs. Blackwell describes an incident at the Fort William Henry hotel: "I remember a lively scene at the breakfast table. Aaron Powell was with us, and the Black waiter pointedly offered him the menu. Miss Anthony glanced at it and started to place her order, not to Powell in polite modesty, but directly and assertively to the waiter. He pretended not to hear her; Powell fidgeted and read his newspaper; she kept insisting, determined not to let any man stand between her and her order for coffee, cornbread, and beefsteak. 'What do I need to understand is the full order for your group, sir?' the waiter asked, stubbornly 177 and suggestively. Powell tried to repeat what she wanted but stumbled and stammered, turning red. I jumped in to ease the tone of laughter, while she, completely unaware of anything except that she didn’t need a 'middleman,' since she was perfectly capable of ordering her own breakfast, repeated her request. The waiter, looking extremely annoyed, decided to just bring something, whether right or wrong."
While at Easton among her old friends Miss Anthony attended Quaker meeting and the spirit moved her to speak very forcibly, as she relates in a letter: "A young Quaker preacher from Virginia, who happened to be there, said: 'Christ was no agitator, but a peacemaker; George Fox was no agitator; the Friends at the South follow these examples and are never disturbed by fanaticism.' This was more than I could bear; I sprung to my feet and quoted: 'I came into the world not to bring peace but a sword.... Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites that devour widow's houses!' Read the New Testament, and say if Christ was not an agitator. Who is this among us crying 'peace, peace, when there is no peace?'—and sat down." It is a matter of regret that she did not tell what became of the gentleman from Virginia.
While she was at Easton with her old friends, Miss Anthony went to a Quaker meeting and felt compelled to speak very passionately. In a letter, she wrote: "A young Quaker preacher from Virginia, who happened to be there, said: 'Christ was not an agitator, but a peacemaker; George Fox was not an agitator; the Friends in the South follow these examples and are never disturbed by fanaticism.' This was more than I could take; I jumped to my feet and quoted: 'I came into the world not to bring peace but a sword.... Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites who devour widows' houses!' Read the New Testament and tell me if Christ was not an agitator. Who is among us crying 'peace, peace,' when there is no peace?"—and sat down." It's unfortunate that she didn't mention what happened to the gentleman from Virginia.
Miss Anthony writes to Mary Hallowell, during these days: "I am more tired than ever before and know that I am draining the millpond too low each day to be filled quite up during the night, but I am having fine audiences of thinking men and women. Oh, if we could but make our meetings ring like those of the anti-slavery people, wouldn't the world hear us? But to do that we must have souls baptized into the work and consecrated to it."
Miss Anthony writes to Mary Hallowell during these days: "I'm more exhausted than ever and know I'm draining the millpond too low each day to fill it back up at night, but I'm having great audiences of thoughtful men and women. Oh, if only we could make our meetings resonate like those of the anti-slavery activists, wouldn't the world hear us? But to do that, we need people dedicated to the cause and committed to the work."
Mrs. Blackwell's domestic affairs will not permit any further lecturing and Miss Anthony says in a letter to her: "O, dear, dear, how I do wish you could have kept on with me. I can't tell you how utterly awful is the suspense these other women keep me in: first, they can't, then they can, then they won't unless things are so and so; and when I think everything 178 is settled, it all has to be gone over again. The fact is I am not fit to deal with anybody who is not terribly in earnest." To this she replies: "Dear child, I'm sorry I can not help you, but pity a poor married woman and forgive. The ordeal that I have been going through, four sewingwomen each giving about two days, no end of little garments to alter and to make, with a husband whose clothes as well as himself have been neglected for three months, the garden to be covered up from the frost, shrubs to transplant, winter provisions to lay in and only one good-natured, stupid servant to help with all. This, Susan, is 'woman's sphere.'"
Mrs. Blackwell's home responsibilities won’t allow for any more lectures, and Miss Anthony writes to her: "Oh, dear, how I wish you could have stayed with me. I can't explain how frustrating this suspense is with these other women: first they can’t, then they can, then they won’t unless things are just right; and when I think everything 178 is settled, it all has to be discussed again. Honestly, I’m not able to deal with anyone who isn’t completely serious." To this she replies: "Dear child, I’m sorry I can’t assist you, but please have compassion for a poor married woman and forgive me. The ordeal I’m going through—with four seamstresses each working for about two days, endless little garments to alter and create, a husband whose clothes and himself have been neglected for three months, the garden needing to be covered for frost, shrubs that need to be transplanted, winter supplies to stock up on, and just one good-natured but clueless servant to help with everything—this, Susan, is 'woman's sphere.'"
As Miss Anthony never approved of a woman's neglecting her household for any purpose, she urged no more but sought elsewhere for assistance. There was not one unmarried woman except herself in all the corps of available speakers and, while some of them could make a trip of a few weeks, not one could be depended on for steady work. In October she secured Mrs. Tracy Cutler for awhile, and later Frances D. Gage, J. Elizabeth Jones and Lucy N. Coleman, but was obliged to hold many meetings alone. These were continued at intervals through the fall of 1859 and the winter and spring of 1860, and numerous pages of foolscap are still in existence containing a carefully kept account of the expenses. Each meeting was made partly to pay for itself, the lecturers received $12 a week, Miss Anthony herself taking only this sum, and it may be believed that no more extended and effective propaganda work ever was accomplished with the same amount of money. While this was being done, she also assisted Clarina Howard Nichols and Susan E. Wattles to plan an important campaign in Kansas with money furnished from the Jackson fund.
As Miss Anthony never supported a woman neglecting her home for any reason, she didn’t press further and looked for help elsewhere. There was not a single unmarried woman besides herself in the entire group of available speakers, and while some could take a trip for a few weeks, none could be relied on for consistent work. In October, she managed to secure Mrs. Tracy Cutler for a time, and later Frances D. Gage, J. Elizabeth Jones, and Lucy N. Coleman, but she had to hold many meetings alone. These continued at intervals through the fall of 1859 and into the winter and spring of 1860, and numerous pages of foolscap still exist that contain a detailed record of expenses. Each meeting was partly designed to break even, the lecturers received $12 a week, with Miss Anthony taking only this amount herself, and it’s clear that no more extensive and effective outreach work has ever been done with the same amount of money. While this was happening, she also helped Clarina Howard Nichols and Susan E. Wattles plan an important campaign in Kansas, funded by the Jackson fund.
She received the following characteristic letter from Rev. Thomas K. Beecher when she asked for the use of his church in Elmira: "I will answer for myself and afterwards append the decision of the trustees. Anybody with good moral character and clean feet is welcome to use our meeting house, if they like, but were I you I should prefer Holden's Hall. But, 179 lastly, I should shrink from holding such a meeting. I fear that you will come to pain of disappointment when your enthusiasm is chilled and bruised against the stone walls of Elmira apathy. More people will attend at Holden's Hall than at church. So speaks in brief, yours with hearty respect."
She got the following typical letter from Rev. Thomas K. Beecher when she asked to use his church in Elmira: "I’ll speak for myself first and then include the decision of the trustees. Anyone with good moral character and clean shoes is welcome to use our meeting house if they want, but if I were you, I’d prefer Holden’s Hall. But, 179 in the end, I would hesitate to hold such a meeting. I worry that you’ll experience disappointment when your excitement is dampened and hit against the cold walls of Elmira’s indifference. More people will show up at Holden’s Hall than at church. So that’s my brief take, yours with warm respect."
Mrs. Blackwell writes her teasingly about what she calls her obtuseness, going straight ahead with her work, never knowing when she was snubbed or defeated, giving the undiluted doctrine to people without ever perceiving their frantic efforts to escape, and ignoring all the humorous features of the campaigns. Miss Anthony retorts: "You might give some of the funny things at your own expense, but tell just as many as you please at mine. You see I have always gone with such a blind rush that I never had time to see the ridiculous, and blessed for me and my work and my happiness that I did not." Another invariable habit was never to notice complaints written to her. She always answered the business points but entirely ignored complainings, charges against other people and all extraneous matters.
Mrs. Blackwell playfully writes to her about what she calls her lack of awareness, focusing solely on her work, completely oblivious to when she was insulted or defeated, presenting the unfiltered truth to people without noticing their desperate attempts to get away, and overlooking all the funny aspects of the campaigns. Miss Anthony responds: "You could share some of the funny stories at your own expense, but go ahead and tell as many as you want at mine. You see, I've always rushed forward so blindly that I never had time to see the absurd, and thank goodness for me, my work, and my happiness that I didn’t." Another consistent habit was her refusal to acknowledge complaints addressed to her. She always addressed the business matters but completely ignored grievances, accusations against others, and all irrelevant issues.
She relates a significant incident which occurred during this summer campaign when she and Antoinette Blackwell spent a Sunday at Gerrit Smith's. He had established at Peterboro and was maintaining at his own expense a Free church. Mrs. Blackwell, under the influence of Theodore Parker, Chapin and other liberal thinkers, had become very broad in her doctrines, and was greatly pleased at an opportunity to preach for Mr. Smith, thinking to find perfect appreciation and sympathy. After church Miss Anthony went to her room and found her weeping bitterly, but she begged to be left to herself. When more composed she sent for her and told how in the midst of her sermon, when she felt herself surpassing anything she ever had done, she heard a gentle snore, and looking down beheld Mr. Smith sound asleep! She was terribly disappointed and now had made up her mind there was but one thing for the human soul, and that was to live absolutely within itself. There is no friend, no relative, who can enter into the depths 180 of another individuality. A husband and wife may be very happy together; in all the little occurrences which really make up the sum of everyday life, they may be perfectly congenial; but there will be times when each will feel the other separated by an immeasurable distance. Henceforth she would enjoy what solace there was in her religious faith for herself but would expect no other soul to share it with her. "This was to me a wonderful revelation," said Miss Anthony, "and I realized, as never before, that in our most sacred hours we dwell indeed in a world of solitude."
She shares an important experience from this summer campaign when she and Antoinette Blackwell spent a Sunday with Gerrit Smith. He had established a Free church in Peterboro and was funding it himself. Mrs. Blackwell, inspired by Theodore Parker, Chapin, and other progressive thinkers, had adopted very broad beliefs and was excited to have the chance to preach for Mr. Smith, expecting to find complete understanding and support. After the service, Miss Anthony went to her room and found her crying deeply, but she asked to be left alone. Once she calmed down, she called for Miss Anthony and revealed that during her sermon, when she felt she was delivering her best work ever, she heard a soft snore and looked down to see Mr. Smith fast asleep! She felt utterly let down and had decided that the only thing for the human soul was to live entirely within itself. There is no friend or relative who can fully understand another person's depths. A husband and wife can be very happy together and perfectly compatible in the little moments that make up daily life, but there will be times when each person feels an unbridgeable distance from the other. From now on, she would find solace in her religious faith for herself but wouldn’t expect anyone else to share it. "This was a profound revelation for me," Miss Anthony said, "and I realized, more than ever, that in our most sacred moments, we truly live in a world of solitude."

Antoinette Brown Blackwell
Antoinette Brown Blackwell
On December 2, 1859, occurred that terrible tragedy in the country's history, the execution of John Brown for the raid on the United States arsenal at Harper's Ferry. The nation was shaken as by a great earthquake. Its dreadful import was realized perhaps by none so strikingly as by that little band of Abolitionists who never had wavered in their belief that slavery must ultimately disrupt the Union. When the country was paralyzed with horror and uncertainty, they alone dared call public meetings of mourning and indignation. It was natural that in Rochester they should turn to Susan B. Anthony for leadership. Without a moment's hesitation for fear of consequences she engaged Corinthian Hall and set about arranging a meeting for the evening of that day. Parker Pillsbury wrote:
On December 2, 1859, a tragic event marked the nation's history: the execution of John Brown for his raid on the United States arsenal at Harper's Ferry. The country was shaken to its core. Perhaps none felt its dreadful significance more than the small group of Abolitionists who had always believed that slavery would ultimately tear the Union apart. While the nation was gripped by horror and uncertainty, they alone had the courage to hold public meetings for mourning and outrage. Naturally, in Rochester, they looked to Susan B. Anthony for guidance. Without a moment’s hesitation, undeterred by potential consequences, she booked Corinthian Hall and began organizing a meeting for that evening. Parker Pillsbury wrote:
Can you not make this gathering one of a popular character? What I mean is will not some sturdy Republican or Gerrit Smith man preside, another act as secretary and several make addresses? Only we must not lose the control. I do not believe that any observance of the day will be instituted outside our ranks. I am without tidings from the "seat of war" since Tuesday evening; and do not know what we shall hear next. My voice is against any attempt 181 at rescue. It would inevitably, I fear, lead to bloodshed which could not compensate nor be compensated. If the people dare murder their victim, as they are determined to do, and in the name of law, he dares and is prepared to die and the moral effect of the execution will be without a parallel since the scenes on Calvary eighteen hundred years ago, and the halter that day sanctified shall be the cord to draw millions to salvation.
Can we make this gathering popular? What I’m suggesting is that a strong Republican or someone linked to Gerrit Smith should lead, another person can take the secretary role, and several people can give speeches. But we need to ensure we stay in control. I don’t think there will be any observance of the day outside of our group. I haven’t heard anything from the "seat of war" since Tuesday night, and I’m unsure about what we’ll hear next. I'm against any attempts 181 at rescue. I’m concerned it would inevitably lead to bloodshed that wouldn’t benefit anyone. If people are determined to kill their victim, as it seems they are, and in the name of the law, he is ready to die, then the moral impact of the execution will be unprecedented since the events at Calvary eighteen hundred years ago, and the gallows that day will become a means to save millions.

Parker Pillsbury
Parker Pillsbury
Miss Anthony found that beyond the little band of Abolitionists not a person dared give her any assistance. Her diary says: "Not one man of prominence in religion or politics will publicly identify himself with the John Brown meeting." She went from door to door selling tickets and collecting money. Samuel D. Porter, a prominent member of the Liberty party, assisted her, as did that circle of staunch Quaker friends who never failed her in any undertaking; Frederick Douglass had been obliged to flee to England. An admission fee of fifty cents kept out the rabble, and not more than 300 were present. The masses of the people, even those in full sympathy, were afraid to attend. Rev. Abram Pryn, a Free church minister, made a fine address, and Parker Pillsbury spoke as never before. Mr. Porter said: "This was the only occasion that ever matched Pillsbury's adjectives." Miss Anthony presided and there was no disturbance. The surplus receipts were sent to John Brown's family.
Miss Anthony discovered that aside from the small group of Abolitionists, no one was willing to help her. Her diary notes: "Not one prominent man in religion or politics will publicly support the John Brown meeting." She went door-to-door selling tickets and collecting donations. Samuel D. Porter, a key member of the Liberty party, helped her, along with a loyal group of Quaker friends who always stood by her in any effort; Frederick Douglass had been forced to escape to England. A fifty-cent admission fee kept away the troublemakers, and only about 300 people showed up. Most of the public, even those who fully supported the cause, were too afraid to attend. Rev. Abram Pryn, a Free church minister, delivered a great speech, and Parker Pillsbury spoke better than ever. Mr. Porter remarked: "This was the only time that ever matched Pillsbury's adjectives." Miss Anthony chaired the event, and everything went smoothly. The extra funds collected were sent to John Brown's family.
Mrs. Stanton wrote shortly afterwards, urging her to come to Seneca Falls: "Indeed it would do me great good to see some reformers just now. The death of my father, the worse than death of my dear cousin Gerrit,[28] the martyrdom of that great and glorious John Brown, all conspire to make me regret 182 more than ever my dwarfed and perverted womanhood. In times like these every soul should do the work of a fullgrown man. When I pass the gate of the celestials and good Peter asks me where I wish to sit, I will say: 'Anywhere so that I am neither a negro nor a woman. Confer on me, great angel, the glory of white manhood, so that henceforth I may feel unlimited freedom.'"
Mrs. Stanton wrote shortly afterwards, urging her to come to Seneca Falls: "It would really do me a lot of good to see some reformers right now. The death of my father, the even worse loss of my dear cousin Gerrit,[28] and the tragedy of that great and glorious John Brown, all make me feel more than ever my limited and twisted womanhood. In times like these, everyone should do the work of a full-grown man. When I reach the gates of heaven and good Peter asks me where I'd like to sit, I will say: 'Anywhere as long as I’m not a Black person or a woman. Give me, great angel, the honor of being a white man so that from now on I can feel totally free.'"
In this year of 1859, Charles F. Hovey, a wealthy merchant of Boston, a radical in religion and a noted reformer and philanthropist, left $50,000 to be expended in securing equal rights for women, the abolition of slavery, and other reforms, at the discretion of Wendell Phillips, Wm. Lloyd Garrison and the other executors. As slavery was abolished four years later, a considerable portion of this was used for the cause of woman.
In 1859, Charles F. Hovey, a wealthy merchant from Boston, a religious radical and a well-known reformer and philanthropist, left $50,000 to be spent on securing equal rights for women, ending slavery, and other reforms, at the discretion of Wendell Phillips, Wm. Lloyd Garrison, and the other executors. Since slavery was abolished four years later, a significant portion of this was used to support the women's cause.
Early in December the anti-slavery committee insisted that Miss Anthony should resume the management of their conventions, as they wished to hold a series throughout the large cities of the State and had been unable to find any one who could so successfully conduct them. Abby Kelly Foster, though often critical and censorious, wrote her regarding one of her speeches: "It is a timely, noble, clear-sighted and fearless vindication of our platform. I want to say how delighted both Stephen and myself are to see that you, though much younger than some others in the anti-slavery school, have been able to appreciate so entirely the genius of our enterprise." The distinguished George B. Cheever, of the Church of the Puritans in New York, one of the few orthodox clergymen who stood with the Abolitionists in those early days, wrote Miss Anthony: "May God be with you and guide and bless you in your efforts. That is the strength we all need and must have if we accomplish anything good and permanent in this terrible conflict."
Early in December, the anti-slavery committee insisted that Miss Anthony take charge of their conventions again, as they wanted to hold a series across the major cities of the state and couldn't find anyone else who could run them as well. Abby Kelly Foster, despite often being critical, wrote to her about one of her speeches: "It’s a timely, noble, clear-sighted, and fearless defense of our platform. I want to express how delighted both Stephen and I are to see that you, even though much younger than some others in the anti-slavery movement, have been able to fully grasp the brilliance of our mission." The notable George B. Cheever, from the Church of the Puritans in New York, one of the few traditional clergymen who supported the Abolitionists back then, wrote to Miss Anthony: "May God be with you and guide and bless you in your efforts. That’s the strength we all need and must have if we aim to achieve anything good and lasting in this difficult struggle."

George B. Cheever
George B. Cheever
A single instance will show how closely the question of woman's rights was connected with that of anti-slavery in the popular mind. When Miss Anthony and Mrs. Blackwell were at Fort William Henry, at the head of Lake George, they spoke one evening in the hotel parlors. There were a number of southerners present and many of them were delighted with the meeting, whose doctrines were entirely new to them, and made liberal contributions. The next day the speakers left in the stage with one of these, Judge John J. Ormond and his two daughters, of Tuscaloosa, Ala. He told Miss Anthony he had been instrumental in securing many laws favorable to women in that state and it would be a pleasure to him to see that their memorial was presented to the Alabama Legislature. When she reached home she sent it to him with the following letter:
A single example will show how closely the issue of women's rights was linked to anti-slavery in people's minds. When Miss Anthony and Mrs. Blackwell were at Fort William Henry, at the top of Lake George, they spoke one evening in the hotel lounge. There were a number of southerners present, and many of them were excited about the meeting, which was teaching them completely new ideas, and they made generous contributions. The next day, the speakers left on the stagecoach with one of these southerners, Judge John J. Ormond, and his two daughters from Tuscaloosa, Alabama. He told Miss Anthony that he had helped secure many laws beneficial to women in that state, and he would be pleased to see their memorial presented to the Alabama Legislature. When she got home, she sent it to him along with the following letter:
Enclosed is a copy of our woman's rights memorial. Will you give me a full report of the action taken upon it?... I hope you and your daughters arrived home safe. Say to the elder I shall be most happy to hear from her when she shall have fairly inaugurated some noble life work. I trust each will take to her soul a strong purpose and that on her tombstone shall be engraved her own name and her own noble deeds instead of merely the daughter of Judge Ormond, or the relict of some Honorable or D. D. When true womanhood shall be attained it will be spoken of and remembered for itself alone. My kindest regards to them, accompanied with the most earnest desire that they shall make truth and freedom the polar star of their lives.
Attached is a copy of our women's rights memorial. Can you provide me with a full report on the actions taken regarding it? I hope you and your daughters got home safely. Please let the elder know that I would love to hear from her once she starts some meaningful work in life. I hope each of them embraces a strong purpose and that her tombstone will reflect her own name and her own noble accomplishments—rather than just being known as the daughter of Judge Ormond or the widow of some respected figure or D.D. When true womanhood is achieved, it will be recognized and remembered for what it is. Please send my warmest regards to them, along with my sincere hope that they make truth and freedom the core principles of their lives.
To this Judge Ormond made cordial reply, October 17, 1859:
To this, Judge Ormond replied warmly on October 17, 1859:
DEAR MADAM: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 2d inst., with the papers enclosed. The petition to the Legislature will be presented by the senator from this county and I will apprise you of the action had upon it. My daughters are obliged to you for the interest you take in them. To a certain extent I agree with you as to the duties of woman. I am greatly in favor of her elevation to her proper sphere as the equal of man as to her civil rights, the security of her person, the right to her property and, where there is a separation after marriage, her equal right with the father to the custody and education of the children. All this as a legislator I have endeavored to accomplish, making large innovations upon the ancient common law. If I differ from you as to her political rights, it is because I think that, from political as well as moral considerations, she is unfit for, indeed incapacitated from, the performance of most of the duties which are now performed by men as members of the body politic; but there are many avocations and professions now exclusively occupied by men which women are as well, 184 perhaps better fitted to fill. I hope these will soon be thrown open to an active competition of both sexes.
Dear Madam,
Then came the raid on Harper's Ferry and all its terrible consequences, and in December Judge Ormond wrote again:
I’m writing to confirm that I received your letter dated the 2nd of this month, along with the enclosed documents. The senator from our county will present the petition to the Legislature, and I will keep you updated on any actions taken regarding it. My daughters appreciate your interest in them. I somewhat agree with your views on women’s roles. I strongly support elevating women to their rightful place as equals to men in terms of civil rights, personal safety, property rights, and equal rights to custody and education of children after a separation following marriage. As a legislator, I have worked towards achieving this, making significant changes to the old common law. If I disagree with you on political rights, it’s because I believe, for both political and moral reasons, that women are unfit for, or indeed unable to perform, most duties currently held by men in the political arena; however, there are many jobs and professions now dominated by men that women are just as capable of, if not better suited for. I hope these fields will soon allow for fair competition between both genders.
MADAM: In redemption of my promise to tell you the fate of the woman's rights petition to our Legislature, I have the honor to inform you that it was virtually rejected, being laid on the table. I interested a distinguished member of our Senate in its presentation and, in addition, wrote a letter which under ordinary circumstances would have insured its respectful consideration. But after your petition was forwarded came the treasonable and murderous invasion of John Brown. The atrocity of this act, countenanced as it manifestly was by a great party at the North, has extinguished our last spark of fraternal feeling. Whilst we are all living under a Constitution which secures to us our right to our slaves, the results of which are in truth more beneficial to the whole North, and especially to the New England States, than to us, you are secretly plotting murderous inroads into our peaceful country and endeavoring to incite our slaves to cut the throats of our wives and children. Can you believe that this state of things can last? We now look upon you as our worst enemies and are ready to separate from you. Measures are in progress as far as practicable to establish non-intercourse with you and to proscribe all articles of northern manufacture or origin, including New England teachers. We can live without you; it remains to be seen how you will get along without us. You will probably find that fanaticism is not an element of national wealth or conducive to the happiness or comfort of the people.
Then came the raid on Harper's Ferry and all its awful consequences, and in December, Judge Ormond wrote again:
In conclusion, let me assure you this is written more in sorrow than in anger. I am not a politician and have always been a strenuous friend of the Union. I am now in favor of a separation, unless you immediately retrace your steps and give the necessary guarantees by the passage of appropriate laws that you will faithfully abide by the compromises of the Constitution, by which alone the slaveholding States can with honor or safety remain in the Union. But that this will be done, I have very little hope, as "madness seems to rule the hour;" and as you have thus constituted yourselves our enemies, you must not be surprised at finding that we are yours.
Dear Madam: I’m following up on my promise to update you about the women’s rights petition to our Legislature. Unfortunately, I have to let you know that it was essentially rejected and set aside. I managed to get a prominent Senate member to support its presentation and even wrote a letter that would typically ensure it received proper attention. However, after your petition was sent, we faced the treasonous and violent invasion by John Brown. The horror of this event, clearly supported by a large political faction in the North, has completely destroyed our last feelings of brotherhood. While we all live under a Constitution that guarantees our rights to our slaves—which actually benefits the entire North, especially the New England States, more than us—you are secretly planning violent attacks on our peaceful community and trying to provoke our slaves to harm our families. Do you really think this can continue? We now see you as our greatest enemies and are ready to break away from you. We are working on establishing a trade embargo against you and banning all goods from the North, including educators from New England. We can survive without you; now it’s up to you to figure out how you’ll manage without us. You’ll likely find that extremism isn’t a source of national wealth or a path to happiness or comfort for the people.
In closing, I want to make it clear that this comes from a place of sorrow rather than anger. I’m not a politician, and I have always been a strong supporter of the Union. Right now, I support separation unless you quickly retract your actions and provide the necessary assurances by passing appropriate laws to guarantee that you will faithfully adhere to the compromises laid out in the Constitution, which is the only way the slaveholding States can remain in the Union with honor or safety. However, I have very little hope that will happen, as "madness seems to rule the hour;" and since you’ve positioned yourselves as our enemies, don’t be surprised that we see you as ours.
During the first decade of its history the movement toward securing a larger liberty for women was known by the comprehensive term "woman's rights." At its inception, under the English common law which everywhere prevailed, woman was legally a part of man's belongings, one of his chattels. Restrained by custom from speaking in public or expressing herself through the newspapers, she had been silent under the oppression of ages. When at length she found her voice there were so many wrongs to be righted that she scarcely knew which first should receive attention. Those early meetings could not be called woman suffrage conventions, for many who advocated all the other reforms which they considered either disbelieved in or were indifferent to the franchise. It was only the Anthonys, Stantons, Stones, Roses, Garrisons, Phillips of this great movement for woman's liberty who were philosophical enough to see that the right of suffrage was the underlying principle of the whole question; so it was not for many years, not until practically all other demands had been granted, that they were finally resolved into a suffrage organization, pure and simple. At the beginning of 1860 the laws relating to women, as briefly stated by the great jurist, David Dudley Field, were as follows:
CHAPTER XII.
RIFT IN COMMON LAW—DIVORCE QUESTION.
1860.
The elective franchise is confined entirely to men. A married woman can not sue for her services, as all she earns legally belongs to the husband, whereas his earnings belong to himself, and the wife legally has no interest 186 in them. Where children have property and both parents are living, the father is the guardian. In case of the wife's death without a will, the husband is entitled to all her personal property and to a life interest in the whole of her real estate to the entire exclusion of the children, even though this property may have come to her through a former husband and the children of that marriage still be living. If the husband die without a will, the widow is entitled to one-third of the personal property and to a life interest in one-third only of the real estate. In case a wife be personally injured, either in reputation by slander, or in body by accident, compensation must be recovered in the joint name of herself and her husband, and when recovered it belongs to him. On the other hand, the wife has no legal claim in a similar case in regard to the husband. The father may by deed or will appoint a guardian for the minor children, who may thus be taken entirely away from the jurisdiction of the mother at his death. Where both parents are dead, the children shall be given to the nearest of kin and, as between relatives of the same degree of consanguinity, males shall be preferred. No married woman can act as administrator in any case.
During the first decade of its existence, the movement to secure greater freedoms for women was referred to as "woman's rights." At the start, under the prevailing English common law, a woman was legally considered part of a man's property, one of his possessions. Limited by societal norms from speaking in public or voicing her opinions in newspapers, she remained silent under centuries of oppression. When she finally found her voice, there were so many injustices to address that she hardly knew where to start. Those initial gatherings couldn't really be called woman suffrage conventions since many participants who supported various other reforms either didn’t believe in or were indifferent to voting rights. It was only the Anthonys, Stantons, Stones, Roses, Garrisons, and Phillips of this significant movement for women's freedom who understood that the right to vote was a fundamental issue. Therefore, it wasn't until many years later—after most other demands had been met—that they finally formed a strict suffrage organization. At the beginning of 1860, the laws concerning women, as summarized by the distinguished jurist David Dudley Field, were as follows:
One can not but ask why, under such laws, women ever would marry, but in those days virtually all occupations were closed to them and the vast majority were compelled to marry for support. In the few cases where women had their own means, they married because of the public sentiment which considered it a serious reproach to remain a spinster and rigorously forbade to her all the pleasures and independence that are freely accorded to the unmarried woman of today. And they married because it is natural for women to marry, and all laws and all customs, all restrictions and all freedom, never will circumvent nature.
The right to vote is entirely restricted to men. A married woman cannot sue for her earnings because everything she earns legally belongs to her husband, while he keeps his income for himself, and she has no legal claim to it 186. If children have property and both parents are alive, the father is the guardian. If the wife dies without a will, the husband receives all her personal property and a life interest in all her real estate, completely excluding the children, even if the property came from a previous husband and the children from that marriage are still alive. If the husband dies without a will, the widow is entitled to one-third of the personal property and a life interest in only one-third of the real estate. If a wife suffers personal injury, whether through slander affecting her reputation or through an accident hurting her body, any compensation must be claimed in both her and her husband's names, and when awarded, it goes to him. On the other hand, the wife has no legal right to claim similar compensation for her husband. The father can appoint a guardian for the minor children through a deed or will, which can completely remove them from their mother's care after his death. If both parents are deceased, the children will be given to the closest relatives, and among relatives of the same blood relation, males are preferred. No married woman can serve as an administrator under any circumstances.
On February 3 and 4, 1860, the State Woman's Rights Convention was held at Albany in Association Hall, an interesting and successful meeting. At its close, in a letter to Mrs. Wright, Miss Anthony said: "Mr. Anson Bingham, chairman of the judiciary committee, will bring in a radical report in favor of all our claims, but previous to doing so he wishes our strongest arguments made before the committee and says Mrs. Stanton must come. I wish you would slip over there and make her feel that the salvation of the Empire State, at least of the women in it, depends upon her bending all her powers to move the hearts of our law-givers at this time. I should go there myself this very night but I must watch and encourage friends 187 here." Mrs. Stanton replied to her urgent appeal: "I am willing to do the appointed work at Albany. If Napoleon says cross the Alps, they are crossed. You must come here and start me on the right train of thought, as your practical knowledge of just what is wanted is everything in getting up the right document."
One can’t help but wonder why, with such laws in place, women would ever get married. Back then, almost all jobs were closed off to them, and the vast majority had to marry for financial support. In the few cases where women had their own income, they got married because society viewed being single as a serious disgrace and strictly denied them all the pleasures and independence that unmarried women enjoy today. They married because it’s natural for women to want to marry, and no laws, customs, restrictions, or freedoms can change that fundamental truth.
The readers of history never will be able to separate Miss Anthony's addresses from Mrs. Stanton's; they themselves scarcely could do it. Some of the strongest ever written by either were prepared without the assistance of the other, but most of their resolutions, memorials and speeches were the joint work of both. Miss Anthony always said, "Mrs. Stanton is my sentence maker, my pen artist." No one can excel Miss Anthony in logic of thought or vigor of expression; no one is so thoroughly supplied with facts, statistics and arguments, but she finds it difficult and distasteful to put them into written form. When, however, some one else has taken her wonderful stock of material and reduced it to shape, she is a perfect critic. Her ear is as carefully attuned to the correct balance of words as that of a skilled musician to harmony in music. She will detect instantly a weak spot in a sentence or a paragraph and never fail to suggest the exact word or phrase needed to give it poise and strength.
On February 3 and 4, 1860, the State Woman's Rights Convention was held in Association Hall, Albany, and it was an interesting and successful meeting. At the end, Miss Anthony wrote to Mrs. Wright: "Mr. Anson Bingham, the chair of the judiciary committee, will present a strong report supporting all our claims, but before he does that, he wants our best arguments presented to the committee and says Mrs. Stanton must come. I hope you can go over there and help her realize that the future of the Empire State, at least for the women in it, depends on her putting all her efforts into convincing our lawmakers right now. I would go myself tonight, but I need to support and encourage friends 187 here." Mrs. Stanton responded to her urgent appeal: "I'm ready to do the assigned work in Albany. If Napoleon says to cross the Alps, they will be crossed. You need to come here and get me started on the right path of thought, as your practical knowledge of exactly what's needed is crucial in drafting the right document."
Mrs. Stanton had a large house and a constantly increasing family, making it exceedingly difficult to find time for literary work; so when a state paper was to be written, Miss Anthony would go to Seneca Falls. After the children were in bed, the two women would sit up far into the night arranging material and planning their work. The next day Mrs. Stanton would seek the quietest spot in the house and begin writing, while Miss Anthony would give the children their breakfast, start the older ones to school, make the dessert for dinner and trundle the babies up and down the walk, rushing in occasionally to help the writer out of a vortex. Many an article which will be read with delight by future generations was thus prepared. 188 Mrs. Stanton describes these occasions in her charming Reminiscences:
The readers of history will never be able to separate Miss Anthony's speeches from Mrs. Stanton's; they themselves can hardly do it. Some of the strongest pieces written by either were created without the other's help, but most of their resolutions, memorials, and speeches were a collaboration of both. Miss Anthony always said, "Mrs. Stanton is my sentence maker, my pen artist." No one can match Miss Anthony’s logic or the power of her expression; no one is as thoroughly equipped with facts, statistics, and arguments, but she finds it difficult and unappealing to write them down. However, when someone else has taken her incredible material and shaped it, she becomes an excellent critic. Her ear is as finely tuned to the right balance of words as a skilled musician's is to harmony in music. She can instantly spot a weak point in a sentence or paragraph and will always suggest the perfect word or phrase needed to give it balance and strength.
It was mid such exhilarating scenes that Miss Anthony and I wrote addresses for temperance, anti-slavery, educational and woman's rights conventions. Here we forged resolutions, protests, appeals, petitions, agricultural reports and constitutional arguments, for we made it a matter of conscience to accept every invitation to speak on every question, in order to maintain woman's right to do so. It is often said by those who know Miss Anthony best, that she has been my good angel, always pushing and guiding me to work. With the cares of a large family, perhaps I might in time, like too many women, have become wholly absorbed in a narrow selfishness, had not my friend been continually exploring new fields for missionary labors. Her description of a body of men on any platform, complacently deciding questions in which women had an equal interest without an equal voice, readily roused me to a determination to throw a fire-brand in the midst of their assembly.
Mrs. Stanton had a big house and a growing family, which made it really tough to find time for writing. So, whenever it was time to write a state paper, Miss Anthony would head to Seneca Falls. After the kids were in bed, the two women would stay up late into the night organizing their material and planning their work. The next day, Mrs. Stanton would find the quietest spot in the house and start writing, while Miss Anthony would get the kids their breakfast, send the older ones off to school, make dessert for dinner, and take the babies for walks, rushing inside every now and then to help the writer out of a jam. Many articles that future generations will read with joy were prepared this way. 188 Mrs. Stanton shares these moments in her delightful Reminiscences:
Thus, whenever I saw that stately Quaker girl coming across my lawn I knew that some happy convocation of the sons of Adam were to be set by the ears with our appeals or resolutions. The little portmanteau stuffed with facts was opened and there we had what Rev. John Smith and Hon. Richard Roe had said, false interpretation of Bible texts, statistics of women robbed of their property, shut out of some college, half-paid for their work, reports of some disgraceful trial—injustice enough to turn any woman's thoughts from stockings and puddings. Then we would get out our pens and write articles for papers, a petition to the Legislature, letters to the faithful here and there, stir up the women in Ohio, Pennsylvania or Massachusetts, call on the Lily, the Una, the Liberator, the Standard, to remember our wrongs. We never met without issuing a pronunciamento on some question.
Amid all these exciting events, Miss Anthony and I wrote speeches for conventions on temperance, anti-slavery, education, and women's rights. We created resolutions, protests, appeals, petitions, agricultural reports, and constitutional arguments, making it our mission to accept every invitation to speak on these topics to support women's rights to do so. Those who know Miss Anthony well often say she has been my guiding angel, always encouraging and directing me to take action. With the demands of a large family, I might have ended up, like many women, completely consumed by selfishness if my friend hadn't consistently found new ways for us to contribute. Her descriptions of groups of men on any platform, casually deciding issues that affected women without giving them a voice, easily motivated my determination to challenge their meetings.
In thought and sympathy we were one, and in the division of labor we exactly complemented each other. In writing we did better work together than either could do alone. While she is slow and analytical in composition, I am rapid and synthetic. I am the better writer, she the better critic. She supplied the facts and statistics, I the philosophy and rhetoric, and together we made arguments which have stood unshaken by the storms of nearly fifty long years.[29]
So, whenever I saw that dignified Quaker girl crossing my lawn, I knew a group of men were about to discuss our appeals or resolutions. The small suitcase packed with facts would be opened, revealing what Rev. John Smith and Hon. Richard Roe had said, misinterpretations of Bible verses, statistics about women losing their property, being excluded from certain colleges, underpaid for their work, and reports of some humiliating trials—enough injustice to make any woman forget about knitting and cooking. Then we would pull out our pens and write articles for newspapers, petitions to the Legislature, letters to supporters everywhere, mobilizing women in Ohio, Pennsylvania, or Massachusetts, and calling on the Lily, the Una, the Liberator, and the Standard to back our cause. We never met without putting out a statement on some issue.
In 1878 Theodore Tilton gave this graphic description: "These two women, sitting together in their parlors, have for the last thirty years been diligent forgers of all manner of projectiles, from fireworks to thunderbolts, and have hurled them with unexpected explosion into the midst of all manner of educational, 189 reformatory, religious and political assemblies, sometimes to the pleasant surprise and half welcome of the members; more often to the bewilderment and prostration of numerous victims; and in a few signal instances, to the gnashing of angry men's teeth. I know of no two more pertinacious incendiaries in the whole country; nor will they themselves deny the charge. In fact, this noise-making twain are the two sticks of a drum for keeping up what Daniel Webster called 'the rub-a-dub of agitation.'"
In our thoughts and feelings, we were in sync, and our division of labor complemented each other perfectly. We produced better writing together than either of us could do alone. While she takes her time and analyzes deeply, I'm quick and able to synthesize. I'm the stronger writer, and she’s the stronger critic. She provided the facts and statistics, while I contributed the philosophy and rhetoric, and together we created arguments that have stood strong for nearly fifty years.[29]
On March 19, 1860, Mrs. Stanton presented her address to a joint session of the Legislature at Albany, occupying the speaker's desk and facing as magnificent an audience as ever assembled in the old Capitol. It was a grand plea for a repeal of the unjust and oppressive laws relating to women, and it was universally said that its eloquence could not have been surpassed by any man in the United States. A bill was then in the hands of the judiciary committee, simply an amendment of the Property Law of 1848, to which Andrew J. Colvin objected as not liberal enough. Miss Anthony gave him a very radical bill just introduced into the Massachusetts Legislature, which he examined carefully, adding several clauses to make it still broader. It was accepted by the committee, composed of Messrs. Hammond, Ramsey and Colvin, reported to the Senate and passed by that body in February. It was concurred in by the Assembly the day following Mrs. Stanton's speech, and signed by Governor Edwin D. Morgan.[30] This new law declared in brief:
In 1878, Theodore Tilton provided this vivid account: "These two women, sitting together in their living rooms, have spent the last thirty years skillfully creating all kinds of projectiles, from fireworks to thunderbolts, and have launched them with surprising force into all kinds of educational, 189 reformative, religious, and political gatherings, sometimes to the pleasant surprise and partial welcome of the attendees; more often to the confusion and dismay of many victims; and in a few notable cases, to the gnashing of frustrated men's teeth. I know of no two more tenacious instigators in the entire country; nor would they themselves deny this accusation. In fact, this loud duo are the two sticks of a drum keeping up what Daniel Webster called 'the rub-a-dub of agitation.'"
Any property, real and personal, which any married woman now owns, or which may come to her by descent, etc., shall be her sole and separate property, not subject to control or interference by her husband.
On March 19, 1860, Mrs. Stanton delivered her speech to a joint session of the Legislature in Albany, standing at the speaker's desk and addressing a remarkable audience that gathered in the old Capitol. It was a powerful call for the repeal of unfair and oppressive laws affecting women, and many agreed that its eloquence could not have been matched by any man in the United States. At that time, there was a bill with the judiciary committee, which was just an amendment to the Property Law of 1848. Andrew J. Colvin felt it wasn't progressive enough. Miss Anthony handed him a very progressive bill that had just been introduced in the Massachusetts Legislature, which he reviewed carefully, adding several clauses to broaden it. The committee, composed of Messrs. Hammond, Ramsey, and Colvin, accepted it, and it was reported to the Senate and passed in February. The Assembly agreed to it the day after Mrs. Stanton's speech, and it was signed by Governor Edwin D. Morgan.[30] This new law stated briefly:
Any married woman may bargain, sell, etc., carry on any trade or perform any services on her own account, and her earnings shall be her sole and separate property and may be used or invested by her in her own name. 190
Any property, whether real estate or personal belongings, that a married woman currently owns or may inherit, etc., will be her own separate property, not subject to her husband's control or interference.
A married woman may buy, sell, make contracts, etc., and if the husband has willfully abandoned her, or is an habitual drunkard, or insane, or a convict, his consent shall not be necessary.
Any married woman can negotiate, sell, and engage in any business or provide services for herself, and her earnings will be her exclusive property that she can use or invest in her own name. 190
A married woman may sue and be sued, bringing action in her own name for damages and the money recovered shall be her sole property.
A married woman can buy, sell, and enter into contracts, and if her husband has intentionally abandoned her, is a regular drinker, is mentally ill, or is in prison, she doesn’t need his consent.
Every married woman shall be joint guardian of her children with her husband, with equal powers, etc., regarding them.
A married woman can sue and be sued, filing a lawsuit in her own name for damages, and any money she recovers will be entirely hers.
At the decease of the husband the wife shall have the same property rights as the husband would have at her death.
Every married woman will share equal guardianship of her children with her husband, having the same rights and responsibilities regarding them.
This remarkable action, which might be termed almost a legal revolution, was the result of nearly ten years of laborious and persistent effort on the part of a little handful of women who, by constant agitation through conventions, meetings and petitions, had created a public sentiment which stood back of the Legislature and gave it sanction to do this act of justice. While all these women worked earnestly and conscientiously to bring about this great reform, there was but one, during the entire period, who gave practically every month of every year to this purpose, and that one was Susan B. Anthony. In storm and sunshine, in heat and cold, in seasons of encouragement and in times of doubt, criticism and contumely, she never faltered, never stopped. Going with her petition from door to door, only to have them shut in her face by the women she was trying to help; subjecting herself to the jeers and insults of men whom she need never have met except for this mission; held up by the press to the censure and ridicule of thousands who never had seen or heard her; misrepresented and abused above all other women because she stood in the front of the battle and offered herself a vicarious sacrifice—can the women of New York, can the women of the nation, ever be sufficiently grateful to this one who, willingly and unflinchingly, did the hardest pioneer work ever performed by mortal?
Upon the husband's death, the wife will have the same property rights that the husband would have had if she had died first.
Miss Anthony divided the winter of 1860 between the anti-slavery and the woman's cause. As she had very little on hand (!) she arranged another course of lectures for Rochester, inviting A.D. Mayo, Ralph Waldo Emerson, Thomas 191 Starr King and others. These speakers were in the employ of the lyceum bureau, but were so restricted by it that they could give their great reform, lectures only under private management. At the close of Emerson's he said to Miss Anthony that he had been instrumental in establishing the lyceum for the purpose of securing a freedom of speech not permitted in the churches, but he believed that now he would have to do as much to break it up, because of its conservatism, and organize some new scheme which would permit men and women to utter their highest thought. She was in the habit of arranging many of her woman's rights meetings in different towns when Phillips or others were to be there for a lyceum lecture, thus securing them for a speech the following afternoon.
This incredible action, which can almost be considered a legal revolution, came from nearly ten years of hard and persistent effort by a small group of women who, through continuous rallies, meetings, and petitions, created public support that backed the Legislature and allowed it to carry out this act of justice. While all these women worked diligently and sincerely to achieve this significant reform, there was only one who dedicated nearly every month of every year to this cause, and that was Susan B. Anthony. Through storms and sunshine, in heat and cold, during times of encouragement and periods of uncertainty, criticism, and scorn, she never wavered or stopped. She went door to door with her petition, often facing slams in her face from the women she aimed to help; she endured the mockery and insults from men she would have never encountered had it not been for this mission; she was criticized and ridiculed by the media, facing scorn from thousands who had never met or heard of her; she was misrepresented and vilified more than any other woman because she stood at the forefront of the battle and offered herself as a sacrificial figure—can the women of New York, can the women of the nation, ever be truly grateful to this one who, willingly and courageously, undertook the hardest pioneering work ever done by anyone?
T.S. King
Miss Anthony spent the winter of 1860 working on both the anti-slavery movement and women's rights. Since she had very little on her plate, she organized another series of lectures in Rochester, bringing in speakers like A.D. Mayo, Ralph Waldo Emerson, Thomas 191 Starr King, and others. These speakers were associated with the lyceum bureau but faced such strict limitations that they could only give their impactful reform lectures under private arrangements. After one of Emerson's talks, he told Miss Anthony that he had helped establish the lyceum to ensure free speech that wasn’t allowed in churches, but now he felt he might need to dismantle it due to its conservative stance and create something new that would allow both men and women to express their best ideas. She often coordinated her women's rights meetings in various towns when Phillips or other speakers were scheduled to give lyceum lectures, allowing her to secure them for a talk the following afternoon.

A letter received this winter from her sister Mary is interesting as showing that the belief in equal rights for women was quite as strong in other members of the family. She had been requested by the board of education to fill the place of one of the principals who was ill, and gives the following account:
T.S. King
I was willing to do the best I could to help out, so the next morning, with fear and trembling, I faced the 150 young men and women, many of whom, like their fathers and mothers before them, felt that no woman had the ability to occupy such a place. All went well until it was noised about that I should expect as much salary as had been paid the principal. To establish such a precedent would never do, so a man from a neighboring town was sent for post-haste, but the moment he began his administration the boys rebelled. After slates and books had been thrown from the window and I had been obliged to guard him from their snowballs on his way home, he decided teaching, in that place at least, was not his "sphere" and refused to return.
A letter received this winter from her sister Mary is interesting because it shows that the belief in equal rights for women was just as strong among other family members. She had been asked by the board of education to take the place of one of the principals who was sick, and she provides the following account:
Next morning the committee asked me to resume the management. I answered: "No person can fill the place of a long-tried teacher, but I in a measure succeeded—yet not one of you would entertain the idea of paying me as much as the principal. You sent to another town for a man, who has made an absolute failure, and yet you do not hesitate to pay him the full salary for the time he was here. If you will be as just to me, I will resume the work and do my best—on any other conditions I must decline." They 192 agreed to the proposition, I finished the term and for the first time on record a woman received a principal's salary!
I was determined to give it my all, so the next morning, feeling a bit nervous, I faced the 150 young men and women. Many of them, like their parents before them, thought that no woman could handle such a position. Everything went well until word got out that I expected to earn the same salary as the principal. Setting that kind of standard was unacceptable, so they quickly brought in a man from a nearby town. However, as soon as he started, the boys protested. After slates and books were thrown out the window and I had to shield him from their snowballs on his way home, he figured that teaching, at least in that place, wasn't for him and refused to return.
A little later Miss Mary continues the story:
The following morning, the committee asked me to take over management again. I said, "No one can truly replace a teacher with so much experience, but I managed to make it work—still, none of you would consider paying me as much as the principal. You brought in someone from another town who completely failed, and yet you're willing to pay him the full salary for the time he was here. If you treat me fairly, I will take on the role and give it my all—under any other conditions, I have to say no." They 192 accepted my terms, I completed the term, and for the first time on record, a woman received a principal's salary!
You know the principal of Number Ten has been ill nearly two months. I asked him if Miss Hayden, who took his place, was to receive his salary. He replied: "Do you think after the money has been audited to me, I ought to turn around and give it all to her?" Said I: "If the board are willing to pay you $72 a month while you are sick and pay her the same, all right; but if only one is to receive that salary, I say, and most emphatically, she is the one." He wanted to know if I was not aware that mine was the only case where such a thing had been done in Rochester. I told him I was heartily glad I had been the means of having justice done for once, and was really in hopes other women teachers would follow my example and suffer themselves no longer to be duped.
A little later, Miss Mary continues the story:
Miss Hayden however was obliged to accept $25 a month for doing exactly the work for which the man received $72 during all his illness. To keep her from making trouble, the board gave her a small present with the understanding that it was not to be considered as salary. A short time afterwards Miss Mary wrote again: "A woman teacher on a salary of $20 a month has just been ill for a week and another was employed to take her place; when she recovered, she was obliged to have the supply teacher's salary deducted from her own. So I posted down to the superintendent's office and had another decidedly plain talk. He owned that it was unjust but said there was no help for it."
You know the principal of Number Ten has been sick for almost two months. I asked him if Miss Hayden, who took over for him, would get his salary. He replied, "Do you really think that after the money has been approved for me, I should just turn around and give it all to her?" I said, "If the board is willing to pay you $72 a month while you’re out and pay her the same, that’s fine; but if only one of you is getting that salary, I firmly believe it should be her." He wanted to know if I didn’t realize that my situation was the only one like this in Rochester. I told him I was really glad to have stood up for justice for once, and I truly hoped that other women teachers would follow my example and not let themselves be fooled any longer.
In the winter of 1860, Henry Ward Beecher delivered his great woman's rights speech at Cooper Institute, New York. At that time his name was a power in the whole world and his masterly exposition of the rights of women is still used as one of the best suffrage leaflets. Miss Anthony tells in her diary of meeting Tilton and of his amusing account of the struggle they had to get this speech published in the Independent. Her little visits to New York and Boston always inspired her with fresh courage, for here she would meet Theodore Parker, Frothingham, Cheever, Chapin, Beecher, Greeley, Phillips, Garrison, the great spirits of that age, and all in perfect sympathy with what she represented. 193
Miss Hayden, however, had to accept $25 a month for doing exactly the same work that the man received $72 for during his entire illness. To prevent her from causing any trouble, the board gave her a small gift with the understanding that it wasn’t considered as part of her salary. Shortly after, Miss Mary wrote again: "A female teacher with a salary of $20 a month was just sick for a week, and another was hired to cover for her; when she got better, she had to have the substitute teacher's pay deducted from her own. So I went down to the superintendent's office and had another very straightforward talk. He admitted it was unfair but said there was nothing that could be done about it."
The Tenth National Woman's Rights Convention assembled in Cooper Institute, May 10, 1860. Miss Anthony called it to order and read a full and interesting report of the work and progress of the past year. The usual eloquent speeches were made by Phillips, Mrs. Rose, Rev. Beriah Green, Mary Grew, Rev. Samuel Longfellow, brother of the poet, and others. The warmest gratitude was expressed "toward Susan B. Anthony, through whose untiring exertions and executive ability the recent laws for women were secured." A hearty laugh was enjoyed at the expense of the man who shouted from the audience, "She'd a great deal better have been at home taking care of her husband and children." The proceedings were pleasant and harmonious, but next morning the whole atmosphere was changed and Elizabeth Cady Stanton did it with a little set of resolutions declaring that, under certain conditions, divorce was justifiable. She supported them by an address which for logic of argument, force of expression and beauty of diction never has been, never can be surpassed. No such thoughts ever before had been put into words. She spoke on that day for all the women of the world, for the wives of the present and future generations. The audience sat breathless and, at the close of the following peroration, burst into long-continued applause:
In the winter of 1860, Henry Ward Beecher gave his significant women's rights speech at Cooper Institute in New York. At that time, he was a renowned figure worldwide, and his powerful explanation of women's rights is still considered one of the best suffrage pamphlets today. Miss Anthony recounts in her diary meeting Tilton and his entertaining story about the challenges they faced to get this speech published in the Independent. Her short trips to New York and Boston always filled her with renewed courage, as she would connect with Theodore Parker, Frothingham, Cheever, Chapin, Beecher, Greeley, Phillips, Garrison, and other great minds of that era, all fully supporting what she stood for. 193
We can not take our gauge of womanhood from the past but from the solemn convictions of our own souls, in the higher development of the race. No parchments, however venerable with the mold of ages, no human institutions, can bound the immortal wants of the royal sons and daughters of the great I Am—rightful heirs of the joys of time and joint heirs of the glories of eternity. If in marriage either party claim the right to stand supreme, to woman, the mother of the race, belongs the scepter and the crown. Her life is one long sacrifice for man. You tell us that among all womankind there is no Moses, Christ or Paul—no Michael Angelo, Beethoven or Shakespeare—no Columbus or Galileo—no Locke or Bacon. Behold those mighty minds so grand, so comprehensive—they themselves are our great works! Into you, O sons of earth, goes all of us that is immortal. In you center our very life, our hopes, our intensest love. For you we gladly pour out our heart's blood and die, knowing that from our suffering comes forth a new and more glorious resurrection of thought and life.
The Tenth National Woman's Rights Convention took place at Cooper Institute on May 10, 1860. Miss Anthony called the meeting to order and presented a detailed and engaging report on the progress made over the past year. The usual inspiring speeches were delivered by Phillips, Mrs. Rose, Rev. Beriah Green, Mary Grew, Rev. Samuel Longfellow, the poet's brother, and others. There was heartfelt appreciation expressed "for Susan B. Anthony, whose tireless efforts and leadership secured the recent laws for women." A good laugh followed a comment from the audience, where someone shouted, "She’d be better off at home taking care of her husband and kids." The meeting was enjoyable and went smoothly, but the next morning, the mood shifted drastically when Elizabeth Cady Stanton introduced a series of resolutions stating that, under certain circumstances, divorce was justified. She backed them up with a speech that was unmatched in logical arguments, powerful expression, and beautiful language. No one had ever articulated such ideas before. That day, she spoke for all the women in the world, representing the wives of today and future generations. The audience listened intently, and at the end of her impassioned speech, they erupted in prolonged applause:
This speech set the convention on fire. Antoinette Blackwell 194 spoke strongly in opposition, Mrs. Rose eloquently in favor. Mr. Phillips was not satisfied even with the motion to lay the resolutions on the table but moved to expunge them from the journal of the convention, which, he said, had nothing to do with laws except those that rested unequally upon women and the laws of divorce did not. It seems incredible that Mr. Phillips could have taken this position, when by the law the wife had no legal claim upon either property or children in case of divorce, and, even though the innocent party, must go forth into the world homeless and childless; in the majority of States she could not sue for divorce in her own name nor could she claim enough of the community property to pay the costs of the suit. Miss Anthony said:
We shouldn’t measure womanhood by the past, but by the profound beliefs within our souls and the higher evolution of humanity. No ancient texts or human institutions can limit the timeless needs of the noble sons and daughters of the great I Am—rightful heirs to the joys of life and co-heirs to the glories of eternity. In marriage, if one person seeks to be dominant, the mother of humanity should hold the scepter and the crown. Her life is a continuous sacrifice for man. You say there’s no Moses, Christ, or Paul among women—no Michelangelo, Beethoven, or Shakespeare—no Columbus or Galileo—no Locke or Bacon. Look at those amazing minds; they are our greatest accomplishments! In you, O sons of Earth, lies all that is immortal in us. You are the core of our existence, our hopes, our deepest love. For you, we willingly give our heart's blood and die, knowing that from our suffering will come a new and more glorious renewal of thought and life.
I hope Mr. Phillips will withdraw his motion. It would be contrary to all parliamentary usage that when the speeches which advocated them are published in the proceedings, the resolutions should not be. I wholly dissent from the point that this question does not belong on our platform. Marriage has ever been a one-sided contract, resting most unequally upon the sexes. Woman never has been consulted; her wish never has been taken into consideration as regards the terms of the marriage compact. By law, public sentiment and religion, woman never has been thought of other than as a piece of property to be disposed of at the will and pleasure of man. This very hour, by our statute books, by our so-called enlightened Christian civilization, she has no voice whatever in saying what shall be the basis of this relation. She must accept marriage as man proffers it, or not at all.
This speech ignited the convention. Antoinette Blackwell 194 spoke passionately against it, while Mrs. Rose spoke eloquently in support. Mr. Phillips wasn’t satisfied even with the motion to set the resolutions aside; he pushed to remove them entirely from the convention’s journal, claiming they had nothing to do with laws except those that unfairly affected women and that divorce laws didn’t fall under that category. It’s hard to believe Mr. Phillips could take this stance, given that by law, a wife had no legal rights to property or children in the event of a divorce, and even as the innocent party, she had to face the world without a home or kids. In most States, she couldn’t even file for divorce in her own name, nor could she claim enough of the community property to cover the costs of the lawsuit. Miss Anthony said:
And then again, on Mr. Phillips' own ground, the discussion is perfectly in order, since nearly all the wrongs of which we complain grow out of the inequality, the injustice of the marriage laws, that rob the wife of the right to herself and her children and make her the slave of the man she marries. I hope, therefore, the resolutions will be allowed to go out to the public, that there may be a fair report of the ideas which actually have been presented here and that they may not be left to the mercy of the press.
I hope Mr. Phillips will withdraw his motion. It goes against all parliamentary practice that when speeches supporting a resolution are published in the proceedings, the resolutions themselves shouldn’t be. I completely disagree with the notion that this issue doesn’t belong on our agenda. Marriage has always been an unfair contract, heavily favoring one gender over the other. Women have never been consulted; their opinions haven’t been considered when it comes to the terms of marriage. By law, public opinion, and religion, women have been treated like property, controlled at a man’s discretion. Right now, thanks to our laws and our so-called enlightened Christian civilization, women have no say in defining the foundation of this relationship. They have to accept marriage on a man’s terms, or not at all.
Abby Hopper Gibbons supported Mr. Phillips, but Mr. Garrison favored the publication of the resolutions. The motion to expunge them from the minutes was lost.
And once again, in Mr. Phillips’ own area, the discussion is entirely relevant, since almost all the issues we’re addressing arise from the inequality and unfairness of marriage laws, which strip a wife of her rights to herself and her children and reduce her to a servant to the man she marries. I hope, therefore, that the resolutions will be made public, so there can be an accurate report of the ideas that have actually been presented here, and they won’t be left to the whims of the media.
Ernestine L. Rose
Abby Hopper Gibbons backed Mr. Phillips, but Mr. Garrison preferred to publish the resolutions. The motion to remove them from the minutes didn't pass.

This discussion stirred the country from center to circumference, and all the prominent newspapers had editorials favoring one side or the other. It produced the first unpleasantness in the ranks of those who had stood together for the past decade. Greeley launched thunderbolts against the right of divorce under any circumstances, and Mrs. Stanton 195 replied to him in his own paper. Lucy Stone, who just before the convention had written to Mrs. Stanton, "That is a great, grand question, may God touch your lips," now took sides with Phillips. To Mrs. Stanton and Miss Anthony came letters from far and wide, both approving and condemning. Mrs. William H. Seward and her sister, Mrs. Worden, wrote that it not only was a germane question to be discussed at the convention but that there could be no such thing as equal rights with the existing conditions of marriage and divorce. From Lucretia Mott came the encouraging words: "I was rejoiced to have such a defense of the resolutions as yours. I have the fullest confidence in the united judgment of Elizabeth Stanton and Susan Anthony and I am glad they are so vigorous in the work." Parker Pillsbury sent a breezy note: "What a pretty kettle of hot water you tumbled into at New York! Your marriage and divorce speeches and resolutions you must have learned in the school of a Wollstonecraft or a Sophie Arnaut. You broke the very heart of the portly Evening Post and nearly drove the Tribune to the grave."
Ernestine L. Rose
For the censure of the world at large they did not care, but Phillips' defection almost broke their hearts. He was their ideal of the brave and the true and always before they had had his approval and assistance in every undertaking. Miss Anthony wrote Mrs. Stanton: "It is not for you or for me, any more than for Mr. Phillips, to dictate our platform; that must be fixed by the majority. He is evidently greatly distressed. I find my only comfort in that glorious thought of Theodore Parker: 'All this is but the noise and dust of the wagon bringing the harvest home.' These things must be, and happy are they who see clearly to the end." And to her friend Amy Post: "It is wonderful what letters of approval we are receiving, some of them from the noblest women of the State, not connected in any way with our great movement but sympathizing fully with our position on the question of divorce. I only regret that history may not see Wendell Phillips first and grandest in the recognition of this great truth; but he is a man and can not put himself in the position of a wife, can not 196 feel what she does under the present marriage code. And yet in his relations to his own wife he is the embodiment of chivalry, tenderness and love."
This discussion energized the entire country, and all the prominent newspapers published editorials taking sides. It caused the first friction among those who had united for the past decade. Greeley launched severe criticisms against the right to divorce under any circumstances, and Mrs. Stanton 195 responded in his own paper. Lucy Stone, who had recently written to Mrs. Stanton, "That is a great, grand question; may God touch your lips," now sided with Phillips. Mrs. Stanton and Miss Anthony received letters from across the nation, both in support and opposition. Mrs. William H. Seward and her sister, Mrs. Worden, stated that it was not only a relevant topic to discuss at the convention but that true equal rights couldn't exist under the current marriage and divorce conditions. From Lucretia Mott came encouraging words: "I was delighted to have such a strong defense of the resolutions as yours. I have full confidence in the combined judgment of Elizabeth Stanton and Susan Anthony, and I'm glad they are so active in the work." Parker Pillsbury sent a lighthearted note: "What a mess you got into at New York! Your speeches and resolutions about marriage and divorce must have come from the teachings of Wollstonecraft or Sophie Arnaut. You really shocked the hefty Evening Post and nearly sent the Tribune to its end."
In a letter to Miss Anthony, Mrs. Stanton said: "We are right. My reason, my experience, my soul proclaim it. Our religion, laws, customs, all are founded on the idea that woman was made for man. I am a woman, and I can feel in every nerve where my deepest wrongs are hidden. The men know we have struck a blow at their greatest stronghold. Come what will, my whole soul rejoices in the truth I have uttered. One word of thanks from a suffering woman outweighs with me the howls of Christendom."
They didn't care about the criticism from the wider world, but Phillips' departure nearly broke their hearts. He represented everything brave and true to them, and they had always counted on his approval and support in every effort. Miss Anthony wrote to Mrs. Stanton: "It's not for you or me, nor for Mr. Phillips, to dictate our platform; that should be determined by the majority. He is clearly very upset. My only comfort comes from that beautiful thought by Theodore Parker: 'All this is just the noise and dust of the wagon bringing the harvest home.' These things must happen, and those who can see clearly to the end are the lucky ones." And to her friend Amy Post: "It's amazing what letters of support we're receiving, some from the most admirable women in the state, who aren't directly involved in our major movement but completely sympathize with our stance on the divorce issue. I only wish history could recognize Wendell Phillips as the first and greatest to appreciate this significant truth; but he is a man and can't understand from a wife's perspective, can't 196 feel what she endures under the current marriage laws. Still, in his relationship with his own wife, he embodies chivalry, tenderness, and love."
Notwithstanding all that had passed, Miss Anthony wrote Mr. Phillips for money from the Hovey fund to publish the report of the convention containing these very resolutions, and he sent it accompanied with a cordial letter. With his generous disposition he soon recognized the fact that it was eminently proper to agitate this question of divorce, in order to make it possible for a woman to secure release from a habitual drunkard, or a husband who treated her with personal violence or willfully abandoned her, and to have some claim on their property and a right to their children, if she were the innocent party. Before three months he wrote Miss Anthony, "Go ahead, you are doing grandly," and he spoke many times afterwards on their platform. During the height of this discussion Miss Anthony was in Albany and Rev. Mayo, thinking to annihilate her, said: "You are not married, you have no business to be discussing marriage." "Well, Mr. Mayo," she replied, "you are not a slave, suppose you quit lecturing on slavery."
In a letter to Miss Anthony, Mrs. Stanton said: "We are right. My reason, my experience, my soul all confirm it. Our religion, laws, and customs are all based on the idea that women were made for men. I am a woman, and I can feel in every nerve where my deepest pains are hidden. The men know we have dealt a blow to their greatest stronghold. No matter what happens, my whole soul rejoices in the truth I have spoken. One word of thanks from a suffering woman means more to me than the cries of the entire Christian world."
As a result of this agitation a little clique of women in Boston, led by Caroline H. Dall, announced that they would hold a convention which should not be open to free discussion but should be "limited to the subjects of Education, Vocation and Civil Position." They drew to themselves a small body of conservatives and it was thought might start a new movement, but the meeting had no permanent results. Parker Pillsbury 197 said of it: "With the exception of Phillips, no soul kindled with volcanic fire was permitted a solitary spark. O, such a meeting! Beautiful as parlor theatricals, but as a bold shriek for freedom or a protest against tyrant laws, not a sparrow on the housetop could have been more harmless." Miss Anthony wrote at this time: "Cautious, careful people, always casting about to preserve their reputation and social standing, never can bring about a reform. Those who are really in earnest must be willing to be anything or nothing in the world's estimation, and publicly and privately, in season and out, avow their sympathy with despised and persecuted ideas and their advocates, and bear the consequences."
Despite everything that had happened, Miss Anthony wrote to Mr. Phillips asking for money from the Hovey fund to publish the report of the convention that included these very resolutions, and he sent it along with a friendly letter. With his generous nature, he quickly recognized that it was completely appropriate to push for this issue of divorce, to allow a woman to escape from a habitual drunkard, a husband who abused her, or someone who had willfully abandoned her, as well as to have some claim to their property and a right to their children, if she were the innocent party. Within three months, he wrote to Miss Anthony, "Keep going, you’re doing amazing," and he spoke several times afterward on their platform. During the peak of this discussion, Miss Anthony was in Albany, and Rev. Mayo, thinking to defeat her, said: "You're not married, you have no right to discuss marriage." "Well, Mr. Mayo," she replied, "you’re not a slave; what if you stopped lecturing on slavery?"
In June she and Mrs. Stanton went to a large meeting of Progressive Friends at Waterloo, where the latter read this same speech on divorce and then, to quote Miss Anthony's own words, "As usual when she had fired her gun she went home and left me to finish the battle." In this case it lasted several days, but Mrs. Stanton knew she could count upon her friend to defend her to the last ditch. Miss Anthony was always on the skirmish line. She would interview the married women who could not leave home and children, get their approval of her plans and then go to the front. Once or twice a year she would gather her hosts for a big battle, but the rest of the time she did picket duty, acted as scout and penetrated alone the enemy's country. Between meetings she would find her way home, make over her old dresses and on rare occasions get a new one. This she called "looking after the externals." Then, as her mother was an invalid, she would clean the house from top to bottom and do a vast amount of necessary work.
As a result of this unrest, a small group of women in Boston, led by Caroline H. Dall, announced they would hold a convention that wouldn't allow for open discussion but would instead be "limited to the topics of Education, Vocation, and Civil Position." They attracted a small group of conservatives, and it was thought they might spark a new movement, but the meeting had no lasting impact. Parker Pillsbury 197 remarked on it: "Except for Phillips, no one with passionate conviction was allowed a single moment to shine. Oh, such a meeting! As lovely as a parlor performance, but as a bold cry for freedom or a protest against oppressive laws, not even a sparrow on the rooftops could have been more harmless." Miss Anthony wrote at that time: "Cautious, careful people, always trying to protect their reputation and social status, can never create meaningful change. Those who are genuinely committed must be willing to be seen as anything or nothing in the eyes of the world, and openly and consistently, in good times and bad, express their support for unpopular and persecuted ideas and their supporters and deal with the consequences."
In her diary are many such entries as these: "Washed all the shutters. Took up the carpet this morning.... Whitewashed the kitchen today.... Helped the girl wash this morning; in the afternoon ironed six shirts, and started for New York at 4 o'clock. Was a little bit tired." At one time, with the help of a seamstress, she made fourteen shirts, stitching by hand all the collars, bosoms and wristbands, 198 and, as this woman had worked in the Troy laundry, she taught Miss Anthony to clear-starch and iron them. Each summer she managed to be home long enough to assist with the canning, pickling and preserving. The little journal gives the best glimpses of her daily life, usually only a hasty scrawl of a few lines but containing many flashes of humor and wisdom. Thus the records run:
In June, she and Mrs. Stanton attended a large meeting of Progressive Friends at Waterloo, where Mrs. Stanton delivered the same speech on divorce. To quote Miss Anthony's own words, "As usual, when she fired her shot, she went home and left me to finish the battle." This time, it lasted several days, but Mrs. Stanton knew she could rely on her friend to stand by her until the end. Miss Anthony was always on the front lines. She would interview married women who couldn’t leave home and kids, get their support for her plans, and then head to the forefront. Once or twice a year, she would rally her troops for a big fight, but most of the time, she handled picket duty, acted as a scout, and ventured alone into enemy territory. Between meetings, she would return home, repurpose her old dresses, and occasionally get a new one. She referred to this as "taking care of the externals." Since her mother was unwell, she would clean the house from top to bottom and do a lot of necessary chores.
Crowded house at Port Byron. I tried to say a few words at opening, but soon curled up like a sensitive plant. It is a terrible martyrdom for me to speak.... Very many Abolitionists have yet to learn the A B C of woman's rights.... The Boston Congregationalist has a scurrilous article. Shall write the editor.... It is discouraging that no man does right for right's sake, but everything to serve party.... I find such comfort in Aurora Leigh when I am sorely pressed.... Heard Stephen A. Douglas today; a low spectacle for both eye and ear.... Gave my lecture on "The True Woman" at Penn Yan teachers' institute. Some strange gentleman present supported my plea for physical culture for girls.... Had a talk with Frederick Douglass. He seems to have no faith in simple and abstract right.... Lost patience this morning over a lamp and suffered vastly therefor. Why can I not learn self-control?... Company came and found me out in the garden picking peas and blackberries—and hoopless.... A fine-looking young colored man on train presented me with a bouquet. Can't tell whether he knew me or only felt my sympathy.... Am reading Buckle's History of Civilization and Darwin's Descent of Man. Have finished his Origin of Species. Pillsbury has just given me Emerson's poems....
In her diary are many entries like these: "Washed all the shutters. Took up the carpet this morning.... Whitewashed the kitchen today.... Helped the girl wash this morning; in the afternoon, I ironed six shirts and headed to New York at 4 o'clock. I was a little tired." At one point, with the help of a seamstress, she made fourteen shirts, stitching by hand all the collars, fronts, and cuffs, 198 and since this woman had worked in the Troy laundry, she taught Miss Anthony how to clear-starch and iron them. Each summer, she managed to be home long enough to help with canning, pickling, and preserving. The little journal offers the best glimpses of her daily life, usually just a quick scrawl of a few lines but packed with humor and insight. Thus, the records continue:
Miss Anthony did not fail to put aside everything long enough to attend the State Teachers' Convention at Syracuse. The right of women to take part had now become so well established that it needed no further defense, but she still fought for equal pay for equal services, and equal advantages of education for colored children, and each year found her views gaining a stronger support from both men and women. After this convention she continued her meetings, anti-slavery and woman's rights, and during the summer visited again her birthplace at Adams, Mass., writing home:
The house was packed at Port Byron. I tried to say a few words at the start, but I quickly became shy and withdrawn. Speaking is really hard for me.... A lot of Abolitionists still need to grasp the basics of women's rights.... The Boston Congregationalist published a nasty article. I'm going to write to the editor.... It's discouraging that no man does what's right just for the sake of doing what’s right, but instead to benefit his party.... I find a lot of comfort in Aurora Leigh when I'm really stressed.... I heard Stephen A. Douglas today; it was quite a miserable experience for both my eyes and ears.... I gave my lecture on "The True Woman" at the Penn Yan teachers' institute. A strange gentleman in the audience supported my push for physical education for girls.... I had a talk with Frederick Douglass. He seems to lack faith in straightforward and abstract ideas of right.... I lost my cool this morning over a lamp and paid for it. Why can't I learn to keep my composure?... Guests arrived and found me in the garden picking peas and blackberries—without a hoop skirt.... A handsome young Black man on the train gave me a bouquet. I can't tell if he recognized me or just sensed my empathy.... I'm reading Buckle's History of Civilization and Darwin's Descent of Man. I've finished his Origin of Species. Pillsbury just gave me Emerson's poems....
Found grandfather working in the oat field, just think of it, ninety-and-a-half years old! But in honor of my arrival he remained home and visited all the afternoon. How hard the women here work, and how destitute they are of all the conveniences. It is perfectly barbarous when they have plenty of money. I borrowed a calico dress and sunbonnet and with the cousins 199 climbed to the very top of Old Greylock. Later I visited the "Daniel House," as grandfather calls our old home. I rambled through the orchard, but the spice-apple tree is dead and the little tree in the corner that we children loved so well. I visited the old spring up in the pasture, and thought how many times the tired feet of mother and grandmother had trod those paths—and the little brook runs over the stones as merry and beautiful as ever.
Miss Anthony made sure to take time out of her busy schedule to attend the State Teachers' Convention in Syracuse. The right for women to participate was now well established and didn’t need further defense, but she still advocated for equal pay for equal work and equal educational opportunities for Black children. Each year, her views gained more support from both men and women. After this convention, she continued her meetings on anti-slavery and women's rights, and during the summer, she visited her hometown of Adams, Massachusetts, writing back home:
From here she went to Boston to attend a meeting of the Hovey fund committee and urged them to establish a "depository" at Albany with Lydia Mott in charge, which was done. This depot of supplies of literature, etc., for the anti-slavery cause, and central meeting place for its friends, was continued throughout the war. The Mott sisters, cousins of James, lovely and cultured Quaker women, had a little home in Maiden Lane and kept a gentlemen's furnishing store, making by hand the ruffled shirtbosoms and other fine linen. As their home had been so long the center for the reformers of the day, the committee were glad to put Lydia in charge of this depository, at a small salary, and she conducted an extensive correspondence for them during several years. Miss Anthony stayed with her till everything was arranged and in good running order. In July she had received the following invitation:
I found Grandpa working in the oat field—can you believe it? He’s ninety and a half years old! But to celebrate my visit, he stayed home and talked with me all afternoon. The women here work so hard and have very few conveniences. It’s really outdated, especially since they have enough money. I borrowed a calico dress and sunhat and, along with my cousins, climbed all the way to the top of Old Greylock. Later, I checked out the "Daniel House," as Grandpa calls our old home. I wandered through the orchard, but the spice-apple tree is gone, along with the little tree in the corner that we kids loved so much. I visited the old spring in the pasture and thought about how many times Mom and Grandma walked those paths—and the little brook still flows over the stones as cheerfully and beautifully as ever.
By a unanimous vote of the Union Agricultural Society of Dundee a resolution was passed to tender you an invitation to deliver the annual address at our next fair. We know it is a departure from established usage, but your experience as one of a brave band of radical reformers will have taught you that only by gradual steps and continued efforts can the prejudices of custom be overcome and the rights of humanity maintained. Woman's rights are coming to be respected more and more every year, and we hope you will aid us in demonstrating that a woman can deliver as profitable an address at an agricultural fair as can a lord of creation....
From there, she went to Boston to attend a meeting of the Hovey fund committee and encouraged them to set up a "depository" in Albany with Lydia Mott in charge, which they did. This storage of literature and other supplies for the anti-slavery cause, as well as a central meeting place for its supporters, continued throughout the war. The Mott sisters, who were cousins of James and lovely, cultured Quaker women, had a small home on Maiden Lane and ran a men's furnishing store, making ruffled shirt fronts and other fine linens by hand. Since their home had long been a hub for the reformers of the time, the committee was happy to put Lydia in charge of the depository, offering her a small salary, and she managed extensive correspondence for them over several years. Miss Anthony stayed with her until everything was organized and running smoothly. In July, she received the following invitation:
Yours respectfully, WILLIAM HOUSE, Secretary, per D. S. BRUNER.
With a unanimous vote from the Union Agricultural Society of Dundee, we have decided to invite you to give the annual address at our upcoming fair. We realize this is different from what is typically done, but your involvement with a bold group of radical reformers has demonstrated that only through gradual progress and sustained efforts can we dismantle traditional prejudices and promote human rights. Women's rights are becoming increasingly recognized each year, and we hope you will help us demonstrate that a woman can deliver just as impactful an address at an agricultural fair as any man.
To refuse such an opportunity was not to be thought of, so she accepted, and then wrote Mrs. Stanton, who answered: "Come on and we will grind out the speech. I shall expect to get the inspiration, thoughts and facts from you, and will agree to dress all the children you bring."
Sincerely, WILLIAM HOUSE, Secretary, by D. S. BRUNER.
She found a cordial welcome when she reached Dundee, October 17. It rained so hard her address was deferred till 200 the next day, as it had to be delivered out of doors, so she visited the "art" and "culinary" departments of the fair, and records in her diary: "I have just put an extra paragraph in my speech on bedquilts and bad cooking." Her stage was a big lumber wagon, and her desk the melodeon of James G. Clark, the noted singer and Abolitionist, who held an umbrella over her head to keep off the rain. The diary says: "More than 2,000 feet were planted in the mud, but I had a grand listening to the very end." The speech was a great success and was published in full in the Dundee Record, occupying the entire front page. It was a fine exposition of modern methods of farming and a strong plea for beautifying the home, giving the children books and music and making life so pleasant they would not want to leave the country for the city. These ideas at that time were new and attracted much attention and favorable comment. This was the first instance of a woman's making an address on such an occasion.
To turn down an opportunity like that was out of the question, so she agreed and then wrote to Mrs. Stanton, who replied: "Come on over and we’ll work on the speech. I expect to get the inspiration, ideas, and facts from you, and I'll take care of dressing all the kids you bring."
At the close of 1860 an incident occurred which attracted wide attention and strikingly illustrated Miss Anthony's unflinching courage and firm persistence when she felt she was right. One evening in December she was in Albany at the depository with Lydia Mott when a lady, heavily veiled, entered and in a long, confidential talk told her story, which in brief was as follows: She was the sister of a United States senator and of a prominent lawyer, and in her younger days was principal of the academy and had written several books. She married a distinguished member of the Massachusetts Senate and they had three children. Having discovered that her husband was unfaithful to her and confronted him with the proofs, he was furious and threw her down stairs, and thereafter was very abusive. When she threatened to expose him, he had her shut up in an insane asylum, a very easy thing for husbands to do in those days. She was there a year and a half, but at length, through a writ of habeas corpus, was released and taken to the home of her brother. Naturally she longed to see her children and the husband permitted the son to visit her a few weeks. When she had to give him up she 201 begged for the thirteen-year-old daughter, who was allowed to remain for two weeks, and then the father demanded her return. The mother pleaded for longer time but was refused. She prayed her brother to interfere but he answered: "It is of no use for you to say another word. The child belongs by law to the father and it is your place to submit. If you make any more trouble about it we'll send you back to the asylum."
She received a warm welcome when she arrived in Dundee on October 17. It rained so heavily that her speech was postponed until 200 the following day, since it had to be delivered outdoors. Instead, she explored the "art" and "culinary" sections of the fair and noted in her diary: "I just added an extra paragraph in my speech about bed quilts and bad cooking." Her stage was a large lumber wagon, and her desk was the melodeon of James G. Clark, the famous singer and Abolitionist, who held an umbrella over her head to shield her from the rain. The diary mentions: "More than 2,000 feet were stuck in the mud, but I had a fantastic audience until the very end." The speech was a huge success and was fully published in the Dundee Record, taking up the entire front page. It was an excellent exploration of modern farming techniques and a strong appeal for enhancing home life by providing children with books and music, making their lives so enjoyable that they wouldn’t want to leave the countryside for the city. These ideas were new at the time and generated a lot of attention and positive feedback. This was the first instance of a woman delivering a speech on such an occasion.
Then in her desperation she took the child and fled from the house, finding refuge with a Quaker family, where she stayed until she learned that her hiding-place was discovered, and now as a last resort she came to these women. They assured the unhappy mother that they would help her and, upon making careful inquiry among her friends, found that, while all believed her sane, no one was willing to take her part because of the prominence of her brothers and husband. Finally it was decided that Miss Anthony should go with the mother and child to New York and put them in a safe place, so they were directed to disguise themselves and be at the train on Christmas afternoon. Miss Anthony went on board and soon saw a woman in an old shawl, dilapidated bonnet and green goggles, accompanied by a poorly dressed child, and she knew that so far all was well, but she found the woman in a terrible state of nervousness. She had met her brother coming out of another car where he had just placed his young son to return to boarding-school, after a happy vacation at home, while his sister with her child was fleeing like a criminal; but fortunately he had not recognized her.
At the end of 1860, an incident happened that gained a lot of attention and clearly showed Miss Anthony's unwavering bravery and strong determination when she believed she was in the right. One evening in December, she was in Albany at the depository with Lydia Mott when a woman, heavily veiled, came in and, after a long, confidential conversation, shared her story, which was briefly as follows: She was the sister of a United States senator and a well-known lawyer. In her younger days, she was the principal of an academy and had written several books. She married a prominent member of the Massachusetts Senate, and they had three children. After discovering her husband's infidelity and confronting him with the evidence, he became enraged and threw her down the stairs, subsequently being very abusive. When she threatened to expose him, he had her committed to an insane asylum, which was something husbands could easily do at that time. She spent a year and a half there, but eventually, through a writ of habeas corpus, she was released and taken to her brother's home. Naturally, she longed to see her children, and her husband allowed their son to visit her for a few weeks. When she had to let him go, she 201 begged for her thirteen-year-old daughter to stay with her for longer, and the father allowed her to remain for two weeks, but then demanded her return. The mother pleaded for more time but was denied. She asked her brother to step in, but he replied, "There's no point in saying anything more. The child legally belongs to the father, and you need to accept that. If you cause any more trouble, we’ll send you back to the asylum."
Miss Anthony and her charges reached New York at 10 o'clock at night and went through snow and slush to a hotel but were refused admittance because it did not take women "unaccompanied by a gentleman." They made their weary way to another, only to be met with a similar refusal. Finally she thought of an acquaintance who had had a wretched experience with a bad husband and was now divorced, and she felt that sympathy would certainly impel this woman to give them shelter. When they reached the house they found her keeping boarders and she said all would leave if they learned 202 she was "harboring a runaway wife." It was then midnight. They went in the cold arid darkness to a hotel on Broadway, but here the excuse was made that the house was full. Miss Anthony's patience had reached its limit and she declared: "I know that is not so. You can give us a place to sleep or we will sit in this office all night." The clerk threatened to call the police. "Very well," was the reply, "we will sit here till they come and take us to the station." At last he gave them a room without a fire, and there, cold, wet and exhausted, they remained till morning. Then they started out again on foot, as they had not enough money left to hire a carriage.
Then in her desperation, she took the child and ran away from the house, finding safety with a Quaker family, where she stayed until she found out that her hiding place had been discovered. Now, as a last resort, she turned to these women for help. They assured the distressed mother that they would support her and, after carefully checking with her friends, found that while everyone believed she was sane, no one was willing to stand up for her because of the high profile of her brothers and husband. Finally, it was decided that Miss Anthony would accompany the mother and child to New York and help them find a safe place. They were instructed to disguise themselves and be at the train station on Christmas afternoon. Miss Anthony boarded the train and soon spotted a woman in an old shawl, worn-out bonnet, and green goggles, accompanied by a poorly dressed child. She knew that everything was going as planned, but she noticed that the woman was incredibly anxious. She had just seen her brother coming out of another car where he had placed his young son to return to boarding school after a joyful vacation at home, while his sister, with her child, was escaping like a criminal. Fortunately, he had not recognized her.
They went to Mrs. Rose but she could not accommodate them; then to Abby Hopper Gibbons, who sent them to Elizabeth F. Ellet, saying if they could not find quarters to come back and she would care for them. Mrs. Ellet was not at home. All day they went from place to place but no one was willing to accept the responsibility of sheltering them, and at night, utterly worn out, they returned to Mrs. Gibbons. She promised to keep the mother and child until other arrangements could be effected, and Miss Anthony left them there and took the 10 o'clock train back to Albany. She arrived toward morning, tired out in mind and body, but soon was made comfortable by the ministrations of her faithful friend Lydia.
Miss Anthony and her companions arrived in New York at 10 o'clock at night and made their way through snow and slush to a hotel, only to be refused entry because it didn't accept women "without a gentleman." They trudged to another hotel, but faced the same refusal. Finally, she remembered an acquaintance who had gone through a terrible experience with a bad husband and was now divorced, believing that this woman's sympathy would lead her to offer them shelter. When they reached the house, they found her hosting boarders, and she said that everyone would leave if they found out she was "harboring a runaway wife." It was now midnight. They went into the cold and darkness to a hotel on Broadway, but they were told the place was full. Miss Anthony's patience was exhausted, and she declared: "I know that's not true. You can give us a place to sleep or we will sit in this office all night." The clerk threatened to call the police. "That's fine," she replied, "we'll sit here until they come and take us to the station." Eventually, he reluctantly gave them a room without a fire, and there, cold, wet, and exhausted, they stayed until morning. Then they set out on foot again, as they didn't have enough money left to hire a carriage.
Abby Hopper Gibbons
They went to Mrs. Rose, but she couldn’t help them; then to Abby Hopper Gibbons, who sent them to Elizabeth F. Ellet, saying that if they couldn’t find a place to stay, they should come back, and she would take care of them. Mrs. Ellet wasn’t home. They spent all day going from place to place, but no one was willing to take on the responsibility of giving them shelter, and at night, completely exhausted, they returned to Mrs. Gibbons. She promised to keep the mother and child until they could make other arrangements, and Miss Anthony left them there and took the 10 o’clock train back to Albany. She arrived toward morning, worn out in mind and body, but soon felt comfortable thanks to her loyal friend Lydia’s care.

It was not long before the family became convinced that Miss Anthony knew the whereabouts of mother and child and then began a siege of persecution. She had at this time commenced that never-to-be-forgotten series of anti-slavery conventions which were mobbed in every town from Buffalo to 203 Albany. In the midst of all this excitement and danger, she was constantly receiving threats from the brothers that they would have her arrested on the platform. They said she had broken the laws and they would make her pay the penalty; that their sister was an "ugly" woman and nobody could live with her. To this she replied: "I have heard there was Indian blood in your family; perhaps your sister has got a little of it as well as yourselves. I think you would not allow your children to be taken away from you, law or no law. There is no reason or justice in a woman's submitting to such outrages, and I propose to defy the law and you also."
Abby Hopper Gibbons
If she had been harassed only by these men, it would have caused her no especial worry, but letters and telegrams from friends poured in urging her to reveal the hiding-place and, most surprising of all, both Garrison and Phillips wrote that she had abducted a man's child and must surrender it! Mr. Phillips remonstrated: "Let us urge you, therefore, at once to advise and insist upon this woman's returning to her relatives. Garrison concurs with me fully and earnestly in this opinion, thinking that our movement's repute for good sense should not be compromised by any such mistake." In a letter from Mr. Garrison covering six pages of foolscap, he argued: "Our identification with the woman's rights movement and the anti-slavery cause is such that we ought not unnecessarily involve them in any hasty and ill-judged, no matter how well-meant, efforts of our own. We, at least, owe to them this—that if for any act of ours we are dragged before courts we ought to be able to show that we acted discreetly as well as with good intentions." Both men spoke kindly and affectionately but they were unable to view the question from a mother's or even from a woman's standpoint. Miss Anthony replied to them:
It didn't take long for the family to become convinced that Miss Anthony knew where the mother and child were, and they started a campaign of harassment against her. At this time, she had begun the unforgettable series of anti-slavery conventions that were disrupted in every town from Buffalo to 203 Albany. Amid all this chaos and danger, she was constantly getting threats from the brothers that they would have her arrested while she was speaking. They claimed she had broken the law and would face the consequences; they said their sister was an "ugly" woman and that no one could stand to live with her. In response, she said: "I've heard there’s Indian blood in your family; maybe your sister has a bit of it too. I don’t think you would let your children be taken away from you, law or no law. There’s no reason or justice in a woman putting up with such abuses, and I intend to defy the law and you as well."
I can not give you a satisfactory statement on paper, but I feel the strongest assurance that all I have done is wholly right. Had I turned my back upon her I should have scorned myself. In all those hours of aid and sympathy for that outraged woman I remembered only that I was a human being. That 204 I should stop to ask if my act would injure the reputation of any movement never crossed my mind, nor will I now allow such a fear to stifle my sympathies or tempt me to expose her to the cruel, inhuman treatment of her own household. Trust me that as I ignore all law to help the slave, so will I ignore it all to protect an enslaved woman.
If she had only been bothered by these men, it wouldn’t have stressed her out much, but letters and telegrams from friends kept coming in, insisting she reveal the hiding place. Most surprising of all, both Garrison and Phillips wrote that she had kidnapped a man's child and must return it! Mr. Phillips protested: "Let us urge you, therefore, to immediately advise and insist that this woman return to her family. Garrison completely agrees with me on this, believing that our movement's reputation for good sense shouldn't be compromised by a mistake like this." In a six-page letter from Mr. Garrison, he argued: "Our connection to the women's rights movement and the anti-slavery cause is so significant that we shouldn't unnecessarily entangle them in any hasty and poorly thought-out, no matter how well-meaning, actions of our own. We owe it to them, at the very least, that if we are taken to court for any of our actions, we can show that we acted wisely as well as with good intentions." Both men spoke kindly and affectionately, but they couldn’t see the issue from a mother’s or even a woman’s perspective. Miss Anthony replied to them:
At the anti-slavery convention in Albany Mr. Garrison pleaded with her to give up the child and insisted that she was entirely in the wrong. He said: "Don't you know the law of Massachusetts gives the father the entire guardianship and control of the children?" "Yes, I know it," she replied, "and does not the law of the United States give the slaveholder the ownership of the slave? And don't you break it every time you help a slave to Canada?" "Yes, I do." "Well, the law which gives the father the sole ownership of the children is just as wicked and I'll break it just as quickly. You would die before you would deliver a slave to his master, and I will die before I will give up that child to its father." It was impossible for even such great men as Garrison and Phillips to feel for a wronged and outraged woman as they could for a wronged and outraged black man. Miss Anthony wrote at this time: "Only to think that in this great trial I should be hounded by the two men whom I adore and reverence above all others!" Through all this ordeal her father sustained her position, saying: "My child, I think you have done absolutely right, but don't put a word on paper or make a statement to any one that you are not prepared to face in court. Legally you are wrong, but morally you are right, and I will stand by you."
I can't provide a clear explanation in writing, but I'm completely confident that everything I've done is absolutely right. If I had turned my back on her, I would have hated myself. During all those hours of support and empathy for that abused woman, the only thing I remembered was that I was a human being. I never thought about whether my actions would damage the reputation of any movement, and I won't let that fear stop my compassion or cause me to expose her to the cruel and inhumane treatment from her own family. Trust me, just as I disregard all laws to help the enslaved, I will also ignore them to protect an enslaved woman.
Mrs. Elizabeth F. Ellet, author of Women of the Revolution and other works, cared for and protected the unfortunates, obtained sewing for the mother and helped her to live in peaceful seclusion for a year. She was placed in the family of a physician who watched her closely and testified, as did all connected with her, that she was perfectly sane. According to her letters still in existence, the husband took possession of her funds in bank, drew all the money due to her from her publishers and forbade them to pay her any more from the 205 sale of her books, as he had a legal right to do. In this extremity one of the brothers sent her some money through Miss Mott, who stood as firm as Miss Anthony in the face of threat and persecution. At length, feeling safe, the mother let the little girl go to Sunday-school alone and at the door of the church she was suddenly snatched up, put into a close carriage and in a few hours placed in possession of the father. The mother and her friends made every effort to secure the child, but the law was on the side of the father and they never succeeded.
At the anti-slavery convention in Albany, Mr. Garrison urged her to give up the child and insisted that she was completely wrong. He said, "Don't you know that the law of Massachusetts gives the father full guardianship and control of the children?" "Yes, I know," she replied, "but doesn't the law of the United States also give the slaveholder ownership of the slave? And don’t you break that law every time you help a slave escape to Canada?" "Yes, I do." "Well, the law that gives the father sole ownership of the children is just as wicked, and I'll break it just as easily. You would stand firm and refuse to hand a slave back to their master, and I will stand firm and refuse to give up that child to its father." It was hard for even great men like Garrison and Phillips to empathize with a wronged and outraged woman in the same way they could with a wronged and outraged black man. Miss Anthony noted at this time, "Can you believe that during this great trial, I should be pursued by the two men I admire and respect more than anyone else?" Throughout this ordeal, her father supported her stance, saying, "My child, I believe you have done absolutely the right thing, but don't put anything in writing or make a statement to anyone that you're not ready to defend in court. Legally, you are wrong, but morally, you are right, and I will stand by you."
Mrs. Elizabeth F. Ellet, author of *Women of the Revolution* and other works, cared for and protected those in need, arranged for sewing for the mother, and helped her live in a peaceful, secluded environment for a year. She was taken in by a physician who monitored her closely and testified, as did everyone else connected to her, that she was perfectly sane. According to her letters that still exist, her husband took control of her bank funds, withdrew all the money owed to her from her publishers, and instructed them not to pay her any more from the 205 sales of her books, which he had the legal right to do. In this difficult situation, one of her brothers sent her some money through Miss Mott, who stood as steadfast as Miss Anthony in the face of threats and persecution. Eventually, feeling secure, the mother allowed her little girl to go to Sunday school by herself, but at the church door, she was suddenly grabbed, put into a closed carriage, and a few hours later, was back in the custody of her father. The mother and her friends did everything they could to get the child back, but the law favored the father, and they were never successful.
The beginning of 1861 found the country in a state approaching demoralization. Lincoln had received a majority of the electoral vote but far from a majority of the popular vote. The victory was so narrow that the Republicans did not feel themselves strong enough for aggressive action, and the party was composed of a number of diverse elements not yet sufficiently united to agree upon a distinctive policy. Its one cohesive force was the principle of no further extension of slavery, but there was no thought among its leaders of any interference with this institution in the States where it already existed. They accepted the interpretation of the Constitution which declared that it sanctioned and protected slavery, but were determined that the Territories should be admitted into the Union as free States. While many of them were in favor of emancipation, they expected that in some way this question would be settled without recourse to extreme measures, and they feared the effect, not only on the South but on the North, of the forcible language and radical demands of the Abolitionists.
CHAPTER XIII.
MOB EXPERIENCE——CIVIL WAR.
1861—1862.
The latter were roused to desperation. Never for an instant did they accept the doctrine that the North should be satisfied merely by the prevention of any further spread of slavery; they believed the system should be exterminated root and branch. They were angered at the reserved and dispassionate language of Lincoln and alarmed at the threats of the secession 208 of the South, which must result either in putting it forever beyond the power of the government to interfere with slavery, or in terrorizing it into making such concessions as would enable the slave power to intrench itself still more strongly under the protection of the Constitution.
The start of 1861 had the country on the verge of demoralization. Lincoln had won a majority of the electoral vote but far from the majority of the popular vote. The victory was so slim that the Republicans didn’t feel strong enough to take bold action, and the party was made up of various groups that weren’t yet united enough to agree on a clear policy. Its only unifying force was the principle of not allowing any further expansion of slavery, but its leaders had no intention of interfering with this institution in the States where it already existed. They accepted the interpretation of the Constitution that allowed and protected slavery, but were determined that the Territories should be admitted into the Union as free States. While many of them supported emancipation, they hoped that the issue would somehow be resolved without resorting to extreme measures, and they worried about the impact, not just on the South but also on the North, of the aggressive language and radical demands of the Abolitionists.
At this critical moment, therefore, the Abolitionists put forth every effort to rouse public sentiment to the impending dangers. They gathered their forces and sent them throughout New England, New York and the Western States, bearing upon their banners the watchwords, "No Compromise with Slaveholders. Immediate and Unconditional Emancipation." One detachment, under the intrepid leadership of Susan B. Anthony, arranged a series of meetings for New York in the winter of 1861. This party was composed of Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Rev. Samuel J. May, Rev. Beriah Green, Aaron M. Powell and Stephen S. Foster; but one after another gave out and went home, while Miss Anthony still remained at the helm. The series began at Buffalo, January 3, in St. James Hall. The mob was ready for them and, led by ex-Justice George Hinson and Birdseye Wilcox, hissed, hooted, yelled and stamped, making it utterly impossible for the speakers to be heard. Prominent among the disturbers were young Horatio Seymour and a son of ex-President Fillmore. The police refused to obey the orders of a Republican mayor and joined in the efforts of the mob, which held carnival two entire days, finally crowding upon the platform and taking possession; and in the midst of the melee the gas was turned off. Miss Anthony stood her ground, however, until lights were brought in, and then herself declared the meeting adjourned.
The latter group was pushed to desperation. They never accepted the idea that the North should be satisfied just by stopping the spread of slavery; they believed the system should be completely eradicated. They were frustrated by Lincoln's reserved and unemotional language and were alarmed by the threats of Southern secession 208, which would either remove the government's ability to intervene in slavery forever or intimidate it into making concessions that would allow the slave power to entrench itself even more securely under the Constitution's protection.
In towns where there were not enough people to create a disturbance, the meetings passed off quietly, but they were mobbed and broken up in every city from Buffalo to Albany. Democratic officials encouraged the mob spirit and where Republicans might have wished to oppose it, they were too cowardly to do so. The meetings were advertised for three days in Rochester, beginning January 12, and, as the newspapers occupied many columns with a discussion as to whether they would be 209 broken up here as elsewhere, the opposition was thoroughly aroused and the turbulent elements had time to become fully organized. The board of aldermen were called together to consider whether means could not be found to prevent Mr. Reynolds allowing the use of Corinthian Hall, which had been rented for the occasion, and whether it would not be wise to issue an order forbidding the owner of any public building to let it to the Abolitionists; but finally adjourned without action.
At this crucial moment, the Abolitionists put in all their effort to raise public awareness about the looming dangers. They gathered their supporters and sent them throughout New England, New York, and the Western States, carrying the slogans, "No Compromise with Slaveholders. Immediate and Unconditional Emancipation." One group, led courageously by Susan B. Anthony, organized a series of meetings in New York during the winter of 1861. This group included Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Rev. Samuel J. May, Rev. Beriah Green, Aaron M. Powell, and Stephen S. Foster, but one by one, they left and went home, while Miss Anthony stayed in charge. The series kicked off in Buffalo on January 3, at St. James Hall. A hostile crowd, organized by former Justice George Hinson and Birdseye Wilcox, hissed, booed, yelled, and stomped, making it impossible for the speakers to be heard. Among the troublemakers were young Horatio Seymour and a son of ex-President Fillmore. The police ignored the orders of a Republican mayor and joined the mob, which caused chaos for two full days, eventually crowding onto the stage and taking control; amid the chaos, the lights were turned off. Miss Anthony held her ground, though, until lights were brought in, at which point she declared the meeting adjourned.
The mob, under the lead of Constable Richard L. Swift, fully answered all expectations. As Miss Anthony stepped forward to open the meeting, she was greeted with a broadside of hisses and ironical applause. When Mrs. Stanton began her address her voice was drowned in jeers and groans and, although she persevered for some time, she was unable to complete a single sentence. Rev. May attempted to speak and was met by yells, and stamping of feet. A Southerner in the audience rose and said: "Well, I may as well go back to Kentucky, for this is ahead of any demonstration against free speech I ever saw in the South;" but he was stopped by cries of, "Put him out!" The men kept on their hats, smoked pipes and cigars, stamped, bellowed, swore, and bedlam reigned. The acting mayor, sheriff and chief of police were present, but not an arrest was made. Mrs. Stanton finally left the platform, but Miss Anthony courageously maintained her position until the chief of police mounted the rostrum and declared the meeting adjourned. Even then the rioters refused to go out of the hall, and the speakers were obliged to leave under protection of the police amid the hooting and howling of the rabble. All wanted to give up the rest of the meetings, but Miss Anthony declared they had a right to speak and it was the business of the authorities to protect them, and persisted in finishing the series as advertised. On Sunday the only place where they were allowed to hold services was in Zion's colored church. The house was filled, morning and evening, and they were left in peace. 210
In towns where there weren’t enough people to cause a disruption, the meetings went smoothly, but they were crowded and shut down in every city from Buffalo to Albany. Democratic officials fueled the mob mentality, and while Republicans might have wanted to resist it, they were too scared to do so. The meetings were advertised for three days in Rochester, starting January 12, and as the newspapers filled many columns debating whether they would be 209 interrupted here like everywhere else, the opposition was fully energized and the unruly groups had enough time to become organized. The board of aldermen was convened to discuss whether they could find ways to prevent Mr. Reynolds from allowing the use of Corinthian Hall, which had been booked for the event, and whether it would be wise to issue an order prohibiting any public building owner from renting it to the Abolitionists; however, they ultimately adjourned without making a decision.
At Port Byron the meeting was broken up by the throwing of cayenne pepper on the stove. When the speakers reached Utica, where Mechanics' Hall had been engaged, they learned that the board of directors had met and decided it should not be used, in direct violation of the contract with Miss Anthony, who had spent $60 on the meeting. They found the doors locked and a large crowd on the outside. The mayor was among them and begged her not to attempt to hold a meeting. In reply she demanded that the doors be opened. He refused but offered to escort her to a place of safety. She answered: "I am not afraid. It is you who are the coward. If you have the power to protect me in person, you have also the power to protect me in the right of free speech. I scorn your assistance." She declined his proffered arm, but he persisted in escorting her through the mob. As no hall could be had they held their meeting at the residence of her host, James C. DeLong, and formed an anti-slavery organization. The instigator of the opposition in Utica was ex-Governor Horatio Seymour. Of the meeting at Rome, Miss Anthony wrote:
The crowd, led by Constable Richard L. Swift, completely met all expectations. As Miss Anthony stepped forward to open the meeting, she was met with a barrage of hisses and sarcastic applause. When Mrs. Stanton started her speech, her voice was drowned out by jeers and groans, and although she kept trying for a while, she couldn't finish a single sentence. Rev. May tried to speak but was greeted with yells and stomping. A Southerner in the audience stood up and said, "Well, I might as well go back to Kentucky because this is the worst attack on free speech I’ve ever seen in the South," but he was interrupted by shouts of, "Get him out!" The men kept their hats on, smoked pipes and cigars, stomped their feet, yelled, swore, and chaos ruled. The acting mayor, sheriff, and chief of police were present, but not one arrest was made. Mrs. Stanton eventually left the platform, but Miss Anthony bravely held her ground until the chief of police came up and announced the meeting was over. Even then, the rioters wouldn’t leave the hall, and the speakers had to exit with police protection amid the yelling and screaming of the mob. Everyone wanted to cancel the remaining meetings, but Miss Anthony insisted they had the right to speak and that it was the authorities' job to protect them, so she insisted on finishing the series as planned. On Sunday, the only place they were allowed to hold services was in Zion's colored church. The place was packed, morning and evening, and they were left in peace. 210
Last evening there was a furious organized mob. I stood at the foot of the stairs to take the admission fee. Some thirty or forty had properly paid and passed up when a great uproar in the street told of times coming. It proved to be a closely packed gang of forty or fifty rowdies, who stamped and yelled and never halted for me. I said, "Ten cents, sir," to the leader, but he brushed me aside, big cloak, furs and all, as if I had been a mosquito, and cried, "Come on, boys!" They rushed to the platform, where were Foster and Powell who had not yet commenced speaking, seated themselves at the table, drew out packs of cards, sang the Star-Spangled Banner and hurrahed and hooted. After some thirty or forty minutes, Mr. Foster and Aaron came down and I accompanied them back to Stanwix Hotel, where the gang made desperate efforts to get through the entrance room in pursuit of the "damned Abolitionists." The Republican paper called us pestiferous fanatics and infidels, and advised every decent man to stay away. Were the Republicans true at this crisis, we not only should be heard quietly, as in past years, but should have far larger audiences; and yet a hundred unmolested conventions would not have made us a tithe of the sympathizers this one diabolical mob has done.
At Port Byron, the meeting was disrupted when cayenne pepper was thrown on the stove. When the speakers arrived in Utica, where Mechanics' Hall had been reserved, they found out that the board of directors had convened and decided not to allow its use, directly breaking the contract with Miss Anthony, who had spent $60 on the meeting. They discovered the doors were locked and a large crowd outside. The mayor was among them, pleading with her not to proceed with the meeting. In response, she insisted that the doors be opened. He refused but offered to escort her to safety. She replied, "I'm not afraid. You're the coward. If you have the power to protect me physically, then you also have the power to protect my right to free speech. I don't need your help." She rejected his arm, but he continued to escort her through the crowd. Since they couldn't secure a hall, they held their meeting at the home of her host, James C. DeLong, and formed an anti-slavery organization. The main instigator of the opposition in Utica was former Governor Horatio Seymour. Regarding the meeting in Rome, Miss Anthony wrote:
Mr. May was in favor of giving up the conventions and was especially anxious that one should not be attempted in Syracuse, which city, he said, had always maintained freedom of 211 speech and he did not want the record broken; but still, if they insisted upon coming he would do all in his power to help them. Miss Anthony was firm, replying: "If Syracuse is capable of maintaining free speech the record will not be broken; if it is not capable, it has no right to the reputation." Convention Hall was engaged and Mr. May and Mr. C.D.B. Mills lent every possible assistance, but the Abolitionists encountered here the worst opposition of all. The hall was filled with a howling, drunken, infuriated crowd, headed by Ezra Downer, a liquor dealer, and Luke McKenna, a pro-slavery Democrat. Even Mr. May, who was venerated by all Syracuse, was not allowed to speak. Rotten eggs were thrown, benches broken, and knives and pistols gleamed in every direction. The few ladies present were hurried out of the room, and Miss Anthony faced that raging audience, the only woman there. The Republican chief of police refused to make any effort toward keeping order. The mob crowded upon the platform and took possession of the meeting, and Miss Anthony and her little band were forced out of the hall. They repaired to the residence of Dr. R.W. and Mrs. Hannah Fuller Pease, which was crowded with friends of the cause. That evening the rioters dragged through the streets hideous effigies of Susan B. Anthony and Rev. S.J. May, and burned them in the public square.
Last night, there was an angry organized mob. I was at the bottom of the stairs collecting the entrance fee. About thirty or forty people had paid and gone in when a loud disturbance outside indicated trouble. It turned out to be a packed crowd of forty or fifty rowdy individuals who were stomping, shouting, and completely ignoring me. I said, “Ten cents, sir,” to the leader, but he pushed me aside, cloak and furs and all, like I was nothing, and yelled, “Come on, boys!” They rushed to the platform where Foster and Powell were sitting, not yet speaking, pulled out decks of cards, sang the Star-Spangled Banner, and cheered and booed. After about thirty or forty minutes, Mr. Foster and Aaron came down, and I walked back with them to the Stanwix Hotel, where the gang tried desperately to push through the entrance in pursuit of the “damned Abolitionists.” The Republican paper called us harmful fanatics and infidels, advising every decent man to stay away. If the Republicans had been honest during this crisis, we should have been heard peacefully, as in previous years, and we would have had much larger audiences; yet even a hundred peaceful conventions wouldn't have gained us as many supporters as this one malicious mob has.
Not at all daunted or discouraged, Miss Anthony took her speakers forthwith into the very heart of the enemy's country, the capital of the State. Albany had at that time a Democratic mayor, George H. Thacher. As soon as the papers announced the coming of the Abolitionists, over a hundred prominent citizens addressed a petition to the mayor to forbid their meeting for fear of the same riotous demonstrations which had disgraced the other cities. He replied at considerable length, saying that he had taken an oath to support the Constitutions of the United States and the State of New York, that both guaranteed the right of free speech to all citizens, and while he was mayor he intended to protect them in that right.
Mr. May was in favor of dropping the conventions and was particularly anxious that one shouldn’t be attempted in Syracuse. He said that the city had always upheld freedom of 211 speech, and he didn't want that reputation ruined; however, if they insisted on coming, he would do everything he could to support them. Miss Anthony was resolute, responding, "If Syracuse can maintain free speech, the record won’t be broken; if it can't, then it doesn't deserve that reputation." Convention Hall was booked, and Mr. May and Mr. C.D.B. Mills offered as much help as they could, but the Abolitionists faced the worst opposition yet. The hall was packed with a loud, drunken, and furious crowd, led by Ezra Downer, a liquor dealer, and Luke McKenna, a pro-slavery Democrat. Even Mr. May, who was respected by everyone in Syracuse, wasn't allowed to speak. Rotten eggs were thrown, benches were smashed, and knives and pistols glinted everywhere. The few women present were quickly escorted out, while Miss Anthony stood her ground, the only woman there. The Republican chief of police refused to take action to maintain order. The mob surged onto the platform and took control of the meeting, forcing Miss Anthony and her small group out of the hall. They went to the home of Dr. R.W. and Mrs. Hannah Fuller Pease, which was filled with supporters of the cause. That evening, the rioters paraded grotesque effigies of Susan B. Anthony and Rev. S.J. May through the streets and burned them in the public square.
On the day of the convention he called at the Delevan 212 House for Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stan ton, now reinforced by Lucretia Mott, Martha C. Wright, Gerrit Smith and Frederick Douglass, and accompanied them to Association Hall. They found it packed to the doors. The mayor went on the platform and announced that he had placed policemen in various parts of the hall in citizens' clothes, and that whoever made the least disturbance would be at once arrested. Then he laid a revolver across his knees, and there he sat during the morning, afternoon and evening sessions. Several times the mob broke forth, and each time arrests were promptly made. Toward the close of the evening he said to Miss Anthony: "If you insist upon holding your meetings tomorrow, I shall still protect you, but it will be a difficult thing to hold this rabble in check much longer. If you will adjourn at the close of this session I shall consider it a personal favor." Of course she willingly acceded to his request. He accompanied the ladies to their hotel, the mob following all the way.
Not at all discouraged, Miss Anthony immediately brought her speakers into the very heart of enemy territory, the state capital. At that time, Albany had a Democratic mayor, George H. Thacher. As soon as the newspapers reported the arrival of the Abolitionists, over a hundred prominent citizens submitted a petition to the mayor asking him to prohibit their meeting, fearing the same violent protests that had marred other cities. He responded at length, stating that he had taken an oath to uphold the Constitutions of the United States and New York State, both of which guaranteed all citizens the right to free speech, and that while he was mayor, he would protect that right.
This closed the series of conventions. With a Republican mayor in every other city, there had been no attempt at official protection; and yet it may be remembered, in extenuation, that it is always easier for the party out of power than for the one in power to stand for principle; the former has nothing to lose. The Republicans at this time were panic-stricken and staggering under the weight of responsibility suddenly laid upon them; and the Abolitionists, by their radical demands and scathing criticism, were adding to their difficulties. There can be no justification, however, for any official who is too cowardly or too dishonest to fulfill the duties of his office.
On the day of the convention, he stopped by the Delevan 212 House to pick up Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton, who were now joined by Lucretia Mott, Martha C. Wright, Gerrit Smith, and Frederick Douglass, and took them to Association Hall. The place was packed. The mayor went on stage and announced that he had stationed plainclothes police officers throughout the hall, and anyone who caused even the slightest disturbance would be immediately arrested. Then he laid a revolver across his lap and sat there during the morning, afternoon, and evening sessions. Several times the crowd erupted, and each time, arrests were quickly made. Toward the end of the evening, he said to Miss Anthony: "If you insist on holding your meetings tomorrow, I will still protect you, but it's going to be really tough to keep this crowd under control much longer. If you could adjourn at the end of this session, I would consider it a personal favor." Of course, she agreed to his request. He accompanied the ladies to their hotel, with the crowd following them the entire way.
Immediately upon the close of this anti-slavery meeting, the State Woman's Rights Convention was held in Albany, February 7 and 8. Mr. Garrison, Mrs. Rose, Lucretia Mott and many of the old brilliant galaxy were among the speakers. They little thought that this was the last convention they would hold for five years, that a long and terrible war would cast its shadow over every household before they met again, that differences would arise in their own ranks, and that never more would they come together in the old, fraternal spirit that 213 had bound them so closely and given them strength to bear the innumerable hardships which so largely had been their portion.
This ended the series of conventions. With a Republican mayor in every other city, there was no effort for official protection; yet it’s worth pointing out that it’s always easier for the party out of power to stand by principles than for the one in power because the former has nothing to lose. At this time, the Republicans were panicking and struggling under the heavy responsibility suddenly placed on them, while the Abolitionists, with their radical demands and harsh criticism, were only making things harder for them. However, there’s no excuse for any official who is too cowardly or dishonest to do their job.
After the Albany meeting, Miss Anthony at once began preparations for the National Woman's Rights Convention in New York in May. The date was set, the Tabernacle secured and many of the speakers engaged, but in the meantime the affairs of the nation had become more and more complicated; the threatened secession of the Southern States had been accomplished; the long-expected, long-dreaded crisis seemed close at hand; the people were uncertain and bewildered in the presence of the dreadful catastrophe. All thought, all interest, all action were centered in the new President. The whole nation was breathlessly awaiting the declaration of Lincoln's policy. To call any kind of meeting which had an object other than that relating to the preservation of the Union seemed almost a sacrilege. Letters poured in upon Miss Anthony urging her to relinquish all idea of a convention, but she never had learned to give up. Even after the fall of Sumter and the President's call for troops, the letters were still insisting that she declare the meeting postponed; but it was not until the abandonment of the Anti-Slavery Anniversary, which always took place the same week, and until she found there were absolutely no speakers to be had, that she finally yielded.
Immediately after this anti-slavery meeting wrapped up, the State Woman's Rights Convention took place in Albany on February 7 and 8. Mr. Garrison, Mrs. Rose, Lucretia Mott, and many other notable figures were among the speakers. They had no idea that this would be the last convention they would hold for five years, that a long and devastating war would affect every household before they met again, that disagreements would emerge within their own ranks, and that they would never again gather in the same fraternal spirit that 213 had united them and given them the strength to endure the countless hardships they had experienced.
About this time she takes care of a sister with a baby, and writes Mrs. Stanton: "O this babydom, what a constant, never-ending, all-consuming strain! We should never ask anything else of the woman who has to endure it. I realize more and more that rearing children should be looked upon as a profession which, like any other, must be made the primary work of those engaged in it. It can not be properly done if other aims and duties are pressing upon the mother." And yet so great was her spirit of self-sacrifice that in this same letter she offers to take entire charge of Mrs. Stanton's seven children while she makes a three months' trip abroad. At a later date, when caring for a young niece, she says: "The dear little 214 Lucy engrosses most of my time and thoughts. A child one loves is a constant benediction to the soul, whether or not it helps to the accomplishment of great intellectual feats."
After the Albany meeting, Miss Anthony immediately started preparing for the National Woman's Rights Convention in New York in May. The date was set, the Tabernacle was booked, and many of the speakers were lined up. However, during this time, the nation's situation became increasingly complicated; the Southern States had successfully seceded, and the long-anticipated, long-feared crisis seemed imminent. The people felt uncertain and confused in light of the looming disaster. All thoughts, interests, and actions were focused on the new President. The entire nation was anxiously waiting for Lincoln’s policy announcement. Holding any meeting that didn’t focus on preserving the Union felt almost sacrilegious. Letters flooded in to Miss Anthony, urging her to abandon the idea of a convention, but she had never learned to give up. Even after the fall of Sumter and the President's call for troops, more letters came insisting she postpone the meeting. It wasn’t until the cancellation of the Anti-Slavery Anniversary, which always happened the same week, and when she realized there were absolutely no speakers available, that she finally gave in.
The watchword of the Abolitionists ever had been "Peace." Under the leadership of Garrison, their policy had been one of non-resistance. When war actually was precipitated, when the South had fired upon the stars and stripes and the tread of marching feet resounded through every northern city, they were amazed and bewildered. Instinctively they turned to their great leaders for guidance. In Music Hall, Boston, April 21, 1861, to an audience of over 4,000, Wendell Phillips made that masterly address, justifying "this last appeal to the God of Battles," and declaring for War. It was one of the matchless speeches of all history, and touched the keynote which soon swelled into a grand refrain from ocean to ocean. But even then there were those who waited for the declaration of Garrison, the great pioneer of Abolitionism. A letter written by Rev. Beriah Green to Miss Anthony, May 22, expresses the sentiment which pervaded the minds of many Abolitionists at this period:
About this time, she takes care of a sister with a baby and writes to Mrs. Stanton: "Oh, this baby thing—what a constant, never-ending, all-consuming strain! We shouldn't ask anything more from a woman who has to go through it. I'm realizing more and more that raising children should be viewed as a profession that, like any other, needs to be the main focus for those involved. It can't be done properly if other goals and responsibilities are weighing on the mother." Yet, her incredible spirit of self-sacrifice leads her, in the same letter, to offer to take full responsibility for Mrs. Stanton's seven children while she goes on a three-month trip abroad. Later, when looking after a young niece, she says: "The dear little 214 Lucy occupies most of my time and thoughts. A child you love is a constant blessing to the soul, whether or not it helps achieve great intellectual accomplishments."
I looked forward to the Anti-Slavery Anniversary with the keenest pleasure and hope. I should see luminous faces; I should bear the voice of wisdom; I should gather strength and courage and return to my task-garden refreshed and quickened. But when I read the official notice in the Standard and Liberator of the grounds on which the meeting was given up, "that nothing should be done at this solemn crisis needlessly to check or divert the mighty current of popular feeling which is now sweeping southward with the strength and impetuosity of a thousand Niagaras," I was surprised and puzzled. I have read Phillips' War Speech, marked the tenor and spirit of the Liberator, seen the stars and stripes paraded in the Standard, perused James Freeman Clarke's sermon, and I feel more desolate and solitary than ever. Mrs. Stanton, too, is for War for the Union, and I say to myself: "How will Susan Anthony and Parker Pillsbury and all the other old comrades be affected by these signs of the times?"
The watchword of the Abolitionists had always been "Peace." Under Garrison's leadership, their approach was one of non-resistance. When war actually broke out, when the South fired upon the stars and stripes and the sound of marching feet echoed through every northern city, they were shocked and confused. They instinctively turned to their great leaders for direction. At Music Hall in Boston on April 21, 1861, in front of an audience of over 4,000, Wendell Phillips delivered a powerful speech, justifying "this last appeal to the God of Battles" and advocating for War. It was one of the most extraordinary speeches in history and struck a chord that soon resonated from coast to coast. But even then, many waited for Garrison's declaration, the great trailblazer of Abolitionism. A letter written by Rev. Beriah Green to Miss Anthony on May 22 reflects the thoughts that many Abolitionists held during this time:
Miss Anthony replied in the same strain:
I was really excited and hopeful about the Anti-Slavery Anniversary. I was expecting to see bright faces, hear wise voices, and gain strength and courage to return to my work with renewed energy. But when I read the official announcement in the Standard and Liberator explaining why the meeting was canceled, saying that “nothing should be done at this crucial moment to unnecessarily interrupt or divert the powerful wave of public sentiment that is currently rushing southward with the force and intensity of a thousand Niagaras,” I was shocked and confused. I’ve read Phillips' War Speech, noticed the tone and spirit of the Liberator, seen the stars and stripes displayed in the Standard, and read James Freeman Clarke's sermon, and I feel more lost and alone than ever. Mrs. Stanton is also for War for the Union, and I find myself wondering: “How will Susan Anthony, Parker Pillsbury, and all the other old friends react to these changes in the atmosphere?”
A feeling of sadness, almost of suffocation, has been mine ever since the first announcement that the anti-slavery meeting was postponed. I can not welcome the demon of expediency or consent to be an abettor, by silence any more than by word or act, of wicked means to accomplish an end, not even 215 for the sake of emancipating the slaves. I have tried hard to persuade myself that I alone remained mad, while all the rest had become sane, because I have insisted that it is our duty to bear not only our usual testimony but one even louder and more earnest than ever before.... The Abolitionists, for once, seem to have come to an agreement with all the world that they are out of time and place, hence should hold their peace and spare their rebukes and anathemas. Our position to me seems most humiliating, simply that of the politicians, one of expediency not principle. I have not yet seen one good reason for the abandonment of all our meetings, and am more and more ashamed and sad that even the little Apostolic number have yielded to the world's motto—"the end justifies the means."
Miss Anthony responded in the same way:
As the long, hard winter's work had left her very tired she gladly turned to that haven of refuge, the farm-home. The father, who was willing always to put the control of affairs into her capable hands, took this opportunity to make a long-desired trip to Kansas, going the first of May and returning in September. She assumed the entire management of the farm, put in the crops, watched over, harvested and sold them; assisted her mother with the housework and the family sewing and, by way of variety, pieced a silk quilt and wove twenty yards of rag carpet in the old loom. She found time, more-over, to go to the Progressive Friends' meeting at Junius and to attend the State Teachers' Convention at Watertown. She also managed a large anti-slavery Fourth of July meeting at Gregory's grove, near Rochester, securing a number of distinguished speakers. In writing her, relative to this meeting, Frederick Douglass said: "I rejoice not in the death of any one, yet I can not but feel that, in the death of Stephen A. Douglas, a most dangerous person has been removed. No man of his time has done more than he to intensify hatred of the negro and to demoralize northern sentiment. Since Henry Clay he has been the King of Compromise. Yours for the freedom of man and of woman always."
I’ve been feeling a heavy sadness, almost like I can’t breathe, ever since the first announcement that the anti-slavery meeting was postponed. I can’t accept the excuse-making or stay silent, just as I won’t use wrong methods to achieve a goal, not even 215 to free the slaves. I’ve tried to convince myself that I’m the only one losing my mind while everyone else has come to their senses, because I believe it’s our duty to not just be witnesses, but to do so even louder and more passionately than before. The Abolitionists seem to agree with everyone that they no longer belong and should stay quiet and hold back their criticisms and condemnations. This position feels really humiliating to me, just like politicians making decisions based on convenience rather than principles. I haven’t seen a good reason for us to stop all our meetings, and I feel more ashamed and saddened that even our small group has given in to the world’s saying—"the end justifies the means.”
Frederick Douglass
As the long, hard winter's work had left her very tired, she gladly turned to the comforting refuge of the farm home. Her father, who always trusted her capable hands to manage things, took this chance to go on a long-desired trip to Kansas, leaving at the beginning of May and returning in September. She took over the complete management of the farm, planted the crops, oversaw them, harvested and sold the produce; helped her mother with housework and family sewing, and to mix things up, pieced together a silk quilt and wove twenty yards of rag carpet on the old loom. She also found time to attend the Progressive Friends' meeting in Junius and the State Teachers' Convention in Watertown. Additionally, she organized a large anti-slavery Fourth of July meeting at Gregory's grove, near Rochester, bringing in several notable speakers. In a letter to her about this meeting, Frederick Douglass wrote: "I do not take pleasure in anyone's death, but I can't help feeling that the death of Stephen A. Douglas means a dangerous person has been removed. No one in his time has done more than he to increase hatred against black people and to undermine northern sentiment. Since Henry Clay, he has been the King of Compromise. Yours in the fight for the freedom of both men and women always."

From her diary may be obtained an idea of the busy life 216 which only allowed the briefest entries, but these show her restlessness and dissatisfaction:
Frederick Douglass
Tried to interest myself in a sewing society; but little intelligence among them.... Attended Progressive Friends' meeting; too much namby-pamby-ism.... Went to colored church to hear Douglass. He seems without solid basis. Speaks only popular truths.... Quilted all day, but sewing seems to be no longer my calling.... I stained and varnished the library bookcase today, and superintended the plowing of the orchard.... The last load of hay is in the barn; all in capital order. Fitted out a fugitive slave for Canada with the help of Harriet Tubman.... The teachers' convention was small and dull. The woman's committee failed to report. I am mortified to death for them.... Washed every window in the house today. Put a quilted petticoat in the frame. Commenced Mrs. Browning's Portuguese Sonnets. Have just finished Casa Guidi Windows, a grand poem and so fitting to our terrible struggle.... I wish the government would move quickly, proclaim freedom to every slave and call on every able-bodied negro to enlist in the Union army. How not to do it seems the whole study at Washington. Good, stiff-backed Union Democrats would dare to move; they would have nothing to lose and all to gain for their party. The present incumbents have all to lose; hence dare not avow any policy, but only wait. To forever blot out slavery is the only possible compensation for this merciless war.
From her diary, you can get a sense of her hectic life 216 which only let her make the shortest notes, but these reveal her restlessness and unhappiness:
All through the chroniclings of the monotonous daily life is the cry: "The all-alone feeling will creep over me. It is such a fast after the feast of great presences to which I have been so long accustomed." During these days she reads Adam Bede, and thus writes Mrs. Stanton:
I tried to join a sewing group, but there’s not much intelligence among them. I went to a Progressive Friends meeting; it was too wishy-washy. I attended a Black church to hear Douglass speak. He doesn’t seem to have a solid foundation; he only talks about popular truths. I quilted all day, but sewing doesn’t feel like my calling anymore. I stained and varnished the library bookcase today and oversaw the plowing of the orchard. The last load of hay is stored in the barn; everything is looking great. I helped a fugitive slave get to Canada with Harriet Tubman's help. The teachers' convention was small and boring. The women's committee didn’t report back, and I’m really embarrassed for them. I washed every window in the house today. I put a quilted petticoat in the frame. I started reading Mrs. Browning’s Portuguese Sonnets. I just finished Casa Guidi Windows, a fantastic poem that’s so relevant to our terrible struggle. I wish the government would act quickly, grant freedom to every slave, and call on every able-bodied Black person to join the Union army. It seems like figuring out how to avoid that is the main focus in Washington. Good, strong-backed Union Democrats would be ready to take action; they have nothing to lose and everything to gain for their party. The current leaders have everything to lose, which is why they’re unwilling to state any policy and just wait. The only way to truly end slavery is to finish this brutal war.
I finished Adam Bede yesterday noon. I can not throw off the palsied oppression of its finale to poor, poor Hetty—and Arthur almost equally commands my sympathy. He no more desired to wrong her or cause her one hour of sorrow than did Adam, but the impulse of his nature brooked no restraint. Should public sentiment tolerate such a consummation of love—or passion, if it were not love? (But I believe it was, only the impassable barrier of caste forbade its public avowal.) If such a birth could be left free from odium and scorn, contempt and pity from the world, it would be a thousand times more holy, more happy, than many of those in legal marriage. It will not do for me to read romances; they are too real to shake off. What is the irresistible power so terrifically pictured in both Hetty and Arthur, which led them on to the very ill they most would shun?
All throughout the records of the dull daily life is the cry: "The feeling of being all alone will sneak up on me. It’s such a quick change after being surrounded by so many important people for so long." During these days, she reads Adam Bede, and this is how Mrs. Stanton writes:
To crown the result I went to the colored church to hear Sallie Holley, but she did not come. Mrs. Coleman was in the pulpit and read a poem of Gerald Massey on Peace, spoke a few minutes and said she saw Miss Anthony present and hoped she'd occupy the time. Then rang round the house the 217 appalling cry of "Miss Anthony." There was no escape, and I staggered up and stammered out a few words and sat down—dead, killed—thoroughly enraged that I had not spent the forenoon in making myself ready at least to read something, instead of poring over Adam Bede.
I finished reading Adam Bede yesterday afternoon. I can't shake off the deep sadness of its ending for poor Hetty—and Arthur almost equally pulls at my heartstrings. He didn't want to hurt her or make her suffer for even a moment any more than Adam did, but he couldn't help himself due to his natural impulses. Should society accept such an outcome of love—or passion, if it wasn't really love? (But I believe it was; only the unbridgeable gap of social class kept it from being openly recognized.) If such a relationship could exist without shame and scorn, contempt and pity from the world, it would be so much more sacred and joyful than many legal marriages. I can’t bear to read romantic stories; they're too real to forget. What is this overwhelming force so dramatically shown in both Hetty and Arthur that drove them toward the very harm they most wanted to avoid?
To this Mrs. Stanton replies: "You speak of the effect of Adam Bede on you. It moved me deeply, and The Mill on the Floss is another agony. Such books as these explain why the 'marriage question' is all-absorbing. O, Susan, are you ever coming to visit me again? It would be like a new life to spend a day with you. How I shudder when I think of our awful experience with those mobs last winter, and yet even now I long for action." Miss Anthony was equally restive in her own seclusion which, although by no means an idle one, had shut her from the great outside world that at this hour seemed to cry aloud for the best service of every man and woman. In January, 1862, she went to Mrs. Stanton's and together they prepared an address for the State Anti-Slavery Convention to be held at Albany, February 7 and 8, and here in the society of Garrison and Phillips, she received fresh inspiration. Soon after reaching home, at Phillips' request, she arranged a lecture for him in Rochester. After paying all expenses, she sent him a check—there is no record of its size—but he returned a portion, saying:
To make matters worse, I went to the colored church to hear Sallie Holley, but she didn't show up. Mrs. Coleman was at the pulpit and read a poem by Gerald Massey about Peace, spoke for a few minutes, and then mentioned that she saw Miss Anthony there and hoped she would take over. Then the dreadful cry of "Miss Anthony" echoed around the room. There was no way to escape, so I got up, stumbled through a few words, and sat down—totally defeated—completely frustrated that I hadn't spent the morning preparing to at least read something instead of getting lost in Adam Bede.
DEAR SUSAN: Thank you, but you are too generous. I can't take such an awful big lion's share, even to satisfy your modesty. Put the enclosed, with my thanks, into your own pocket, as a slight compensation for all your trouble. Remember and pay my successor not one cent more than you can afford.... I had to charter a locomotive all to myself to get back from Oswego in time for Rondout. Riding in the darkness with the engineer through the snow gave me time to think of the pleasant group and supper I missed the night before at the Hallowells. Kind regards to them. Tell Mrs. Hallowell her lunch tasted good about midnight, as I entered Syracuse.
To this, Mrs. Stanton replies: "You talk about how Adam Bede affected you. It really moved me too, and The Mill on the Floss is another heart-wrencher. Books like these show why the 'marriage question' is so all-consuming. Oh, Susan, are you ever going to visit me again? Spending a day with you would feel like a breath of fresh air. I get chills just thinking about our terrible experience with those mobs last winter, yet even now I crave action." Miss Anthony was also restless in her own solitude, which, though not idle, had kept her away from the larger world that seemed to urgently need the best efforts from everyone. In January 1862, she went to Mrs. Stanton's, and together they prepared an address for the State Anti-Slavery Convention to be held in Albany on February
Miss Anthony managed the usual series of lectures this winter. When she sent Mr. Tilton his check he returned this rollicking answer:
DEAR SUSAN: Thanks, but you’re being too kind. I can’t accept such a large amount, even to make you feel comfortable. Please take the enclosed sum, with my thanks, as a small way to compensate you for all your hard work. Don’t pay my successor a single cent more than you can afford... I had to rent an entire train just to make it back from Oswego in time for Rondout. Traveling through the dark with the engineer in the snow gave me a chance to think about the great group and dinner I missed the night before at the Hallowells. Send my best regards to them. Please let Mrs. Hallowell know that her lunch was delicious around midnight when I got to Syracuse.
DEAR S.B.A.: I received your letter and its enclosure, which latter has already vanished like April snow, to pay the debts of the subscriber.... Our morning ride with our good friend Frederick gives me pleasure whenever 218 I think of it. Those pictures of Mount Hope and the waterfall were better than any in the Academy of Design. As to yourself, I have had some talk with Rev. Oliver Johnson about your "sphere," and we both agree that you are defrauding some honest man of his just due. I recommend that you form an acquaintance, with a view to prospective results for life, with some well-settled, Old-School Presbyterian clergyman, and send me some of the cake.
Miss Anthony organized the usual lineup of lectures this winter. When she sent Mr. Tilton his check, he sent back this playful response:
Theodore Tilton
DEAR S.B.A.: I received your letter and the note you included, which has already vanished like April snow, regarding the subscriber's debts.... I really enjoy our morning rides with our good friend Frederick whenever 218 I think back on them. Those photos of Mount Hope and the waterfall were even better than anything at the Academy of Design. As for you, I've discussed your "sphere" with Rev. Oliver Johnson, and we both think that you're taking advantage of some honest person who deserves better. I recommend you get to know a well-established, traditional Presbyterian pastor, considering future life possibilities, and send me some of the cake.

In 1862, as the previous year, Miss Anthony was determined to hold a National Woman's Rights Convention in New York, but her efforts met with no favorable response and so, for the second time, she was obliged to give up the annual protest which seemed to her a sacred duty. She did not then acknowledge, nor has she ever admitted, that there is any question of more vital importance than that relating to the freedom of woman. Defeated here she decided to start out again in the anti-slavery lecture field, since, as she wrote her friend Lydia: "It is so easy to feel your power for public work slipping away if you allow yourself to remain too long snuggled in the Abrahamic bosom of home. It requires great will-force to resurrect one's soul." In her tour she visited Adams, accompanied by her loved niece, Ann Eliza McLean, and wrote back an amusing account of how she lectured the male relatives for requiring their women folks to use worn-out cook-stoves, broken kitchen utensils and all sorts of inconvenient things in the household. While there she went with a large party of relatives over the mountains to see the wonderful Hoosac Tunnel, now well under way. One day she spoke to an audience on the very top of the Green mountains. On this 219 trip, having for a rarity a little leisure, she visited the art galleries of New York and wrote:
Theodore Tilton
My very heart of hearts has been made to rejoice in the work of two of earth's noblest women—Harriet Hosmer and Rosa Bonheur. Twice have I visited the Academy of Design and there have I sat in silent, reverential awe, with eyes intent upon the marble face of Harriet Hosmer's Beatrice Cenci. I have no power to express my hope, my joy, my renewed faith in womanhood. In the accomplishment of that grand work of the sculptor's chisel, making that cold marble breathe and pulsate, Harriet Hosmer has done more to ennoble and elevate woman than she possibly could have done by mere words, it matters not how Godlike; though I would not ignore true words, for it is these which rouse to action the latent powers of the Harriet Hosmers.... Even the rude and uncultivated seem awed into silence when they come into the presence of that sleeping, but speaking purity. Rosa Bonheur is the first woman who has dared venture into the field of animal painting, and her work not only surpasses anything ever done by a woman, but is a bold and successful step beyond all other artists. Mark another significant fact: The three greatest productions of art during the past three years are by women—Elizabeth Barrett Browning's Aurora Leigh, Rosa Bonheur's Horse Fair and Harriet Hosmer's Beatrice Cenci—and these triumphs are in three of its most difficult and exalted departments.
In 1862, like the previous year, Miss Anthony was determined to hold a National Woman's Rights Convention in New York. However, her efforts received no positive response, and for the second time, she had to give up the annual protest that she considered a sacred duty. She didn’t acknowledge, nor has she ever admitted, that any issue is more crucial than the freedom of women. After this setback, she decided to jump back into the anti-slavery lecture circuit, since, as she wrote to her friend Lydia, "It's so easy to feel your ability for public work slipping away if you let yourself stay too long cozied up in the comfort of home. It takes a lot of willpower to revive one's spirit." During her tour, she visited Adams with her beloved niece, Ann Eliza McLean, and sent back a funny account of how she lectured the male relatives for expecting their women to use old cook-stoves, broken kitchen tools, and all sorts of inconvenient items at home. While there, she joined a large group of relatives to cross the mountains and see the impressive Hoosac Tunnel, which was already well under construction. One day, she spoke to an audience on the very top of the Green Mountains. On this 219 trip, having a rare bit of free time, she visited the art galleries of New York and wrote:
In April she took Mrs. Stanton's four boys from Seneca Falls to New York, and cared for them while the family were removing to that city. In May she attended the New York Anniversary and the New England convention in Boston, and on the Fourth of July the celebration at Framingham, and during this time gave many addresses on anti-slavery. When in Boston she had a delightful visit with the Garrisons, and called on Mrs. Phillips with Mrs. Garrison, one of the few persons admitted to the invalid's seclusion.
My heart is filled with joy by the work of two of the most remarkable women in the world—Harriet Hosmer and Rosa Bonheur. I've visited the Academy of Design twice, where I sat in silent, respectful awe, my eyes fixed on Harriet Hosmer's marble Beatrice Cenci. I can’t fully express my hope, my joy, and my renewed belief in womanhood. Through that incredible sculpture, bringing lifeless marble to life, Harriet Hosmer has done more to uplift and empower women than she ever could with just words, no matter how beautiful; although I recognize that true words can inspire the hidden strength of women like Harriet Hosmer. Even those who are rough and unrefined seem to fall silent in the presence of that serene yet expressive purity. Rosa Bonheur is the first woman to bravely enter the world of animal painting, and her work not only outshines anything created by a woman but also boldly surpasses that of all other artists. Here’s another important point: the three greatest works of art in the past three years come from women—Elizabeth Barrett Browning's Aurora Leigh, Rosa Bonheur's Horse Fair, and Harriet Hosmer's Beatrice Cenci—each a triumph in some of the most challenging and elevated areas of art.
While all the women were giving themselves, body and soul, to the great work of the war, the New York Legislature, April 10, 1862, finding them off guard, very quietly amended the law of 1860 and took away from mothers the lately-acquired right to the equal guardianship of their children. They also repealed the law which secured to the widow the control of the property for the care of minor children. Thus at one blow were swept away the results of nearly a decade of hard work on the part of women, and wives and mothers were left in almost the same position as under the old common law. Had 220 one woman been a member of the Legislature, such an act never would have been possible; but the little band who for ten years had watched and toiled to protect the interests of their sex, were in the sanitary commission, the hospitals, at the front, on the platform in the interest of the Union, or at home doing the work of those who had gone into the army, and this was their reward! Miss Anthony's anger and sorrow were intense when she heard of the repeal of the laws which she had spent seven long years to obtain, tramping through cold and heat to roll up petitions and traversing the whole State of New York in the dead of winter to create public sentiment in their favor. In her anguish she wrote Lydia Mott:
In April, she took Mrs. Stanton's four boys from Seneca Falls to New York and took care of them while the family moved to that city. In May, she went to the New York Anniversary and the New England convention in Boston, and on the Fourth of July, she celebrated in Framingham. During this time, she gave many talks on anti-slavery. While in Boston, she had a lovely visit with the Garrisons and visited Mrs. Phillips with Mrs. Garrison, one of the few people allowed to see the invalid.
Your startling letter is before me. I knew some weeks ago that abominable thing was on the calendar, with some six or eight hundred bills before it, and hence felt sure it would not come up this winter, and that in the meantime we should sound the alarm. Well, well; while the old guard sleep the "young devils" are wide awake, and we deserve to suffer for our confidence in "man's sense of justice;" but nothing short of this could rouse our women again to action. All our reformers seem suddenly to have grown politic. All alike say: "Have no conventions at this crisis; wait until the war excitement abates;" which is to say: "Ask our opponents if they think we had better speak, or rather if they do not think we had better remain silent." I am sick at heart, but I can not carry the world against the wish and will of our best friends. What can we do now when even the motion to retain the mother's joint guardianship is voted down? Twenty thousand petitions rolled up for that—a hard year's work—the law secured—the echoes of our words of gratitude in the Capitol scarcely died away, and now all is lost!
While all the women were fully committed, body and soul, to the monumental effort of the war, the New York Legislature, on April 10, 1862, caught them off guard and quietly amended the law of 1860, taking away from mothers the recently granted right to share equal guardianship of their children. They also repealed the law that allowed widows to control the property necessary to care for minor children. In one swift move, nearly a decade of hard work by women was erased, leaving wives and mothers nearly in the same position they had been under the old common law. If 220 even one woman had been a member of the Legislature, this act would never have happened; but the small group who had spent ten years advocating for the interests of their gender were busy with the sanitary commission, in the hospitals, at the front lines, speaking up for the Union, or staying home to manage the tasks of those who had gone off to war, and this was their reward! Miss Anthony's anger and heartbreak were overwhelming when she learned of the repeal of the laws she had dedicated seven long years to achieve, tirelessly gathering petitions and traveling across New York in the dead of winter to shape public opinion in support of them. In her distress, she wrote to Lydia Mott:
This year began the acquaintance with Anna Dickinson, whose letters are as refreshing as a breeze from the ocean:
Your shocking letter is in front of me. I knew weeks ago that terrible issue was scheduled, with around six or eight hundred bills before it, so I thought for sure it wouldn’t come up this winter, and in the meantime, we should raise the alarm. Well, while the old guard sleeps, the "young devils" are wide awake, and we deserve to suffer for believing in "man's sense of justice;" but nothing less than this could push our women to act again. All our reformers seem to have suddenly turned political. They all say: "Don’t hold any conventions right now; wait until the war excitement dies down;" which really means: "Ask our opponents if they think we should speak, or rather if they think we should stay silent." I’m heartbroken, but I can’t oppose the wishes and will of our closest friends. What can we do now when even the motion to keep joint guardianship for moms is voted down? Twenty thousand petitions collected for that—a year’s hard work—the law secured—the echoes of our words of thanks in the Capitol have barely faded, and now it’s all lost!
The sunniest of sunny mornings to you, how are you today? Well and happy, I hope. To tell the truth I want to see you very much indeed, to hold your hand in mine, to hear your voice, in a word, I want you—I can't have you? Well, I will at least put down a little fragment of my foolish self and send it to look up at you.... I work closely and happily at my preparations for next winter—no, for the future—nine hours a day, generally; but I never felt better, exercise morning and evening, and never touch book or paper after gaslight this warm weather; so all those talks of yours were not thrown away upon me.
This year marked the start of my friendship with Anna Dickinson, whose letters are as refreshing as a breeze from the ocean:
What think you of the "signs of the times?" I am sad always, under all my folly;—this cruel tide of war, sweeping off the fresh, young, brave life 221 to be dashed out utterly or thrown back shattered and ruined! I know we all have been implicated in the "great wrong," yet I think the comparatively innocent suffer today more than the guilty. And the result—will the people save the country they love so well, or will the rulers dig the nation's grave?
Good morning! How are you today? I hope you're doing well and feeling happy. Honestly, I really want to see you—hold your hand, hear your voice. In short, I want you. Can’t be with you? Well, at least I’ll send a little piece of my silly self to look up at you. I'm working hard and happily on my preparations for next winter—no, for the future—about nine hours a day, usually. But I’ve never felt better; I exercise in the morning and evening, and I don’t touch a book or paper after dark in this warm weather. So all those conversations of yours weren’t wasted on me.
Will you not write to me, please, soon? I want to see a touch of you very much.
What do you think about the "signs of the times?" I'm always sad, even under all my foolishness; this cruel tide of war is sweeping away fresh, young, brave lives 221, leaving them to be completely destroyed or thrown back, shattered and ruined! I know we've all been involved in the "great wrong," but I believe the relatively innocent suffer more today than the guilty. And the outcome—will the people save the country they love so much, or will the leaders dig the nation's grave?
Anna E. Dickinson
Will you please write to me soon? I really want to see a bit of you.

Early in September Greeley writes her: "I still keep at work with the President in various ways and believe you will yet hear him proclaim universal freedom. Keep this letter and judge me by the event."
Anna E. Dickinson
Miss Anthony thus lectures Mrs. Stanton because she has a teacher and educates her children at home: "I am still of the opinion that whatever the short-comings of the public schools your children would be vastly more profited in them, side by side with the very multitude with whom they must mingle as soon as school days are over. Any and every private education is a blunder, it seems to me. I believe those persons stronger and nobler who have from childhood breasted the commonalty. If children have not the innate strength to resist evil, keeping them apart from what they must inevitably one day meet, only increases their incompetency."
Early in September, Greeley writes to her: "I'm still working with the President in different ways and I believe you'll hear him announce universal freedom. Keep this letter and judge me by what happens."
In the summer of 1862 Miss Anthony attended her last State Teachers' Convention, which was held in Rochester, where she began her labors in this direction. In 1853 she had forced this body to grant her a share in their deliberations, the first time a woman's voice had been heard. For ten years she never had missed an annual meeting, keeping up her membership dues and allowing no engagement to interfere. Year after year she had followed them up, insisting that in the conventions women teachers should hold offices, serve on committees and exercise free speech; demanding that they should be eligible to all positions in the schools with equal pay for equal work; and compelling a general recognition of their rights. All 222 these points, with the exception of equal pay, had now been gained and there was much improvement in salaries.
Miss Anthony lectures Mrs. Stanton because she has a teacher and educates her children at home: "I still believe that, despite the shortcomings of public schools, your children would benefit greatly from them, alongside the many others they will have to interact with as soon as school is over. Any kind of private education seems like a mistake to me. I think those who have faced the common people from a young age are stronger and more admirable. If children don’t have the natural strength to resist negativity, keeping them away from what they will inevitably encounter one day only makes them less capable."
Her mission here being ended, she turned her attention to other fields; but for the privileges which are enjoyed by the women teachers of the present day, they are indebted first of all to Susan B. Anthony.[31]
In the summer of 1862, Miss Anthony attended her final State Teachers' Convention, which took place in Rochester, where she had started her efforts in this area. In 1853, she had pushed this group to allow her to participate in their discussions, marking the first time a woman's voice was heard. For ten years, she never missed an annual meeting, keeping up with her membership dues and not letting any commitments interfere. Year after year, she advocated for women teachers to hold positions, serve on committees, and speak freely at the conventions; she demanded they be eligible for all roles in schools with equal pay for equal work; and she fought for general recognition of their rights. All 222 of these points, except for equal pay, had now been achieved, and there was significant improvement in salaries.
After speaking at intervals through the summer, she started on a regular tour early in the fall, writing Lydia Mott: "I can not feel easy in my conscience to be dumb in an hour like this. I am speaking now extempore and more to my satisfaction than ever before. I am amazed at myself, but I could not do it if any of our other speakers were listening to me. I am entirely off old anti-slavery grounds and on the new ones thrown up by the war. What a stay, counsel and comfort you have been to me, dear Lydia, ever since that eventful little temperance meeting in that cold, smoky chapel in 1852. How you have compelled me to feel myself competent to go forward when trembling with doubt and distrust. I never can express the magnitude of my indebtedness to you."
Her mission here being over, she shifted her focus to other areas; but for the rights that women teachers have today, they owe it primarily to Susan B. Anthony.[31]
A letter from Abby Kelly Foster at this time said: "I am especially gratified to know that you have entered the field in earnest as your own speaker, which you ought to have done years ago instead of always pushing others to the front and taking the drudgery yourself." Miss Anthony was very successful, each day gaining more courage. Her sole theme was "Emancipation the Duty-of the Government." A prominent citizen of Schuyler county wrote her after she had spoken at Mecklinburg: "There is not a man among all the political speakers who can make that duty as plain as you have done." Her whole heart was in the work and she was constantly inspired by the thought that the day of deliverance for the slave was approaching.
After speaking occasionally throughout the summer, she began a regular tour early in the fall, writing to Lydia Mott: "I can't feel right in my conscience to stay silent during a time like this. I'm speaking now off the cuff and feeling more satisfied than ever before. I'm amazed at myself, but I wouldn't be able to do it if any of our other speakers were listening. I'm completely off the old anti-slavery topics and focusing on the new issues brought up by the war. What a support, guide, and comfort you've been to me, dear Lydia, ever since that impactful little temperance meeting in that cold, smoky chapel in 1852. You've pushed me to believe I can move forward even when I'm filled with doubt and uncertainty. I'll never be able to express how grateful I am to you."
FATHER AND MOTHER OF SUSAN B. ANTHONY.
A letter from Abby Kelly Foster at this time said: "I’m really pleased to hear that you’ve taken on the role of your own speaker, which you should have done years ago instead of always pushing others forward and taking on the hard work yourself." Miss Anthony was very successful, gaining more confidence each day. Her main topic was "Emancipation: The Duty of the Government." A prominent citizen of Schuyler County wrote to her after she spoke at Mecklinburg: "No one among all the political speakers can make that duty as clear as you have." She was fully committed to the work and was continually motivated by the thought that the day of liberation for the enslaved was nearing.

At the height of her enthusiasm came the heaviest blow it would have been possible for her to receive. She had come home for a few days, and the Sunday morning after election 223 was sitting with her father talking over the political situation. They had been reading the Liberator and the Anti-Slavery Standard and were discussing the probable effect of Lincoln's proclamation, when suddenly he was stricken with acute neuralgia of the stomach. He had not had a day's illness in forty years and had not the slightest premonition of this attack. He lingered in great suffering for two weeks and died on November 25, 1862.
FATHER AND MOTHER OF SUSAN B. ANTHONY.
No words can express the terrible bereavement of his family. He had been to them a tower of strength. From childhood his sons and daughters had carried to him every grief and perplexity and there never had been a matter concerning them too trivial to receive his careful attention. In manhood and womanhood they still had turned to him above all others for advice and comfort, even the grandchildren receiving always the same loving care. Between husband and wife there ever had been the deepest, truest affection. He was far ahead of his time in his recognition of the rights of women. Years before he had written to a brother: "Take your family into your confidence and give your wife the purse." He was never willing to enter into any pleasure which his wife did not share. They tell of him that once the daughters persuaded him to remain in town on a stormy evening and go to the Hutchinson concert. As they were driving home he said: "Never again ask me to do such a thing; I suffered more in thinking of your mother at home alone than any enjoyment could possibly compensate." A short time before his death he and his wife went to Ontario Beach one afternoon and did not return till 10 o'clock. When asked by the daughters what detained them, the mother answered that they had a fish supper and then strolled on the beach by moonlight; and on their laughing at her and saying she was worse than the girls, she replied: "Your father is more of a lover today than he was the first year of our marriage."
At the peak of her excitement came the hardest blow she could have imagined. She had returned home for a few days, and on the Sunday morning after the election 223, she was sitting with her dad discussing the political situation. They had been reading the Liberator and the Anti-Slavery Standard and were talking about the likely impact of Lincoln's proclamation when suddenly he was hit with severe stomach nerve pain. He hadn't been sick a day in forty years and had no warning of this attack. He suffered greatly for two weeks and passed away on November 25, 1862.
He was a broad, humane, great-hearted man, always mindful of the rights of others, always standing for liberty to every human being. Public-spirited, benevolent and genial in disposition, 224 his loss was widely mourned. The family's devoted friend, Rev. Samuel J. May, conducted the funeral services, at which Frederick Douglass and several prominent Abolitionists paid affectionate tribute, expressing "profound reverence for Mr. Anthony's character as a man, a friend and a citizen." Many letters of sympathy were received by Miss Anthony, but nothing brought consolation to her heart; her best and strongest friend was gone. Parker Pillsbury expressed her sorrow when he wrote: "You must be stricken sore indeed in the loss of your constant helper in the great mission to which you are devoted, your counselor, your consoler, your all that man could be, besides the endearing relation of father. What or who can supply the loss?"
No words can describe the awful loss his family is experiencing. He had always been their rock. From childhood, his sons and daughters brought him every sadness and confusion, and nothing was ever too unimportant for him to address carefully. Even as adults, they continued to seek his advice and comfort above all others, and his grandchildren received the same kind of loving care. The bond between him and his wife was filled with deep and genuine affection. He was ahead of his time in recognizing women's rights. Years earlier, he had written to his brother: "Involve your family in your decisions and give your wife access to the finances." He never took part in any enjoyment that his wife did not share. It's said that once, his daughters convinced him to stay in town on a stormy evening for a Hutchinson concert. On the way home, he remarked: "Don’t ever ask me to do that again; I felt worse thinking about your mother being home alone than any fun could possibly make up for." A little while before he passed, he and his wife went to Ontario Beach one afternoon and didn’t get back until 10 o'clock. When their daughters asked what had kept them, their mother replied that they had a fish dinner and then took a moonlit stroll on the beach. When the daughters teased her, saying she was worse than the girls, she responded: "Your father is more of a romantic now than he was in our first year of marriage."
There had not been a day in her life which had not felt his presence. She went forth to every duty sustained by his cheery and brave encouragement. With her father's support she could face the opposition and calumny of the world, and when these became too great she had but to turn again to him for the fullest sympathy and appreciation. He had inspired all she had done and with his wise advice and financial aid had assisted in the doing. When he passed away she felt the foundations taken from beneath her feet. For a little while she was stunned and helpless, and then the old strength came slowly back. The same spiritual force that had upheld her so many years still spoke to her soul and bade her once more take up life's duties.
He was a generous, kind-hearted man who always respected the rights of others and fought for everyone's freedom. He was community-minded, caring, and friendly, 224 and his passing was deeply felt by many. The family’s close friend, Rev. Samuel J. May, led the funeral services, where Frederick Douglass and other prominent Abolitionists offered heartfelt tributes, expressing their "deep respect for Mr. Anthony's character as a person, a friend, and a citizen." Miss Anthony received many letters of sympathy, but nothing could ease her grief; her closest and strongest friend was gone. Parker Pillsbury conveyed her sorrow when he wrote: "You must be feeling deeply hurt by the loss of your constant supporter in the important mission you are dedicated to, your advisor, your comforter, all that a man could be, in addition to the cherished role of father. What or who can fill that void?"
There hadn't been a day in her life that didn't feel his presence. She approached every responsibility supported by his cheerful and brave encouragement. With her father's backing, she could confront the world's opposition and slander, and when it became overwhelming, all she had to do was turn to him for complete understanding and appreciation. He had inspired everything she did and, with his wise advice and financial help, had contributed to her achievements. When he passed away, she felt like the ground had been pulled out from under her. For a little while, she was shocked and powerless, but then her old strength gradually returned. The same inner strength that had supported her for so many years still spoke to her soul and urged her to take up life's responsibilities once again.
It was with a sore and heavy heart that Miss Anthony again turned to her public work, but she was impelled by the thought that it would have been her father's earnest wish, and also by the feeling that work alone could give relief to the sorrow which overwhelmed her. She was bitterly disappointed that the "old guard" persisted in putting the question of the rights of women in the background, thus losing the vantage points gained by years of agitation. She alone, of all who had labored so earnestly for this sacred cause, was not misled by the sophistry that the work which women were doing for the Union would compel a universal recognition of their demands when the war was ended. Subsequent events showed the correctness of her judgment in maintaining that the close of the war would precipitate upon the country such an avalanche of questions for settlement that the claims of women would receive even less consideration than heretofore had been accorded. Next to this cause, however, that of the slaves appealed to her most strongly and she willingly continued her labors for them, trusting that the day might come when Garrison, Phillips, Greeley and the other great spirits would redeem their pledges and unite their strength in securing justice for women.
CHAPTER XIV.
WOMEN'S NATIONAL LOYAL LEAGUE.
1863—1864.
On January 11, 1863, Miss Anthony received this letter from Theodore Tilton: "Well, what have you to say to the proclamation? Even if not all one could wish, it is too much not to be thankful for. It makes the remainder of slavery too valueless and precarious to be worth keeping. The millenium 226 is on the way. Three cheers for God!... I had the pleasure of dining yesterday with Wendell Phillips in New York. Shall I tell you a secret? I happened to allude to one Susan Anthony. 'Yes,' said he, 'one of the salt of the earth.'" On the 16th came this from Henry B. Stanton: "I date from the federal capital. Since I arrived here I have been more gloomy than ever. The country is rapidly going to destruction. The army is almost in a state of mutiny for want of its pay and for lack of a leader. Nothing can carry the North through but the Southern negroes, and nobody can marshal them into the struggle except the Abolitionists. The country was never so badly off as at this moment. Such men as Lovejoy, Hale and the like have pretty much given up the struggle in despair. You have no idea how dark the cloud is which hangs over us.... We must not lay the flattering unction to our souls that the proclamation will be of any use if we are beaten and have a dissolution of the Union. Here then is work for you. Susan, put on your armor and go forth!"
It was with a heavy heart that Miss Anthony returned to her public work, driven by the belief that it would have been her father's deep wish, and by the feeling that only work could ease the overwhelming sorrow she felt. She was deeply disappointed that the "old guard" continued to push the issue of women's rights to the background, thereby losing the advantages gained from years of activism. Among all who had worked so hard for this important cause, she alone was not fooled by the argument that the contributions women were making for the Union would lead to widespread recognition of their demands once the war ended. Later events proved her right in asserting that the end of the war would bring an overwhelming number of issues to address, leaving women's claims with even less attention than they had before. However, next to this cause, the plight of slaves resonated with her strongly, and she continued her efforts for them, hoping that one day Garrison, Phillips, Greeley, and other great leaders would fulfill their promises and join forces to secure justice for women.
From many prominent men and women came the same cry, and so she did gird on her armor and go forth. The latter part of February she took up her abode with Mrs. Stanton in New York. Herculean efforts were being made at this time by the Republicans, under the leadership of Charles Sumner, to secure congressional action in regard to emancipation. A widespread fear existed that the President's proclamation might not prove sufficient, that some way of overriding it might be found, and there was much anxiety to secure such an expression of public sentiment as would justify Congress in submitting an amendment to the United States Constitution which should forever abolish slavery. This could best be done through petitions, and here Miss Anthony recognized her work. An eloquent appeal was sent out, enclosing the following:
On January 11, 1863, Miss Anthony received a letter from Theodore Tilton: "So, what do you think about the proclamation? Even if it isn't everything we want, we should still be grateful for it. It makes the remaining slavery seem too worthless and unstable to keep. The millennium 226 is on the horizon. Three cheers for God!... I had a great dinner yesterday with Wendell Phillips in New York. Should I let you in on a secret? I mentioned one Susan Anthony. 'Yes,' he said, 'she's one of the best people around.'" On the 16th, Henry B. Stanton wrote: "I'm writing from the federal capital. Since I got here, I've been gloomier than ever. The country is spiraling into chaos. The army is practically mutinying due to lack of pay and leadership. The only thing that can help the North is the Southern Black population, and only the Abolitionists can rally them to fight. The country has never been in such a terrible state as it is now. People like Lovejoy and Hale have mostly given up hope in despair. You have no idea how dark the cloud hanging over us is.... We shouldn't fool ourselves into thinking the proclamation will matter if we lose and the Union falls apart. So here’s your task. Susan, put on your armor and get out there!"
CALL FOR A MEETING OF THE LOYAL WOMEN OF THE NATION.
From many respected individuals, there was a common call, and so she put on her armor and set out. In late February, she moved in with Mrs. Stanton in New York. During this time, Republicans, led by Charles Sumner, were making tremendous efforts to get Congress to act on emancipation. There was a widespread fear that the President's proclamation might not be enough, that a way to override it could be found, and there was a lot of anxiety about getting public support to convince Congress to put forward an amendment to the United States Constitution that would permanently abolish slavery. The best way to achieve this was through petitions, and Miss Anthony recognized this as her mission. An inspiring appeal was sent out, including the following:
In this crisis it is the duty of every citizen to consider the peculiar blessings of a republican form of government, and decide what sacrifices of wealth 227 and life are demanded for its defense and preservation.... No mere party or sectional cry, no technicalities of constitutional or military law, no methods of craft or policy, can touch the heart of a nation in the midst of revolution. A grand idea of freedom or justice is needful to kindle and sustain the fires of a high enthusiasm.
CALL FOR A MEETING OF THE LOYAL WOMEN OF THE NATION.
At this hour the best word and work of every man and woman are imperatively demanded. To man, by common consent, are assigned the forum, camp and field. What is woman's legitimate work and how she may best accomplish it is worthy our earnest counsel one with another.... Woman is equally interested and responsible with man in the final settlement of this problem of self-government; therefore let none stand idle spectators now. When every hour is big with destiny and each delay but complicates our difficulties, it is high time for the daughters of the Revolution in solemn council to unseal the last will and testament of the fathers, lay hold of their birthright of freedom and keep it a sacred trust for all coming generations.
During this crisis, it's essential for every citizen to recognize the unique advantages of a republican government and to decide what sacrifices of wealth 227 and life are necessary for its defense and preservation. No simple party or regional appeal, no legal or military technicalities, and no tricks or policies can resonate with a nation in the midst of revolution. A strong idea of freedom or justice is vital to spark and keep alive the flames of enthusiasm.
To this end we ask the loyal women of the nation to meet in the Church of the Puritans, New York, on Thursday, the 14th of May next. Let the women of every State be largely represented both in person and by letter.
Right now, the best efforts and actions from everyone are critically needed. By general agreement, men are expected to take on roles in public speaking, the military, and combat. The question of what women’s rightful roles are and how they should fulfill them deserves our earnest discussion. Women share equal interest and responsibility with men in ultimately resolving the issue of self-governance; therefore, no one should remain a passive observer at this time. Every moment is filled with potential, and each delay only increases our challenges. It’s time for the daughters of the Revolution to come together for serious discussion to interpret the final wishes of the founders, take hold of their inheritance of freedom, and protect it as a sacred duty for future generations.
On behalf of the Woman's Central Committee,
To accomplish this, we invite the committed women of the nation to meet at the Church of the Puritans in New York on Thursday, May 14th. We encourage women from every state to be well represented both in person and by letter.
ELIZABETH CADY STANTON, SUSAN B. ANTHONY.
On behalf of the Women's Central Committee,
An immense audience, mostly women, assembled in Dr. Cheever's famous church. Miss Anthony called the convention to order and nominated Lucy Stone for president. Stirring addresses were made by Mrs. Stanton and the veteran anti-slavery speaker, Angelina Grimké Weld, while the Hutchinson family with their songs added inspiration to the occasion. Miss Anthony presented a series of patriotic resolutions with the following spirited address:
ELIZABETH CADY STANTON, SUSAN B. ANTHONY.
There is great fear expressed on all sides lest this shall be made a war for the negro. I am willing that it shall be. It is a war which was begun to found an empire upon slavery, and shame on us if we do not make it one to establish the freedom of the negro—against whom the whole nation, North and South, East and West, in one mighty conspiracy, has combined from the beginning. Instead of suppressing the real cause of the war, it should have been proclaimed not only by the people but by the President, Congress, Cabinet and every military commander. Instead of President Lincoln's waiting two long years before calling to the aid of the government the millions of allies whom we have had within the territory of rebeldom, it should have been the first decree he sent forth. By all the laws of common sense—to say nothing of laws military or civil—if the President, as commander-in-chief of the army and navy, could have devised any possible means whereby he might hope to suppress the rebellion without the sacrifice of the life of one loyal citizen, without the sacrifice of one dollar of the loyal North, it was clearly his duty to have done so. Every interest of the insurgents, every dollar of their 228 property, every institution, every life in every rebel State even, if necessary, should have been sacrificed, before one dollar or one man should have been drawn from the free States. How much more then was it the President's duty to confer freedom on the millions of slaves, transform them into an army for the Union, cripple the rebellion and establish justice, the only sure foundation of peace. I therefore hail the day when the government shall recognize that this is a war for freedom.
An enormous crowd, mostly women, gathered in Dr. Cheever's well-known church. Miss Anthony officially started the convention and nominated Lucy Stone for president. There were powerful speeches by Mrs. Stanton and the seasoned anti-slavery speaker, Angelina Grimké Weld, while the Hutchinson family inspired everyone with their songs. Miss Anthony introduced a series of patriotic resolutions along with the following passionate address:
We talk about returning to "the Union as it was" and "the Constitution as it is"—about "restoring our country to peace and prosperity—to the blessed conditions which existed before the war!" I ask you what sort of peace, what sort of prosperity, have we had? Since the first slave ship sailed up the James river with its human cargo and there, on the soil of the Old Dominion, it was sold to the highest bidder, we have had nothing but war. When that pirate captain landed on the shores of Africa and there kidnapped the first stalwart negro and fastened the first manacle, the struggle between that captain and that negro was the commencement of the terrible war in the midst of which we are today. Between the slave and the master there has been war, and war only. This is but a new form of it. No, no; we ask for no return to the old conditions. We ask for something better. We want a Union which is a Union in fact, a Union in spirit, not a sham. By the Constitution as it is, the North has stood pledged to protect slavery in the States where it existed. We have been bound, in case of insurrections, to go to the aid, not of those struggling for liberty but of the oppressors. It was politicians who made this pledge at the beginning, and who have renewed it from year to year. These same men have had control of the churches, the Sabbath-schools and all religious institutions, and the women have been a party in complicity with slavery. They have made the large majority in all the churches throughout the country and have, without protest, fellowshipped the slaveholder as a Christian; accepted proslavery preaching from their pulpits; suffered the words "slavery a crime" to be expurgated from all the lessons taught their children, in defiance of the Golden Rule, "Do unto others as you would that others should do unto you." They have meekly accepted whatever morals and religion the selfish interest of politics and trade dictated.
There's a lot of worry from everyone that this will become a war for the freedom of Black people. I'm okay with that. This conflict started with the goal of building an empire through slavery, and we should feel ashamed if we don't make it a fight to secure freedom for Black people—against whom the whole nation, North and South, East and West, has conspired from the beginning. Instead of ignoring the true reason for the war, it should have been recognized not just by the people but also by the President, Congress, the Cabinet, and every military leader. Rather than President Lincoln waiting two long years to call on the millions of allies we had in the rebel territories, that should have been his first action. By all common sense—and apart from military or civil laws—if the President, as commander-in-chief of the army and navy, could have found any way to suppress the rebellion without risking the life of even one loyal citizen or spending one dollar of the loyal North, it was definitely his duty to do so. Every resource of the insurgents, every dollar of their property, every institution, and every life in the rebel states should have been sacrificed, if necessary, before spending one dollar or drafting one person from the free states. How much more should it have been the President's duty to grant freedom to the millions of enslaved people, turn them into an army for the Union, weaken the rebellion, and establish justice, the only true basis for peace? So, I celebrate the day when the government acknowledges this as a war for freedom.
Woman must now assume her God-given responsibilities and make herself what she is clearly designed to be, the educator of the race. Let her no longer be the mere reflector, the echo of the worldly pride and ambition of man. Had the women of the North studied to know and to teach their sons the law of justice to the black man, they would not now be called upon to offer the loved of their households to the bloody Moloch of war. Women of the North, I ask you to rise up with earnest, honest purpose and go forward in the way of right, fearlessly, as independent human beings, responsible to God alone for the discharge of every duty. Forget conventionalisms; forget what the world will say, whether you are in your place or out of it; think your best thoughts, speak your best words, do your best works, looking to your own consciences for approval.
We talk about going back to "the Union as it was" and "the Constitution as it is"—about "restoring our country to peace and prosperity—to the good times that existed before the war!" I ask you, what kind of peace, what kind of prosperity have we really experienced? Since the first slave ship sailed up the James River with its human cargo and sold those individuals to the highest bidder on the land of the Old Dominion, we have known nothing but war. When that pirate captain landed on the shores of Africa, kidnapped the first strong Black man, and put the first shackles on him, that struggle between the captain and the man marked the start of the terrible war we are in today. Between the slave and the master, there has been nothing but war. This is just a new version of it. No, we don’t want to go back to the old conditions. We want something better. We want a Union that is truly united, a Union in spirit, not just a cover. According to the Constitution as it is, the North has been committed to protecting slavery in the states where it existed. We have been obligated, in cases of uprisings, to support not those fighting for freedom but the oppressors. It was politicians who made this promise in the beginning and have renewed it year after year. These same individuals have controlled churches, Sunday schools, and all religious institutions, and women have been complicit in maintaining slavery. They have made up the large majority in churches across the country and have, without objection, accepted slaveholders as fellow Christians; they have tolerated pro-slavery sermons from their pulpits; they have allowed the phrase "slavery a crime" to be removed from all lessons taught to their children, defying the Golden Rule, "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." They have passively accepted whatever morals and religion the selfish interests of politics and commerce dictated.
The fourth resolution, asking equal rights for women as well 229 as negroes, was seriously objected to by several who insisted that they did not want political rights. Lucy Stone, Mrs. Weld, Mrs. Rose and Mrs. Coleman made strong speeches in its favor, and Miss Anthony said:
Women must now embrace their God-given responsibilities and become what they are clearly meant to be, the educators of society. They should no longer be passive reflections or echoes of men's worldly pride and ambition. If the women of the North had worked to understand and teach their sons the principles of justice towards Black individuals, they wouldn’t now be asked to send their loved ones off to the bloodshed of war. Women of the North, I urge you to rise up with sincere and honest intent and move forward in the pursuit of what is right, boldly, as independent individuals, accountable to God alone for fulfilling every duty. Forget societal norms; disregard what others will say about whether you are in your rightful place; focus on your truest thoughts, share your best words, and do your finest work, seeking approval only from your own consciences.
This resolution merely makes the assertion that in a genuine republic, every citizen must have the right of representation. You remember the maxim "Governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed." This is the fundamental principle of democracy, and before our government can be placed on a lasting foundation, the civil and political rights of every citizen must be practically established. This is the meaning of the resolution. It is a philosophical statement, made not because women suffer, not because slaves suffer, not because of any individual rights or wrongs—but as a simple declaration of the fundamental truth of democracy proclaimed by our Revolutionary fathers. I hope the discussion will no longer be continued as to the comparative rights or wrongs of one class or another. This is the question before us: Is it possible that peace and union shall be established in this country, is it possible for this government to be a true democracy, a genuine republic, while one-sixth or one-half of the people are disfranchised?
The fourth resolution, advocating for equal rights for women and Black individuals, faced strong opposition from several people who claimed they weren’t interested in political rights. Lucy Stone, Mrs. Weld, Mrs. Rose, and Mrs. Coleman delivered powerful speeches supporting it, and Miss Anthony said:
The resolution was adopted by a large majority. A business meeting was held in the afternoon to decide upon the practical work, and again the room was crowded. Miss Anthony was in the chair. There were women of all ages, classes and conditions, and the assembly was pervaded with deep and solemn feeling. The following was unanimously adopted: "We, loyal women of the nation, assembled in convention this 14th day of May, 1863, hereby pledge ourselves one to another in a Loyal League, to give support to the government in so far as it makes a war for freedom." Mrs. Stanton was elected president and Miss Anthony secretary of the permanent organization. A great meeting was held in Cooper Institute in the evening. An eloquent address to President Lincoln, read by Miss Anthony, was adopted and sent to him.[32] Powerful speeches were made by Ernestine L. Rose and Rev. Antoinette Blackwell, a patriotic address to the soldiers was adopted, and the convention closed amid great enthusiasm.
This resolution simply states that in a real republic, every citizen must have the right to representation. Remember the saying, "Governments get their just powers from the consent of the governed"? This is the core principle of democracy. Before our government can be built on a strong foundation, the civil and political rights of every citizen must be fully established. That’s what the resolution means. It’s a philosophical statement—not made because women suffer, not because slaves suffer, and not because of any specific rights or wrongs—but as a clear declaration of the fundamental truth of democracy, as stated by our Revolutionary forefathers. I hope we can move beyond debating the rights or wrongs of one group against another. The question is: Can we achieve peace and unity in this country, and can this government be a true democracy, a real republic, while one-sixth or even half of the population is denied the right to vote?
At subsequent meetings it was decided to confine the work of the League to the one object of securing signatures to petitions 230 to the Senate and House of Representatives, praying for an act emancipating all persons of African descent held in involuntary servitude. They set their standard at a million names. Their scheme received the commendation of the entire anti-slavery press, and of prominent men and women in all parts of the country. The first of June headquarters were opened in Room 20, Cooper Institute, and the great work was begun. Miss Anthony prepared and sent out thousands of petitions accompanied by this letter:
The resolution was passed by a large majority. A business meeting took place in the afternoon to determine the practical work, and once again, the room was packed. Miss Anthony was in charge. There were women of all ages, backgrounds, and situations, and the atmosphere was filled with deep and serious emotion. The following was unanimously agreed upon: "We, loyal women of the nation, gathered in convention this 14th day of May, 1863, hereby commit ourselves to one another in a Loyal League, to support the government as it fights for freedom." Mrs. Stanton was elected president, and Miss Anthony became the secretary of the permanent organization. A big meeting was held at Cooper Institute in the evening. An inspiring address to President Lincoln, read by Miss Anthony, was approved and sent to him.[32] Powerful speeches were delivered by Ernestine L. Rose and Rev. Antoinette Blackwell, a patriotic address to the soldiers was approved, and the convention concluded with great enthusiasm.
THE WOMEN'S NATIONAL LOYAL LEAGUE TO THE WOMEN OF THE REPUBLIC: We ask you to sign and circulate this petition for the entire abolition of slavery. Remember the President's proclamation reaches only the slaves of rebels. The jails of loyal Kentucky are today filled with Georgia, Mississippi and Alabama slaves, advertised to be sold for their jail fees "according to law," precisely as before the war! While slavery exists anywhere there can be freedom nowhere. There must be a law abolishing slavery. We have undertaken to canvass the nation for freedom. Women, you can not vote or fight for your country. Your only way to be a power in the government is through the exercise of this one, sacred, constitutional "right of petition;" and we ask you to use it now to the utmost. Go to the rich, the poor, the high, the low, the soldier, the civilian, the white, the black—gather up the names of all who hate slavery, all who love liberty, and would have it the law of the land, and lay them at the feet of Congress, your silent but potent vote for human freedom guarded by law....
At later meetings, it was decided to focus the League's efforts solely on gathering signatures for petitions 230 to the Senate and House of Representatives, asking for a law that would free all individuals of African descent who were being held in involuntary servitude. They aimed to collect a million signatures. This plan received praise from the entire anti-slavery press and from many notable individuals across the country. On June 1st, they opened headquarters in Room 20 at Cooper Institute, and the significant work began. Miss Anthony prepared and sent out thousands of petitions along with this letter:
Every day and every hour were given to the Loyal League. All through the hot summer Miss Anthony remained at her post in Cooper Institute, scattering her letters far and wide, pushing into the field every woman who was willing to work, sending out lecturers to stir up the people, directing affairs with the sagacity of an experienced general, sparing no one who could be pressed into service, and herself least of all. On July 15, during the New York Draft Riots, she writes home: "These are terrible times. The Colored Orphan Asylum which was burned was but one block from Mrs. Stanton's, and all of us left the house on Monday night. Yesterday when I started for Cooper Institute I found the cars and stages had been stopped by the mob and I could not get to the office. I took the ferry and went to Flushing to stay with my cousin, but 231 found it in force there. We all arose and dressed in the middle of the night, but it was finally gotten under control."
THE WOMEN'S NATIONAL LOYAL LEAGUE TO THE WOMEN OF THE REPUBLIC: We urge you to sign and share this petition for the complete abolition of slavery. Remember, the President's proclamation only affects the slaves of rebels. The jails in loyal Kentucky are currently filled with slaves from Georgia, Mississippi, and Alabama, advertised to be sold to cover their jail fees "according to law," just like before the war! As long as slavery exists anywhere, there can be no true freedom anywhere. We need a law to abolish slavery. We are dedicated to spreading the message of freedom across the nation. Women, even if you cannot vote or fight for your country, the only way to make your voice heard in government is through the exercise of this sacred constitutional "right of petition;" and we ask you to use it now fully. Reach out to the rich, the poor, the powerful, the ordinary, the soldiers, the civilians, the white, the black—gather the names of everyone who hates slavery, everyone who values liberty and wants it to be the law of the land, and present them to Congress as your silent but powerful vote for human freedom protected by law....
Miss Anthony had many heartaches during these trying times and longed more and more for that strength which had been taken from her forever. Writing to her mother of her brother Daniel R.'s election as mayor of Leavenworth, Kan., she says: "O, how has our dear father's face flitted before me as I have thought what his happiness would have been over this honor. Last night when my head was on my pillow, I seemed to be in the old carriage jogging homeward with him, while he happily recounted D.R.'s qualifications for this high post and accepted his election as the triumph of the opposition to rebels and slaveholders. Every day I appreciate more fully father's desire for justice to every human being, the lowest and blackest as well as the highest and whitest, and my constant prayer is to be a worthy daughter."
Every day and every hour were dedicated to the Loyal League. Throughout the hot summer, Miss Anthony stayed at her post in Cooper Institute, sending her letters everywhere, getting every woman willing to help involved, dispatching speakers to engage the public, managing operations with the insight of a seasoned general, sparing no one who could be recruited, and working herself harder than anyone. On July 15, during the New York Draft Riots, she wrote home: "These are awful times. The Colored Orphan Asylum that was burned was just one block away from Mrs. Stanton's, and we all left the house on Monday night. Yesterday when I tried to get to Cooper Institute, I found the trains and buses had been stopped by the mob, and I couldn’t reach the office. I took the ferry to Flushing to stay with my cousin, but 231 was there in full force. We all got up and got dressed in the middle of the night, but it was finally brought under control."
On the anniversary of his death she writes again to her mother: "It has seemed to me last night and today that I must fly to you and with you sit down in the quiet. It is torture here with not one who knew or cared for the loved one. It is sacrilege to speak his name or tell my grief to those who knew him not. O, how my soul reaches out in yearning to his dear spirit! Does he see me, will he, can he, come to me in my calm, still moments and gently minister and lift me up into nobler living and working?"
Miss Anthony faced many heartaches during these tough times and increasingly longed for the strength that had been taken from her forever. In a letter to her mother about her brother Daniel R.'s election as mayor of Leavenworth, Kan., she writes: "Oh, how our dear father's face has come to mind as I think about how happy he would have been about this honor. Last night, as I lay on my pillow, I felt like I was in the old carriage heading home with him, while he joyfully talked about D.R.'s qualifications for this important position and celebrated his election as a victory against the rebels and slaveholders. Every day, I understand more deeply father's commitment to justice for every human being, the lowest and darkest as well as the highest and lightest, and my constant prayer is to be a worthy daughter."
In a letter to her, relative to the sale of the home, the mother uses these touching words: "If it had been my heart that had ceased to beat, all might have gone on as before, but now all must go astray. I know I ought to get rid of this care, and Mary and I should not try to live here alone, but every foot of ground is sacred to me, and I love every article bought by the dear father of my children." On this subject Miss Anthony writes to her sister Mary:
On the anniversary of his death, she writes again to her mother: "Last night and today, I've felt like I should rush to you and sit with you in the quiet. It’s torture here with no one who knew or cared for my loved one. It feels wrong to speak his name or share my grief with those who didn’t know him. O, how my soul longs for his dear spirit! Does he see me? Will he? Can he come to me in my calm, quiet moments and gently lift me up to live and work in a better way?"
Your letter sent a pang to my very heart's core that the dear old home, so full of the memory of our father, must be given up. I do wish it could be best to keep it, and yet I do not think he will be less with us away from that loved spot, for my experience in the past months disproves such feeling. Every 232 place, every movement, almost, suggests him. Last evening, I strolled west on Forty-fifth street to the Hudson river, a mile or more. There was newly-sawed lumber there and the smell carried me back, back to the old sawmill and childhood's days. I looked at the beautiful river and the schooners with their sails spread to the breeze. I felt alone, but my mind traversed the entire round of the loved ones. I doubt if there be any mortal who clings to loves with greater tenacity than do I. To see mother without father in the old home, to feel the loneliness of her spirit, and all of us bereft of the joy of looking into the loved face, listening to the loved tones, waiting for his sanction or rejection—O, how I could see and feel it all!
In a letter to her about selling the house, the mother expresses her feelings: "If it had been my heart that stopped beating, everything might have stayed the same, but now everything must fall apart. I know I should let go of this burden, and Mary and I shouldn’t try to live here alone, but every bit of this place is precious to me, and I cherish every item bought by the beloved father of my children." On this topic, Miss Anthony writes to her sister Mary:
The rest of us have our work to engross us and other objects to center our affections upon, but mother now lives in her children, and I often feel as if we did too little to lighten her heart and cheer her path. Never was there a mother who came nearer to knowing nothing save her own household, her husband and children, whether high in the world's esteem or crucified, the same still with her through all. If we sometimes give her occasion to feel that we prized father more than her, it was she who taught us ever to hold him thus above all others. Our high respect and deep love for him, our perfect trust in him, we owe to mother's precepts and vastly more to her example. And, by and by, when we have to reckon her among the invisible, we shall live in remembrance of her wise counsel, tender watching, self-sacrifice and devotion not second to that we now cherish for the memory of our father—nay, it will even transcend that in measure, as a mother's constant and ever-present love and care for her children are beyond those of a father.
Your letter struck me hard because it means we have to let go of the beloved home filled with memories of our father. I really wish we could keep it, but I don’t think he would feel any less present if we weren’t there, since my experiences over the past few months suggest otherwise. Every place and almost every movement reminds me of him. Last night, I walked west on Forty-fifth Street to the Hudson River, about a mile. There was freshly cut lumber there, and the smell took me back to the old sawmill and my childhood. I looked at the beautiful river and the sailboats catching the breeze. I felt alone, but my mind wandered through all the memories of my loved ones. I doubt anyone holds onto their loves more fiercely than I do. The thought of seeing Mom without Dad in the old home, feeling her loneliness, and all of us missing the joy of looking into his beloved face, hearing his familiar voice, waiting for his approval or disapproval—oh, how vividly I can see and feel it all!
A bit of mirth comes into the somber atmosphere with a note from Theodore Tilton:
The rest of us have our jobs to keep us busy and other things to direct our love toward, but Mom now lives through her kids, and I often feel like we don’t do enough to lift her spirits and brighten her path. There’s never been a mother who seemed to know only her own home, her husband, and her children, whether they’re being celebrated or are suffering—it’s all the same to her. If we sometimes make her feel like we value Dad more than her, it was she who taught us to always hold him in such high regard. Our deep respect and love for him, our complete trust in him, comes from Mom’s teachings and even more, from her example. And eventually, when we have to count her among the unseen, we will remember her wise advice, loving watchfulness, selflessness, and devotion—not secondary to what we cherish about Dad’s memory—in fact, it will surpass that, as a mother's constant and ever-present love and care for her children is beyond what a father provides.
To SUSAN B. ANTHONY, ADJUTANT-GENERAL—Since of late you have been bold in expressing your opinion that the draft should be strenuously enforced and that the broken ranks of our brave armies should be supplied with new men, it will serve to show you how great the difference is between those who say and those who do, if I inform you—as in duty bound I do hereby—that I know a little lady only half your size who doubles your zeal in all these respects and who, without waiting for your tardy example, presented on her own account to the government on Thursday last a new man, weighing nine pounds, to be enrolled among the infantry of the United States.
A touch of humor brightens the serious mood with a message from Theodore Tilton:
Miss Anthony undertook the great work of this National Loyal League without the guarantee from any source of a single dollar. The expenses were very heavy; office rent, clerk hire, printing bills, postage, etc., brought them up to over $5,000, but as usual she was fertile in resources for raising money. All who signed the petition were requested to give a cent and in this way about $3,000 were realized. A few 233 contributions came in, but the demands were infinite for every dollar which patriotic citizens could spare, and the league felt desirous of paying its own way. To assist in this, she arranged a course of lectures at Cooper Institute. Among those who responded to her call were Hon. William D. Kelley, Edwin P. Whipple, Theodore D. Weld, Rev. Stephen H. Tyng, Frederick Douglass, Wendell Phillips, George William Curtis, Frances D. Gage and several others. Most of these donated their services and others reduced their price. Letters of commendation were received from editors, ministers, senators and generals. George Thompson, the British Abolitionist and ex-member of Parliament, gave hearty sympathy and co-operation.
To SUSAN B. ANTHONY, ADJUTANT-GENERAL—Recently, you've expressed your strong belief that the draft should be strictly enforced and that our brave armies need new recruits. I want to highlight the important distinction between those who talk and those who take action. It’s my duty to let you know about a small woman, who is only half your size, but has more passion for this cause than you do. Without waiting for your slow example, she took the initiative to present a new recruit to the government last Thursday—a healthy baby boy weighing nine pounds, ready to be enrolled in the United States infantry.
Stephen H. Tyng
Miss Anthony took on the significant task of this National Loyal League without any financial guarantees from any source. The expenses were quite high; office rent, staff salaries, printing costs, postage, and so on totaled over $5,000, but as always, she was resourceful in finding ways to raise money. Everyone who signed the petition was asked to contribute a cent, which managed to bring in about $3,000. A few 233 contributions came in, but the need for funding was endless, and the league wanted to be self-sufficient. To help with this, she organized a series of lectures at Cooper Institute. Among those who answered her call were Hon. William D. Kelley, Edwin P. Whipple, Theodore D. Weld, Rev. Stephen H. Tyng, Frederick Douglass, Wendell Phillips, George William Curtis, Frances D. Gage, and several others. Most of them donated their services, while others lowered their fees. Letters of support were received from editors, ministers, senators, and generals. George Thompson, the British abolitionist and former member of Parliament, offered his full sympathy and support.

Benjamin F. Wade wrote: "You may count upon any aid which I am competent to bestow to forward the object of your league. As a member of Congress, you shall have my best endeavors for your success, for a cause more honorable to human nature or one that promised more benefit to the world, never called forth the efforts of the patriot or philanthropist." From Major-General Rosecrans came the message: "The cause in which you are engaged is sacred, and would ennoble mean and sanctify common things. You have my best wishes for continued success in your good work."
Stephen H. Tyng
Geo Thompson
Benjamin F. Wade wrote: "You can count on any support I can provide to help your league's goals. As a member of Congress, I will do my best to help you succeed because there’s no cause more honorable for humanity or that offers more benefits to the world than this one." From Major-General Rosecrans came the message: "The cause you're working on is sacred and would elevate the ordinary and make common things special. You have my best wishes for ongoing success in your important work."

Geo Thompson
In December, 1863, Miss Anthony went to Philadelphia to attend the great meeting which celebrated the thirtieth anniversary of the founding of the American Anti-Slavery Society, and was strengthened and encouraged by the lofty and enthusiastic addresses and the renewed expressions of friendship and fealty to herself.
The work of securing the petitions was rapidly and energetically pushed during the winter and spring of 1864. Miss Anthony gave all her time to the office.[33] During the year and a half of her arduous labors, she received from the Hovey Committee $12 a week. As she boarded with Mrs. Stanton at a reduced price she managed to keep her expenses within this limit. She writes home: "I go to a restaurant near by for lunch every noon. I take always strawberries with two tea-rusks. Today I said, 'All this lacks is a glass of milk from my mother's cellar,' and the girl replied, 'We have very nice Westchester county milk.' So tomorrow I shall add that to my bill of fare. My lunch costs, berries, five cents, rusks five, and tomorrow the milk will be three." There is reason to believe, however, that she often would have been glad to afford a second dish of strawberries.
In December 1863, Miss Anthony traveled to Philadelphia to participate in the major meeting celebrating the thirtieth anniversary of the American Anti-Slavery Society. She felt uplifted and motivated by the inspiring and passionate speeches and the renewed affirmations of friendship and loyalty towards her.
The Hovey Committee sent $155, Gerrit Smith $200, Schieffelin Brothers, Druggists, $100, and Jessie Benton Fremont, $50. In her great need of funds, Miss Anthony decided to appeal to Henry Ward Beecher and she relates how, as she was wearily climbing Columbia Heights to his home, she felt a hand on her shoulder and heard a hearty voice say: "Well, old girl, what do you want now?" It was Mr. Beecher himself who, the moment she explained her mission, said: "I'll take up a collection in Plymouth church next Sunday." The result of this was $200. The carefully kept books still in existence show that when the accounts of the league were closed, there was a deficit of $4.72 to settle all indebtedness, and this Miss Anthony paid out of her own pocket! 235
The effort to secure the petitions was quickly and energetically pushed during the winter and spring of 1864. Miss Anthony devoted all her time to the office.[33] During the year and a half of her hard work, she received $12 a week from the Hovey Committee. Since she stayed with Mrs. Stanton at a discounted rate, she was able to keep her expenses within that budget. She wrote home: "I go to a nearby restaurant for lunch every day. I always have strawberries with two tea rusks. Today I said, 'All this needs is a glass of milk from my mother's cellar,' and the girl replied, 'We have very nice Westchester county milk.' So tomorrow I’ll add that to my meal. My lunch costs, strawberries, five cents, rusks five, and tomorrow the milk will be three." However, it’s likely that she often wished she could afford a second serving of strawberries.
In January the brother Daniel R. came East for his beautiful young bride, and the mother from her quiet farm-nook sends her petition to New York. She can not manage the "infare" unless Susan comes home and helps. So she drops the affairs of government long enough to skim across the State and lend a hand in preparing for this interesting event, and then back again to her incessant drudgery, made doubly hard by financial anxiety.
The Hovey Committee sent $155, Gerrit Smith sent $200, Schieffelin Brothers, Druggists, contributed $100, and Jessie Benton Fremont gave $50. In her urgent need for funds, Miss Anthony decided to reach out to Henry Ward Beecher, and she describes how, while she was tiredly climbing Columbia Heights to his home, she felt a hand on her shoulder and heard a friendly voice say, "Well, old girl, what do you need now?" It was Mr. Beecher himself who, as soon as she explained her purpose, said, "I'll take up a collection in Plymouth Church next Sunday." This resulted in $200. The carefully maintained records that still exist show that when the league's accounts were closed, there was a deficit of $4.72 to settle all debts, which Miss Anthony paid out of her own pocket! 235
Robert Dale Owen
In January, Daniel R. came East for his lovely young bride, and their mother, from her peaceful farmhouse, sent her request to New York. She can't handle the "infare" unless Susan comes home to help. So she puts aside her government duties long enough to travel across the state and assist with preparations for this exciting occasion, and then it's back to her never-ending grind, which is made even tougher by financial stress.

During all this work of the Loyal League, Miss Anthony found her strongest and staunchest support in Robert Dale Owen, who was then in New York by appointment of President Lincoln as chairman of the Freedman's Inquiry Commission. She was also in constant communication with Senator Charles Sumner, who was most anxious that the work should be hastened. The blank petitions were sent in great sacks to him at Washington, and distributed under his "frank" to all parts of the Union. On February 9, 1864, he presented in the Senate the first installment. The petitions from each State were tied by themselves in a large bundle and endorsed with the number of signatures. Two able-bodied negroes carried them into the Senate chamber, and Mr. Sumner presented them, saying in part:
Robert Dale Owen
These petitions are signed by 100,000 men and women, who unite in this unparalleled number to support their prayer. They are from all parts of the country and from every condition of life.... They ask nothing less than universal emancipation, and this they ask directly at the hands of Congress. It is not for me to assign reasons which the army of petitioners has forborne to assign; but I may not improperly add that, naturally and obviously, they all feel in their hearts, what reason and knowledge confirm, not only that slavery is the guilty origin of the rebellion, but that its influence everywhere, even outside the rebel States, has been hostile to the Union, always impairing loyalty and sometimes openly menacing the national government. The petitioners know well that to save the country from peril, especially to save the national life, there is no power in the ample arsenal of self-defense which Congress may not grasp; for to Congress under the Constitution, belongs the 236 prerogative of the Roman Dictator to see that the republic receives no detriment. Therefore to Congress these petitioners now appeal.
During all this work of the Loyal League, Miss Anthony found her strongest and most reliable support in Robert Dale Owen, who was then in New York appointed by President Lincoln as chairman of the Freedman's Inquiry Commission. She was also in regular contact with Senator Charles Sumner, who was very eager to speed up the process. The blank petitions were sent to him in large bags in Washington and distributed under his "frank" to all parts of the Union. On February 9, 1864, he presented the first batch in the Senate. The petitions from each state were tied together in a large bundle and labeled with the number of signatures. Two able-bodied Black men carried them into the Senate chamber, and Mr. Sumner presented them, saying in part:
After an earnest discussion by the Senate the petition was referred to the Select Committee on Slavery and Freedom, whose chairman was Thomas D. Eliot, of Massachusetts. Immediately afterwards several thousand more blank petitions were sent out, accompanied by a second appeal which closed: "Shall we not all join in one loud, earnest, effectual prayer to Congress, which will swell on its ear like the voice of many waters, that this bloody, desolating war shall be arrested and ended by the immediate and final removal by statute law and amended Constitution, of that crime and curse which alone has brought it upon us?"
These petitions are signed by 100,000 men and women who come together in this impressive number to support their request. They are from all over the country and from every walk of life. They ask for nothing less than universal freedom, and they are making this request directly to Congress. I won’t list the reasons that the petitioners have chosen not to mention; however, I can add that they all deeply feel, as reason and knowledge confirm, that slavery is not only the root cause of the rebellion but also its effects are felt everywhere, even beyond the rebel states, undermining loyalty and sometimes openly threatening the national government. The petitioners understand well that to protect the country from danger, especially to preserve the nation's existence, there is no power in the extensive arsenal of self-defense that Congress cannot use; for under the Constitution, Congress has the authority similar to that of a Roman Dictator to ensure that the republic suffers no harm. Therefore, these petitioners now turn to Congress for help.
Charles Sumner
After a serious discussion by the Senate, the petition was sent to the Select Committee on Slavery and Freedom, chaired by Thomas D. Eliot from Massachusetts. Shortly after, several thousand more blank petitions were distributed, along with a second appeal that concluded: "Shall we not all come together in one loud, serious, and powerful prayer to Congress, which will rise like the sound of many waters, demanding that this bloody and devastating war be stopped immediately and for good through new laws and amendments to the Constitution, removing the crime and curse that brought it upon us?"

In answer to an invitation to be present at the first anniversary of the Women's National Loyal League, Senator Sumner wrote:
Charles Sumner
I can not be with you for my post of duty is here. I am grateful to your association for what you have done to arouse the country to insist on the extinction of slavery. Now is the time to strike and no effort should be 237 spared. The good work must be finished, and to my mind nothing seems to be done, while anything remains to be done. There is one point to which attention must be directed. No effort should be spared to castigate and blast the whole idea of property in man, which is the corner-stone of the rebel pretension and the constant assumption of the partisans of slavery, or of its lukewarm opponents. Let this idea be trampled out and there will be no sympathy with the rebellion, and there will be no such abomination as slave-hunting, which is beyond question the most execrable feature of slavery itself.
In response to an invitation to attend the first anniversary of the Women's National Loyal League, Senator Sumner wrote:
As Miss Anthony herself had asked so many favors of Wendell Phillips, she thought it would be a good idea to have Mrs. Stanton invite him to make an address at this anniversary; but he was not in the least deceived, as his reply shows:
I can’t be with you because my duty is here. I appreciate your efforts to motivate the country to fight for the end of slavery. Now is the time to take action, and no effort should be 237 wasted. The work must be completed, and for me, nothing is truly achieved while there’s still something left to do. One important point needs our attention. We have to work hard to condemn and eliminate the entire concept of property in man, which is the basis of the rebels' claims and the ongoing belief of slavery's supporters, as well as its indifferent opponents. If we destroy this idea, there will be no sympathy for the rebellion, and we will put an end to the horrifying act of slave-hunting, which is undoubtedly the most despicable aspect of slavery itself.
DEAR MRS. STANTON: Your S.B.A. thinks she is very cunning. As if I did not see a huge pussy under that meal! She has been so modest, humble, ashamed, reluctant, apologetic, contrite, self-accusing whenever the last ten years she has asked me to do anything, go anywhere, speak on any topic! Now she makes you pull the chestnuts out of the fire and thinks I do not see her waiting behind. Ah, the hand is the hand of Esau, the voice is the voice of Jacob, wicked, sly, skulking, mystifying Jacob. Why don't "secretaries" write the official letters? How much they leave the "president" to do! Naughty idlers, those secretaries! Well, let me thank Miss Secretary Anthony for her gentle consideration; then let me say I'll try to speak, as you say, fifteen minutes.... Remember me defiantly to S.B.A.
As Miss Anthony had asked Wendell Phillips for so many favors, she thought it would be a good idea for Mrs. Stanton to invite him to speak at this anniversary; however, he wasn’t fooled at all, as his reply shows:
In the midst of all this correspondence came a letter from a sweetheart of her girlhood, now a prominent officeholder in Ohio, stating that he was a widower but would not long remain one if his old friend would take pity upon him. It is sincerely to be hoped that the secretary of the Loyal League found time at least to have one of her clerks answer this epistle.
DEAR MRS. STANTON: Your S.B.A. thinks she's pretty clever. As if I didn’t see that big cat under that meal! She has been so modest, humble, ashamed, reluctant, apologetic, contrite, and self-blaming every time over the past ten years she has asked me to do anything, go anywhere, or discuss any topic! Now she has you doing the hard work and thinks I don’t see her hiding in the background. Ah, the hand is the hand of Esau, the voice is the voice of Jacob—wicked, sly, sneaky, and confusing Jacob. Why don’t “secretaries” write the official letters themselves? They leave so much for the “president” to deal with! Naughty slackers, those secretaries! Well, let me thank Miss Secretary Anthony for her thoughtful consideration; then let me say I’ll try to speak, as you mentioned, for fifteen minutes... Remember me defiantly to S.B.A.
The meeting was held in the Church of the Puritans, May 12, 1864, and soul-stirring speeches were made by Phillips, Mrs. Rose, Lucretia Mott, George Thompson, Mrs. Stanton and Miss Anthony. The report of the executive committee showed that a debt of $5,000, including $1,000 for postage alone, had been paid; that 25,000 blank petitions had been sent out; that the league now numbered 5,000 members, and that branch Loyal Leagues had been formed in many cities. Strong resolutions were adopted demanding not only emancipation but enfranchisement for the negroes. The entire proceedings 238 of the convention illustrated how thoroughly the leading women of the country understood the political situation, how broad and comprehensive was their grasp of public affairs, and with what a patriotic and self-sacrificing spirit they performed their part of the duties imposed by the great Civil War.
In the middle of all this communication, she received a letter from a childhood sweetheart, now an important official in Ohio, saying he was a widower but wouldn’t stay that way for long if his old friend felt sorry for him. It is truly to be hoped that the secretary of the Loyal League found at least a moment for one of her clerks to respond to this letter.
By August, 1864, the signatures to the petitions had reached almost 400,000. Again and again Charles Sumner and Henry Wilson had written Miss Anthony that these petitions formed the bulwark of their demand for congressional action to abolish slavery. Public sentiment on this point had now become emphatic, the Senate had passed the bill for the prohibition of slavery, and the intention of the House of Representatives was so apparent that it did not seem necessary to continue the petitions. The headquarters in Cooper Institute were closed, and the magnificent work, which from this center had radiated throughout the country, found its reward in the proposition by Congress, on February 1, 1865, for Amendment XIII to the Federal Constitution:
The meeting took place at the Church of the Puritans on May 12, 1864, and passionate speeches were delivered by Phillips, Mrs. Rose, Lucretia Mott, George Thompson, Mrs. Stanton, and Miss Anthony. The executive committee's report revealed that a debt of $5,000 had been cleared, which included $1,000 just for postage; 25,000 blank petitions had been distributed; the league now had 5,000 members, and branch Loyal Leagues were established in several cities. Strong resolutions were passed, demanding not just emancipation but voting rights for Black people. The entire proceedings 238 of the convention showed how well the leading women of the country understood the political landscape, how broad and extensive their understanding of public issues was, and with what patriotic and selfless spirit they engaged in their responsibilities during the Civil War.
Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime, whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist in the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
By August 1864, the signatures on the petitions had reached almost 400,000. Over and over, Charles Sumner and Henry Wilson had written to Miss Anthony, saying that these petitions were crucial to their push for Congress to take action to end slavery. Public opinion on this issue had become very clear; the Senate had passed the bill to ban slavery, and it was obvious that the House of Representatives supported it, so there seemed to be no need to keep collecting signatures. The headquarters at Cooper Institute were closed, and the incredible work that had spread from this center across the country was rewarded on February 1, 1865, with Congress's proposal for Amendment XIII to the Federal Constitution:
The faithful, untiring, persistent chief of this Women's National Loyal League was Susan B. Anthony, whose only material reminder of that great achievement for the freedom of the slave is the arm-chair in which, for the past thirty-five years, she has sat and conducted her vast correspondence in the interest of liberty for the half of humanity still in bondage; yet in the blessed thought that her efforts were an important factor in securing freedom for millions of her fellow-creatures, she has been rewarded a thousandfold. But what words can express her sense of humiliation when, at the close of this long conflict, the government which she had served so faithfully still held her unworthy a voice in its councils, while it recognized as the political superiors of all the noble women of the nation, the negro men just emerged from slavery 239 and not only totally illiterate but also densely ignorant of every public question?
Neither slavery nor forced labor, except as a punishment for a crime for which the person has been properly convicted, will exist in the United States or anywhere under their control.
Elizabeth Blackwell
The dedicated, tireless, and persistent leader of the Women's National Loyal League was Susan B. Anthony, whose only physical reminder of that significant achievement for the freedom of slaves is the armchair where she has spent the past thirty-five years managing her extensive correspondence advocating for liberty for the half of humanity still in bondage. Yet she has been rewarded a thousandfold by the comforting thought that her efforts played a crucial role in securing freedom for millions of her fellow beings. However, what words can capture her humiliation when, at the end of this long struggle, the government she had served so faithfully still considered her unworthy of a voice in its decisions, while recognizing as the political superiors of all the noble women in the nation the newly freed Black men, who were not only completely uneducated but also profoundly ignorant of every public issue? 239

There never can be an adequate portrayal of the services rendered by the women of this country during the Civil War, but none will deny that, according to their opportunities, they were as faithful and self-sacrificing as were the men. A comparison of values is impossible, but women's labors supplemented those of men, and together they wrought out the freedom of the slave and the salvation of the Union. Among the great body of women, a few stand out in immortal light. The plan of the vital campaign of the Tennessee, one of the great strategic movements of history, was made by Anna Ella Carroll. The work of Dorothea Dix, government superintendent of women nurses, with its onerous and important duties, needs no eulogy. Dr. Elizabeth Blackwell, fresh from England and an intimacy with Florence Nightingale, originated the Sanitary Commission. No name is held in more profound reverence than that of Clara Barton, for her matchless services upon the battlefield among the dead and dying. To Josephine S. Griffing belongs the full credit of founding the Freedmen's Bureau, which played so valuable a part in the help and protection of the newly emancipated negroes. Who of all the public speakers rendered greater aid to the Union than the inspired Anna Dickinson? Yet not one of these ever received the slightest official recognition from the government. In the cases of Miss Carroll, Dr. Blackwell and Mrs. Griffing, the honors and the profits all were absorbed by men. Neither Dorothea Dix nor Clara Barton ever asked for a pension. All of these women at the close of the war appealed for the right of suffrage, a voice in the affairs of government; but such appeals were and still are treated with contemptuous denial. The situation was thus eloquently summed up by that woman statesman, Elizabeth Cady Stanton:
Elizabeth Blackwell
The lessons of the war were not lost on the women of this nation; through 240 varied forms of suffering and humiliation, they learned that they had an equal interest with men in the administration of the government, alike enjoying its blessings or enduring its miseries. When in the enfranchisement of the black men they saw another ignorant class of voters placed above their heads, and beheld the danger of a distinctively "male" government, forever involving the nations of the earth in war and violence; and demanded for the protection of themselves and children, that woman's voice should be heard and her opinions in public affairs be expressed by the ballot, they were coolly told that the black man had earned the right to vote, that he had fought and bled and died for his country.
There can never be a complete representation of the contributions made by the women of this country during the Civil War, but no one can deny that, given their opportunities, they were just as dedicated and selfless as the men. It's impossible to compare their efforts directly, but women's work complemented that of men, and together they achieved the freedom of the enslaved and the preservation of the Union. Among the many women, a few shine brightly in history. The strategy for the vital Tennessee campaign, one of the major strategic movements in history, was conceived by Anna Ella Carroll. Dorothea Dix, the government superintendent of women nurses, has no need for praise; her important responsibilities speak for themselves. Dr. Elizabeth Blackwell, who came from England with connections to Florence Nightingale, started the Sanitary Commission. No name is revered more than Clara Barton's, for her extraordinary service on the battlefield among the dead and wounded. Josephine S. Griffing deserves full credit for founding the Freedmen's Bureau, which played a crucial role in assisting and protecting the newly freed African Americans. Who among public speakers contributed more to the Union than the inspiring Anna Dickinson? Yet none of these women ever received any official acknowledgment from the government. In the cases of Miss Carroll, Dr. Blackwell, and Mrs. Griffing, all the honors and benefits were taken by men. Neither Dorothea Dix nor Clara Barton ever sought a pension. After the war, all these women called for the right to vote, to have a say in government affairs, but those calls were met with disdainful rejection. Elizabeth Cady Stanton, that eloquent woman politician, summed up the situation perfectly:
[33] She was assisted from time to time by Mrs. Stanton, Lucy Stone, Charlotte B. Wilbour, Dr. Clemence S. Lozier, Mary F. Gilbert, Frances V. Hallock, Mattie Griffith (Brown), Rebecca Shepard (Putnam), and Frances M. Russell, all donating their services. The bookkeeper and the clerks were paid small salaries from the office receipts.
The women of this nation learned important lessons from the war; through various forms of suffering and humiliation, they came to realize that they had an equal stake alongside men in how the government operated, sharing in its benefits and experiencing its challenges. When they noticed another uneducated group of voters, black men, being prioritized over them in the fight for voting rights, and recognized the danger of a government that was clearly "male," constantly dragging nations into war and violence, they insisted that for their own safety and that of their children, women's voices needed to be heard and their views on public issues should be expressed through the ballot. They faced indifference and were told that black men had earned the right to vote because they had fought, bled, and died for their country.
[33] She received help occasionally from Mrs. Stanton, Lucy Stone, Charlotte B. Wilbour, Dr. Clemence S. Lozier, Mary F. Gilbert, Frances V. Hallock, Mattie Griffith (Brown), Rebecca Shepard (Putnam), and Frances M. Russell, all volunteering their services. The bookkeeper and the clerks were paid small salaries from the office earnings.
Soon after closing the league headquarters, Miss Anthony went to Auburn to attend the wedding of Wm. Lloyd Garrison, Jr., and Ellen, daughter of her dear friend Martha C. Wright and niece of Lucretia Mott, a union of two families very acceptable to the friends of both. From this scene of festivity she returned home to meet a fresh sorrow in the sudden death, almost at the hour of her arrival, of Ann Eliza, daughter of her eldest sister Guelma and Aaron McLean, the best beloved of all her nieces. She was twenty-three years old, beautiful and talented, a good musician and an artist of fine promise. In her Miss Anthony had centered many hopes and ambitions, and the letters show that she was always planning and working for her future as she would have done for that of a cherished daughter. She was laid to rest on the silver wedding anniversary of her parents. Miss Anthony writes: "She had ceased to be a child and had become the fullgrown woman, my companion and friend. I loved her merry laugh, her bright, joyous presence, and yet my loss is so small compared to the awful void in her mother's life that I scarcely dare mention it."
CHAPTER XV.
"MALE" IN THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION.
1865.
Months afterwards she wrote her sister Hannah: "Today I made a pilgrimage to Mount Hope. The last rays of red, gold and purple fringed the horizon and shone serenely on the mounds above our dear father and Ann Eliza. What a contrast in my feelings; for the one a subdued sorrow at the sudden ending of a life full-ripened, only that we would have 242 basked in its sunshine a little longer; for the other a keen anguish over the untimely cutting off in the dawn of existence, with the hopes and longings but just beginning to take form, the real purpose of life yet dimly developed, a great nature but half revealed. The faith that she and all our loved and gone are graduated into a higher school of growth and progress is the only consolation for death."
Soon after wrapping up at the league headquarters, Miss Anthony headed to Auburn to attend the wedding of Wm. Lloyd Garrison, Jr. and Ellen, who is the daughter of her good friend Martha C. Wright and the niece of Lucretia Mott. This union was well-received by both families. After this celebration, she returned home only to face a new heartbreak with the sudden death—almost at the moment of her arrival—of Ann Eliza, the daughter of her oldest sister Guelma and Aaron McLean, who was the most beloved of all her nieces. At just twenty-three years old, she was beautiful and talented, a skilled musician and an artist with great potential. Miss Anthony had placed many hopes and dreams in her, and her letters reveal that she was always strategizing and working towards Ann Eliza's future as if she were her own cherished daughter. Ann Eliza was laid to rest on her parents' silver wedding anniversary. Miss Anthony writes: "She had ceased to be a child and had become the fullgrown woman, my companion and friend. I loved her merry laugh, her bright, joyous presence, and yet my loss is so small compared to the awful void in her mother's life that I scarcely dare mention it."
At another time she wrote her brother: "This new and sorrowful reminder of the brittleness of life's threads should soften all our expressions to each other in our home circles and open our lips to speak only words of tenderness and approbation. We are so wont to utter criticisms and to keep silence about the things we approve. I wish we might be as faithful in expressing our likes as our dislikes, and not leave our loved ones to take it for granted that their good acts are noted and appreciated and vastly outnumber those we criticise. The sum of home happiness would be greatly multiplied if all families would conscientiously follow this method."
Months later, she wrote to her sister Hannah: "Today I took a trip to Mount Hope. The last rays of red, gold, and purple lined the horizon and shone gently on the mounds above our dear father and Ann Eliza. What a contrast in my feelings; for one, a deep sorrow at the sudden end of a life that was fully blossomed, wishing only that we could have 242 enjoyed its warmth a little longer; for the other, a sharp pain over the premature loss at the start of life, with hopes and dreams just beginning to take shape, the true purpose of life still unclear, a beautiful spirit only half revealed. The belief that she and all our loved ones who have passed on have moved on to a higher stage of growth and progress is the only comfort for death."
There were urgent appeals in these days from the lately-married brother and his wife for sister Susan to come to Kansas and, as no public work seemed to be pressing, she started the latter part of January, 1865. She stopped in Chicago to visit her uncle Albert Dickinson, was detained a week by heavy storms, and reached Leavenworth the last day of the month. Of her journey she wrote home:
At another time she wrote her brother: "This recent and painful reminder of how fragile life is should encourage us to be kinder in how we speak to each other at home and to express only words of love and praise. We often find ourselves criticizing and staying silent about the things we like. I wish we could be just as open about our praises as our criticisms, and not assume that our loved ones know we notice and appreciate their good deeds, which far exceed the ones we point out negatively. The overall happiness in our homes would be greatly increased if all families made an effort to do this."
I paid a dollar for a ride across the Mississippi on the ice. When we reached Missouri all was devastation. I asked the conductor if there were not a sleeper and he replied, "Our sleeping cars are in the ditch." Scarcely a train had been over the road in weeks without being thrown off the track. We were nineteen hours going the 200 miles from Quincy to St. Joe. Twelve miles out from the latter we had to wait for the train ahead of us to get back on the rails. I was desperate. Any decent farmer's pigpen would be as clean as that car. There were five or six families, each with half a dozen children, moving to Kansas and Nebraska, who had been shut up there for days. A hovel stood up the bank a little way and several of the men went there and washed their faces. After watching them enjoy this luxury for a while I finally rushed up myself and asked the woman in charge if she would sell me a cup of coffee. She grunted out yes, after some hesitation, and while she was making it, I washed my face and hands. When she handed me my 243 drink she said, "This is no rye; it is real coffee." And so it was and I enjoyed it, brass spoon, thick, dingy, cracked cup and all.
There were urgent requests during this time from her recently married brother and his wife for sister Susan to come to Kansas. Since there wasn’t any pressing public work, she left in the latter part of January 1865. She stopped in Chicago to visit her uncle Albert Dickinson but was delayed for a week due to heavy storms. She arrived in Leavenworth on the last day of the month. About her trip, she wrote home:
This was Miss Anthony's first visit to Kansas and she found much to interest her in Leavenworth—caravans of emigrants long trains of supplies for the army, troops from the barracks crowds of colored refugees, the many features of frontier life so totally different from all she had seen and known in her eastern home. The prominence of her brother brought many distinguished visitors to his house, she enjoyed the long carriage drives and the days were filled with pleasant duties, so that she writes, "I am afraid I shall get into the business of being comfortable." On her birthday, February 15, the diary shows that she wagered a pair of gloves with the family physician that it would not rain before morning, and on the 16th is recorded: "The bell rang early this morning and a boy left a box containing a pair of gloves with the compliments of the doctor." In March one entry reads: "The new seamstress starts in pretty well but she can not sew nicely enough for the little clothes. We shall have to make those ourselves."
I paid a dollar to cross the Mississippi on the ice. When we got to Missouri, everything was a mess. I asked the conductor if there was a sleeper car, and he replied, "Our sleeping cars are in the ditch." Almost no train had traveled that route in weeks without derailing. It took us nineteen hours to cover the 200 miles from Quincy to St. Joe. Twelve miles from the latter, we had to wait for the train ahead of us to get back on the tracks. I was at my breaking point. Any decent farmer's pigpen would have been cleaner than that car. There were five or six families, each with half a dozen kids, moving to Kansas and Nebraska, who had been stuck there for days. A run-down shack was up the bank a little way, and several of the men went there to wash their faces. After watching them enjoy this luxury for a bit, I finally rushed over myself and asked the woman in charge if she could sell me a cup of coffee. She grunted out a yes after a moment of hesitation, and while she was making it, I washed my face and hands. When she handed me my 243 drink, she said, "This isn’t rye; it’s real coffee." And it really was, and I enjoyed it, brass spoon, thick, dingy, cracked cup and all.
This life of ease proved to be of short duration. Her brother was renominated for mayor and plunged at once into the thick of a political campaign, while Miss Anthony went to the office to help manage his newspaper, limited only by his injunction "not to have it all woman's rights and negro suffrage." The labor, however, which she most enjoyed was among the colored refugees. Soon after the slaves were set free they flocked to Kansas in large numbers, and what should be done with this great body of uneducated, untrained and irresponsible people was a perplexing question. She went into the day schools, Sunday-schools, charitable societies and all organizations for their relief and improvement. The journal shows that four or five days or evenings every week were given to this work and that she formed an equal rights league among them. A colored printer was put into the composing-room, and at once the entire force went on strike. The diary declares "it is a burning, blistering shame," and relates her attempts to secure other work for him. She met at this time Hiram Revels, a colored 244 Methodist preacher, afterwards United States senator from Mississippi.
This was Miss Anthony's first visit to Kansas, and she found a lot to pique her interest in Leavenworth—caravans of emigrants, long trains of supplies for the army, troops from the barracks, crowds of Black refugees, and many aspects of frontier life that were completely different from what she had experienced in her eastern home. Her brother's prominence brought many distinguished guests to their house, and she enjoyed the long carriage rides. The days were filled with enjoyable tasks, and she wrote, "I'm afraid I’ll get used to being comfortable." On her birthday, February 15, her diary notes that she bet a pair of gloves with the family doctor that it wouldn’t rain before morning, and on the 16th she recorded: "The bell rang early this morning, and a boy dropped off a box with a pair of gloves, compliments of the doctor." In March, one entry mentions: "The new seamstress is doing pretty well but isn’t sewing nicely enough for the little clothes. We'll have to make those ourselves."
During these months she was in constant receipt of letters pressing her to return to the East. Phillips said: "Come back, there is work for you here." From Lydia Mott came the pathetic cry: "Our old fraternity is no more; we are divided, bodily and spiritually, and I seem to grow more isolated every day." Pillsbury wrote: "We do not know much now about one another. We called a meeting of the Hovey Committee and only Whipple and I were present. Why have you deserted the field of action at a time like this, at an hour unparalleled in almost twenty centuries? If you watch our papers you must have observed that with you gone, our forces are scattered until I can almost truly say with him of old, 'I only am left.' It is not for me to decide your field of labor. Kansas needed John Brown and may need you. It is no doubt missionary ground and, wherever you are, I know you will not be idle; but New York is to revise her constitution next year and, if you are absent, who is to make the plea for woman?" Mrs. Stanton insisted that she should not remain buried in Kansas and concluded a long letter:
This easy life didn’t last long. Her brother was re-nominated for mayor and immediately jumped into a political campaign, while Miss Anthony went to the office to help manage his newspaper, limited only by his instruction "not to make it all about women's rights and Black suffrage." However, the work she enjoyed the most was with the Black refugees. Soon after the slaves were freed, they moved to Kansas in large numbers, and figuring out what to do with this large group of uneducated, untrained, and irresponsible people was a challenging issue. She got involved in day schools, Sunday schools, charitable organizations, and all initiatives for their support and improvement. Her journal indicates that she dedicated four or five days or evenings each week to this work and that she started an equal rights league among them. A Black printer was hired in the composing room, and immediately the whole team went on strike. The diary states, "it is a burning, blistering shame," and describes her efforts to find other work for him. During this time, she met Hiram Revels, a Black Methodist preacher who later became a United States senator from Mississippi.
I hope in a short time to be comfortably located in a new house where we will have a room ready for you when you come East. I long to put my arms around you once more and hear you scold me for my sins and short-comings. Your abuse is sweeter to me than anybody else's praise for, in spite of your severity, your faith and confidence shine through all. O, Susan, you are very dear to me. I should miss you more than any other living being from this earth. You are intertwined with much of my happy and eventful past, and all my future plans are based on you as a coadjutor. Yes, our work is one, we are one in aim and sympathy and we should be together. Come home.
During these months, she constantly received letters urging her to return to the East. Phillips wrote, "Come back, there’s work for you here." From Lydia Mott came the heart-wrenching plea, "Our old fraternity is no more; we are divided, both physically and spiritually, and I feel more isolated every day." Pillsbury wrote, "We don’t know much about each other right now. We called a meeting of the Hovey Committee, and only Whipple and I showed up. Why have you abandoned the battlefield at a time like this, at an hour unmatched in nearly twenty centuries? If you’re keeping up with our papers, you must have noticed that without you here, our forces are scattered to the point where I could almost genuinely say, 'I only am left.' It’s not my place to decide where you should work. Kansas needed John Brown and may need you too. It’s definitely ground where you can do missionary work, and wherever you are, I know you won’t be idle; but New York is going to revise her constitution next year, and if you’re not here, who will advocate for women?" Mrs. Stanton insisted that she shouldn’t stay isolated in Kansas and wrapped up a long letter:
Miss Anthony's own heart yearned to return, but the workers were so few in Kansas and so many in the Eastern States. that she scarcely knew where the call of duty was strongest. At the close of the war her mind grasped at once the full import of the momentous questions which would demand settlement and she felt the necessity of placing herself in touch with those who would be most powerful in moulding public sentiment. The threatened division in the Abolitionist ranks and the 245 reported determination of Mr. Garrison to disband the Anti-Slavery Society, filled her with dismay and she sent back the strongest protests she could put into words:
I hope to be happily settled into a new house soon, where we’ll have a room ready for you when you come East. I can’t wait to hold you again and let you criticize me for my mistakes and shortcomings. Your teasing means more to me than anyone else's praise because, despite your tough love, your faith and confidence shine through. Oh, Susan, you mean so much to me. I would miss you more than anyone else in the world. You’re connected to so much of my happy and memorable past, and all my future plans depend on you as a partner. Yes, our work is united; we share the same goals and understanding, and we need to be together. Come home.
How can any one hold that Congress has no right to demand negro suffrage in the returning rebel States because it is not already established in all the loyal ones? What would have been said of Abolitionists ten or twenty years ago, had they preached to the people that Congress had no right to vote against admitting a new State with slavery, because it was not already abolished in all the old States? It is perfectly astounding, this seeming eagerness of so many of our old friends to cover up and apologize for the glaring hate toward the equal recognition of the manhood of the black race. Well, you will be in New York to witness, perhaps, the disbanding of the Anti-Slavery Society—and I shall be away out here, waiting anxiously to catch the first glimpse of the spirit of the meeting. But Phillips will be glorious and genial to the end. All through this struggle he has stood up against the tide, one of the few to hold the nation to its vital work—its one necessity, moral as military—absolute justice and equality for the black man. I wish every ear in this country might listen to his word.
Miss Anthony deeply wished to go back, but there were so few workers in Kansas and so many in the Eastern States that she hardly knew where her duty called her most. At the end of the war, she immediately understood the significant issues that needed to be resolved, and she recognized the need to connect with those who had the most influence in shaping public opinion. The potential split among the Abolitionists and the 245 reported decision by Mr. Garrison to dissolve the Anti-Slavery Society overwhelmed her with concern, and she sent back the strongest protests she could articulate:
A letter from Mr. Phillips said: "Thank you for your kind note. I see you understand the lay of the land and no words are necessary between you and me. Your points we have talked over. If Garrison should resign, we incline to Purvis for president for many, many reasons. We (Hovey Committee) shall aid in keeping our Standard floating till the enemy comes down." All the letters received by Miss Anthony during May and June were filled with the story of the dissension in the Anti-Slavery Society.
How can anyone say that Congress doesn't have the right to demand voting rights for Black people in the former rebel states just because it isn't established in all the loyal states? What would people have said about abolitionists ten or twenty years ago if they claimed that Congress couldn't vote against admitting a new state with slavery because it wasn't already abolished in all the older states? It's really shocking how many of our old friends seem eager to ignore and justify the blatant hatred towards recognizing the equality of Black people. Well, you'll be in New York to possibly witness the disbanding of the Anti-Slavery Society, while I'll be here, anxiously waiting to catch the first hint of the meeting's spirit. But Phillips will be inspiring and warm until the end. Throughout this struggle, he has stood strong against the tide, one of the few keeping the nation focused on its essential work—its critical need, both morally and militarily—for complete justice and equality for Black people. I wish everyone in this country could hear his words.
It is not a part of this work to go into the merits of that discussion. In brief, Mr. Garrison and his followers believed that, with the ratification of the Thirteenth Amendment, slavery was forever abolished in the United States and there was no further need of the Anti-Slavery Society which he himself had founded. Phillips and his following held that "no emancipation can be effectual and no freedom real, unless the negro has the ballot and the States are prohibited from enacting laws making any distinction among their citizens on Account of race or color." There were minor differences of opinion respecting men and measures, but the above are the fundamental points which led to the first breach that had occurred 246 for a quarter of a century in the ranks of the great anti-slavery leaders, who had borne a persecution never equalled in the history of our country. It resulted, at the May Anniversary in New York, in Garrison's declining a re-election to the presidency of the society, which he had held for thirty-two years, and in the election of Phillips.
A letter from Mr. Phillips said: "Thank you for your kind note. I see you understand the situation and no words are needed between us. We've already discussed your points. If Garrison resigns, we are leaning toward Purvis for president for many reasons. We (Hovey Committee) will help keep our Standard alive until the enemy arrives." All the letters Miss Anthony received during May and June were filled with the story of the conflict in the Anti-Slavery Society.
Those most intimately connected with Miss Anthony sustained the position of Mr. Phillips—Mrs. Stanton, Parker Pillsbury, Robert Purvis, Charles Remond, Stephen Foster, Lucretia and Lydia Mott, Anna Dickinson, Sarah Pugh—and she herself was his staunchest defender. Believing as strongly as she did that the suffrage is the very foundation of liberty, that without it there can be no real freedom for either man or woman, she could not have done otherwise, and yet, so great was her reverence and affection for Mr. Garrison, it was with the keenest regret she found herself no longer able to follow him. She writes: "I am glad I was spared from witnessing that closing scene. It will be hard beyond expression to leave him out of our councils, but he never will be out of our sympathies. I hope you will refrain from all personalities. Pro-slavery signs are too apparent and too dangerous at this hour for us to stop for personal adjustments. To go forward with the great work pressing upon the society, without turning to the right or the left, is the one wise course."
It’s not part of this work to dive into the details of that discussion. In short, Mr. Garrison and his supporters believed that with the ratification of the Thirteenth Amendment, slavery was permanently abolished in the United States and that the Anti-Slavery Society he had founded was no longer necessary. Phillips and his supporters argued that "no emancipation can be effective and no freedom real unless Black people have the right to vote, and the States are prohibited from creating laws that make any distinctions among their citizens based on race or color." There were some minor disagreements regarding individuals and strategies, but these are the key points that led to the first split in over twenty-five years among the prominent anti-slavery leaders, who had faced persecution like none other in the history of our country. This culminated at the May Anniversary in New York with Garrison declining re-election for the presidency of the society, a position he had held for thirty-two years, and the election of Phillips.
Parker Pillsbury was made editor of the Standard in place of Oliver Johnson, and was assisted by George W. Smalley, who had married an adopted daughter of Wendell Phillips. Mr. Pillsbury wrote Miss Anthony soon after the anniversary:
Those closest to Miss Anthony supported Mr. Phillips—Mrs. Stanton, Parker Pillsbury, Robert Purvis, Charles Remond, Stephen Foster, Lucretia and Lydia Mott, Anna Dickinson, Sarah Pugh— and she herself was his strongest supporter. Believing deeply that suffrage is the essential foundation of liberty and that without it there can be no true freedom for either men or women, she couldn't have acted otherwise. However, her respect and affection for Mr. Garrison were so profound that she felt a sharp regret at no longer being able to follow him. She writes: "I am glad I was spared from witnessing that final scene. It will be incredibly hard to leave him out of our meetings, but he will always remain in our thoughts. I hope you will avoid personal criticism. Pro-slavery sentiments are too obvious and too dangerous right now for us to engage in personal disputes. Moving forward with the important work facing the society, without veering to the right or the left, is the only wise path."
We could not see how the colored race were to be risked, shut up in the States with their old masters, whom they had helped to conquer and out of whose defeat their freedom had come; so we voted to keep the machinery in gear until better assurances were given of a free future than we yet possess. We have offended some by our course. I am sorry, but it was Mr. Garrison who taught me to be true to myself. To my mind, suffrage for the negro is now what immediate emancipation was thirty years ago. If we emancipate from slavery and leave the European doctrine of serfdom extant, even in the mildest form, then the colored race, or we, or perhaps both, have another war in store. And so my work is not done till the last black man can declare in the full face of the world, "I am a man and a brother."
Parker Pillsbury became the editor of the Standard, replacing Oliver Johnson, and had the support of George W. Smalley, who was married to Wendell Phillips' adopted daughter. Mr. Pillsbury wrote to Miss Anthony shortly after the anniversary:
We couldn't understand how people of color could be at risk while still living in the states with their former masters, whom they had helped defeat to gain their freedom; so we decided to keep everything going until we have better guarantees of a free future than what we currently possess. Our actions have upset some individuals. I regret that, but it was Mr. Garrison who taught me to stay true to myself. In my view, voting rights for Black people today are just like immediate emancipation was thirty years ago. If we free them from slavery but still allow the European concept of serfdom to persist, even in its mildest form, then the people of color, or we, or maybe both, are heading for another conflict. So my work isn't done until the last Black man can proudly say to the world, "I am a man and a brother."
In June, as the expected little stranger had arrived safe, Miss Anthony accepted an invitation to deliver the Fourth of July address at Ottumwa, and then went through her inevitable agony whenever she had a speech to prepare. She took the stage for Topeka, finding among her fellow-passengers her relative, Major Scott Anthony, with Mr. Butterfield of the Overland Dispatch, and the long, hot, dusty ride was enlivened by an animated discussion of the political questions of the day. During this drive over the unbroken prairies, she made the prediction that, given a few decades of thrift, they would be dotted with farms, orchards and villages and the State would be a paradise.
Miss Anthony was among the first of the Abolitionists to declare that the negroes must have the suffrage, one of the most unpopular ideas ever broached, and she writes: "As fearless, radical and independent as my brother is, he will not allow my opinions on this subject to go into his paper." At Topeka she spoke to a large audience in the Methodist church on this question. In order to reach Ottumwa she had to ride 125 miles by stage in the heat of July, and her expenses were considerable. No price had been guaranteed for her address, but she learned to her surprise that she was expected to make it a gratuitous offering, as was the custom on account of the poverty of the people. They came from miles around and were enthusiastic over her speech on "President Johnson's Mississippi Reconstruction Proclamation." The Republicans insisted that she should put her notes in shape for publication, but urged her to leave out the paragraph on woman suffrage.[34]
In June, after the much-anticipated little one arrived safely, Miss Anthony accepted an invitation to give the Fourth of July speech in Ottumwa and went through her usual struggle whenever she had to prepare a speech. She took the stage for Topeka, finding her relative, Major Scott Anthony, along with Mr. Butterfield from the Overland Dispatch, among her fellow passengers. The long, hot, dusty ride was made more enjoyable by a lively discussion about the political issues of the day. During this drive across the endless prairies, she predicted that, with a bit of hard work over the next few decades, they would be filled with farms, orchards, and villages, turning the State into a paradise.
The other speakers were Sidney Clark, M.C., and a professor from Lawrence University. They were entertained by a prominent official who had just built a new house, the upper story of which was unfinished. It was divided into three rooms by hanging up army blankets, and each of the orators was assigned to one of these apartments. Miss Anthony was so exhausted from the long stage-ride, the speaking and the heat, that she scarcely could get ready for bed, but no sooner 248 had she touched the pillow than she was assailed by a species of animals noted for the welcome they extended to travellers in the early history of Kansas. Her dilemma was excruciating. Should she lie still and be eaten alive, or should she get up, strike a light and probably rouse the honorable gentlemen on the other side of the army blankets? A few minutes decided the question; she slipped out of bed, lighted her tallow dip and reconnoitered. Then she blew out her light, and sat by the window till morning.
Miss Anthony was one of the first Abolitionists to state that Black people should have the right to vote, which was one of the most unpopular opinions at the time. She wrote, "As fearless, radical, and independent as my brother is, he won’t let my views on this subject be published in his paper." In Topeka, she spoke to a large crowd at the Methodist church about this issue. To get to Ottumwa, she had to travel 125 miles by stagecoach in the July heat, and her expenses were substantial. No fee was promised for her speech, but she was surprised to find out she was expected to give it for free, as was customary due to the people’s poverty. They came from far and wide and were excited about her talk on "President Johnson's Mississippi Reconstruction Proclamation." The Republicans urged her to prepare her notes for publication but insisted she remove the section on women's suffrage.[34]
She spoke at Lawrence in the Unitarian and the Congregational churches, and August 1, the thirty-first anniversary of England's emancipation of the slaves in the West Indies, she addressed an immense audience in a grove near Leavenworth. She discussed the changed condition of the colored people and their new rights and duties, and called their attention to the fact that not one of the prominent politicians advertised was there; pointed out that if they possessed the ballot and could vote these men into or out of office, all would be eager for an opportunity to address them; and then drew a parallel between their political condition and that of women. At this time she received a second intimation of what was to come, when prominent Republicans called upon her and insisted that hereafter she should not bring the question of woman's rights into her speeches on behalf of the negro.
The other speakers were Sidney Clark, the host, and a professor from Lawrence University. They were entertained by a well-known official who had just built a new house, where the upper floor was still unfinished. It was divided into three rooms using army blankets, and each of the speakers was given one of these makeshift rooms. Miss Anthony was so tired from the long journey, the speaking engagements, and the heat that she could barely get ready for bed, but as soon as 248 her head hit the pillow, she was attacked by a type of insect known for the hospitality they extend to travelers in the early days of Kansas. She faced a tough choice: should she stay still and be eaten alive, or should she get up, light a candle, and likely wake up the esteemed gentlemen on the other side of the army blankets? A few minutes settled the issue; she quietly got out of bed, lit her candle, and did a quick search. Then she blew out the candle and sat by the window until morning.
A few days afterwards Miss Anthony was seated in her brother's office reading the papers when she learned to her amazement that several resolutions had been offered in the House of Representatives sanctioning disfranchisement on account of sex. Up to this time the Constitution of the United States never had been desecrated by the word "male," and she saw instantly that such action would create a more formidable barrier than any now existing against the enfranchisement of women. She hesitated no longer but started immediately on her homeward journey, stopping in Atchison, where she was the guest of ex-Mayor Crowell. Senator Pomeroy called, accompanied her to church and arranged for her to address the colored people next day. She lectured also in St. Joseph, Mo. At 249 Chillicothe one of the editors sent word that if she would not "lash" him he would print her handbills free of charge. Here she addressed a great crowd of colored people in a tobacco factory. At Macon City she spoke to them in an abandoned barracks, and slept in a slab house. Her night's experience at Ottumwa was repeated here, except that the army of invaders were fleas. The next day she was invited to the Methodist minister's home and his church placed at her disposal, where she addressed a large white audience. Of her speech in St. Louis she wrote:
She spoke at the Unitarian and Congregational churches in Lawrence, and on August 1, which marked the thirty-first anniversary of England's emancipation of the slaves in the West Indies, she addressed a huge crowd in a grove near Leavenworth. She discussed the changed situation of Black people and their new rights and responsibilities, and pointed out that none of the prominent politicians who were being advertised showed up; she emphasized that if they had the right to vote and could put these men into or out of office, all of them would be eager for a chance to speak to them; and then she drew a comparison between their political situation and that of women. During this time, she received a second hint of what was to come when prominent Republicans visited her and insisted that she should not include the issue of women's rights in her speeches advocating for Black rights.
Sunday afternoon I spoke to the colored people in an old slave church in which priests used to preach "Servants, obey your masters;" and in which slaves never dared breathe aloud their hearts' deepest prayer for freedom. The church was built by actual slaves with money they earned working odd hours allowed them by their masters. The greatest danger for these people now lies in being duped by the priests and Levites who used to pass them by on the other side but who, now that they have become popular prey, wildly run to and fro to do them good—that is, get their money and give themselves easy, fat posts as superintendents, missionaries, teachers, etc. The country is full of these soul-sharks, men who haven't had brains enough to find pulpits or places in the free States.
A few days later, Miss Anthony was sitting in her brother's office reading the newspapers when she was stunned to discover that several resolutions had been proposed in the House of Representatives allowing the disenfranchisement based on gender. Up until that moment, the Constitution of the United States had never been tainted with the word "male," and she immediately realized that such a move would create a much tougher obstacle than any currently in place against women's voting rights. She hesitated no longer and began her journey home, stopping in Atchison where she stayed with ex-Mayor Crowell. Senator Pomeroy visited, took her to church, and arranged for her to speak to the Black community the following day. She also gave a lecture in St. Joseph, Mo. At 249 Chillicothe, one of the editors expressed that if she wouldn't criticize him publicly, he would print her handbills for free. Here, she spoke to a large gathering of Black people in a tobacco factory. In Macon City, she addressed them in an abandoned barracks and spent the night in a wooden house. Her experience in Ottumwa was similar here, except that she was invaded by fleas instead. The next day, she was welcomed into the home of the Methodist minister, and his church was made available to her, where she spoke to a large white audience. Of her speech in St. Louis, she wrote:
As Miss Anthony took the train for Chicago, a woman-thief picked her pocket but she caught her and, without any appeal to the police, compelled her to deliver up the stolen goods. At Chicago she lectured several times, visited the Freedmen's Commission, heard General Howard, called on General Sherman, went to the board of trade, where she was greatly shocked at the roaring of the "bulls and bears," and had pleasant visits with relatives in the city and adjacent towns, speaking at a number of these places. She lectured at Battle Creek and Ann Arbor, arriving at Rochester September 23. Pausing only for a brief visit, she went on to New York to fulfill the purpose which brought her eastward. She stopped at Auburn to counsel with Mrs. Wright and Mrs. Worden, but found both very dubious about reviving interest in woman's rights at this critical moment. After a night of mapping out the campaign with Mrs. Stanton, she started out bright and early the next morning on that mission which she was to follow faithfully and 250 steadfastly, without cessation or turning aside, for the next thirty years—to compel the Constitution of the United States to recognize the political rights of woman! The days were spent in hunting up old friends and supporters of the years before the war and enlisting their sympathies in the great work now at hand; and the evenings were occupied with Mrs. Stanton in preparing an appeal and a form of petition praying Congress to confer the suffrage on women.[35] This was the first demand ever made for Congressional action on this question. The Fourteenth Amendment, as proposed, contained in Section 2, to which the women objected, the word "male" three times, and read as follows:
On Sunday afternoon, I talked to the Black community in an old slave church where preachers used to say, "Servants, obey your masters." In that place, enslaved people never dared to express their deepest wish for freedom. The church was built by actual slaves using money they made from working odd hours permitted by their masters. The biggest threat for these people now is being deceived by the priests and church leaders who used to overlook them but are now rushing to offer help—mainly to take their money and secure easy, well-paying jobs as supervisors, missionaries, teachers, and so on. The country is filled with these opportunists, men who haven't been smart enough to find preaching jobs or roles in the free states.
Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for president and vice-president of the United States, representatives in Congress, the executive and judicial officers of a State, or the members of the legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such state, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.
As Miss Anthony took the train to Chicago, a pickpocket stole from her, but she caught her and, without calling the police, forced her to return the stolen items. In Chicago, she gave several lectures, visited the Freedmen's Commission, listened to General Howard, met with General Sherman, and went to the board of trade, where she was really shocked by the noise of the "bulls and bears." She also had nice visits with family in the city and nearby towns, speaking at several of these locations. She lectured in Battle Creek and Ann Arbor, arriving in Rochester on September 23. After a short visit, she continued on to New York to accomplish the reason for her trip east. She stopped in Auburn to discuss matters with Mrs. Wright and Mrs. Worden but found them both quite skeptical about rekindling interest in women's rights at such a critical time. After spending a night planning the campaign with Mrs. Stanton, she set out bright and early the next morning on a mission that she would pursue faithfully and steadfastly, without pause or distraction, for the next thirty years—to make the U.S. Constitution recognize women's political rights! Her days were spent reconnecting with old friends and supporters from before the war and rallying their support for the important work ahead, while her evenings were dedicated to working with Mrs. Stanton to prepare an appeal and petition asking Congress to grant women the right to vote. This was the first time anyone had ever demanded Congressional action on this issue. The proposed Fourteenth Amendment included the word "male" three times in Section 2, which the women opposed, and it read as follows:
If it had been adopted without this word "male," all women would have been virtually enfranchised, as men would have let women vote rather than have them counted out of the basis of representation. Thaddeus Stevens made a vigorous attempt to have women included in the provisions of this amendment.
Representatives will be allocated to different States based on their population, counting the total number of people in each State, not including untaxed Native Americans. However, if any male residents of that state who are twenty-one years old and citizens of the United States are denied the right to vote in any election for selecting electors for the president and vice president, representatives in Congress, state executive and judicial officers, or members of the state legislature, or if their voting rights are limited in any way, except for participating in rebellion or other crimes, the number of representatives will be decreased in proportion to the number of such male citizens compared to the total number of male citizens who are twenty-one years old in that State.
Thaddeus Stevens
If it had been adopted without the word "male," all women would have essentially been granted the right to vote, as men would have allowed women to vote instead of excluding them from the basis of representation. Thaddeus Stevens made a strong effort to include women in the provisions of this amendment.

Thaddeus Stevens
A letter written by Mrs. Stanton to Martha Wright is a sample of hundreds which were sent to friends in all parts of the country:
I enclose you the proof of the memorial which Susan and I have just been getting up for Congress. I have been writing to Mr. Garrison to make some mention of us, "the only disfranchised class now remaining," in his last Liberator. It is fitting that we should be recognized in his valedictory. We have now boosted the negro over our own heads, and we had better begin to remember that self-preservation is the first law of nature. Will you see if you can get our petition in your city and county papers? Sign it yourself and send it to your representatives in Senate and Congress, and then try to galvanize the women of your district into life. Some say: "Be still; wait; this is the negro's hour." We believe this is the hour for everybody to do the best thing for reconstruction.
A letter written by Mrs. Stanton to Martha Wright is an example of hundreds that were sent to friends across the country:
Miss Anthony found the leaders among the men so absorbed with their interest in the male negro that they had given little thought to the suffrage as related to women; but the Hovey Committee appropriated $500 to begin the petition work. She went to Concord and held a parlor meeting attended by Emerson, Alcott, Sanborn and other sages of that intellectual center, stating what the women desired to accomplish. After she finished, Emerson was appealed to for an opinion but said: "Ask my wife. I can philosophize, but I always look to her to decide for me in practical matters." Mrs. Emerson replied without hesitation that she fully agreed with Miss Anthony in regard to the necessity for petitioning Congress at once to enfranchise women, either before this great body of negroes was invested with the ballot or at the same time. Mr. Emerson and the other gentlemen then assured her of their sympathy and support.
I’m sending you the draft of the memorial that Susan and I just prepared for Congress. I’ve been reaching out to Mr. Garrison to mention us, “the only disenfranchised class still left,” in his latest Liberator. It’s important that we are acknowledged in his farewell message. We’ve now uplifted the Black community, and we should remember that self-preservation is the most basic law of nature. Could you check if you can get our petition published in your city and county newspapers? Sign it yourself and send it to your representatives in the Senate and Congress, and then try to rally the women in your district to take action. Some say, “Be patient; wait; this is the Black community’s time.” We believe this is the moment for everyone to contribute to reconstruction.
R. Waldo Emerson
Miss Anthony found that the male leaders were so focused on the rights of Black men that they hadn’t given much thought to women’s suffrage. However, the Hovey Committee allocated $500 to kick off the petition efforts. She went to Concord and held a parlor meeting that included Emerson, Alcott, Sanborn, and other thinkers from that intellectual hub, where she explained what women aimed to achieve. After she finished, they asked Emerson for his thoughts, but he replied, "Ask my wife. I can philosophize, but I always look to her to make the practical decisions." Mrs. Emerson quickly stated that she completely agreed with Miss Anthony about the need to petition Congress immediately to grant women the vote, either before the large group of Black men received the ballot or alongside them. Mr. Emerson and the other men then expressed their support and sympathy for her cause.

She presented her claims at the annual anti-slavery meeting in Westchester and at many other gatherings. She went also to Philadelphia to visit James and Lucretia Mott and interest Mary Grew and Sarah Pugh and all the friends in that locality; then back to New York with tireless energy and unflagging zeal. She wrote articles for the Anti-Slavery Standard, sent out petitions and left no stone unturned to accomplish 252 her purpose. The diary shows the days to have been well filled:
Ralph Waldo Emerson
Went to Tilton's office to express regrets at not being able to attend their tin wedding. He read us his editorial on Seward and Beecher. Splendid!... Went to hear Beecher, morning and evening. There is no one like him.... Spent the day at Mrs. Tilton's and went with her to Mrs. Bowen's.... Listened to O.B. Frothingham, "Justice the Mother of Wisdom."... Put some new buttons on my cloak. This is its third winter.... Excellent audience in Friends' meeting house, at Milton-on-the-Hudson. Visited the grave of Eliza W. Farnham.... Went over to New Jersey to confer with Lucy Stone and Antoinette Blackwell.... Called at Dr. Cheever's, and also had an interview with Robert Dale Owen.... Went to Worcester to see Abby Kelly Foster and from there to Boston.... Found Dr. Harriot K. Hunt ready for woman suffrage work. Took dinner at Garrison's. Saw Whipple and May, then went to Wendell Phillips'.... Spent the day with Caroline M. Severance, at West Newton. She is earnest in the cause of women.... Returned to New York and commenced work in earnest. Spent nearly all the Christmas holidays addressing and sending off petitions.
She shared her views at the annual anti-slavery meeting in Westchester and at many other events. She also traveled to Philadelphia to see James and Lucretia Mott and to engage Mary Grew, Sarah Pugh, and all the friends in that area; then she returned to New York with endless energy and determination. She wrote articles for the Anti-Slavery Standard, distributed petitions, and did everything she could to achieve 252 her goal. The diary indicates that her days were fully packed:
Henry Ward Beecher and Theodore Tilton entered heartily into the plans of Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton. Mr. Tilton proposed that they should form a National Equal Rights Association, demanding suffrage for negroes and for women, that Mr. Phillips should be its president, the Anti-Slavery Standard its official organ; and Mr. Beecher agreed to lecture in behalf of this new movement. Mr. Tilton came out with a strong editorial in the Independent, advocating suffrage for women and paying a beautiful tribute to the efficient services in the past of those who were now demanding recognition of their political rights:
I visited Tilton's office to apologize for missing their tin wedding. He shared his editorial on Seward and Beecher with us. It was fantastic!... I attended Beecher's talks both in the morning and evening. There's nobody quite like him.... I spent the day at Mrs. Tilton's and accompanied her to Mrs. Bowen's.... I listened to O.B. Frothingham's "Justice the Mother of Wisdom."... I added some new buttons to my coat. This is its third winter.... There was an excellent audience at the Friends' meeting house in Milton-on-the-Hudson. I visited the grave of Eliza W. Farnham.... I went over to New Jersey to meet with Lucy Stone and Antoinette Blackwell.... I stopped by Dr. Cheever's, and also had a meeting with Robert Dale Owen.... I went to Worcester to see Abby Kelly Foster, and then on to Boston.... I found Dr. Harriot K. Hunt ready to work on women's suffrage. I had dinner at Garrison's. I met Whipple and May, and then went to Wendell Phillips'.... I spent the day with Caroline M. Severance in West Newton. She's committed to the cause of women.... I returned to New York and got straight to work. I spent almost all of the Christmas holidays addressing and sending out petitions.
A LAW AGAINST WOMEN.—The spider-crab walks backward. Borrowing this creature's mossy legs, two or three gentlemen in Washington are seeking to fix these upon the Federal Constitution, to make that instrument walk backward in like style. For instance, the Constitution has never laid any legal disabilities upon woman. Whatever denials of rights it formerly made to our slaves, it denied nothing to our wives and daughters. The legal rights of an American woman—for instance, her right to her own property, as against a squandering husband; or her right to her own children as against a malicious father—have grown, year by year, into a more generous and just statement in American laws. This beautiful result is owing in great measure to the persistent efforts of many noble women who, for years past, both publicly and 253 privately, by pen and speech, have appealed to legislative committees and to the whole community for an enlargement of the legal and civil status of their fellow-countrywomen. Signal, honorable and beneficent have been the works and words of Lucretia Mott, Lydia Maria Child, Paulina Wright Davis, Abby Kelly Foster, Frances D. Gage, Lucy Stone, Caroline H. Ball, Antoinette Blackwell, Susan B. Anthony, Elizabeth Cady Stanton and many others. Not in all the land lives a poor woman or a widow who does not owe some portion of her present safety under the law to the brave exertions of these faithful laborers.
Henry Ward Beecher and Theodore Tilton fully embraced the plans of Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton. Mr. Tilton suggested that they create a National Equal Rights Association to push for voting rights for both Black individuals and women, proposing that Mr. Phillips serve as its president and the Anti-Slavery Standard be its official publication. Mr. Beecher agreed to give lectures in support of this new initiative. Mr. Tilton published a powerful editorial in the Independent, championing women's suffrage and honoring the significant contributions of those now seeking acknowledgment of their political rights.
All forward-looking minds know that, sooner or later, the chief public question in this country will be woman's claim to the ballot. The Federal Constitution, as it now stands, leaves this question an open one for the several States to settle as they choose. Two bills, however, now lie before Congress proposing to array the fundamental law of the land against the multitude of American women by ordaining a denial of the political rights of a whole sex. To this injustice we object totally! Such an amendment is a snap judgment before discussion; it is an obstacle to future progress; it is a gratuitous bruise inflicted on the most tender and humane sentiment that has ever entered into American politics. If the present Congress is not called to legislate for the rights of women, let it not legislate against them. Americans now live who shall not go down into the grave till they have left behind them a republican government; and no republic is republican that denies to half its citizens those rights which the Declaration of Independence and a true Christian democracy make equal to all. Meanwhile, let us break the legs of the spider-crab.
A LAW AGAINST WOMEN.—The spider-crab moves backward. Using this creature's mossy legs as inspiration, a few gentlemen in Washington are trying to push these ideas onto the Federal Constitution, making that document regress in the same way. For instance, the Constitution has never placed any legal restrictions on women. Whatever rights it previously denied to our slaves, it has never denied to our wives and daughters. The legal rights of an American woman—for example, her right to her own property against an irresponsible husband; or her right to her children against a vindictive father—have progressively improved, year by year, into a more equitable and just representation in American laws. This incredible outcome is largely due to the relentless efforts of many extraordinary women who, for years, both publicly and 253 privately, through writing and public speaking, have urged legislative committees and the entire community to enhance the legal and civil status of their fellow countrywomen. The contributions and speeches of Lucretia Mott, Lydia Maria Child, Paulina Wright Davis, Abby Kelly Foster, Frances D. Gage, Lucy Stone, Caroline H. Ball, Antoinette Blackwell, Susan B. Anthony, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, and many others have been remarkable, honorable, and beneficial. No poor woman or widow in the country can claim she doesn't owe part of her current legal safety to the courageous efforts of these dedicated advocates.
[35] As the question of suffrage is now agitating the public mind, it is the hour for woman to make her demand. Propositions already have been made on the floor of Congress to so amend the Constitution as to exclude women from a voice in the government. As this would be to turn the wheels of legislation backward, let the women of the nation now unitedly protest against such a desecration of the Constitution, and petition for that right which is at the foundation of all government, the right of representation. Send your petition when signed to your representative in Congress, at your earliest convenience.
All progressive people understand that, sooner or later, the main public issue in this country will be women's right to vote. The Federal Constitution, as it currently stands, leaves this issue open for each state to decide as they choose. However, two bills are currently in Congress that aim to set the fundamental law of the land against countless American women by denying an entire gender their political rights. We wholly object to this injustice! Such an amendment is a snap judgment without any discussion; it is an obstruction to future progress; it is an unnecessary harm inflicted on the most sensitive and compassionate feelings that have ever been part of American politics. If the current Congress won't legislate for the rights of women, then it shouldn't legislate against them. There are Americans alive today who will not leave this world until they have helped create a republic, and no republic is truly a republic if it denies half of its citizens the rights that the Declaration of Independence and genuine Christian democracy proclaim as equal for all. In the meantime, let’s take decisive action.
ELIZABETH CADY STANTON, SUSAN B. ANTHONY, LUCY STONE.
[35] As the issue of voting rights is currently stirring the public interest, it's time for women to make their demands known. There have already been proposals in Congress to change the Constitution to deny women a say in the government. This would be a step backward in the legislative process, so let the women of the nation stand together to protest against such a violation of the Constitution and request the right that is fundamental to all governance: the right to representation. Please send your signed petition to your representative in Congress as soon as possible.
ELIZABETH CADY STANTON, SUSAN B. ANTHONY, LUCY STONE.
The reconstruction period of our government was no less trying a time than the four years of warfare which preceded it. The Union had been preserved but the disorganization of the Southern States was complete. Lincoln, whose cool judgment, restraining wisdom and remarkable genius for understanding and persuading men never had been more needed, was dead by the hand of an assassin. In his place was a man, rash, headlong, aggressive, stubborn, distrusted by the party which had placed him in power. This chief executive had to deal not only with the great, perplexing questions which always follow upon the close of a war, but with these rendered still more difficult by the great mass of bewildered and helpless negroes, ignorant of how to care for themselves, with no further claims upon their former owners, and yet destined to live among them. The immense Republican majority in Congress found itself opposed by a President, southern in birth and sympathy and an uncompromising believer in State Rights.
CHAPTER XVI.
THE NEGRO'S HOUR.
1866.
The southern legislatures, while accepting the Thirteenth Amendment, which prohibited slavery, passed various laws whose effect could not be other than to keep the negro in a condition of "involuntary servitude." To the South these measures seemed to be demanded by ordinary prudence to retain at least temporary control of a race unfitted for a wise use of liberty; to the North they appeared a determination to evade the 256 provisions of the Thirteenth Amendment, and Congress decided upon more radical measures. One wing of the old Abolitionists, under the leadership of Phillips, had steadfastly insisted that there could be no real freedom without the ballot. Several attempts had been made to secure congressional action for the enfranchisement of the negro, which the majority of Republicans had now come to see was essential for his protection, and these resulted finally in the submission of the Fourteenth Amendment. Charles Sumner stated that he covered nineteen pages of foolscap in his effort so to formulate it as to omit the word "male" and, at the same time, secure the ballot for the negro.
The reconstruction period of our government was just as challenging as the four years of war that had come before it. The Union was intact, but the Southern States were in complete disarray. Lincoln, whose level-headed judgment, wise restraint, and remarkable ability to understand and persuade people had never been more crucial, was killed by an assassin. In his place was a man who was reckless, impulsive, aggressive, stubborn, and distrusted by the party that had put him in charge. This president had to tackle not only the complex issues that always arise at the end of a war but also those made even more difficult by the large number of confused and vulnerable African Americans, who didn’t know how to support themselves, had no claims to their former owners, and yet had to live among them. The large Republican majority in Congress found itself at odds with a president who was Southern by birth and sympathies and a staunch believer in states' rights.
When Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton sounded the alarm, the old leaders in the movement for woman's rights came at once to their aid, but they were soon to meet with an unexpected and serious disappointment. In January Miss Anthony went to the anti-slavery meeting at Boston, full of the new idea of consolidating the old Anti-Slavery and the Woman's Rights Societies under one name, that of the Equal Rights Association. She was warmly supported by Tilton, Lucy Stone, Powell and others, but to their amazement they found Mr. Phillips very cool and discouraging. He said this could be done only by amending the constitution of the Anti-Slavery Society, which required three months' notice. Still they did not dream of his opposing the proposition and so deputized Mr. Powell to give the formal notice, in order that it might be acted upon at the coming May Anniversary. On the way back the New York delegation discussed this new plan enthusiastically, and Miss Anthony wrote home that there was a strong wish in the society to widen its object so as to include universal suffrage, believing this to be the case. The necessary steps at once were taken for calling a national woman's rights meeting to convene in New York the same week as the Anti-Slavery Anniversary, and the following call was issued setting forth its principal objects:
The southern legislatures, while accepting the Thirteenth Amendment, which banned slavery, passed various laws that effectively kept Black people in a state of "involuntary servitude." To the South, these measures seemed necessary for maintaining at least temporary control over a group they believed was unfit to use freedom wisely; to the North, they looked like an attempt to dodge the 256 provisions of the Thirteenth Amendment, prompting Congress to consider more extreme actions. One faction of the old abolitionists, led by Phillips, firmly argued that real freedom couldn't exist without the right to vote. Several efforts had been made to push for congressional action to grant Black people the right to vote, which the majority of Republicans had come to recognize was vital for their protection, ultimately leading to the proposal of the Fourteenth Amendment. Charles Sumner claimed he filled nineteen pages of foolscap in his attempt to draft it in such a way that would exclude the word "male" while still ensuring voting rights for Black people.
Those who tell us the republican idea is a failure, do not see the deep gulf between our broad theory and our partial legislation; do not see that our government 257 for the last century has been but a repetition of the old experiments of class and caste. Hence the failure is not in the principle, but in the lack of virtue on our part to apply it. The question now is, have we the wisdom and conscience, from the present upheavings of our political system to reconstruct a government on the one enduring basis which never yet has been tried—Equal Rights to All?
When Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton raised the alarm, the veteran leaders in the fight for women's rights quickly came to help, but they were soon faced with an unexpected and serious setback. In January, Miss Anthony attended the anti-slavery meeting in Boston, excited about the idea of merging the old Anti-Slavery and Women’s Rights Societies under one name: the Equal Rights Association. She received strong support from Tilton, Lucy Stone, Powell, and others, but to their surprise, Mr. Phillips was quite dismissive and discouraging. He mentioned that this could only happen by amending the constitution of the Anti-Slavery Society, which required three months' notice. However, they never imagined he would oppose the proposal and so appointed Mr. Powell to give the formal notice, so it could be addressed at the upcoming May Anniversary. On the way back, the New York delegation enthusiastically discussed this new plan, and Miss Anthony wrote home about a strong desire in the society to broaden its mission to include universal suffrage, believing that to be the case. Immediate steps were taken to organize a national women's rights meeting in New York during the same week as the Anti-Slavery Anniversary, and the following call was issued outlining its main objectives:
From the proposed class legislation in Congress, it is evident we have not yet learned wisdom from the experience of the past; for, while our representatives at Washington are discussing the right of suffrage for the black man as the only protection to life, liberty and happiness, they deny that "necessity of citizenship" to woman, by proposing to introduce the word "male" into the Federal Constitution. In securing suffrage but to another shade of manhood, while disfranchising 15,000,000 women, we come not one line nearer the republican idea. Can a ballot in the hand of woman and dignity on her brow, more unsex her than do a scepter and a crown? Shall an American Congress pay less honor to the daughter of a President than a British Parliament to the daughter of a King? Should not our petitions command as respectful a hearing in a republican Senate as a speech of Victoria in the House of Lords? Do we not claim that here all men and women are nobles—all heirs apparent to the throne? The fact that this backward legislation has roused so little thought or protest from the women of the country but proves what some of our ablest thinkers already have declared, that the greatest barrier to a government of equality is the aristocracy of its women; for while woman holds an ideal position above man and the work of life, poorly imitating the pomp, heraldry and distinction of an effete European civilization, we as a nation never can realize the divine idea of equality.
People who argue that the republican idea has failed don't see the significant difference between our broad principles and our limited laws. They don't realize that our government 257 for the last century has merely repeated the old patterns of class and caste. Thus, the failure isn't in the principle itself, but in our inability to apply it with integrity. The question now is whether we have the wisdom and integrity, given the current turmoil in our political system, to create a government based on the one solid foundation that has never been tried—Equal Rights for All?
To build a true republic, the church and the home must undergo the same upheavings we now see in the state; for while our egotism, selfishness, luxury and ease are baptized in the name of Him whose life was a sacrifice, while at the family altar we are taught to worship wealth, power and position, rather than humanity, it is vain to talk of a republican government. The fair fruits of liberty, equality and fraternity must be blighted in the bud till cherished in the heart of woman. At this hour the nation needs the highest thought and inspiration of a true womanhood infused into every vein and artery of its life; and woman needs a broader, deeper education such as a pure religion and lofty patriotism alone can give. From the baptism of this second Revolution should she not rise up with new strength and dignity, clothed in all those "rights, privileges and immunities" which shall best enable her to fulfill her highest duties to humanity, her country, her family and herself?
The proposed class legislation in Congress reveals that we haven't yet learned from our past mistakes. While our representatives in Washington debate the right to vote for Black men as the only way to protect life, liberty, and happiness, they are denying women the "necessity of citizenship" by suggesting the inclusion of the word "male" in the Federal Constitution. By granting voting rights to just another group of men while disenfranchising 15 million women, we aren’t getting any closer to the republican ideal. Can a ballot in a woman’s hand and dignity on her brow make her any less of a woman than a scepter and crown? Shouldn't an American Congress show as much respect to the daughter of a President as a British Parliament does to the daughter of a King? Shouldn't our petitions get as much attention in a republican Senate as a speech from Victoria does in the House of Lords? Don’t we claim that here, all men and women are equals—all heirs to the throne? The fact that this backward legislation has sparked so little thought or protest from women across the country only confirms what some of our leading thinkers have said: that the biggest obstacle to a government of equality is the elitism among its women. As long as women maintain a status above men and life’s work, poorly mimicking the pomp and distinctions of a fading European civilization, our nation will never achieve the true concept of equality.
On behalf of the National Woman's Rights Central Committee,
To create a real republic, both the church and the home need to undergo the same transformations we see in the government. As long as our egotism, selfishness, luxury, and comfort are justified in the name of the One whose life was a sacrifice, and at the family altar we learn to value wealth, power, and status over humanity, it's meaningless to discuss a republican government. The true benefits of liberty, equality, and fraternity will be limited until they are embraced in a woman's heart. Right now, the nation needs the highest thoughts and inspiration of true womanhood infused into every part of its life; and women need a broader, deeper education that only pure religion and noble patriotism can provide. From the awakening of this second Revolution, shouldn’t she rise up with new strength and dignity, empowered by all those "rights, privileges, and immunities" that will help her fulfill her most important responsibilities to humanity, her country, her family, and herself?
ELIZABETH CADY STANTON, President; SUSAN B. ANTHONY, Secretary.
On behalf of the National Women's Rights Central Committee,
Letters both encouraging and discouraging were received. Robert Purvis, one of the most elegant and scholarly colored men our country has known, whose father was a Scotchman 258 and mother a West Indian with no slave blood, sent this noble response: "....I can not agree that this or any hour is 'especially the negro's.' I am an anti-slavery man because I hate tyranny and in my nature revolt against oppression, whatever its form or character. As an Abolitionist, therefore, I am for the equal rights movement, and as one of the confessedly oppressed race, how could I be otherwise? With what grace could I ask the women of this country to labor for my enfranchisement, and at the same time be unwilling to put forth a hand to remove the tyranny, in some respects greater, to which they are subjected? Again wishing you a successful meeting, I am very gratefully yours."
ELIZABETH CADY STANTON, President; SUSAN B. ANTHONY, Secretary.
Robert Purvis
Letters both encouraging and discouraging were received. Robert Purvis, one of the most refined and educated Black men our country has known, whose father was a Scotsman 258 and mother a West Indian with no slave ancestry, sent this powerful response: "....I cannot agree that this or any hour is 'especially the negro's.' I am anti-slavery because I hate tyranny and inherently rebel against oppression, regardless of its form or nature. As an Abolitionist, I support the equal rights movement, and as someone from an oppressed race, how could I feel any differently? With what integrity could I ask the women of this country to fight for my rights while also refusing to help dismantle the tyranny, which in some ways is even greater, that they face? Again wishing you a successful meeting, I am very gratefully yours."

Anna Dickinson, who had come upon the scene of action since the last woman's rights convention five years before, wrote Miss Anthony that she should be present but was not sure that she was yet ready to speak: "I'm a great deal of a Quaker—I don't like to take up any work till I feel called to it. My personal interest is perhaps stronger in that of which thee writes me than in any other, but my hands are so full just now. I see what I shall do in the future, and I hope the near future. Wait for me a little—forbear, and I honestly believe I'll do thee some good and faithful service; I don't mean wait for me, but be patient with me. I write this out of my large love for and confidence in thee. I will talk to thee more of it by end of the month when I see thee in Boston and put my mite in thy hands; till then believe me, dear friend, affectionately and truly thine."
Robert Purvis
At the business meeting of the anti-slavery convention the proposition was made by the National Woman's Rights Committee that, as all there was left for the society to do was to 259 secure suffrage for the negro, and as the woman's society also was working for universal suffrage, they should merge the two into one, and in that way the same conventions, appeals, petitions, etc., would answer for both. To this Mr. Phillips vigorously objected because the necessary three months' notice had not been given! As Mr. Powell had been delegated the previous January to give this, there could be no other conclusion than that he had refrained from doing so. There was considerable discussion on the question but, as president of the Anti-Slavery Society, Mr. Phillips' influence was supreme and the coalition was declined.
Anna Dickinson, who had arrived on the scene since the last women's rights convention five years ago, wrote to Miss Anthony that she should be there but wasn't sure if she was ready to speak yet: "I'm very much a Quaker—I don’t want to take on any work until I feel it's my calling. My personal interest in what you're writing about is probably stronger than in anything else, but I'm really busy right now. I can see what I want to do in the future, hopefully soon. Please wait for me a little—bear with me, and I honestly believe I'll be able to provide you with some good and faithful service; I don't mean for you to wait for me, but to be patient with me. I'm writing this out of my deep love for and trust in you. I'll discuss it more with you by the end of the month when I see you in Boston and put my contribution in your hands; until then, believe me, dear friend, affectionately and truly yours."
The Woman's Rights Convention met in Dr. Cheever's church, May 10, 1866, with a large audience present. It was their first meeting since before the war, and while it had many elements of gladness, yet it was not unmixed with sorrow. Mr. Garrison was absent, the first rift had been made in the love and gratitude in which for many years Mr. Phillips had been held, and a vague feeling of distrust and alarm was beginning to creep over the women, lest, after all these years of patient work, they were again to be sacrificed.
At the business meeting of the anti-slavery convention, the National Woman's Rights Committee proposed that, since the only task left for the society was to 259 secure voting rights for Black people, and since the women's society was also advocating for universal suffrage, they should combine their efforts into one group. This way, the same conventions, appeals, petitions, and so on would work for both causes. Mr. Phillips strongly opposed this because the required three months' notice had not been given! Since Mr. Powell had been assigned to provide this notice the previous January, it seemed clear that he did not fulfill his duty. There was a lot of discussion on the topic, but as president of the Anti-Slavery Society, Mr. Phillips held the ultimate influence, and the merger was rejected.
Miss Anthony presented a ringing set of resolutions, and splendid addresses were given by Mrs. Stanton, Theodore Tilton and Henry Ward Beecher. Mr. Phillips then made a long and eloquent speech which was rapturously received by the audience, but which filled the leaders with sadness, because of the skillful evasion of the disputed question which they never had expected from this staunch friend. Miss Anthony read an address to Congress[36] which was adopted with unanimous approval. At the close of the convention a business session was held, at which she offered a resolution declaring that, since by the act of emancipation and the Civil Rights Bill, the negro and woman now had the same civil and political status, alike needing only the ballot, therefore the time had come for an organization which should demand universal suffrage; and that hereafter their society should be known as the American 260 Equal Rights Association. She supported this by an able speech in which she said:
The Women's Rights Convention took place at Dr. Cheever's church on May 10, 1866, with a large audience in attendance. It was their first meeting since before the war, and while there were many reasons to be happy, there was also a sense of sadness. Mr. Garrison was missing, the first crack had appeared in the love and gratitude that Mr. Phillips had received for many years, and a vague sense of distrust and concern was starting to settle over the women, as they feared that after all their years of hard work, they might be sacrificed once again.
For twenty years we have pressed the claims of woman to the right of representation in the government. Each successive year after 1848, conventions were held in different States, until the beginning of the war. Up to this hour we have looked only to State action for the recognition of our rights; but now, by the results of the war, the whole question of suffrage reverts back to the United States Constitution. The duty of Congress at this moment is to declare what shall be the basis of representation in a republican form of government. There is, there can be, but one true basis, viz.: that taxation and representation must be inseparable; hence our demand must now go beyond woman—it must extend to the farthest limit of the principle of the "consent of the governed," as the only authorized or just government. We therefore wish to broaden our woman's rights platform and make it in name what it ever has been in spirit, a human rights platform. As women we can no longer claim for ourselves what we do not for others, nor can we work in two separate movements to get the ballot for the two disfranchised classes, negroes and women, since to do so must be at double cost of time, energy and money.... Therefore, that we may henceforth concentrate all our forces for the practical application of our one grand, distinctive, national idea—universal suffrage—I hope we will unanimously adopt the resolution before us, thus resolving ourselves into the American Equal Eights Association.
Miss Anthony presented a powerful set of resolutions, and great speeches were given by Mrs. Stanton, Theodore Tilton, and Henry Ward Beecher. Mr. Phillips then delivered a long and passionate speech that the audience received with enthusiasm, but it left the leaders feeling sad because he skillfully avoided the contentious issue they never expected him to sidestep. Miss Anthony read an address to Congress[36] that was unanimously approved. At the end of the convention, a business session took place, where she proposed a resolution stating that, due to the Emancipation Act and the Civil Rights Bill, both Black people and women now had the same civil and political rights, both only needing the right to vote. Therefore, it was time to form an organization that would advocate for universal suffrage, and from then on, their society would be known as the American 260 Equal Rights Association. She supported this with a strong speech in which she stated:
Notwithstanding the rebuff they had received from the Anti-Slavery Society, this resolution was unanimously adopted and the Woman's Rights Society which had existed practically for sixteen years was merged into the American Equal Rights Association to work for universal suffrage. A constitution was adopted and officers chosen.[37] Mrs. Stanton thus describes the last moments of the convention: "As Lucretia Mott uttered her few parting words of benediction, the fading sunlight through the stained windows falling upon her pure face, a celestial glory seemed about her, a sweet and peaceful influence 261 pervaded every heart, and all responded to Theodore Tilton when he said this closing meeting was one of the most beautiful, delightful and memorable which any of its participants ever enjoyed."
For twenty years, we’ve fought for women’s right to have a voice in government. Every year since 1848, conventions have been held in various states until the war began. Until now, we’ve relied on state actions to acknowledge our rights, but now, due to the war, the entire issue of voting rights is back on the table concerning the United States Constitution. Right now, it’s Congress’s responsibility to define how representation works in a democratic government. There is, and can only be, one true foundation: taxation and representation must go together; therefore, our claim now must go beyond just women’s rights—it also has to encompass the full principle of "consent of the governed" as the only legitimate form of government. We aim to broaden our women’s rights agenda to genuinely represent it as a human rights agenda. As women, we can no longer seek for ourselves what we don’t seek for others, nor can we pursue two separate movements for the voting rights of two marginalized groups, Black people and women, because that would cost us double in time, energy, and resources. Therefore, to concentrate all our efforts on the practical realization of our singular, important national idea—universal suffrage—I hope we can all agree to adopt the resolution in front of us, thus coming together to form the American Equal Rights Association.
A short time thereafter Miss Anthony, Mrs. Stanton, Mr. Phillips and Mr. Tilton were in the Standard office discussing the work. Mr. Phillips argued that the time was ripe for striking the word "white" out of the New York constitution, at its coming convention, but not for striking out "male." Mr. Tilton supported him, in direct contradiction to all he had so warmly advocated only a few weeks before, and said what the women should do was to canvass the State with speeches and petitions for the enfranchisement of the negro, leaving that of the women to come afterward, presumably twenty years later, when there would be another revision of the constitution. Mrs. Stanton, entirely overcome by the eloquence of these two gifted men, acquiesced in all they said; but Miss Anthony, who never could be swerved from her standard by any sophistry or blandishments, was highly indignant and declared that she would sooner cut off her right hand than ask the ballot for the black man and not for woman. After Phillips had left, she overheard Tilton say to Mrs. Stanton, "What does ail Susan? She acts like one possessed." Mrs. Stanton replied, "I can not imagine; I never before saw her so unreasonable and absolutely rude."
Despite the rejection they faced from the Anti-Slavery Society, this resolution was adopted unanimously, and the Woman's Rights Society, which had been around for nearly sixteen years, was merged into the American Equal Rights Association to advocate for universal suffrage. A constitution was adopted, and officers were elected.[37] Mrs. Stanton describes the final moments of the convention like this: "As Lucretia Mott delivered her brief farewell blessing, the fading sunlight through the stained glass windows illuminated her pure face, creating a heavenly aura around her. A sweet and peaceful atmosphere 261 filled every heart, and everyone agreed with Theodore Tilton when he said this closing meeting was one of the most beautiful, delightful, and memorable experiences any of the attendees ever had."
She was obliged to leave immediately to keep an engagement, but as soon as she was at liberty went straight to Mrs. Stanton's home, and found her walking up and down the long parlors, wringing her hands. She threw her arms around Miss Anthony, exclaiming: "I never was so glad to see you. Do tell me what is the matter with me? I feel as if I had been scourged from the crown of my head to the soles of my feet!" They sat down together and went over the whole conversation, and she then saw and felt most keenly the insult and degradation concealed in the proposition of the two men, and agreed with Miss Anthony that she would sacrifice her life before she would accept it. 262
A short time later, Miss Anthony, Mrs. Stanton, Mr. Phillips, and Mr. Tilton were in the Standard office discussing their work. Mr. Phillips argued that it was the right time to remove the word "white" from the New York constitution at the upcoming convention, but not to remove "male." Mr. Tilton backed him up, going against everything he had passionately supported just a few weeks earlier, and suggested that the women should campaign across the state with speeches and petitions for the rights of Black people, leaving women's rights to be addressed later, presumably twenty years down the line when there would be another constitutional revision. Mrs. Stanton, completely swayed by the arguments of these two persuasive men, agreed with everything they said; however, Miss Anthony, who could never be influenced by any reasoning or flattery, was incredibly outraged and declared that she would rather cut off her right hand than ask for the vote for Black men and not for women. After Phillips left, she overheard Tilton say to Mrs. Stanton, "What's wrong with Susan? She seems like she's lost it." Mrs. Stanton replied, "I can't imagine; I've never seen her so unreasonable and completely rude."
This incident illustrates one marked difference in these two women, each so strong in her own characteristics. Mrs. Stanton in the presence of brilliant intellect and elegant culture at times would seem to be entirely psychologized, even though the arguments used were in direct conflict with her own instincts and judgment. On the contrary, no eloquence, no persuasiveness of manner, no magnetic power could induce Miss Anthony for one moment to abandon her convictions of truth and justice. Mrs. Stanton's disposition was one of extreme suavity which loved to please, while Miss Anthony's nature was rugged, unflinching and stern in upholding the right without regard to expediency.
She had to leave right away for an appointment, but as soon as she was free, she went straight to Mrs. Stanton's house and found her pacing back and forth in the long living rooms, wringing her hands. She hugged Miss Anthony tightly, saying, "I'm so glad to see you! Please tell me what's wrong with me. I feel like I've been beaten from head to toe!" They sat down together and went through the entire conversation, and she then realized and felt deeply the insult and humiliation hidden in what the two men proposed, agreeing with Miss Anthony that she would rather give up her life than accept it. 262
On May 31 both the Anti-Slavery Society and the Equal Rights Association held large meetings in Boston. The latter, in conformity with its new name, announced that "any member of the audience, man or woman, was entitled to speak on the topics under debate and would be made welcome." This had been the rule always in the old woman's rights conventions, but it was reaffirmed now in order to show the broad and catholic spirit of the new organization. At this Boston meeting Anna Dickinson made her first speech for the rights of woman. It was one of those bursts of inspiration which no pen can reproduce, and was received by the audience with cheer upon cheer. She gave $100 to the cause, assuring them of her services henceforth, and Miss Anthony wrote of her, "She is sound to the heart's core."
This incident highlights a significant difference between these two women, each strong in her own way. Mrs. Stanton, with her brilliant intellect and refined culture, sometimes appeared completely influenced by psychology, even when her arguments directly contradicted her own instincts and judgment. In contrast, no amount of eloquence, charm, or magnetic personality could ever sway Miss Anthony to abandon her beliefs in truth and justice for even a moment. Mrs. Stanton had an extremely smooth disposition that enjoyed pleasing others, whereas Miss Anthony's character was tough, unwavering, and strict in defending what is right, regardless of what was convenient.
The great work of rolling up petitions, not only to Congress but to the New York Constitutional Convention, was then commenced. The executive board of the Standard offered to lease to the Equal Rights Association office-room and a certain amount of space in the paper. These, however, were put at such a price and placed under such restrictions as it was thought unwise to accept. All the matter submitted would be subject to "editorial revision," even though the association paid for the space, and as Mr. Pillsbury had resigned the editorship and Mr. Powell had taken it, they decided they could not trust the "editorial revision." The women had done so 263 vast an amount of gratuitous work for the Standard in past years, that they felt themselves entitled to more liberal treatment. The editor had written, only a short time before, of the excellent service Miss Anthony had rendered in straightening out the accounts. She also had secured numerous subscribers, sending in as many as thirty at a time from some of her meetings.
On May 31, both the Anti-Slavery Society and the Equal Rights Association held large meetings in Boston. The latter, reflecting its new name, announced that "any member of the audience, regardless of gender, was welcome to speak on the topics being discussed." This had always been the practice at previous women's rights conventions, but it was reaffirmed now to highlight the inclusive spirit of the new organization. At this Boston meeting, Anna Dickinson delivered her first speech advocating for women's rights. It was one of those moments of inspiration that no written words can truly capture, and the audience responded with loud cheers. She donated $100 to the cause, committing to support them moving forward, and Miss Anthony wrote of her, "She is sound to the heart's core."
For the purpose of arousing public interest in the approaching New York Constitutional Convention, an equal rights meeting was held at Albany, in Tweddle Hall, November 21. To make this a success Miss Anthony spent many weeks of hard work. The diary notes that, among other things, she directed and sent out 1200 complimentary tickets.[38] At this Albany convention political differences began to appear. Mrs. Stanton complimented the Democrats for the assistance they had rendered; Frederick Douglass objected to their receiving any credit, branding their advocacy as a trick of the enemy, and there were frequent sharp encounters. Miss Anthony made an extended speech, of which there is but this newspaper report:
The significant task of gathering petitions, not just for Congress but also for the New York Constitutional Convention, began. The executive board of the Standard offered to lease office space to the Equal Rights Association along with some space in the paper. However, the pricing and the restrictions made it seem unwise to accept the offer. Everything submitted would still be subject to "editorial revision," even if the association paid for the space, and since Mr. Pillsbury had resigned from the editorship and Mr. Powell had taken over, they decided they couldn’t trust the "editorial revision." The women had done such a huge amount of unpaid work for the Standard in previous years that they felt they deserved better treatment. The editor had, not long before, praised Miss Anthony for her excellent work in sorting out the accounts. She had also brought in many subscribers, sending in as many as thirty at a time from some of her meetings.
She referred to the assertion of Horace Greeley, that while women had the abstract right to suffrage the great majority of them did not wish it. So they told us when we said the negro ought to be free; he did not wish it; he was contented and happy. As we replied relative to the negro, so do we regarding women. If they do not desire the right to vote, it is an evidence of the depth to which they have been degraded by its deprivation. A woman clerk, in the New York Mercantile Library, told her that during the war the salaries of the male clerks all had been raised, but not those of the women, and a man's, who held an inferior position, had been increased to $300 more than her own. The clerk said that if she had been a voter she did not believe such injustice would have been perpetrated. In Rochester the salaries of the male teachers in the public schools were raised $100 per annum while the small salaries of the women were still further reduced. In Auburn $200 additional compensation was voted to the male teachers and $25 to the women, 264 who thereupon held a meeting and passed an ironical resolution thanking the board for their liberal allowance. The board then required them to sign a paper saying they did not intend an insult, and those who did not make such recantation were discharged. The speaker then referred to the power of the ballot. No politician dared oppose the eight-hour agitation, because the workingman held the franchise. Give the workingwoman a vote and she, too, can protect herself.
To generate public interest in the upcoming New York Constitutional Convention, an equal rights meeting took place at Tweddle Hall in Albany on November 21. To ensure its success, Miss Anthony dedicated many weeks of hard work. Her diary notes that, among other tasks, she organized and distributed 1,200 complimentary tickets.[38] At this Albany convention, political disagreements started to surface. Mrs. Stanton praised the Democrats for the help they had provided; Frederick Douglass countered that they deserved no credit, labeling their support as a tactic of the enemy, leading to frequent heated exchanges. Miss Anthony delivered a lengthy speech, though only a newspaper report of it remains:
A form of petition was approved asking that women might be members of the coming Constitutional Convention and vote on the new constitution. Respectful reports were made by the New York papers with the exception of the World, which said in a long and abusive article:
She referred to what Horace Greeley had said, stating that while women had the theoretical right to vote, most actually didn’t want it. That’s what people argued when we fought for Black freedom; they claimed Black individuals were content and satisfied. Just as we responded about Black people, we say the same about women. If they don’t want the right to vote, it shows how much they've been affected by being denied it. A female clerk from the New York Mercantile Library mentioned that during the war, all the male clerks received salary increases, but the women did not. One man in a lower position got a raise of $300 more than her salary. The clerk believed that if she had been able to vote, this unfairness wouldn’t have occurred. In Rochester, male public school teachers got an annual salary increase of $100, while the already low salaries of women were cut even further. In Auburn, male teachers received an additional $200, while women only got $25. 264 They then held a meeting and sarcastically thanked the board for their generous compensation. The board required them to sign a document stating they didn’t intend to insult anyone, and those who refused were fired. The speaker then discussed the significance of voting power. No politician would dare oppose the eight-hour workday movement because working men had the right to vote. If we give working women the right to vote, they’ll be able to protect themselves as well.
Altogether the ablest, most dignified and best-balanced man in the body is Frederick Douglass, and there is a deep feeling for him for United States senator in spite of the drift of the convention, which is evidently in favor of Susan B. Anthony; notwithstanding which Elizabeth Cady Stanton is likewise a candidate with considerable strength, favoring as she does the Copperheads, the Democratic party and other dead and buried remains of alleged disloyalty. Susan is lean, cadaverous and intellectual, with the proportions of a file and the voice of a hurdy-gurdy. She is the favorite of the convention. Mrs. Stanton is of intellectual stock, impressive in manner and disposed to henpeck the convention which of course calls out resistance and much cackling.... Susan has a controlling advantage over her in the fact that she is unencumbered with a husband. As male members of Congress rarely have wives in Washington, so female members will be expected to be without husbands at the capital....
A petition was approved requesting that women be allowed to be members of the upcoming Constitutional Convention and to vote on the new constitution. The New York papers reported on this respectfully, except for the World, which published a long and harsh article.
Parker Pillsbury, one of the notabilities of the body, is a good-looking white man naturally, but has a cowed and sneakish expression stealing over him, as though he regretted he had not been born a nigger or one of these females.... Lucy Stone, the president of the convention, is what the law terms a "spinster." She is a sad old girl, presides with timidity and hesitation, is wheezy and nasal in her pronunciation and wholly without dignity or command.... Mummified and fossilated females, void of domestic duties, habits and natural affections; crack-brained, rheumatic, dyspeptic, henpecked men, vainly striving to achieve the liberty of opening their heads in presence of their wives; self-educated, oily-faced, insolent, gabbling negroes, and Theodore Tilton, make up the less than a hundred members of this caravan, called, by themselves, the American Equal Rights Association.
Frederick Douglass is the most capable, respected, and well-rounded person in the group, and there's strong backing for him as a candidate for United States senator, even though the convention clearly favors Susan B. Anthony. However, Elizabeth Cady Stanton is also a significant candidate, supporting the Copperheads, the Democratic Party, and other remnants of supposed disloyalty. Susan is thin, pale, and intellectual, with a sharp demeanor and a voice that sounds like a hurdy-gurdy. She’s the favorite of the convention. Mrs. Stanton comes from an intellectual background, has a commanding presence, and often tries to take charge of the convention, which leads to some pushback and a lot of squawking. Susan has a distinct advantage because she doesn’t have a husband. Just as male Congress members typically don’t have wives in Washington, female members are also expected to be without husbands while in the capital.
On December 6 and 7 a mass meeting was held in Cooper Institute, Miss Anthony presiding. There were the usual effective speeches and large and appreciative audiences present at every session. From New York the speakers went at once to Rochester and held a two days' convention there. The forces 265 then divided and, under the management of Miss Anthony, held meetings in a large number of the towns of western and central New York, to arouse public sentiment in favor of giving women a representation at the Constitutional Convention.
Parker Pillsbury, one of the notable figures here, is a decent-looking white guy, but he has a timid and sneaky expression, like he wishes he had been born Black or one of these women. Lucy Stone, the president of the convention, is what the law refers to as a "spinster." She is a sad, older woman who leads with uncertainty and hesitation, speaks in a wheezy and nasal manner, and lacks dignity or authority. The group consists of outdated women with no domestic responsibilities, eccentric, sickly, and henpecked men who struggle to express themselves in front of their wives, self-taught, smooth-talking, arrogant Black men, and Theodore Tilton. Together, they make up the fewer than one hundred members of this gathering, which they call the American Equal Rights Association.
Meanwhile the petitions asking Congress to include women in the proposed Fourteenth Amendment were rapidly pushed, and as soon as ten or twelve thousand names were secured they were sent at once to Washington, as the resolution was then under discussion. And here came the revelation which had been for some time foreshadowed—the Republicans refused to champion this cause! From the founding of the Anti-Slavery Society in 1833, women had been always its most loyal supporters, bearing their share of the odium and persecution of early days. When the Republican party was formed, the leading women of the country had allied themselves with it and given faithful service during the long, dark years which followed. All the Abolitionists and prominent Republicans had upheld the principle of equal rights to all, and now, when the test came, they refused to recognize the claims of woman! Some of the senators and representatives declined to present the petitions sent from their own districts; others offered them merely as petitions for "universal suffrage," carefully omitting the word "woman" and trusting that it would be inferred they meant suffrage for the negro men.
On December 6 and 7, a large meeting took place at Cooper Institute, with Miss Anthony in charge. There were the usual impactful speeches and big, appreciative crowds at every session. From New York, the speakers immediately traveled to Rochester and held a two-day convention there. The groups 265 then split up and, under Miss Anthony's leadership, held meetings in many towns across western and central New York to generate public support for women's representation at the Constitutional Convention.
Even Charles Sumner, who so many times had acknowledged his indebtedness to Miss Anthony, Mrs. Stanton and the other women who were now asking for their rights, presented a petition from Massachusetts, headed by Lydia Maria Child, with the declaration that he did it under protest and that it was "most inopportune." Mrs. Child was the first and one of the ablest editors of the Anti-Slavery Standard, and had battled long and earnestly for the freedom of the slave at the cost of her literary popularity; but now when she asked that she might receive the rights of citizenship at least at the same time they were conferred upon the freedman, her plea was declared "most inopportune."
Meanwhile, the petitions urging Congress to include women in the proposed Fourteenth Amendment were quickly gathered, and as soon as ten or twelve thousand signatures were collected, they were immediately sent to Washington, since the resolution was being discussed at that time. And here came the revelation that had been hinted at for a while—the Republicans refused to support this cause! From the founding of the Anti-Slavery Society in 1833, women had always been its most loyal supporters, sharing the burden of the stigma and persecution of the early days. When the Republican party was formed, the leading women of the country joined forces with it and provided dedicated support during the long, dark years that followed. All the Abolitionists and prominent Republicans had endorsed the principle of equal rights for all, and now, when the moment of truth arrived, they refused to acknowledge the rights of women! Some of the senators and representatives chose not to present the petitions from their own districts; others submitted them only as petitions for "universal suffrage," intentionally leaving out the word "woman" and hoping it would be assumed they meant suffrage for Black men.
The Democrats in Congress, who never had favored or assisted 266 in any way the so-called woman's rights doctrines, seized upon this opportunity to harass the Republicans and defeat negro suffrage. They not only presented the women's petitions but made long and eloquent speeches in their favor, using with telling force against the Republicans their own oft-repeated arguments for equal rights to all. In the midst of this agitation, the District of Columbia Suffrage Bill being under discussion, Edgar Cowan, a Pennsylvania Democrat, moved to strike out the word "male," and thus precipitated a debate which occupied three entire days in the Senate. Among the Republicans Benjamin F. Wade and B. Gratz Brown made splendid arguments for woman suffrage and announced their votes in favor of the measure. Senator Wilson, from Massachusetts, declared himself ready at any and all times to vote for a separate bill enfranchising women, but opposed to connecting it with negro suffrage. The vote in the Senate to strike the word "male" from the proposed bill resulted: yeas, 9; nays, 47; in the House, yeas, 49; nays, 74—68 not voting. A number of members in both Houses who believed in woman suffrage voted "no" because they preferred to sacrifice the women rather than the negroes.[39]
Even Charles Sumner, who had often recognized his debt to Miss Anthony, Mrs. Stanton, and the other women now fighting for their rights, presented a petition from Massachusetts, led by Lydia Maria Child, stating that he did so under protest and that it was "the most inconvenient." Mrs. Child was the first and one of the most skilled editors of the Anti-Slavery Standard, and she had fought hard for the freedom of slaves, sacrificing her literary popularity for it. But now, when she asked to receive citizenship rights at least at the same time as they were granted to freedmen, her request was deemed "the most inconvenient."
B.F. Wade
The Democrats in Congress, who had never supported or helped the so-called women's rights movements, took this opportunity to criticize the Republicans and block Black suffrage. They not only presented the women's petitions but also delivered passionate speeches in their support, effectively using the Republicans' own frequently voiced arguments for equal rights against them. Amidst this turmoil, while the District of Columbia Suffrage Bill was being discussed, Edgar Cowan, a Democrat from Pennsylvania, proposed to remove the word "male," sparking a debate that lasted three full days in the Senate. Among the Republicans, Benjamin F. Wade and B. Gratz Brown made strong arguments for women's suffrage and declared their votes in favor of the measure. Senator Wilson from Massachusetts stated he was always ready to vote for a separate bill to grant women the right to vote, but he opposed linking it with Black suffrage. The Senate vote to remove the word "male" from the proposed bill resulted in: yeas, 9; nays, 47; and in the House, yeas, 49; nays, 74—68 members did not vote. Several members in both Houses who supported women's suffrage voted "no" because they preferred to sacrifice women's rights rather than those of Black individuals.[39]

B. Gratz Brown
B.F. Wade

The Republican press was equally hostile to the proposition to enfranchise women. Mr. Greeley, who in times past had 267 been so staunch a supporter of woman's rights, now said in the New York Tribune:
B. Gratz Brown
A CRY FROM THE FEMALES,—.... Our heart warms with pity towards these unfortunate creatures. We fancy that we can see them, deserted of men, and bereft of those rich enjoyments and exalted privileges which belong to women, languishing their unhappy lives away in a mournful singleness, from which they can escape by no art in the construction of waterfalls or the employment of cotton-padding. Talk of a true woman needing the ballot as an accessory of power, when she rules the world by a glance of her eye! There was sound philosophy in the remark of an Eastern monarch, that his wife was sovereign of the empire, because she ruled his little ones and his little ones ruled him. The sure panacea for such ills as the Massachusetts petitioners complain of, is a wicker-work cradle and a dimple-cheeked baby.
The Republican press was just as opposed to the idea of granting women the right to vote. Mr. Greeley, who had previously been a strong supporter of women's rights, now stated in the New York Tribune:
The New York Post, which under Mr. Bryant's editorship had favored the enfranchisement of women, also took ground against it now, and this was the attitude of Republican papers in all parts of the country. The Democratic press was opposed, except when it could make capital against the Republicans by espousing it.
A CRY FROM THE WOMEN,—.... Our hearts go out to these unfortunate women. We imagine them, abandoned by men and stripped of the rich experiences and elevated privileges that belong to women, wasting away their unhappy lives in lonely sadness, from which they can't find an escape by creating waterfalls or using cotton padding. They say a true woman needs the vote as a tool of power, but she already influences the world with just a glance! There was wisdom in what an Eastern king said about his wife being the true ruler of the empire because she took care of their children, who in turn controlled him. The best solution for the issues that the petitioners from Massachusetts are concerned about is a cozy cradle and a chubby-cheeked baby.
In November Miss Anthony went to a great anti-slavery meeting in Philadelphia. Between the two sessions, Lucretia Mott invited about twenty of the leading men and women to lunch with her. At her request Miss Anthony acted as spokesman and, in behalf of the women, begged Mr. Phillips to reconsider his position and make the woman's and the negro's cause identical, but here, in the presence of the women who had stood shoulder to shoulder with him in all his hard-fought battles of the last twenty years, he again refused, declaring that their time had not yet come. Miss Anthony sent the most impassioned appeals to the Joint Committee of Fifteen, with Thaddeus Stevens as chairman, which had charge of the congressional policy on reconstruction, urging that if they could not report favorably on the petitions, at least they would not interpose any new barrier against woman's right to the ballot; but, although Mr. Stevens had ever been friendly to the claims of women, he refused to recognize them now. Everywhere they were met by the cry, "This is the negro's hour!"
The New York Post, under Mr. Bryant's leadership, had supported women's voting rights, but now it shifted its stance, reflecting the views of Republican papers across the country. The Democratic press opposed it, except when it could use the issue to attack the Republicans by supporting it.
It was a long time before the women could believe that the 268 Republicans and Abolitionists, who had advocated their cause for years, would forsake them at this critical moment. The letters written during this period showed the agony of spirit they endured as they beheld one after another repudiating their demands and setting them aside in favor of the negro. Not only did the men thus abandon the cause of equal rights but, by their specious arguments, they persuaded many of the women that it was their duty to sacrifice their own claims and devote themselves to securing suffrage for the colored men. This indignant letter from Mrs. Stanton to one of the "old guard," who at first declined to circulate petitions, will serve as an example of many which were sent to the women:
In November, Miss Anthony attended a major anti-slavery meeting in Philadelphia. Between the two sessions, Lucretia Mott invited about twenty prominent men and women to lunch with her. At her request, Miss Anthony spoke on behalf of the women, asking Mr. Phillips to reconsider his stance and align the causes of women and Black people. However, in front of the women who had stood by him in all his hard-fought battles over the past twenty years, he again declined, insisting that their time had not yet come. Miss Anthony sent passionate appeals to the Joint Committee of Fifteen, led by Thaddeus Stevens, which was responsible for congressional policy on reconstruction, urging them that if they couldn't support the petitions, at least they shouldn't create any new barriers against women's right to vote. Yet, even though Mr. Stevens had always been supportive of women's claims, he chose not to acknowledge them now. Everywhere they went, they faced the cry, "This is the negro's hour!"
I have just read your letter, and it would have been a wet blanket to Susan and me were we not sure that we are right. With three bills before Congress to exclude us from all hope of representation in the future, I thank God that two women of the nation felt the insult and decided to rouse the rest to use the only right we have in the government—the right of petition. If the petition goes with our names alone, ours be the glory, and the disgrace to all the rest! We have sent out 1,000 franked by Representative James Brooks, of the New York Express, and if they come back to us empty, Susan and I will sign all of them, that every Democratic member may have one to shame those hypocritical Republicans. When your granddaughters hear that against such insults you made no protest, they will blush for their ancestry.
It took a long time for the women to accept that the 268 Republicans and Abolitionists, who had supported their cause for years, would abandon them at such a crucial moment. The letters written during this time revealed the deep pain they felt as they watched one man after another reject their demands and prioritize those of Black men instead. Not only did the men turn their backs on the fight for equal rights, but through their misleading arguments, they convinced many women that it was their responsibility to set aside their own needs and focus on securing voting rights for Black men. This passionate letter from Mrs. Stanton to one of the "old guard," who initially refused to help circulate petitions, exemplifies many such letters that were sent to the women:
This letter from Lucretia Mott shows that some men remained true to the woman's cause: "My husband and myself cordially hail this movement. The negro's hour came with his emancipation from cruel bondage. He now has advocates not a few for his right to the ballot. Intelligent as these are, they must see that this right can not be consistently withheld from women. We pledge $50 toward the necessary funds." At this time Miss Anthony in a strong and earnest letter showed the injustice of the Standard's behavior:
I just read your letter, and it would be really discouraging for Susan and me if we weren’t so confident that we're right. With three bills in Congress trying to cut off our chance for representation in the future, I'm grateful that two women from this country felt the insult and decided to motivate others to exercise our only right in government—the right to petition. If the petition goes out with just our names, let the credit be ours and the shame go to everyone else! We’ve sent out 1,000, with postage covered by Representative James Brooks of the New York Express, and if they come back to us without any signatures, Susan and I will sign all of them, so every Democratic member can have one to embarrass those hypocritical Republicans. When your granddaughters find out that you didn’t protest against these insults, they will be ashamed of their heritage.
How I do wish the good old Standard would preach the whole gospel of the whole loaf of republicanism; but I am sorry to say the present indications are that it will extend even less favor to us than ever before. I gather this from Mr. Powell's announcement to me last week that henceforth, if I were not going to give my personal efforts to the Standard, he should not publish notices of our meetings except at "full advertising rates." I was not a little startled but answered: "Of course I shall say the Standard is the truest and 269 best paper for negro suffrage; but I can not say that it is so for woman suffrage." He said he saw this and hereafter we must pay for all notices.
This letter from Lucretia Mott demonstrates that some men stayed committed to the women's cause: "My husband and I fully support this movement. The moment for Black people arrived with their liberation from brutal bondage. They now have many advocates for their right to vote. As intelligent as these supporters are, they must recognize that this right cannot consistently be denied to women. We pledge $50 to help with the necessary funds." At this time, Miss Anthony, in a powerful and heartfelt letter, highlighted the unfairness of the Standard's actions:
Lucretia Mott
I really wish the good old Standard would fully embrace the message of complete republicanism, but I’m sorry to say the current signs indicate it will be even less supportive of us than before. I got this impression from Mr. Powell's announcement to me last week that from now on, if I wasn’t going to personally contribute to the Standard, he wouldn't publish notices of our meetings unless we paid "full advertising rates." I was quite surprised but responded, "Of course I’ll say that the Standard is the most genuine and 269 best paper for African American suffrage; but I can’t say that it supports women’s suffrage." He acknowledged this and stated that from now on, we must pay for all notices.
![]()
Now, I do complain of this and with just cause, so long as $2,000 of the sainted Hovey's money are sunk annually in the struggle to keep the Standard afloat, while Mr. Hovey's will expressly says: "In case chattel slavery should be abolished before the expenditure of the full amount, the residue shall be applied toward securing woman's rights," etc. Mr. Pillsbury told the Hovey Committee last winter, after abolition was proclaimed, that he could not in conscience accept his salary from them as editor of the Standard for another year unless it should advocate woman's claims equally with those of the negro.
Lucretia Mott
In her diary she writes: "Even Charles Sumner bends to the spirit of compromise and presents a constitutional amendment which concedes the right to disfranchise law-abiding, tax-paying citizens." Robert Purvis again expressed his cordial sympathy: "I am heartily with you in the view 'that the reconstruction of the Union is a work of greater importance than the restoration of the rebel States;' and that it should be in accordance with the true republican idea of the personal rights of all our citizens, without regard to sex or color. If the settlement of this question upon the comprehensive basis of equal rights and impartial justice to all should require the postponement of the enfranchisement of the colored man, I am willing for the delay, though it should take a decade of years to 'fight it out on that line.'" Mr. Purvis frequently said in the debates of those days that he would rather his son never should be enfranchised than that his daughter never should be, as she bore the double disability of sex and color and, by every principle of justice, should be the first to be protected.
I have every reason to complain about this, especially since $2,000 of the late Hovey's money is wasted every year just to keep the Standard running, even though Mr. Hovey's will clearly states: "If chattel slavery is abolished before the entire amount is spent, the remaining funds shall be used to secure women's rights," and so on. Last winter, after abolition was declared, Mr. Pillsbury told the Hovey Committee that he couldn't in good conscience accept his salary from them as editor of the Standard for another year unless it equally supported women's rights alongside those of Black individuals.
As the struggle for the enfranchisement of the negro grew more intense, and the entire burden of it fell upon the Republican party, its members became more and more insistent that the women should not jeopardize the claims of the colored man by pressing their own. Miss Anthony, Mrs. Stanton and a few others of the stronger and more independent women declared they would not suffer in silence the injustice and insult of having this great body of ignorant men granted the political rights which were denied intelligent women; nor 270 would they submit without protest to having a million ballots added to the mass which already were sure to be cast against the enfranchisement of women if ever the question came to a popular vote. As a result of their stand for justice, they found themselves utterly deserted by all the great leaders with whom they had labored so earnestly and harmoniously for many years—Garrison, Phillips, Greeley, Curtis, Tilton, Higginson, Douglass, Gerrit Smith. Of all the old Abolitionists only four—Samuel J. May, Robert Purvis, Parker Pillsbury and Stephen S. Foster—remained loyal to their standard. There was not one of the men repudiating them who did not believe thoroughly in the principle of woman's full right to the ballot. The women simply were sacrificed to political expediency; set aside without a moment's hesitation in obedience to the party shibboleth. "This is the negro's hour!"
In her diary, she writes: "Even Charles Sumner gives in to the spirit of compromise and presents a constitutional amendment that allows for the disenfranchisement of law-abiding, tax-paying citizens." Robert Purvis again expressed his strong support: "I completely agree with you that 'reconstructing the Union is a more important task than restoring the rebel States;' and it should align with the true republican idea of the personal rights of all our citizens, regardless of sex or color. If resolving this issue on the broad basis of equal rights and impartial justice for all means that the enfranchisement of the colored man has to be delayed, I’m okay with the wait, even if it takes ten years to 'fight it out on that line.'" Mr. Purvis often stated in the debates of that time that he would prefer his son never to be enfranchised than for his daughter to miss out, as she faced the double disadvantage of sex and color, and, by every principle of justice, should be the first to be safeguarded.
[37] 'WHEREAS, by the war, society is once more resolved into its original elements, and in the reconstruction of our government we again stand face to face with the broad question of natural rights, all associations based on special claims for special classes are too narrow and partial for the hour; therefore, from the baptism of a second Revolution, purified and exalted by suffering, seeing with a holier vision that the peace, prosperity and perpetuity of the republic rest on Equal Rights to All, we, today assembled in our Eleventh National Woman's Rights Convention, bury the woman in the citizen, and our organization in that of the American Equal Rights Association.
As the fight for the voting rights of Black people became more intense, the entire responsibility fell on the Republican party, and its members increasingly insisted that women should not risk the rights of Black men by advocating for their own. Miss Anthony, Mrs. Stanton, and a few other strong and independent women declared they would not quietly accept the injustice and insult of letting a large group of ignorant men gain political rights that were denied to educated women; nor would they quietly allow a million ballots to be added to the pile that was already guaranteed to be cast against women's suffrage if it ever came to a public vote. Because of their stand for justice, they found themselves completely abandoned by all the prominent leaders with whom they had worked so hard and harmoniously for many years—Garrison, Phillips, Greeley, Curtis, Tilton, Higginson, Douglass, Gerrit Smith. Of all the old Abolitionists, only four—Samuel J. May, Robert Purvis, Parker Pillsbury, and Stephen S. Foster—remained loyal to their cause. Not one of the men who turned their backs on them did not fully believe in the principle of women's right to vote. The women were simply sacrificed for political convenience, set aside without a moment's hesitation to obey the party's mantra, "This is the negro's hour!"
President, Lucretia Mott; vice-presidents, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Theodore Tilton, Frederick Douglass, Josephine S. Griffing, Frances D. Gage, Robert Purvis, Martha C. Wright, Rebecca W. Mott; corresponding secretaries, Susan B. Anthony, Caroline M. Severance, Mattie Griffith; treasurer, Ludlow Patton; recording secretary, Henry B. Blackwell.
[37] 'WHEREAS, because of the war, society is once again broken down to its basic elements, and as we rebuild our government, we find ourselves confronted with the important issue of natural rights. Any groups formed around specific claims for certain classes are too limited and partial for this moment. Therefore, from the renewed spirit of a second Revolution, which has been cleansed and uplifted by suffering, and with a clearer vision that the peace, prosperity, and future of the republic depend on Equal Rights for All, we, gathered here today at our Eleventh National Woman's Rights Convention, merge the woman in the citizen, and our organization with that of the American Equal Rights Association.
President, Lucretia Mott; vice-presidents, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Theodore Tilton, Frederick Douglass, Josephine S. Griffing, Frances D. Gage, Robert Purvis, Martha C. Wright, Rebecca W. Mott; corresponding secretaries, Susan B. Anthony, Caroline M. Severance, Mattie Griffith; treasurer, Ludlow Patton; recording secretary, Henry B. Blackwell.
The first three months of 1867 were spent by Miss Anthony and a corps of speakers in a series of conventions throughout the State of New York in order to secure for women a representation in the Constitutional Convention. The history of these was that of many which had preceded them, large crowds and much enthusiasm in some places, small audiences and chilling receptions at others. The press comments were generally fair, but occasionally there was a weak attempt at wit or satire. For instance, the editor of the Buffalo Commercial thus replied through his columns to a polite note from Miss Anthony enclosing an advertisement of the convention and requesting that the blank space left be filled with the names of places where tickets usually were sold, the bill to be sent to her:
CHAPTER XVII.
CAMPAIGNS IN NEW YORK AND KANSAS.
1867.
By reference to the notice which we publish elsewhere, it will be seen that we have complied with the request of Susan, except in giving the names of places where tickets are to be had. "The bars of the principal hotels" suggested itself; but then it occurred to us that perhaps some of our strong-minded female fellow-citizens might not like to go to these places for cards of admission. Then we thought of inserting "for freight or passage apply to the captain on board;" but we did not know whether Susan or Elizabeth was captain, and a row might have resulted, in which case the former would probably become "black-eyed Susan." We finally concluded not to meddle with the matter but to let Susan and Elizabeth do as the man insisted upon doing who enacted the part of the king in the play, and who profanely declared that as he was king, he would die just where he d—— pleased. The girls can sell tickets just where "they've a mind ter." We may not be able to give the proposed meeting "frequent editorial notice;" still the probabilities are that we shall allude to it if we live and do well, and we shan't charge Susan a cent 272 for our services. We would not have it said, nor would we have you, "O Susan, Susan, lovely dear," imagine that we are ag'in "the one true basis of a genuine republic."
The first three months of 1867 were spent by Miss Anthony and a team of speakers holding a series of conventions across the State of New York to secure representation for women in the Constitutional Convention. The story of these events mirrored many that came before, with large crowds and lots of enthusiasm in some areas, while other locations saw small audiences and cold receptions. The media coverage was generally fair, though at times it included weak attempts at humor or satire. For example, the editor of the Buffalo Commercial responded to a polite note from Miss Anthony, which included an ad for the convention and asked for the blank space to be filled in with the names of ticket-selling locations, with the cost to be billed to her:
And yet, after all this, the freedom-loving General Rufus Saxton had the courage to preside at the meeting and introduce the speakers. He subsequently wrote: "I pray that God will bless your noble work and that, sooner than you think, woman shall be admitted to her proper place, where God intended she should be, and to exclude her from which must, like any other great wrong, bring misery and sorrow." The Troy Times said:
If you check out the notice we’re posting elsewhere, you’ll see that we’ve followed Susan's request, except for naming places where you can get tickets. We thought about mentioning "the bars of the main hotels," but realized some of our strong-minded female friends might not want to go there for tickets. We also considered saying, "for freight or passage, talk to the captain on board," but we weren't sure if Susan or Elizabeth was the captain, which could lead to a conflict, possibly making Susan the "black-eyed Susan." In the end, we decided to stay out of it and let Susan and Elizabeth handle things like the guy who played the king in the show, who boldly declared that since he was king, he would die exactly where he wanted. The girls can sell tickets wherever "they feel like it." We might not be able to give the planned meeting "frequent editorial notice," but we’ll probably mention it if we can, and we won’t charge Susan a cent 272 for our assistance. We wouldn’t want it to be said, nor would we want you to, "O Susan, Susan, lovely dear," think that we’re against "the one true basis of a genuine republic."
The last time we heard Miss Anthony speak was in 1861, shortly after the election of Lincoln when, it will be remembered, she was mobbed from city to city. Since then time and the various undertakings in which she has engaged have apparently had no effect upon her, unless to render her more eloquent and more sanguine of the ultimate righting of all wrongs, and to inspire additional enthusiasm for a cause to which she has clung with a perseverance deserving admiration. She is very choice in the selection of words and phrases, speaks in an earnest, attractive monotone, and really made one of the most eloquent and sensible speeches for female suffrage to which we ever listened.
And yet, after all this, the freedom-loving General Rufus Saxton had the courage to lead the meeting and introduce the speakers. He later wrote: "I pray that God will bless your noble work and that, sooner than you think, women will be accepted in their rightful place, where God intended them to be, and to exclude them from that must, like any other profound injustice, bring misery and sorrow." The Troy Times said:
At Fairfield, Herkimer Co., Miss Anthony spoke in the presence of a large number of students from the academy and, at the close of her address, there were vigorous calls for the wife of the principal, who was known to be opposed to any phase of so-called woman's rights. She finally responded and, in the course of her remarks, said that when she was a teacher she used to believe that women should receive the same salary as men, but since she had married and realized the responsibilities of a man of family, she had been converted to the belief that men should receive more than women. Miss Anthony at once retorted: "It would seem then, that so long as you were earning your own living you wanted a good salary, but so soon as you give your services to a husband, you want him to receive the value of both your work and his own, regardless of those women who still have to support themselves and very often a family." The fact that the lady was 273 her hostess did not save her from this merited rebuke, which was heartily appreciated and enjoyed by the students.
The last time we heard Miss Anthony speak was in 1861, right after Lincoln was elected, when she was overwhelmed by crowds from city to city. Since then, time and the different projects she has taken on don’t seem to have changed her, except to make her more articulate and optimistic about finally addressing all injustices, and to increase her passion for a cause she has fiercely supported and that deserves our respect. She is very careful about her word choices, speaks in a genuine, engaging monotone, and truly delivered one of the most powerful and sensible speeches for women's suffrage that we’ve ever heard.
In these tours the burden of the preliminary arrangements always was assumed by Miss Anthony. When Mrs. Stanton and she reached a place where a meeting was to be held, the former would go at once to bed, while the latter rushed to the newspaper offices to look after the advertising, then to the hall to see that all was in readiness, and usually conducted the afternoon session alone. In the evening Mrs. Stanton would appear, rested and radiant, and read a carefully written address, while Miss Anthony, exhausted and having had no time to prepare a speech, would make a few impromptu remarks as best she could. Then the papers would comment on the difference between the beautiful and amiable Mrs. Stanton and the aggressive and jaded Miss Anthony, and attribute it to the fact that one was a wife and the other a spinster.[40]
At Fairfield, Herkimer Co., Miss Anthony spoke in front of a large group of students from the academy, and at the end of her speech, there were enthusiastic calls for the principal’s wife, who was known to be against any form of what was called women's rights. She finally spoke up and, during her comments, stated that when she was a teacher, she believed women should earn the same salary as men, but after getting married and understanding the responsibilities of a family man, she had changed her mind and thought men should earn more than women. Miss Anthony immediately shot back: "So, it seems that as long as you were supporting yourself, you wanted a good salary, but once you offered your services to a husband, you believe he should earn both your salary and his own, ignoring the women who still have to support themselves and often a family." The fact that the lady was 273 her hostess didn’t protect her from this well-deserved criticism, which was greatly appreciated and enjoyed by the students.
At Albany Miss Anthony arranged with Charles J. Folger, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, for an address by Mrs. Stanton, which was given January 13, 1867, before the joint committees, in the Assembly chamber, crowded with men and women. She based her claim on the assumption that when a new constitution is demanded, the State is resolved into its original elements and all the people have a right to a voice in its reconstruction, supporting her position by an imposing array of legal authorities. Of the discussion by the legislators, which followed the address, Mr. Pillsbury wrote to the Hallowells: "Their arguments against universal suffrage Susan could have extinguished with her thimble."
During these tours, Miss Anthony always took charge of the preliminary arrangements. When Mrs. Stanton and she arrived at a location for a meeting, Mrs. Stanton would immediately go to bed, while Miss Anthony hurried to the newspaper offices to handle advertising, then to the venue to ensure everything was ready, and often led the afternoon session alone. In the evening, Mrs. Stanton would show up, well-rested and glowing, to deliver a carefully prepared speech, while Miss Anthony, tired and without time to prepare her remarks, would do her best to say a few off-the-cuff comments. The newspapers would then comment on the contrast between the graceful and pleasant Mrs. Stanton and the forceful and weary Miss Anthony, attributing it to the fact that one was a wife and the other a spinster.[40]
While Miss Anthony was in Albany she learned that a member from New York City had presented a bill to license houses of ill-repute, and she protested to Judge Folger. He told her 274 that this was a subject which could not be publicly discussed, especially by women. She replied that if there were any attempt to pass the bill she would arouse the women and it should be discussed from one end of the State to the other. The bill never was taken up.
At Albany, Miss Anthony made arrangements with Charles J. Folger, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, for an address by Mrs. Stanton, which took place on January 13, 1867, in the Assembly chamber filled with both men and women. She based her claim on the idea that when a new constitution is needed, the State reverts to its original elements, and everyone has the right to have a say in its reconstruction, backing her argument with a strong collection of legal authorities. After the address, Mr. Pillsbury wrote to the Hallowells about the legislators' discussion: "Susan could have easily countered their arguments against universal suffrage with just her thimble."
In answer to an invitation to be present at Albany, Mr. Beecher sent his regrets as follows:
While Miss Anthony was in Albany, she found out that someone from New York City had proposed a bill to license brothels, and she voiced her concerns to Judge Folger. He told her 274 that this was a topic that couldn’t be openly discussed, especially by women. She responded that if there was any effort to pass the bill, she would rally the women and it should be talked about all over the State. The bill was never addressed.
I should certainly come and contribute my share of influence if I were not tied hand and foot. I am to preside and speak on Wednesday night in my own church; on Thursday I preside and introduce a lecturer at the Academy of Music, in Brooklyn; on Friday, at Cooper Institute, I have a speech to make for the starving people of the South; and on Saturday, at the same place, a speech for the Cretans. These are but the punctuations of my main business, which, just now, is to write a novel for Bonner, at which I am working every forenoon. I have also a matter of two sermons every week to prepare. I write these details, because our friend Studwell intimates to me that you feel I do not care to be identified with this movement in such a way as to take the unpopularity of the women chiefly engaged in it. I should be unwilling to have you think so. I have never belonged even to an anti-slavery society, Christian or heathen. I am willing to take my stand with anybody on great issues or objects, but in regard to the organizations and instruments by which to attain the end, I have always let others work their way and I mine. I think there is a touch of wildness in my blood (some of my ancestors must have nursed an Indian breast) which is impatient of the harness and so I have always worked on my own hook. I am surprised to see how rapidly the thoughts of intelligent men and women are ameliorating on this question. It needs only that women should have a conscience educated to this duty of suffrage, and it will be yielded.
In response to an invitation to be present at Albany, Mr. Beecher sent his regrets as follows:
Early in March the Legislature of Kansas submitted two amendments, one enfranchising the negroes and one the women. State Senator Samuel N. Wood wrote Miss Anthony that an equal rights convention had been called to meet in Topeka, April 2, and urged her to send out the strongest speakers to canvass the State in behalf of the woman suffrage amendment. This was the first time the enfranchisement of women ever had been presented for a popular vote and its advocates were most anxious that it should be carried. Neither Miss Anthony nor Mrs. Stanton could go to Kansas at this time, so they appealed to Lucy Stone, begging her to make the campaign. Since her marriage, twelve years before, she had 275 been practically out of public work, insisting that she had lost her power for speaking. Miss Anthony assured her that if she would take the platform it would come back to her, and Mr. Blackwell joined in the entreaty. He gave up his business position to accompany his wife and they made a thorough canvass of that State during April and May. Mr. Phillips was unwilling that any money from the Jackson fund should be used for this purpose, as he did not want the question agitated at this time, but as Miss Anthony and Lucy Stone constituted a majority of the committee, they appropriated $1,500 for it. Even thus early in the contest the Republican managers began to show their hand. Lucy Stone wrote from Atchison May 9:
I would definitely come and support you if I weren't so busy. I'm scheduled to lead and speak at my church on Wednesday night; on Thursday, I'm introducing a lecturer at the Academy of Music in Brooklyn; on Friday, I'm giving a speech at Cooper Institute for the starving people of the South; and on Saturday, I'm giving another speech there for the Cretans. These are just the highlights of my main work, which right now is writing a novel for Bonner that I focus on every morning. I also have to prepare two sermons each week. I'm writing this because our friend Studwell suggested that you might think I don't want to be associated with this movement in a way that could lead to the unpopularity faced by the women involved. I wouldn't want you to think that. I've never even been part of an anti-slavery society, whether religious or not. I'm happy to stand with anyone on important issues, but when it comes to the organizations and methods used to achieve those goals, I've always let others follow their paths while I follow mine. I think there’s a bit of wildness in my blood (some of my ancestors must have suckled from an Indian) that makes me resistant to constraints, so I've always done my own thing. I'm amazed at how quickly the views of smart people are changing on this issue. All it takes is for women to understand the importance of suffrage, and it will be granted.
I should be glad to be with you tomorrow at the equal rights convention in New York and to know this minute whether Phillips has consented to take the high ground which sound policy, as well as justice and statesmanship require. Just now there is a plot here to get the Republican party to drop the word "male," and canvass only for the word "white." A call has been signed by the chairman of the Republican State Central Committee, for a meeting at Topeka on the 15th, to pledge the party to that single issue. As soon as we saw it and the change of tone in some of the papers, we sent letters to all those whom we had found true, urging them to be at Topeka and vote for both words. Till this action of the Republicans is settled, we can affirm nothing. Everywhere we go, we have the largest and most enthusiastic meetings and any one of our audiences would give a majority for women; but the negroes are all against us. These men ought not to be allowed to vote before we do because they will be so much more dead weight to lift.
Early in March, the Kansas Legislature submitted two amendments: one granting voting rights to African Americans and the other to women. State Senator Samuel N. Wood informed Miss Anthony that an equal rights convention was scheduled for April 2 in Topeka and urged her to send out the most effective speakers to campaign for the woman suffrage amendment across the state. This was the first time the enfranchisement of women had ever been put to a popular vote, and its supporters were eager for it to pass. Neither Miss Anthony nor Mrs. Stanton could travel to Kansas at that moment, so they reached out to Lucy Stone, asking her to lead the campaign. Since her marriage twelve years earlier, she had 275 largely stepped back from public life, claiming she had lost her ability to speak publicly. Miss Anthony reassured her that if she took the stage, her confidence would return, and Mr. Blackwell joined in urging her to participate. He gave up his job to accompany his wife, and they conducted a thorough campaign in the state during April and May. Mr. Phillips was reluctant to allow any funds from the Jackson fund to be used for this cause, as he did not want the issue to be raised at that time. However, since Miss Anthony and Lucy Stone were the majority on the committee, they allocated $1,500 for it. Even at this early stage of the campaign, the Republican leaders began to reveal their intentions. Lucy Stone wrote from Atchison on May 9:
Again she wrote of the situation in Kansas:
I’m excited to be with you tomorrow at the equal rights convention in New York and to find out if Phillips has agreed to take a strong stance that both sound policy and justice demand. Right now, there’s a push for the Republican Party to drop the word "male" and focus solely on the word "white." The chairman of the Republican State Central Committee has called for a meeting in Topeka on the 15th to commit the party to that single issue. As soon as we noticed that and the shift in tone from some of the newspapers, we sent letters to all reliable contacts, urging them to be in Topeka and vote for both terms. Until the Republicans resolve this issue, we can’t make any promises. Everywhere we go, we hold the largest and most passionate meetings, and any one of our crowds would support women’s voting; however, African Americans are completely against us. These men shouldn’t be allowed to vote before we do because they’ll be a heavier burden to bear.
The Tribune and Independent alone, if they would urge universal suffrage as they do negro suffrage, could carry this whole nation upon the only just plane of equal human rights. What a power to hold and not use!.... They must take it up. I shall see them the very first thing when I get home. At your meeting next Monday evening, I think you should insist that all of the Hovey fund used for the Standard and anti-slavery purposes since slavery was abolished, must be returned with interest to the three causes which by the express terms of the will were to receive all of the fund when slavery should be ended. I trust you will not fail to rebuke the cowardly use of the terms "universal," "impartial" and "equal," applied to hide a dark skin and an unpopular client.... I hope not a man will be asked to speak at the convention. If they volunteer, very well, but I have been for the last time on my knees to Phillips, Higginson or any of them. If they help now, they should ask us and not we them.
Again she wrote about the situation in Kansas:
The Tribune and Independent alone could raise this whole country to the rightful standard of equal human rights if they would advocate for universal suffrage with the same passion they show for Black suffrage. It's such a powerful position to have and not use! They really need to step up. I'm going to make it a priority to meet with them as soon as I'm home. At your meeting next Monday night, I think you should insist that all of the Hovey fund that has been used for the Standard and anti-slavery initiatives since slavery ended must be returned with interest to the three causes that, according to the clear terms of the will, were supposed to receive all of the fund when slavery was abolished. I trust you won't hold back in criticizing the cowardly use of terms like "universal," "impartial," and "equal," which are used to hide the reality of having dark skin and not being a favored client.... I hope no one is asked to speak at the convention. If they choose to volunteer, that's fine, but I've personally had enough of being on my knees for Phillips, Higginson, or any of them. If they really want to help now, they should ask us instead of us asking them.
On May 9 and 10 the Equal Rights Association held its first anniversary in New York, at the Church of the Puritans. Cordial and encouraging letters were received from Lydia Maria Child, Anna Dickinson, Clara Barton, Mary A. Livermore and many other distinguished women. While there were the usual number of able speeches, the strongest discussion was on the following resolution, offered by Miss Anthony: "The proposal to reconstruct our government on the basis of manhood suffrage, which emanated from the Republican party and has received the recent sanction of the American Anti-Slavery Society, is but a continuation of the old system of class and caste legislation, always cruel and proscriptive in itself and ending, in all ages, in national degradation and revolution." Henry Ward Beecher spoke eloquently in its favor, saying in part:
L. Maria Child.
On May 9 and 10, the Equal Rights Association celebrated its first anniversary in New York at the Church of the Puritans. They received warm and supportive letters from Lydia Maria Child, Anna Dickinson, Clara Barton, Mary A. Livermore, and many other notable women. Alongside the usual number of impactful speeches, the most intense debate centered on the following resolution put forth by Miss Anthony: "The proposal to reshape our government based on manhood suffrage, originating from the Republican Party and recently endorsed by the American Anti-Slavery Society, is merely a continuation of the outdated system of class and caste legislation, which has always been harsh and discriminatory, ultimately resulting in national decline and revolution." Henry Ward Beecher spoke passionately in support of it, asserting in part:

I am not a farmer, but I know that spring comes but once in the year. When the furrow is open is the time to put in your seed, if you would gather a harvest in its season. Now, when the red-hot plowshare of war has opened a furrow in this nation, is the time to put in the seed. If any say to me, "Why will you agitate the woman question when it is the hour for the black man?" I answer, it is the hour for every man and every woman, black or white. The bees go out in the morning to gather the honey from the morning-glories. They take it when they are open, for by 10 o'clock they are shut, never to open again. When the public mind is open, if you have anything to say, say it. If you have any radical principles to urge, any higher wisdom to make known, don't wait until quiet times come, until the public mind shuts up altogether.
L. Maria Child.
We are in the favored hour; and if you have great principles to make known, this is the time to advocate them. I therefore say whatever truth is to be known for the next fifty years in this nation, let it be spoken now—let it be enforced now. The truth that I have to urge is not that women have the right of suffrage—not that Chinamen or Irishmen have that right—not that native born Yankees have it—but that suffrage is the inherent right of mankind.... I do not put back for a single day the black man's enfranchisement. I ask not that he should wait. I demand that this work should be done, not upon the ground that it is politically expedient now to enfranchise black men; but I propose that you take expediency out of the way, and put a principle which is more enduring in the place of it—manhood and womanhood suffrage for all. That is the question. You may just as well meet it 277 now as at any other time. You will never have so favorable an occasion, so sympathetic a heart, never a public reason so willing to be convinced as today.... I believe it is just as easy to carry the enfranchisement of all as of any one class, and easier than to carry it class after class.
I’m not a farmer, but I know that spring comes only once a year. When the soil is tilled, it’s time to plant your seeds if you want to harvest them in their season. Right now, with the intense conflict of war affecting this nation, it’s the moment to plant those seeds. If someone asks me, "Why focus on women's issues when it's time for Black men?" I respond that it’s time for everyone, both men and women, Black or white. Bees go out in the morning to gather honey from morning-glories. They collect it when the flowers are open because by 10 o'clock, they shut, never to reopen. When the public is open to new ideas, if you have something to say, say it. If you have radical ideas to promote, any deeper knowledge to share, don’t wait for calmer times when the public completely closes off.
H. W. Beecher
We are at a critical moment, and if you have important ideas to share, now is the time to voice them. So I say, whatever truths need to be known in this country over the next fifty years, let’s express them now—let’s take action now. The truth I want to highlight is not just that women have the right to vote, not that Chinese or Irish people have that right, not even that native-born Americans have it—but that voting is a fundamental right for all people... I do not postpone the rights of Black men for even a single day. I don’t ask that they wait. I insist that this should be addressed, not because it's politically convenient to allow Black men to vote now; rather, I suggest we set aside convenience and establish a more lasting principle—voting rights for both men and women, for everyone. That's the issue. You might as well face it 277 now as at any other time. You won’t find a more favorable moment, a more understanding audience, or a public more willing to be convinced than today... I believe it’s just as easy to secure voting rights for everyone as it is for any single group, and it’s even easier than doing it one group at a time.

The resolution was adopted unanimously, as was also a memorial to Congress, written by Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton, asking most earnestly that the negro should be enfranchised, but just as earnestly that the suffrage should be conferred on woman at the same time. The leading thought was expressed in these beautiful words:
H.W. Beecher
We believe that humanity is one in all those intellectual, moral and spiritual attributes out of which grow human responsibilities. The Scripture declaration is, "So God created man in his own image, male and female created he them," and all divine legislation throughout the realm of nature recognizes the perfect equality of the two conditions; for male and female are but different conditions. Neither color nor sex is ever discharged from obedience to law, natural or moral, written or unwritten. The commandments thou shalt not steal, or kill, or commit adultery, recognize no sex; and hence we believe that all human legislation which is at variance with the divine code, is essentially unrighteous and unjust....
The resolution was adopted unanimously, as was a memorial to Congress, written by Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton, urgently asking that Black people be granted the right to vote, but just as passionately asking that women be granted suffrage at the same time. The main idea was conveyed in these beautiful words:
Women and colored men are loyal, liberty-loving citizens, and we can not believe that sex or complexion should be any ground for civil or political degradation. Against such outrage on the very name of a republic we do and ever must protest; and is not our protest against this tyranny of "taxation without representation" as just as that thundered from Bunker Hill, when our Revolutionary fathers fired the shot which shook the world?... We respectfully and earnestly pray that, in restoring the foundations of our nationality, all discriminations on account of sex or race may be removed; and that our government may be republican in fact as well as form; A GOVERNMENT BY THE PEOPLE, AND THE WHOLE PEOPLE; FOR THE PEOPLE, AND THE WHOLE PEOPLE.
We believe that all humanity shares the intellectual, moral, and spiritual qualities that create human responsibilities. The Scriptures say, "So God created man in his own image; in the image of God, he created him; male and female he created them." All divine laws in nature recognize the perfect equality of the two genders, as male and female are simply different states of being. No one is exempt from following natural or moral laws, whether they are written or unwritten, regardless of their color or sex. The commandments against stealing, killing, or committing adultery apply to everyone; therefore, we believe that any human laws that contradict divine principles are fundamentally wrong and unjust...
Women and people of color are loyal, freedom-loving citizens, and we cannot accept that gender or skin color should justify civil or political discrimination. We strongly oppose such an affront to the core of a republic; isn’t our resistance to this tyranny of "taxation without representation" just as righteous as the rallying cry from Bunker Hill, when our Revolutionary leaders fired the shot that changed the world? We respectfully and earnestly ask that, while rebuilding our national foundations, all forms of discrimination based on gender or race be abolished; and that our government be genuinely republican in both principle and practice: A GOVERNMENT BY THE PEOPLE, AND THE WHOLE PEOPLE; FOR THE PEOPLE, AND THE WHOLE PEOPLE.
This was the last convention ever held in the old historic Church of the Puritans. It soon passed into other hands, and where once sparkled and scintillated flashes of repartee and gems of oratory, now glitter and shine the magnificent jewels in the great establishment of Tiffany.
After this May Anniversary Miss Anthony prepared to go before the New York Constitutional Convention with speeches and petitions for the recognition of women in the new constitution. The necessary arrangements involved an immense amount of labor, and her diary says: "My trips from Albany to New York and back are like the flying of the shuttle in the loom of the weaver." At this hearing, June 27, 1867, after Mrs. Stanton had finished her address she announced that they would answer any questions, whereupon Mr. Greeley said in his drawling monotone: "Miss Anthony, you know the ballot and the bullet go together. If you vote, are you ready to fight?" Instantly she retorted: "Yes, Mr. Greeley, just as you fought in the late war—at the point of a goose-quill!" After the merriment had subsided, he continued: "When should this inalienable right of suffrage commence for young men and foreigners? Have we the right to say when it shall begin?" Miss Anthony replied: "My right as a human being is as good as that of any other human being. If you have a right to vote at twenty-one, then I have. All we ask is that you shall take down the bars and let the women and the negroes in, then we will settle all these matters." The Tribune report said this was received with "loud and prolonged applause."
This was the last convention ever held in the old historic Church of the Puritans. It soon changed hands, and where once there were sparkling exchanges of witty remarks and brilliant speeches, now the magnificent jewels in the great Tiffany establishment glitter and shine.
Miss Anthony continued with great vivacity: "Can you show me any class possessed of the franchise which is shut out of schools or degraded in the labor market, or any class but women and negroes denied any privilege they show themselves possessed of capacity to attain? Since you refuse to grant woman's demand, tell her the reason why. Men sell their votes; but did any one ever hear of their selling their right to vote? We demand that you shall recognize woman's capacity to vote." The newspaper account ended: "She closed by demanding 279 the right to vote for women as an inalienable one, and predicted that from its exercise would follow the happiest results to man, to woman, to the country, to the world at large; and took her seat amidst warm expressions of approval." In writing to her mother of this occasion she said:
After this May Anniversary, Miss Anthony got ready to present speeches and petitions to the New York Constitutional Convention for women’s recognition in the new constitution. The necessary preparations took a huge amount of effort, and her diary notes: "My trips from Albany to New York and back are like the flying of the shuttle in the loom of the weaver." At this hearing on June 27, 1867, after Mrs. Stanton finished her speech, she announced that they would answer any questions. Mr. Greeley then said in his slow, monotonous voice: "Miss Anthony, you know the ballot and the bullet go together. If you vote, are you ready to fight?" She quickly replied: "Yes, Mr. Greeley, just as you fought in the recent war—at the tip of a quill!" After the laughter died down, he continued: "When should this inalienable right of suffrage start for young men and foreigners? Do we have the right to decide when it should begin?" Miss Anthony responded: "My right as a human being is just as valid as that of any other human being. If you have the right to vote at twenty-one, then so do I. All we ask is that you remove the obstacles and let the women and the Black people in; then we will resolve all these issues." The Tribune reported that this was met with "loud and prolonged applause."
Elizabeth Cady Stanton
Miss Anthony continued with great energy: "Can you show me any group that has the right to vote and is excluded from schools or treated poorly in the job market, or any group aside from women and Black people denied any privilege that they’ve shown they’re able to achieve? Since you won’t grant women’s request, tell her why not. Men sell their votes; but has anyone ever heard of them selling their right to vote? We demand that you recognize women's ability to vote." The newspaper account ended: "She closed by demanding 279 the right to vote for women as an unalienable one, and predicted that its exercise would bring about the best outcomes for men, women, the country, and the world in general; and took her seat amidst warm expressions of approval." In writing to her mother about this occasion, she said:

We had to rush up by Wednesday night's boat, without any preparation, and passed the ordeal last night, members asking questions and stating objections. At the close the cheerful face and cordial hand of our good Mr. Reynolds were presented to me. Mr. Ely also came up to be introduced, saying he knew my father and brother well, but had never had the pleasure of my acquaintance. Ah, when my "wild heresies" become "fashionable orhodoxies," won't my acquaintance be a pleasure to other Rochester people, too? George William Curtis was delighted—said the impression made upon the members was vastly beyond anything he had imagined possible. It is always a great comfort to feel that we have not distressed our cultured friends.
Elizabeth Cady Stanton
Mrs. Stanton is going to slip out to Johnstown to spend Sunday with her mother. How I wish I could slip out to Rochester to sit a few hours in my mother's delightful east chamber, but I must hie me back to New York by tonight's boat instead.
We had to catch the boat on Wednesday night without any preparation and went through a tough meeting last night, where members asked questions and expressed their concerns. In the end, I was greeted by the friendly face and warm hand of Mr. Reynolds. Mr. Ely also came over to introduce himself, mentioning that he knew my father and brother well but had never had the pleasure of meeting me. Oh, when my "wild ideas" become "accepted beliefs," won't it be nice for other folks in Rochester to know me too? George William Curtis was excited—he said the impression made on the members was much stronger than he had ever expected. It’s always comforting to know that we haven't upset our cultured friends.
In a letter from George William Curtis, he declared: "You may count upon me not to be silent when, whether by my action or another's, this question comes before the convention." Petitions were presented by various members, signed by 28,000 men and women, asking that the constitution be so amended as to secure the right of suffrage to the women of New York. One of these was headed by Margaret Livingston Cady, mother of Mrs. Stanton, one by Gerrit Smith, one by Henry Ward Beecher, and all contained many influential names. Mr. Greeley was chairman of the committee on suffrage and, as Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton knew he would seize upon this occasion to repeat his hackneyed remark, "The best women I know do not want to vote," they wrote Mrs. Greeley to roll up a big petition in Westchester. So she got out her old chaise and, with her daughter Ida, drove over the county, collecting signatures. After all the others had been presented, Mr. Curtis arose and said: "Mr. Chairman, I hold in my hand a petition signed by Mrs. Horace Greeley and 300 other women of Westchester asking that the word 'male' be stricken from the constitution." As Mr. Greeley was about to 280 make an adverse report, his anger and embarrassment, as well as the amusement of the audience, may be imagined.[41]
Mrs. Stanton is heading out to Johnstown to spend Sunday with her mom. How I wish I could go to Rochester to spend a few hours in my mom's lovely east room, but I have to catch tonight's boat back to New York instead.
A magnificent argument in behalf of the petitions was made by Mr. Curtis, and the discussion lasted several days; but the committee handed in an adverse report, which was sustained by a large majority of the convention. When this result was announced, Anna Dickinson wrote Miss Anthony:
In a letter from George William Curtis, he stated: "You can count on me to speak up when, whether it's through my actions or someone else's, this issue comes up at the convention." Various members submitted petitions signed by 28,000 men and women, requesting that the constitution be amended to guarantee the right to vote for women in New York. One of these petitions was led by Margaret Livingston Cady, the mother of Mrs. Stanton, another by Gerrit Smith, and another by Henry Ward Beecher, all of which included many notable names. Mr. Greeley was the chairman of the committee on suffrage, and since Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton knew he would use this opportunity to repeat his tired line, "The best women I know do not want to vote," they wrote to Mrs. Greeley to gather a large petition in Westchester. So, she got out her old carriage and, with her daughter Ida, traveled around the county collecting signatures. After all the other petitions had been presented, Mr. Curtis stood up and said: "Mr. Chairman, I have in my hand a petition signed by Mrs. Horace Greeley and 300 other women of Westchester asking that the word 'male' be removed from the constitution." As Mr. Greeley was about to 280 make a negative report, one can only imagine his anger and embarrassment, as well as the audience's amusement.[41]
My blood boiled, my nerves thrilled, as I read from day to day the reports of the convention debate. Reasons urged for the enfranchisement of paupers, of idiots, of the ignorant, the degraded, the infamous—none for women! The exquisite care with which men guard their own rights in the most vulnerable of their sex—the silence, the scorn, the ridicule with which they pass by or allude to our claims—great God! it is too much for endurance and patience. Daily I pray for a tongue of flame and inspired lips to awaken the sleeping, arouse the careless, shake to trembling and overthrow the insolence of opposition.... After men and women have alike borne the burden and heat of battle, to mark the absolute silence with which these men regard the rights of half the race, while they squabble and wrangle, debate and contend, for exact justice to the poorest and meanest man—to mark this spectacle is to be filled with alternate pity and disgust.
A powerful argument supporting the petitions was presented by Mr. Curtis, and the discussion went on for several days; however, the committee submitted a negative report, which was upheld by a large majority of the convention. When this outcome was announced, Anna Dickinson wrote to Miss Anthony:
Naturally the women felt highly indignant at the treatment they had received, especially from the Republican party, which was so deeply indebted for their services and from which they had every reason to expect recognition and support, and they did not hesitate freely to express themselves. Soon after their defeat at Albany Mr. Curtis wrote: "I beg you and your friends to understand that the real support of this measure, the support from conviction, comes from men who believe in Republican principles, and not from the Democracy as such." While 281 a close analysis might prove the truth of this assertion, the women were not able to find comfort in the fact. As a party, the Republicans were opposed to their claims, and with the immense majority of its members completely under the domination of party, the result could be nothing but defeat. Not only was this the case, but the leaders, who dictated its policy and directed its action, although avowed believers in the political rights of women, did not hesitate to sacrifice them for the success of the party.
My blood was boiling and my nerves were shot as I read the daily reports from the convention debate. They argued for the voting rights of the poor, the uneducated, the marginalized, and the notorious—yet nothing for women! The way men meticulously protect their own rights, even for the most vulnerable among them—the silence, the contempt, the mockery with which they ignore or dismiss our demands—good grief! It’s too much to handle. Every day, I wish I had a passionate voice and inspiring words to wake up the complacent, shake the indifferent, and challenge the arrogance of those against us... After both men and women have faced the struggles and challenges of battle, witnessing the complete silence with which these men treat the rights of half the population while they argue over justice for the poorest and most insignificant man—it’s a sight that fills me with equal parts pity and disgust.
Lucy Stone and her husband had returned from Kansas the last of May, reporting a good prospect for carrying the woman suffrage amendment; but the Republicans there soon became frightened lest the one enfranchising the negro should be lost and, in order to lighten their ship, decided to throw the women overboard. Although the proposition had been submitted by a Republican legislature and signed by a Republican governor, the Republican State Committee resolved to remain "neutral," and then sent out speakers who, with the sanction of the committee, bitterly assailed this amendment and those advocating it. Prominent among these were P.B. Plumb, I.S. Kalloch, Judge T.C. Sears and C.V. Eskridge. The Democratic State Convention vigorously denounced the amendment. The State Temperance Society endorsed it, and this aroused the active enmity of the Germans. Eastern politicians warned those of Kansas not to imperil the negro's chance by taking up the woman question. Mr. Greeley, who at the beginning of the campaign warmly espoused woman suffrage in Kansas,[42] soured by his experience in the New York Constitutional Convention, withdrew the support of the Tribune and threw his influence against the amendment. Even the Independent, under the editorship of Tilton, was so dominated by party that, notwithstanding the appeals of the 282 women, it had not one word of endorsement. There was scarcely a Republican home in that State which did not take one or the other of these papers, looking upon its utterances as inspired, and their influence was so great that their support alone could have carried the amendment.
Naturally, the women felt very angry about the treatment they had received, especially from the Republican Party, which owed so much to their efforts and from which they expected recognition and support. They didn't hold back in expressing their feelings. Soon after their defeat in Albany, Mr. Curtis wrote: "I urge you and your friends to recognize that the real support for this measure, the support from genuine belief, comes from men who value Republican principles, not from the Democracy as such." While 281 a close analysis might confirm this claim, the women couldn't find comfort in it. As a party, the Republicans opposed their demands, and with most of its members completely controlled by the party line, defeat was inevitable. Not only was this the case, but the leaders, who shaped its policy and actions, even though they publicly supported women's political rights, did not hesitate to prioritize the party's success over these rights.
Such was the situation when Miss Anthony started with Mrs. Stanton for Kansas, hoping to turn the tide. She learned, however, to her great disappointment, that no more money was available from the Jackson or the Hovey fund. The proposed campaign would call for so large an amount that any other woman would have given up in despair. Even the stock of literature had been exhausted and there was nothing left in the way of tracts or pamphlets. Undaunted, she set forth under a blazing July sun and tramped up and down Broadway soliciting advertisements for the fly-leaves of the new literature she meant to have printed.[43] She then visited various friends who were interested in the woman's cause, and received such sums as they could spare, but their number was not large and the demands were numerous. She also sent out many appealing letters, like this to her friend Mrs. Wright:
Lucy Stone and her husband returned from Kansas at the end of May, reporting a good chance for passing the women's suffrage amendment. However, the Republicans there quickly got scared that the amendment to enfranchise Black voters would be lost and, to lighten their load, decided to cast the women aside. Even though the proposal had been put forward by a Republican legislature and signed by a Republican governor, the Republican State Committee chose to stay "neutral," then sent out speakers who, with the committee's approval, harshly criticized the amendment and its supporters. Among these speakers were P.B. Plumb, I.S. Kalloch, Judge T.C. Sears, and C.V. Eskridge. The Democratic State Convention strongly condemned the amendment. The State Temperance Society endorsed it, which angered the German community. Politicians from the East cautioned Kansas politicians not to jeopardize the chance for Black enfranchisement by focusing on women's rights. Mr. Greeley, who had initially supported women's suffrage in Kansas,[42] became disillusioned by his experience at the New York Constitutional Convention, withdrew the Tribune's support, and opposed the amendment. Even the Independent, under Tilton's editorship, was so influenced by party loyalty that, despite the women's appeals, it had no supportive words to say. There was hardly a Republican household in the state that didn't subscribe to one or the other of these newspapers, viewing their statements as authoritative, and their influence was so significant that their backing alone could have secured the amendment.
Mrs. Stanton and I start for Kansas Wednesday evening, stopping at Rochester just to look at my mother and my dear sister, sick so long, and I devoting scarce an hour to her the whole year. How will the gods make up my record on home affections?
Such was the situation when Miss Anthony set out with Mrs. Stanton for Kansas, hoping to change things. However, to her great disappointment, she learned that no more money was available from the Jackson or the Hovey fund. The proposed campaign would require such a large amount that any other woman would have given up in despair. Even the supply of literature had been completely depleted, leaving nothing in terms of tracts or pamphlets. Undeterred, she ventured out under a scorching July sun and walked up and down Broadway, soliciting advertisements for the fly-leaves of the new literature she planned to have printed.[43] She then visited various friends who supported the women's cause and received whatever sums they could spare, though their numbers were few and the needs were many. She also sent out numerous heartfelt letters, like this one to her friend Mrs. Wright:
You see our little trust fund—$1,800—of Jackson money is wrenched from us. The Hovey Committee gave us our last dollar in May, to balance last year's work, and I am responsible for stereotyping and printing the tracts, for the New York office expenses, and for Mrs. Stanton and myself in Kansas, in all not less than $2,000. Not one of the friends wants the Kansas work to go undone, and to do it, both tracts and lecturers must be sent out. We need money as never before. I have to take from my lean hundreds, that never dreamed of reaching thousands, to pay our travelling expenses. It takes $50 each for bare railroad tickets. We are advertised to speak every day—Sundays not excepted—from September 2, one week from today, to November 6. What an awful undertaking it looks to me, for I know Kansas possibilities in fare, lodging and travelling. I never was so nearly driven to desperation—so much waiting to be done, and not a penny but in hope and trust. Oh, if 283 somebody else could go and I stay here, I could raise the money; but there is no one and I must go. We must not lose Kansas now, at least not from lack of work done according to our best ability.
Mrs. Stanton and I are going to Kansas on Wednesday evening, stopping in Rochester just to visit my mother and my dear sister, who have been sick for so long, and I’ve barely spent an hour with her all year. How will the gods judge me for my family connections?
Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton left New York August 28, 1867. It was necessary then to change cars several times to reach Atchison, their first appointment, and the trains being late they missed connections and were finally stranded at Macon City over Sunday. They found that while Mr. Wood had made out a very elaborate plan for their meetings and had posters printed for each place, these still remained piled up in the printing office. After making a two weeks' tour of the principal towns with Mrs. Stanton, Miss Anthony saw that an entire new program was necessary, that the meetings must be better advertised and there must be a central distributing point for tracts, etc., so she stationed herself at Lawrence. Senators Pomeroy and Ross gave the full use of their "franking" privilege and the former contributed $50 besides.
As you know, our little trust fund—$1,800—from Jackson is being taken away from us. The Hovey Committee gave us our last dollar in May to cover last year’s expenses, and I’m responsible for creating and printing the tracts, for the New York office costs, and for the expenses for Mrs. Stanton and myself in Kansas, totaling at least $2,000. No one among our friends wants the work in Kansas to be neglected, and to make it happen, we need to send out both tracts and speakers. We need money now more than ever. I have to dip into my small savings, which I never thought would reach thousands, to cover our travel costs. It costs $50 each just for basic train tickets. We are scheduled to speak every day—Sundays included—from September 2, one week from today, to November 6. This feels like an overwhelming task to me, knowing the costs in Kansas for travel, food, and lodging. I’ve never been this close to desperation—so much waiting to be done, and not a penny, just hope and trust. Oh, if 283 someone else could go while I stay here, I could raise the money; but there’s no one, and I have to go. We must not lose Kansas now, at least not for lack of effort based on our best abilities.
The Republicans called a mass meeting at Lawrence, September 5, of citizens from all parts of the State, "for consultation concerning the best method for defeating the proposition to strike the word 'male' from the Constitution of Kansas, and for arranging a canvass of the State in opposition to this amendment." A newspaper account said:
Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton left New York on August 28, 1867. They had to change trains several times to get to Atchison, their first appointment, and since the trains were delayed, they missed connections and ended up stuck in Macon City over Sunday. They discovered that while Mr. Wood had created a detailed plan for their meetings and had printed posters for each location, these were still piled up in the printing office. After touring the main towns for two weeks with Mrs. Stanton, Miss Anthony realized that a completely new plan was needed, that the meetings had to be promoted better, and that there needed to be a central location for distributing tracts and other materials, so she set up base in Lawrence. Senators Pomeroy and Ross fully utilized their "franking" privilege, and the former also contributed $50.
On motion of Judge G. W. Smith, Messrs. T. C. Sears, Rev. S. E. McBurney and C. V. Eskridge were appointed a committee on resolutions, and reported the following, which were unanimously adopted:
The Republicans held a big meeting in Lawrence on September 5, bringing together citizens from across the State, "to discuss the best way to defeat the proposal to remove the word 'male' from the Constitution of Kansas, and to organize a campaign across the State against this amendment." A newspaper report stated:
Resolved, That we recognize the doctrine of manhood suffrage as a principle of the Republican party, supported by reason, experience and justice.
On the motion of Judge G. W. Smith, Mr. T. C. Sears, Rev. S. E. McBurney, and C. V. Eskridge were appointed to a resolutions committee, and they reported the following, which were unanimously approved:
Resolved, That we are unqualifiedly opposed to the dogma of "Female Suffrage," and while we do not recognize it as a party question, the attempt of certain persons within the State, and from without it, to enforce it upon the people of the State, demands the unqualified opposition of every citizen who respects the laws of society and the well-being and good name of our young commonwealth.
Resolved, That we recognize the principle of voting rights for all men as a core belief of the Republican party, supported by reason, experience, and justice.
On motion, the executive committee were instructed to open a campaign based upon the foregoing resolutions; and an Anti-Female Suffrage Committee appointed of one member from each county.
Resolved, That we are entirely opposed to the notion of "Female Suffrage," and while we don’t view it as a political issue, the attempts of certain individuals both inside and outside the State to force it on the people require the full resistance of every citizen who cares about the laws of society and the welfare and reputation of our growing commonwealth.
At the beginning of the campaign, Republican leaders and newspapers were in favor of woman suffrage, but when it was 284 feared that its advocacy would hazard the chances of negro suffrage, they repudiated the amendment. While it was by no means certain that all women when enfranchised would vote the Republican ticket, there was no doubt whatever that the negroes would, and so it was party expediency to sacrifice the women. Notwithstanding the opposition of both Republican and Democratic politicians, the woman suffrage advocates had large and friendly audiences and the amendment would have been carried beyond a doubt, if it had had the continued sanction of Republican leaders. In October, stung by the reproaches of the women, a number of influential Republicans from different parts of the country[44] sent out an appeal which was published in the newspapers of Kansas, but this was wholly offset by the active opposition of the State Committee.
Upon motion, the executive committee was directed to launch a campaign based on the above resolutions, and an Anti-Female Suffrage Committee was formed with one member representing each county.
The hardships of a campaign in the early days of Kansas scarcely can be described. Much of the travelling had to be done in wagons, fording streams, crossing the treeless prairies, losing the faintly outlined road in the darkness of night, sleeping in cabins, drinking poor water and subsisting on bacon, soda-raised bread, canned meats and vegetables, dried fruits and coffee without cream or milk, sweetened with sorghum. The nights offered the greatest trial, owing to a species of insect supposed to breed in the cotton wood trees. In one of her letters home Miss Anthony says: "It is now 10 A. M. and Mrs. Stanton is trying to sleep, as we have not slept a wink for several nights, but even in broad daylight our tormentors are so active that it is impossible. We find them in our bonnets, and this morning I think we picked a thousand out of the ruffles of our dresses. I can assure you that my avoirdupois is being rapidly reduced. It is a nightly battle with the infernals.... Twenty-five years hence it will be delightful to live in this beautiful State, but now, alas, its women 285 especially see hard times, and there is no poetry in their lives." She was not given to complaining but again she writes:
At the start of the campaign, Republican leaders and newspapers supported women's voting rights, but when they worried that pushing for it would jeopardize the chances for Black voting rights, they backed away from the amendment. While it was uncertain that all women would vote for the Republican party once they had the right to vote, there was no doubt that Black voters would, so it became politically convenient to sacrifice women's rights. Despite facing opposition from both Republican and Democratic politicians, women’s suffrage advocates drew large and supportive crowds, and the amendment would have certainly passed if Republican leaders had continued to back it. In October, feeling pressured by women's criticisms, several influential Republicans from different regions of the country[44] issued an appeal that was published in Kansas newspapers, but this was completely undermined by the active opposition from the State Committee.
It is enough to exhaust the patience of Job, the slip-shod way in which telegraph, express and postoffices are managed here. It is almost impossible to arrange for halls or to get literature delivered at the point where it is sent. We speak in school houses, barns, sawmills, log cabins with boards for seats and lanterns hung around for lights, but people come twenty miles to hear us. The opposition follow close upon our track, but they make converts for us. The fact is that most of them are notoriously wanting in right action toward women. Their objections are as low and scurrilous as they used to be in the East fifteen or twenty years ago. There is a perfect greed for our tracts, and the friends say they do more missionary work than we ourselves. If our suffrage advocates only would go into the new settlements at the very beginning, they could mould public sentiment, but they wait until the comforts of life are attainable and then find the ground occupied by the enemy.
The challenges of the campaign in the early days of Kansas are hard to describe. A lot of the travel had to be done in wagons, crossing streams, navigating the treeless prairies, losing the barely visible road in the dark, sleeping in cabins, drinking bad water, and living on bacon, soda bread, canned meats and veggies, dried fruit, and coffee with no cream or milk, sweetened with sorghum. The nights were the toughest part, thanks to a type of insect thought to breed in the cottonwood trees. In one of her letters home, Miss Anthony writes: "It's now 10 A.M., and Mrs. Stanton is trying to sleep since we haven't had a wink of rest for several nights. But even during the day, our tormentors are so active that it's impossible. We find them in our hats, and this morning I think we picked a thousand out of the ruffles of our dresses. I assure you, I’m losing weight quickly. It's a nightly battle with these pests.... Twenty-five years from now, it will be wonderful to live in this beautiful state, but right now, sadly, its women 285 especially are facing tough times, and there's no poetry in their lives." She wasn't one to complain, but again she writes:
Of course they were guests in some beautiful homes, free from all discomforts, but these were the exceptions. A striking instance of the first reception usually accorded the two ladies is given by Mrs. Starrett, in her Kansas chapter in the History of Woman Suffrage:
It really tests anyone's patience how carelessly the telegraph, express, and post offices are run here. It’s nearly impossible to book venues or get materials delivered to the right places. We give talks in schoolhouses, barns, sawmills, and log cabins with wooden benches and lanterns for light, yet people travel twenty miles to hear us. The opposition is always right behind us, but they often end up attracting people to our cause. The truth is, most of them are clearly poor in how they treat women. Their objections are just as low and nasty as they were in the East fifteen or twenty years ago. There’s a big demand for our tracts, and our supporters claim they do more outreach than we do ourselves. If our suffrage advocates would just go into the new settlements right from the start, they could influence public opinion, but they wait until life is more comfortable and then find the enemy already has a strong presence.
All were prepared beforehand to do Mrs. Stanton homage for her talents and fame, but many persons who had formed their ideas of Miss Anthony from the unfriendly remarks in opposition papers had conceived a prejudice against her. Perhaps I can not better illustrate how she everywhere overcame and dispelled this prejudice than by relating my own experience. A convention was called at Lawrence, and the friends of woman suffrage were asked to entertain strangers who might come from abroad. Ex-Governor Robinson asked me to entertain Mrs. Stanton. We had all things in readiness when I received a note stating that she had found relatives in town with whom she would stop, and Miss Anthony would come instead. I hastily put on bonnet and shawl, saying, "I won't have her and I am going to tell Governor Robinson so."
Of course they were guests in some beautiful homes, free from all discomforts, but these were the exceptions. A striking example of the first reception typically given to the two ladies is provided by Mrs. Starrett, in her Kansas chapter in the History of Woman Suffrage:
At the gate I met a dignified Quaker-looking lady with a small satchel and a black and white shawl on her arm. Offering her hand she said, "I am Miss Anthony, and I have been sent to you for entertainment during the convention."... Half disarmed by her genial manner and frank, kindly face, I led the way into the house and said I would have her stay to tea and then we would see what farther arrangements could be made. While I was looking after things she gained the affections of the babies; and seeing the door of my sister's sick-room open, she went in and in a short time had so won the heart and soothed instead of exciting the nervous sufferer, entertaining her with accounts of the outside world, that by the time tea was over I was ready to do anything if Miss Anthony would only stay with 286 us. And stay she did for over six weeks, and we parted from her as from a beloved and helpful friend. I found afterwards that in the same way she made the most ardent friends wherever she became personally known.
Everyone was ready to show their appreciation for Mrs. Stanton's talents and fame, but many who had heard negative remarks about Miss Anthony in opposing articles had developed a bias against her. I think the best way to illustrate how she consistently overcame and put an end to this bias is by sharing my own experience. A convention was organized in Lawrence, and supporters of women's suffrage were asked to host visitors coming from out of town. Ex-Governor Robinson asked me to host Mrs. Stanton. We had everything set up when I received a note saying she had found relatives in town and would be staying with them, with Miss Anthony coming instead. I quickly put on my bonnet and shawl, saying, "I won't have her, and I'm going to let Governor Robinson know."
The physical discomforts could have been borne without a murmur, but it was the treachery of friends, both East and West, which brought the discouragement and heart-sickness. One of the active opponents who canvassed the State was Charles Langston, the negro orator, whose brother John M. had met with much kindness from Miss Anthony and her family before the war. When one considers how these women had spent the best part of their lives in working for the freedom of the negro, their humiliation can be imagined at seeing educated colored men laboring with might and main to prevent white women from obtaining the same privileges which they were asking for themselves. It was a bitter dose and one which women have been compelled to take in every State where a campaign for woman suffrage has been made.
At the gate, I met a calm lady in Quaker style with a small bag and a black and white shawl over her arm. She offered her hand and said, "I'm Miss Anthony, and I've been sent to keep you company during the convention." Halfway won over by her friendly demeanor and sincere, warm face, I led her into the house and invited her to stay for tea, suggesting we could discuss further arrangements later. While I took care of things, she charmed the babies; noticing the door to my sister's sick-room was open, she went in and quickly won over the nervous patient, calming her with stories from the outside world. By the time tea was over, I was eager to do anything if Miss Anthony would just stay with us. And she did, for more than six weeks, and we parted ways as if saying goodbye to a beloved and supportive friend. I later learned she also formed deep connections with everyone she got to know personally.
The Hutchinsons—John, his son Henry and lovely daughter Viola—were giving a series of concerts, travelling in a handsome carriage drawn by a span of white horses. As they had one vacant seat, they were carrying Rev. Olympia Brown, a talented Universalist minister from Massachusetts, who had been canvassing the State for several months, and she spoke for suffrage while they sang for both the negro and woman. Hon. Charles Robinson, the first Free State governor of Kansas, volunteered to take Mrs. Stanton in his carriage and pay all expenses. Their hard trip killed a pair of mules and a pair of Indian ponies. Miss Anthony directed affairs from her post at Lawrence and made herculean efforts to raise money for the campaign, which thus far was dependent on the collections at the meetings. There was scarcely a hope of victory.
The physical discomforts could have been tolerated without complaint, but it was the betrayal by friends, both from the East and the West, that brought discouragement and heartache. One of the main opponents actively campaigning in the State was Charles Langston, the Black orator, whose brother John M. had received a lot of kindness from Miss Anthony and her family before the war. When you think about how these women dedicated their lives to fighting for the freedom of Black people, you can imagine their humiliation at seeing educated Black men working tirelessly to stop white women from gaining the same rights they were asking for themselves. It was a bitter pill to swallow, one that women have had to endure in every State where there has been a campaign for women's suffrage.
On the 7th of October came a telegram from George Francis Train, who was then at Omaha, largely interested in the Union Pacific railroad. He had been invited by the secretary and other members of the St. Louis Suffrage Association to go to Kansas and help in the woman's campaign. Accordingly he telegraphed that if the committee wanted him he was ready, 287 would pay his own expenses and win every Democratic vote. Miss Anthony never had seen Mr. Train; she merely knew of him as very wealthy and eccentric. The Republicans not only had forsaken the women but were waging open war upon them. The sole hope of carrying the amendment was by adding enough Democratic votes to those of Republicans who would not obey their party orders to vote against it. Every member of the woman suffrage committee who could be communicated with—Rev. and Mrs. Starrett, Rev. John S. Brown and daughter Sarah, Judge Thatcher and others—said that Mr. Train was an eloquent speaker and advised that he be invited, so the following telegram was sent: "Come to Kansas and stump the State for equal rights and woman suffrage. The people want you, the women want you. S. N. Wood, M. W. Reynolds, Charles Robinson, Mrs. J. H. Lane, E. Cady Stanton, Susan B. Anthony."
The Hutchinsons—John, his son Henry, and his lovely daughter Viola—were putting on a series of concerts, traveling in a stylish carriage pulled by a team of white horses. Since they had one empty seat, they were giving a ride to Rev. Olympia Brown, a talented Universalist minister from Massachusetts, who had been campaigning in the state for several months, advocating for suffrage while they sang for both Black people and women. Hon. Charles Robinson, the first Free State governor of Kansas, offered to take Mrs. Stanton in his carriage and cover all expenses. Their tough journey took the lives of a pair of mules and a pair of Indian ponies. Miss Anthony managed everything from her position in Lawrence and made tremendous efforts to raise money for the campaign, which so far relied solely on the donations collected at the meetings. There was hardly any hope of victory.
Mr. Train accepted and Miss Anthony at once began laying out a route for him and telegraphed: "Begin at Leavenworth Monday, October 21. Yes, with your help we shall triumph. All shall be ready for you." If she had had any political experience, she would have made his appointments along the railroad, whose employes were largely Irish, with whom he was very popular on account of his Fenian affiliations; but in her ignorance, she arranged for most of the meetings in small towns off the railroads, where the inhabitants were chiefly Republicans.
On October 7th, a telegram arrived from George Francis Train, who was in Omaha and heavily invested in the Union Pacific Railroad. He had been invited by the secretary and other members of the St. Louis Suffrage Association to travel to Kansas and assist with the women’s campaign. He replied that if the committee needed him, he was ready, would cover his own expenses, and would win every Democratic vote. Miss Anthony had never met Mr. Train; she only knew he was very wealthy and eccentric. The Republicans had not only abandoned the women but were actively opposing them. The only chance of passing the amendment was by gaining enough Democratic votes to supplement those Republicans who resisted their party’s orders to vote against it. Every member of the woman suffrage committee who could be reached—Rev. and Mrs. Starrett, Rev. John S. Brown and his daughter Sarah, Judge Thatcher, and others—agreed that Mr. Train was an inspiring speaker and recommended inviting him. Thus, the following telegram was sent: "Come to Kansas and campaign for equal rights and woman suffrage. The people want you, the women want you. S. N. Wood, M. W. Reynolds, Charles Robinson, Mrs. J. H. Lane, E. Cady Stanton, Susan B. Anthony."
Mark W. Reynolds, editor of the Democratic paper at Lawrence, agreed to accompany him; but when the time arrived, although Mr. Reynolds had joined in the telegram of invitation, he took to the woods, going on a buffalo hunt without any excuse or explanation. Mr. Train made his first speech at Leavenworth, Mayor John A. Halderman presiding, Colonel D. R. Anthony, Rev. William Starrett and other Republicans on the platform. Laing's Hall was packed with Irishmen and when he first mentioned woman suffrage all of them hissed, but after he pointed out the absurdity of letting the negroes vote and shutting out their own mothers and wives, the tide 288 turned and they cheered for the women. The next meeting was at Lawrence, and here Mr. Train objected decidedly to the route marked out, saying it was too rough a trip for any man, and as Mr. Reynolds had deserted him he was for giving up the tour. Not so Miss Anthony; she said: "Your offer and his were accepted in good faith. The engagements have been made and hand-bills sent to every post-office within fifty miles of the towns where meetings are to be held. The next announcement is for Olathe tomorrow night. I shall take Mr. Reynolds' place. At one o'clock I shall send a carriage to your hotel. You can do as you please about going. If you decline I shall go there and to all the other meetings alone." He replied: "Miss Anthony, you know how to make a man feel ashamed."
Mr. Train agreed, and Miss Anthony immediately started planning a route for him, sending a telegram: "Start in Leavenworth on Monday, October 21. Yes, with your support we will succeed. Everything will be ready for you." If she had any political experience, she would have scheduled his stops along the railroad, where the workers were mostly Irish, and he was quite popular because of his Fenian connections; but in her lack of knowledge, she set up most of the meetings in small towns away from the railroads, where the residents were mainly Republicans.
The next day when the carriage came to the Starretts, for Miss Anthony, Mr. Train was in it and, with her heart in her throat, she took her seat beside him. The situation was entirely unforeseen and decidedly embarrassing, but she never turned back, never allowed any earthly obstacle to stand in her way. There was a crowded house at Olathe and when the meeting closed two young men announced that they had been sent to take Mr. Reynolds and Mr. Train to Paola, and they would have to leave at 4 A. M. Miss Anthony was the guest of Rev. and Mrs. J. C. Beach. Next morning they started on time in a pouring rain, stopping at a little wayside inn for breakfast at six. The meeting was at eleven, in the Methodist church.
Mark W. Reynolds, the editor of the Democratic paper in Lawrence, agreed to go with him; but when the time came, even though Mr. Reynolds had participated in the invitation telegram, he disappeared into the woods to go buffalo hunting without any excuse or explanation. Mr. Train gave his first speech in Leavenworth, with Mayor John A. Halderman presiding and Colonel D. R. Anthony, Rev. William Starrett, and other Republicans on the platform. Laing's Hall was filled with Irishmen, and when he first mentioned women's suffrage, they all hissed. However, after he highlighted the absurdity of allowing Black people to vote while excluding their own mothers and wives, the crowd's reaction shifted, and they cheered for women's rights. The next meeting was in Lawrence, where Mr. Train strongly disagreed with the planned route, claiming it was too rough for anyone to endure. Since Mr. Reynolds had abandoned him, he thought about canceling the tour. But Miss Anthony said, "Your offer and his were accepted in good faith. The commitments have been made and flyers sent to every post office within fifty miles of the towns where meetings are scheduled. The next event is in Olathe tomorrow night. I will take Mr. Reynolds' place. At one o'clock, I’ll send a carriage to your hotel. You can decide whether to go or not. If you choose not to, I’ll head there and to all the other meetings by myself." He responded, "Miss Anthony, you know how to make a man feel ashamed."
After it was over the county superintendent of schools, Mr. Bannister, took them to Ottawa in a lumber wagon. The steady rain had put the roads in a fearful condition and by the time they reached the river bottoms it was very dark and pouring in torrents. The driver lost his way and brought them up against a brush fence. Mr. Train jumped out of the vehicle, took off his coat so that his white shirtsleeves would show and thus guided the team back to the road; then he and the county superintendent took turns walking in front of the horses. The river finally was crossed and they reached Ottawa at 9 o'clock. Mr. Train 289 was very fastidious and, no matter how late the hour, never would appear in public before he had changed his gray travelling suit for full dress costume with white vest and lavender kid gloves, declaring that he would not insult any audience by shabby clothes. This evening he made no exception and so, while he went to the hotel, Miss Anthony, wet, hungry and exhausted, made her way straight to the hall to see what had become of their audience.
The next day, when the carriage arrived at the Starretts for Miss Anthony, Mr. Train was inside it. With her heart racing, she took her seat next to him. The situation was completely unexpected and quite awkward, but she never turned back and never let any obstacles get in her way. The house in Olathe was packed, and when the meeting ended, two young men announced that they had been sent to take Mr. Reynolds and Mr. Train to Paola, and they needed to leave at 4 A.M. Miss Anthony was the guest of Rev. and Mrs. J.C. Beach. The next morning, they set off on time in pouring rain, stopping at a small roadside inn for breakfast at six. The meeting was scheduled for eleven at the Methodist church.
She found that it had been taken in charge by General Blunt, one of the Republican campaign orators, and as she entered, he was making a violent attack on woman suffrage. Her arrival was not noticed and she concluded to sit quietly down in a corner and let matters take their course. A stairway led from some lower region up to the platform and, just as the speaker was declaring, "This man Train is an infernal traitor and a vile copperhead," Mr. Train appeared at the top of the stairs. The audience broke into a roar, and in a few moments he had the general under a scathing fire.
After it was over, the county superintendent of schools, Mr. Bannister, took them to Ottawa in a lumber wagon. The steady rain had made the roads really bad, and by the time they reached the river bottoms, it was very dark and pouring. The driver got lost and ended up against a brush fence. Mr. Train jumped out of the vehicle, took off his coat so his white shirtsleeves would show, and guided the team back to the road. Then he and the county superintendent took turns walking in front of the horses. They finally crossed the river and reached Ottawa at 9 o'clock. Mr. Train 289 was very particular about his appearance and, no matter how late it was, he would never go out in public before changing from his gray travel suit into formal attire with a white vest and lavender gloves, insisting that he wouldn’t disrespect any audience with messy clothes. This evening was no different, so while he headed to the hotel, Miss Anthony, wet, hungry, and exhausted, went straight to the hall to see what had happened to their audience.
From Ottawa they travelled, still in a lumber wagon, to Mound City and then to Fort Scott, where they had an immense audience. After the meeting Train went to the newspaper office and wrote out his speech, which filled two pages of the Monitor, and Miss Anthony and the friends spent all of Sunday in wrapping and mailing these papers. From here they drove to Humboldt in a mail wagon, stopping for dinner at a little "half-way house," a cabin with no floor. Miss Anthony retains a lively recollection of this place, for the hostess brought a platter of fried pork, swimming in grease, and in her haste emptied the contents the whole length of her light gray travelling dress. They found many people ill, and Mr. Train always prescribed not a drop of green tea, not a mouthful of pork, though that was the only meat they could get, plenty of fruit, though there was none to be had in Kansas, and a thorough bath every morning, although there was not enough water to wash the dishes. During this trip he stopped at hotels, but Miss Anthony usually was invited to stay with 290 families who were either her personal friends or warm advocates of the cause she represented.
She discovered that General Blunt, one of the Republican campaign speakers, had taken charge, and as she walked in, he was making a harsh attack on women's right to vote. No one noticed her arrival, so she decided to quietly sit in a corner and let things unfold. A staircase from below led up to the platform, and just as the speaker was saying, "This man Train is a dirty traitor and a disgusting copperhead," Mr. Train appeared at the top of the stairs. The audience erupted in cheers, and in no time, he had the general facing intense criticism.
So on they went, to Leroy, Burlington, Emporia, Junction City. It was 9 o'clock when they reached the last and, as usual, Miss Anthony had to make her speech without change of dress, and a half hour later Mr. Train stepped on the platform, refreshed and resplendent. His first words were: "When Miss Anthony gets back to New York she is going to start a woman suffrage paper. Its name is to be The Revolution; its motto, 'Men, their rights, and nothing more; women, their rights, and nothing less.' This paper is to be a weekly, price $2 per year; its editors, Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Parker Pillsbury; its proprietor, Susan B. Anthony. Let everybody subscribe for it!" Miss Anthony was dumbfounded. During the long journey that day, he had asked her why the equal rights people did not have a paper and she had replied that it was not for lack of brains but want of money. "Will not Greeley and Beecher and Phillips and Tilton advance the money?" "No, they say this is the negro's hour and no time to advocate woman suffrage." "Well," said he, "I will give you the money." She had not taken him seriously and was amazed when he made this public statement, announcing name, price, editors, motto and everything complete.
From Ottawa, they traveled in a lumber wagon to Mound City and then to Fort Scott, where they had a huge audience. After the meeting, Train went to the newspaper office and wrote out his speech, which filled two pages of the Monitor. Miss Anthony and their friends spent all of Sunday wrapping and mailing these papers. From there, they drove to Humboldt in a mail wagon, stopping for dinner at a little "half-way house," a cabin with no floor. Miss Anthony vividly remembers this place because the hostess brought out a platter of fried pork swimming in grease, and in her haste, spilled the entire contents all over her light gray traveling dress. They encountered many people who were sick, and Mr. Train always advised against any green tea and any pork, even though that was the only meat available; he suggested plenty of fruit, even though there was none to be found in Kansas, and a thorough bath every morning, despite there not being enough water to wash the dishes. During this trip, he stayed at hotels, but Miss Anthony was usually invited to stay with 290 families who were either her personal friends or strong supporters of the cause she represented.
Geo. Francis Train
So they continued on to Leroy, Burlington, Emporia, Junction City. It was 9 o'clock when they arrived at the last stop, and, as usual, Miss Anthony had to give her speech without changing her outfit. Half an hour later, Mr. Train stepped up to the platform, looking refreshed and impressive. His opening words were: "When Miss Anthony returns to New York, she's going to launch a women’s suffrage newspaper. It's going to be called The Revolution, with the motto: 'Men, their rights, and nothing more; women, their rights, and nothing less.' This paper will be weekly, priced at $2 per year; the editors will be Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Parker Pillsbury; and the owner will be Susan B. Anthony. Let everyone subscribe!" Miss Anthony was taken aback. During their long journey that day, he had asked her why the equal rights activists didn't have a newspaper, and she had answered that it wasn't for lack of intelligence but a shortage of funds. "Won't Greeley, Beecher, Phillips, and Tilton chip in the money?" "No, they say this is the hour for the negro and not the time to push for women's suffrage." "Well," he said, "I'll provide the money." She hadn’t taken him seriously, so she was astonished when he made this public announcement, revealing the name, price, editors, motto, and everything else in full.

They spoke at Topeka and Wyandotte and reached Leavenworth the Sunday previous to election. Mr. Train spent the evening at Colonel Anthony's, entertaining them in his inimitable manner till midnight, and after he left the colonel declared that "he knew more about more things than any man living." Governor Robinson and Mrs. Stanton were to close the campaign in this city the day before election, and the meeting had been thoroughly advertised, but at the last moment they telegraphed that they would be unable to arrive till evening, so it was decided that Mr. Train should remain at Leavenworth to speak in the afternoon, and Miss Anthony 291 should keep the engagement at Atchison, announcing Mr. Train for the evening. This she did, but at night, when a great crowd had assembled, a telegram brought word that the cars were off the track and he could not reach that city. There was nothing for her to do but make a short speech and adjourn the meeting.
Geo. Francis Train
Mr. Train had promised Miss Anthony that he really would advance the money to start a paper and, in addition, had proposed to defray all the expenses of Mrs. Stanton and herself if they would join him in a lecture tour of the principal cities on the way eastward. It was essential, therefore, for her to have a talk with him before she could make a definite statement to Mrs. Stanton, and her only chance for this was to cross the Missouri river and wait for the belated train from Leavenworth. She found the ferryboats had stopped running for the night, but George Martin, chairman of the suffrage committee of Atchison, offered to take her across in a skiff. Undaunted, she seated herself therein and in the dense darkness was safely landed on the opposite shore. Here she boarded the cars and went to St. Joseph where she met Mr. Train, made the necessary arrangements and returned to Leavenworth by the first train.
They spoke in Topeka and Wyandotte and arrived in Leavenworth the Sunday before the election. Mr. Train spent the evening at Colonel Anthony's, entertaining them in his unique way until midnight. After he left, the colonel remarked that "he knows more about more things than any man alive." Governor Robinson and Mrs. Stanton were supposed to wrap up the campaign in the city the day before the election, and the event had been fully advertised. However, at the last minute, they sent a message saying they couldn’t arrive until the evening. So, it was decided that Mr. Train would stay in Leavenworth to speak in the afternoon, while Miss Anthony 291 would keep the engagement in Atchison, announcing Mr. Train for the evening. She did that, but at night, when a large crowd had gathered, a telegram arrived saying the trains were off the tracks and he wouldn’t be able to get to the city. All she could do was give a short speech and adjourn the meeting.
On election day the Hutchinsons, Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton, in open carriages, visited all the polling-places in Leavenworth, where the two ladies spoke and the Hutchinsons sang. Both amendments were overwhelmingly defeated, that for negro suffrage receiving 10,843 votes, and that for woman suffrage 9,070, out of a total of about 30,000. These 9,000 votes were the first ever cast in the United States for the enfranchisement of women. How many of them were Republican and how many Democratic, and how much influence Mr. Train may have had one way or another, never can be known; but it is a significant fact that Douglas county, the most radical Republican district, gave the largest vote against woman suffrage, and Leavenworth, the strongest Democratic county, gave the largest majority in its favor. 292
Mr. Train had promised Miss Anthony that he would indeed provide the money to start a paper and, in addition, offered to cover all the expenses for Mrs. Stanton and her if they would join him on a lecture tour of the main cities heading east. Therefore, it was crucial for her to speak with him before she could give Mrs. Stanton a definite answer, and her only opportunity for this was to cross the Missouri River and wait for the delayed train from Leavenworth. She found that the ferryboats had stopped running for the night, but George Martin, chair of the suffrage committee in Atchison, offered to take her across in a small boat. Undeterred, she got in and was safely dropped off on the other side in the pitch darkness. There, she caught a train to St. Joseph, where she met Mr. Train, made the necessary arrangements, and returned to Leavenworth on the first train.
The Commercial, the Democratic paper of this city, said:
On election day, the Hutchinsons, Miss Anthony, and Mrs. Stanton visited all the polling places in Leavenworth in open carriages, where the two ladies spoke and the Hutchinsons sang. Both amendments were overwhelmingly defeated, with the one for Black suffrage receiving 10,843 votes and the one for women's suffrage getting 9,070, out of a total of about 30,000. These 9,000 votes were the first ever cast in the United States for the right of women to vote. We can’t know how many were Republican or Democratic, or how much influence Mr. Train had, if any. However, it's significant that Douglas County, the most radical Republican district, cast the largest number of votes against women's suffrage, while Leavenworth, the strongest Democratic county, gave the largest majority in support of it. 292
When we consider the many obstacles thrown in the way of the advocates of this measure, the indifference with which the masses look upon anything new in government and their indisposition to change, the degree of success of these advocates is not only remarkable, but one of which they have a just right to feel proud. To these two ladies, Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton, to their indomitable will and courage, to their eloquence and energy, is due much of the merit of the work performed in the State.... While in the recent election these ladies were not successful to the full extent of their wishes, they have the consciousness of knowing that their work has been commensurate with the combined efforts of party organization, congressmen, senators, press and ministers to enfranchise the negro, and that the people of Kansas are not more averse to giving the franchise to woman than to the black man.
The Commercial, the Democratic newspaper in this city, stated:
During the campaign the usual order was for Miss Anthony to speak the first half hour, making a clear, concise, strong argument for suffrage as the right of an American citizen, pleading for the negro as well as for the women, and urging men to vote for both amendments. She then was followed by Mr. Train, who insisted that it would be one of the grossest outrages to give suffrage to the black man and not to the white woman, and pleaded earnestly that the women of Kansas should be enfranchised. In this he was sincere, as he believed thoroughly that women ought to have the ballot. He was an inimitable mimic and was unsparing in his ridicule of those Republicans who had battled so valiantly for equal rights but now demanded that American women should stand back quietly and approvingly and see the negro fully invested with the powers denied to themselves. He had a remarkable memory, an unequalled quickness of repartee, a peculiar gift of improvising epigrams and, while erratic, was a brilliant and entertaining speaker. He was at this time about thirty-five, nearly six feet tall, a handsome brunette, with curling hair and flashing dark eyes, the picture of vigorous health. He was exquisitely neat in person and irreproachable in habits, and had a fine courtliness of bearing toward women which suggested the old-school gentleman. Miss Anthony often said that all the severe criticisms made upon him for years had not 293 been able to impair the respect with which he inspired her during that most trying campaign. Mrs. Stanton, essentially an aristocrat and severe in her judgment of men and manners, spoke most highly of Mr. Train in her Reminiscences.
Considering the numerous challenges faced by the supporters of this measure, the public's indifference towards anything new in government and their reluctance to embrace change, the level of success these advocates have achieved is not only impressive but also something they can justly be proud of. Much of the credit for the progress made in the State goes to these two women, Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton, whose unwavering determination and courage, along with their eloquence and energy, made a major impact. While these women didn’t meet all their goals in the recent election, they can find reassurance in knowing that their efforts matched the combined work of political organizations, Congress members, senators, the press, and ministers to secure voting rights for Black individuals. Moreover, the people of Kansas are not any more resistant to granting women the right to vote than they are to granting it to Black men.
Some of the friends in Kansas were opposed to the contemplated lecture tour, and letters were received from the East urging that it be abandoned. Mrs. Stanton was accustomed to defer to Miss Anthony in such matters.[45] The latter felt that they had been deserted by their old friends and supporters and the breach was too wide to be soon healed. Here was a man of wealth and high personal character, who offered to arrange a lecture tour of the principal cities of the country, pay all expenses and at the end of the journey furnish capital for a paper. It seemed to her she could best serve the cause she placed above all else by accepting the offer, and she did so.
During the campaign, the usual arrangement was for Miss Anthony to speak for the first half hour, presenting a clear, concise, and strong argument for suffrage as a right of American citizens, advocating for both the African American community and women, and urging men to support both amendments. After her, Mr. Train took the stage, insisting that it would be incredibly unfair to grant suffrage to black men while denying it to white women, passionately advocating for the enfranchisement of women in Kansas. He was sincere in his beliefs, fully convinced that women deserved the right to vote. Known for his exceptional mimicry, he was unrelenting in his ridicule of those Republicans who had previously fought hard for equal rights but now expected American women to stand back and quietly accept the empowerment of black men while being denied those same rights. He had an impressive memory, unmatched quick wit, and a unique talent for creating impromptu epigrams. While somewhat unpredictable, he was a brilliant and engaging speaker. At this time, he was around thirty-five, nearly six feet tall, a handsome brunette with curly hair and bright dark eyes, the image of robust health. He was impeccably polished in appearance and had impeccable habits, demonstrating a refined courtesy towards women that reflected the old-school gentleman. Miss Anthony often remarked that all the harsh criticisms directed at him over the years had not 293 diminished the respect he inspired in her during that challenging campaign. Mrs. Stanton, who was fundamentally an aristocrat and had a strict judgment of men and manners, spoke very highly of Mr. Train in her Reminiscences.
As time was limited, Miss Anthony had to make arrangements for hall, etc., by telegraph, which cost Mr. Train $100. The series commenced in Omaha, November 19, and continued in Chicago, Springfield. St. Louis, Louisville, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Buffalo, Rochester, Syracuse, Albany, Springfield (Mass.), Worcester, Boston and Hartford, ending with a great meeting in Steinway Hall, New York, December 14. Mr. Train engaged the most elegant suites of rooms in the best hotels for the ladies, secured the finest halls, and this was remembered as the only luxurious suffrage tour they ever had made. There was a railway wreck between Louisville and Cincinnati, and he chartered a special train in order that they might keep their engagement at the latter place. This trip cost him $3,000.
Some of the friends in Kansas were against the planned lecture tour, and letters came from the East urging that it be called off. Mrs. Stanton usually deferred to Miss Anthony on such matters.[45] Miss Anthony felt that they had been abandoned by their old friends and supporters, and the divide was too great to heal quickly. Here was a wealthy man of high integrity who offered to organize a lecture tour of major cities across the country, cover all expenses, and provide funding for a publication at the end of the journey. She believed that accepting the offer was the best way to support the cause she valued above all else, and so she did.
Where heretofore the Democratic papers had been abusive and some, at least, of the Republican papers complimentary, the tone was now completely reversed. Because they had affiliated with Mr. Train, the former had nothing but praise, and for 294 the same reason the latter were unsparing in their denunciations, and were bitterly indignant at the women for accepting from Mr. Train and other Democrats the help which they themselves had positively refused. They insisted that the Democrats only used woman suffrage as a club to beat negro suffrage, which doubtless was true of many, but Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton claimed the right to accept proffered aid without looking behind it for the motive. The opposition, however, did not arise alone from the press and the politicians. From the leading advocates of suffrage came a vehement protest against any partnership with George Francis Train. The old associates wrote scores of letters expressing their personal allegiance, but refusing to attend the meetings and repudiating the connection of Mr. Train with the woman suffrage movement. Miss Anthony was made to realize to the fullest extent the feeling which had been aroused, but the last entry in the diary says: "The year goes out, and never did one depart that had been so filled with earnest and effective work; 9,000 votes for woman in Kansas, and a newspaper started! The Revolution is going to be work, work and more work. The old out and the new in!"
As time was short, Miss Anthony had to make arrangements for the hall and other things by telegraph, which cost Mr. Train $100. The series started in Omaha on November 19 and continued in Chicago, Springfield, St. Louis, Louisville, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Buffalo, Rochester, Syracuse, Albany, Springfield (Mass.), Worcester, Boston, and Hartford, finishing with a big meeting at Steinway Hall in New York on December 14. Mr. Train booked the most elegant suites in the best hotels for the ladies, secured the finest venues, and this trip was remembered as the only luxurious suffrage tour they ever had. There was a train wreck between Louisville and Cincinnati, and he hired a special train so they could keep their appointment in Cincinnati. This trip cost him $3,000.
[41] His intense feeling on the matter is thus described in the History of Woman Suffrage:
Whereas previously the Democratic papers had been harsh and some of the Republican papers were supportive, the situation had completely flipped. Because they partnered with Mr. Train, the Democrats were now full of praise, and for the same reason, the Republicans were relentless in their criticism and were outraged at the women for accepting help from Mr. Train and other Democrats, which they themselves had firmly rejected. They argued that the Democrats only used women's suffrage as a tool to undermine Black suffrage, which was likely true for many, but Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton asserted their right to accept offered help without questioning the intentions behind it. However, the opposition didn't just come from the press and politicians. Leading advocates of suffrage also strongly protested any association with George Francis Train. Former allies wrote numerous letters expressing their personal loyalty but declined to attend meetings and distanced themselves from Mr. Train's involvement in the women's suffrage movement. Miss Anthony fully realized the extent of the stir that had been created, but the last entry in her diary states: "The year ends, and never has one passed that was so filled with earnest and effective work; 9,000 votes for women in Kansas, and a newspaper launched! The Revolution is going to be work, work, and more work. The old is out and the new is in!"
"A few weeks after this he met Mrs. Stanton and Miss Anthony at one of Alice Cary's Sunday evening receptions. As he approached, both arose and with extended hands exclaimed most cordially, 'Good evening, Mr. Greeley.' But his hands hung limp by his side, as he said in measured tones: 'You two ladies are the most maneuvering politicians in the State of New York. I saw in the manner my wife's petition was presented, that Mr. Curtis was acting under instructions, and I saw the reporters prick up their ears.' Turning to Mrs. Stanton, he asked, 'You are so tenacious about your own name, why did you not inscribe my wife's maiden name, Mary Cheney Greeley, on her petition?' 'Because,' she replied, 'I wanted all the world to know that it was the wife of Horace Greeley who protested against her husband's report.' 'Well,' said he, 'I understand the animus of that whole proceeding, and I have given positive instructions that no word of praise shall ever again be awarded you in the Tribune, and that if your name is ever necessarily mentioned, it shall be as Mrs. Henry B. Stanton!' And so it has been to this day."
[41] His strong feelings on the subject are described in the History of Woman Suffrage:
A few weeks later, he bumped into Mrs. Stanton and Miss Anthony at one of Alice Cary's Sunday evening gatherings. As he got closer, both women stood up and, reaching out their hands, warmly said, "Good evening, Mr. Greeley." But he let his hands hang by his sides and replied in a calm voice, "You two ladies are the most calculating politicians in the State of New York. I noticed from how my wife's petition was presented that Mr. Curtis was acting based on instructions, and I saw the reporters perk up." He turned to Mrs. Stanton and asked, "You’re so protective of your own name; why didn't you put my wife's maiden name, Mary Cheney Greeley, on her petition?" "Because," she answered, "I wanted everyone to know that it was the wife of Horace Greeley who protested against her husband's report." "Well," he said, "I get the intent behind that whole situation, and I have instructed that no praise should ever be given to you again in the Tribune, and if your name ever comes up, it will be mentioned as Mrs. Henry B. Stanton!" And that has been the case to this day.
The first entry in the diary of 1868, January 1, reads: "All the old friends, with scarce an exception, are sure we are wrong. Only time can tell, but I believe we are right and hence bound to succeed." Immediately after the meeting at Steinway Hall, Mr. Train had brought with him to call on Miss Anthony, David M. Melliss, financial editor of the New York World, and they entered into an agreement by which the two men were to supply the funds for publishing a paper until it was on a paying basis. It was to be conducted by Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton in the interests of women, and Mr. Train and Mr. Melliss were to use such space as they desired for expressing their financial and other opinions. The first number was issued January 8, a handsome quarto of sixteen pages.
CHAPTER XVIII.
ESTABLISHING THE REVOLUTION.
1868.
Ten thousand copies were printed and, under the congressional frank of Representative James Brooks, of New York, were sent to all parts of the country. The advent of this element in the newspaper world created a sensation such as scarcely ever has been equalled by any publication. From hundreds of clippings a few characteristic examples are selected. The New York Sunday Times said:
The first entry in the diary from 1868, January 1, says: "Almost all the old friends, with hardly an exception, think we're wrong. Only time will tell, but I believe we're right and destined to succeed." Right after the meeting at Steinway Hall, Mr. Train brought David M. Melliss, the financial editor of the New York World, to visit Miss Anthony. They came to an agreement where the two men would provide the funds to publish a paper until it became profitable. Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton were to run it in support of women, while Mr. Train and Mr. Melliss would have space to share their financial and other views. The first issue was released on January 8, a nice quarto with sixteen pages.
THE LADIES MILITANT.—It is out at last. If the women as a body have not succeeded in getting up a revolution, Susan B. Anthony, as their representative, has. Her Revolution was issued last Thursday as a sort of New Year's gift to what she considered a yearning public, and it is said to be "charged to the muzzle with literary nitre-glycerine." If Mrs. Stanton would 296 attend a little more to her domestic duties and a little less to those of the great public, perhaps she would exalt her sex quite as much as she does by Quixotically fighting windmills in their gratuitous behalf, and she might possibly set a notable example of domestic felicity. No married woman can convert herself into a feminine Knight of the Rueful Visage and ride about the country attempting to redress imaginary wrongs without leaving her own household in a neglected condition that must be an eloquent witness against her. As for the spinsters, we have always said that every woman has a natural and inalienable right to a good husband and a pretty baby. When, by proper "agitation," she has secured this right, she best honors herself and her sex by leaving public affairs behind her, and endeavoring to show how happy she can make the little world of which she has just become the brilliant center.
Ten thousand copies were printed and, using the congressional frank of Representative James Brooks from New York, were distributed all over the country. The introduction of this element in the newspaper industry caused a sensation like hardly anything else ever has in any publication. From hundreds of clippings, a few notable examples are chosen. The New York Sunday Times said:
The New York Independent, the great organ of the Congregationalists, had this breezy editorial:
THE LADIES MILITANT.—It's finally here. While women as a whole may not have sparked a revolution, Susan B. Anthony, as their representative, definitely has. Her Revolution was published last Thursday as a kind of New Year's gift to what she thought was an eager audience, and it’s described as "packed with literary dynamite." If Mrs. Stanton would 296 focus a bit more on her home duties and a bit less on broader public issues, she could uplift her gender just as much as she does by heroically battling imagined giants on their behalf. Plus, she might set an excellent example of domestic happiness. No married woman can become a female Knight of the Woeful Countenance and travel the country trying to resolve imagined injustices without leaving her own home in a neglected state that speaks volumes against her. As for unmarried women, we have always argued that every woman has a natural and undeniable right to a good husband and a beautiful baby. Once she secures this right through proper "advocacy," she best honors herself and her gender by stepping away from public affairs and demonstrating how happy she can make the small world she has just become the shining center of.
The Revolution is the martial name of a bristling and defiant new weekly journal, the first number of which has just been laid on our table. When we mention that it is edited by Mr. Parker Pillsbury and Mrs. Elizabeth Cady Stanton, all the world will immediately know what to expect from it. Those two writers can never be accused of having nothing to say, or of backwardness in saying it. Each has separately long maintained a striking individuality of tongue and pen. Working together, they will produce a canvas of the Rembrandt school—Mrs. Stanton painting the high lights and Mr. Pillsbury the deep darks. In fact, the new journal's real editors are Hope and Despair. Beaumont and Fletcher were intellectually something alike; but Mrs. Stanton and Mr. Pillsbury are totally different. The lady is a gay Greek, come forth from Athens; the gentleman is a sombre Hebrew, bound back to Jerusalem. We know of no two more striking, original, and piquant writers. What keen criticisms, what knife-blade repartees, what lacerating sarcasms we shall expect from the one! What solemn, reverberating, sanguinary damnations we shall hear from the other!
The New York Independent, the main publication for the Congregationalists, had this upbeat editorial:
Conspicuous among the new journal's contributors is that great traveller, hotel-builder, epigrammatist and kite-flyer, Mr. George Francis Train. So The Revolution, from the start, will arouse, thrill, edify, amuse, vex and nonplus its friends. But it will compel attention; it will conquer a hearing. Its business management is in the good hands of Miss Susan B. Anthony, who has long been known as one of the most indefatigable, honest, obstinate, faithful, cross-grained and noble-minded of the famous women of America. It only remains to add that, as "the price of liberty is eternal vigilance," so the price of The Revolution is two dollars a year.
The Revolution is the bold name of a new weekly journal that has just arrived. With Mr. Parker Pillsbury and Mrs. Elizabeth Cady Stanton in charge, everyone will know what to expect. These two writers are never short on words or afraid to share their opinions. Each has always had a unique voice and style. Together, they will create a work reminiscent of Rembrandt—Mrs. Stanton highlighting the brightest parts and Mr. Pillsbury focusing on the darkest shades. In reality, the journal's true editors are Hope and Despair. Beaumont and Fletcher had somewhat similar ideas, but Mrs. Stanton and Mr. Pillsbury are completely different. She is a vibrant Greek, emerging from Athens; he is a serious Hebrew, connected to Jerusalem. We don't know of two more striking, original, and sharp writers. What keen critiques, what biting comebacks, and what sharp sarcasm we can expect from her! What heavy, echoing, fierce condemnations we will hear from him!
The Cincinnati Enquirer in a complimentary notice said: "Mrs. Elizabeth Cady Stanton's Revolution grows with each additional number more spicy, readable and revolutionary. It hits right and left, from the shoulder and overhand, at 297 every body and thing that opposes the granting of suffrage to females as well as males. The Revolution is mourning over no lost cause, but is aggressive, bold and determined to win one dear to its heart." New York's society paper, the Home Journal, commented: "The Revolution is plucky, keen and wide awake, and although some of its ways are not at all to our taste, we are glad to recognize in it the inspiration of the noblest aims, and the sagacity and talent to accomplish what it desires. It is on the right track, whether it has taken the right train or not;" while the Chicago Workingman's Advocate declared: "We have no doubt it will prove an able ally of the labor reform movement." The Boston Commonwealth observed approvingly: "It is edited by Mrs. E.C. Stanton and Parker Pillsbury, whose names are guarantees of ability and character. Their effusions are able, pertinent and courageous."
Prominent among the new journal's contributors is the remarkable traveler, hotelier, witty writer, and kite enthusiast, Mr. George Francis Train. From the start, The Revolution will engage, excite, educate, entertain, frustrate, and bewilder its supporters. However, it will demand attention; it will earn its audience. The business management is expertly handled by Miss Susan B. Anthony, who has long been recognized as one of the most tireless, honest, stubborn, devoted, difficult, and principled women in America. Lastly, it's important to note that, just as "the price of liberty is eternal vigilance," the subscription to The Revolution is two dollars a year.
To quote from Mrs. Stanton: "Radical and defiant in tone, it awoke friends and foes alike to action. Some denounced it, some ridiculed it, but all read it. It needed just such clarion notes, sounded forth long and loud each week, to rouse the friends of the movement from the apathy into which they had fallen after the war." Miss Anthony went to Washington to introduce the paper and returned with a list of distinguished subscribers, including President Johnson himself! The following from Mrs. Stanton will show how criticising letters usually were answered:
The Cincinnati Enquirer praised, saying: "Mrs. Elizabeth Cady Stanton's Revolution gets more exciting, engaging, and revolutionary with each issue. It goes after everyone and everything that opposes giving women the right to vote, just like men. The Revolution isn't mourning a lost cause; it's aggressive, bold, and determined to win a cause close to its heart." New York's society magazine, the Home Journal, noted: "The Revolution is spirited, sharp, and alert, and even though some of its methods aren't to our liking, we're happy to see it driven by the noblest goals and the skill to achieve what it aims for. It's on the right path, whether it has taken the right train or not;" while the Chicago Workingman's Advocate stated: "We believe it will be a strong ally of the labor reform movement." The Boston Commonwealth remarked positively: "It's edited by Mrs. E.C. Stanton and Parker Pillsbury, whose names guarantee skill and integrity. Their writings are capable, relevant, and courageous."
I know that you would feel that we were right if I could talk with you. If George Francis Train had done for the negro all that he has done for woman the last three months, the Abolitionists would enshrine him as a saint. The attacks on Susan and me by a few persons have been petty and narrow, but we are right and this nine days' wonder will soon settle itself. Of course, people turn up the whites of their eyes, but time will bring them all down again. We have reason to congratulate ourselves that we have shocked more friends of the cause into life than we ever dreamed we had—persons who never gave a cent or said a word for our movement are the most concerned lest Susan and I should injure it. Mr. Train has some extravagances and idiosyncrasies, but he is willing to devote his energies to our cause when no other man is, and we should be foolish not to accept his aid. To think of Boston women holding a festival to aid the Anti-Slavery Standard, while their own petitions are ignored in the Senate of the United States! Women have 298 been degraded so long they have lost all self-respect. If we love the black man as well as ourselves we shall fulfill the Bible injunction. The anti-slavery requirement to love him better is a little too much for human nature.
To quote Mrs. Stanton: "Bold and challenging in tone, it motivated both supporters and opponents to take action. Some condemned it, some laughed at it, but everyone read it. It required just such powerful messages, delivered loud and clear each week, to awaken the supporters of the movement from the indifference they had slipped into after the war." Miss Anthony traveled to Washington to present the paper and came back with a list of notable subscribers, including President Johnson himself! The following from Mrs. Stanton will illustrate how criticism in letters was typically addressed:
A few members of the executive board of the Equal Rights Association made a strong attempt to prevent the editors of The Revolution from occupying the room at No. 37 Park Row, used for their headquarters. Miss Anthony soon showed, however, that she had made herself personally responsible for the rent, that while she was overwhelmed with the work of the Kansas campaign letters were continually sent her asking if she could not somehow get the money to pay it, and that as soon as she returned, she borrowed $100 on her own note and paid it in full. So she held possession and the committee, after voting itself out at one session, voted itself back at the next, and finally abandoned the room.
I know you’d agree with us if we could have a conversation. If George Francis Train had done for Black people what he’s done for women over the past three months, the Abolitionists would treat him like a hero. The criticism that Susan and I have received from a few people has been petty and short-sighted, but we’re in the right, and this temporary scandal will pass soon. Sure, some people might roll their eyes, but time will help everyone cool down again. We have every reason to be proud that we’ve inspired more supporters of the cause than we ever anticipated—people who’ve never contributed or spoken up for our movement are now the ones most concerned about Susan and me harming it. Mr. Train has his quirks and strange behaviors, but he’s willing to dedicate his energy to our cause when no one else is, and it would be foolish not to accept his help. It’s absurd that women in Boston are organizing a festival to support the Anti-Slavery Standard while their own petitions are being ignored in the U.S. Senate! Women have 298 been disrespected for so long that they’ve lost all self-esteem. If we truly care for Black people as we do for ourselves, we’ll follow the biblical commandment. The anti-slavery push to love them more is a bit too much for human nature.
On the very day the first copy of The Revolution appeared, Mr. Train announced that he was going to England immediately. Miss Anthony says in her diary: "My heart sank within me; only our first number issued and our strongest helper and inspirer to leave us! This is but another discipline to teach us that we must stand on our own feet." Mr. Train gave her $600 and assured her that he had arranged with Mr. Melliss to supply all necessary funds during his short absence, but she felt herself invested with a heavy responsibility. A few days later Mrs. Stanton said in a letter to a friend:
A few members of the executive board of the Equal Rights Association tried hard to stop the editors of The Revolution from using their headquarters at No. 37 Park Row. However, Miss Anthony quickly made it clear that she was personally responsible for the rent. Despite being swamped with work from the Kansas campaign, she kept receiving letters asking if she could figure out a way to pay it. As soon as she got back, she borrowed $100 on her own promise to pay it back and settled the debt. So, she maintained control of the space, and the committee, after voting itself out once, voted itself back in at the next meeting before finally giving up the room.
Our paper has a monied basis of $50,000 and men who understand business to push it. Train is engaging writers and getting subscribers in Europe. It will improve in every way when we are thoroughly started. Just now we are fighting for our life among reformers; they pitch into us without mercy. We are trying to make the Democrats take up our question, for that is the only way to move the Republicans. Subscribers come in rapidly, beyond our most sanguine expectations. The press in the main is cordial, but looks askance at a political paper edited by a woman. If we had started a "Lily" or a "Rosebud" and remained in the region of sentiment, we should have been eulogized to the skies, but here is something dangerous.
On the day the first copy of The Revolution came out, Mr. Train announced that he was going to England right away. Miss Anthony writes in her diary: "I felt a wave of sadness; our first issue just out and our most important supporter and motivator is leaving us! This is just another lesson to remind us that we need to rely on ourselves." Mr. Train gave her $600 and promised that he had made arrangements with Mr. Melliss to cover all necessary funds during his brief absence, but she felt a heavy sense of responsibility. A few days later, Mrs. Stanton mentioned in a letter to a friend:
Instead of Mr. Train's securing writers and subscribers in Europe, he was arrested for complicity with the Fenians the moment he made his first speech, and spent the year in a Dublin 299 jail. He wrote that the finding of fifty copies of The Revolution in his possession was an additional reason for his arrest, as the officials did not stop to read a word, the name was sufficient. While Mr. Train continued his contributions to the paper during his residence in jail, he was not able to meet his financial obligations to it. Mr. Melliss made heroic efforts to pay in his quota, but the days were full of anxiety for everybody connected with The Revolution. Miss Anthony was used to such care. She had been the financial burden-bearer of every reform with which she had been connected, but to this crushing weight was added such a persecution as she never had experienced before, even in the days of pro-slavery mobs. Then the attacks had been made by open and avowed enemies, and she had had a host of staunch supporters to share them and give her courage; now her persecutors were in ambush and were those who had been her nearest and dearest friends; and now she was alone except for Mrs. Stanton and Mr. Pillsbury. Even they were labored with, and besought to renounce one who seemed to have complete mastery over them and was leading them to destruction, but nothing could shake their allegiance. The excuse for this persecution was that the Equal Rights Association was injured by the publication of The Revolution.
Our publication has financial support of $50,000 and a team of experienced businesspeople to move it forward. Train is hiring writers and gaining subscribers in Europe. It will improve in every way once we fully launch. Right now, we’re struggling to survive against reformers; they attack us non-stop. We're working to convince the Democrats to adopt our issues because that’s the only way to influence the Republicans. Subscribers are coming in quickly, exceeding our highest expectations. Overall, the press is supportive but skeptical about a political publication led by a woman. If we had launched something like "Lily" or "Rosebud" and focused on sentimental topics, we would have been praised to the skies, but this is something challenging.
That there should be a paper published in the interest of the rights of women had been the dream of the advocates for many years. Antoinette Blackwell had written Miss Anthony several years before: "I wish we had the contemplated paper for Mrs. Stanton's especial benefit. I am afraid it will be too late for her when we get it fairly established, which does not promise to be very soon. Lucy believes her own talents lie in other directions, and gives no approval to the plan for herself." Lucy Stone had written: "We must have a paper and dear, brave, sensible Mrs. Stanton must be the editor." And at another time: "I feel very proud of Mrs. Stanton, she is so strong and noble. When we have a new paper she must be the editor."
Instead of Mr. Train securing writers and subscribers in Europe, he was arrested for being involved with the Fenians as soon as he delivered his first speech, and spent the year in a Dublin 299 jail. He stated that finding fifty copies of The Revolution in his possession was an additional reason for his arrest, as the officials didn’t bother to read anything; just seeing the name was enough. While Mr. Train continued writing for the paper during his time in jail, he couldn’t meet his financial obligations to it. Mr. Melliss made strong efforts to contribute his share, but everyone associated with The Revolution was anxious during those days. Miss Anthony was used to such pressure. She had always been the financial supporter of every reform she was involved in, but this burden was made even heavier with persecution she hadn’t faced before, even during the pro-slavery mobs. Back then, the attacks came from open and obvious enemies, and she had many strong supporters to stand by her and give her courage; now her persecutors were hidden and included those who had once been her closest friends, and she felt alone except for Mrs. Stanton and Mr. Pillsbury. Even they faced pressure to turn against someone who seemed to have complete control over them and was leading them to ruin, but nothing could change their loyalty. The justification for this persecution was that the Equal Rights Association was harmed by the publication of The Revolution.
Mrs. Stanton, with her house and her large family, had no 300 desire for this position. Miss Anthony herself was not a writer, and many times of late years had agitated the question of raising money to have Lucy Stone and her husband at the head of a paper, they having now signified their willingness to hold such a place. The founding of The Revolution was totally unexpected and its editors accepted it only because of the great need of a medium through which the cause of woman might be thoroughly advocated. There was not the slightest desire to enter into rivalry with anybody or to antagonize the Republicans. If the latter had been willing to furnish the money to start a paper, or had allowed space in their own publications, the favor would have been most gladly accepted. Had the members of the Equal Rights Association raised a fund to establish an organ, so much the better, but although the subject had been talked of for years, the capital had not been forthcoming. There was no attempt to make the association responsible for the opinions of The Revolution, as this letter from Mrs. Stanton indicates:
The idea of creating a paper focused on women's rights had been a goal for advocates for many years. Antoinette Blackwell had told Miss Anthony a few years earlier: "I wish we had the paper we talked about for Mrs. Stanton's special benefit. I'm worried it will be too late for her by the time we get it up and running, which doesn’t seem to be happening anytime soon. Lucy thinks her talents lie in other areas and doesn't support the idea for herself." Lucy Stone had expressed: "We need a paper, and the wonderful, brave, sensible Mrs. Stanton should be the editor." And on another occasion, she said: "I'm really proud of Mrs. Stanton; she is so strong and noble. When we get a new paper, she has to be the editor."
Susan and I, though members of the Equal Rights Association, do many things outside that body for which no one is responsible. The idea of starting a paper under its auspices, or as an organ for it, never entered our minds. We went to Kansas as individuals; personal friends outside that association gave us money to go and contributed the funds to start a paper. We object to that resolution of censure, first, because we were outside its province; second, because it was an outrage to repudiate Susan and me, who have labored without cessation for twenty years and had just returned from a hard three months' campaign. For any one to question our devotion to this cause is to us amazing. The treatment of us by Abolitionists also is enough to try the souls of better saints than we. The secret of all this furor is Republican spite. They want to stave off our question until after the presidential campaign. They can keep all the women still but Susan and me. They can't control us, therefore the united effort of Republicans, Abolitionists and certain women to crush us and our paper.
Mrs. Stanton, with her home and her big family, had no 300 interest in this position. Miss Anthony herself wasn’t a writer, and many times in recent years had discussed the idea of raising money to have Lucy Stone and her husband lead a newspaper, as they had now expressed their willingness to take on that role. The launch of The Revolution was completely unexpected, and its editors only accepted it because of the critical need for a platform to advocate for women's rights. There was absolutely no desire to compete with anyone or to oppose the Republicans. If they had been willing to provide the funds to start a newspaper, or had given space in their own publications, that help would have been happily accepted. If the members of the Equal Rights Association had raised money to create a publication, that would have been even better, but even though this topic had been discussed for years, the funds had not materialized. There was no effort to hold the association accountable for the views expressed in The Revolution, as this letter from Mrs. Stanton shows:
In showing how the women were sacrificed, The Revolution said:
Susan and I, even though we're part of the Equal Rights Association, do a lot of things on our own that no one oversees. The idea of starting a newspaper under its name or as part of it never even occurred to us. We went to Kansas as individuals; our personal friends outside the association funded our trip and helped launch the newspaper. We oppose that censure resolution for two reasons: first, because we weren’t part of its scope; and second, because it’s outrageous to turn away Susan and me, who have worked hard for twenty years and just returned from a tough three-month campaign. It's shocking that anyone would doubt our dedication to this cause. The way we've been treated by Abolitionists is enough to test the patience of even better people than us. The source of all this turmoil is Republican resentment. They want to push our issue to the back until after the presidential campaign. They can silence all other women, but not Susan and me. They can't control us, so there’s a united effort from Republicans, Abolitionists, and some women to undermine us and our publication.
Charles Sumner, Horace Greeley, Gerrit Smith and Wendell Phillips, with one consent, bid the women of the nation stand aside and behold the salvation of the negro. Wendell Phillips says, "One idea for a generation," to come up in the order of their importance. First negro suffrage, then temperance, 301 then the eight-hour movement, then woman suffrage. Three generations hence, woman suffrage will be in order! What an insult to the women who have labored thirty years for the emancipation of the slave, now when he is their political equal, to propose to lift him above their heads. Gerrit Smith, forgetting that our great American idea is "individual rights," on which Abolitionists have ever based their strongest arguments for emancipation, says: "This is the time to settle the rights of races; unless we do justice to the negro we shall bring down on ourselves another bloody revolution, another four years' war, but we have nothing to fear from woman, she will not avenge herself!" Woman not avenge herself? Look at your asylums for the deaf, the dumb, the blind, the insane, and there behold the results of this wholesale desecration of the mothers of the race! Woman not avenge herself? Go into the streets of your cities at the midnight hour, and there behold those whom God meant to be queens in the moral universe giving your sons their first lessons in infamy and vice. No, you can not wrong the humblest of God's creatures without making discord and confusion in the whole social system.
In demonstrating how the women were sacrificed, The Revolution stated:
In regard to the bitter persecution waged upon the two women, Ellen Wright Garrison said in a letter to Miss Anthony: "This sitting in judgment upon those whose views differ from our own, pouring vials of wrath on their heads and calling in the outside and prejudiced public to help condemn, is unwise and un-Christian." Her mother, Martha Wright, who at first was inclined to blame, wrote in the spring of 1868: "As regards the paper, its vigorous pages are what we need. I regret the idiosyncrasies of Mr. Train, as they give occasion to the sons and daughters of the Philistines to rejoice, and the children of the uncircumcised only wanted a good excuse to triumph. Shall you be at the May meeting? I will not be there under any circumstances without you and Susan and our good friend Parker; so whatever may become of Mr. Train or of the paper, count me now and ever as your true and unswerving friend."
Charles Sumner, Horace Greeley, Gerrit Smith, and Wendell Phillips all believe that women in the nation should step back and let the Black community save itself. Wendell Phillips says, "One priority for a generation," ranked by importance. First is Black voting rights, then temperance, 301, then the eight-hour workday, and finally, women’s voting rights. Three generations from now, women’s voting rights will be prioritized! It’s an insult to the women who have fought for thirty years for the freedom of the enslaved that now, when he is their political equal, the plan is to place him above them. Gerrit Smith, ignoring our fundamental American belief in "individual rights," which Abolitionists have always used as their main argument for freedom, says: "Now is the time to establish the rights of races; if we don't serve justice to the Black community, we’ll face another bloody revolution, another four-year war," but he insists there’s no danger from women, claiming, "she will not seek revenge!" Women not seeking revenge? Look at the asylums for the deaf, mute, blind, and mentally ill, and see the consequences of this widespread neglect towards the mothers of our society! Women not seeking revenge? Walk the streets of your city at midnight and witness those who were meant to be queens in the moral realm teaching your sons their first lessons in disgrace and vice. No, you cannot mistreat even the humblest of God’s creatures without creating discord and chaos in the entire social fabric.
The following graphic description, by the correspondent, Nellie Hutchinson, was published in the Cincinnati Commercial:
Regarding the harsh treatment directed at the two women, Ellen Wright Garrison wrote in a letter to Miss Anthony: "Sitting in judgment on those whose views differ from ours, attacking them and calling in the biased public to help condemn them, is unwise and un-Christian." Her mother, Martha Wright, who initially felt critical, wrote in the spring of 1868: "Concerning the paper, its strong content is exactly what we need. I regret Mr. Train's quirks, as they give the sons and daughters of the Philistines a reason to rejoice, and those who oppose us are just looking for an excuse to celebrate. Will you be at the May meeting? I won’t go under any circumstances without you, Susan, and our good friend Parker; so whatever happens with Mr. Train or the paper, count me now and always as your loyal and steadfast friend."
There's a peculiarly resplendent sign at the head of the third flight of stairs, and obeying its directions I march into the north corridor and enter The Revolution office. Nothing so very terrible after all. The first face that salutes my vision is a youthful one—fresh, smiling, bright-eyed, auburn-crowned. It belongs to one of the employes of the establishment, and its owner conducts 302 me to a comfortable sofa, then trips lightly through a little door opposite to inform Miss Anthony of my presence.
The following graphic description, by the correspondent, Nellie Hutchinson, was published in the Cincinnati Commercial:
I glance about me. What editorial bliss is this! Actually a neat carpet on the floor, a substantial round table covered by a pretty cloth, engravings and photographs hung thickly over the clear white walls. Here is Lucretia Mott's saintly face, beautiful with eternal youth; there Mary Wollstonecraft looking into futurity with earnest eyes. In an arched recess are shelves containing books and piles of pamphlets, speeches and essays of Stuart Mill, Wendell Phillips, Higginson, Curtis. Two screens extend across the front of the room, inclosing a little space around the two large windows which give light, air and glimpses of City Hall park. Glancing around the corner we see editor Pillsbury seated at his desk by the further window. Opposite is another desk covered with brown wrappers and mailing books. Close against the screen stands yet another, at which sits the bookkeeper, an energetic young woman who ably manages all the business affairs of The Revolution. There's an atmosphere of womanly purity and delicacy about the place; everything is refreshingly neat and clean, and suggestive of reform.
There's a surprisingly bright sign at the top of the third flight of stairs, and following its directions, I walk into the north corridor and enter The Revolution office. It's not as bad as I expected. The first person I see is a young staff member—fresh, smiling, bright-eyed, with auburn hair. This person leads 302 me to a comfortable sofa and then quickly goes through a small door nearby to let Miss Anthony know I'm here.
Ah! here comes Susan—the determined—the invincible, the Susan who is possibly destined to be Vice-President or Secretary of State some of these days! What a delicious thought! I tremble as she steps rapidly toward me and I perceive in her hand a most statesmanlike roll of MSS. The eyes scan me coolly and interrogatively but the pleasant voice gives me a yet pleasanter greeting. There's something very attractive, even fascinating in that voice—a faint echo of the alto vibration—the tone of power. Her smile is very sweet and genial, and lights up the pale, worn face rarely. She talks awhile in her kindly, incisive way. "We're not foolishly or blindly aggressive," says she, tersely; "we don't lead a fight against the true and noble institutions of the world. We only seek to substitute for various barbarian ideas, those of a higher civilization—to develop a race of earnest, thoughtful, conscientious women." And I thought as I remembered various newspaper attacks, that here was not much to object to. The world is the better for thee, Susan.
I look around. What a wonderful editorial space this is! There’s a neat carpet on the floor, a solid round table covered with a lovely cloth, and a variety of engravings and photographs densely hung on the bright white walls. Here’s Lucretia Mott’s saintly face, radiating eternal youth; there’s Mary Wollstonecraft gazing into the future with intense eyes. In an arched nook, there are shelves filled with books and stacks of pamphlets, speeches, and essays by Stuart Mill, Wendell Phillips, Higginson, and Curtis. Two screens stretch across the front of the room, framing a small area around two large windows that let in light, fresh air, and views of City Hall park. If we peek around the corner, we see editor Pillsbury sitting at his desk by the far window. Across from him is another desk cluttered with brown wrappers and mailing books. Right next to the screen is yet another desk where the bookkeeper, an energetic young woman, takes care of all the business affairs of The Revolution. There’s an atmosphere of feminine purity and delicacy in the room; everything is wonderfully tidy and clean, feeling truly inspiring for reform.
She rises; "Come, let me introduce you to Mrs. Stanton." And we walk into the inner sanctum, a tiny bit of a room, nicely carpeted, one-windowed and furnished with two desks, two chairs, a little table—and the senior editor, Mrs. Stanton. The short, substantial figure, with its handsome black dress and silver crown of curls, is sufficiently interesting. The fresh, girlish complexion, the laughing blue eyes and jolly voice are yet more so. Beside her stands her sixteen-year-old daughter, who is as plump, as jolly, as laughing-eyed as her mother. We study Cady Stanton's handsome face as she talks on rapidly and facetiously. Nothing little or mean in that face; no line of distrust or irony; neither are there wrinkles of care—life has been pleasant to this woman.
Ah! Here comes Susan—the determined, the unstoppable, the one who might be destined to be Vice President or Secretary of State one day! What a delightful thought! I feel nervous as she approaches quickly, and I notice she’s holding a very official-looking stack of papers. Her eyes scan me coolly and curiously, but her pleasant voice offers an even warmer greeting. There’s something very appealing, even captivating about that voice—a slight echo of an alto tone—the sound of authority. Her smile is sweet and friendly, brightening her pale, tired face rarely. She talks for a bit in her kind, sharp way. “We’re not thoughtlessly aggressive,” she says succinctly; “we don’t fight against the true and noble institutions of the world. We only want to replace various outdated ideas with those of a higher civilization—to nurture a generation of serious, thoughtful, conscientious women.” And I thought, remembering the various newspaper attacks, that there wasn’t much to argue against. The world is better because of you, Susan.
SUSAN B. ANTHONY.
She gets up. "Come on, let me introduce you to Mrs. Stanton." We walk into the inner office, a small but cozy room, nicely carpeted, with one window, two desks, two chairs, a little table—and the senior editor, Mrs. Stanton. The short, solid figure in her beautiful black dress and silver curls is quite striking. Her fresh, youthful complexion, sparkling blue eyes, and cheerful voice are even more captivating. Next to her is her sixteen-year-old daughter, just as plump, cheerful, and bright-eyed as her mother. We take in Cady Stanton's lovely face as she talks quickly and playfully. There’s nothing small-minded or petty about that face; no hint of distrust or sarcasm; no wrinkles of worry—life has treated this woman well.
![]()
We hear a bustle in the outer room—rapid voices and laughing questions—then the door is suddenly thrown open and in steps a young Aurora, habited in a fur-trimmed cloak, with a jaunty black velvet cap and snowy feather set upon her dark clustering curls. What sprite is this, whose eyes flash and sparkle with a thousand happy thoughts, whose dimples and rosy lips and 303 white teeth make so charming a picture? "My dear Anna," says Susan, starting up, and there's a shower of kisses. Then follows an introduction to Anna Dickinson. As we clasp hands for a moment, I look into the great gray eyes that have flashed with indignation and grown moist with pity before thousands of audiences. They are radiant with mirth now, beaming as a child's, and with graceful abandon she throws herself into a chair and begins a ripple of gay talk. The two pretty assistants come in and look at her with loving eyes; we all cluster around while she wittily recounts her recent lecturing experience. As the little lady keeps up her merry talk, I think over these three representative women. The white-haired, comely matron sitting there hand-in-hand with her daughter, intellectual, large-hearted, high-souled—a mother of men; the grave, energetic old maid—an executive power; the glorious girl, who, without a thought of self, demands in eloquent tones justice and liberty for all, and prophesies like an oracle of old.
SUSAN B. ANTHONY.
May we not hope that America's coming woman will combine these salient qualities, and with all the powers of mind, soul and heart vivified and developed in a liberal atmosphere, prove herself the noblest creature in the world? And so I leave them there—the pleasant group—faithful in their work, happy in their hopes.
We hear a commotion in the other room—quick voices and laughing questions—then the door swings open, and in walks a young Aurora, dressed in a fur-trimmed cloak, wearing a stylish black velvet cap and a snowy feather set atop her dark, curly hair. What spirit is this, whose eyes shine and sparkle with a thousand happy thoughts, whose dimples and rosy lips and 303 white teeth create such a charming image? "My dear Anna," says Susan, jumping up, and a flurry of kisses follows. Then we’re introduced to Anna Dickinson. As we shake hands for a moment, I look into her big gray eyes that have flashed with indignation and grown moist with pity before thousands of audiences. They are now radiant with joy, shining like a child's, and with graceful abandon, she throws herself into a chair and begins a stream of cheerful conversation. The two lovely assistants come in and look at her with affection; we all gather around as she humorously recounts her recent lecturing experience. As the little lady continues her merry chat, I reflect on these three remarkable women—the white-haired, attractive matron sitting there, hand-in-hand with her daughter, who is intellectual, warm-hearted, and noble—a true mother of men; the serious, energetic old maid—an executive force; and the magnificent girl, who, without a thought for herself, passionately calls for justice and freedom for all, prophesying like an ancient oracle.
On May 14, 1868, the American Equal Rights Association held its second anniversary in Cooper Institute. Mrs. Stanton, who had a wholesome dread of anything disagreeable, was determined not to go, but Miss Anthony declared that to stay away would be showing the "white feather" and that, as their enemies had been many weeks working up a sentiment against them, their presence would prove they had nothing to fear. When the convention assembled, Lucretia Mott, the president, being absent on account of the recent death of her husband, Colonel Higginson said to Miss Anthony: "Now we want everything pleasant and peaceable here, do we not?" "Certainly," she replied. "Well then, we must have Lucy Stone open this meeting." "Why so," asked Miss Anthony, "when Mrs. Stanton is first vice-president? It would be not only an insult to her but a direct violation of parliamentary usage. I shall never consent to it." Finding that, nevertheless, there was a scheme to carry out this plan, she put Mrs. Stanton on the alert and, as the officers filed on the platform, gave her a gentle push to the front, whereupon she opened the convention with the utmost suavity.
May we not hope that the upcoming woman in America will blend these important qualities and, with all the powers of mind, soul, and heart energized and nurtured in a supportive environment, show herself to be the greatest being in the world? And so I leave them there—the enjoyable group—dedicated to their work, optimistic in their hopes.
It was here that these pioneers of the movement for woman 304 suffrage had the humiliation of hearing Frederick Douglass announce that it was women's duty to take a back seat and wait till the negro was enfranchised before they put in their claim. Rev. Olympia Brown and Lucy Stone both declared the Republican party false to its principles unless it protected women as well as colored men in their right to vote, and in his report on the Kansas campaign, Mr. Blackwell, after speaking of the splendid work of Lucy Stone, Miss Anthony, Mrs. Stanton and Miss Brown, said: "Their eloquence and determination gave great promise of success; but, in an inopportune moment, Horace Greeley and others saw fit in the Constitutional Convention to report adversely to woman suffrage in New York, which influenced the sentiment in the younger western State and its enterprise was crushed. Even the Republicans in Kansas set their faces against the extension of suffrage to women."
On May 14, 1868, the American Equal Rights Association held its second anniversary at Cooper Institute. Mrs. Stanton, who had a strong aversion to anything unpleasant, was set on not attending, but Miss Anthony insisted that staying away would show the "white feather" and that, since their opponents had been working for weeks to build negative sentiment against them, their presence would demonstrate they had nothing to fear. When the convention started, Lucretia Mott, the president, was absent due to the recent death of her husband. Colonel Higginson said to Miss Anthony, "Now we want everything pleasant and peaceful here, right?" "Of course," she replied. "Well, then, we should have Lucy Stone open this meeting." "Why's that?" asked Miss Anthony, "when Mrs. Stanton is the first vice-president? That would not only insult her, but go directly against parliamentary rules. I will never agree to that." Realizing that there was still a plan to go ahead with this, she alerted Mrs. Stanton and, as the officers walked onto the platform, gave her a gentle push to the front, allowing her to open the convention with great grace.
Throughout the entire convention there was much resentment on the part of the women at the manner in which they had been abandoned in favor of the negro. During the same week, at the anti-slavery meeting in Steinway Hall, Anna Dickinson, in the midst of an impassioned speech, declared: "The position of the black woman today is no better than before her emancipation from slavery. She has simply changed masters from a white owner to a black husband in many cases." She demanded freedom and franchise for woman as for man, irrespective of color; and, while giving Mr. Phillips credit for his years of service in the cause of woman, took occasion to enter her protest against the tenor of a portion of his morning address—in effect, that woman's rights must be set aside until the rights of the black man were fully secured.
It was here that these pioneers of the movement for women's 304 suffrage had to endure the embarrassment of hearing Frederick Douglass say that it was women's responsibility to take a back seat and wait until Black men were granted the right to vote before they made their claims. Rev. Olympia Brown and Lucy Stone both stated that the Republican Party was betraying its principles unless it ensured that women were protected along with men of color in their right to vote. In his report on the Kansas campaign, Mr. Blackwell, after mentioning the outstanding work of Lucy Stone, Miss Anthony, Mrs. Stanton, and Miss Brown, said: "Their eloquence and determination gave great promise of success; but, at an unfortunate moment, Horace Greeley and others decided during the Constitutional Convention to report negatively on woman suffrage in New York, which swayed public opinion in the younger western states and crushed the initiative. Even the Republicans in Kansas opposed extending suffrage to women."
As there was so much cavilling and faultfinding on the part of many of the Equal Rights Association at every forward and radical step taken by Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton, they formed an independent committee of themselves, Elizabeth Smith Miller, daughter of Gerrit Smith, Mrs. Horace Greeley and Abby Hopper Gibbons, daughter of Isaac T. Hopper, the noted Abolitionist, and wife of a prominent banker. These 305 ladies sent a memorial to the Republican National Convention, which met in Chicago and nominated General Grant, but it never saw the light after reaching there. Snubbed on every hand by the Republicans, they determined to appeal to the Democrats. On June 27 Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton attended a mass convention addressed by Governor Seymour, calling out the following editorial from the New York Sun:
Throughout the entire convention, many women felt a lot of resentment about how they had been overlooked in favor of Black individuals. During the same week, at the anti-slavery meeting in Steinway Hall, Anna Dickinson, delivering a passionate speech, stated: "The situation of the Black woman today is no better than it was before she was freed from slavery. In many cases, she has merely switched from being owned by a white person to being partnered with a Black man." She demanded freedom and voting rights for women just like for men, regardless of their race; and while acknowledging Mr. Phillips for his years of support for women's rights, she took the opportunity to express her disagreement with part of his morning speech, which suggested that women's rights should be put on hold until Black men’s rights were fully achieved.
The fact that Mrs. Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Miss Susan B. Anthony were the only ladies admitted upon the platform at Cooper Institute, may be regarded as not only committing them to Governor Seymour's views, but as committing the approaching Democratic convention, in whose behalf he spoke, to the doctrine of woman suffrage. Therefore, whether Miss Anthony is received as a delegate to the July convention, it is clear that female suffrage must be incorporated among the planks of the national Democratic platform; and if Governor Seymour, who is a remarkably fine-looking man, is nominated, he will receive the undivided support of the women of the North, which will more than compensate for the loss of the negro vote of the South.
As there was so much criticism and complaining from many members of the Equal Rights Association about every progressive and radical step taken by Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton, they formed an independent committee consisting of Elizabeth Smith Miller, daughter of Gerrit Smith, Mrs. Horace Greeley, and Abby Hopper Gibbons, daughter of Isaac T. Hopper, the well-known Abolitionist, and wife of a prominent banker. These 305 ladies sent a memorial to the Republican National Convention, which took place in Chicago and nominated General Grant, but it never received any attention after arriving there. Snubbed at every turn by the Republicans, they decided to appeal to the Democrats. On June 27, Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton attended a mass convention addressed by Governor Seymour, prompting the following editorial from the New York Sun:
At the meeting of the Equal Rights Committee, held in New York, a half-sarcastic resolution was offered by Theodore Tilton and adopted by the committee declaring that as "Miss Susan B. Anthony, through various published writings in The Revolution, had given the world to understand that the hope of the woman's rights cause rests more largely with the Democratic party than with any other portion of the people; therefore she be requested to attend the approaching National Democratic Convention in New York for the purpose of fulfilling this cheerful hope by securing in the Democratic platform a recognition of woman's right to the elective franchise."
The fact that Mrs. Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Miss Susan B. Anthony were the only women on stage at Cooper Institute suggests that they not only shared Governor Seymour's views, but also connected the upcoming Democratic convention he addressed with the movement for women's voting rights. So, regardless of whether Miss Anthony is accepted as a delegate to the July convention, it’s clear that women's suffrage needs to be part of the national Democratic platform; and if Governor Seymour, who is quite handsome, is nominated, he will receive strong support from women in the North, which will more than compensate for the loss of the Black vote in the South.
Miss Anthony ignored the sarcasm, and with Mrs. Stanton at once prepared a memorial.[46] The convention met and dedicated Tammany Hall on July 4, 1868. This was the first time since the war that the southern Democrats had joined with the northern 306 in national convention and, conservative as they naturally were and separated as they had been from all the woman's rights agitation which had kept the North stirred up for the past decade, one can imagine their amazement when Miss Anthony, Mrs. Stanton and a few other ladies walked into the great hall and occupied reserved seats at the left of the platform. Their memorial was sent to the president, Horatio Seymour, and by him handed to the secretary, who read it amid jeers and laughter. It was then referred to the resolution committee where it slept the sleep of death. The special correspondent of the Chicago Republican thus describes the scene when the memorial was presented:
At the meeting of the Equal Rights Committee in New York, Theodore Tilton proposed a half-sarcastic resolution that was adopted by the committee. It stated that since "Miss Susan B. Anthony, through various articles in The Revolution, has conveyed that the hope for women's rights relies more on the Democratic Party than any other group; therefore, she is invited to attend the upcoming National Democratic Convention in New York to help achieve this optimistic goal by getting the Democratic platform to acknowledge women's right to vote."
Susan B. Anthony appeared to the convention like Minerva, goddess of wisdom. Her advent was with thunders, not of applause, but of the scorn of a degenerate masculinity. The great Horatio said, with infinite condescension, that he held in his hand a memorial of the women of the United States. The name of Miss Anthony was greeted with a yell such as a Milton might imagine to rise from a conclave of the damned. "She asked to plead the cause of her sex; to demand the enfranchisement of the women of America—the only class of citizens not represented in the government, the only class without a vote, and their only disability, the insurmountable one of sex." As these last significant words, with more than significant accent and modulation, came from the lips of the knightly, the courtly Horatio, a bestial roar of laughter, swelling now into an almost Niagara chorus, now subsiding into comparative silence, and again without further provocation rising into infernal sublimity, shook the roof of Tammany. Sex—the sex of women—was the subject of this infernal scorn; and the great Democratic gathering, with yells and shrieks and demoniac, deafening howls, consigned the memorial of Susan B. Anthony to the committee on resolutions.
Miss Anthony brushed off the sarcasm and, along with Mrs. Stanton, prepared a memorial.[46] The convention gathered and dedicated Tammany Hall on July 4, 1868. This marked the first time since the war that southern Democrats joined northern Democrats306 in a national convention. Despite their natural conservatism and their distance from the women's rights movement that had previously stirred the North for the last decade, it’s easy to imagine their shock when Miss Anthony, Mrs. Stanton, and a few other women entered the grand hall and took their reserved seats on the left side of the platform. Their memorial was sent to President Horatio Seymour, who passed it on to the secretary, who then read it amidst jeers and laughter. It was subsequently handed off to the resolution committee, where it was ignored completely. The special correspondent of the Chicago Republican provides this account of the scene when the memorial was presented:
The World, the Herald, the Democratic press generally, spoke of this incident in satirical and half-contemptuous tones, and the few papers which treated it seriously declared in effect that, if they had to take the "nigger," they might as well add woman to the unpalatable dose. A petition from the Workingmen's Association to this same convention, demanding a "greenback plank" in the platform, was received with great respect and the plank put in as requested—offering the very strongest object lesson of the superiority of an enfranchised over a disfranchised class. It was not that the convention 307 had more respect for the workingman, per se, but they feared his vote and so adopted the greenback plank in order to placate him, and then nominated for President the most ultra of gold bond-paying advocates.
Susan B. Anthony stepped into the convention like Minerva, the goddess of wisdom. Her arrival brought not applause, but mockery from a waning masculinity. The notable Horatio proclaimed, with a sense of superiority, that he had a memorial from the women of the United States. Miss Anthony's name sparked a roar reminiscent of what a poet like Milton might imagine coming from a group of the damned. "She came to advocate for her gender; to demand voting rights for the women of America—the only group of citizens not represented in government, the only group without a vote, and their only barrier, an impossible one, being their gender." As these significant words, delivered with great emphasis, flowed from the polished Horatio, a harsh wave of laughter erupted, growing into an almost overwhelming chorus before fading into relative silence, only to rise again, without any further provocation, into a nearly hellish uproar that shook the roof of Tammany. The target of ridicule was women—their gender; and the vast Democratic assembly, filled with shouts and howls and deafening noise, sent Susan B. Anthony's memorial to the committee on resolutions.
The Revolution took up with great earnestness the cause of workingwomen, investigated their condition and published many articles in regard to it. A meeting was called at the office of The Revolution and a Workingwoman's Association formed, with officers chosen from the various occupations represented, which ranged from typesetters to ragpickers. In September the National Labor Union Congress was held in Germania Hall, New York, and Miss Anthony was selected to represent this association. Mr. J. C. C. Whaley, a master workman from the great iron mills of Philadelphia, presided and she was cordially received. A committee on female labor was formed with her as chairman, and reported a strong set of resolutions, urging the organization of women's trades unions, demanding an eight-hour law and equal pay in all positions, and pledging support to secure the ballot for women.
The World, the Herald, and the Democratic press in general talked about this incident in a sarcastic and somewhat dismissive way. The few newspapers that took it seriously implied that if they had to accept the "Black man," they might as well include women in the unappealing mix. A petition from the Workingmen's Association to the same convention, requesting a "greenback plank" in the platform, was treated with considerable respect and the plank was included as they asked—showing a clear example of how much better off an enfranchised class is compared to a disenfranchised one. It wasn't that the convention 307 had more respect for the working class itself; they were worried about his vote, so they added the greenback plank to keep him happy, and then nominated for President the most extreme supporter of gold bond-paying policies.
After an extended discussion the words "to secure the ballot" were stricken out, and a resolution adopted that "by accepting Miss Anthony as a delegate, the Labor Congress did not commit itself to her position on female suffrage." Here was this great body of men, honestly anxious to do something to ameliorate the condition of workingwomen, and yet denying to them the ballot, the strongest weapon which the workingman possessed for his own protection; unable to see that by placing it in the hands of women, they would not only give to them immense power but would double the strength of all labor organizations.
The Revolution seriously took on the cause of working women, looked into their situation, and published many articles about it. A meeting was held at the office of The Revolution where a Workingwoman's Association was formed, with officers elected from various occupations, including typesetters and ragpickers. In September, the National Labor Union Congress took place at Germania Hall in New York, and Miss Anthony was chosen to represent this association. Mr. J. C. C. Whaley, a master worker from the huge iron mills of Philadelphia, presided over the meeting, where she received a warm welcome. A committee on female labor was established with her as the chair, and they reported a strong set of resolutions, pushing for the formation of women's trade unions, demanding an eight-hour workday and equal pay in all jobs, and promising to support the fight for women's voting rights.
Miss Anthony gave a large amount of time to the cause of workingwomen, taught them how to organize among themselves, stirred up the newspapers to speak in their behalf, and interested in them many prominent women and also "Sorosis," that famous club, which had just been formed. In addressing women typesetters she said: "The four things indispensable to a compositor are quickness of movement, good spelling, 308 correct punctuation and brains enough to take in the idea of the article to be set up. Therefore, let no young woman think of learning the trade unless she possesses these requisites. Without them there will be only hard work and small pay. Make up your minds to take the 'lean' with the 'fat,' and be early and late at the case precisely as men are. I do not demand equal pay for any women save those who do equal work in value. Scorn to be coddled by your employers; make them understand that you are in their service as workers, not as women."
After a lengthy discussion, the phrase "to secure the ballot" was removed, and a resolution was adopted stating that "by accepting Miss Anthony as a delegate, the Labor Congress did not commit itself to her position on female suffrage." Here was this large group of men, genuinely eager to improve the conditions for working women, yet denying them the right to vote, the most powerful tool that working men had for their own protection. They couldn’t see that by giving women the vote, they would not only empower them but also double the strength of all labor organizations.
The diary says in October, "Blue days these." Mr. Train was still in the Dublin jail. Mr. Melliss was doing his part manfully, subscribers were constantly coming in, but no paper can be sustained by its subscription-list. Miss Anthony wrote hundreds of letters in its interests, and walked many a weary mile and had many an unpleasant experience soliciting advertisements, but the Republicans were hostile and the Democrats had no use for The Revolution. Invariably the more liberal-minded men would say: "We advertise in the Tribune and Independent, and your paper will reach few homes where one or the other is not taken;" which was true. All the business and financial management devolved upon Miss Anthony, and she was untrained in this department. She labored all the day and late into the night over these details, longing to be in the field and pushing the cause by means of the platform, as she had been accustomed to do, and yet feeling that through the paper she could reach a larger audience. Her diary shows that, notwithstanding past differences, she still visited at Phillips', Garrison's, Greeley's and very often at Tilton's. In August she tells of attending the funeral of the baby in the family of the last, the departure from the usual customs, the house filled with sunshine, the mother dressed in white, and the inspired words of Mr. Beecher.
Miss Anthony dedicated a lot of time to the cause of working women, teaching them how to organize, encouraging newspapers to advocate for them, and attracting the interest of many prominent women and the famous club "Sorosis," which had just been formed. When speaking to women typesetters, she said: "The four essential things for a compositor are speed, good spelling, 308 correct punctuation, and enough intelligence to grasp the concept of the article being set up. So, no young woman should consider learning the trade unless she has these qualifications. Without them, you'll just face hard work and low pay. Be prepared to accept the 'lean' times with the 'fat,' and show up early and stay late at the case just like men do. I don't demand equal pay for any women except those who do equal work in value. Don’t accept being pampered by your employers; make it clear that you are working for them as professionals, not as women."
She is invited to Flushing, Owego and various places to address teachers' institutes and occasionally to give a lyceum lecture and, regardless of all fatigue, goes wherever a few dollars may be gathered. Mrs. Stanton finishes her new home at 309 Tenafly, N. J., and Miss Anthony enjoys slipping over there for a quiet Sunday. Mrs. Stanton did most of her editorial work at home and Mr. Pillsbury stayed in the office.
The diary notes in October, "Blue days these." Mr. Train was still in Dublin jail. Mr. Melliss was doing his part valiantly; subscribers kept coming in, but no publication can survive on subscriptions alone. Miss Anthony wrote hundreds of letters to support it, walked many weary miles, and faced many unpleasant experiences while soliciting ads, but the Republicans were unfriendly and the Democrats had no interest in The Revolution. Often, the more progressive men would say, "We advertise in the Tribune and Independent, and your paper will reach few homes that don't take one or the other," which was true. All the business and financial management fell to Miss Anthony, and she wasn’t trained in that area. She worked all day and late into the night on these details, wishing she could be out in the field promoting the cause from the platform like she was used to, yet knowing that through the paper she could reach a broader audience. Her diary reveals that, despite past disagreements, she still visited Phillips', Garrison's, Greeley's, and often Tilton's. In August, she wrote about attending the funeral of the baby in Tilton's family, the break from usual customs, the house filled with sunshine, the mother dressed in white, and the inspiring words of Mr. Beecher.
The last battle for 1868 was made in what was known as the Hester Vaughan case. When Anna Dickinson lectured in New York before the Workingwoman's Association she told the story of Hester Vaughan: A respectable English girl, twenty years old, married and came to Philadelphia only to find that the husband had another wife. She then secured employment at housework and was seduced by a man who deserted her as soon as he knew she was to become a mother. She wandered about the streets and finally, in the dead of winter, after being alone and in labor three days, her child was born in a garret and she lay on the floor twenty-four hours without fire or food. When discovered the child was dead and the mother had nearly perished. Circumstances indicated that she might have killed the child. Four days after its birth, she was taken to prison, where she was kept for five months, then tried, found guilty and sentenced to be hanged. She had now been in jail ten months.
She gets invited to Flushing, Owego, and various other places to speak at teachers' institutes and occasionally to give a lecture at a lyceum, and despite feeling tired, she goes wherever she can make a little money. Mrs. Stanton finishes her new home at 309 Tenafly, N. J., and Miss Anthony loves to sneak over there for a peaceful Sunday. Mrs. Stanton did most of her editorial work at home while Mr. Pillsbury stayed in the office.
The Revolution and the Workingwoman's Association, headed by Miss Anthony, took up the case, not so much because of the individual as to call attention to the wrongs constantly perpetrated against woman. They created such a public sentiment that a great meeting was held in Cooper Institute, where Horace Greeley presided and a number of well-known men and women took part, including Mrs. Stanton, Mrs. Rose, Dr. Lozier and Eleanor Kirk.[47] Speaking briefly but to the point Miss Anthony submitted resolutions demanding that women should be tried by a jury of their peers, have a voice in making the laws and electing the officers who execute them; and declaring for the abolition of capital punishment. These were adopted with enthusiasm and the meeting, by unanimous vote, asked the governor of Pennsylvania for an unconditional 310 pardon for the girl, while over $300 were subscribed for her benefit. Through Miss Anthony arrangements were made for Mrs. Stanton and Elizabeth Smith Miller to carry to Governor Geary a memorial from the Workingwoman's Association in behalf of Hester Vaughan. During their interview the governor declared emphatically that justice never would be done in such cases until women were in the jury-box. These efforts, supplemented by others afterwards made in Philadelphia, resulted in his granting the pardon, and the girl was assisted back to her home in England.
The last battle of 1868 was centered around the Hester Vaughan case. When Anna Dickinson gave a lecture in New York for the Workingwoman's Association, she shared Hester Vaughan's story: A respectable 20-year-old English girl got married and moved to Philadelphia, only to discover that her husband already had another wife. She then found work doing house chores but was seduced by a man who abandoned her as soon as he learned she was pregnant. She roamed the streets, and eventually, in the dead of winter, after being alone in labor for three days, she gave birth to her child in a cramped attic and lay on the floor for 24 hours without heat or food. When she was finally found, the child was dead, and the mother was close to death. There were circumstances that suggested she might have killed her baby. Four days after the birth, she was taken to prison, where she stayed for five months before being tried, found guilty, and sentenced to hang. By that time, she had already spent ten months in jail.
Although The Revolution suffered the anxieties inseparable from the launching of a new paper, it found much reason for encouragement. A number of prominent men and newspapers, during the year, had come out boldly in favor of woman suffrage and there seemed to be a considerable public sentiment drifting in that direction; but there were signs even more hopeful than these. Immediately upon the assembling of Congress, in December, 1868, Senator S. C. Pomeroy, of Kansas, presented a resolution as an amendment to the Federal Constitution providing that "the basis of suffrage in the United States shall be that of citizenship; and all native or naturalized citizens shall enjoy the same rights and privileges of the elective franchise; but each State shall determine by law the age," etc.
The Revolution and the Workingwoman's Association, led by Miss Anthony, took on the case, not just for the sake of the individual but to highlight the injustices that women face. They generated such strong public sentiment that a large meeting was held at Cooper Institute, with Horace Greeley presiding and many prominent men and women in attendance, including Mrs. Stanton, Mrs. Rose, Dr. Lozier, and Eleanor Kirk.[47] Speaking briefly but effectively, Miss Anthony presented resolutions calling for women to be tried by a jury of their peers, to have a say in making the laws, and to elect the officials who enforce them; she also advocated for the abolition of capital punishment. These resolutions were enthusiastically adopted, and the meeting unanimously requested the governor of Pennsylvania for an unconditional 310 pardon for the girl, while over $300 were raised for her support. Through Miss Anthony, arrangements were made for Mrs. Stanton and Elizabeth Smith Miller to deliver a memorial from the Workingwoman's Association to Governor Geary on behalf of Hester Vaughan. During their meeting, the governor stated clearly that true justice would never be achieved in such cases until women were included in the jury box. These efforts, along with additional actions taken later in Philadelphia, ultimately led to the governor granting the pardon, and the girl was helped back to her home in England.
S.C. Pomeroy
Although The Revolution faced the usual anxieties that come with starting a new publication, it found many reasons for optimism. Throughout the year, several prominent individuals and newspapers had openly supported woman suffrage, and there appeared to be significant public sentiment moving in that direction; however, there were even more encouraging signs. As soon as Congress convened in December 1868, Senator S. C. Pomeroy from Kansas introduced a resolution as an amendment to the Federal Constitution stating that "the basis of suffrage in the United States shall be that of citizenship; and all native or naturalized citizens shall enjoy the same rights and privileges of the elective franchise; but each State shall determine by law the age," etc.

A few days later George W. Julian, of Indiana, offered a similar amendment in the House of Representatives, as follows: "The right of suffrage in the United States shall be based upon citizenship, and shall be regulated by Congress; and all citizens of the United States, whether native or naturalized, shall enjoy 311 this right equally, without any distinction or discrimination whatever founded on sex."
S.C. Pomeroy
Geo W. Julian
A few days later, George W. Julian from Indiana proposed a similar amendment in the House of Representatives, stating: "The right to vote in the United States shall be based on citizenship and shall be regulated by Congress; and all citizens of the United States, whether native or naturalized, shall enjoy 311 this right equally, without any distinction or discrimination based on sex."

The last of December Senator Henry Wilson, of Massachusetts, and Mr. Julian introduced bills to enfranchise women in the District of Columbia, the latter including also the women in the Territories. A review of the situation in The Revolution of December 31, said:
Geo W. Julian
In our political opinions, we have been grossly misunderstood and misrepresented. There never was a time, even in the re-election of Lincoln, when to differ from the leading party was considered more inane and treasonable. Because we made a higher demand than either Republicans or Abolitionists, they in self-defense revenged themselves by calling us Democrats; just as the church at the time of its apathy on the slavery question revenged the goadings of Abolitionists by calling them "infidels." If claiming the right of suffrage for every citizen, male and female, black and white, a platform far above that occupied by Republicans or Abolitionists today, is to be a Democrat, then we glory in the name, but we have not so understood the policy of modern Democracy. Though The Revolution and its founders may have been open to criticism in many respects, all admit that we have galvanized the people into life and slumbering friends to action on this question.
The last of December, Senator Henry Wilson from Massachusetts and Mr. Julian introduced bills to grant women voting rights in the District of Columbia, with the latter also including women in the Territories. A review of the situation in The Revolution on December 31 said:
In our political views, we have been seriously misunderstood and misrepresented. There has never been a time, even during Lincoln's re-election, when going against the main party was seen as more foolish and traitorous. Because we made a stronger demand than either the Republicans or the Abolitionists, they responded by calling us Democrats; similar to how the church, when it was indifferent to the slavery issue, labeled the Abolitionists "infidels" to push back against their criticism. If insisting on the right to vote for every citizen, male and female, Black and white—a platform much stronger than what Republicans or Abolitionists support today—means being a Democrat, then we proudly accept that label, even though we haven't fully understood the modern Democratic agenda. While The Revolution and its founders may have had their flaws, everyone agrees that we have energized the public and inspired previously dormant supporters to take action on this issue.
Notwithstanding the protests and petitions of the women, the Fourteenth Amendment had been formally declared ratified July 28, 1868, the word "male" being thereby three times branded on the Constitution. In the resolutions of Senator Pomeroy and Mr. Julian, however, they found new hope and fresh courage. They had learned that the Federal Constitution could be so amended as to enfranchise a million men who but yesterday were plantation slaves. Here, then, was the power which must be invoked for the enfranchisement of women. From the office of The Revolution went out thousands of petitions to the women of the country to be circulated in the interests of an amendment to regulate the suffrage without making distinctions of sex. It was decided that a convention should be held in Washington in order to meet the legislators on their own ground. A suffrage association had been formed in that city with Josephine S. Griffing, founder of the Freedmen's Bureau, president; Hamilton Willcox, secretary. This was the first ever held in the capital, and it brought many new and valuable workers into the field. Clara Barton here made her first appearance at a woman suffrage meeting, and was a true and consistent advocate of the principle from that day forward.
CHAPTER XIX.
AMENDMENT XV—FOUNDING OF NATIONAL SOCIETY.
1869.
The venerable Lucretia Mott presided, and Senator Pomeroy opened the convention with an eloquent speech, January 19, 1869. A feature of this occasion was the appearance of several 314 young colored orators, speaking in opposition to suffrage for women and denouncing them for jeopardizing the black man's claim to the ballot by insisting upon their own. One of them, George Downing, standing by the side of Lucretia Mott, declared that God intended the male should dominate the female everywhere! Another was a son of Robert Purvis, who was earnestly and publicly rebuked by his father. Edward M. Davis, son-in-law of Lucretia Mott, also condemned the women for their temerity and severely criticised the resolutions, which demanded the same political rights for women as for negro men.
Despite the protests and petitions from women, the Fourteenth Amendment was officially declared ratified on July 28, 1868, with the word "male" included three times in the Constitution. However, in the resolutions from Senator Pomeroy and Mr. Julian, they found new hope and fresh determination. They discovered that the Federal Constitution could be amended to grant voting rights to a million men who were recently plantation slaves. This, then, was the power that needed to be called upon for the enfranchisement of women. From the office of The Revolution, thousands of petitions were sent out to women across the country to gather support for an amendment to allow suffrage without distinguishing between sexes. It was decided to hold a convention in Washington to engage with legislators directly. A suffrage association had been established in the city, with Josephine S. Griffing, founder of the Freedmen's Bureau, as president, and Hamilton Willcox as secretary. This was the first convention ever held in the capital, attracting many new and valuable activists to the movement. Clara Barton made her first appearance at a women's suffrage meeting here and committed herself as a true and consistent advocate for the cause from that day on.
Miss Anthony called on Senator Harlan, of Iowa, chairman of the District committee, who readily granted the women a hearing which took place January 26, when she and Mrs. Stanton gave their arguments. This was the first congressional hearing ever granted to present the question of woman suffrage. An appeal was sent to Congress praying that women should be recognized in the next amendment. In her letter to the Philadelphia Press, Grace Greenwood thus described the leading spirits of the convention:
The respected Lucretia Mott led the gathering, and Senator Pomeroy kicked off the convention with a powerful speech on January 19, 1869. One notable aspect of this event was the participation of several 314 young Black speakers who opposed women's suffrage and criticized them for putting the Black man's right to vote at risk by insisting on their own. Among them, George Downing, standing next to Lucretia Mott, stated that God intended for men to dominate women everywhere! Another speaker was a son of Robert Purvis, who was openly chastised by his father. Edward M. Davis, Lucretia Mott's son-in-law, also denounced the women for their boldness and strongly criticized the resolutions that called for equal political rights for women and Black men.
Near Lucretia Mott sat her sister, Martha Wright, a woman of strong, constant character and rare intellectual culture; Mrs. Cady Stanton, of impressive and beautiful appearance, in the rich prime of an active, generous and healthful life; Miss Susan B. Anthony, looking all she is, a keen, energetic, uncompromising, unconquerable, passionately earnest woman; Clara Barton, whose name is dear to soldiers and blessed in thousands of homes to which the soldiers shall return no more—a brave, benignant-looking woman....
Miss Anthony visited Senator Harlan from Iowa, who was the chairman of the District committee. He quickly agreed to give the women a hearing on January 26, where she and Mrs. Stanton presented their arguments. This was the first congressional hearing ever held to discuss woman suffrage. An appeal was sent to Congress asking that women be included in the next amendment. In her letter to the Philadelphia Press, Grace Greenwood described the key figures of the convention:
Miss Anthony followed in a strain not only cheerful, but exultant—reviewing the advance of the cause from its first despised beginning to its present position, where, she alleged, it commanded the attention of the world. She spoke in her usual pungent, vehement style, hitting the nail on the head every time, and driving it in up to the head. Indeed, it seems to me, that while Lucretia Mott may be said to be the soul of this movement, and Mrs. Stanton the mind, the "swift, keen intelligence," Miss Anthony, alert, aggressive and indefatigable, is its nervous energy—its propulsive force....
Near Lucretia Mott sat her sister, Martha Wright, a woman of strong, steady character and exceptional education; Mrs. Cady Stanton, striking and beautiful, in the vibrant prime of an active, generous, and healthy life; Miss Susan B. Anthony, embodying all she represents—sharp, energetic, unyielding, unbeatable, and deeply passionate; Clara Barton, a name beloved by soldiers and cherished in countless homes to which the soldiers will never return—a brave, kind-looking woman....
To see the three chief figures of this great movement sitting upon a stage in joint council, like the three Fates of a new dispensation—dignity and the ever-acceptable grace of scholarly earnestness, intelligence and beneficence making them prominent—is assurance that the women of our country, bereft 315 of defenders or injured by false ones, have advocates equal to the great demands of their cause.
Miss Anthony spoke with a tone that was not just upbeat, but also triumphant—reflecting on the progress of the cause from its initially overlooked beginnings to its current status, which she claimed captured the world's attention. She spoke in her usual sharp, passionate manner, hitting the mark every time and driving it home. In fact, it seems to me that while Lucretia Mott could be seen as the heart of this movement, and Mrs. Stanton as the intellect, the "quick, sharp intelligence" of Miss Anthony—who is always alert, aggressive, and tireless—represents its driving force and energy.
Grace Greenwood
To see the three main leaders of this important movement sitting together on stage, like the three Fates of a new era—dignified and gracefully embodying the seriousness of scholarship, intelligence, and kindness that sets them apart—is a guarantee that the women of our country, deprived 315 of true supporters or harmed by false ones, have advocates who can meet the significant demands of their cause.

Immediately after this convention, Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton, by invitation of a number of State suffrage committees, made a tour of Chicago, Springfield, Bloomington, Galena, St. Louis, Madison, Milwaukee and Toledo, speaking to large audiences. At St. Louis they were met by a delegation of ladies and escorted to the Southern Hotel, and then invited by the president of the State association, Mrs. Virginia L. Minor, to visit various points of interest in the city. At Springfield, Ill., the lieutenant-governor presided over their convention, and Governor Palmer and many members of the legislature were in the audience. With the Chicago delegation, Mrs. Livermore, Judge Waite, Judge Bradwell, Mrs. Myra Bradwell, editor of the Legal News, and others, they addressed the legislature. At Chicago, in Crosby Music Hall, the meeting was decidedly aggressive. Miss Anthony's resolutions stirred up the politicians, but she defended them bravely, according to report:
Grace Greenwood
She stood outside of any party which threw itself across the path of complete suffrage to woman, and therefore she stood outside of the Republican party, where all her male relatives and friends were to be found. Republican leaders had told them to wait; that the movement was inopportune; but all the time had continued to put up bars and barriers against its future success. No woman should belong at present to either party; she should simply stand for suffrage.... She protested against any Republicans saying that Mrs. Stanton or herself had laid a straw in the way of the negro. Because they insisted that the rights of women ought to have equal prominence with the rights of black men, it was 316 assumed that they opposed the enfranchisement of the negro. She repelled the assumption. She arraigned the entire Republican party because they refused to see that all women, black and white, were as much in political servitude as the black men.
Immediately after this convention, Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton, invited by several state suffrage committees, toured Chicago, Springfield, Bloomington, Galena, St. Louis, Madison, Milwaukee, and Toledo, speaking to large crowds. In St. Louis, they were greeted by a delegation of women and escorted to the Southern Hotel. They were then invited by the president of the state association, Mrs. Virginia L. Minor, to visit various attractions in the city. In Springfield, Illinois, the lieutenant governor presided over their convention, and Governor Palmer along with many members of the legislature attended. Along with the Chicago delegation—including Mrs. Livermore, Judge Waite, Judge Bradwell, Mrs. Myra Bradwell, editor of the Legal News, and others—they addressed the legislature. In Chicago, at Crosby Music Hall, the meeting was notably assertive. Miss Anthony's resolutions riled up the politicians, but she defended them bravely, according to reports:
At this meeting Robert Laird Collyer (not the distinguished Robert Collyer) made a long address against the enfranchisement of women, mixing up purity, propriety and pedestals in the usual incoherent fashion. He was so completely annihilated by Anna Dickinson that no further defense of the measure was necessary. Suffrage societies were organized in Chicago, Milwaukee and Toledo. In her account of this convention, Mrs. Livermore wrote of Miss Anthony:
She distanced herself from any group that opposed full voting rights for women, which meant she was not a part of the Republican Party, where all her male relatives and friends were. Republican leaders had told them to wait, claiming the timing for the movement wasn't right; however, they kept creating barriers to its future success. No woman should be affiliated with either party right now; instead, she should focus solely on advocating for suffrage... She challenged any Republicans who claimed that either she or Mrs. Stanton had hindered progress for Black people. Because they argued that women's rights should be regarded as equally important as Black men's rights, it was assumed they were against the enfranchisement of Black people. She rejected that assumption. She criticized the entire Republican Party for failing to acknowledge that all women, both Black and white, were just as politically oppressed as Black men.
She is entirely unlike Mrs. Stanton, notwithstanding the twain have been fast friends and diligent co-laborers for a quarter of a century.... Miss Anthony is a woman whom no one can know thoroughly without respect. Entirely honest, fearfully in earnest, energetic, self-sacrificing, kind-hearted, scorning difficulties of whatever magnitude, and rigidly sensible, she is the warm friend of the poor, oppressed, homeless and friendless of her own sex. Her labors in their behalf are tireless and judicious. You think her plain until she smiles, and then the worn face lights up so pleasantly and benignly that you forget to criticise and your heart warms towards her. Knowing her great goodness, and how she has devoted her life to hard, unpaid work for the negro slave and for woman, we can never read jibes and jeers at her expense without a twinge of pain. Let the press laugh at her as it may, she is a mighty power among both men and women, and those who really love as well as respect her are a host.
At this meeting, Robert Laird Collyer (not the well-known Robert Collyer) gave a lengthy speech opposing women's voting rights, tying together themes of purity, propriety, and idealization in his typical disorganized manner. Anna Dickinson completely dismantled his arguments, making any further defense of the measure unnecessary. Suffrage groups were formed in Chicago, Milwaukee, and Toledo. In her account of this convention, Mrs. Livermore wrote about Miss Anthony:
In this winter of 1869 the Press Club of New York made the startling innovation of giving a dinner to which ladies were invited. Among the guests were Phoebe and Alice Gary, Mary L. Booth, Elizabeth Oakes Smith, Olive Logan, Mary Kyle Dallas and Miss Anthony. J. W. Simonton, of the Associated Press, was toast-master. Not having had the slightest intimation that she was expected to speak, Miss Anthony was called upon to respond to the question, "Why don't the women propose?" Without a moment's hesitation she arose and said: "Under present conditions, it would require a good deal of assurance for a woman to say to a man, 'Please, sir, will you support me for the rest of my life?' When all avocations are open to woman and she has an opportunity to 317 acquire a competence, she will then be in a position where it will not be humiliating for her to ask the man she loves to share her prosperity. Instead of requesting him to provide food, raiment and shelter for her, she can invite him into her home, contribute her share to the partnership and not be an utter dependent. There will be also another advantage in this arrangement—if he prove unworthy she can ask him to walk out." It will be seen by this original and daring reply that Miss Anthony could not attend a dinner party even without creating a sensation.
She is totally different from Mrs. Stanton, even though they've been close friends and dedicated partners for twenty-five years. Miss Anthony is someone who earns respect from anyone who truly knows her. She's completely honest, very serious, energetic, selfless, kind-hearted, unafraid of challenges of any size, and very practical. She's a passionate friend to the poor, oppressed, homeless, and lonely women. Her efforts on their behalf are both tireless and well thought out. You might think she looks plain until she smiles, and then her worn face lights up so warmly and kindly that you forget to judge her, and your heart opens to her. Knowing her immense goodness and how she has devoted her life to hard, unpaid work for enslaved people and for women, it's painful to see mockery directed at her. Let the press laugh at her if it wants; she is a powerful force among both men and women, and many genuinely love and respect her.
The passage of the Thirteenth Amendment abolishing slavery, and the Fourteenth establishing the citizenship of the negro, did not prove sufficient to protect him in his right of suffrage and, although Sumner and other Republican leaders contended that another amendment was not necessary for this, the majority of the party did not share this opinion and it became evident that one would have to be added.[48] Those proposed by Pomeroy and Julian securing universal suffrage were brushed aside without debate, and the following was submitted by Congress to the State legislatures, February 27, 1869:
In the winter of 1869, the Press Club of New York made a surprising move by hosting a dinner that included women. Among the guests were Phoebe and Alice Gary, Mary L. Booth, Elizabeth Oakes Smith, Olive Logan, Mary Kyle Dallas, and Miss Anthony. J. W. Simonton from the Associated Press served as the toastmaster. Not having any notice that she was expected to speak, Miss Anthony was asked to respond to the question, "Why don't women propose?" Without hesitating, she stood up and said: "Given the current circumstances, it would take a lot of confidence for a woman to say to a man, 'Please, sir, will you support me for the rest of my life?' When all professions are open to women and they have the chance to 317 achieve financial independence, they will be in a position where it won’t be embarrassing to ask the man they love to share in their success. Instead of asking him to provide for her in terms of food, clothing, and shelter, she can welcome him into her home, contribute her part to the partnership, and not be completely dependent. There’s also another benefit to this arrangement—if he turns out to be unworthy, she can simply ask him to leave." It’s clear from this original and bold response that Miss Anthony couldn’t attend a dinner party without stirring up some excitement.
The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States, or by any State, on account of race, color or previous condition of servitude.
The passing of the Thirteenth Amendment, which abolished slavery, and the Fourteenth Amendment, which granted citizenship to Black people, wasn't enough to protect their voting rights. While Sumner and other Republican leaders argued that another amendment was unnecessary, most of the party disagreed, and it became clear that an additional amendment was needed.[48] The proposals for universal suffrage from Pomeroy and Julian were dismissed without discussion, and the following was presented by Congress to the state legislatures on February 27, 1869:
Amendment XIV had settled the status of citizenship. "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside." Now came the next measure to protect the citizen's right to vote, which proposed to guard against any discrimination on account of race, of color, of previous condition, but by the omission of the one word "sex," all women still were left disfranchised. At this time the leading Republicans believed in universal suffrage. Garrison, Phillips, Greeley, Sumner, Tilton, Wilson, Wade, 318 Stevens, Brown, Julian and many others had publicly declared their belief in the right of woman to the ballot, but now driven by party necessity, they repudiated their principles, and deferred the day of her freedom for generations. Yet it was not forgotten still carefully to include her in the basis of representation, fully to make her amenable to the laws, and strictly to hold her to her share of taxation. In reference to this The Revolution said:
No citizen of the United States shall be denied or restricted from voting by the United States or any state because of their race, color, or previous condition of servitude.
The proposed amendment for "manhood suffrage" not only rouses woman's prejudices against the negro, but on the other hand his contempt and hostility toward her.... Just as the Democratic cry of a "white man's government" created the antagonism between the Irishman and the negro, which culminated in the New York riots of 1863, so the Republican cry of "manhood suffrage" creates an antagonism between black men and all women, which will culminate in fearful outrages on womanhood, especially in the Southern States. While we fully appreciate the philosophy that every extension of rights prepares the way for greater freedom to new classes and hastens the day of liberty to all, we at the same time see that the immediate effect of class enfranchisement is greater tyranny and abuse of those who have no voice in the government. Had Irishmen been disfranchised in this country, they would have made common cause with the negro in fighting for his rights, but when exalted above him, they proved his worst enemies. The negro will be the victim for generations to come, of the prejudice engendered by making this a white man's government. While the enfranchisement of each new class of white men was a step toward his ultimate freedom, it increased his degradation in the transition period, and he touched the depths when all men but himself were crowned with citizenship.
Amendment XIV established the status of citizenship. "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State where they live." Next came a measure aimed at protecting the right to vote for citizens, which sought to prevent discrimination based on race, color, or previous condition, but by leaving out the word "sex," all women remained disenfranchised. At this time, leading Republicans believed in universal suffrage. Garrison, Phillips, Greeley, Sumner, Tilton, Wilson, Wade, 318 Stevens, Brown, Julian, and many others had publicly stated their belief in a woman's right to vote, but now, due to party needs, they abandoned their principles and delayed her freedom for generations. Yet, it wasn't forgotten to still include her in the basis of representation, making her fully subject to the laws, and holding her accountable for her share of taxes. Regarding this, The Revolution stated:
Just so with woman, while the enfranchisement of all men hastens the day for justice to her, it makes her degradation more complete in the transition state. It is to escape the added tyranny, persecutions, insults, horrors which will surely be visited upon her in the establishment of an aristocracy of sex in this republic, that we raise our indignant protest against this wholesale desecration of woman in the pending amendment, and earnestly pray the rulers of this nation to consider the degradation of disfranchisement. Our Republican leaders see that it is a protection and defense for the black man, giving him new dignity and self-respect, and making his rights more sacred in the eyes of his enemies. It is mockery to tell woman she is excluded from all political privileges on the ground of respect; since the laws and constitutions for her, in common with all disfranchised classes, harmonize with the degradation of the position.
The proposed amendment for "manhood suffrage" not only fuels women's biases against Black men, but it also increases his resentment and hostility towards her. Similar to how the Democratic slogan of a "white man's government" sparked conflict between Irishmen and Black men, leading to the New York riots of 1863, the Republican slogan of "manhood suffrage" creates tension between Black men and all women, which will lead to horrific violence against women, especially in the Southern States. While we fully grasp that expanding rights leads to greater freedom and speeds up the arrival of liberty for everyone, we also acknowledge that the immediate effect of class voting rights is heightened oppression and mistreatment of those who lack a voice in the government. If Irishmen had been denied the right to vote in this country, they would have joined forces with Black men to advocate for their rights, but once they were given a higher status, they became his fiercest opponents. For generations, Black men will endure the prejudice brought on by establishing this as a white man's government. Although each new group of white men gaining the right to vote was a step towards eventual freedom for him, it only intensified his degradation during that transition, and he reached his lowest point when all men except him were granted citizenship.
respect; since the laws and constitutions concerning her, just like those regarding all disenfranchised groups, reflect the degradation of their position.
In their protest against this discrimination and their insistence that the word "sex" should be included in the Fifteenth Amendment, Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton stood practically 319 alone. Most of the other women allowed themselves to be persuaded by the politicians that it was their duty to step aside and wait till the negro was invested with this highest attribute of citizenship.
In their protest against this discrimination and their insistence that the word "sex" should be included in the Fifteenth Amendment, Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton stood practically 319 alone. Most of the other women were convinced by the politicians that it was their duty to step aside and wait until Black men were given this highest attribute of citizenship.
In the first issue of The Revolution for 1869 appeared this letter from George Francis Train, who had just been released from the Dublin jail and had returned to America:
In the first issue of The Revolution for 1869, this letter from George Francis Train appeared, who had just been released from the Dublin jail and had returned to America:
....I knew the load I had to carry in the woman question, but you did not know the load you had to carry in Train. When the poor man's horse fell and broke his leg, the crowd sympathized. "How much you pity?" asked the Frenchman; "I pity man $20." I saw that the theoretical breeching had broken in Kansas, and with voice, with pen, with time and, what none of your old friends did, with purse, I threw myself into the battle.
I recognized the weight of the issues women face, but you didn’t see the challenges you had with Train. When a poor man’s horse fell and broke its leg, the crowd sympathized with him. "How much do you care?" the Frenchman asked; "I care about the man $20." I noticed that the theoretical support had failed in Kansas, so I contributed my voice, my writing, my time, and unlike your previous friends—my money—I jumped into the fight.
With your remarkable industry and extraordinary executive ability you have astonished all by your success. You remember I begged you never to stop to defend me but to push on to victory. Now both parties are neck and neck to see who shall lead the army of in-coming negro voters. Woman already begins to creep. Soon she will walk and legislate. No sneers, no low jokes, no obscene remarks are now bandied about. The iceberg of prejudice is moving down the Gulf Stream of a wider liberty and will melt away with the bigotry of ages. The ball is rolling down the hill. You no longer need my services. The Revolution is a power. Would it not be more so without Train? Had you not better omit my name in 1869? Would it not bring you more subscribers, and better assist the noble cause of reform? Although the Garrisonians have so ungenerously attacked me, perhaps they will do as much for you as I have. If so, tell them, confidentially, the thousands I have devoted to the cause, and guarantee the haters of Train that his name shall not appear in The Revolution after January 1. I can not better show my unselfishness than by asking you to forget my honest exertions for equal rights and equal pay for women, and to shut me out of The Revolution in future, in order to bring in again "the apostates."
Your hard work and outstanding leadership have impressed everyone with your success. Remember I encouraged you to keep defending me and strive for victory. Now both sides are in a close race to see who can lead the wave of Black voters. Women are beginning to assert themselves. Soon they’ll be able to walk and legislate. No more teasing, crude jokes, or offensive comments. The massive wall of prejudice is shifting towards a greater sense of freedom and will eventually fade away with the bigotry of the past. The momentum is growing. You don’t need my assistance anymore. The Revolution has gained significant strength. Wouldn’t it be stronger without Train? Should you think about leaving my name out in 1869? It might draw in more subscribers and better support the noble cause of reform. Even though the Garrisonians have unfairly criticized me, they could benefit you as much as I have. If that’s true, let them know privately about the thousands I’ve contributed to the cause, and assure Train's critics that my name will not appear in The Revolution after January 1. I can’t show my selflessness better than by asking you to overlook my sincere efforts for equal rights and pay for women and to exclude me from The Revolution moving forward, to welcome back "the apostates."
Although Mr. Train continued to supply funds and to send an occasional letter for a few months longer, his active connection with the paper ceased after its first year. In the issue of May 1 it contained the following editorial comment:
Although Mr. Train kept providing funds and sending an occasional letter for a few more months, his active involvement with the paper ended after its first year. The May 1 issue included the following editorial comment:
Our readers will find Mr. Train's valedictory in another column. Feeling that he has been a source of grief to our numerous friends and, through their constant complaints, an annoyance to us, he magnanimously retires. He has always said that as soon as we were safely launched on the tempestuous sea of journalism, he should leave us "to row our own boat." Our partnership dissolves today. Now we shall look for a harvest of new subscribers, as many have written and said to us again and again, if you will only drop Train, we 320 will send you patrons by the hundred. We hope the fact that Train has dropped us will not vitiate these promises. Our generous friend starts for California on May 7, in the first train over the Pacific road. He takes with him the sincere thanks of those who know what he has done in the cause of woman, and of those who appreciate what a power The Revolution has already been in rousing public thought to the importance of her speedy enfranchisement.
You can find Mr. Train's farewell in another column. Feeling that he has caused grief to our many friends and, due to their constant complaints, annoyance to us, he is generously stepping down. He has always said that once we were safely navigating the challenging waters of journalism, he would let us "row our own boat." Our partnership ends today. Now we are looking forward to a wave of new subscribers, as many have written and repeatedly told us that if we just let Train go, we 320 will receive patrons by the hundreds. We hope that Train's departure from us won't affect these promises. Our kind friend is leaving for California on May 7, taking the first train over the Pacific route. He leaves with the heartfelt gratitude of those who recognize his contributions to women and those who understand the impact The Revolution has had in raising public awareness about the pressing need for her enfranchisement.
The heading of the financial department and the column of Wall street gossip, which had given so much offense, were removed, and the paper became purely an advocate of the rights of humanity in general and women in particular. Up to this time the editorial rooms had been in the fourth story of the New York World building, and the paper was printed on the fifth floor of another several blocks away, with no elevator in either. Miss Anthony made the trip from one to the other and climbed the seven flights of stairs half a dozen times a day for sixteen months. In 1869, Mrs. Elizabeth B. Phelps, a wealthy and practical philanthropist of New York City, purchased a large and elegant house on East Twenty-third street, near the Academy of Design, which she dedicated as the "Woman's Bureau." She proposed to rent the rooms wholly for women's clubs and societies and for enterprises conducted by women. The first floor was taken by The Revolution. The handsome and spacious parlors above were to be used for receptions, readings, concerts, etc., and it was Mrs. Phelps' intention to make the Bureau a center, not only for the women of New York, but for all those who might visit the city.
The financial department's heading and the Wall Street gossip column, which had caused so much offense, were removed, and the newspaper became strictly an advocate for the rights of humanity in general and women in particular. Until that point, the editorial offices had been on the fourth floor of the New York World building, and the paper was printed on the fifth floor of another building several blocks away, with no elevator in either. Miss Anthony made the trip between the two and climbed the seven flights of stairs half a dozen times a day for sixteen months. In 1869, Mrs. Elizabeth B. Phelps, a wealthy and practical philanthropist from New York City, bought a large and elegant house on East Twenty-third Street, near the Academy of Design, which she dedicated as the "Woman's Bureau." She planned to rent the rooms exclusively for women's clubs and societies and for enterprises led by women. The first floor was occupied by The Revolution. The attractive and spacious parlors above were to be used for receptions, readings, concerts, etc., and Mrs. Phelps intended to make the Bureau a hub, not just for the women of New York, but for all who might visit the city.
Notwithstanding all that had passed, Miss Anthony did not abate her labors for the Equal Rights Association and she worked unceasingly for the success of the approaching May Anniversary in New York, securing, among other advantages, half fare on all the railroads for delegates. Hundreds of letters were sent out from The Revolution office to distinguished people in all parts of the country and cordial answers were received, showing that the hostility against the paper and its editors was principally confined to a very small area. A private letter from Mrs. Stanton says: "We have written 321 every one of the old friends, ignoring the past and urging them to come. We do so much desire to sink all petty considerations in the one united effort to secure woman suffrage. Though many unkind acts and words have been administered to us, which we have returned with sarcasm and ridicule, there are really only kind feelings in our souls for all the noble men and women who have fought for freedom during the last thirty years."
Notwithstanding everything that had happened, Miss Anthony continued her work for the Equal Rights Association and tirelessly focused on the success of the upcoming May Anniversary in New York, securing, among other benefits, half-price fares on all the railroads for delegates. Hundreds of letters were sent out from The Revolution office to notable individuals across the country, and friendly responses were received, indicating that the opposition to the paper and its editors was mainly limited to a very small area. A private letter from Mrs. Stanton states: "We have written 321 to each of our old friends, setting aside the past and encouraging them to join us. We greatly wish to move beyond all minor issues in our united effort to secure women’s suffrage. Although we have faced many unkind actions and words, which we have met with sarcasm and ridicule, we truly hold only kind feelings in our hearts for all the noble men and women who have fought for freedom over the last thirty years."
Under date of April 4, Mary A. Livermore wrote Miss Anthony, asking if she could secure a pass for her over the Erie road, and saying: "I have written to the New England friends to let bygones be bygones and come to the May meeting. It seems to me personal feelings should be laid aside and women should all pull together." After telling of the excellent prospects of her own suffrage paper, the Agitator, just started in Chicago, she continues: "It seems as if everybody who does not like The Revolution is bound to take the Agitator, which is very well, since they are detachments of the same corps. We must keep up a good understanding and work together. If you want to let people know there is no rivalry between us, you can announce that I am to send your paper fortnightly letters from the West detailing the progress of affairs here."
On April 4, Mary A. Livermore wrote to Miss Anthony, asking if she could get a pass for her over the Erie road, and saying: "I’ve reached out to our New England friends to put the past behind us and attend the May meeting. I believe personal feelings should be set aside so that women can unite." After sharing the great prospects of her new suffrage paper, the Agitator, just launched in Chicago, she adds: "It seems like everyone who isn’t a fan of The Revolution is likely to take the Agitator, which is fine, since they are parts of the same team. We need to maintain a good relationship and work together. If you want to let others know there’s no competition between us, you can announce that I will send your paper letters from the West every two weeks detailing what’s happening here."
A cheery letter from Anna Dickinson says: "Work has run in easy grooves this winter—not that the travel has not often been exhausting and the roads wearisome; but that every one in this western world is ablaze with the grand question. Thank God, and hurrah! I feel in both moods. I hope you and that adorable cherub, E.C.S., are well, and that everything is flourishing as it should flourish with two such saints. As for me, the finger of care touches lightly; furthermore I am in a doubly delectable condition by reason of having my face set towards home, and beyond home is a vista of my Susan's countenance. Please, my dear, can't you meet this sinner at Cortlandt street, and then the sinner and the saint will have all the afternoon together somewhere, and that seems almost too good to be true?" 322
A cheerful letter from Anna Dickinson says: "This winter’s work has gone pretty smoothly—not that traveling hasn't often been tiring and the roads frustrating; but everyone in this western world is fired up about the big question. Thank God, and hooray! I’m feeling both ways. I hope you and that lovely little angel, E.C.S., are doing well and that everything is thriving as it should with two such wonderful people. As for me, stress barely touches me; plus, I’m in an especially great mood because I'm heading home, and beyond home is the sight of Susan’s face. Please, my dear, can’t you meet this sinner at Cortlandt street, and then the sinner and the saint can spend the entire afternoon together somewhere, and that seems almost too good to be true?" 322
This was the beginning of a correspondence with Gail Hamilton, who wrote: "I regret to say that I can neither honor nor shame your anniversary with my presence. I have been out on a sixteen-months' cruise, fighting single handed for equal rights, and am now hauled up in dock for repairs. But you, I am sure, will be glad to know that, though much battered and tempest-tossed, I came into port with all sail set and every rag of bunting waving victory. This is a private note to you, and as you are but a landsman yourself, you will never know if my ropes are not knotted sailor-fashion."
This was the start of a correspondence with Gail Hamilton, who wrote: "I’m sorry to say that I can’t celebrate your anniversary with my presence. I’ve been on a sixteen-month cruise, fighting solo for equal rights, and now I’m in dock for repairs. However, I’m sure you’ll be happy to hear that, despite being battered and tossed around by storms, I arrived in port with all my sails up and every piece of bunting waving victory. This is a private note to you, and since you’re just a landlubber, you’ll never know if my ropes aren’t tied like a sailor’s."

Gail Hamilton
Gail Hamilton
The third aniversary of the Equal Rights Association opened at Steinway Hall, May 12, 1869, Mrs. Stanton presiding, and proved to be the most stormy and unsatisfactory meeting ever held. The usual brilliant galaxy of speakers was present, besides a number of prominent men and women who were just beginning to be heard on the woman suffrage platform. Among these were Olive Logan, Phoebe Couzins, Madam D'Hericourt, a French physician and writer, Rev. Phoebe A. Hanaford, Rev. O.B. Frothingham, Hon. Henry Wilson, Rev. Gilbert Haven and others. There were also more delegates from the West, headed by Mrs. Livermore, than had been present at any previous meeting. The usual number of fine addresses were made and all promised fair, but Stephen S. Foster soon disturbed the harmony by suggesting that it was time for Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton to withdraw from the association, as they had repudiated its principles and the Massachusetts society could no longer co-operate with 323 them. This called forth indignant speeches from all parts of the house, and he was soon silenced.[49]
The third anniversary of the Equal Rights Association kicked off at Steinway Hall on May 12, 1869, with Mrs. Stanton in charge, and it turned out to be the most chaotic and frustrating meeting ever held. The usual impressive lineup of speakers was there, along with several notable men and women who were just starting to make their voices heard on the woman suffrage stage. Among them were Olive Logan, Phoebe Couzins, Madam D'Hericourt, a French doctor and writer, Rev. Phoebe A. Hanaford, Rev. O.B. Frothingham, Hon. Henry Wilson, Rev. Gilbert Haven, and others. There were also more delegates from the West, led by Mrs. Livermore, than had attended any previous meeting. A typical number of excellent speeches were delivered and everything seemed promising, but Stephen S. Foster soon disrupted the atmosphere by suggesting that it was time for Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton to leave the association, as they had rejected its principles and the Massachusetts society could no longer work with them. This prompted angry speeches from all over the room, and he was quickly silenced.323

O.B. Frothingham
O.B. Frothingham
Frederick Douglass and several other men attempted to force the adoption of a resolution that "we gratefully welcome' the pending Fifteenth Amendment prohibiting disfranchisement on account of race and earnestly solicit the State legislatures to pass it without delay." Miss Anthony declared indignantly that she protested against this amendment because it did not mean equal rights; it put 2,000,000 colored men in the position of tyrants over 2,000,000 colored women, who until now had been at least the equals of the men at their side. She continued:
Frederick Douglass and several other men tried to push a resolution that stated "we happily welcome" the upcoming Fifteenth Amendment, which prohibits disenfranchisement based on race, and strongly urged the State legislatures to pass it without delay. Miss Anthony responded angrily, saying she opposed this amendment because it didn't guarantee equal rights; it placed 2,000,000 Black men in a position of power over 2,000,000 Black women, who up until now had been equals to the men beside them. She went on:
The question of precedence has no place on an equal rights platform. The only reason it ever forced itself here was because certain persons insisted that woman must stand back and wait until another class should be enfranchised. In answer we say: "If you will not give the whole loaf of justice to the entire people, if you are determined to extend the suffrage piece by piece, then give it first to women, to the most intelligent and capable of them at least. I remember a long discussion with Tilton and Phillips on this very question, when we were about to carry our petitions to the New York Constitutional Convention. Mr. Tilton said that we should urge the amendment to strike out the word 'white,'" and added: "The question of striking out the word 'male' we, as an equal rights association, shall of course present as an intellectual theory, but not as a practical thing to be accomplished at this convention." Mr. Phillips also emphasized this point; but I repudiated this downright insolence, when for fifteen years I had canvassed the entire State, county by county, with petition in hand asking for woman suffrage! To think that those two men, among the most progressive of the nation, should 324 dare look me in the face and speak of this great principle for which I had toiled, as a mere intellectual theory!
The issue of priority doesn't belong in a discussion about equal rights. The only reason it came up here is that some people insisted that women should wait until another group is allowed to vote. In response, we say: "If you won’t provide full justice to everyone, if you're determined to grant the right to vote step by step, then give it first to women, especially to the most intelligent and capable among them. I remember a long discussion with Tilton and Phillips about this very issue when we were preparing to take our petitions to the New York Constitutional Convention. Mr. Tilton suggested that we aim for an amendment to remove the word 'white,' and added: 'The question of removing the word 'male' we, as an equal rights association, will of course propose as an idea, but not as something practical to achieve at this convention.' Mr. Phillips also emphasized this point; however, I rejected this blatant disrespect, especially after fifteen years of traveling across the entire state, county by county, with a petition in hand asking for women’s right to vote! To think that those two men, who are among the most progressive in the country, could 324 look me in the face and dismiss this important principle I’ve fought for as just an idea!
If Mr. Douglass had noticed who applauded when he said "black men first and white women afterwards," he would have seen that it was only the men. When he tells us that the case of black men is so perilous, I tell him that even outraged as they are by the hateful prejudice against color, he himself would not today exchange his sex and color with Elizabeth Cady Stanton.
If Mr. Douglass had noticed who applauded when he said, "black men first and white women later," he would have realized it was only the men. When he tells us that the situation for black men is so dangerous, I remind him that despite the deep anger they feel due to the awful prejudice surrounding their skin color, he himself would not want to trade his gender and race with Elizabeth Cady Stanton today.
Mr. Douglass—"Will you allow me a question?"
Mr. Douglass—"Can I ask you a question?"
Miss Anthony—"Yes, anything for a fight today."
Miss Anthony—"Yeah, I'm up for a fight today."
Mr. Douglass—"I want to inquire whether granting to woman the right of suffrage will change anything in respect to the nature of our sexes."
Mr. Douglass—"I want to ask whether giving women the right to vote will change anything about the nature of our sexes."
Miss Anthony—"It will change the nature of one thing very much, and that is the dependent condition of woman. It will place her where she can earn her own bread, so that she may go out into the world an equal competitor in the struggle for life; so that she shall not be compelled to take such positions as men choose to accord and then accept such pay as men please to give.... It is not a question of precedence between women and black men; the business of this association is to demand for every man, black or white, and every woman, black or white, that they shall be enfranchised and admitted into the body politic with equal rights and privileges."
Miss Anthony—"It will significantly change one thing, and that is the dependent status of women. It will enable her to earn her own living, allowing her to step into the world as an equal competitor in the fight for survival; so that she will not have to accept any positions that men choose to offer and then settle for whatever wages men decide to pay.... This isn't about prioritizing women over black men; the goal of this association is to demand that every man, regardless of race, and every woman, regardless of race, be granted the same rights and privileges in the political sphere."
As everybody in the hall was allowed to vote there was no difficulty in securing the desired endorsement of an amendment to enfranchise negro men and make them the political superiors of all women. There never had been a convention so dominated by men. Although the audience refused to listen to most of them and drowned their voices by expressions of disapproval and calls for the women speakers, they practically wrested the control of the meeting from the hands of the women and managed it to suit themselves.
As everyone in the hall was allowed to vote, it was easy to get approval for the amendment to give black men the right to vote and make them politically superior to all women. Never before had a convention been so dominated by men. Even though the audience largely ignored most of them and silenced their voices with disapproval and calls for the women speakers, they effectively took control of the meeting from the women and managed it to fit their own interests.
This was Mrs. Livermore's first appearance at one of these anniversaries and she created a commotion by introducing this resolution: "While we recognize the disabilities which legal marriage imposes upon woman as wife and mother, and while we pledge ourselves to seek their removal by putting her 325 on equal terms with man, we abhorrently repudiate 'free loveism' as horrible and mischievous to society, and disown any sympathy with it." It was the first time the subject had been brought before a woman's rights convention and its introduction was indignantly resented by the "old guard." Lucy Stone exclaimed: "I feel it is a mortal shame to give any foundation for the implication that we favor 'free loveism.' I am ashamed that the question should be raised here. There should be nothing at all said about it. Do not let us, for the sake of our own self-respect, allow it to be hinted that we helped to forge a shadow of a chain which comes in the name of 'free love.' I am unwilling that it should be suggested that this great, sacred cause of ours means anything but what we have said it does. If any one says to us, 'Oh, I know what you mean, you mean free love by this agitation,' let the lie stick in his throat."
This was Mrs. Livermore's first appearance at one of these anniversaries, and she caused quite a stir by introducing this resolution: "While we acknowledge the limitations that legal marriage imposes on women as wives and mothers, and while we commit to working towards their removal by placing her 325 on equal footing with men, we completely reject 'free love' as harmful and dangerous to society, and disassociate ourselves from it." It was the first time this topic had been brought up at a women's rights convention, and its introduction was strongly opposed by the "old guard." Lucy Stone exclaimed, "I find it incredibly shameful to provide any basis for the suggestion that we support 'free love.' I am embarrassed that this question should even come up here. We should not say anything about it. For the sake of our own self-respect, let us not allow it to be implied that we contributed to the creation of a shadow of a chain that comes under the label of 'free love.' I refuse to let it be suggested that this important, sacred cause of ours means anything other than what we have stated. If anyone says to us, 'Oh, I know what you mean, you mean free love with this movement,' let that lie choke them."
Mrs. Rose followed with a strong protest, saying: "I think it strange that the question of 'free love' should have been brought upon this platform. I object to Mrs. Livermore's resolution, not on account of its principles, but on account of its pleading guilty. When a man tries to convince me that he is not a thief, then I take care of my coppers. If we pass this resolution that we are not 'free lovers,' people will say, 'It is true that you are, for you try to hide it.' Lucretia Mott's name has been mentioned as a friend of 'free love,' but I hurl back the lie into the faces of those who uttered it. We have been thirty years in this city before the public, and it is an insult to all the women who have labored in this cause; it is an insult to the thousands and tens of thousands of men and women who have listened to us in our conventions, to say at this late hour, 'We are not free lovers.'"
Mrs. Rose strongly protested, saying: "I find it odd that the issue of 'free love' has been brought up here. I oppose Mrs. Livermore's resolution, not because of its principles, but because it admits guilt. When someone tries to convince me they're not a thief, I keep a close eye on my coins. If we pass this resolution stating that we are not 'free lovers,' people will say, 'It's true that you are, because you’re trying to hide it.' Lucretia Mott's name has come up as a supporter of 'free love,' but I reject that falsehood with force. We've been in this city for thirty years in front of the public, and it disrespects all the women who have worked hard for this cause; it insults the thousands and tens of thousands of men and women who have listened to us at our conventions, to claim at this late stage, 'We are not free lovers.'"
The charge of "free love" was vigorously repudiated by Miss Anthony also, who closed the discussion by asserting: "This howl comes from the men who know that when women get their rights they will be able to live honestly and not be compelled to sell themselves for bread, either in or out of marriage. There are very few women in the world who would 326 enter into this relationship with drunkards and libertines provided they could get their subsistence in any other way. We can not be frightened from our purpose, the public mind can not long be prejudiced by this 'free love' cry of our enemies." Olive Logan poured oil upon the troubled waters in a graceful speech, and the subject was dropped.
The accusation of "free love" was strongly rejected by Miss Anthony, who ended the discussion by stating: "This outcry comes from men who understand that when women gain their rights, they will be able to live honestly and won’t be forced to sell themselves for food, whether in marriage or not. There are very few women in the world who would 326 enter into such relationships with drunks and immoral men if they could earn a living in any other way. We can't be scared away from our goal; the public won't stay biased for long against this 'free love' talk from our opponents." Olive Logan eased the tension with a gracious speech, and the topic was put to rest.
At each recurring anniversary the conviction had been growing that the term "equal rights" was too comprehensive, permitting entirely too much latitude as to speakers and subjects. Ever themselves having been repressed and silenced, when at last women made a platform on which they had a right to stand, they declared first of all for "free speech." They would not refuse to any human being what so long had been denied to them and, as a result, fanatics, visionaries and advocates of all reforms flocked to this platform, delighted to find such audiences. According to the tenets of the association, all speakers must have equal rights on their platform and there was no escape. Sometimes it was nothing more harmful than a man with a map to explain how the national debt could be paid without money, or a woman with a system of celestial kites by which she proposed to communicate with the other world. Occasionally the advocates of various political theories would secure possession, consuming the time and diverting attention from the main issue. At the convention just closed, the hobby-riders were present in greater force than ever before and it seemed imperative that some means should be adopted to shut them out thereafter. It was proposed to change the name to Woman Suffrage Association, which would bar all discussion of a miscellaneous character. There was a strong objection to this, however, because such action required three months' notice.
At each anniversary, the belief grew that the term "equal rights" was too broad, allowing too much freedom regarding speakers and topics. Having been suppressed and silenced themselves, when women finally had a platform of their own, they first called for "free speech." They wouldn't deny any person what had long been denied to them; as a result, fanatics, dreamers, and advocates of various reforms flocked to this stage, eager to find such audiences. According to the group's principles, all speakers had to have equal rights on their platform, and there was no way around it. Sometimes, it was nothing more than a guy with a map explaining how the national debt could be settled without cash or a woman with a scheme involving celestial kites to communicate with the other side. Occasionally, advocates of different political theories took over, using up time and distracting from the main issue. At the recent convention, these hobbyists were more prominent than ever before, and it seemed crucial to find a way to exclude them in the future. It was suggested to change the name to the Woman Suffrage Association, which would prevent any off-topic discussions. However, there was strong resistance to this because such a move required three months' notice.
At the close of the convention a reception was held at the Woman's Bureau, Saturday evening, May 15, 1869, and attended by women from nineteen States who had come as representatives to the Equal Rights Association.[50] At their 327 earnest request, it was decided to form a new organization to be called the National Woman Suffrage Association, whose especial object should be a Sixteenth Amendment to the Federal Constitution, securing the ballot to the women of the nation on equal terms with men. A convention of officially appointed delegates was at that time impracticable, as there were but few local suffrage societies and still fewer State organizations. It was thought that although it might not be formed by delegates elected for this specific object, it would be sufficient for working purposes until the next spring when, the required three months' notice having been given, a permanent organization might be effected. Accordingly, a constitution was adopted and officers elected.[51] The following week at Cooper Institute Anna Dickinson made her great speech for the rights of women, entitled "Nothing Unreasonable," to inaugurate the new National Woman Suffrage Association, and before an immense audience she pleaded for woman with the same beauty and eloquence as in days past she had pictured the wrongs of the slave and urged his emancipation.
At the end of the convention, a reception took place at the Woman's Bureau on Saturday evening, May 15, 1869, attended by women from nineteen states who came as representatives for the Equal Rights Association.[50] At their 327 insistence, it was decided to create a new organization called the National Woman Suffrage Association, with the main goal of securing a Sixteenth Amendment to the Federal Constitution that would grant women the right to vote on equal terms with men. At that time, it wasn't feasible to hold a convention of officially appointed delegates since there were only a few local suffrage societies and even fewer state organizations. It was believed that while it might not be established by delegates elected specifically for this purpose, it would suffice for practical efforts until the following spring, when, after providing three months' notice, a permanent organization could be formed. As a result, a constitution was adopted and officers were elected.[51] The next week at Cooper Institute, Anna Dickinson delivered her powerful speech for women's rights titled "Nothing Unreasonable," to launch the new National Woman Suffrage Association, and in front of a large audience, she advocated for women with the same beauty and eloquence that she had previously used to describe the injustices faced by slaves and to promote their freedom.
The association was organized May 15, and on the 17th Mrs. Livermore wrote Miss Anthony from Boston: "I hope you are rested somewhat. I am very sorry for you, that you are carrying such heavy burdens. If you and I lived in the same city, I would relieve you of some of them, for I believe we might work together, with perhaps an occasional collision. Now I want you to answer these two questions: 1st.—Did you do anything in the way of organizing at the Saturday evening reunion, and if so, what? That Equal Rights Association 328 is an awful humbug. I would not have come on to the anniversary, nor would any of us, if we had known what it was. We supposed we were coming to a woman suffrage convention. 2d.—If Mrs. Stanton will not go West to a series of meetings this fall and winter, would you dare undertake it with me alone? We must have strong people of established reputations. 'Only the Stanton, the Anthony, and the Livermore,' that is what the Chicago Tribune says...." Later, while still in Boston, she wrote again:
The association was organized on May 15, and on the 17th, Mrs. Livermore wrote to Miss Anthony from Boston: "I hope you’re feeling a bit more rested. I'm really sorry to hear that you're carrying such heavy burdens. If we lived in the same city, I would help lighten your load because I think we could work well together, even if we occasionally disagreed. Now, I need you to answer these two questions: 1st.—Did you do anything to organize at the Saturday evening reunion, and if so, what? That Equal Rights Association 328 is a total sham. I wouldn’t have come to the anniversary, nor would any of us, if we had known what it was really about. We thought we were coming to a woman suffrage convention. 2d.—If Mrs. Stanton won’t go West for a series of meetings this fall and winter, would you be willing to take it on with me alone? We need strong people with established reputations. 'Only the Stanton, the Anthony, and the Livermore,' that’s what the Chicago Tribune says...." Later, while still in Boston, she wrote again:
You are mistaken in thinking I exhorted the formation of a national suffrage association the Saturday night after the New York convention; I only advised talking it up. All agreed that it ought to be formed but that a preliminary call should be issued first. I am for a national organization with Mrs. Stanton, president, and with you as one of the executive committee, but I want it arrived at compatibly with parliamentary rules.... And now having asserted myself, let me say that I sympathize more with your energy and earnestness which lead you to override forms and rules than I do with the awfully proper and correct spirit that waits till everybody consents before it does anything. I have no doubt but we all shall join the National Association, each State by its elected members, when we hold our great Western Woman Suffrage Convention in Chicago next fall. Mrs. Stanton and you must both be present; we probably shall all vote together then to go into the National Association. Remember you are to make that series of conventions with me. I am depending on you.
You’re mistaken if you think I advocated for starting a national suffrage association right after the New York convention on Saturday night; I merely suggested we discuss it. Everyone agreed it should be created, but we decided to issue a preliminary call first. I support forming a national organization with Mrs. Stanton as president and you on the executive committee, but I want us to make that decision following parliamentary procedures. Now that I’ve made my point, I want to say that I actually relate more to your energy and determination, which make you skip formalities and rules, rather than the overly cautious attitude that waits for everyone to agree before taking action. I’m confident we will all join the National Association, with each state represented by its chosen members, when we hold our major Western Woman Suffrage Convention in Chicago next fall. Both you and Mrs. Stanton need to be there; I’m sure we’ll all vote together to join the National Association then. Remember, you’re supposed to coordinate that series of conventions with me. I’m counting on you.
The next November, in answer to a circular signed by Lucy Stone, Julia Ward Howe, Caroline M. Severance, T.W. Higginson and George H. Vibbert, a call was issued resulting in a convention at Cleveland, O., to form another national suffrage association on the following basis of representation: "The delegates appointed by existing State organizations shall be admitted, provided their number does not exceed, in each case, that of the congressional delegation of the State. Should it fall short of that number, additional delegates may be admitted from local organizations, or from no organization whatever, provided the applicants be actual residents of the State they claim to represent." The American Suffrage Association was thus formed, with twenty-one States represented; Henry Ward Beecher, president; Henry B. Blackwell, Amanda Way, 329 recording secretaries; Lucy Stone, chairman executive committee.
The following November, in response to a letter signed by Lucy Stone, Julia Ward Howe, Caroline M. Severance, T.W. Higginson, and George H. Vibbert, a call was made that led to a convention in Cleveland, Ohio, to create another national suffrage association based on this representation: "Delegates appointed by existing State organizations will be allowed, as long as their number doesn’t exceed the congressional delegation from that State. If it does not meet that number, additional delegates can be accepted from local organizations, or from no organization at all, as long as the applicants are actual residents of the State they claim to represent." Thus, the American Suffrage Association was formed, with twenty-one States participating; Henry Ward Beecher as president; Henry B. Blackwell, Amanda Way, 329 as recording secretaries; and Lucy Stone as the chair of the executive committee.
In the midst of her exacting duties and many annoyances, Miss Anthony found time to write numerous letters and obtain a testimonial for Ernestine L. Rose, who was about to return with her husband to England, after having given many years of valuable service to the women of America. She secured a handsome sum of money and a number of presents for her, and Mrs. Rose went on board ship laden with flowers and very happy and grateful. Miss Anthony wrote to Lucretia Mott: "Was it not a little funny that this unsentimental personage should have suggested the thing and stirred so many to do the sentimental, and yet could not even take the time to go to the wharf and say good-by? I spent Sunday evening with her and it is a great comfort to me that I helped others contribute to her pleasure." On the back of this letter, which was sent to her sister, Martha Wright, Mrs. Mott penned: "Think of the complaints made of Susan when she does so much and puts others up to doing, and always keeps herself in the background."
In the middle of her demanding responsibilities and countless frustrations, Miss Anthony found time to write several letters and get a testimonial for Ernestine L. Rose, who was about to return to England with her husband after providing many years of valuable service to the women of America. She secured a generous amount of money and several gifts for her, and Mrs. Rose boarded the ship loaded with flowers, feeling very happy and grateful. Miss Anthony wrote to Lucretia Mott: "Isn't it a bit funny that this unsentimental person suggested the idea and motivated so many to be sentimental, yet couldn't even find the time to go to the wharf to say goodbye? I spent Sunday evening with her, and it gives me great comfort that I helped others contribute to her happiness." On the back of this letter, which was sent to her sister, Martha Wright, Mrs. Mott wrote: "Think about the complaints made about Susan when she does so much and encourages others to do as well, yet always stays in the background."
In the summer of 1869, under the auspices of the National Association, large and successful conventions were held at Saratoga and Newport in the height of the season. Of the former The Revolution said: "That a woman suffrage convention should have been allowed to organize in the parlors of Congress Hall, that those parlors should have been filled to their utmost capacity by the habitual guests of the place, that such men as ex-President Fillmore, Thurlow Weed, George Opdyke and any number of clergymen from different parts of the country, should have been interested lookers-on, are significant facts which may well carry dismay to the enemies of the cause. That the whole convention was conducted by women in a dignified, orderly and business-like manner, is a strong intimation that in spite of all which has been said to the contrary, women are capable of learning how to manage public affairs."
In the summer of 1869, with support from the National Association, large and successful conventions took place at Saratoga and Newport during peak season. Regarding the former, The Revolution remarked: "It's significant that a woman suffrage convention was allowed to organize in the parlors of Congress Hall, that those parlors were filled to capacity by regular guests, and that notable figures like ex-President Fillmore, Thurlow Weed, George Opdyke, and various clergymen from across the country were interested observers. These facts should alarm the opponents of the cause. The entire convention was run by women in a dignified, orderly, and professional way, which strongly suggests that despite what has often been claimed, women are indeed capable of managing public affairs."
The following comment was made by Mrs. Stanton on the 330 Newport convention: "So, obeying orders, we sailed across the Sound one bright moonlight night with a gay party of the 'disfranchised,' and found ourselves quartered on the enemy the next morning as the sun rose in all its resplendent glory. Although trunk after trunk—not of gossamers, laces and flowers, but of suffrage ammunition, speeches, petitions, resolutions, tracts, and folios of The Revolution—had been slowly carried up the winding stairs of the Atlantic, the brave men and fair women, who had tripped the light fantastic toe until the midnight hour, slept heedlessly on, wholly unaware that twelve apartments were already filled with the strong-minded invaders.... The audience throughout the convention was large, fashionable and as enthusiastic as the state of the weather would permit."
The following comment was made by Mrs. Stanton on the 330 Newport convention: "So, following orders, we sailed across the Sound one bright moonlit night with a lively group of the 'disfranchised,' and found ourselves settled among the opposition the next morning as the sun rose in all its radiant glory. Even though trunk after trunk—not filled with delicate fabrics, laces, and flowers, but with suffrage materials, speeches, petitions, resolutions, pamphlets, and volumes of The Revolution—had been slowly carried up the winding stairs of the Atlantic, the brave men and women, who had danced until the midnight hour, slept soundly on, completely unaware that twelve rooms were already filled with the determined invaders.... The audience throughout the convention was large, stylish, and as enthusiastic as the weather would allow."
The Fourth of July was celebrated by the association in a beautiful grove in Westchester county, Miss Anthony, Mrs. Stanton, Judge E.D. Culver and others making addresses. Weekly meetings of as many of its members as were in New York were held at the Woman's Bureau, a large number of practical questions relating to women were brought forward, and there was constant agitation and discussion. A note from the tax collector called forth this indignant answer from Miss Anthony:
The Fourth of July was celebrated by the association in a beautiful grove in Westchester County, with Miss Anthony, Mrs. Stanton, Judge E.D. Culver, and others giving speeches. Weekly meetings with any of its members who were in New York were held at the Woman's Bureau, where a wide range of practical issues related to women were discussed, leading to ongoing debates and discussions. A note from the tax collector prompted this indignant response from Miss Anthony:
I have your polite note informing me that as publisher of The Revolution, I am indebted to the United States in the sum of $14.10 for the tax on monthly sales of that journal. Enclosed you will find the amount, but you will please understand that I pay it under protest. The Revolution, you are aware, is a journal the main object of which is to apply to these degenerate times the great principle for which our ancestors fought, that taxation and representation should go together. I am not represented in the United States government, and yet it taxes me; and it taxes me, too, for publishing a paper the chief purpose of which is to rebuke the glaring inconsistency between its professions and its practices. Under the circumstances, the federal government ought to be ashamed to exact this tax of me....
I got your polite note informing me that as the publisher of The Revolution, I owe the United States $14.10 for the tax on the magazine's monthly sales. I’ve included the payment, but please know that I’m doing it under protest. The Revolution, as you know, aims to uphold the important principle our ancestors fought for—that taxation and representation should go together—especially during these troubling times. I am not represented in the U.S. government, yet it still taxes me; and it taxes me for publishing a paper whose main purpose is to highlight the clear inconsistency between the government’s claims and its actions. Given the circumstances, the federal government should be ashamed to demand this tax from me....
On September 10 Miss Anthony attended the Great Western Woman Suffrage Convention at Chicago, where she spoke several times and was cordially received. She was the guest of Mrs. Kate N. Doggett, founder of the Fortnightly Club. From here she 331 went to the St. Louis convention, October 6 and 7, which was especially distinguished because of the resolutions presented by Francis Minor, a prominent lawyer of that city, with an argument to prove that, under the Fourteenth Amendment, women already had a legal right to vote. These were supported by his wife, Virginia L. Minor, in a strong speech. They were the first thus to interpret this amendment. Ten thousand extra copies of The Revolution containing the resolutions and this speech were published, laid on the desk of every member of Congress, sent to the leading newspapers and circulated throughout the country. For a number of years the National Suffrage Association held to this construction of the amendment, until it was decided to the contrary by the Supreme Court of the United States.
On September 10, Miss Anthony attended the Great Western Woman Suffrage Convention in Chicago, where she spoke several times and received a warm welcome. She was the guest of Mrs. Kate N. Doggett, the founder of the Fortnightly Club. From there, she 331 went to the St. Louis convention on October 6 and 7, which was particularly notable because of the resolutions presented by Francis Minor, a well-known lawyer from that city, arguing that women already had a legal right to vote under the Fourteenth Amendment. His wife, Virginia L. Minor, passionately supported this point in a strong speech. They were the first to interpret this amendment in that way. Ten thousand extra copies of The Revolution, which included the resolutions and this speech, were published, placed on the desks of every member of Congress, sent to major newspapers, and distributed across the country. For several years, the National Suffrage Association maintained this interpretation of the amendment until the Supreme Court of the United States ruled otherwise.
Conventions were held in Cincinnati and Dayton, O. At the latter Miss Anthony gave a scathing review of the laws affecting married women, the control which they allowed the husband over the wife, children and property, making, however, no attack upon men but only upon laws. Each of the other speakers, all of whom were married, in turn took up the cudgel, and proceeded to tell how good her own husband was, and to say that if Miss Anthony only had a good husband she never would have made that speech, but each admitted that the men were better than the laws. In her closing remarks Miss Anthony used their own testimony against them and created great merriment in the audience. Whenever she commented on existing conditions or on general principles, individual men and women were sure to rush into the fray, making a personal application and waxing highly indignant. The Dayton Herald said of her evening address: "She made a clear, logical and lawyerlike argument, in sprightly language, that women being persons are citizens, and as citizens, voters. We think that none who examine her authorities and line of discussion can avoid her conclusions, and we are certain that many of the ablest jurists of the land have the honor (logically and legally) to coincide in her argument."
Conventions were held in Cincinnati and Dayton, Ohio. At the latter, Miss Anthony delivered a sharp critique of the laws impacting married women, highlighting the control that husbands had over their wives, children, and property. However, she did not attack men, only the laws. Each of the other speakers, all of whom were married, took their turn to defend their husbands, claiming that if Miss Anthony had a good husband, she wouldn’t have made that speech. Yet, they all admitted that the men were better than the laws. In her closing remarks, Miss Anthony turned their own statements against them, bringing great laughter to the audience. Whenever she commented on current issues or general principles, individual men and women would rush in, making personal connections and getting very upset. The Dayton Herald described her evening address: "She presented a clear, logical, and legal argument, in lively language, that women are persons and, as such, citizens, and therefore voters. We believe that anyone who examines her sources and the flow of her discussion cannot help but agree with her conclusions. We are confident that many of the most respected jurists in the country logically and legally agree with her argument."
In 1869 Mrs. Isabella Beecher Hooker came actively into the 332 suffrage work and proved a valuable ally. She had been much prejudiced against Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton by newspaper reports and by the misrepresentations of some of her acquaintances, and in order to overcome this feeling Paulina Wright Davis arranged that the three should visit her for several days at her home in Providence, R.I., saying in her invitation: "I once had a prejudice against Susan B. Anthony but am ashamed of it. I investigated carefully every charge made against her, and I now know her to be honest, honorable, generous and above all petty spites and jealousies." Mrs. Hooker was so delightfully disappointed in the two ladies that she became at once and forever their staunchest friend and advocate. To Caroline M. Severance she wrote:
In 1869, Mrs. Isabella Beecher Hooker got actively involved in the 332 suffrage movement and turned out to be a valuable ally. She had been quite biased against Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton due to newspaper articles and the misrepresentations of some of her friends. To change her opinion, Paulina Wright Davis set up a visit for the three of them to spend several days at her home in Providence, R.I. In her invitation, she wrote: "I used to have a prejudice against Susan B. Anthony, but I'm ashamed of it. I carefully looked into every accusation against her, and I now see her as honest, honorable, generous, and above all, free from petty grudges and jealousy." Mrs. Hooker was pleasantly surprised by the two ladies and immediately became their loyal friend and supporter. She wrote to Caroline M. Severance:
I have studied Miss Anthony day and night for nearly a week, and I have taken the testimony of those who have known her intimately for twenty years, and all are united in this resume of her character: She is a woman of incorruptible integrity and the thought of guile has no place in her heart. In unselfishness and benevolence she has scarcely an equal, and her energy and executive ability are bounded only by her physical power, which is something immense. Sometimes she fails in judgment, according to the standard of others, but in right intentions never, nor in faithfulness to her friends. I confess that after studying her carefully for days, and under the shadow of ——'s letters against her, and after attending a two-days' convention in Newport engineered by her in her own fashion, I am obliged to accept the most favorable interpretation of her which prevails generally, rather than that of Boston. Mrs. Stanton, too, is a magnificent woman, and the truest, womanliest one of us all. I have spent three days in her company, in the most intense, heart-searching debate I ever undertook in my life. I have handled what seemed to me to be her errors without gloves, and the result is that I love her as well as I do Miss Anthony. I hand in my allegiance to both as the leaders and representatives of the great movement.
I’ve been studying Miss Anthony day and night for almost a week, and I've gathered insights from people who have known her well for twenty years. Everyone agrees on this summary of her character: She is a woman of strong integrity, and there is no deceit in her heart. In terms of selflessness and kindness, she has few equals, and her energy and leadership skills are only matched by her incredible physical strength. Sometimes she misjudges situations based on others' standards, but she never wavers in her good intentions or loyalty to her friends. I admit that after observing her closely for days, considering ——’s letters against her, and participating in a two-day convention in Newport that she organized so well, I feel compelled to take the most positive view of her, which is generally accepted, rather than that of Boston. Mrs. Stanton is also an incredible woman and the most genuinely feminine among us all. I spent three days with her, engaging in the most intense, soul-searching debate I’ve ever experienced. I pointed out what I saw as her mistakes directly, and because of that, I love her just as much as I love Miss Anthony. I pledge my support to both as the leaders and representatives of this great movement.
Mrs. Hooker set about arranging a mass convention at her home in Hartford, Conn., and upon Miss Anthony's expressing some doubt as to being present, she wrote: "Here I am at work on a convention intended chiefly to honor Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton, and behold the Quakeress says maybe she can not come! I won't have the meeting if you are going to flunk. It has been a real consolation to me in this wearisome business to think you would for once be relieved 333 from all responsibility and come as orator and guest. Don't fail me."
Mrs. Hooker started organizing a big convention at her home in Hartford, Conn., and when Miss Anthony expressed some doubts about attending, she wrote: "Here I am working on a convention mainly to honor Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton, and look, the Quakeress says maybe she can't come! I won't have the meeting if you're going to back out. It's been a real comfort to me in this tedious task to think you would finally be free from all responsibility and come as the speaker and a guest. Don't let me down."
The convention, which closed October 29, was a great success and a State society was formed with a distinguished list of officers. The Hartford Post gave considerable space to Miss Anthony's address, saying:
The convention, which wrapped up on October 29, was a huge success and a State society was established with a notable group of officers. The Hartford Post dedicated a significant amount of space to Miss Anthony's speech, stating:
Miss Anthony is a resolute, substantial woman of forty or fifty, exhibiting no signs of age or weariness. Her hair is dark, her head well formed, her face has an expression of masculine strength. If she were a man you would guess that she was a schoolmaster, or a quiet clergyman, or perhaps a business man and deacon. She pays no special attention to feminine graces, but is not ungraceful or unwomanly. In speaking her manner is self-possessed without ranting or unpleasant demonstrations, her tones slightly monotonous. Long experience has taught her a candid, kindly, sensible way of presenting her views, which wins the good will of her hearers whether they accept them or not. She said in part:
Miss Anthony is a determined, strong woman in her forties or fifties, showing no signs of aging or fatigue. Her hair is dark, her head is well-shaped, and her face displays a strong sense of determination. If she were a man, you might think she was a schoolteacher, a reserved clergyman, or perhaps a businessman and deacon. She doesn’t emphasize traditional feminine qualities, but she’s neither awkward nor unfeminine. When she speaks, her demeanor is calm and composed, without any shouting or unpleasant displays, and her tone is somewhat monotone. Years of experience have given her a straightforward, friendly, and sensible way of expressing her opinions, earning her audience's goodwill whether they agree with her or not. She said in part:
"How different is this from the assemblages that used to greet us who twenty years ago commenced to agitate the enfranchisement of woman. We begin to see the time, which we shall gladly welcome, when we shall not be needed at the front of the battle. Of late years, the country has been occupied in discussing the claim of man to hold property in his fellow-man, and has decided the question in the negative. Still another form of slavery remains to be disposed of; the old idea yet prevails that woman is owned and possessed by man, to be clothed and fed and cared for by his generosity. All the wrongs, arrogances and antagonisms of modern society grow out of this false condition of the relations between man and woman. The present agitation rises from a demand of the soul of woman for the right to own and possess herself. It is said that as a rule man does sufficiently provide for woman, and that she ought to remain content. The great facts of the world are at war with this assumption.
"How different this is from the gatherings that welcomed us, who twenty years ago began advocating for women's rights. We can see the time approaching, which we will happily welcome, when we won’t need to be at the forefront of the struggle anymore. Recently, the country has been focused on discussing whether it’s acceptable for one person to own another, and it has decided that this is not okay. Yet another form of oppression still needs attention; the outdated notion persists that women are owned and controlled by men, and that they should be taken care of out of a man's kindness. All the injustices, arrogance, and conflicts in modern society arise from this incorrect perception of the relationship between men and women. The current movement is driven by women’s strong desire for the right to own and control themselves. Some argue that, in general, men do enough to support women and that women should be satisfied with that. The undeniable realities of the world challenge this belief."
"For example, I see in the New York Herald 1,200 advertisements of people wanting work. Upon examination, 500 of them come from women and 300 more are from boarding-house keepers; and we may therefore say that eight of the twelve hundred advertisements are from women compelled to rely upon their own energies to gain their food and clothing. Every morning from 6 to 7 o'clock you may see on the Bowery and other great north and south avenues of New York, troops of young girls and women, with careworn or crime-stained faces, carrying their poor lunch half-concealed beneath a scanty shawl. If the facts were in accordance with the common theory, we should not see these myriads of women thus thrust out to get their living. Society must either provide great establishments maintained by taxation to care for women, or else the doors of all trades and callings must be thrown wide open to them.... This woman's movement promises an entire change of the conditions of wages and support. The status of woman can not be materially changed while the subsistence question remains as at present."
"For instance, I see in the New York Herald 1,200 job ads. Upon closer inspection, 500 of them are from women and another 300 are from boarding-house owners. This means that eight out of the twelve hundred ads are from women who must rely on their own efforts to earn their food and clothing. Every morning from 6 to 7 o'clock, groups of young girls and women can be seen on the Bowery and other major north-south streets of New York, with tired or troubled faces, carrying their modest lunches hidden under a thin shawl. If the situation reflected the common belief, we wouldn’t see so many women forced to find their own way to make a living. Society must either create large institutions funded by taxes to support women or open up all jobs and professions to them... This movement for women's rights promises a complete transformation in how wages and support are structured. The status of women cannot be fundamentally improved as long as the issue of survival remains unchanged."
Miss Anthony was entertained at the home of Governor Jewell, afterwards Postmaster-General. One morning she went over to Mrs. Hooker's and found all her guests at the breakfast table, Henry Ward Beecher, Wm. Lloyd Garrison, Mrs. Severance, Mrs. Davis and others. She received a hearty welcome and Mrs. Hooker insisted she should sit down and have a cup of tea or coffee. Mr. Beecher joined in the entreaty, saying: "Now, Miss Anthony, you know you have to make a big speech today. When I want to be very effective and make people cry, I drink a cup of tea before speaking; when I want to be very clever and make them laugh, I drink coffee; but when I want them to cry half the time and laugh the other half, I take a cup of each."
Miss Anthony was hosted at Governor Jewell's home, who later became Postmaster-General. One morning, she stopped by Mrs. Hooker's and found all her guests around the breakfast table: Henry Ward Beecher, Wm. Lloyd Garrison, Mrs. Severance, Mrs. Davis, and others. She received a warm welcome, and Mrs. Hooker insisted that she sit down for a cup of tea or coffee. Mr. Beecher chimed in, saying, "Now, Miss Anthony, you know you have to give a big speech today. When I want to be really effective and make people cry, I drink a cup of tea before speaking; when I want to be clever and make them laugh, I drink coffee; but when I want them to cry half the time and laugh the other half, I take a cup of each."
In a letter to Miss Anthony after she returned home Mrs. Hooker said: "I am astonished at the praise I receive for my part in the convention, and humbled too, for I realize how worthy of all these pleasant and commendatory words you and others have been all these years, and what have you received—or rather what have you not received? Thank God, that is all over now and you are to have blue sky and clear sailing. It must be through suffering we enter the gates of peace." But the peace was a long way off and the hardest struggle was yet to come! A little later Mrs. Hooker wrote to a friend:
In a letter to Miss Anthony after she got back home, Mrs. Hooker said: "I’m surprised by all the praise I’m getting for my role in the convention, and it makes me feel humble because I recognize how deserving you and others have been of all these nice and positive words over the years. What have you received—or rather, what haven’t you received? Thank God, that's all behind us now, and you’re about to experience clear skies and smooth sailing. We must go through suffering to reach the gates of peace." But peace was still far away, and the toughest struggle was yet to come! A little later, Mrs. Hooker wrote to a friend:
I can't tell you how my heart swells—but there is present within me one undercurrent of feeling that will come to the surface ever and anon, viz., the wonderful dignity, strength and purity of the early workers in this reform. I can't wait for history to do them justice; I want to make history today, and so far as in me lies I will do it. I have come in at the death and get a large share of the glory, and lo, here are these, a great company, who have been in the field for thirty years, and a whole generation has passed them by unrecognized. Every one here says, "Our noble friend Susan has carried the day right over the heads of all of us." Said one of our editors, Charles Dudley Warner, a man of finest taste and culture, when he had been praising the dignity and power of the whole platform: "Susan Anthony is my favorite. She was the only woman there who never once thought of herself. You could see in her every motion and in her very silence that the cause was all she cared for, self was utterly forgotten."
I can't explain how much my heart swells, but there’s a feeling inside me that occasionally comes to light—it’s the incredible dignity, strength, and purity of the early advocates for this reform. I can’t wait for history to recognize them; I want to make history today, and I will do everything I can. I stepped in at the end and get a big share of the glory, while so many remarkable people who have worked in this field for thirty years have been overlooked by an entire generation. Everyone here says, "Our noble friend Susan has triumphed over all of us." One of our editors, Charles Dudley Warner, a man of great taste and culture, praised the dignity and power of everyone on the platform: "Susan Anthony is my favorite. She was the only woman there who never once thought of herself. You could see in her every gesture and even in her silence that the cause was all she cared about; she completely forgot herself."
He had indeed struck the key note to Miss Anthony's strongest characteristic, utter forgetfulness of self, total 335 self-abnegation, self-sacrifice without a consciousness that it was such. Mrs. Hooker's statement that she "had come in at the death" shows the strong faith of most of these early workers that it would be only a brief time until the rights they claimed would be recognized and granted; but she herself has labored faithfully yet another thirty years without breaking down the Chinese Wall of opposition.
He had really pinpointed Miss Anthony's most defining trait: complete selflessness, total 335 self-neglect, and self-sacrifice without even realizing it was happening. Mrs. Hooker's comment that she "had come in at the death" reflects the strong belief of many of these early activists that it would only be a short time until the rights they fought for would be acknowledged and granted; yet she herself continued to work diligently for another thirty years without dismantling the Chinese Wall of opposition.
One object of Mrs. Hooker in calling this Hartford convention was to see if she could not bring together what were now becoming known as "the New York and Boston wings of the suffrage party," but she comments: "We have decided to give up our attempts at reconciliation; we have neither time nor strength to spare, and if we had, they would probably fail."
One of Mrs. Hooker's goals in organizing this Hartford convention was to see if she could unite what were now being referred to as "the New York and Boston factions of the suffrage party," but she notes: "We've decided to abandon our attempts at reconciliation; we don't have the time or energy to waste, and even if we did, they would likely fail."
In December Miss Anthony went to the Dansville Sanitarium for a few days and after her return, Dr. Kate Jackson, so widely known and loved, wrote her: "Since your visit here, through which I obtained somewhat of an insight into your struggles and labors, I have been in special sympathy with you. I do admire the liberal and comprehensive spirit which you and Mrs. Stanton show in allowing both sides of a question to be fairly discussed in your paper, and in giving any woman who does good work for her race in any field the credit for it, even though she may not exactly agree with you on all points. The spirit of exclusiveness is not calculated to push any reform among the masses.... Our house and hearts are always open to you. I want to send you something more than good wishes and so enclose a little New Year's gift to you, with my love and earnest prayers for your success."
In December, Miss Anthony visited the Dansville Sanitarium for a few days, and after she came back, Dr. Kate Jackson, who is well-known and loved, wrote to her: "Since your visit here, which gave me some insight into your struggles and efforts, I have felt especially sympathetic towards you. I really admire the open and inclusive approach that you and Mrs. Stanton take in allowing both sides of an issue to be discussed fairly in your paper, as well as giving credit to any woman who does important work for her community in any field, even if she doesn’t agree with you on every point. A spirit of exclusivity won't help advance any reform among the public.... Our home and hearts are always open to you. I want to send you more than just good wishes, so I’m enclosing a small New Year’s gift for you, along with my love and sincere prayers for your success."
The lovely Quaker, Sarah Pugh, wrote from Philadelphia:
The lovely Quaker, Sarah Pugh, wrote from Philadelphia:
Dear Susan: Not "Dear Madam," or "Respected Friend," according to our stately fashion, for my heart yearns too warmly toward thee and thy work for such formality. Would it were in my power to help thee more in thy onward way, for it must be onward even though opponents fill it with stumbling-blocks. Lucretia Mott is firm in her adherence to New York—not but that she can work, if the way offers, in all organizations which labor for the same end. My opinion of The Revolution may be expressed in what was said of another paper: "It fights no sham battles with enemies already 336 defeated. It is true, good men and women not a few stumble at it, object to it and in some cases antagonize it, but nobody despises it. An affectation of contempt is not contempt."
Dear Susan: Not "Dear Madam" or "Respected Friend," as our formal customs suggest, because I feel too warmly towards you and your work for that kind of formality. I wish I could support you more on your journey, which must keep going despite the obstacles posed by opponents. Lucretia Mott is still dedicated to New York—not that she can’t make contributions, when the chance comes up, to any organization working for the same cause. My view of The Revolution can be summed up by something said about another publication: "It doesn’t fight fake battles against enemies who have already been defeated. It’s true that many decent men and women stumble upon it, object to it, and sometimes oppose it, but no one truly hates it. A display of contempt isn’t real contempt."
Scores of similar letters were received from the early workers in the cause. It is unnecessary to enter further into a discussion of this division in the ranks of the advocates of woman suffrage. The conscientious historian must perform some unpleasant duties, hence it could not be passed without notice. The mass of correspondence on this question has been carefully sifted and that which would give pain to others, even though it would magnify the subject of this work, has been rigorously excluded. Most of the writers and those whom they criticised have ended their labors and passed from the scene of action. No good can be accomplished, either to the individuals or to the reform, by inflicting these personalities upon future generations. Among earnest, forceful, aggressive leaders of any great movement, there must arise controversies because of these strong characteristics, but the chief interest of mankind lies not in the individuals but in the results which they were able to accomplish. A comparison of the position of woman today with that which she occupied at the beginning of the agitation in her behalf, fifty years ago, offers more eloquent testimony to the efforts of those heroic pioneers than could be put into words by the most gifted pen.
A lot of similar letters came in from the early activists in the movement. There's no need to dive deeper into the divisions among the supporters of women's suffrage. A responsible historian has to tackle some tough subjects, so it can't be overlooked. The large volume of correspondence on this topic has been carefully reviewed, and anything that might upset others, even if it would highlight the focus of this work, has been strictly excluded. Most of the writers and those they critiqued have completed their work and are no longer active. No benefit will come to individuals or the movement by passing on these personal critiques to future generations. In any significant movement, strong, passionate leaders will inevitably spark controversies due to their bold traits. However, what really matters to humanity isn't the individuals involved but the results they achieved. Comparing the status of women today to where they stood at the start of the movement fifty years ago provides more compelling evidence of the efforts of those brave pioneers than any eloquent writing could convey.
[49] In reference to this unwarranted attack, the noted writer, William Winter, said in the New York Tribune:
[49] Regarding this unprovoked attack, the well-known writer, William Winter, stated in the New York Tribune:
"Noble, virtuous, honorable women are a country's greatest wealth, and when, from petty envy or jealousy, any one attempts with private innuendoes or public assaults to blacken a fair name which has long stood before the nation representing a principle, it is an injury not only to the individual but to the moral sense of the nation, and all true people are interested in maintaining its integrity and power. Susan B. Anthony has stood before this nation twenty years, earnestly devoted to every good work. As a teacher in the schools of New York for fifteen years, she bears from superintendents the highest testimonials to her faithfulness and ability. Her noble labors in the temperance cause are known throughout the State, and in association with the true men and women who fought the anti-slavery battle, she was equally faithful and earnest, finishing her work by getting up a petition for the black man's freedom of 400,000 names—the largest ever presented in Congress. For woman's enfranchisement her labors have been unremitting and unwearied for the last eighteen years. She is a frank, generous, self-sacrificing woman, of a kind, tender nature, firm principle, great executive ability, and in every relation of life true as the needle to the pole. Her motto has ever been, 'Let the weal and the woe of humanity be everything to me; their praise and their blame of no effect.'"
"Noble, virtuous, and honorable women are a country's greatest asset, and when someone, out of petty envy or jealousy, tries to tarnish a well-respected name that has long represented a principle in front of the nation through private gossip or public attacks, it harms not only the individual but also the moral integrity of the nation. Everyone who values truth is invested in preserving its integrity and strength. Susan B. Anthony has been devoted to every good cause in this nation for twenty years. As a teacher in New York schools for fifteen years, she has received the highest praise from superintendents for her dedication and skills. Her significant contributions to the temperance movement are recognized throughout the State, and alongside the dedicated men and women who fought against slavery, she was equally committed and passionate, culminating her efforts by organizing a petition for the freedom of black people with 400,000 signatures—the largest ever submitted to Congress. For women's rights, she has tirelessly worked for the last eighteen years. She is an honest, generous, selfless woman with a kind heart and strong principles, remarkable leadership skills, and is consistently true in every aspect of her life. Her motto has always been, 'Let the good and the suffering of humanity be everything to me; their praise and their blame mean nothing to me.'"
[51] President, Elizabeth Cady Stanton. Vice-presidents, Elizabeth B. Phelps, N.Y.; Anna Dickinson, Penn.; Kate N. Doggett, Ill.; Madame Anneke, Wis.; Lucy Elmes, Conn.; Mattie Griffith Brown, Mass.; Mrs. Nicholas Smith, Kan.; Lucy A. Snow, Maine; Elizabeth B. Schenck, Cal.; Josephine S. Griffing, D.C.; Paulina Wright Davis, R.I.; Mary Foote Henderson, Phoebe W. Cousins, Mo. Corresponding secretaries, Laura Curtis Bullard, Ida Greeley, Adelaide Hallock. Recording secretaries, Abby Burton Crosby, Sarah E. Fuller. Treasurer, Elizabeth Smith Miller. Executive committee, Ernestine L. Rose, Charlotte B. Wilbour, Mathilda F. Wendt, Mary F. Gilbert, Susan B. Anthony. Advisory counsel, Matilda Joslyn Gage, N.Y.; Mrs. Francis Minor, Mo.; Adeline Thomson, Penn,; Mrs. M.B. Longley, Ohio; Mrs. J.P. Root, Kan.; Lilie Peckham, Wis.
[51] President, Elizabeth Cady Stanton. Vice-presidents, Elizabeth B. Phelps, N.Y.; Anna Dickinson, Penn.; Kate N. Doggett, Ill.; Madame Anneke, Wis.; Lucy Elmes, Conn.; Mattie Griffith Brown, Mass.; Mrs. Nicholas Smith, Kan.; Lucy A. Snow, Maine; Elizabeth B. Schenck, Cal.; Josephine S. Griffing, D.C.; Paulina Wright Davis, R.I.; Mary Foote Henderson, Phoebe W. Cousins, Mo. Corresponding secretaries, Laura Curtis Bullard, Ida Greeley, Adelaide Hallock. Recording secretaries, Abby Burton Crosby, Sarah E. Fuller. Treasurer, Elizabeth Smith Miller. Executive committee, Ernestine L. Rose, Charlotte B. Wilbour, Mathilda F. Wendt, Mary F. Gilbert, Susan B. Anthony. Advisory counsel, Matilda Joslyn Gage, N.Y.; Mrs. Francis Minor, Mo.; Adeline Thomson, Penn.; Mrs. M.B. Longley, Ohio; Mrs. J.P. Root, Kan.; Lilie Peckham, Wis.
CHAPTER XX.
FIFTIETH BIRTHDAY—END OF EQUAL RIGHTS SOCIETY.
1870.
Conventions and conventions for fifty years, without a break, planned and managed by one woman—was there ever a similar record? The year 1870 opened with the Second National Woman Suffrage Convention, in Lincoln Hall, Washington, D. C., January 19. It had been advertised for two days, but the interest was so great that it was continued through the third day and evening. Mrs. Stanton was in the chair and the papers united in praising the beauty, dignity and elegant attire of the women on the platform. A long table at the Arlington Hotel was reserved for them, and Miss Anthony relates that as they were all going into the dining-room one day, Jessie Benton Fremont beckoned to her and when she went over to the table where the general and she were sitting, she said in her bright, pretty way: "Now tell me, did you hunt the country over and pick out a score of the most beautiful women you could find to melt the hearts of our congressmen?"
Conventions and events for fifty years, without a break, organized and run by one woman—has there ever been a record like that? The year 1870 kicked off with the Second National Woman Suffrage Convention at Lincoln Hall in Washington, D.C., on January 19. It was advertised for two days, but the excitement was so high that it continued into a third day and night. Mrs. Stanton was in charge, and the newspapers all praised the beauty, dignity, and stylish outfits of the women on stage. A long table at the Arlington Hotel was reserved for them, and Miss Anthony recalls that as they were all entering the dining room one day, Jessie Benton Fremont waved her over. When she approached their table, Jessie said in her charming, cheerful way, "Now tell me, did you search high and low to find a group of the most beautiful women to win over our congressmen?"
Letters of warm approval were read from John Stuart Mill and Helen Taylor, of England; Professor Homer B. Sprague, of Cornell University; Bishop Simpson, of the Methodist church; Senator Matthew H. Carpenter, and many other distinguished persons. A number of senators and representatives addressed the meetings, as did also Hon. A.G. Riddle, of the District of Columbia, Rev. Samuel J. May, Charlotte B. Wilbour, Isabella Beecher Hooker, and the usual corps of well-known suffrage speakers. Jennie Collins, the Lowell factory 338 girl, electrified the audience by discussing the great question from the standpoint of the workingwomen. All the New York dailies sent women reporters, a comparatively new feature at conventions.
Letters of warm approval were read from John Stuart Mill and Helen Taylor of England; Professor Homer B. Sprague from Cornell University; Bishop Simpson of the Methodist Church; Senator Matthew H. Carpenter; and many other notable individuals. Several senators and representatives spoke at the meetings, along with Hon. A.G. Riddle from the District of Columbia, Rev. Samuel J. May, Charlotte B. Wilbour, Isabella Beecher Hooker, and the usual group of well-known suffrage speakers. Jennie Collins, the Lowell factory girl, captivated the audience by discussing the important issue from the perspective of working women. All the New York daily newspapers sent women reporters, which was a relatively new aspect of conventions.
A hearing was arranged before the joint committees for the District of Columbia, and a number of the ladies made short addresses. Mrs. Stanton based her remarks on the unanswerable argument of Francis Minor at the St. Louis convention a few months before, the first assertion of woman's right to vote under the Fourteenth Amendment. Miss Anthony said:
A hearing was set up in front of the joint committees for the District of Columbia, and several women gave brief speeches. Mrs. Stanton centered her comments around the compelling argument made by Francis Minor at the St. Louis convention a few months earlier, which was the first claim for a woman's right to vote under the Fourteenth Amendment. Miss Anthony said:
We are here for the express purpose of urging you to present in your respective bodies, a bill to strike the word "male" from the District of Columbia Suffrage Act and thereby enfranchise the women of the District. We ask that the experiment of woman suffrage shall be made here, under the eye of Congress, as was that of negro suffrage. Indeed, the District has ever been the experimental ground of each step toward freedom. The auction-block was here first banished, slavery here first abolished, the freedmen here first enfranchised; and we now ask that women here shall be first admitted to the ballot. There was great fear and trepidation all over the country as to the results of negro suffrage, and you deemed it right and safe to inaugurate the experiment here; and you all remember that three days' discussion in 1866 on Senator Cowan's proposition to strike out the word "male." Well do I recollect with what anxious hope we watched the daily reports of that debate, and how we longed that Congress might then declare for the establishment in this District of a real republic. But conscience or courage or something was wanting, and women were bidden still to wait.
We are here to ask you to introduce a bill in your respective bodies to remove the word "male" from the District of Columbia Suffrage Act, giving women in the District the right to vote. We request that the trial of women's suffrage occurs here, under Congress's oversight, just like it did for Black suffrage. Historically, the District has always been a testing ground for progress toward freedom. The auction block was first abolished here, slavery was first ended here, and freedmen gained the right to vote here; now we ask that women be the first to access the ballot here. There was a lot of fear nationwide about the outcomes of Black suffrage, yet you decided it was right and safe to start the experiment here. You all remember the three days of debate in 1866 about Senator Cowan's proposal to remove the word "male." I clearly remember our anxious hope as we followed daily updates on that discussion, wishing Congress would declare the establishment of a true republic in this District. But for some reason—whether it was a lack of conscience or courage—women were still told to wait.
When, on that March day of 1867, the negroes of the District first voted, the success of that election inspired Congress with confidence to pass the proposition for the Fifteenth Amendment, and the different States to ratify it, until it has become a fixed fact that black men all over the nation not only may vote but sit in legislative assemblies and constitutional conventions. We now ask Congress to do the same for women. We ask you to enfranchise the women of the District this very winter, so that next March they may go to the ballot-box, and all the people of this nation may see that it is possible for women to vote and the republic yet stand. There is no reason, no argument, nothing but prejudice, against our demand; and there is no way to break down this prejudice but to make the experiment. Therefore, we most earnestly urge it, in full faith that so soon as Congress and the people shall have witnessed its beneficial results, they will go forward with a Sixteenth Amendment which shall prohibit any State from disfranchising any of its citizens on account of sex.
When, on that March day in 1867, the Black citizens of the District first voted, the success of that election gave Congress the confidence to pass the proposal for the Fifteenth Amendment, leading the various States to ratify it. This established that Black men across the nation can not only vote but also sit in legislative assemblies and constitutional conventions. We now ask Congress to do the same for women. We request that you grant the women of the District the right to vote this winter, so that come next March, they can go to the ballot box, and everyone in this nation can see that it's possible for women to vote while the republic still stands. There’s no reason, no argument, nothing but prejudice against our demand; and the only way to break down this prejudice is to try it out. Therefore, we strongly urge this, fully believing that as soon as Congress and the people witness its positive results, they will move forward with a Sixteenth Amendment that will prevent any State from disenfranchising any of its citizens based on their sex.
A letter from Mrs. Fannie Howland in the Hartford Courant thus describes the hearing: 339
A letter from Mrs. Fannie Howland in the Hartford Courant describes the hearing this way: 339
Senator Hannibal Hamlin, chairman, presented to them successively the gentlemen of the committee, who took their seats around a long table. Mrs. Stanton stood at one end, serene and dignified. Behind her sat a large semicircle of ladies, and close about her a group of her companions, who would have been remarkable anywhere for the intellectual refinement and elevated expression of their earnest faces. Opposite sat Charles Sumner, looking fatigued and worn, but listening with alert attention. So these two veterans in the cause of freedom were fitly and suggestively brought face to face.
Senator Hannibal Hamlin, the chair, introduced the committee members one by one as they settled around a long table. Mrs. Stanton stood at one end, calm and dignified. Behind her was a large semicircle of women, and gathered closely around her was a group of friends, marked by their intellectual sophistication and serious expressions. Sitting across from her was Charles Sumner, looking tired and worn but listening intently. Thus, these two veterans in the fight for freedom were fittingly and meaningfully brought together.
The scene was impressive. It was simple, grand, historic. Women have often appeared in history—noble, brilliant, heroic women; but woman collectively, impersonally, today asks recognition in the commonwealth—not in virtue of hereditary noblesse—not for any excellence or achievement of individuals, but on the one ground of her possessing the same rights, interests and responsibilities as man. There was nothing in this gathering at the Capitol to touch the imagination with illusion, no ball-room splendor of light, fragrance and jewels, none of those graceful enchantments by which women have been content to reign through brief dynasties of beauty and briefer fealties of homage. The cool light of a winter morning, the bare walls of a committee room, the plain costumes of everyday use, held the mind strictly to the actual facts which gave that group of representative men and women its moral significance, its severe but picturesque unity. Some future artist, looking back for a memorable illustration of this period, will put this new "Declaration of Independence" upon canvas, and will ransack the land for portraits of those ladies who spoke for their countrywomen at the Capitol, and of those senators and representatives who gave them audience. Mrs. Stanton was followed by Miss Anthony, morally as inevitable and impersonal as a Greek chorus, but physically and intellectually individual, intense, original, full of humor and good nature.
The scene was striking. It was simple, grand, and historic. Women have often appeared in history—noble, brilliant, heroic women—but woman as a whole, asking for recognition today, seeks it in society—not because of noble birth, not for individual excellence or achievement, but solely based on the principle of having the same rights, interests, and responsibilities as men. There was nothing in this gathering at the Capitol to spark the imagination with illusion, no glamorous ballroom filled with light, fragrance, and jewels, none of those charming enchantments that have traditionally allowed women to rule through fleeting dynasties of beauty and short-lived tributes of admiration. The cool light of a winter morning, the bare walls of a committee room, and the simple clothing of everyday wear kept the focus strictly on the actual facts that gave this group of representative men and women its moral significance, its stern yet captivating unity. Some future artist, looking back for a memorable representation of this time, will capture this new "Declaration of Independence" on canvas and will search the country for portraits of the women who spoke for their fellow countrywomen at the Capitol, along with the senators and representatives who listened to them. Mrs. Stanton was followed by Miss Anthony, as morally inevitable and impersonal as a Greek chorus, yet physically and intellectually unique, intense, original, filled with humor and good nature.
The Hearth and Home, in Photographs of our Agitators, thus depicts Miss Anthony on this occasion:
The Hearth and Home, in Photos of our Activists, shows Miss Anthony on this occasion:
She is the Bismarck; she plans the campaigns, provides the munitions of war, organizes the raw recruits, sets the squadrons in the field. Indeed, in presence of a timid lieutenant, she sometimes heads the charge; but she is most effective as the directing generalissimo. Miss Anthony is a quick, bright, nervous, alert woman of fifty or so—not at all inclined to embonpoint—sharp-eyed, even behind her spectacles. She presides over the treasury, she cuts the Gordian knots, and when the uncontrollables get by the ears at the conventions, she is the one who straightway drags them asunder and turns chaos to order again. In every dilemma, she is unanimously summoned. As a speaker, she is angular and rigid, but trenchant, incisive, cutting through to the heart of whatever topic she touches.
She is the Bismarck; she plans the campaigns, supplies the necessary resources for war, organizes new recruits, and positions teams on the field. In fact, when a nervous lieutenant is present, she sometimes leads the charge; but she is most effective as the commanding general. Miss Anthony is an energetic, sharp, and alert woman in her fifties—not at all heavyset—sharp-eyed, even behind her glasses. She manages the finances, sorts out problems, and when conflicts arise at conventions, she is the first to step in and restore order. In every crisis, she is called upon unanimously. As a speaker, she is straightforward and firm, but incisive, cutting straight to the heart of whatever topic she tackles.
Mrs. Hooker wrote: "There were congratulations without stint; but Sumner, grandest of all, approaching us said in a deep voice, really full of emotion: 'I have been in this place, 340 ladies, for twenty years; I have followed or led in every movement toward liberty and enfranchisement; but this meeting exceeds in interest anything I ever have witnessed.'" In her weekly letter to the Independent, Mary Clemmer wrote of this convention:
Mrs. Hooker wrote: "There were endless congratulations; but Sumner, the most impressive of all, came up to us and said in a deep voice, truly filled with emotion: 'I have been in this place, 340 ladies, for twenty years; I have either followed or led every movement toward freedom and the right to vote; but this meeting is more significant than anything I have ever seen.'" In her weekly letter to the Independent, Mary Clemmer wrote about this convention:
I am glad to say that it was not mongrel—in part a dramatic reading, in part a concert, and in part an organ advertisement; but wholly a convention whose leaders, in dignity and intellect, were fully the peers of the men whose councils they besieged and arraigned. There was Mrs. Stanton—smiling, serene, and motherly—just the woman whose hand laid upon a young man's arm, whose voice speaking to him, could do so much to hold him back from evil. There was Susan Anthony—anxious, earnest and importunate, sarcastic, funny and unconventional as ever. Among all the company, "Susan" is the most violently and the most unjustly abused. To be sure, she can be very provocative of such speech. She sometimes has a lawless way of talking and acting, which men think wonderfully fascinating in a belle, but utterly unforgivable in a plain, middle-aged woman. Moreover, "Susan's" utter abnegation to her cause, her passion for it, sometimes carries her on to "ways and means" not altogether tenable—in fine, she will offend your taste and mine; but this is only the outside and a very small side of Susan Anthony. A man, and more than a man—a woman who can deny herself, ignore herself, for a principle, for what she believes to be the truth, whether we believe it or not, is at least entitled to our respect.
I’m pleased to say that it wasn’t a mixed experience—a bit of a dramatic reading, a bit of a concert, and a bit of an organ promotion; but it was entirely a convention where the leaders, with their dignity and intelligence, stood on equal ground with the men they challenged. There was Mrs. Stanton—smiling, calm, and nurturing—exactly the kind of woman whose hand on a young man's arm and whose voice speaking to him could do so much to guide him away from making poor choices. There was Susan Anthony—anxious, earnest, and persistent, sarcastic, funny, and as unconventional as ever. Among everyone there, "Susan" is the one most harshly and unfairly criticized. Of course, she can provoke such reactions. She sometimes has a rebellious way of speaking and acting that men find wonderfully charming in a young woman but completely unacceptable in an ordinary, middle-aged woman. Plus, "Susan's" total dedication to her cause and her passion for it sometimes lead her to tactics that aren’t entirely acceptable—in short, she might offend your tastes and mine; but this is just the surface, a very small aspect of Susan Anthony. A person, and more than just a person—a woman who can set herself aside, ignore her own needs for a principle, for what she believes is the truth, whether we agree with her or not, deserves at least our respect.
Susan B. Anthony has a strong, earnest and loving nature; her devotion to her sex is an utterly absorbing and absolute passion. Born and nurtured a Quaker, she transgresses no prejudice, even of education, when she stands forth everywhere and in all places the unflinching, unwearied, never-to-be-put-down champion of woman. In the better age, when the woman of the future shall be man's equal in law, in education, in labor, in labor's rewards; when time shall have softened the asperities of the present, and the crudeness of the personal shall be buried forever in the grave, Susan B. Anthony will live as one of the truest friends that woman ever had.
Susan B. Anthony has a strong, passionate, and loving nature; her commitment to women's rights is an all-consuming and unwavering passion. Raised as a Quaker, she holds no biases, even in education, as she stands boldly everywhere as the tireless, relentless, and unbeatable advocate for women. In a brighter future, when women will be equal to men in law, education, work, and the rewards of their labor; when time has softened the harshness of today, and personal biases are a thing of the past, Susan B. Anthony will be remembered as one of the greatest allies women ever had.

Mary Clemmer
Mary Clemmer
Sarah Pugh wrote Miss Anthony to stop over in Philadelphia and visit Mrs. Mott and herself on her way home from Washington, adding, "We are true to you." In accepting the invitation, Miss Anthony said: "I pray every day to keep broad and generous towards all who scatter and divide, and hope I may hold out to the end. The movement can not be damaged, though some particular schemes may, by any ill-judged action. The wheels are secure on the iron rails, and 341 no 'National' or 'American'—no New York or Boston—assumption or antagonism can block them. Individuals may jump on or off, yet the train is stopped thereby but for a moment."
Sarah Pugh wrote to Miss Anthony asking her to stop in Philadelphia to visit Mrs. Mott and her on her way back from Washington, adding, "We are loyal to you." In accepting the invitation, Miss Anthony said: "I pray every day to stay open-minded and generous toward everyone who spreads division, and I hope I can maintain that until the end. The movement can’t be harmed, even if some specific plans might be, by any poorly judged action. The wheels are secure on the iron tracks, and 341 no 'National' or 'American'—no New York or Boston—claim or opposition can stop them. Individuals may get on or off, but the train is only paused for a moment."
A letter to her from the California association declares: "We will split into a thousand pieces before we will prove false to you, who have so long borne the heat and burden of the day." The heat and burden had indeed been great, and one less strong in body and less heroic in soul would have sunk under them. Although she was still weighed down by the terrible financial struggle of The Revolution, the storm of opposition which it had aroused was passing away and the old friends and many new ones were flocking around the intrepid standard bearer, whom neither fear nor favor could induce to swerve from the straight line marked out by her own convictions and conscience. Miss Anthony would soon complete a half-century, and her friends resolved to commemorate it in a worthy manner. Handsomely engraved cards were sent out, reading:
A letter to her from the California association states: "We will break into a thousand pieces before we let you down, who have long carried the heat and weight of the day." The heat and weight had indeed been heavy, and anyone less strong in body and less courageous in spirit would have faltered under it. Even though she was still burdened by the awful financial struggle of The Revolution, the wave of opposition it had stirred was fading, and old friends, along with many new ones, were gathering around the brave standard bearer, whom neither fear nor favor could sway from the clear path laid out by her own beliefs and conscience. Miss Anthony was about to reach half a century, and her friends decided to celebrate this milestone in a meaningful way. Beautifully engraved cards were sent out, reading:
The ladies of the Woman's Bureau invite you to a reception on Tuesday evening, February 15, 1870, to celebrate the Fiftieth Birthday of Susan B. Anthony. On this occasion her friends will be afforded an opportunity to testify their appreciation of her twenty years' service in behalf of woman. ELIZABETH B. PHELPS, ANNA B. DARLING, CHARLOTTE B. WILBOUR.
The women of the Woman's Bureau invite you to a reception on Tuesday evening, February 15, 1870, to celebrate Susan B. Anthony's 50th birthday. This event will give her friends the opportunity to express their gratitude for her twenty years of service to women. ELIZABETH B. PHELPS, ANNA B. DARLING, CHARLOTTE B. WILBOUR.
There had been hard work to persuade Miss Anthony to accept this testimonial, but she was very happy that evening when the spacious parlors were crowded with the leading men and women of the day. Although her opinions and methods had been many times attacked by the newspapers, they now united in cordial congratulations. The New York World, in a long account, thus described the affair:
There was a lot of effort put into convincing Miss Anthony to accept this recognition, but she felt very pleased that evening when the large parlors were filled with the prominent men and women of the time. Even though her views and approaches had been criticized by the newspapers many times before, they now came together to offer warm congratulations. The New York World, in a lengthy report, described the event like this:
A large number of friends and admirers of the private virtues and public services of Miss Anthony assembled at the Woman's Bureau in Twenty-third street last evening to congratulate the lady upon this auspicious anniversary, and to wish her the customary "many happy returns of the day." The parlors were dazzling with light, the atmosphere laden with perfume, the walls covered with beautiful works of art, and the sweet sounds of women's laughter and silvery voices filled the apartments. Miss Susan B. Anthony stood at the entrance of the front parlor to receive her numerous friends. She 342 wore a dress of rich shot silk, dark red and black, cut square in front, with a stomacher of white lace and a pretty little cameo brooch. All female vanities she rigorously discarded—no hoop, train, bustle, panier, chignon, powder, paint, rouge, patches, no nonsense of any sort. From her kindly eyes and from her gentle lips, there beamed the sweetest smiles to all those loving friends who, admiring her really admirable efforts in the cause of human freedom, her undaunted heroism amid a dark and gloomy warfare, were glad to press her hand and show their appreciation of her character and achievements.
A large group of friends and admirers of Miss Anthony’s personal qualities and public service gathered at the Woman's Bureau on Twenty-third Street last night to celebrate her special anniversary and wish her the traditional "many happy returns of the day." The rooms were bright with light, filled with fragrances, adorned with beautiful artwork, and filled with joyful laughter and cheerful voices. Miss Susan B. Anthony stood at the entrance of the front parlor to greet her many friends. She 342 wore a stunning dress made of rich shot silk in dark red and black, featuring a square neckline, a white lace stomacher, and a lovely cameo brooch. She completely set aside any female vanities—no hoop skirts, trains, bustles, panniers, chignons, powder, makeup, or patches—none of that nonsense. Her kind eyes and gentle smile radiated warmth to all those loving friends who, impressed by her truly commendable efforts for human freedom and her fearless spirit during a challenging struggle, were eager to shake her hand and express their admiration for her character and accomplishments.
Every daily paper in the city had some pleasant comment, while scores of loving and appreciative letters were received. Accompanying these were many beautiful gifts and also checks to the amount of $1,000.[52]
Every local newspaper in the city had nice things to say, and there were countless heartfelt and supportive letters received. Along with these came many lovely gifts and checks totaling $1,000.[52]

SUSAN B. ANTHONY
SUSAN B. ANTHONY
After the guests had assembled, Isabella Beecher Hooker announced that Anna T. Randall would read a poem written for the occasion by Phoebe Gary.[53] She was followed by Mrs. Hooker, who read some delightfully humorous verses from her husband, John Hooker, dedicated to Miss Anthony. There were more poetical tributes, recitations by Sarah Fisher Ames and other well-known elocutionists, and then a call for the recipient of all these honors. Miss Anthony stepped forward, completely overwhelmed and, after stammering her thanks for the unexpected ovation of the evening, said in a voice which 343 broke in spite of her self-control: "If this were an assembled mob opposing the rights of women I should know what to say. I never made a speech except to rouse people to action. My work is that of subsoil plowing.... I ask you tonight, as your best testimony to my services, on this, the twentieth anniversary of my public work, to join me in making a demand on Congress for a Sixteenth Amendment giving women the right to vote, and then to go with me before the several legislatures to secure its ratification; and when the Secretary of State proclaims that that amendment has been ratified by twenty-eight States, then Susan B. Anthony will stop work—but not before."
After the guests had gathered, Isabella Beecher Hooker announced that Anna T. Randall would read a poem written for the occasion by Phoebe Gary.[53] Following her, Mrs. Hooker shared some delightfully humorous verses from her husband, John Hooker, dedicated to Miss Anthony. There were more poetic tributes, recitations by Sarah Fisher Ames and other well-known speakers, and then a call for the person receiving all these honors. Miss Anthony stepped forward, completely overwhelmed and, after stammering her thanks for the unexpected applause of the evening, said in a voice which 343 broke despite her best efforts to stay composed: "If this were a gathered crowd opposing women's rights, I would know exactly what to say. I've never given a speech unless it was to inspire people to take action. My work is like tilling the soil.... I ask you tonight, as the best recognition of my services, on this twentieth anniversary of my public work, to join me in calling on Congress for a Sixteenth Amendment granting women the right to vote, and then to go with me to various legislatures to ensure its ratification; and when the Secretary of State announces that the amendment has been ratified by twenty-eight States, then Susan B. Anthony will stop working—but not before."
When all was over, before she slept, Miss Anthony wrote this characteristically tender little note to the one who never was absent from her mind:
When everything was done, before she went to bed, Miss Anthony wrote this characteristically sweet little note to the one who was always on her mind:
MY DEAR MOTHER: It really seems tonight as if I were parting with something dear—saying good-by to somebody I loved. In the last few hours I have lived over nearly all of life's struggles, and the most painful is the memory of my mother's long and weary efforts to get her six children up into womanhood and manhood. My thought centers on your struggle especially because of the proof-reading of Alice Gary's story this week. I can see the old home—the brick-makers—the dinner-pails—the sick mother—the few years of more fear than hope in the new house, and the hard years since. And yet with it all, I know there was an undercurrent of joy and love which makes the summing-up vastly in their favor. How I wish you and Mary and Hannah and Guelma could have been here—and yet it is nothing—and yet it is much.
DEAR MOM: Tonight feels like I'm saying goodbye to something really important—like I'm parting with someone I loved. In the last few hours, I've gone over almost all of life's challenges, and the hardest one is remembering your long and exhausting efforts to raise your six kids into adulthood. I'm especially focused on your struggle because I've been proofreading Alice Gary's story this week. I can see our old home—the brick-makers—the lunch pails—the sick mom—the years filled with more fear than hope in the new house, and the tough years that followed. Yet despite all that, I know there was a deep current of joy and love that really makes it all worthwhile. I wish you, Mary, Hannah, and Guelma could have been here—and still, it feels like nothing—and yet, it means so much.
My constantly recurring thought and prayer now are that the coming fraction of the century, whether it be small or large, may witness nothing less worthy in my life than has the half just closed—that no word or act of mine may lessen its weight in the scale of truth and right.
My ongoing thought and prayer now is that the next part of the century, whether it's short or long, will be just as significant in my life as the half that’s just finished—that no word or action of mine will lessen its value in the realm of truth and righteousness.
Then there is the bare mention of a luncheon a few days before with Alice and Phoebe Cary, Mrs. Stanton and Mrs. Hooker. What a treat would have been a résumé of the conversation of that gifted quintette of women!
Then there’s just a quick note about a lunch a few days earlier with Alice and Phoebe Cary, Mrs. Stanton, and Mrs. Hooker. What a treat it would have been to get a recap of the conversation among that talented group of women!
Mrs. Stanton was ill and could not attend the reception, which was a great disappointment to Miss Anthony. They had shared so much trouble that she felt most anxious they should share this one great pleasure. In the diary at midnight 344 is recorded: "Fiftieth birthday! One half-century done, one score years of it hard labor for bettering humanity—temperance—emancipation—enfranchisement—oh, such a struggle! Terribly stormy night, but a goodly company and many, many splendid tributes to my work. Really, if I had been dead and these the last words, neither press nor friends could have been more generous and appreciative."
Mrs. Stanton was sick and couldn’t make it to the reception, which really disappointed Miss Anthony. They had gone through so much together that she was eager for them to enjoy this one big happiness. In the diary at midnight 344 it says: "Fiftieth birthday! One half-century done, one score years of it hard work for improving humanity—temperance—emancipation—enfranchisement—oh, what a struggle! It was a terribly stormy night, but there was a great group and so many amazing tributes to my work. Honestly, if I had been dead and these were the last words, neither the press nor my friends could have been more generous and appreciative."
This beautiful anniversary was a sweet oasis in the severe monotony of a life which had been filled always with hard work, criticism and misrepresentation, although it was only a public expression of the numerous and strong friendships which had been many times manifested in private. The birthday celebration served also to disprove the oft-repeated assertion that all women conceal their age, but though Miss Anthony made this frank avowal of her fifty years, there was scarcely a newspaper which did not introduce its comments with the usual silly and threadbare remarks.
This beautiful anniversary was a refreshing break in the relentless routine of a life filled with hard work, criticism, and misrepresentation, even though it was merely a public expression of the many strong friendships that had often been shown in private. The birthday celebration also served to challenge the frequently repeated claim that all women hide their age, but although Miss Anthony openly stated that she was fifty, hardly any newspaper introduced its coverage without the usual silly and tired remarks.
After the people began to recover in a social, intellectual and financial way from the effects of the Civil War, the lyceum bureau became a marked feature in literary life. The principal bureaus were in New York, Boston and Chicago. Their managers engaged the best speakers and each season marked out a route, made the appointments, advertised extensively and sent them throughout the country. They paid excellent prices, assuming all responsibility, and engagements with them were considered very desirable. Under the management of the New York bureau, Mrs. Stanton began a tour in November, 1869. Miss Anthony at this time, while well-known from one end of the country to the other, had not gained a reputation as a platform orator. She thoroughly distrusted her own power to make a sustained speech of an entire evening, and at all conventions had placed others on the program for the principal addresses, presided herself, if necessary, and kept everything in motion.
After people started to bounce back socially, intellectually, and financially from the aftermath of the Civil War, the lyceum bureau became an important part of literary life. The main bureaus were located in New York, Boston, and Chicago. Their managers hired the best speakers, planned routes for each season, scheduled engagements, advertised widely, and sent them across the country. They offered excellent pay, took on all responsibilities, and being booked by them was seen as very prestigious. Under the management of the New York bureau, Mrs. Stanton launched a tour in November 1869. At that time, Miss Anthony was well-known across the country, but she had not yet made a name for herself as a public speaker. She was very skeptical about her ability to deliver a full evening speech, so at all conventions, she had others scheduled for the main addresses, took on the role of presiding when needed, and kept everything running smoothly.
By the winter of 1870, however, the bureau began to receive applications from all parts of the United States for lectures from her, and Mrs. Stanton being ill for a month, Miss Anthony 345 went as her substitute. She proved so acceptable that in February, March and April she was engaged by the bureau for many places in Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois and Michigan, and received a considerable sum for her services, besides securing a number of subscribers and some liberal donations for The Revolution. In her journal she speaks of the good audiences, the enthusiasm and the many prominent callers at most of the places. At Mattoon she had a day and a night with Anna Dickinson and wrote: "I found her the most weary and worn I had ever seen her, and desperately tired of the lecture field. Her devotion to me is marvelous. She is like my loving and loved child."
By the winter of 1870, though, the bureau started getting requests for lectures from all over the United States on her behalf, and since Mrs. Stanton was sick for a month, Miss Anthony 345 stepped in as her substitute. She was so well-received that in February, March, and April, the bureau hired her to speak in many locations across Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, and Michigan. She earned a significant amount for her services and also brought in a number of subscribers and some generous donations for The Revolution. In her journal, she mentioned the great audiences, the enthusiasm, and the many noteworthy visitors at most of the venues. In Mattoon, she spent a day and a night with Anna Dickinson and wrote: "I found her the most weary and worn I had ever seen her, and desperately tired of the lecture circuit. Her devotion to me is incredible. She is like my loving and beloved child."
At Peoria, the editor of the Democratic paper stated that the laws of Illinois were better for women than for men. Colonel Robert G. Ingersoll, whom she never had seen, was in the audience, and sent a note to the president of the meeting, asking that Miss Anthony should not answer the editor but give him that privilege. He then took up the laws, one after another, and, illustrating by cases in his own practice, showed in his eloquent manner how cruelly unjust they were to women and proved how necessary it was that women should have a voice in making them. He also offered the following resolution, which was unanimously adopted: "We pledge ourselves, irrespective of party, to use all honorable means to make the women of America the equals of men before the law."
At Peoria, the editor of the Democratic newspaper claimed that the laws of Illinois favored women more than men. Colonel Robert G. Ingersoll, who she had never seen before, was in the audience and sent a note to the meeting's president, asking that Miss Anthony not respond to the editor but allow him that opportunity. He then went through the laws, one by one, and using examples from his own practice, he powerfully demonstrated how outrageously unfair they were to women and highlighted how essential it was for women to have a say in creating these laws. He also proposed the following resolution, which was adopted unanimously: "We pledge ourselves, regardless of party, to use all honorable means to make the women of America equal to men in the eyes of the law."
In Detroit Rev. Justin Fulton occupied one evening in opposition to woman suffrage, and Miss Anthony replied to him the next. An audience of a thousand gathered in Young Men's Hall at each meeting. The Free Press had a most scurrilous review of the debate in which it said:
In Detroit, Rev. Justin Fulton spent one evening arguing against women's suffrage, and Miss Anthony responded to him the next. A crowd of a thousand gathered at Young Men's Hall for each meeting. The Free Press published a highly critical review of the debate in which it said:
The speakeress rattled on in this strain until a late hour, saying nothing new, nothing noble, not a word that would give one maid or mother a purer or better thought. She drew no pictures of love in the household—she did not seem to think that man and wife could even stay under the same roof. She was not content that any woman should be a bashful, modest woman, but wanted them to be like her, to think as she thought.... People went there to see Susan B. Anthony, who has achieved an evanescent reputation by her strenuous endeavors to defy nature. Not one woman in a hundred cares to 346 vote, cares aught for the ballot, would take it with the degrading influences it would surely bring.... Old, angular, sticking to black stockings, wearing spectacles, a voice highly suggestive of midnight Caudleism at poor Anthony, if he ever comes around, though he never will. If all woman's righters look like that, the theory will lose ground like a darkey going through a cornfield in a light night. If she had come out and plainly said, "See here, ladies, see me, I am the result of twenty years of constant howling at man's tyranny," there would never have been another "howl" uttered in Detroit. Or, if she had plainly said, in so many words, "I am going to lecture on bosh, for the sake of that almighty half-dollar per head—take it as bosh," people would have admired her candor, though forming the same conclusions without her assistance....
The speaker went on and on late into the night, saying nothing new, nothing inspiring, and not a word that would give any woman or mother a better or purer thought. She didn’t depict a loving household—she didn’t even seem to believe that a husband and wife could live together peacefully. Instead of being content with women being shy and modest, she wanted them to be just like her, thinking just like she does.... People came to see Susan B. Anthony, who gained some temporary fame through her efforts to challenge the status quo. Not one woman in a hundred wants to 346 vote, cares about the ballot, or would accept it despite the degrading impacts it would surely bring.... Old, awkward, wearing black stockings, glasses perched on her nose, with a voice reminiscent of late-night Caudle talks if poor Anthony ever showed up, though he never will. If all women’s rights advocates look like her, the movement will lose support quickly. If she had openly said, "Look, ladies, see me; I am the result of twenty years of constant complaining about men’s tyranny," there would never have been another "complaint" voiced in Detroit. Or, if she had clearly stated, "I’m here to lecture on nonsense for the sake of that precious half-dollar per person—consider it nonsense," people would have respected her honesty, even if they arrived at the same conclusions without her help....
Myra Bradwell, the able editor of the Chicago Legal News, paid the following tribute: "Miss Anthony is terribly in earnest on this suffrage question. We fully agree with her that the great battle-ground in the first instance should be in Congress.... She is now fifty, and the best years of her life have been devoted solely to the cause of woman. She has never turned aside from this object but has always been in the field, defending her principles against all assaults with an ability which has not only won the admiration of her friends but the respect of her enemies."
Myra Bradwell, the skilled editor of the Chicago Legal News, offered the following tribute: "Miss Anthony is incredibly serious about the suffrage issue. We completely agree with her that the primary battleground should be in Congress.... She is now fifty, and the best years of her life have been dedicated entirely to the cause of women. She has never wavered from this goal and has consistently been in the field, defending her principles against all attacks with a skill that has not only earned the admiration of her supporters but also the respect of her opponents."
She made many new acquaintances on this tour, and one entry in the diary is: "Quite a novel feature this—to have people quarrel as to who shall have the pleasure of entertaining me as their guest!" She returned to New York on Saturday, April 30, and on Sunday the diary says: "Spent the day at Mrs. Tilton's and heard Beecher preach a splendid sermon on 'Visiting the Sins of the Parents on the Children.'"
She made a lot of new friends on this trip, and one entry in the diary says: "What a unique situation this is—having people argue about who gets to host me as their guest!" She got back to New York on Saturday, April 30, and on Sunday the diary notes: "Spent the day at Mrs. Tilton's and listened to Beecher deliver a fantastic sermon on 'Passing the Sins of the Parents to the Children.'"
Various friends of the woman suffrage cause had decided that something must be done to unite the two national organizations. An editorial in the Independent to this effect was followed by a call for a conference to meet at the Fifth Avenue Hotel, April 6, signed by Theodore Tilton, Phoebe Cary, Rev. John Chadwick and a number of others. The meeting was duly held, and the venerable Lucretia Mott, who now rarely left home, came all the way from Philadelphia to use her influence toward a reconciliation. Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton were lecturing in the West and the former telegraphed: "The 347 entire West demands united national organization for the Sixteenth Amendment, this very congressional session, and so does Susan B. Anthony." Mrs. Stanton wrote to the conference: "I will do all I can for union. If I am a stumbling-block I will gladly resign my office. Having fought the world twenty years, I do not now wish to turn and fight those who have so long stood together through evil and good report. I should be glad to have all united, with Mr. Beecher or Lucretia Mott for our general.... I am willing to work with any and all or to get out of the way entirely, that there may be an organization which shall be respectable at home and abroad."
Various supporters of women's suffrage agreed that action was needed to bring the two national organizations together. An editorial in the Independent expressed this idea, followed by a call for a conference to be held at the Fifth Avenue Hotel on April 6, signed by Theodore Tilton, Phoebe Cary, Rev. John Chadwick, and several others. The meeting took place as planned, and the esteemed Lucretia Mott, who rarely ventured out, traveled all the way from Philadelphia to lend her influence for a reconciliation. Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton were giving lectures in the West, and Miss Anthony sent a telegram stating: "The 347 entire West demands a united national organization for the Sixteenth Amendment this very congressional session, and so does Susan B. Anthony." Mrs. Stanton wrote to the conference: "I will do everything I can to achieve unity. If I am an obstacle, I will happily resign my position. After fighting for twenty years, I don't want to turn against those who have stood together through both good times and bad. I would welcome everyone coming together, with Mr. Beecher or Lucretia Mott as our leader... I am ready to collaborate with anyone or to step aside completely so there can be an organization that is respected both at home and abroad."
The representatives of the American Association insisted that they had offered the olive branch at the time of their organization and it had been refused. This olive branch had been a suggestion that the National Association should consider itself a local society and become auxiliary to the American. After a protracted but fruitless discussion of over four hours, they withdrew from the room, declining to accept or to suggest any overtures. The proposition made by the callers of the conference was that the two associations should merge into one, with a new constitution embodying the best features of both, and with a board of officers elected from the two existing organizations. Even the friendly offices of Lucretia Mott, which never before were disregarded, failed to effect a union, and the many letters from mutual friends were equally ineffective. In her regular letter to The Revolution Miss Anthony said:
The representatives of the American Association insisted that they had extended an olive branch when they first formed their organization, but it had been rejected. This olive branch was a suggestion that the National Association should view itself as a local chapter and become an auxiliary to the American. After a long and unproductive discussion lasting over four hours, they left the room, choosing not to accept or propose any compromises. The proposal put forward by the attendees of the conference was that the two associations should merge into one, adopting a new constitution that combined the best elements of both, with a board of officers elected from the two current organizations. Even the supportive efforts of Lucretia Mott, which had never before been ignored, were unable to bring about a union, and numerous letters from mutual friends were also ineffective. In her regular letter to The Revolution, Miss Anthony wrote:
There is but one feeling all through this glorious West, and that is that it is a sin to have a divided front at this auspicious moment. Since my last I have had splendid meetings in Quincy, Farmington, Elwood, Mendota, Peru, La-Salle, Batavia, Peoria and Champaign in Illinois, and in Sturgis and Jonesvine, Michigan. I can tell you with emphasis that the fields are white unto harvest—waiting, waiting only the reapers. And it is a shame—it is a crime—for any of the old or new public workers to halt by the way to pluck the motes out of their neighbors' eyes. Not one of us but has blundered; yet if only we are in earnest, each will forgive, in the faith that the others, like herself, mean right. How any one can stand in the way of a united national organization at an hour like this, is wholly inexplicable.
There’s only one feeling throughout this amazing West, and that is that it’s a mistake to have a divided front right now. Since my last message, I’ve had great meetings in Quincy, Farmington, Elwood, Mendota, Peru, La Salle, Batavia, Peoria, and Champaign in Illinois, as well as Sturgis and Jonesville in Michigan. I can confidently say that the fields are ready for harvest—just waiting for the harvesters. It’s shameful—it’s a crime—for any of the old or new public workers to stop along the way to criticize their neighbors. None of us is without mistakes; yet if we are sincere, we will forgive each other, trusting that, like us, others have good intentions. I don’t understand how anyone can stand in the way of a united national organization at a time like this.
Just before the May Anniversary Mrs. Stanton published the following card in The Revolution: "It is a great thing for those who have been prominent in any movement to know when their special work is done, and when the posts they hold can be more ably filled by others. Having, in my own judgment, reached that time, at the present anniversary of our association I must forbid the use of my name for president or any other official position in any organization whatsoever."
Just before the May Anniversary, Mrs. Stanton published the following notice in The Revolution: "It's essential for those who have been leaders in any movement to recognize when their specific contributions are complete and when the roles they occupy can be better handled by others. In my own opinion, I have reached that point, and at this anniversary of our association, I must decline the use of my name for president or any other official position in any organization."
The anniversary had been advertised for Irving Hall, but when it was found that colored people would not be admitted to that building, it was changed to Apollo Hall, and opened May 10 with Mrs. Stanton presiding. At the business meeting in the afternoon, with representatives present from nineteen States, the proposition of the conference committee was considered. According to the report in The Revolution there was much feeling on the part of the younger women against any organization which did not have Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton at the head, but at their earnest request, made in the interest of harmony, it was finally voted to accept the name Union Woman Suffrage Society, and Mr. Tilton for president.
The anniversary was originally set to be at Irving Hall, but when it was discovered that people of color wouldn’t be allowed in that building, it was moved to Apollo Hall, opening May 10 with Mrs. Stanton in charge. At the business meeting in the afternoon, representatives from nineteen states were present, and they discussed the proposal from the conference committee. According to a report in The Revolution, many of the younger women were strongly opposed to any organization that didn't have Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton leading it. However, at their sincere request, aimed at promoting harmony, it was ultimately decided to go with the name Union Woman Suffrage Society, with Mr. Tilton as president.
On May 14, 1870, the Saturday after the suffrage convention, a number of the old Equal Rights Association came together at a called meeting in New York, which is thus described in The Revolution of May 19:
On May 14, 1870, the Saturday following the suffrage convention, several members of the original Equal Rights Association gathered for a special meeting in New York, which is described in The Revolution of May 19:
One of the most interesting as well as important events of the past week, was the transfer of the American Equal Rights Association to the new Union Woman Suffrage Society. This was done on Saturday in the spacious parlors of Mrs. Margaret E. Winchester in Gramercy Place, Mrs. Stanton occupying the chair in the absence of the president, Lucretia Mott. Henry B. Blackweil presented this resolution:
One of the most notable events from the past week was the transition of the American Equal Rights Association to the newly formed Union Woman Suffrage Society. This occurred on Saturday in the large parlor of Mrs. Margaret E. Winchester in Gramercy Place, with Mrs. Stanton presiding in place of the president, Lucretia Mott. Henry B. Blackwell presented the following resolution:
"WHEREAS, The American Equal Rights Association was organized in 1866 in order to secure equal rights to all American citizens, especially the right of suffrage, irrespective of race, color, or sex; and, whereas, Political distinctions of race are now abolished by the ratification of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments; and whereas, Arrangements have been made by the formation of woman suffrage associations for the advocacy of the legal and political rights of women as a separate question; and, whereas, An unnecessary multiplication of agencies for the accomplishment of a common object should always be avoided; therefore 349
"WHEREAS, The American Equal Rights Association was established in 1866 to secure equal rights for all American citizens, especially the right to vote, regardless of race, color, or gender; and, whereas, Political distinctions based on race have now been eliminated with the ratification of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments; and whereas, Arrangements have been made through the formation of women's suffrage associations to advocate for the legal and political rights of women as a distinct issue; and, whereas, There should always be efforts to avoid unnecessary duplication of organizations working toward a common goal; therefore 349
"Resolved, That we hereby declare the American Equal Eights Association dissolved and adjourned sine die."
"Resolved, That we hereby declare the American Equal Rights Association dissolved and adjourned indefinitely."
Parker Pillsbury offered the following as a substitute:
Parker Pillsbury proposed the following as an alternative:
"WHEREAS, At a meeting of the executive committee held in Brooklyn, March 3, 1870, it was voted, on motion of Oliver Johnson, that 'it is inexpedient to hold any public anniversary of the American Equal Rights Association, and that in our judgment it is expedient to dissolve said body; but as we have no authority to effect such dissolution, an informal business meeting of the association be held in New York, during the coming anniversary week, to consider and act upon this subject; and on motion of Lucy Stone, it was voted that this business meeting be held on Saturday, May 14, 1870, at 10 A.M., at the home of Mrs. Margaret E. Winchester;' therefore
"WHEREAS, At a meeting of the executive committee held in Brooklyn on March 3, 1870, it was decided, on the motion of Oliver Johnson, that 'it is not advisable to hold any public anniversary of the American Equal Rights Association, and that in our opinion it is fitting to dissolve said organization; however, since we do not have the authority to carry out this dissolution, an informal business meeting of the association will be held in New York during the upcoming anniversary week to discuss and take action on this matter; and on the motion of Lucy Stone, it was agreed that this business meeting will take place on Saturday, May 14, 1870, at 10 A.M., at the home of Mrs. Margaret E. Winchester;' therefore"
"Resolved, That instead of terminating our existence as an association, we do hereby transfer it, together with all its books, records, reports or whatsoever appertains to it, and unite it with the Union Woman Suffrage Society, organized in New York, May 10, 1870."
"Resolved, That instead of ceasing to exist as an organization, we are transferring it, along with all its books, records, reports, and anything else related to it, to join the Union Woman Suffrage Society, which was established in New York on May 10, 1870."
A long and earnest discussion succeeded.... At last, after two hours, the vote was reached by the previous question, with this result:
A long and serious discussion followed.... Finally, after two hours, they reached a vote through the previous question, resulting in this:
For dissolution, Lucy Stone, Henry B. Blackwell—2. For transfer, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Parker Pillsbury, Susan B. Anthony, Theodore Tilton, Paulina Wright Davis, Phoebe W. Couzins, Edwin A. Studwell, Mrs. Studwell, Mrs. John J. Merritt, Mrs. Robert Dale Owen, Margaret E. Winchester, Dr. Clemence S. Lozier, Charlotte B. Wilbour, Eleanor Kirk, Jennie Collins, Elizabeth B. Phelps, Miss Chichester, Mrs. S.B. Morse—18.
For dissolution, Lucy Stone, Henry B. Blackwell—2. For transfer, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Parker Pillsbury, Susan B. Anthony, Theodore Tilton, Paulina Wright Davis, Phoebe W. Couzins, Edwin A. Studwell, Mrs. Studwell, Mrs. John J. Merritt, Mrs. Robert Dale Owen, Margaret E. Winchester, Dr. Clemence S. Lozier, Charlotte B. Wilbour, Eleanor Kirk, Jennie Collins, Elizabeth B. Phelps, Miss Chichester, Mrs. S.B. Morse—18.
Thus ended the existence of the American Equal Rights Association, formed in May, 1866, for the purpose of securing to negroes and women the rights of citizenship. These having been obtained for the negro men, women were left the only class denied equality, and the question therefore became simply one of woman's rights.
Thus ended the existence of the American Equal Rights Association, formed in May 1866 to secure citizenship rights for Black individuals and women. With citizenship rights obtained for Black men, women remained the only group denied equality, making the issue simply about women's rights.
At the first anniversary of the American Woman Suffrage Association, the next November, which also was held in Cleveland, this letter was presented:
At the first anniversary of the American Woman Suffrage Association the following November, which also took place in Cleveland, this letter was presented:
FRIENDS AND CO-WORKERS: We, the undersigned, a committee appointed by the Union Woman Suffrage Society in New York, May, 1870, to confer with you on the subject of merging the two organizations into one, respectfully announce:
FRIENDS AND CO-WORKERS: We, the undersigned, a committee appointed by the Union Woman Suffrage Society in New York in May 1870, to discuss merging the two organizations into one, respectfully announce:
1st. That in our judgment no difference exists between the objects and methods of the two societies, nor any good reason for keeping them apart. 2d. That the society we represent has invested us with full power to arrange with you a union of both under a single constitution and executive. 3d. That we ask you to appoint a committee of equal number and authority with our own, to consummate if possible this happy result. 350
1. We believe there’s no difference between the goals and methods of the two societies, and no good reason to keep them separate. 2. The society we represent has given us full authority to work with you to unite both under one constitution and leadership. 3. We request that you appoint a committee with the same number and authority as ours to achieve this positive outcome if possible. 350
Yours, in the common cause of woman's enfranchisement, Isabella Beecher Hooker, Samuel J. May, Charlotte B. Wilbour, Josephine S. Griffing, Laura Curtis Bullard, Gerrit Smith, Sarah Pugh, Frederick Douglass, Mattie Griffith Brown, James W. Stillman—Theodore Tilton, ex officio.
Yours, in the shared mission of women's rights, Isabella Beecher Hooker, Samuel J. May, Charlotte B. Wilbour, Josephine S. Griffing, Laura Curtis Bullard, Gerrit Smith, Sarah Pugh, Frederick Douglass, Mattie Griffith Brown, James W. Stillman—Theodore Tilton, ex officio.
The acceptance of this proposition was strongly urged by Judge Bradwell, of Chicago, and the committee on resolutions recommended "the appointment of a committee of conference, of like number with the one appointed by the Union Suffrage Society with a view to the union of both organizations." After a spirited discussion, this resolution was rejected. The National Association, having exhausted all efforts for reconciliation and union, never thereafter made further overtures. Two distinct organizations were maintained, and there were no more attempts at union for twenty years.
The acceptance of this idea was strongly advocated by Judge Bradwell of Chicago, and the resolutions committee suggested "the formation of a conference committee, with the same number of members as the one created by the Union Suffrage Society, aimed at uniting both organizations." After a lively discussion, this resolution was turned down. The National Association, having tried all means for reconciliation and union, never made any more attempts afterward. Two separate organizations continued to exist, and there were no further efforts at unity for twenty years.
We touch our caps, and place to night
We tip our caps and head out tonight.
The victor's wreath upon her.
The winner's wreath on her.
The woman who outranks us all
The woman who is above us all
In courage and in honor.
In bravery and in honor.
While others in domestic broils
While others deal with drama
Have proved by word and carriage,
Have proven by words and actions,
That one of the United States
That one of the United States
Is not the state of marriage,
Isn’t marriage nowadays,
She, caring not for loss of men,
She, not caring about the loss of men,
Nor for the world's confusion,
Nor for the world's chaos,
Hap carried on a civil war
Hap fought a civil war.
And made a "Revolution."
And created a "Revolution."
True, other women have been brave,
True, other women have been brave,
When banded or hus-banded,
When tied or bonded,
But she has bravely fought her way
But she has bravely fought her way
Alone and single-handed.
Solo and independent.
And think of her unselfish life,
And think about her selfless life,
Her generous disposition,
Her kind nature,
Who never made a lasting prop
Who never created a lasting support
Out of a proposition.
Out of a suggestion.
She might have chose an honored name,
She might have chosen an esteemed name,
and none had scorned or hissed it;
and none had mocked or jeered at it;
Have written Mrs. Jones or Smith,
Have written Mrs. Jones or Smith,
But, strange to say, she Missed it.
But, strangely enough, she missed it.
For fifty years to come may she
For the next fifty years, may she
Grow rich and ripe and mellow,
Grow wealthy and mature and easygoing,
Be quoted even above "par,"
Be quoted even above "par,"
"Or any other fellow;"
"Or any other person;"
And spread the truth from pole to pole,
And share the truth from one end of the world to the other,
and keep her light a-burning
and keep her light burning
Before she cuts her stick to go
Before she cuts her stick to go
To where there's no returning.
To a place of no return.
Because her motto grand hath been
Because her motto has been grand
The rights of every human
Every person's rights
And first and last, and right or wrong,
And first and last, and right or wrong,
She takes the part of woman.
She plays the role of a woman.
"A perfect woman, nobly planned,"
"A perfect woman, beautifully designed,"
To aid, not to amuse one:
To help, not to entertain one:
Take her for all in all, we ne'er
Take her for all in all, we never
Shall see the match of Susan.
Shall see the match of Susan.
CHAPTER XXI.
END OF REVOLUTION—STATUS OF WOMAN SUFFRAGE.
1870.
Immediately after the Suffrage Anniversary in May, 1870, Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton decided to call a mass meeting of women to discuss the questions involved in the McFarland-Richardson trial, which had set the country ablaze with excitement. The case in brief was that McFarland was a drunken, improvident husband, and his wife, Abby Sage, was compelled to be the breadwinner for the family, first as an actress and later as a public reader. She was a woman of education, refinement and marked ability, and enjoyed an intimate friendship with some of the best families of New York. Boarding in the same house with her was Albert D. Richardson, a prominent newspaper man, a stockholder in the Tribune and a special favorite of Mr. Greeley. He befriended Mrs. McFarland, protected her against the brutality of her husband and learned to love her. It was understood among their mutual friends that when she was legally free they would be married. She secured her divorce; and a few days later McFarland walked into the Tribune office, shot and fatally wounded Richardson. Some hours before he died, Mrs. McFarland was married to him, Revs. Henry Ward Beecher and O.B. Frothingham officiating, in the presence of Mr. Greeley and several other distinguished persons. McFarland was tried, acquitted on the ground of insanity, given the custody of their little son and allowed to go free.
Immediately after the Suffrage Anniversary in May 1870, Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton decided to hold a mass meeting of women to discuss the issues surrounding the McFarland-Richardson trial, which had caused a stir across the country. In short, McFarland was an irresponsible, alcoholic husband, and his wife, Abby Sage, had to be the breadwinner for the family, first as an actress and later as a public reader. She was an educated, refined woman with significant talent, and she had close friendships with some of the best families in New York. Living in the same boarding house as her was Albert D. Richardson, a well-known newspaper man, a stockholder in the Tribune, and a close associate of Mr. Greeley. He became friends with Mrs. McFarland, protected her from her husband's abuse, and eventually fell in love with her. Their mutual friends understood that once she was legally free, they would get married. She obtained her divorce, and a few days later, McFarland walked into the Tribune office, shot, and fatally wounded Richardson. Some hours before Richardson died, Mrs. McFarland married him, with Revs. Henry Ward Beecher and O.B. Frothingham officiating, in the presence of Mr. Greeley and several other prominent individuals. McFarland was tried, acquitted on the grounds of insanity, given custody of their young son, and allowed to go free.
Press and pulpit were rent with discussions and, although 352 the general verdict was that if McFarland were insane he should be placed under restraint and not permitted to retain the child, Mrs. Richardson was persecuted in the most cruel and unmerciful manner. The women of New York especially felt indignant at the result of the trial. Miss Anthony offered to take the responsibility of a public demonstration, with Mrs. Stanton to make the address. She sent out 3,000 handsome invitations to the leading women of the city. Before the meeting a number of cautionary letters were received, of which this from Miss Catharine Beecher will serve as a sample:
Press and the pulpit were filled with debates, and although 352 the general consensus was that if McFarland was insane, he should be restrained and not allowed to keep the child, Mrs. Richardson was treated in the most cruel and merciless way. The women of New York were particularly outraged by the outcome of the trial. Miss Anthony volunteered to organize a public demonstration, with Mrs. Stanton giving the speech. She sent out 3,000 beautiful invitations to the prominent women of the city. Before the meeting, several warning letters were received, and this one from Miss Catharine Beecher serves as a good example:
I am anxious for your own sake and for the sake of "our good cause," that you should manage wisely your very difficult task. There is a widespread combination undermining the family state, and we need to protect all the customs as well as the laws that tend to sustain it. In doing this, we need to discriminate between what is in bad taste and evil in its tendencies, and what is in direct violation of a moral law. The custom that requires a man to wait a year after the death of one wife before he takes another, it is usually in bad taste and inexpedient to violate, but there are cases in which such violation is demanded and is lawful.
I’m worried about you and our shared mission, so I hope you handle your very difficult task wisely. There’s a widespread effort undermining the family unit, and we need to protect both the traditions and laws that support it. In doing this, we need to differentiate between what is in bad taste and potentially harmful, and what actually violates a moral law. The tradition that requires a man to wait a year after his wife’s death before remarrying is often seen as bad taste and isn’t advisable to break, but there are times when breaking this tradition is necessary and acceptable.
But the law of marriage demanding that in no case a man shall seek another wife while his first one lives is always imperative. Then the question of divorce arises, and here the Lord of morality and religion, who sees the end from the beginning, has decided that only one crime can justify it. A woman may separate from her husband for abuse or drunkenness and not violate this law, but neither party can marry again without practically saying, "I do not recognize Jesus Christ as the true teacher of morals and religion." If Mrs. McFarland were sure she could prove adultery, she was morally free to marry again; but could she be justified on any other ground without denying the authority of the Lord Jesus Christ? Is not here a point where you need to be very cautious and guarded?
However, the law of marriage states that under no circumstances can a man seek another wife while his first one is still alive. This raises the issue of divorce, and here the Lord of morality and religion, who sees the end from the beginning, has established that only one wrongdoing can justify it. A woman can leave her husband due to abuse or drunkenness without breaking this law, but neither party can remarry without essentially stating, "I do not recognize Jesus Christ as the true source of morals and religion." If Mrs. McFarland could prove adultery, she would be morally free to marry again; but could she justify it on any other grounds without rejecting the authority of the Lord Jesus Christ? Isn’t this a point where you need to be very careful and thoughtful?
I hope to have the pleasure of meeting you on Tuesday at Apollo Hall. Very truly and affectionately your friend.
I look forward to seeing you on Tuesday at Apollo Hall. Sincerely and fondly, your friend.
The following account is taken from The Revolution:
The following account is taken from The Revolution:
On May 17, long before the hour appointed, Apollo Hall was filled. Ministers had preached and editors written their ambiguous views on the justice of the McFarland verdict. Reporters had interviewed the murderer and described (probably from imagination) the conduct and statements of Mrs. Richardson. John Graham had informed a gaping public what should be and what was the opinion of every decent woman in New York in regard to the guilt of this heart-broken widow, thus making it extremely difficult to feel the actual state of the public pulse on this all-important subject. Mrs. Stanton's lecture clearly expressed the convictions of the intelligent and 353 right-minded. Never before in the annals of metropolitan history had there been such an assemblage of women, and it was an equally noticeable fact that they were the earnest, deep-thinking women of the times.[54]
On May 17, well before the scheduled start time, Apollo Hall was full. Ministers had preached, and editors had shared their vague opinions on the McFarland verdict's fairness. Reporters had interviewed the murderer and described (likely from their imagination) the actions and comments of Mrs. Richardson. John Graham had told a curious public what every decent woman in New York thought about this grieving widow's guilt, making it really hard to understand the actual public opinion on this important issue. Mrs. Stanton's lecture clearly reflected the views of the educated and well-intentioned. Never before in the city's history had there been such a gathering of women, and it was equally remarkable that they were the thoughtful, serious women of the time.353
Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton were greeted with the heartiest applause, and as soon as silence was obtained, the former said it was the first time in her life that she had addressed a public audience composed exclusively of women, and it was natural that she should feel somewhat embarrassed under circumstances so peculiar. This quaint observation brought down the house. After a few more of her downright and invigorating remarks, she introduced Mrs. Stanton, who was robed in quiet black, with an elegant lace shawl over her shoulders and her beautiful white hair modestly ornamented with a ribbon. Her appearance was very motherly and winning. Great applause followed her address, and as she took her seat Celia Burleigh read the resolutions adopted on Monday by Sorosis, which were heartily reaffirmed by all present. After remarks by Miss Anthony, Jenny June Croly, Mrs. Robert Dale Owen, Eleanor Kirk and others, a petition to Governor Hoffman, asking that McFarland be placed in an insane asylum, was enthusiastically endorsed.
Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton received enthusiastic applause, and once the audience quieted down, Anthony noted that it was the first time in her life she had spoken to an entirely female audience, so it was only natural for her to feel a bit nervous in such an unusual situation. This humorous remark received a big laugh from the crowd. After a few more of her direct and inspiring comments, she introduced Mrs. Stanton, who was dressed in simple black, wearing an elegant lace shawl over her shoulders and her lovely white hair modestly adorned with a ribbon. She had a very nurturing and charming presence. After her speech, the audience applauded her warmly, and as she took her seat, Celia Burleigh read the resolutions that had been adopted on Monday by Sorosis, which everyone present fully supported. Following comments from Miss Anthony, Jenny June Croly, Mrs. Robert Dale Owen, Eleanor Kirk, and others, a petition to Governor Hoffman asking that McFarland be placed in an insane asylum was met with enthusiastic support.
So great was the desire that a similar meeting was held in Brooklyn. These assemblies threw the newspaper's into convulsions of horror that modest and shrinking women should dare discuss such questions, advocate the same moral standard for both sexes, criticise judge, jury and laws, and demand a different kind of justice from that which men were in the habit of dealing out. Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton came in for their usual lion's share of censure, but they had so long offered themselves as a vicarious sacrifice that they had learned to take criticism and abuse philosophically. For weeks afterwards, however, they received letters from unhappy wives in all parts of the country, thanking them for their attitude in this affair, and pouring out the story of their own wretchedness.
So intense was the desire that a similar meeting took place in Brooklyn. These gatherings sent newspapers into fits of horror at the idea of modest and reserved women daring to discuss such topics, advocating for the same moral standards for both genders, criticizing judges, juries, and laws, and demanding a different kind of justice than what men typically imposed. Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton faced their usual share of criticism, but after long offering themselves as a vicarious sacrifice, they had learned to accept criticism and abuse with a philosophical mindset. However, for weeks afterward, they received letters from distressed wives all across the country, thanking them for their stance in this matter and sharing their own stories of misery.
Miss Anthony had little time to think about either the reproof or the approval, for the next day after this meeting saw the beginning of one of the most sorrowful tragedies in her 354 life—the giving up of The Revolution! The favorable financial auspices under which it was launched have been described, and an imperfect idea given of the storm of opposition it encountered because of the alliance with Mr. Train. He put into the paper about $3,000 and severed his connection with it after sixteen months. Mr. Melliss continued his assistance for nearly the same length of time, contributing altogether $7,000. He was its staunch supporter as long as his means would allow, but at length became apprehensive that it never would reach a paying basis and, as he was not a man of wealth, felt unable to advance more money.
Miss Anthony had little time to reflect on either the criticism or the praise, because the day after this meeting marked the start of one of the most heartbreaking events in her 354 life—the shutdown of The Revolution! The promising financial conditions under which it was started have been noted, along with a partial understanding of the backlash it faced due to its association with Mr. Train. He invested about $3,000 into the paper and ended his involvement after sixteen months. Mr. Melliss continued his support for nearly the same amount of time, contributing a total of $7,000. He was a loyal backer as long as he could afford to be, but eventually he grew worried that it would never be financially sustainable, and since he wasn’t wealthy, he felt unable to invest more money.
From a pecuniary point of view things looked very dark for The Revolution. Every newspaper, in its early days, swallows up money like a bottomless well. The Revolution had started on an expensive basis; its office rent was $1,300 per annum; it was printed on the best of paper, which at that time was very costly; typesetting commanded the highest prices. Partly as a matter of pride and partly for the interest of the paper, Miss Anthony was not willing to reduce expenses. At the end of the first year The Revolution had 2,000, and at the end of the second year 3,000 bona fide, paying subscribers, but these could not sustain it without plenty of advertising, and advertisers never lavish money on a reform paper. Mr. Pillsbury's valuable services were given at a minimum price, Mrs. Stanton received no salary and Miss Anthony drew out only what she was compelled to use for her actual expenses. She was exhausted in mind and body from the long and relentless persecution of those who once had been her co-workers, but to the world she showed still the old indomitable spirit. Her letters to friends and relatives at this time, appealing for funds to carry on the paper, are heart-breaking. A dearly loved Quaker cousin, Anson Lapham, of Skaneateles, loaned her at different times $4,000. To him she wrote:
From a financial standpoint, things looked very bleak for The Revolution. Every newspaper, in its early days, consumes money like a bottomless pit. The Revolution launched on an expensive footing; its office rent was $1,300 a year; it was printed on high-quality paper, which was quite pricey at that time; and typesetting came at premium rates. Partly out of pride and partly for the sake of the paper's quality, Miss Anthony was unwilling to cut costs. By the end of the first year, The Revolution had 2,000 bona fide paying subscribers, and by the end of the second year, it had 3,000, but these numbers weren't enough to keep it afloat without significant advertising, and advertisers rarely spend generously on a reform paper. Mr. Pillsbury provided his valuable services for a minimal fee, Mrs. Stanton received no salary, and Miss Anthony only withdrew what she absolutely needed for her expenses. She was drained mentally and physically from the long and relentless harassment by those who were once her colleagues, yet to the outside world, she maintained her unyielding spirit. Her letters to friends and family during this time, seeking funds to keep the paper going, are deeply moving. A beloved Quaker cousin, Anson Lapham, from Skaneateles, loaned her $4,000 at various times. To him, she wrote:
My paper must not, shall not go down. I am sure you believe in me, in my honesty of purpose, and also in the grand work which The Revolution seeks to do, and therefore you will not allow me to ask you in vain to come to the rescue. Yesterday's mail brought forty-three subscribers from 355 Illinois and twenty from California. We only need time to win financial success. I know you will save me from giving the world a chance to say, "There is a woman's rights failure; even the best of women can't manage business." If I could only die, and thereby fail honorably, I would say "amen," but to live and fail—it would be too terrible to bear.
My paper can't and won't fail. I'm sure you believe in me, in my good intentions, and in the important work that The Revolution is trying to achieve, so I know you won't let me ask for help without a purpose. Yesterday's mail brought forty-three subscribers from 355 Illinois and twenty from California. We just need a little more time to succeed financially. I know you'll help me prevent people from saying, "There's a women's rights failure; even the best women can't run a business." If I could just die and fail with dignity, I would say "amen," but living and failing—it would be too much to bear.
To Francis G. Shaw, of Staten Island, who sent $100, she wrote: "I wonder why it is that I must forever feel compelled to take the rough things of the world. Why can't I excuse myself from the overpowering and disagreeable struggles? I can not tell, but after such a day as yesterday, my heart fails me—almost. Then I remember that the promise is to those only who hold out to the end—and nerve myself to go forward. I am grateful nowadays for every kind word and every dollar." On the back is inscribed: "My pride would not let me send this, and I substituted merely a cordial note of thanks." Her letters home during this dark period are too sacred to be given to the public. The mother and sisters were distressed beyond expression at the merciless criticism and censure with which she had been assailed, and begged her to withdraw from it all to the seclusion of her own pleasant home, but when she persisted in standing by her ship, they aided her with every means in their power. Her sister Mary loaned her the few thousands she had been able to save by many years' hard work in the schoolroom, and the mother contributed from her small estate.
To Francis G. Shaw, from Staten Island, who sent $100, she wrote: "I wonder why I always feel like I have to endure the harsh realities of life. Why can't I escape the heavy and unpleasant struggles? I can't say, but after a day like yesterday, I almost lose hope. Then I remember that the promise is for those who keep going until the end—and I gather my strength to move forward. I'm thankful these days for every kind word and every dollar." On the back, it's written: "My pride wouldn't let me send this, so I just wrote a warm thank-you note instead." Her letters home during this difficult time are too personal to share with the public. Her mother and sisters were deeply upset by the unrelenting criticism and blame she faced, and they urged her to retreat to the comfort of her own home, but when she chose to stand by her commitments, they supported her in every way they could. Her sister Mary lent her the few thousand dollars she had saved from years of hard work in the classroom, and their mother contributed from her limited resources.
Her brother Daniel R., a practical newspaper man, assured her that he was ready at any time to be one of a stock company to support the paper, but that it was useless to sink any more money in the shape of individual subscriptions. He urged her to cut down expenses, make it a semi-monthly or monthly if necessary, but not to go any more deeply in debt, saying: "I know how earnest you are, but you stand alone. Very few think with you, and they are not willing to risk a dollar. You have put in your all and all you can borrow, and all is swallowed up. You are making no provision for the future, and you wrong yourself by so doing. No one will thank you hereafter. Although you are now fifty years old and have 356 worked like a slave all your life, you have not a dollar to show for it. This is not right. Do make a change." Her sister Mary spent all her vacation in New York one hot summer looking after the business of the paper, while Miss Anthony went out lecturing and getting subscribers. After returning home she wrote:
Her brother Daniel R., a practical newspaper guy, assured her that he was ready at any time to be part of a stock company to support the paper, but that it was pointless to invest any more money through individual subscriptions. He urged her to cut down on expenses, consider making it a semi-monthly or monthly if necessary, but not to go any deeper into debt, saying: "I know how dedicated you are, but you’re on your own. Very few agree with you, and they aren't willing to risk a dime. You’ve put in everything you have and everything you can borrow, and it's all gone. You're not making any plans for the future, and that's not fair to yourself. No one will appreciate your efforts later on. Even though you’re now fifty years old and have worked tirelessly all your life, you don't have a dollar to show for it. This isn't right. Please make a change." Her sister Mary spent her entire vacation in New York one hot summer taking care of the paper’s business, while Miss Anthony went around lecturing to gain subscribers. After returning home she wrote:
You can not begin to know how you have changed, and many times every day the tears would fill my eyes if I allowed myself a moment to reflect upon it. I beg of you for your own sake and for ours, do not persevere in this work unless people will aid you enough to do credit to yourself as you always have done. Make a plain statement to your friends, and if they will not come to your rescue, go down as gracefully as possible and with far less indebtedness than you will have three months from now. It is very sad for all of us to feel that you are working so hard and being so misunderstood, and we constantly fear that, in some of your hurried business transactions, your enemies will delight to pick you up and make you still more trouble.
You can’t even imagine how much you’ve changed, and there are so many moments each day when I feel tears welling up in my eyes if I let myself think about it. For your own sake and ours, I’m asking you not to keep pushing forward with this work unless people are willing to help you enough to do justice to yourself like you always have. Be honest with your friends, and if they won’t come to your aid, gracefully step back and try to have a lot less debt than you will in three months. It’s really upsetting for all of us to see you working so hard and being so misunderstood, and we’re always worried that in some of your rushed business deals, your enemies will be eager to take advantage and create even more trouble for you.
At this time, in a letter to Martha C. Wright, Mr. Pillsbury said: "Susan works like a whole plantation of slaves, and her example is scourge enough to keep me tugging also." With her rare optimism, Miss Anthony never gives up hoping, and on January 1, 1870, writes to Sarah Pugh: "The year opens splendidly. December brought the largest number of subscriptions of any month since we began, and yesterday the largest of any day. So the little 'rebel Revolution' doesn't feel anything but the happiest sort of a New Year."
At this time, in a letter to Martha C. Wright, Mr. Pillsbury said: "Susan works like a whole plantation of slaves, and her example is enough to keep me working hard too." With her rare optimism, Miss Anthony never stops hoping, and on January 1, 1870, she writes to Sarah Pugh: "The year starts off beautifully. December brought in the largest number of subscriptions of any month since we began, and yesterday was the largest day ever. So the little 'rebel Revolution' is feeling nothing but the happiest kind of New Year."
A movement was begun for forming a stock company of several wealthy women, on a basis of $50,000, to relieve Miss Anthony of all financial responsibility, making her simply the business manager. Paulina Wright Davis already had given $500, and January 1, 1870, her name appeared as corresponding editor. Isabella Beecher Hooker took the liveliest interest in the paper and was very anxious that it should be continued. She devised various schemes for this purpose and finally decided that her sister, Harriet Beecher Stowe, and herself would give The Revolution their personal influence and that of their large circle of friends, by putting their names on the staff of editors. Early in December, 1869, she sent the following: 357
A movement was started to create a stock company made up of several wealthy women, with a budget of $50,000, to relieve Miss Anthony of all financial obligations, making her just the business manager. Paulina Wright Davis had already contributed $500, and on January 1, 1870, her name was listed as corresponding editor. Isabella Beecher Hooker was very interested in the paper and was eager for it to keep going. She came up with several plans for this and ultimately decided that she and her sister, Harriet Beecher Stowe, would lend The Revolution their personal influence and the support of their extensive network of friends by adding their names to the editorial board. Early in December 1869, she sent the following: 357
We will give our names as corresponding editors for your paper for one year and agree to furnish at least six articles apiece and also to secure an original article from some friend every other week during the year. We agree to do this without promised compensation, but on the condition that you will change the name of the paper to The True Republic, or something equally satisfactory to us; and that you will pay us equally for this service according to your ability, you yourself being sole judge of that.
We will act as the corresponding editors for your paper for one year, each of us providing at least six articles. We also agree to get an original article from a friend every other week for the entire year. We'll do this without guaranteed payment, but only if you change the name of the paper to The True Republic or another name that we find acceptable. Additionally, you will fairly compensate us for our services based on what you can afford, and you will be the sole judge of that.
H.B. STOWE, I.B. HOOKER.
H.B. STOWE, I.B. HOOKER.
This was written while they were in New York City, and on her way home Mrs. Hooker wrote, while on board the train, an enthusiastic letter regarding details of the work, ending, after she arrived: "I give you my hand upon it. I have read the above to my two Mentors, and they approve in the main." In a few days, she said in a long letter:
This was written while they were in New York City, and on her way home, Mrs. Hooker wrote an enthusiastic letter about the work details while on the train, concluding it after she arrived: "I give you my word on it. I've shared the above with my two Mentors, and they mostly approve." In a few days, she mentioned in a long letter:
I wish Mrs. Stanton's "editorial welcome" to us might be in the dignified style of her best essays or speeches, not in the least gossipy or familiar, but stately and full of womanly presence. She ought to have a copy of Mrs. Stowe's editorial the moment it is written, for approval and suggestion. If Mr. Pillsbury would stay for a month or two and initiate Phoebe Cary, and we all work well as we mean to, I think she might get on.... I shall go to the Washington convention to work, not to speak. Tilton should be secured by all means—his wife, too. Our parlor needs her demure, motherly, angelic sweetness, as much as our platform needs him. These little, quiet, domestic women are trump cards, nowadays. I wish we had a whole pack of them.... Mr. Burton will hunt up a capital motto or heading, and he will write, I am sure. Mrs. Jewell met me in the street and said, "Is it true that you and Mrs. Stowe are going to help The Revolution?" I told her what we proposed and she was much delighted.
I hope Mrs. Stanton's "editorial welcome" to us will be as dignified as her best essays or speeches, avoiding any gossip or casualness, and instead being stately and full of feminine presence. She should get a copy of Mrs. Stowe's editorial as soon as it’s written, so she can provide her approval and suggestions. If Mr. Pillsbury could stay for a month or two to mentor Phoebe Cary, and if we all work as well as we plan to, I think she could really succeed.... I'm heading to the Washington convention to work, not to speak. We absolutely need to secure Tilton—along with his wife. Our parlor needs her calm, motherly, angelic sweetness just as much as our platform needs him. These quiet, domestic women are the real assets these days. I wish we had a lot more of them.... Mr. Burton will come up with a great motto or title, and I’m sure he’ll write something too. Mrs. Jewell ran into me on the street and asked, "Is it true that you and Mrs. Stowe are going to help The Revolution?" I told her what we planned, and she was really pleased.
In reply to a letter asking her opinion, Mrs. Stanton wrote: "As for changing the name of The Revolution, I should consider it a great mistake. We are thoroughly advertised under the present title. There is no other like it, never was, and never will be. The establishing of woman on her rightful throne is the greatest of revolutions. It is no child's play. You and I know the conflict of the last twenty years; the ridicule, persecution, denunciation, detraction, the unmixed bitterness of our cup for the last two, when even friends have crucified us. We have so much hope and pluck that none but the Good Father knows how we have suffered. A journal 358 called 'The Rose-bud' might answer for those who come with kid gloves and perfumes to lay immortelle wreaths on the monuments which in sweat and tears we have hewn and built; but for us, and that great blacksmith of ours who forges such red-hot thunderbolts for Pharisees, hypocrites and sinners, there is no name but The Revolution."
In response to a letter requesting her opinion, Mrs. Stanton wrote: "As for changing the name of The Revolution, I believe it would be a huge mistake. We are well-known under the current title. There’s nothing else like it, never has been, and never will be. Establishing women in their rightful place is the greatest of revolutions. It’s no trivial matter. You and I are aware of the struggles over the past twenty years—the ridicule, persecution, condemnation, and the pure bitterness we’ve faced for the last two years, when even friends have betrayed us. We have so much hope and determination that only the Good Father knows how much we have endured. A publication called 'The Rose-bud' might appeal to those who approach us delicately, bringing flowers to adorn the monuments we’ve built through hard work and suffering; but for us, and that great blacksmith who creates fierce lightning bolts for Pharisees, hypocrites, and sinners, there is no name other than The Revolution."
Miss Anthony consulted many newspaper men and all advised against the proposed change, saying that experience had shown this to be fatal to a paper. Acting upon this advice, and also upon her own strong convictions, she decided to retain the original title. Meanwhile, tremendous pressure had been brought to bear upon Mrs. Hooker and Mrs. Stowe not to identify themselves with The Revolution. After Mrs. Stowe's salutatory had been prepared, Mrs. Hooker wrote as follows:
Miss Anthony talked to several journalists, and they all advised against the proposed change, stating that experience had proven it to be harmful to a publication. Following their advice and her own strong beliefs, she chose to keep the original title. Meanwhile, there was intense pressure on Mrs. Hooker and Mrs. Stowe not to associate themselves with The Revolution. After Mrs. Stowe's introductory piece had been prepared, Mrs. Hooker wrote the following:
I think the name should not be changed. If you change it in deference to our wishes and against good advice, it would lay an obligation on us that we could ill endure. Already I was feeling uneasy under the thought, and Mrs. Stowe actually said to me that she should prefer greatly to write as contributor and would do just as much work as if called editor. She settled down on consenting to be corresponding editor; and Mrs. Davis and I will be assistant editors. I will write for The Revolution and work for it just as hard as I can, sending out a circular through Connecticut asking contributions to it.
I think the name should stay the same. If you change it just to make us happy without considering solid advice, it would create a responsibility for us that we couldn't handle. I’m already feeling stressed about it, and Mrs. Stowe even said she would prefer to write instead of being called the editor, but she agreed to be the corresponding editor. Mrs. Davis and I will take on the roles of assistant editors. I’ll contribute to The Revolution and do my best, including sending out a circular across Connecticut asking for submissions.
Later—Since reading Mrs. Stanton on the Richardson-McFarland case, I feel disinclined to be associated with her in editorial work. I want to say this very gently; but I have no time for circumlocution....
Later—After reading Mrs. Stanton’s take on the Richardson-McFarland case, I feel hesitant to get involved with her in editorial matters. I want to say this delicately, but I really don’t have time for beating around the bush....

Alice Cary
Alice Cary
The promised contributions did not materialize, and The Revolution received no aid of any description. The struggle was bravely continued throughout the first five months of 1870. The Cary sisters were devoted friends of Miss Anthony and deeply interested in the paper, and some of their sweetest poems had appeared in its columns. Their beautiful home was just three blocks below The Revolution office, and she spent many hours with them. These frequent calls, breakfasts and luncheons were much more delightful to her than their Sunday evening receptions, although at those were gathered the writers, artists, musicians, reformers and politicians of New York, besides eminent persons who happened to 359 be in the city. It was a literary center which never has been equalled since those lovely and cultured sisters passed away. In her lecture on "Homes of Single Women," Miss Anthony thus describes one of her visits:
The promised contributions never came through, and The Revolution received no support whatsoever. The fight continued bravely for the first five months of 1870. The Cary sisters were close friends of Miss Anthony and were very interested in the paper; some of their finest poems had been published in its pages. Their lovely home was just three blocks down from The Revolution office, and she spent many hours with them. These frequent visits, breakfasts, and lunches were much more enjoyable for her than their Sunday evening receptions, even though those events brought together writers, artists, musicians, reformers, and politicians from New York, along with notable people who happened to 359 be visiting the city. It was a literary hub that hasn't been matched since those wonderful and cultured sisters passed away. In her lecture on "Homes of Single Women," Miss Anthony describes one of her visits:

Phoebe Cary
Phoebe Cary
I shall never forget the December Sunday morning when a note came from Phoebe asking, "Will you come round and sit with Alice while I go to church?" Of course I was only too glad to go; and it was there in the cheery sick-room, as I sat on a cushion at the feet of this lovely, large-souled, clear-brained woman, that she told me how ever and anon in the years gone by, as she was writing her stories for bread and shelter, her pen would run off into facts and philosophies of woman's servitude that she knew would ruin her book with the publishers, but which, for her own satisfaction, she had carefully treasured, chapter by chapter, as her heart had thus overflowed. "I am now," she said, "financially free, where I could write my deepest and best thought for woman, and now I must die. O, how much of my life I have been compelled to write what men would buy, not what my heart most longed to say, and what a clog to my spirit it has been."
I’ll never forget that Sunday morning in December when I received a note from Phoebe asking, “Can you come over and keep Alice company while I go to church?” I was more than happy to help; it was in that cheerful sick room, sitting on a cushion at the feet of this beautiful, generous, wise woman, that she told me how over the years, while writing to make a living, her pen would often drift into the realities and thoughts about women’s servitude that she knew would ruin her chances with publishers, but which she had carefully preserved, chapter by chapter, as her heart overflowed. “I am now,” she said, “financially free, where I can write my deepest and best thoughts for women, and now I have to die. Oh, so much of my life has been spent writing what men would buy, not what I truly wanted to express, and what a burden that has been on my spirit.”
As she sat there, reading from those chapters, her sweet face, her lustrous eyes, her musical voice all aglow as with a live coal from off the altar, I said: "Alice, I must have that story for The Revolution!" "But I may never be able to finish it," she objected. "We'll trust to Providence for that," I replied; and the last five months of The Revolution carried The Born Thrall to thousands of responsive hearts. But, alas, nature gave way and she was never well enough to put the finishing touches to those terribly true-to-life pictures of the pioneer wife and mother.
As she sat there, reading from those chapters, her sweet face, bright eyes, and soothing voice all glowed like a live coal from the altar. I said, “Alice, I need that story for The Revolution!” “But I might never be able to finish it,” she replied. “Let’s leave it to fate,” I said; and for the last five months, The Revolution featured The Born Thrall for thousands of eager readers. Unfortunately, her health declined, and she was never well enough to add the finishing touches to those incredibly realistic portrayals of the pioneer wife and mother.
The poetry for The Revolution was selected by Mrs. Tilton, who had rare literary taste and discrimination. The exquisite child articles, entitled "Dot and I" and signed Faith Rochester, were written by Francis E. Russell. It had a corps of foreign correspondents, among them the English philanthropist, Rebecca Moore. The distinguished list of contributors and the broad scope of The Revolution may be judged from its prospectus for 1870.[55] The chances of its paying expenses, 360 however, did not increase, and the hoped-for stock company never was formed. Mr. Pillsbury had been most anxious for the past year to be released from his editorial duties, and had remained only because he could not bear to desert the paper in its distress. Mrs. Stanton, engaged in the lecture field, had sent only an occasional article, and now declined to continue her services longer without a salary. One person who stood by Miss Anthony unflinchingly through all this trying period was the publisher, R.J. Johnston, who never once failed in prompt and efficient service, and gave the most conscientious care to the make-up of the paper. Although her indebtedness to him finally reached the thousands, he remained faithful up to the printing of the very last number, and his was the first debt she paid out of the proceeds of her lyceum lectures.
The poetry for The Revolution was chosen by Mrs. Tilton, who had a keen sense of literary taste and judgment. The beautiful children's articles, titled "Dot and I" and signed Faith Rochester, were written by Francis E. Russell. It had a team of foreign correspondents, including the English philanthropist, Rebecca Moore. The impressive list of contributors and the wide-ranging focus of The Revolution can be seen in its prospectus for 1870.[55] However, the chances of covering expenses, 360 did not improve, and the anticipated stock company was never established. Mr. Pillsbury had been eager for the past year to step down from his editorial responsibilities but stayed on because he couldn’t bring himself to abandon the paper during its struggles. Mrs. Stanton, busy with her lectures, had submitted only a few articles and now refused to continue without a salary. One person who unwaveringly supported Miss Anthony throughout this challenging time was the publisher, R.J. Johnston, who consistently provided prompt and effective service and took great care in producing the paper. Although her debt to him eventually amounted to thousands, he remained loyal until the very last issue was printed, and he was the first debt she settled with the earnings from her lecture series.
When Mrs. Phelps had opened the Woman's Bureau and invited The Revolution to take an office therein, Miss Anthony had warned her that it might keep other organizations of women away; but she was willing to take the risk. It resulted as prophesied. Not even the strong-minded Sorosis would have its clubrooms there, nor would any other society of women, and after a year's experiment, she gave up her project, rented the building to a private family and The Revolution moved to No. 27 Chatham street. The generous Anna Dickinson, because of her friendship for Miss Anthony, presented Mrs. Phelps with $1,000, as a recompense for any loss she might have sustained through The Revolution. Mrs. Phelps being very ill that winter, added a codicil to her will giving 361 Miss Anthony $1,000 to show that she had only the kindest feelings for her.
When Mrs. Phelps opened the Woman's Bureau and invited The Revolution to set up an office there, Miss Anthony warned her that it might drive other women's organizations away, but she was willing to take the chance. It turned out just as predicted. Even the strong-minded Sorosis wouldn't hold its meetings there, nor would any other women's society, and after a year of trying, she abandoned the project, rented the building to a private family, and The Revolution moved to No. 27 Chatham Street. The generous Anna Dickinson, out of friendship for Miss Anthony, gave Mrs. Phelps $1,000 as compensation for any losses she might have incurred from The Revolution. Mrs. Phelps, who was very ill that winter, added a codicil to her will leaving 361 Miss Anthony $1,000 to show that she held only the kindest feelings for her.
At the beginning of 1870, a stock company was formed and the Woman's Journal established in Boston. Mrs. Livermore merged her Chicago paper, the Agitator, into this new enterprise (as she had proposed to do into The Revolution the year previous) removed to Boston and became editor-in-chief; Lucy Stone was made assistant editor and H.B. Blackwell business manager. This paper secured the patronage of all those believers in the rights of women who were not willing to accept the bold, fearless and radical utterances of The Revolution. The latter had exhausted the finances of its friends and had no further resources. The strain upon Miss Anthony, who alone was carrying the whole burden, was terrible beyond description. Never was there a longer, harder, more persistent struggle against the malice of enemies, the urgent advice of friends, against all hope, than was made by this heroic woman. As the inevitable end approached she wrote of it to Mrs. Stanton, who answered: "Make any arrangement you can to roll that awful load off your shoulders. If Anna Dickinson will be sole editor, I say, glory to God! Leave me to my individual work, the quiet of my home for the summer and the lyceum for the winter.... Tell our glorious little Anna if she only will nail her colors to that mast and make the dear old proprietor free once more, I will sing her praises to the end of time."
At the start of 1870, a stock company was formed and the Woman's Journal was established in Boston. Mrs. Livermore combined her Chicago paper, the Agitator, into this new venture (as she had intended to do with The Revolution the year before), relocated to Boston, and became the editor-in-chief; Lucy Stone was appointed assistant editor, and H.B. Blackwell took on the role of business manager. This paper gained the support of all those who believed in women's rights but were not ready to embrace the bold, fearless, and radical statements of The Revolution. The latter had depleted its supporters' finances and had no resources left. The burden on Miss Anthony, who was carrying the entire load alone, was incredibly overwhelming. Never had there been a longer, tougher, more relentless battle against the spite of enemies, the urgent advice of friends, and despair than the one fought by this courageous woman. As the inevitable outcome drew near, she wrote to Mrs. Stanton about it, who replied: "Make any arrangements you can to relieve yourself of that awful burden. If Anna Dickinson will be the sole editor, I say, glory to God! Let me focus on my individual work, enjoy the peace of my home for the summer, and the lyceum for the winter... Tell our wonderful little Anna that if she will just commit to her cause and free our dear old proprietor once more, I will sing her praises forever."
Anna Dickinson very wisely concluded that she was not suited for an editor. Laura Curtis Bullard was much interested in reform work, possessed of literary ability and very desirous of securing The Revolution. Theodore Tilton, who was editing the New York Independent and the Brooklyn Daily Union, promised to assist her in managing the paper. Miss Anthony at last agreed to let her have it, and on May 22, 1870, the formal transfer was made. She received the nominal sum of one dollar, and assumed personally the entire indebtedness. She had this dollar alone to show for two and a half years of as hard work as ever was performed by mortal, besides all the money she had earned and begged which had 362 gone directly into the paper. During that time $25,000 had been expended, and the present indebtedness amounted to $10,000 more.
Anna Dickinson wisely realized that she wasn't cut out to be an editor. Laura Curtis Bullard was very interested in reform work, had writing talent, and really wanted to take over The Revolution. Theodore Tilton, who was editing the New York Independent and the Brooklyn Daily Union, offered to help her run the paper. Miss Anthony eventually agreed to let her take it, and on May 22, 1870, the formal transfer happened. She received just one dollar and took on the entire debt personally. That dollar was all she had to show for two and a half years of hard work like no one else had ever done, along with all the money she had earned and raised which had 362 gone straight into the paper. During that time, $25,000 had been spent, and the current debt was another $10,000.
Miss Anthony could not view this giving up of The Revolution so philosophically as did Mrs. Stanton; she was of very different temperament. Into this paper she had put her ambition, her hope, her reputation. The stronger the opposition, the firmer was her determination not to yield, nor was it a relief to be rid of it. She would have counted no cost too great, no work too hard, no sacrifice too heavy, could she but have continued the publication. Not only was it a terrible blow to her pride, but it wrung her heart. She could bear the triumph of her enemies far better than she could the giving up of the means by which she had expected to accomplish a great and permanent good for women and for all humanity. On the evening of the day when the paper passed out of her hands forever, she wrote in her diary, "It was like signing my own death-warrant;" and in a letter to a friend she said, "I feel a great, calm sadness like that of a mother binding out a dear child that she could not support." To the public she kept the same brave, unruffled exterior, but in a private letter, written a short time afterwards, is told in a few sentences a story which makes the heart ache:
Miss Anthony couldn't accept the end of The Revolution with the same philosophical outlook as Mrs. Stanton; she had a very different temperament. She had invested her ambition, hope, and reputation into this paper. The more opposition she faced, the stronger her resolve grew to not give in; it wasn't a relief to let it go. She would have considered no cost too high, no effort too tough, and no sacrifice too much, if it meant she could continue the publication. Losing it wasn't just a huge blow to her pride; it broke her heart. She could handle the success of her enemies much better than the loss of the means she believed would bring lasting good to women and all of humanity. On the evening the paper officially left her hands, she wrote in her diary, "It was like signing my own death-warrant;" and in a letter to a friend, she expressed, "I feel a deep, calm sadness like that of a mother letting go of a beloved child she couldn’t support." Publicly, she maintained a brave, composed front, but in a private letter written shortly afterward, she conveyed a brief story that brings heartache:
My financial recklessness has been much talked of. Let me tell you in what this recklessness consists: When there was need of greater outlay, I never thought of curtailing the amount of work to lessen the amount of cash demanded, but always doubled and quadrupled the efforts to raise the necessary sum; rushing for contributions to every one who had professed love or interest for the cause. If it were 20,000 tracts for Kansas, the thought never entered my head to stint the number—only to tramp up and down Broadway for advertisements to pay for them. If to meet expenses of The Revolution, it was not to pinch clerks or printers, but to make a foray upon some money-king. None but the Good Father can ever begin to know the terrible struggle of those years. I am not complaining, for mine is but the fate of almost every originator or pioneer who ever has opened up a way. I have the joy of knowing that I showed it to be possible to publish an out-and-out woman's paper, and taught other, women to enter in and reap where I had sown.
My financial irresponsibility has been a hot topic. Let me clarify what I mean by this: Whenever there was a need for extra spending, I never thought about cutting back on work to lessen the costs. Instead, I always ramped up my efforts to raise the necessary funds, reaching out to everyone who cared about the cause. Whether it was 20,000 pamphlets for Kansas, the idea of reducing that number never crossed my mind—only how to hustle on Broadway to get advertisements to cover the expenses. When it came to funding The Revolution, it wasn't about skimping on payments to clerks or printers; it was about seeking out wealthy donors. Only the Good Father can truly appreciate the intense struggles of those years. I'm not complaining, as my experience mirrors that of almost every pioneer who has ever broken new ground. I take pride in having shown that it was possible to publish a completely women-led newspaper and inspired other women to get involved and benefit from what I started.
Heavy debts are still due, every dollar of which I intend to pay, and I am tugging away, lecturing amid these burning suns, for no other reason than to keep pulling down, hundred by hundred, that tremendous pile. I sanguinely 363 hope to cancel this debt in two years of hard work, and cheerfully look forward to the turning of every possible dollar into that channel. If you today should ask me to choose between the possession of $25,000 and the immense work accomplished by my Revolution during the time in which I sank that amount, I should choose the work done—not the cash in hand. So, you see, I don't groan or murmur—not a bit of it; but for the good name of humanity, I would have liked to see the moneyed men and women rally around the seed-sowers.
I still have significant debts that I intend to pay off, and I’m pushing through by giving lectures in this scorching heat, just to gradually chip away at that huge amount. I confidently 363 hope to clear this debt in two years of hard work and look forward to putting every possible dollar toward that goal. If you asked me today whether I would prefer $25,000 or the amazing work that my Revolution accomplished during the time I used that money, I would choose the work over the cash. So, you see, I don’t complain or grumble—not at all; but for the sake of humanity’s reputation, I would have loved to see the wealthy come together to support those planting the seeds.
Parker Pillsbury wrote her after he returned home: "No one could do better than you have done. If any complain, ask them what they did to help you carry the paper. I am glad you are relieved of a load too heavy for you to bear. Worry yourself no more. Work of course you will, but let there be no further anxiety and nervousness. Suffrage is growing with the oaks. The whirling spheres will usher in the day of its triumph at just the right time, but your full meed of praise will have to be sung over your grave."
Parker Pillsbury wrote to her after he got home: "No one could have done better than you. If anyone complains, ask them what they did to help you with the paper. I’m glad you’re free from a burden that was too heavy for you. Worry no more. You will, of course, keep working, but don’t let it cause you any more anxiety or stress. Suffrage is growing strong like the oaks. The universe will bring in the day of its victory at the right moment, but the full praise you deserve will have to be sung over your grave."
The motto of The Revolution, "The True Republic—Men, their rights and nothing more; women, their rights, and nothing less," was succeeded by "What God hath joined together, let no man put asunder." It was transformed into a literary and society journal, established in elegant headquarters at Brooklyn, inaugurated with a fashionable reception, and conducted by Mrs. Bullard for eighteen months, when she tired of it, or her father tired of advancing money, and it passed into other hands.
The motto of The Revolution, "The True Republic—Men, their rights and nothing more; women, their rights, and nothing less," was followed by "What God has joined together, let no one separate." It was turned into a literary and social magazine, established in stylish offices in Brooklyn, launched with a trendy event, and run by Mrs. Bullard for eighteen months, until she got bored with it, or her father got tired of funding it, and it changed hands.
When Miss Anthony had her accounts audited by an expert, he stated that The Revolution was in a better financial condition than was the New York Independent at the end of its first five years. She had just begun to realize her power as a lyceum lecturer and was in constant demand at large prices. The last two months before giving up the paper, she sent in from her lectures, above all her expenses, $1,300. She always felt that, with this source of revenue, she could have sustained and in time put it on a paying basis, as her subscription list was rapidly increasing, she had learned the newspaper business, and The Revolution was gaining the confidence of the public. But the experience came too late and she was driven to the 364 wall—not a single friend would longer give her money, assistance or encouragement to continue the paper. To this day, she will take up the bound volumes with caressing fingers, touch them with pathetic tenderness, and pore over their pages with loving reverence, as one reads old letters when the hands which penned them are still forever.
When Miss Anthony had her accounts reviewed by an expert, he said that The Revolution was in better financial shape than the New York Independent was at the end of its first five years. She had just started to realize her power as a lecture speaker and was in high demand at good rates. In the last two months before she stopped publishing the paper, she brought in $1,300 from her lectures after covering all her expenses. She always believed that with this income, she could have kept it going and eventually made it profitable since her subscription list was growing fast, she was learning the newspaper business, and The Revolution was earning the public's trust. But it was too late, and she found herself at the 364 end of her rope—none of her friends would support her with money, help, or encouragement to keep the paper going. To this day, she picks up the bound volumes with gentle fingers, touches them with sad tenderness, and studies their pages with loving respect, much like one reads old letters when the hands that wrote them are gone forever.
Miss Anthony did not waste a single day in mourning over her great disappointment. In fact, between May 18, when she agreed to give up The Revolution, and May 22, when the transfer actually was made, she went to Hornellsville and lectured, receiving $150 for that one evening. There are not many instances on record where a woman starts out alone to earn the money with which to pay a debt of $10,000. Very few of the advocates of woman suffrage contributed a dollar toward the payment of this debt, which had nothing in it of a personal nature but had been made entirely in the effort to advance the cause. Miss Anthony worked unceasingly through winter's cold and summer's heat, lecturing sometimes under private auspices, sometimes under those of a bureau, and herself arranging for unengaged nights. As she had all her expenses to pay and continued to contribute from her own pocket whenever funds were needed for suffrage work, it was six years before "she could look the whole world in the face for she owed not any man."
Miss Anthony didn’t spend a single day feeling sorry for herself over her big disappointment. In fact, between May 18, when she agreed to stop The Revolution, and May 22, when the transfer actually happened, she went to Hornellsville and gave a lecture, earning $150 for that one evening. There aren’t many records of a woman setting out alone to earn the money needed to pay off a $10,000 debt. Very few supporters of women’s suffrage contributed a dollar toward settling this debt, which wasn’t personal but was incurred entirely in the effort to promote the cause. Miss Anthony worked tirelessly through the winter's chill and summer's heat, sometimes lecturing under private sponsorship and sometimes under a bureau, and she arranged for her own free nights. Since she had to cover all her expenses and continued to contribute from her own funds whenever money was needed for suffrage work, it took her six years before “she could look the whole world in the face for she owed not any man.”
She started at once on a western tour, lecturing through Ohio, Kansas and Illinois, speaking in the Methodist church at Evanston, June 3, 1870. Dr. E.O. Haven, president of the university, (afterwards Bishop) in presenting her endorsed woman suffrage. At Bloomington she held a debate with a young professor from the State Normal School. The manager asked if she would take $100 instead of half the receipts, as agreed on. She replied that if the prospects were so good as to warrant him in making this offer, she was just Yankee enough to take her chances. This was a shrewd decision, as her half amounted to $250. The professor opposed the enfranchisement of women because they could not fight. As is the case invariably with men who make this objection, he was a very 365 diminutive specimen, and Miss Anthony could not resist observing as she commenced her speech: "The professor talks about the physical disabilities of women; why, I could take him in my arms and lift him on and off this platform as easily as a mother would her baby!" Of course this put the audience in a fine humor.
She immediately went on a tour out west, giving lectures in Ohio, Kansas, and Illinois, and spoke at the Methodist church in Evanston on June 3, 1870. Dr. E.O. Haven, the university president (who later became a bishop), supported her advocacy for women's suffrage while introducing her. In Bloomington, she participated in a debate with a young professor from the State Normal School. The manager asked if she would prefer a flat fee of $100 instead of half the earnings, as they had originally agreed. She confidently replied that if the prospects were good enough for him to make that offer, she was savvy enough to take her chances. This turned out to be a smart move since her half ended up being $250. The professor argued against women's right to vote on the grounds that they couldn't fight. As is often the case with men who use this argument, he was quite a small figure, and Miss Anthony couldn't help but remark as she started her speech: "The professor talks about women's physical limitations; I could easily take him in my arms and lift him on and off this platform just like a mother would with her baby!" This naturally got the audience in a great mood.
In every place she was entertained by representative people and received many social courtesies. She returned to Rochester July 27, spent just twelve hours at home, then hastened eastward, travelling by night in order to reach the Saratoga convention on the 28th. This was held under the auspices of the New York State Association, and managed by the secretary, Matilda Joslyn Gage. Miss Anthony was paid $100, for the first time in the history of conventions. Mrs. Gage wrote: "She is heavily burdened with debt, no one has made so great sacrifices all these years, and she deserves the money." During the summer she sent to a friend in England this summing up of the condition of the suffrage movement in the United States:
In every place, she was hosted by influential people and received a lot of social kindness. She returned to Rochester on July 27, spent just twelve hours at home, and then quickly headed east, traveling at night to make it to the Saratoga convention on the 28th. This event was organized by the New York State Association and was run by the secretary, Matilda Joslyn Gage. For the first time in convention history, Miss Anthony received $100. Mrs. Gage wrote: "She is heavily burdened with debt, no one has made such great sacrifices all these years, and she deserves the money." During the summer, she sent a friend in England a summary of the state of the suffrage movement in the United States:
The secret of the present inaction is that all our best suffrage men are in the Republican party and must keep in line with its interests, make no demands beyond its possibilities, its safety, its sure success. Hence, just now, while that party is trembling lest it should fall into the minority, and thus give place to the Democracy in 1872, it dares not espouse woman suffrage. So our friends quietly drop our demand on Congress for a Sixteenth Amendment, since to press that body to a vote would compel the Republican members to show their hands; and if those who have in private spoken for woman suffrage should not make a false public record, the number in favor would commit the majority of their party to our question; and by so doing give its opponents fresh opportunity to appeal to the ignorant masses, which must inevitably throw it out of power. The extension of the ballot to woman is a question of intelligence and culture, and is sure to have enrolled against it every narrow, prejudiced, small-brained man in all classes. This being the state of things, our movement is at a dead-lock. Practical action, political action, therefore, is almost hopeless until after the presidential election of 1872; and after that for still another four years, unless the Republican party should be defeated and the Democracy come into power.
The reason for our current lack of action is that all our strongest advocates for suffrage are part of the Republican Party and have to align with its interests, making no demands beyond what it can provide, its safety, and its assured success. Right now, as that party fears becoming the minority and possibly allowing the Democrats to take control in 1872, it can’t support women's suffrage. Therefore, our supporters are quietly stepping back from urging Congress to consider a Sixteenth Amendment since pushing for a vote would force Republican members to reveal their positions. If those who have privately backed women's suffrage don’t want to create a misleading public record, the number of supporters would compel the majority of their party to take a stance on our issue, granting opponents a chance to rally the uninformed public, which could easily jeopardize their power. Granting women the right to vote is about intelligence and culture, likely to attract opposition from every narrow-minded, prejudiced, and small-minded individual across all social classes. Given this situation, our movement is at a standstill. Practical and political action seems nearly impossible until after the presidential election of 1872, and even then for another four years unless the Republican Party is defeated and the Democrats gain control.
Just as soon as the Republicans are out of power, they will betake themselves to the study of principles and begin to preach and promise. Hence I devoutly pray without ceasing for the overthrow of that purse-proud, corrupt, cowardly party; not that I expect from the Democracy anything 366 better than their antecedents promise, but that I know such chastisement, such retirement, is the only means by which conscience and courage can be injected into the heads and hearts of the Republicans, the only way to make them see the political necessity of enfranchising the women of the country, and thereby securing their gratitude and through it their vote to place and hold that party in power.
Once the Republicans lose power, they will begin to study principles and start making promises. That’s why I constantly pray for the downfall of that wealthy, corrupt, cowardly party; not because I expect the Democrats to provide anything 366 better than their history suggests, but because I believe that such a setback is the only way to inspire conscience and courage in the minds and hearts of the Republicans. It’s the only way to make them see the political necessity of granting voting rights to women, ensuring their gratitude, which will, in turn, help them stay in power.
Then as to our woman suffrage organizations: There are first, the Cleveland movement with all the strategy and maneuvering of its semi-Republican managers, assented to and accepted by the women in their train; then the Fifth Avenue Union Committee affair, which seems not less likely to be under Republican man-power. With Mrs. Stanton's utter refusal to stand at the helm of the National, and our merging it into the Union Society, and with my transferring The Revolution to the new company—we, E.C.S. and S.B.A., have let slip from our hands all control of organizations and newspapers; thus leaving them, I fear, to drift together into the management of mere politicians. All are lulled into the strictest propriety of expression, according to the gospel of St. Republican. And unless that saint shall enact some new and more blasphemous law against woman, which shall wake our confiding sisterhood into a sense of their befoolment, you will neither see nor hear a word from suffrage society or paper which will be in the slightest out of line with the plan and policy of the dominant party. Nothing less atrocious to woman than was the Fugitive Slave Law to the negro, can possibly sting the women of this country into a knowledge of their real subserviency, and out of their sickening sycophancy to the Republican politicians associated with them.
Regarding our women's suffrage organizations: First, there’s the Cleveland movement with all the tactics and strategies of its semi-Republican leaders, who have gained acceptance from the women involved; then there's the Fifth Avenue Union Committee, which also seems influenced by Republican power. With Mrs. Stanton’s outright refusal to lead the National organization and our merger into the Union Society, along with my transfer of The Revolution to this new group—we, E.C.S. and S.B.A., have lost all control over the organizations and newspapers. I fear this leaves them guided only by mere politicians. Everyone is lulled into strictly respectable expression, following the principles of St. Republican. Unless that saint enacts some new and more outrageous law against women that will awaken our trusting sisterhood to their folly, you won’t see or hear anything from the suffrage society or the paper that diverges even slightly from the plans and policies of the ruling party. Nothing less shocking to women than the Fugitive Slave Law was to Black people could possibly wake the women of this country up to their true subservience and compel them to break free from their nauseating flattery toward the Republican politicians associated with them.
So while I do not pray for anybody or any party to commit outrages, still I do pray, and that earnestly and constantly, for some terrific shock to startle the women of this nation into a self-respect which will compel them to see the abject degradation of their present position; which will force them to break their yoke of bondage, and give them faith in themselves; which will make them proclaim their allegiance to woman first; which will enable them to see that man can no more feel, speak or act for woman than could the old slaveholder for his slave. The fact is, women are in chains, and their servitude is all the more debasing because they do not realize it. O, to compel them to see and feel, and to give them the courage and conscience to speak and act for their own freedom, though they face the scorn and contempt of all the world for doing it!
So while I don't wish for anyone or any group to commit terrible acts, I do pray, and I pray sincerely and consistently, for a massive shock that will awaken the women of this nation to a self-respect that will make them recognize the terrible degradation of their current situation; that will force them to break free from their chains and believe in themselves; that will inspire them to prioritize their identity as women; and that will help them understand that a man can no more feel, speak, or act for a woman than the old slaveholder could for his slave. The truth is, women are trapped, and their servitude is even more degrading because they don’t even realize it. Oh, to make them see and feel, and to give them the courage and conviction to speak up and fight for their own freedom, even if it means facing the scorn and disdain of the entire world for doing so!
Not another woman possessed this strong grasp of the whole situation, this deep comprehension of the abject condition of women, the more hopeless because of their own failure to feel or resent it.
Not another woman had such a firm understanding of the entire situation, the profound awareness of the miserable condition of women, which was even more despairing due to their own inability to feel or oppose it.
During the summer Miss Anthony attended the National Labor Congress in Philadelphia. A great strike of bookbinders had been in progress in New York and she had advised the women to take the vacant places. They were denied admission 367 to all labor unions and their only chance of securing work was when the men and their employers disagreed. This gave a pretext for those who were opposed to a representation of women in labor conventions, and a bitter fight was made upon accepting her as a delegate. Charges of every description were preferred against her which she refuted in a spirited manner, but her credentials were finally rejected. The newspapers took up the fight on both sides, the opposition to Miss Anthony being led by the New York Star, always abusive where the question of woman's rights was concerned. During this controversy the Utica Herald contained a disgraceful editorial, saying:
During the summer, Miss Anthony attended the National Labor Congress in Philadelphia. A major strike by bookbinders was happening in New York, and she encouraged women to take the available jobs. They were excluded from all labor unions, and their only opportunity to find work arose when the men and their employers were at odds. This provided a reason for those who opposed having women represented in labor conventions to fight hard against accepting her as a delegate. She faced all sorts of accusations, which she passionately denied, but in the end, her credentials were rejected. The newspapers took up the battle on both sides, with the New York Star leading the opposition against Miss Anthony, always harsh when it came to women's rights. During this debate, the Utica Herald published a shameful editorial that stated:
Who does not feel sympathy for Susan Anthony? She has striven long and earnestly to become a man. She has met with some rebuffs, but has never succumbed. She has never done any good in the world, but then she doesn't think so. She is sweet in the eyes of her own mirror, but her advanced age and maiden name deny that she has been so in the eyes of others. Boldly she marched, and well, into the presence of 200 horrid male delegates of the Labor Congress, and took somebody's seat.... Susan felt very much like a grizzly bear unable to get at its tormentor. She had gone to the length of her chain and couldn't get her claws into any one's hair. She could only sit and glare.
Who doesn't sympathize with Susan Anthony? She's worked tirelessly to earn respect in a man's world. She’s faced some challenges, but she never gives up. While she might not have made a huge impact globally, she doesn’t see it that way. She feels beautiful in her own skin, even if others judge her by her age and single status. She confidently marched into a room full of 200 unpleasant male delegates at the Labor Congress and claimed a seat.... Susan felt a lot like a grizzly bear unable to reach its enemy. She had hit her limit and couldn’t take her frustrations out on anyone. All she could do was sit there and glare.
At length Susan's case came up for consideration, and the congress committed the crowning act of rashness and, without a thought of the consequences, made an everlasting enemy of Susan Anthony by ruling her out of the convention as a delegate. This was the unkindest cut of all. "A lone, lorn old critter," with whom everything "goes contrairie," was denied the solace of being counted the one-two-hundreth part of a man by a labor convention! We may well believe that Susan wept with sorrow at the blindness of man, and our sympathy if not our tears is freely offered. But so goes the world. This is not the first time that "man's inhumanity to woman" has made Miss Anthony mourn and, as it is not her first rebuff, we counsel her to seek admission again to the ranks of her sex, and cease to cast reproach upon it by struggling to be a man.
Finally, Susan’s situation was addressed, and the congress made a reckless decision by excluding her from the convention as a delegate without considering the consequences, turning her into a lifelong adversary. This was the most painful decision of all. A lonely, unfortunate old woman, who seems to have everything "go wrong," was denied the solace of being recognized as even a small part of a man by a labor convention! We can easily picture Susan crying in sadness over humanity's ignorance, and our sympathy, if not our tears, is truly genuine. But that’s just how things are. This isn’t the first time that "man's cruelty to woman" has caused Miss Anthony pain, and since this isn’t her first setback, we suggest she try to find acceptance among her own gender and stop belittling it by trying to imitate men.
When some of the women remonstrated, the editor replied that he had not supposed there was one woman in Utica who believed in equal rights.
When some of the women protested, the editor responded that he had never thought there was a single woman in Utica who believed in equal rights.
Paulina Wright Davis had been actively arranging for a great convention in New York to celebrate the twentieth anniversary of the first woman's rights convention in Massachusetts, 368 which was held at Worcester, in October, 1850. That one had been managed almost wholly by Mrs. Davis and she had presided over its deliberations, therefore it seemed proper for her to be the central figure in celebrating its second decade. The New England suffrage people declined to take part in this meeting and, for some reason, Mr. Tilton's Union Society was decidedly averse to it. Mrs. Davis finally became ill from anxiety and overwork and joined her entreaties to Mrs. Stanton's that Miss Anthony should drop her lectures and come to New York; so she started for that city September 30, determined that Mrs. Davis' scheme should not be a failure. The entries in her journal give some idea of her energetic and unwearied action:
Paulina Wright Davis had been busy organizing a big convention in New York to celebrate the twentieth anniversary of the first women's rights convention in Massachusetts, 368 which took place in Worcester in October 1850. She had mostly managed that event and presided over its discussions, so it made sense for her to be the main figure in celebrating its second decade. However, the New England suffrage activists refused to participate in this meeting, and for some reason, Mr. Tilton's Union Society was also clearly against it. Mrs. Davis eventually fell ill from stress and exhaustion and joined her pleas to Mrs. Stanton's, urging Miss Anthony to cancel her lectures and come to New York. So, on September 30, she set off for the city, determined that Mrs. Davis's plan would not fail. The entries in her journal reflect her energetic and tireless efforts:
As soon as I reached New York I went to Dr. Lozier's for lunch, then to see Mrs. Phelps. All in despair about the decade meeting. Went at once to consult Alice and Phoebe Cary; from them to Mrs. Winchester, found her just home from Europe; then to Julia Brown Bemis, and thence to Murray street to see Mr. Studwell; then to Tenafly on the evening train.... Back to New York the next morning, to Tilton's, to Curtis', to Mrs. Wilbour's, and then to Providence to see Mrs. Davis. Beached there late at night, woke her up and we talked till morning. She was terribly distressed at the thought of giving up the decade and in the morning I telegraphed to New York that it must go on.... Went there by first train, had all the newspaper notices of its abandonment countermanded and new ones put in, and an item sent out by Associated Press. Too late for last train to Tenafly and had to hire a carriage to take me there.
As soon as I arrived in New York, I went to Dr. Lozier's for lunch and then visited Mrs. Phelps. Everyone was concerned about the decade meeting. I quickly consulted Alice and Phoebe Cary, then went to see Mrs. Winchester, who had just returned from Europe. After that, I visited Julia Brown Bemis and then headed over to Murray Street to see Mr. Studwell. Later, I took the evening train to Tenafly.... I got back to New York the next morning, visiting Tilton's, Curtis', Mrs. Wilbour's, and then made my way to Providence to see Mrs. Davis. I got there late at night, woke her up, and we talked until morning. She was really upset about the idea of giving up the decade, so in the morning, I sent a telegram to New York saying it must go on.... I took the first train back, canceled all the newspaper announcements about its cancellation, had new ones published, and sent a notice to the Associated Press. I missed the last train to Tenafly and had to hire a carriage to get there.
Her time was then divided between working on speeches with Mrs. Stanton and rushing over to New York to prepare for this meeting. On October 19 she writes: "Ground out the resolutions, and took the afternoon train for the city. Met Martha Wright and Mrs. Davis at the St. James Hotel."
Her time was split between working on speeches with Mrs. Stanton and hurrying over to New York to get ready for this meeting. On October 19, she writes: "Finalized the resolutions and took the afternoon train to the city. Met Martha Wright and Mrs. Davis at the St. James Hotel."
There was a great reception the next afternoon in the hotel parlors, and the convention met at Apollo Hall, October 21, the whole of the arrangements having been made in three weeks. Mrs. Davis presided, everybody had been brought into line and it was a notable gathering. Cordial and approving letters to Mrs. Davis were read from Jacob Bright, Canon Kingsley, Frances Power Cobbe, Emily Faithfull, Mary Somerville, 369 Emelie J. Meriman (afterwards the wife of Père Hyacinthe), and other distinguished foreigners. Miss Anthony spoke strongly against their identifying themselves with either of the parties until it had declared for woman suffrage, urging them to accept every possible help from both but to form no alliance, as had been proposed. The feature of the occasion was "The History of the Woman's Rights Movement for Twenty Years," carefully prepared by Mrs. Davis.[56] In addition to this valuable work, she contributed $300 to the expenses of the meeting. It was an unqualified success and her letters were full of warmest gratitude to Miss Anthony.
There was a big reception the next afternoon in the hotel lounges, and the convention met at Apollo Hall on October 21, with all the arrangements made in just three weeks. Mrs. Davis was in charge, everyone was aligned, and it was a significant gathering. Cordial and supportive letters to Mrs. Davis were read from Jacob Bright, Canon Kingsley, Frances Power Cobbe, Emily Faithfull, Mary Somerville, 369 Emelie J. Meriman (who later became the wife of Père Hyacinthe), and other notable guests from abroad. Miss Anthony strongly opposed their alignment with either party until it supported woman suffrage, urging them to seek help from both sides but not to form any alliances, as had been suggested. A highlight of the event was "The History of the Woman's Rights Movement for Twenty Years," which was meticulously prepared by Mrs. Davis.[56] Along with this important work, she also contributed $300 to cover the meeting's expenses. It was an overwhelming success, and her letters expressed her deepest gratitude to Miss Anthony.
In November the latter resumed her lecturing tour which was arranged by Elizabeth Brown, who had been her head clerk in The Revolution office. The first of December she attended the Northwestern Woman Suffrage Convention at Detroit. Here she received a telegram to hasten home and arrived just in time to stand by the death-bed of a dear nephew, Thomas King McLean, twenty-one years old, brother of the beloved Ann Eliza who had died a few years before, and only son of her sister Guelma. He was a senior of brilliant promise in Rochester University. His death was a heavy blow to all the family and one from which his mother never recovered.
In November, she resumed her lecture tour, which was organized by Elizabeth Brown, her former head clerk at The Revolution office. On December 1, she attended the Northwestern Woman Suffrage Convention in Detroit. While there, she received a telegram urging her to hurry home and arrived just in time to be by the deathbed of her beloved nephew, Thomas King McLean, who was just twenty-one years old. He was the brother of the cherished Ann Eliza, who had passed away a few years earlier, and the only son of her sister Guelma. He was a senior with great promise at Rochester University. His death was a devastating loss for the entire family, and it was something his mother never fully recovered from.
With her debts pressing upon her and an array of lecture engagements ahead, Miss Anthony could neither pause to indulge her own grief nor to console and sympathize with the loved ones. The very night of the funeral she again set forth. By the New Year she had lessened her debt $1,600. This trip extended through New York and Pennsylvania, to 370 Washington and into Virginia. Of the last she writes: "A great work to be done here but the lectures can not possibly be made to pay expenses." In Philadelphia she spoke in the Star course, was the guest of Anna Dickinson and was introduced to her audience by Lucretia Mott, then seventy-seven years old. The diary relates that Mrs. Mott came next morning before 8 o'clock to give her $20, saying it was very little but would show her confidence and affection. The lecture given on this tour was entitled "The False Theory" and was highly commended by the press. It never was written and probably never twice delivered in the same words, Miss Anthony always depending largely upon the inspiration of the occasion.
With her debts weighing heavily on her and a series of speaking engagements lined up, Miss Anthony couldn't take a moment to grieve for herself or to comfort her loved ones. That very night after the funeral, she set out again. By the New Year, she had reduced her debt by $1,600. This trip took her through New York and Pennsylvania, to 370 Washington and into Virginia. About Virginia, she wrote: "There’s a lot of work to be done here, but these lectures can’t possibly cover expenses.” In Philadelphia, she spoke in the Star course, was hosted by Anna Dickinson, and was introduced to her audience by Lucretia Mott, who was then seventy-seven years old. The diary mentions that Mrs. Mott came the next morning before 8 o'clock to give her $20, saying it was a small amount but showed her confidence and affection. The lecture given on this tour was called "The False Theory" and received high praise from the press. It was never written down and likely never delivered in the same way twice, as Miss Anthony largely relied on the inspiration of the moment.
The middle of December she slipped back to Rochester to see her bereaved sister, and speaks of their receiving a letter of sympathy from Rev. J.K. McLean, which, she says, "is the first philosophical word that has been spoken." While at home she was invited to the Hallowells' to see Wendell Phillips, their first meeting since their sad difference of opinion concerning the Fourteenth Amendment. They had a cordial interview and she went with him to his lecture in the evening. The entry in the journal that night closes with the underscored sentence, "Phillips is matchless."
In mid-December, she returned to Rochester to visit her grieving sister and mentioned that they received a sympathy letter from Rev. J.K. McLean, which she remarked "is the first philosophical word that has been spoken." While at home, she was invited to the Hallowells' to see Wendell Phillips, marking their first meeting since their disagreement over the Fourteenth Amendment. They had a warm conversation, and she accompanied him to his lecture that evening. The journal entry that night ends with the emphasized sentence, "Phillips is unmatched."
[55] The demands for woman everywhere today are for a wider range of employment, higher wages, thorough mental and physical education, and an equal right before the law in all those relations which grow out of the marriage state. While we yield to none in the earnestness of our advocacy of these claims, we make a broader demand for the enfranchisement of woman, as the only way in which all her just rights can be permanently secured. By discussing, as we shall incidentally, leading questions of political and social importance, we hope to educate women for an intelligent judgment upon public affairs, and for a faithful expression of that judgment at the polls.
[55] Today, women everywhere are demanding a broader range of job opportunities, better pay, comprehensive mental and physical education, and equal rights under the law in all aspects related to marriage. While we are fully committed to advocating for these rights, we are also making a bigger call for women's enfranchisement, as it is the only way to ensure that all of their rightful claims are permanently protected. By addressing key political and social issues, as we will do throughout, we aim to prepare women to make informed judgments about public matters and to effectively represent those judgments at the polls.
As masculine ideas have ruled the race for six thousand years, we especially desire that The Revolution shall be the mouth piece of women, to give the world the feminine thought in politics, religion and social life; so that ultimately in the union of both we may find the truth in all things. On the idea taught by the creeds, codes and customs of the world, that woman was made for man, we declare war to the death, and proclaim the higher truth that, like man, she was created by God for individual moral responsibility and progress here and forever.
As masculine ideas have dominated society for six thousand years, we especially want The Revolution to be the voice of women, to express feminine perspectives in politics, religion, and social life; so that ultimately in the combining of both we may find the truth in everything. We declare a war to the death against the belief taught by the creeds, codes, and customs of the world that woman was made for man, and we proclaim the higher truth that, like man, she was created by God for individual moral responsibility and progress now and forever.
Our principal contributors this year are: Anna Dickinson, Isabella Beecher Hooker, Harriet Beecher Stowe, Alice and Phoebe Cary, Olive Logan, Mary Clemmer, Mrs. Theodore Tilton, Matilda Joslyn Gage, Phoebe Couzins, Elizabeth Boynton and others; and foreign, Rebecca Moore, Lydia E. Becker and Madame Marie Goeg.
Our main contributors this year are: Anna Dickinson, Isabella Beecher Hooker, Harriet Beecher Stowe, Alice and Phoebe Cary, Olive Logan, Mary Clemmer, Mrs. Theodore Tilton, Matilda Joslyn Gage, Phoebe Couzins, Elizabeth Boynton, and others; and from abroad, Rebecca Moore, Lydia E. Becker, and Madame Marie Goeg.
The Revolution is an independent journal, bound to no party or sect, and those who write for our columns are responsible only for what appears under their own names. Hence, if old Abolitionists and Slaveholders, Republicans and Democrats, Presbyterians and Universalists, Catholics and Protestants find themselves side by side in writing on the question, of woman suffrage, they must pardon each other's differences on all other points, trusting that by giving their own views strongly and grandly, they will overshadow the errors by their side.
The Revolution is an independent journal, not tied to any party or group, and those who write for us are only accountable for what they publish under their own names. Therefore, if old Abolitionists and Slaveholders, Republicans and Democrats, Presbyterians and Universalists, Catholics and Protestants find themselves writing together about women's suffrage, they need to overlook each other's disagreements on other issues, trusting that by expressing their own opinions powerfully and boldly, they will outweigh the mistakes beside them.
CHAPTER XXII.
MRS. HOOKER'S CONVENTION—THE LECTURE FIELD.
1871.
A large correspondence was conducted in regard to the Third National Convention, which was to be held in Washington in January, 1871. Isabella Beecher Hooker, who had all the zeal of a new convert, created some amusement among the old workers by offering to relieve them of the entire management of the convention, intimating that she would avoid the mistakes they had made and put the suffrage work on a more aristocratic basis. To Mrs. Stanton she wrote:
A lot of communication took place regarding the Third National Convention, scheduled to be held in Washington in January 1871. Isabella Beecher Hooker, who was as eager as a new convert, amused the veteran activists by volunteering to take over all the planning of the convention, suggesting that she would steer clear of the mistakes they had made and elevate the suffrage movement to a more high-class level. She wrote to Mrs. Stanton:
I have proposed taking the Washington convention into my own hands, expenses and all; arranging program, and presiding or securing help in that direction, if I should need it. I shall hope to get Robert Collyer, and a good many who might not care to speak for "the Union" but would speak for me. I should want from you a pure suffrage argument, much like that you made before the committee at Washington last winter. I know you are tired of this branch, but you are fitted to do a great work still in that direction.... Won't you promise to come to my convention, without charge save travelling expenses, provided I have one? I am waiting to hear from Susan, Mrs. Pomeroy and you, and then shall get Tilton's approval and the withdrawal of the society from the work, if they have undertaken it, and go ahead.
I’ve proposed to take charge of the Washington convention myself, covering all costs; organizing the program, and either leading it myself or finding help if necessary. I hope to get Robert Collyer and several others who might not want to speak for "the Union" but would be willing to speak on my behalf. I’ll need a strong suffrage argument from you, similar to what you presented to the committee in Washington last winter. I know you’re tired of this area, but you’re still capable of doing excellent work in that field... Would you agree to come to my convention, just charging for travel expenses, if I organize one? I’m waiting to hear back from Susan, Mrs. Pomeroy, and you, then I’ll get Tilton’s approval and pull the society from the work if they’ve taken it on, and move forward.
Mrs. Stanton consented gladly and wrote the other friends to do likewise, saying: "I should like to have Susan for president, as she has worked and toiled as no other woman has, but if we think best not to blow her horn, then let us exalt Mrs. Hooker, who thinks she could manage the cause more discreetly, more genteelly than we do. I am ready to rest and see the salvation of the Lord." On their rounds the 372 letters came to Martha Wright, the gentle Quaker, who commented with the fine irony of which she was master: "It strikes me favorably. It would be a fine thing for Mrs. Hooker to preside over the Washington convention, while her sister, Catharine Beecher, was inveighing against suffrage, for the benefit of Mrs. Dahlgren and others. Perhaps she is right in thinking that Robert Collyer and a good many others who would not care to speak for 'the Union,' would speak for her—I for one would be glad to have her try it! If 'Captain Susan' would consent to be placed at the head of the association, there could not be a more suitable and just appointment."
Mrs. Stanton gladly agreed and wrote to the other friends to do the same, saying: "I would like to have Susan as president, since she has worked harder than any other woman, but if we think it's best not to promote her, then let’s support Mrs. Hooker, who believes she could handle the cause more discreetly and more gently than we do. I’m ready to rest and see the salvation of the Lord." While they were discussing, the 372 letters reached Martha Wright, the gentle Quaker, who commented with the fine irony she was known for: "This seems like a good idea. It would be interesting for Mrs. Hooker to lead the Washington convention, while her sister, Catharine Beecher, was speaking out against suffrage for the sake of Mrs. Dahlgren and others. Perhaps she’s right in thinking that Robert Collyer and many others who wouldn't want to speak for ‘the Union’ might speak for her—I, for one, would love to see her try! If ‘Captain Susan’ agreed to take the lead of the association, it would be a fitting and just choice."
Mrs. Stanton wrote that her lecture engagements would not permit her to go to Washington and she would send $100 instead. Mrs. Hooker replied:
Mrs. Stanton wrote that her speaking engagements wouldn't allow her to go to Washington, so she would send $100 instead. Mrs. Hooker replied:
Your offer just suits me, and of myself I should accept $100 with thankfulness, and excuse you, as you desire, but Susan looked disgusted and said, "She must appear before the Congressional committees, at any rate." I had not thought of that, but of course, if you were in Washington, it would be absurd not to be on our platform; and so I don't know what to say. You will talk more forcibly than any one else, and in committee you are invaluable. Still, I want your money, and I could do without you on the platform.... I fully expect, to accomplish far more by a convention devoted to the purely political aspect of the woman question, than by a woman's rights convention, however well-managed; and this, because the time has come for this practical work—discussion has prepared the way, now we must have the thing, the vote itself. It just occurs to me that you might write an argument for the committee, which I would read, but of course your presence is most desirable, and I incline to have you on hand for this last, great effort; for it does seem to me that we need not have another convention in Washington, but only a select committee to work privately every winter, and send for speakers, etc., when the committees are ready to grant hearings.
Your offer is great for me, and I'd happily accept $100 with thanks and let you off the hook as you want. However, Susan looked disgusted and said, "She has to appear before the Congressional committees anyway." I hadn’t thought of that, but of course, if you're in Washington, it would be silly not to be on our platform. I'm not sure what to say. You'll have more impact than anyone else, and in committee, you're essential. Still, I want your money and I could manage without you on the platform... I really believe we'll accomplish much more with a convention that focuses on the political side of women's issues than with a women's rights convention, no matter how well-organized. The time has come for action—discussion has prepared the way, and now we need the actual vote. It just occurred to me that you could write an argument for the committee that I could read, but of course, having you there is the most important. I really want you present for this final push because it seems to me that we don’t need another convention in Washington, just a select committee that can work privately every winter and invite speakers, etc., when the committees are ready to hold hearings.
It is the part of wisdom to suppress Mrs. Stanton's reply to this, but she sent it to Martha Wright, who answered her:
It’s wise to keep Mrs. Stanton’s response to this under wraps, but she sent it to Martha Wright, who replied to her:
You can imagine what success Mrs. Hooker will have with those wily politicians. She thinks they will come serenely from their seats to the lobby, when she tries "all the means known to an honest woman." I fear the means known to the other sort would meet a readier response. I forget which of the senators it was, last winter, who said rudely to Mrs. Davis and Mrs. Griffing, "You just call us out because you like to."... Mrs. Hooker will find it no easy matter to hook them on to her platform, but she will be wiser after trying. She is mistaken in considering the cause so nearly won, 373 but it would be as impossible for her to realize the situation as it was for Rev. Thomas Beecher to be convinced that Mr. Smith saw more clearly than he. "Do you mean," said this potentate, "to bring down the whole Beecher family on your head?" "No," was the reply, "do you mean to bring the whole Smith family on to yours?"
You can imagine how successful Mrs. Hooker will be with those crafty politicians. She thinks they’ll calmly leave their seats to come to the lobby when she tries “all the methods known to an honest woman.” I fear the tactics known to the other kind might get a quicker reaction. I can't remember which senator it was last winter who rudely told Mrs. Davis and Mrs. Griffing, “You just call us out because you enjoy it.”... Mrs. Hooker will find it challenging to get them onto her platform, but she’ll be wiser after she tries. She is mistaken to think the cause is almost won, 373 but it would be just as impossible for her to grasp the situation as it was for Rev. Thomas Beecher to be convinced that Mr. Smith had clearer insights than he did. “Do you mean,” said this influential man, “to bring the whole Beecher family down on you?” “No,” was the reply, “do you mean to bring the whole Smith family down on yours?”
The following circular letter was sent to Curtis, Phillips and other prominent men:
The following circular letter was sent to Curtis, Phillips, and other notable individuals:
A convention has been announced at Washington, for January 11 and 12, to push the Sixteenth Amendment. The management is solely in my hands, and I alone assume the financial responsibility. I go to Washington January 1 to spend some days enlisting members of Congress in this purely political question, and securing short speeches from them on our platform. I have neither State nor national society behind me, but am attempting to carry on a convention with this single aim—to awaken Congress and, through it, the country, to the fact that a Sixteenth Amendment is needed, in order to carry out the principles of the Declaration of Independence; and that we women are tired of petitioning, and would fain begin to vote without delay. Will you speak for me in the day or the evening, and much oblige your sincere friend, ISABELLA B. HOOKER.
A convention has been scheduled in Washington on January 11 and 12 to support the Sixteenth Amendment. I'm in charge of all the planning and will handle the finances myself. I'm heading to Washington on January 1 to spend a few days rallying support from members of Congress for this purely political matter and to arrange for them to give short speeches backing our cause. I don't have any state or national organization backing me, but I'm trying to put together a convention solely to raise awareness in Congress— and through them, the nation— about the necessity of a Sixteenth Amendment to uphold the principles of the Declaration of Independence. We women are tired of simply making requests; we want to start voting right away. Will you speak for me during the day or in the evening? It would mean a lot to your sincere friend, ISABELLA B. HOOKER.
Evidently they would not speak, even "for me," and Mrs. Hooker sends around this note of explanation to the "old guard:" "I know of no gentlemen outside of members of Congress, that can help us at all, who can come. Beecher, Collyer, Curtis and Phillips are all unable. If you think of any one else it would be worth while to invite, please write me at once. I have such a strong determination that members shall understand how much we are in earnest at this time, and how we won't wait any longer, that it does seem to me they will take up a burden of speech themselves, and work also. Mr. Sewall, of Boston, writes me that he will urge Mr. Sumner, as I requested, and other members, but thinks they can not need it."
Clearly, they wouldn't talk, even "for me," and Mrs. Hooker is sending this note to the "old guard": "I don’t know any gentlemen besides members of Congress who can help us at all and are available. Beecher, Collyer, Curtis, and Phillips are all unavailable. If you can think of anyone else worth inviting, please let me know right away. I’m really determined to make sure the members understand how serious we are right now and that we won’t wait any longer; it seems to me they will take on the responsibility of speaking themselves and will work too. Mr. Sewall from Boston wrote to tell me he will push Mr. Sumner to come, as I asked, and other members, but he thinks they don’t need it."
Miss Anthony, however, declined to be snubbed, subdued or displaced, and wrote to Mrs. Stanton in the following vigorous style:
Miss Anthony, however, refused to be ignored, silenced, or pushed aside, and wrote to Mrs. Stanton in the following strong tone:
Mrs. Hooker's attitude is not in the least surprising. She is precisely like every new convert in every reform. I have no doubt but each of the Apostles in turn, as he came into the ranks, believed he could improve upon Christ's methods. I know every new one thought so of Garrison's and Phillips'. The 374 only thing surprising in this case is that you, the pioneer, should drop, and say to each of these converts: "Yes, you may manage. I grant your knowledge, judgment, taste, culture, are all superior to mine. I resign the good old craft to you altogether." To my mind there never was such suicidal letting go as has been yours these last two years.
Mrs. Hooker's attitude isn’t surprising at all. She’s just like every new convert in any movement. I’m sure that each of the Apostles thought they could improve on Christ's methods when they joined. I bet every newcomer felt the same way about Garrison and Phillips. The only surprising part here is that you, the pioneer, would step back and tell each of these newcomers: "Sure, you can handle it. I admit your knowledge, judgment, taste, and culture are all better than mine. I’m completely handing over the good old craft to you." In my opinion, there has never been such a self-destructive letting go as what you've done these last two years.
But I am now teetotally discouraged, and shall make no more attempts to hold you up to what I know is not only the best for our cause, but equally so for yourself, from the moral standpoint if not the financial. O, how I have agonized over my utter failure to make you feel and see the importance of standing fast and holding the helm of our good ship to the end of the storm. Mr. Greeley's "On to Richmond" backdown was not more sad to me, not half so sad. How you can excuse yourself, is more than I can understand.
But I’m completely discouraged now, and I won’t try to convince you anymore to do what I believe is not just best for our cause, but also best for you, both morally and financially. Oh, how I've struggled with my total failure to make you see how important it is to stay strong and navigate our good ship through the storm until the end. Mr. Greeley’s “On to Richmond” retreat was nowhere near as heartbreaking to me. I just can’t understand how you can justify this to yourself.
Mrs. Stanton commented to Mrs. Wright: "For your instruction in the ways of the world, I send you Susan's letter. You see I am between two fires all the time. Some are determined to throw me overboard, and she is equally determined that I shall stand at the masthead, no matter how pitiless the storm."
Mrs. Stanton said to Mrs. Wright: "To help you understand how the world works, I'm sending you Susan's letter. You see, I'm caught in the middle all the time. Some people want to get rid of me, and she’s just as determined to make sure I stay in charge, no matter how harsh the storm gets."
Mrs. Hooker found hers was a greater task than she had anticipated and finally wrote Miss Anthony: "God knows, and you ought to know, that any one who undertakes a convention has put self-seeking one side and is nearer to being a martyr, stake, fagots and all, than any of us care to be unless called by duty with a loud and unmistakable call. I shirked the labor last year and pitied you because so much fell upon you, and out of pure love to you and to the cause determined this time to take all I could on my own shoulders, but you must come and help out."
Mrs. Hooker realized that her task was much bigger than she expected and eventually wrote to Miss Anthony: "God knows, and you should know, that anyone who takes on a convention has set aside their own interests and is closer to being a martyr, with all the stakes and faggots, than any of us would want to be unless compelled by a clear and undeniable call. I avoided the work last year and felt sorry for you because so much was on your shoulders. Out of pure love for you and the cause, I decided this time to take on everything I could handle, but you need to come and help out."
Mrs. Stanton still persisted in her determination not to go to this convention but Miss Anthony cancelled eight or ten lecture engagements, at from $50 to $75 each, in order to be present in person and see that the affair was properly managed. Mrs. Hooker, however, was fully equal to the occasion, her convention was a marked success and she proved to be one of the most valuable acquisitions to the ranks of workers for woman suffrage. She soon learned that the opposition to be overcome was far greater than she had imagined, and after nearly thirty years' effort, not even in her own State have women been able to secure their enfranchisement. It seems, however, a bit of 375 poetic justice that this convention, which was to lift the movement for woman suffrage to a higher plane than it ever before had occupied, should have been the first to invite to its platform Victoria C. Woodhull, whose advent precipitated a storm of criticism compared to which all those that had gone before were as a summer shower to a Missouri cyclone.
Mrs. Stanton still stuck to her decision not to go to this convention, but Miss Anthony canceled eight or ten speaking engagements, earning between $50 and $75 each, to attend in person and ensure everything was well-organized. Mrs. Hooker, however, was more than capable of handling the situation; her convention was a significant success, and she turned out to be one of the most valuable additions to the movement for women's voting rights. She quickly realized that the opposition was much stronger than she had anticipated, and after nearly thirty years of effort, women still hadn’t achieved voting rights even in her own state. However, it seems a bit of 375 poetic justice that this convention, which aimed to elevate the women's suffrage movement to a higher level than it had ever reached before, was the first to invite Victoria C. Woodhull to its platform, whose arrival triggered a storm of criticism that made all previous controversies seem like a light summer rain compared to a Missouri cyclone.

Isabella Beecher Hooker
Isabella Beecher Hooker
On December 21, 1870, Mrs. Woodhull had gone to Washington with a memorial praying Congress to enact such laws as were necessary for enabling women to exercise the right to vote vested in them by the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. This was presented in the Senate by Harris, of Louisiana, and in the House by Julian, of Indiana, referred to the judiciary committees and ordered printed. She had taken this action without consulting any of the suffrage leaders and they were as much astonished to hear of it as were the rest of the world. When they arrived at the capital another surprise awaited them. On taking up the papers they learned that Mrs. Woodhull was to address the judiciary committee of the House of Representatives the very morning their convention was to open. Miss Anthony hastened to confer with Mrs. Hooker, who was a guest at the home of Senator Pomeroy, and to urge that they should be present at this hearing and learn what Mrs. Woodhull proposed to do. Mrs. Hooker emphatically declined, but the senator said: "This is not politics. Men never could work in a political party if they stopped to investigate each member's antecedents and associates. If you are going into a fight, you must accept every help that offers."
On December 21, 1870, Mrs. Woodhull went to Washington with a petition asking Congress to create laws that would allow women to exercise their voting rights granted by the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. This was presented in the Senate by Harris from Louisiana and in the House by Julian from Indiana, referred to the judiciary committees, and ordered for printing. She took this action without consulting any of the suffrage leaders, and they were just as surprised to hear about it as everyone else. When they arrived in the capital, another surprise awaited them. While reviewing the papers, they learned that Mrs. Woodhull was scheduled to speak to the judiciary committee of the House of Representatives the very morning their convention was set to begin. Miss Anthony quickly went to discuss the situation with Mrs. Hooker, who was staying at Senator Pomeroy's home, and urged that they should attend this hearing to see what Mrs. Woodhull planned to do. Mrs. Hooker firmly declined, but the senator said, "This isn't politics. Men would never be able to work in a political party if they stopped to check the background and associates of every member. If you're going into a fight, you have to accept every help that comes your way."
Finally they postponed the opening of their convention till afternoon and, on the morning of January 11, Miss Anthony, Mrs. Hooker, Paulina Wright Davis and Hon. A. G. Riddle appeared in the judiciary committee room. None of them had met Mrs. Woodhull, whom they found to be a beautiful woman, refined in appearance and plainly dressed. She read her argument in a clear, musical voice with a modest and engaging manner, captivating not only the men but the ladies, who invited her to come to their convention and repeat it. Mrs. 376 Hooker and Judge Riddle also addressed the committee and Miss Anthony closed the proceedings with a short speech, thus reported by the Philadelphia Press:
Finally, they postponed the opening of their convention until the afternoon, and on the morning of January 11, Miss Anthony, Mrs. Hooker, Paulina Wright Davis, and Hon. A. G. Riddle showed up in the judiciary committee room. None of them had met Mrs. Woodhull, whom they found to be a beautiful woman, elegantly dressed yet simply attired. She presented her argument in a clear, musical voice with a modest and engaging demeanor, captivating not only the men but also the women, who invited her to join their convention and present again. Mrs. 376 Hooker and Judge Riddle also spoke to the committee, and Miss Anthony wrapped up the proceedings with a brief speech, which was reported by the Philadelphia Press:
She said few women had persecuted Congress as she had done, and she was glad that new, fresh voices were heard today. "But, gentlemen," she continued, "I entreat you to bring this matter before the House. You let our petition, presented by Mr. Julian last winter, come to its death. I ask you to grant our appeal so that I can lay off my armor, for I am tired of fighting. The old Constitution did not disfranchise women, and we begged you not to put the word 'male' into the Fourteenth Amendment. I wish, General Butler, you would say contraband for us. But, gentlemen, bring in a report of some kind, either for or against; don't let the matter die in committee. Make it imperative that every man in the House shall show whether he is for or against it." Mrs. Hooker caught the refrain as Miss Anthony sat down, and said: "Pledge yourselves that we shall have a hearing before Congress."
She stated that not many women had challenged Congress as much as she had, and she was pleased that new, fresh voices were being heard today. "But, gentlemen," she continued, "I urge you to bring this issue to the House. You allowed our petition, which Mr. Julian presented last winter, to fade away. I ask you to approve our request so I can lay down my armor because I’m tired of fighting. The old Constitution did not disenfranchise women, and we pleaded with you not to include the word 'male' in the Fourteenth Amendment. I wish, General Butler, that you would refer to us as contraband. But, gentlemen, please submit some kind of report, either in favor or against; don’t let the issue die in committee. Make it a requirement that every man in the House indicates whether he supports it or not." Mrs. Hooker picked up the chant as Miss Anthony sat down and said: "Pledge that we will have a hearing before Congress."
The Daily Patriot, of Washington, gave this account of the opening of the convention:
The Daily Patriot, of Washington, provided this report on the start of the convention:
About 3 o'clock the principal actors came upon the stage in Lincoln Hall. In the center of the front row was Paulina Wright Davis, a stately, dignified lady with a full suit of frosted hair. On her right was Isabella Beecher Hooker, the ruling genius of the assembly, of commanding voice and look, and evidently at home on the rostrum. On the left was Josephine S. Griffing, of this city, wearing the calm, imperturbable expression which is so eminently her characteristic. Further on was Susan B. Anthony, "the hero of a hundred fights," but still as eager for the fray as when she first enlisted under the banner of woman's rights.... Then came the two New York sensations, Woodhull and Claflin, both in dark dresses, with blue neckties, short, curly brown hair, and nobby Alpine hats, the very picture of the advanced ideas they are advocating. All were fresh from the scene of their contest in the Capitol, wreathed with smiles, flushed with victory, and evidently determined to let the world know that the goal of their ambition was nearly reached; that Congress had virtually surrendered at discretion, and hereafter they were to be considered part and parcel of that great body denominated American citizens.
Around 3 o'clock, the main speakers took the stage in Lincoln Hall. In the center of the front row was Paulina Wright Davis, a dignified woman with a full head of frosted hair. To her right was Isabella Beecher Hooker, the driving force of the group, with a commanding voice and presence, clearly at ease at the podium. On the left was Josephine S. Griffing from this city, wearing her signature calm, unflappable expression. Further along was Susan B. Anthony, "the hero of a hundred fights," still just as eager for action as when she first joined the fight for women's rights. Then came the two New York sensations, Woodhull and Claflin, both dressed in dark outfits with blue neckties, short, curly brown hair, and stylish Alpine hats, embodying the progressive ideas they represented. All had just come from their struggle in the Capitol, beaming with smiles, flushed with victory, and clearly determined to let everyone know that their goal was almost within reach; that Congress had practically surrendered, and from now on they were to be recognized as part of that great entity known as American citizens.
Mrs. Hooker introduced Victoria Woodhull, saying it was her first attempt at public speaking, but her heart was so in the movement that she was determined to try. She advanced to the front of the platform, but was so nervous that she required the assuring arm of the president and her kindly voice to give her courage to proceed. When she did, it was with a perceptible tremor in her tones. After an apology, she read her memorial, which had been presented to the judiciary committee, reported the result of her interview with them, and said she had the assurance that it would be favorably reported, and that the heart of every man in Congress was in the 377 movement. Thus ended the first effort of the great Wall street broker as a public speaker.
Mrs. Hooker introduced Victoria Woodhull, mentioning that it was her first time speaking in public, but her passion for the movement motivated her to give it a shot. She walked up to the front of the stage, but her nerves got the best of her, and she needed the comforting arm of the president and her gentle voice to help her continue. When she began, her voice noticeably shook. After a brief apology, she read her memorial, which had been submitted to the judiciary committee, shared the outcome of her meeting with them, and stated that she had been assured it would be positively received, emphasizing that every man in Congress was supportive of the 377 movement. This marked the end of the first public speaking attempt by the renowned Wall Street broker.
She was followed by Josephine S. Griffing, Lillie Devereux Blake, Frederick Douglass and others. Judge Riddle made the address of the evening. Senator Nye, of Nevada, presided over one evening session; Senator Warner, of Alabama, over one; and Senator Wilson, of Massachusetts, over another. The correspondent of the Philadelphia Press wrote: "Mrs. Woodhull sat sphynx-like during the convention. General Grant himself might learn a lesson of silence from the pale, sad face of this unflinching woman. No chance to send an arrow through the opening seams of her mail.... She reminds one of the forces in nature behind the storm, or of a small splinter of the indestructible; and if her veins were opened they would be found to contain ice." The National Republican thus describes one session:
She was followed by Josephine S. Griffing, Lillie Devereux Blake, Frederick Douglass, and others. Judge Riddle gave the evening's address. Senator Nye from Nevada chaired one evening session, Senator Warner from Alabama led another, and Senator Wilson from Massachusetts oversaw one more. A correspondent from the Philadelphia Press wrote: "Mrs. Woodhull sat like a sphinx during the convention. Even General Grant could learn a thing or two about staying silent from the pale, sad face of this unyielding woman. No chance to strike at the weak spots in her armor... She reminds one of the forces of nature that drive a storm or a tiny piece of something unbreakable; and if her veins were opened, they'd probably reveal ice." The National Republican describes one session as follows:
The attendance yesterday morning clearly demonstrated that the woman's movement has received an immense addition in numbers, quality and earnestness.... Miss Anthony, with her face all aglow, her eyes sparkling with indignation, said that a petition against suffrage had been presented in the Senate by Mr. Edmunds, signed by Mrs. General Sherman, Mrs. Admiral Dahlgren and others. She was glad the enemies of the movement at last had shown themselves. They were women who never knew a want, and had no feeling for those who were less fortunate. They had boasted that if necessary they could get one thousand more signatures of the best women in the land to their petition. What are a thousand names, and who are the best women in the land? In answer to the one thousand the advocates of suffrage could bring tens, aye, hundreds of thousands of women who desire the ballot for self-protection. The fight had now commenced in earnest, and it would not be ended until every woman in this broad land was vested with the full rights of citizenship.
The turnout yesterday morning clearly showed that the women's movement has significantly increased in numbers, quality, and commitment. Miss Anthony, her face glowing and her eyes filled with anger, noted that Mr. Edmunds had submitted a petition against suffrage in the Senate, signed by Mrs. General Sherman, Mrs. Admiral Dahlgren, and others. She was glad that the movement's opponents had finally shown their true colors. These were women who had never faced hardship and had no understanding for those who were less fortunate. They claimed they could easily gather a thousand more signatures from the most respected women in the country for their petition. What does it matter if there are a thousand names, and who decides who the best women are? In response, supporters of suffrage could present tens, even hundreds of thousands of women who want the right to vote for their own protection. The fight has truly begun, and it will continue until every woman in this great country has full citizenship rights.
The tenor of all the speeches was the right of women to vote under the recently adopted Fourteenth Amendment. There was an absence of the usual long series of resolutions, and all were concentrated in the following, presented by Miss Anthony:
The main focus of all the speeches was the right of women to vote under the recently adopted Fourteenth Amendment. There was a lack of the usual lengthy resolutions, and everything was focused on the following, presented by Miss Anthony:
Whereas, The Fourteenth Article of the Constitution of the United States declares that all persons born or naturalized in the United States are citizens thereof, and of the State wherein they reside, and as such entitled to the unabridged 378 exercise of the privileges and immunities of citizens, among which are the rights of the elective franchise; therefore
Whereas the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution states that all persons born or naturalized in the United States are citizens, as well as citizens of the state where they reside, and are therefore entitled to the full 378 exercise of citizens' rights and privileges, including the right to vote; therefore
Resolved, That the Congress of the United States be earnestly requested to pass an act declaratory of the true extent and meaning of the said Fourteenth Article.
Resolved, That Congress of the United States is strongly urged to pass an act declaring the true scope and meaning of the aforementioned Fourteenth Amendment.
Resolved, That it is the duty of American women in the several States to apply for registration at the proper times and places, and in all cases when they fail to secure it to see that suits be instituted in the courts having jurisdiction, and that their right to the franchise shall secure general and judicial recognition.
Resolved, That it is the responsibility of American women in the various states to register at the appropriate times and places, and whenever they are unsuccessful in obtaining registration, they should ensure that lawsuits are filed in the courts with the necessary authority, and that their right to vote is recognized both broadly and by the judiciary.
In presenting the resolutions she said that if Congress failed to do what was asked, and if the courts decided that "persons" are not citizens, then the women had another resource; they could go back to first principles and push the Sixteenth Amendment. A national woman suffrage and educational committee of six was formed, herself among the number; and a large book was opened containing a "Declaration and Pledge of Women of the United States," written by Mrs. Hooker, asserting their belief in their right to the suffrage and their desire to use it. This was signed within a few months by 80,000 women and presented to Congress. The following spring large numbers attempted to vote in various parts of the country.
In presenting the resolutions, she said that if Congress didn’t do what was requested, and if the courts decided that "persons" are not citizens, then the women had another option; they could return to the fundamental principles and push for the Sixteenth Amendment. A national women's suffrage and educational committee of six was formed, with her being one of the members; a large book was opened containing a "Declaration and Pledge of Women of the United States," written by Mrs. Hooker, which asserted their belief in their right to vote and their desire to exercise that right. Within a few months, this was signed by 80,000 women and presented to Congress. The following spring, large numbers tried to vote in various parts of the country.
The advent of Mrs. Woodhull on the woman suffrage platform created a wide-spread commotion. The old cry of "free love" was redoubled, the enemies exulted loud and long, the friends censured and protested. Regarding this matter, Mrs. Hooker wrote:
The arrival of Mrs. Woodhull on the women’s suffrage scene caused a huge stir. The old shout of "free love" was amplified, the opponents celebrated loudly, and the supporters criticized and protested. About this issue, Mrs. Hooker wrote:
My sister Catharine says she is convinced now that I am right and that Mrs. Woodhull is a pure woman, holding a wrong social theory, and ought to be treated with kindness if we wish to win her to the truth. Catharine wanted me to write her a letter of introduction, so that when she went to New York she could make her acquaintance and try to convince her that she is in error in regard to her views on marriage. I gave her the letter and she is in New York now. When she sees her she will be just as much in love with her as the rest of us. Imagine the Dahlgren coterie when they get Catharine to Washington to fight suffrage and find her visiting Victoria and proclaiming her sweetness and excellence.
My sister Catharine now believes that I’m right and that Mrs. Woodhull is an honest person with a misguided social theory. She thinks we should treat her with kindness if we want to help her see the truth. Catharine asked me to write her a letter of introduction, so when she goes to New York, she can meet her and try to change her views on marriage. I gave her the letter, and she’s in New York now. Once she meets her, I’m sure she’ll fall in love with her just like the rest of us. Just imagine the Dahlgren group when they get Catharine to Washington to advocate for suffrage and find her praising Victoria and talking about how amazing she is.
The rest of the story is told in a subsequent letter: "Sister 379 Catharine returned last night. She saw Victoria and, attacking her on the marriage question, got such a black eye as filled her with horror and amazement. I had to laugh inwardly at her relation of the interview and am now waiting for her to cool down!"
The rest of the story is explained in a later letter: "Sister 379 Catharine came back last night. She confronted Victoria about the marriage issue and ended up with a black eye that shocked her. I couldn't help but laugh quietly at her recounting of the meeting and I'm now just waiting for her to calm down!"
The men especially were exercised over the new convert to suffrage and flooded the ladies with letters of protest. To one of these Mrs. Stanton replied:
The men, in particular, were upset about the new supporter of voting rights and bombarded the women with letters of protest. In response to one of these, Mrs. Stanton replied:
In regard to the gossip about Mrs. Woodhull I have one answer to give to all my gentlemen friends: When the men who make laws for us in Washington can stand forth and declare themselves pure and unspotted from all the sins mentioned in the Decalogue, then we will demand that every woman who makes a constitutional argument on our platform shall be as chaste as Diana. If our good men will only trouble themselves as much about the virtue of their own sex as they do about ours, if they will make one moral code for both men and women, we shall have a nobler type of manhood and womanhood in the next generation than the world has yet seen.
Regarding the rumors about Mrs. Woodhull, I want to say this to all my gentleman friends: When the men who make laws for us in Washington can stand up and claim they are completely free from all the sins listed in the Ten Commandments, then we will demand that every woman who fights for our rights on our platform should be as virtuous as Diana. If our good men would spend as much time caring about the integrity of their own gender as they do about ours, and if they would establish one moral standard for both men and women, we would see a greater level of manhood and womanhood in the next generation than the world has ever seen.
We have had women enough sacrificed to this sentimental, hypocritical prating about purity. This is one of man's most effective engines for our division and subjugation. He creates the public sentiment, builds the gallows, and then makes us hangmen for our sex. Women have crucified the Mary Wollstonecrafts, the Fanny Wrights, the George Sands, the Fanny Kembles, of all ages; and now men mock us with the fact, and say we are ever cruel to each other. Let us end this ignoble record and henceforth stand by womanhood. If Victoria Woodhull must be crucified, let men drive the spikes and plait the crown of thorns.
We’ve seen enough women sacrificed to this sentimental, hypocritical talk about purity. It’s one of the most effective ways men divide and control us. They create public opinion, set up the gallows, and then force us to be the executioners of our own gender. Women have condemned the Mary Wollstonecrafts, the Fanny Wrights, the George Sands, the Fanny Kembles throughout history; and now men mock us, claiming we’re always cruel to one another. Let’s put an end to this shameful history and stand united for womanhood. If Victoria Woodhull has to be punished, let men drive the nails and weave the crown of thorns.

Lucinda Hinsdale Stone
Lucinda Hinsdale Stone
Immediately after the Washington convention, Miss Anthony went to fill a lecture engagement at Kalamazoo, the arrangements made by her friend, the widely-known and revered Lucinda H. Stone. She spoke also at Grand Rapids and other points in Michigan. At Chicago she was fortunate enough to have a day with Mrs. Stanton, also on a lecturing tour, and then took the train for Leavenworth. At Kansas City the papers said she made "the success of the lecture season." She spoke in Leavenworth, Lawrence, Topeka, Paola, Olathe and other places throughout the State. Although it was very cold and the half-frozen mud knee deep, she usually 380 had good audiences. At Lincoln, Neb., she was entertained at the home of Governor Butler and introduced by him at her lecture. At Omaha her share of the receipts was $100. At Council Bluffs she was the guest of her old fellow-worker, Amelia Bloomer. Cedar Rapids and Des Moines gave packed houses. She lectured in a number of Illinois towns, taking trains at midnight and at daybreak; and, waiting four hours at one little station, the diary says she was so thoroughly worn-out she was compelled to lie down on the dirty floor. On the homeward route she spoke at Antioch College, and was the guest of President Hosmer's family. According to the infallible little journal: "The president said he had listened to all the woman suffrage lecturers in the field, but tonight, for the first time, he had heard an argument; a compliment above all others, coming from an aged and conservative minister."
Immediately after the Washington convention, Miss Anthony went to give a lecture in Kalamazoo, arranged by her friend, the well-known and respected Lucinda H. Stone. She also spoke in Grand Rapids and other locations in Michigan. In Chicago, she was fortunate enough to spend a day with Mrs. Stanton, who was also on a lecture tour, and then took the train to Leavenworth. In Kansas City, the newspapers declared she had "the success of the lecture season." She lectured in Leavenworth, Lawrence, Topeka, Paola, Olathe, and various other places throughout the state. Even though it was freezing and the half-frozen mud was knee-deep, she usually 380 had good audiences. In Lincoln, Neb., she was hosted by Governor Butler and introduced by him at her lecture. In Omaha, her share of the ticket sales was $100. In Council Bluffs, she stayed with her longtime colleague, Amelia Bloomer. Cedar Rapids and Des Moines had packed houses. She lectured in several towns in Illinois, taking trains at midnight and at dawn; at one little station, she had to wait four hours and was so exhausted that she had to lie down on the dirty floor. On her way home, she spoke at Antioch College and was a guest of President Hosmer's family. According to her reliable little journal: "The president said he had listened to all the woman suffrage lecturers in the field, but tonight, for the first time, he had heard an argument; a compliment above all others, coming from an aged and conservative minister."
She spoke also at Wilberforce University, at Dayton, Springfield, Crestline, and in Columbus before the two Houses of the Legislature. At Salem she ran across Parker Pillsbury, who was lecturing there. When she took the train at Columbus "there sat Mrs. Stanton, fast asleep, her gray curls sticking out." Then again into Michigan she went, speaking at Jackson, Lansing, Ann Arbor and other cities. Mrs. Stanton had preceded her and it was many times said that her lecture needed Miss Anthony's to make it complete. Then to Chicago, where she spoke at a suffrage matinee in Farwell Hall and at the Cook county annual suffrage convention, and dined at Robert Collyer's; back to Iowa, speaking at Burlington, Davenport, Mount Pleasant and Ottumwa; over into Nebraska once more, from there returning to Illinois; into Indiana, thence to Milwaukee and points in Wisconsin; and once more to Chicago, where, as was often the case, she was the guest of Mr. and Mrs. Fernando Jones; from here across to Painesville and other towns in northern Ohio; then on to numerous places in western New York, and finally home to Rochester, April 25, having slept scarcely two nights in the same bed for over three months.
She also spoke at Wilberforce University, in Dayton, Springfield, Crestline, and before the two Houses of the Legislature in Columbus. In Salem, she met Parker Pillsbury, who was giving a lecture there. When she took the train in Columbus, “there sat Mrs. Stanton, fast asleep, her gray curls sticking out.” Then she headed back into Michigan, speaking in Jackson, Lansing, Ann Arbor, and other cities. Mrs. Stanton had been there before her, and people often said that her lecture needed Miss Anthony’s to be complete. Then it was off to Chicago, where she spoke at a suffrage matinee in Farwell Hall, attended the Cook County annual suffrage convention, and dined with Robert Collyer. She returned to Iowa, speaking in Burlington, Davenport, Mount Pleasant, and Ottumwa; then back to Nebraska again, from there returning to Illinois; into Indiana, then to Milwaukee and various locations in Wisconsin; and back to Chicago, where, as was often the case, she stayed with Mr. and Mrs. Fernando Jones. From there, she went to Painesville and other towns in northern Ohio; then on to many places in western New York, and finally home to Rochester on April 25, having barely slept two nights in the same bed for over three months.
Such is the hard life of the public lecturer, the most exhausting 381 and exacting which man or woman can experience. During all this long trip Miss Anthony had met everywhere a cordial welcome and had been entertained in scores of delightful homes. Her speech on this tour was entitled "The New Situation," and was a clear and comprehensive argument to prove that the Fourteenth Amendment gave women the right to vote. Although composed largely of legal and constitutional references, it was not written but drawn from the storehouse of her wonderful memory, aided only by a few notes.
Such is the tough life of a public speaker, the most exhausting 381 and demanding experience one can have. Throughout this long journey, Miss Anthony received a warm welcome everywhere and was hosted in many charming homes. Her speech during this tour was called "The New Situation," and it presented a clear and thorough argument showing that the Fourteenth Amendment granted women the right to vote. Although it contained a lot of legal and constitutional references, it wasn't written down but came from her incredible memory, supported only by a few notes.
At the close of the Washington convention the advocates of woman suffrage honestly believed that the battle was almost won. They felt sure Congress would pass the enabling act, permitting them to exercise the right that they claimed to be conferred by the Fourteenth Amendment, in which claim they were sustained by some of the best constitutional lawyers in the country. The agricultural committee room in the Capitol was placed at the disposal of the national woman suffrage committee, who put Josephine S. Griffing in charge. The latter part of January she wrote:
At the end of the Washington convention, the supporters of women's suffrage genuinely believed that the fight was almost over. They were confident that Congress would pass the enabling act, allowing them to exercise the right they claimed was granted by the Fourteenth Amendment, a claim supported by some of the best constitutional lawyers in the country. The agricultural committee room in the Capitol was made available to the national woman suffrage committee, and they put Josephine S. Griffing in charge. Later in January, she wrote:
Our room is thronged. Yesterday and today no less than twelve wives of members of Congress were here and large numbers of the aristocratic women of Washington. Blanche Butler Ames assures me that all her sympathies are with us. President Grant's sister, Mrs. Cramer, has been here and given her name, saying that Mrs. Grant sent her regards and sympathized with our movement, and that she had refused from principle to sign Mrs. Sherman's protest.... The daily press is on its knees and is publishing long editorials in our favor. You ask if this is a Republican dodge. I do not know. I feel as Douglass did, ready to welcome the bolt from heaven or hell that shivers the chains. If the Republicans hope to save their lives by our enfranchisement, let them live.
Our room is full. Yesterday and today, at least twelve wives of Congress members were here, along with many of Washington's prominent women. Blanche Butler Ames tells me she completely supports us. President Grant's sister, Mrs. Cramer, has visited and shared that Mrs. Grant sends her regards and backs our cause, and she refused to sign Mrs. Sherman's protest on principle.... The daily press is entirely on our side, running extensive editorials supporting us. You might think this is a Republican ploy. I’m not sure. I feel like Douglass, ready to embrace any force, whether good or bad, that breaks the chains. If the Republicans believe they can save themselves through our voting rights, so be it.
Mrs. Hooker wrote from Washington: "Everything conspires to bring about the early confirmation of our hopes. Republicans are discovering that without this new, live issue, they are dead, and once more party necessity is to be God's opportunity. Let us, who know so many good men and true who are in this party, be thankful that through it, rather than through the Democratic, deliverance is to come, for to owe 382 gratitude to a pro-slavery party would nearly choke my thanksgiving."
Mrs. Hooker wrote from Washington: "Everything is coming together to make our hopes a reality soon. Republicans are realizing that without this new, important issue, they're irrelevant, and once again, the needs of the party are becoming God's opportunity. Let's be thankful, we who know so many good and honest people in this party, that deliverance will come through it rather than through the Democrats, because being grateful to a pro-slavery party would almost ruin my thanks."
To this Mrs. Stanton replied: "That is not the point, but which party, as a party, has the best record on our question. For four years I have chafed under the Republican maneuvering to keep us still. Let me call your attention to my speech on the Fifteenth Amendment, in which I said 'this is a new stab at womanhood, to result in deeper degradation to her than she has ever known before.'... Sometimes I exclaim in agony, 'Can nothing raise the self-respect of women?' I despise the Republican party for the political serfdom we suffer today, under the heel of every foreign lord and lackey who treads our soil. If all of you have turned to such idols, I will go alone to Jerusalem."
To this, Mrs. Stanton replied: "That's not the issue; it's about which party, as a whole, has the best track record on our matter. For four years, I've been frustrated with the Republican tactics to keep us stagnant. Let me remind you of my speech on the Fifteenth Amendment, where I stated, 'this is a new attack on womanhood, leading to a deeper degradation than she has ever experienced before.'... Sometimes I cry out in despair, 'Can nothing restore women's self-respect?' I look down on the Republican party for the political servitude we endure today, under the control of every foreign lord and lackey who steps on our soil. If all of you have turned to such false idols, I will go alone to Jerusalem."
When the judiciary committee made its adverse report[57] which was merely that Congress had not the power to act, most of the friends were not discouraged but believed another committee would decide differently. Mrs. Hooker, however, was at the boiling point of indignation over the report and reversed her decision in regard to the Republican party, writing: "Thank God! that party is dead; every one here knows it, feels it, and is waiting to see what will take its place. A great labor and woman suffrage party is ready to spring into life, and a hundred aristocratic Democrats are pledged to the work. You can have no conception of the new conditions unless you are here in the midst of things and read the telegrams from all parts of the country. Early next winter we shall be declared voting citizens." She then quotes a number of prominent Democratic politicians whom she has interviewed and who have given her reason for having faith in that party. But many of the women were fooled then by both political parties, just as they have continued to be up to the present time.
When the judiciary committee gave its negative report[57], stating that Congress didn't have the power to act, most of the supporters didn't lose hope and believed that another committee would reach a different conclusion. Mrs. Hooker, however, was extremely angry about the report and changed her mind about the Republican party, writing: "Thank God! That party is dead; everyone here knows it, feels it, and is waiting to see what will take its place. A strong labor and women’s suffrage party is ready to emerge, and a hundred upper-class Democrats are committed to the cause. You can't fully understand the new circumstances unless you're here in the middle of it all and reading the telegrams from across the country. Early next winter, we will be recognized as voting citizens." She then quotes several prominent Democratic politicians she's spoken with who have given her reasons to trust that party. But many women were misled back then by both political parties, just as they have continued to be up to now.
A letter from Phoebe Couzins expressed the sentiment of 383 numbers which were received this spring: "We made a grand mistake in giving up the National. If you and Mrs. Stanton think best, as your fingers are on the pulse of the people, let us resolve the Union Society into the National Association. So say Mr. and Mrs. Minor, but whatever is done, the two grand women who have the qualifications for leadership must be at the head; the cause will languish until you are back in your old places."
A letter from Phoebe Couzins reflected the feelings of 383 many who responded this spring: "We really messed up by giving up the National. If you and Mrs. Stanton think it's best, since you have a good sense of what the public wants, let's turn the Union Society into the National Association. Mr. and Mrs. Minor agree, but whatever happens, the two incredible women who are qualified to lead must be in charge; the cause will struggle until you take your old positions again."
The suffrage anniversary was held in Apollo Hall, New York, May 11 and 12, 1871. Mrs. Griffing read an able report on the work at Washington the previous winter. There were strong objections by a number of ladies to sitting on the platform with Mrs. Woodhull, but Mrs. Stanton said she should be sandwiched between Lucretia Mott and herself and that surely would give her sufficient respectability. She made a fine constitutional argument, to which the most captious could not object. The excitement created by her appearance at the Washington meeting was mild compared to that in New York City where she was becoming so well-known. The great dailies headed all reports, "The Woodhull Convention." The injustice and vindictiveness of the Tribune, that paper which once had been the champion of woman's cause, were especially hard to bear. It rang the changes upon the term "free love," insisted that, because the women allowed Mrs. Woodhull to stand upon their platform and advocate suffrage, they thereby indorsed all her ideas on social questions, and by every possible means it cast odium on the convention.
The suffrage anniversary took place at Apollo Hall, New York, on May 11 and 12, 1871. Mrs. Griffing delivered a comprehensive report on the efforts in Washington the previous winter. Several women strongly objected to sharing the stage with Mrs. Woodhull, but Mrs. Stanton suggested that Woodhull should be flanked by Lucretia Mott and herself, which would surely lend her enough respectability. She made a compelling constitutional argument that even the harshest critics couldn't dispute. The excitement generated by her presence at the Washington meeting was small compared to the buzz in New York City, where she was becoming quite well-known. The major newspapers prominently labeled all their reports as "The Woodhull Convention." The bias and spite from the Tribune, a newspaper that had once been a strong supporter of women's rights, were particularly hard to endure. It repeatedly criticized the term "free love," claimed that because the women allowed Mrs. Woodhull to speak on their platform and promote suffrage, they were endorsing all her views on social issues, and through every possible means, it cast a negative light on the convention.
There is no doubt that the advocates of "free love," in its usually accepted sense, did endeavor to insinuate themselves among the suffrage women and make this movement responsible for their social doctrines, but every great reform has to suffer from similar parasites. The lives of Miss Anthony, Mrs. Mott, Mrs. Stanton, Mrs. Hooker, Mrs. Davis, and of all the old and tried leaders in this cause, form the strongest testimony of their utter repudiation of any such heresy. It was impossible, however, for the world in general to understand their broad ground that it was their business to accept valuable 384 services without inquiring into the private life of the persons who offered them. If this were a mistake, these pioneers, who fought single-handed such a battle as the women of later days can not comprehend, had to learn the fact by experience.
There’s no doubt that the supporters of "free love," in its commonly understood meaning, tried to insert themselves into the women's suffrage movement and make this cause accountable for their social beliefs. However, every major reform has to deal with similar leeches. The lives of Miss Anthony, Mrs. Mott, Mrs. Stanton, Mrs. Hooker, Mrs. Davis, and all the established leaders in this cause provide the strongest evidence of their complete rejection of such heresy. It was difficult for the general public to grasp their wide perspective that it was their responsibility to accept valuable 384 services without probing into the personal lives of those offering them. If this was a mistake, these pioneers, who fought a battle that women today can’t fully understand, had to learn this truth through experience.
The notorious Stephen Pearl Andrews prepared a set of involved and intricate resolutions which were read by Paulina Wright Davis, the chairman, without any thought of their possessing a deeper meaning than appeared on the surface, but they fell flat on the convention, and were neither discussed nor voted upon. The papers got possession of them, nevertheless, declared that they were adopted as part of the platform, read "free love" between the lines, and used them as the basis of many ponderous and prophetic editorials.
The infamous Stephen Pearl Andrews prepared a complicated set of resolutions, which were read by Paulina Wright Davis, the chair, without considering that they might have a deeper meaning than what was obvious. However, they didn’t resonate with the convention and weren’t discussed or voted on. Despite this, the media got hold of them, claimed they were adopted as part of the platform, interpreted "free love" between the lines, and used them as the foundation for many heavy and prophetic editorials.
A national committee was formed of one woman from each State, with Mrs. Stanton as chairman, of which the New York Standard, edited by John Russell Young, said: "Miss Susan B. Anthony holds a modest position, but we can well believe that in any movement for the enfranchisement of women, like MacGregor, wherever she sits will be the head of the table." The New York Democrat commented: "She deals with facts, not theories, but just gets hold of one nail after another and drives it home.... Her words were to the point, as they always are, and abounded in telling hits in every direction." Even the Tribune was generous enough to say: "The ranks of the agitators with whom Captain Anthony is identified contain no one more indiscreet, more reckless or more honest. We have no sort of sympathy with the object to which the fair captain is now devoting her life; but we know no person before the country more single-minded, sincere and unselfish and, for these reasons, more honestly entitled to the regard of a public which will always appreciate upright intentions and disinterested devotion."
A national committee was created featuring one woman from each state, with Mrs. Stanton as the chair. The New York Standard, edited by John Russell Young, stated: "Miss Susan B. Anthony may have a humble role, but we can easily believe that in any movement for women's rights, like MacGregor, she will be the one leading the way." The New York Democrat noted: "She focuses on facts, not theories, tackling one issue at a time and driving it home... Her words are always direct and full of impactful points." Even the Tribune was fair, saying: "In the ranks of the activists Captain Anthony associates with, there's no one more indiscreet, reckless, or honest. While we do not support the cause to which the honorable captain is now dedicating her life, we recognize no one more straightforward, sincere, and selfless, and for these reasons, she is truly deserving of the respect of a public that values integrity and selfless commitment."
In the closing days of May, she wrote to her old paper, The Revolution:
In the final days of May, she wrote to her old paper, The Revolution:
Your "Stand by the Cause," this week, is the timely word to the friends of woman suffrage. The present howl is an old trick of the arch-fiend to divert public thought from the main question, viz: woman's equal freedom 385 and equal power to make and control her own conditions in the state, in the church and, most of all, in the home.
This week's "Stand by the Cause" carries a relevant message for supporters of women's suffrage. The current uproar is an old tactic used by opponents to distract the public from the main issue: women's equal freedom 385 and the equal power to create and control their own circumstances in society, religion, and especially at home.
Though the ballot is the open sesame to equal rights, there is a fundamental law which can not be violated with impunity between woman and man, any more than between man and man; a law stated a hundred years ago by Alexander Hamilton: "Give to a man a right over my subsistence, and he has power over my whole moral being." Woman's subsistence is in the hands of man, and most arbitrarily and unjustly does he exercise his consequent power, making two moral codes: one for himself, with largest latitude—swearing, chewing, smoking, drinking, gambling, libertinism, all winked at—cash and brains giving him a free pass everywhere; another quite unlike this for woman—she must be immaculate. One hair's breadth deviation, even the touch of the hem of the garment of an accused sister, dooms her to the world's scorn. Man demands that his wife shall be above suspicion. Woman must accept her husband as he is, for she is powerless so long as she eats the bread of dependence. Were man today dependent upon woman for his subsistence, I have no doubt he would very soon find himself compelled to square his life to an entirely new code, not a whit less severe than that to which he now holds her. In moral rectitude, we would not have woman less but man more.
While voting is crucial for equal rights, there’s a fundamental principle that can’t be overlooked between men and women, just as there is among men. This principle was articulated a hundred years ago by Alexander Hamilton: "Give a man control over my livelihood, and he has power over my entire moral being." A woman’s livelihood often depends on a man, who frequently wields this power in arbitrary and unjust ways, creating two distinct moral codes: one for himself, filled with freedom—swearing, chewing, smoking, drinking, gambling, and promiscuity are all excused, as money and intelligence provide him with a free pass; and another standard for women—she must remain pure. Even minor infractions, like merely touching the hem of an “accused” sister, make her subject to public judgment. A man expects his wife to be above reproach, whereas a woman must accept her husband as he is, because she lacks power as long as she depends on him financially. If a man were reliant on a woman for his livelihood today, he would undoubtedly have to adhere to a completely new set of strict rules, just as demanding as those he currently imposes on her. In terms of moral integrity, we shouldn't demand less from women, but more from men.
It is to put an end to such heresies as the following, from the Rochester Democrat, that all women should most earnestly labor. That paper begs us not to forget, "that what may be pardonable in a man, speaking of evils generally, may and perhaps ought to be unpardonable in one of the presumably better sex; because there can not and must not be perfect equality between men and women when the disposition to do wrong is under discussion. Women are permitted to be as much better than men as they choose; but there ought to be no law, on or oft the statute books, recognizing their social and political right to be worse or even as bad as men; and it is shameful that intelligent women should claim such a right, or even dare to mention it at all." No human being or class of human beings would venture to talk thus to equals. It is only because women are dependent on men that such cowardly impudence can be dished out to them day after day by puny legislators and editors, themselves often reeking in social corruption which should banish them forever from the presence of womanhood. Yours for an even-handed scale in morals as well as politics, SUSAN B. ANTHONY.
It’s essential for all women to actively combat heresies like the one from the Rochester Democrat. That paper reminds us not to forget that "what might be excusable for a man when discussing wrongs is something that should be unforgivable for the supposedly better sex; because there cannot and must not be perfect equality between men and women regarding the temptation to do wrong. Women can strive to be better than men, but there should be no laws, whether written or unwritten, that permit them to be worse or even as bad as men; and it’s shameful that intelligent women would claim such a right or even think to mention it." No person or group would dare to speak this way to equals. It’s only because women are dependent on men that such cowardly disrespect can be tolerated daily by weak legislators and editors, who are often themselves entrenched in social corruption that should exclude them from the company of women. Yours for fairness in morals and politics, SUSAN B. ANTHONY.
CHAPTER XXIII.
FIRST TRIP TO THE PACIFIC COAST.
1871.
At the close of the New York convention Miss Anthony, Rev. Olympia Brown and Josephine S. Griffing went with Mrs. Hooker to Hartford for a short visit, which it may be imagined was one protracted "business session." Then Miss Anthony hastened to her own home to prepare for a long journey, as she and Mrs. Stanton had decided to make a lecture tour through California. She left Rochester the last day of May, and met Mrs. Stanton in Chicago where a reception was given them by the suffrage club, in its elegant new headquarters. They spoke in a number of cities en route and attended numerous handsome receptions held in their honor. At Denver they were entertained by Governor and Mrs. McCook. Their audiences were large and enthusiastic, the press respectful and often cordial and appreciative.[58] At Laramie City they were 388 accompanied to the station by a hundred women whom Mrs. Stanton addressed from the platform. A letter written by Miss Anthony during the journey contains these beautiful paragraphs:
At the end of the New York convention, Miss Anthony, Rev. Olympia Brown, and Josephine S. Griffing joined Mrs. Hooker for a short visit in Hartford, which was essentially one long "business session." After that, Miss Anthony rushed back home to get ready for a long trip, as she and Mrs. Stanton had decided to go on a lecture tour through California. She left Rochester on the last day of May and met Mrs. Stanton in Chicago, where the suffrage club held a reception for them at its impressive new headquarters. They spoke in several cities along the way and attended many elegant receptions held in their honor. In Denver, they were hosted by Governor and Mrs. McCook. Their audiences were large and enthusiastic, the press was respectful, and often warm and appreciative.[58] In Laramie City, they were sent off to the station by a hundred women, and Mrs. Stanton spoke to them from the platform. A letter written by Miss Anthony during the journey includes these beautiful paragraphs:
We have a drawing-room all to ourselves, and here we are just as cozy and happy as lovers. We look at the prairie schooners slowly moving along with ox-teams, or notice the one lone cabin-light on the endless plains, and Mrs. Stanton will say: "In all that there is real bliss, if only the two are perfect equals, two loving people, neither assuming to control the other." Yes, after all, life is about one and the same thing, whether in the prairie schooner and sod cabin, or the Fifth Avenue palace. Love for and faith in each other alone can make either a heaven, and without these any home is a hell. It is not the outside things which make life, but the inner, the spirit of love which casteth out all devils and bringeth in all angels.
We have a living room just for ourselves, and here we’re as cozy and happy as a couple in love. We watch the covered wagons slowly moving by with oxen, or notice the one cabin light glowing on the endless plains, and Mrs. Stanton will say: "In all of that, there is real happiness, as long as both are true equals, two loving people, neither trying to control the other." Yes, in the end, life is about the same thing, whether in the covered wagon and sod cabin or the Fifth Avenue mansion. Only love and trust in each other can turn either into a paradise, and without these, any home feels like a nightmare. It's not the external factors that shape life, but the internal ones; the spirit of love that drives out all negativity and brings in all positivity.
Ever since 4 o'clock this morning we have been moving over the soil that is really the land of the free and the home of the brave—Wyoming, the Territory in which women are the recognized political equals of men. Women here can say: "What a magnificent country is ours, where every class and caste, color and sex, may find equal freedom, and every woman sit under her own vine and fig tree." What a blessed attainment at last; and that it should be here among these everlasting mountains, midway between the Atlantic and Pacific, seems significant of the true growth of the individual—the center pure, the heart-beats free and equal.
Since 4 o'clock this morning, we’ve been traveling through the land that symbolizes freedom and bravery—Wyoming, where women are recognized as political equals to men. Here, women can say: "What a magnificent country we have, where every class, race, and gender can enjoy equal freedom, and every woman can sit under her own vine and fig tree." What a wonderful achievement at last; and for it to be here among these everlasting mountains, halfway between the Atlantic and Pacific, feels meaningful for the true growth of individuals—the center strong, the heartbeats free and equal.
At Salt Lake City they were the guests of Mr. and Mrs. W.S. Godbe, and were presented to their audience by Mayor Wells, who afterward took them to call on his five wives. The second evening they were introduced by Bishop Orson Pratt. From here Miss Anthony writes to The Revolution:
At Salt Lake City, they were hosted by Mr. and Mrs. W.S. Godbe and were introduced to their audience by Mayor Wells, who later took them to meet his five wives. On the second evening, Bishop Orson Pratt introduced them. From here, Miss Anthony writes to The Revolution:
If I were a believer in special providences, I should say that our being in Salt Lake City at the dedication of the New Liberal Institute was one. On Sunday morning, July 2, this beautiful hall of the Liberal party—Apostate party, the Saints call it—was well filled. The services consisted of invocations, hymns and brief addresses. Messrs. Godbe, Harrison, Lyman and Lawrence seem to be the advance-guard—the high priests of the new order—and as they sang their songs of freedom, poured out their rejoicings over their 389 emancipation from the Theocracy of Brigham, and told of the beatitudes of soul-to-soul communion with the All-Father, my heart was steeped in deepest sympathy with the women around me and, rising at an opportune pause, I asked if a woman and a stranger might be permitted to say a word. At once the entire circle of men on the platform arose and beckoned me forward; and, with a Quaker inspiration not to be repeated, much less put on paper, I asked those men, bubbling over with the divine spirit of freedom for themselves, if they had thought whether the women of their households were today rejoicing in like manner? I can not tell what I said—only this I know, that young and beautiful, old and wrinkled women alike wept, and men said, "I wanted to get out of doors where I could shout."
If I believed in special interventions, I’d say being in Salt Lake City for the dedication of the New Liberal Institute was one of those moments. On Sunday morning, July 2, this beautiful hall of the Liberal party—what the Saints refer to as the Apostate party—was packed. The service included prayers, hymns, and brief speeches. Messrs. Godbe, Harrison, Lyman, and Lawrence seemed to be the pioneers—the high priests of this new movement—and as they sang their songs of freedom, celebrating their 389 liberation from Brigham's Theocracy, and talked about the blessings of deep connection with the All-Father, my heart was filled with deep empathy for the women around me. When there was a suitable pause, I stood up and asked if a woman and a stranger could say a few words. Immediately, all the men on the platform rose and waved me forward; and with an inspiration reminiscent of Quaker gatherings that can’t be repeated or written down, I asked those men, overflowing with the divine spirit of freedom for themselves, if they had thought about whether the women in their lives were celebrating in the same way that day? I can’t remember exactly what I said—all I know is that both young and beautiful women and older, wrinkled ones were in tears, and men expressed their desire to get outside and shout.
The transition of this people into the new life is complicated—is heartrending. Remember that when these men began their rebellion against Brigham, it was simply a protest against his tyranny—his exorbitant tithing system—a mere refusal to render tribute unto him; not at all a disavowal of the Morman religion or of polygamy. But as bond after bond has burst, this last, strongest and tightest one of plurality of wives is beginning to snap asunder. To illustrate: One man, a noble, loving, beautiful spirit—nothing of the tyrant, nothing of the sensualist—with four lovely wives, three of whom I have seen, and in the homes of two of whom I have broken bread, with thirteen loved and loving children—wakes up to the new idea. Four women's hearts breaking, three sets of children who must leave their father that the one-wife system may be realized! I can assure you my heart aches for the man, the women and the children, and cries, "God help them, one and all."
The transition these people are undergoing into their new lives is complicated and heartbreaking. Remember, when these men started their rebellion against Brigham, it was simply a protest against his tyranny—his outrageous tithing system—a refusal to pay him tribute; it wasn't a rejection of the Mormon religion or polygamy. But as each bond has broken, this last, strongest, and tightest bond of having multiple wives is beginning to unravel. For instance, one man, a noble, loving, beautiful spirit—nothing like a tyrant, nothing like a sensualist—with four lovely wives, three of whom I have met, and in the homes of two of whom I have shared meals, along with thirteen beloved and loving children—awakens to this new idea. Four women's hearts are breaking, three sets of children must leave their father so that the one-wife system can be realized! I can assure you my heart aches for the man, the women, and the children, and cries, "God help them, one and all."
Where the man is a brutal tyrant, the problem is comparatively easy. What we have tried to do is to show them that the principle of the subjection of woman to man is the point of attack; and that woman's work in monogamy and polygamy is one and the same—that of planting her feet on the ground of self-support. The saddest feature here is that there really is nothing by which these women can earn an independent livelihood for themselves and their children, no manufacturing establishments, no free schools to teach. Women here, as everywhere, must be able to live honestly and honorably without the aid of men, before it can be possible to save the masses of them from entering into polygamy or prostitution, legal or illegal. Whichever way I turn, whatever phase of social life presents itself, the same conclusion comes: "Independent bread alone can redeem woman from her curse of subjection to man."
Where the man is a cruel tyrant, the issue is relatively straightforward. What we've aimed to demonstrate is that the fundamental problem is the subjugation of women by men; and that women’s roles in both monogamy and polygamy are essentially the same—that of establishing their own self-sufficiency. The most unfortunate aspect here is that there truly are no opportunities for these women to earn a decent living for themselves and their children—no factories, no free schools to teach. Women here, as everywhere, need to be able to live independently and honorably without depending on men before it becomes possible to rescue the majority from turning to polygamy or sex work, whether it's legal or illegal. No matter where I look or what aspect of social life I examine, the same conclusion arises: "Only independent income can free women from their oppression by men."
I attended the Liberals' Fourth of July celebration. Their beautiful hall was packed; their souls were on fire with their new freedom. Never since the first reading of the Declaration of Independence in 1776, were its great truths responded to with such real and deep feeling as on this occasion. I did not intrude myself on them again—but my soul, too, was on fire for freedom for my sex, as was that of every wife and daughter in that assembly. But these men have yet to learn to loose the bonds of power over the women by their side, precisely as have the men in the States and the world over.
I attended the Liberals' Fourth of July celebration. Their beautiful hall was full; everyone was buzzing with their new freedom. Never since the first reading of the Declaration of Independence in 1776 had its profound truths been met with such genuine and deep emotion as this time. I didn’t want to impose on them again—but I too felt passionately about freedom for women, just like every wife and daughter in that crowd. But these men still need to learn how to break the chains of power over the women beside them, just like men in the States and around the world have.
Here is missionary work—not for any "thus saith the Lord" canting priests or echoing priestesses by divine right, but for great, Godlike, humanitarian men and women, who "feel for those in bonds as bound with them." No 390 Phariseeism, no shudders of Puritanic horror, no standing afar off; but a simple, loving, fraternal clasp of hands with these struggling women, and an earnest work with them—not to ameliorate but to abolish the whole system of woman's subjection to man in both polygamy and monogamy.
Here is missionary work—not for any "thus says the Lord" self-righteous priests or echoing priestesses by divine right, but for great, God-like, humanitarian men and women, who "feel for those in chains as if they were bound with them." No 390 Pharisaical attitude, no shudders of Puritan horror, no standing apart; but a simple, loving, brotherly clasp of hands with these struggling women, and a committed effort alongside them—not to improve but to completely eliminate the entire system of women's subjugation to men in both polygamy and monogamy.
In a letter home she says:
In a letter home, she says:
Our afternoon meeting of women alone was a sad spectacle. There was scarcely a sunny, joyous countenance in the whole 300, but a vast number of deep-lined, careworn, long-suffering faces—more so, even, than those of our own pioneer farmers' and settlers' wives, as I have many times looked into them. Their life of dependence on men is even more dreadful than that of monogamy, for here it is two, six, a dozen women and their great broods of children each and all dependent on the one man. Think of fifteen, twenty, thirty pairs of shoes at one strike, or as many hats and dresses!...
Our afternoon meeting with just the women was a sad sight. Among the 300, there were hardly any happy, smiling faces—most looked deeply lined, tired, and worn out—more so than what I've seen on the faces of our own pioneer farmers' and settlers' wives. Their lives, dependent on men, are even more tragic than that of monogamy, as here there are two, six, or even a dozen women, all with their large groups of children, completely relying on one man. Just imagine fifteen, twenty, or thirty pairs of shoes all at once, or that many hats and dresses!...
But when I look back into the States, what sorrow, what broken hearts are there because of husbands taking to themselves new friendships, just as really wives as are these, and the legal wife feeling even more wronged and neglected. I have not the least doubt but the suffering there equals that here—the difference is that here it is a religious duty for the man to commit the crime against the first wife, and for her to accept the new-comer into the family with a cheerful face; while there the wrong is done against law and public sentiment. But even the most devoted Mormon women say it takes a great deal of grace to accept the other wives, and be just as happy when the husband devotes himself to any of them as to herself, yet the faithful Saint attains to such angelic heights and finds her glory and the Lord's in so doing. The system of the subjection of woman here finds its limit, and she touches the lowest depths of her degradation.
But when I think back to the States, I see so much sorrow and heartbreak because husbands are forming new relationships, just as genuine as their marriages, leaving the legal wife feeling even more wronged and overlooked. I'm sure that the suffering there is just as intense as it is here—the difference is that here, it's viewed as a religious duty for a man to betray his first wife, and for her to welcome the newcomer into the family with a smile; while there, the wrong is against the law and public opinion. Yet even the most devoted Mormon women say it takes a lot of strength to accept the other wives and to feel just as happy when the husband spends time with them as he does with her. Still, the faithful Saint reaches such angelic heights and finds her glory and the Lord's by doing so. Here, the system of women’s oppression has its limits, and she ultimately reaches the lowest point of her degradation.
The empire totters and Brigham feels the ground sliding from under his feet. These men will be very likely to try the "variety" plan of Stephen Pearl Andrews, but the women will hate that even worse than polygamy. One man came to me relating a new vision, direct from Christ himself, to that effect, and I said: "Away with your man-visions! Women propose to reject them all, and begin to dream dreams for themselves."
The empire is shaky, and Brigham feels the ground slipping away beneath him. These men will probably try the "variety" plan of Stephen Pearl Andrews, but the women will dislike that even more than polygamy. One man approached me with a new vision, supposedly from Christ himself, and I said, "Forget your man-visions! Women are going to reject all of them and start dreaming dreams for themselves."
While at Salt Lake they received complimentary passes to California and throughout that State, from Governor Leland Stanford, always a helpful friend to woman suffrage. They reached San Francisco July 9, and took rooms at the Grand Hotel, at that time the best in the city. Their coming had been heralded by the press and they experienced the royal California welcome, receiving flowers, fruit, calls and invitations in abundance. Mrs. Stanton made her first speech in Platt's Hall to an audience of 1,200; all seemed delighted and the papers were very complimentary. At that time the whole coast was much excited over the murder of A.P. Crittenden 391 by Laura D. Fair, and the entire weight of opinion was against her. Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton, always ready to defend their sex, determined to hear the story from her own lips, hoping for the sake of womanhood to learn some mitigating circumstances. The afternoon papers came out with an attack upon them for making this visit to the jail, and in the evening at Miss Anthony's first lecture there was an immense audience, including many friends of Crittenden, determined that there should be no justification of the woman who killed him.
While in Salt Lake, they received complimentary passes to California and throughout the state from Governor Leland Stanford, who was always a supportive ally of women's suffrage. They arrived in San Francisco on July 9 and booked rooms at the Grand Hotel, which was considered the best in the city at that time. Their arrival was widely publicized, and they were greeted with a warm California welcome, receiving an abundance of flowers, fruit, visits, and invitations. Mrs. Stanton delivered her first speech at Platt's Hall to an audience of 1,200 people; everyone seemed thrilled, and the newspapers were very supportive. At that time, the entire coast was buzzing with the news of A.P. Crittenden's murder by Laura D. Fair, and public opinion largely condemned her. Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton, always eager to defend their gender, decided to hear Laura's side of the story directly, hoping to find some circumstances that would be more favorable for women. The afternoon papers criticized them for visiting her in jail, and that evening, at Miss Anthony's first lecture, there was a huge crowd in attendance, including many friends of Crittenden, who were determined that there would be no defense of the woman who killed him.
Miss Anthony made a strong speech on "The Power of the Ballot," which was well received until she came to the peroration. Her purpose had been to prove false the theory that all women are supported and protected by men. She had demonstrated clearly the fact that in the life of nearly every woman there came a time when she must rely on herself alone. She asserted that while she might grant, for the sake of the argument, that every man protected his own wife and daughter, his own mother and sister, the columns of the daily papers gave ample evidence that man did not protect woman as woman. She gave sundry facts to illustrate this point, among them the experience of Sister Irene, who had established a foundling hospital in New York two years before, and at the close of the first year reported 1,300 little waifs laid in the basket at the door. These figures, she said, proved that there were at least 1,300 women in that city who had not been protected by men. She continued impressively: "If all men had protected all women as they would have their own wives and daughters protected, you would have no Laura Fair in your jail tonight."
Miss Anthony gave a powerful speech on "The Power of the Ballot," which was well received until she reached the conclusion. Her aim was to disprove the idea that all women are cared for and protected by men. She clearly showed that almost every woman faces a time when she must depend on herself. She claimed that even if we accept, for the sake of argument, that every man protects his own wife and daughter, his own mother and sister, the daily newspapers provided plenty of evidence that men do not protect women as a whole. She shared various facts to illustrate this, including the story of Sister Irene, who had opened a foundling hospital in New York two years prior and at the end of the first year reported 1,300 abandoned babies left at the door. These numbers, she said, proved that at least 1,300 women in that city had not been protected by men. She continued powerfully: "If all men had protected all women like they would their own wives and daughters, you wouldn’t have a Laura Fair in your jail tonight."
Then burst forth a tremendous hissing, seemingly from every part of the house! She had heard that sound in the old anti-slavery days and quietly stood until there came a lull, when she repeated the sentence. Again came a storm of hisses, but this time they were mingled with cheers. Again she waited for a pause, and then made the same assertion for the third time. Her courage challenged the admiration of the audience, which broke out into a roar of applause, and she closed by saying: 392 "I declare to you that woman must not depend upon the protection of man, but must be taught to protect herself, and there I take my stand."
Then there was a loud hissing sound coming from every part of the house! She remembered that noise from the old anti-slavery days and stood quietly until it quieted down, then she repeated her statement. Again, there was a surge of hisses, but this time they were mixed with cheers. She waited for another break and made the same point for the third time. Her bravery earned the admiration of the audience, which erupted into a loud applause, and she finished by saying: 392 "I tell you that women should not rely on the protection of men, but should be taught to protect themselves, and that’s where I stand."
The next morning, however, she was denounced by the city papers as having vindicated the murder and justified the life which Mrs. Fair had led! Those who had not heard the lecture believed these reports, and other papers in the State took up the cry. Even the press of New York and other eastern cities joined in the chorus, but the latter was much more severe on Mrs. Stanton, who in newspaper interviews did not hesitate to declare her sympathy for Mrs. Fair; and yet for some reason, perhaps because Miss Anthony had dared refer boldly to crime in high places in San Francisco, the batteries there were turned wholly upon her. In her diary she says: "Never in all my hard experience have I been under such fire." So terrific was the onslaught that no one could come to her rescue with a public explanation or defense. Miss Anthony had cut San Francisco in a sore spot and it did not propose to give her another chance to use the scalpel. She attempted to speak in adjacent towns but her journal says: "The shadow of the newspapers hung over me." At length she resolved to cancel all her lecture engagements and wait quietly until the storm passed over and the public mind grew calm. She writes in her diary, a week later: "Some friends called but the clouds over me are so heavy I could not greet them as I would have liked. I never before was so cut down." She tells the story to her sister Mary, who replies:
The next morning, though, the local newspapers accused her of supporting the murder and justifying the life that Mrs. Fair had lived! Those who hadn’t attended the lecture believed these claims, and other papers around the state joined in. Even the press from New York and other eastern cities chimed in, but they were much harsher on Mrs. Stanton, who didn’t hesitate to express her support for Mrs. Fair in newspaper interviews; yet, for some reason—possibly because Miss Anthony had boldly mentioned crime among the powerful in San Francisco—the full force of the criticism fell on her. In her diary, she wrote: "Never in all my hard experience have I been under such fire." The attack was so fierce that no one could come to her aid with a public explanation or defense. Miss Anthony had struck a nerve in San Francisco, and they weren’t about to give her another chance to dig in. She tried to speak in nearby towns, but her journal states: "The shadow of the newspapers hung over me." Eventually, she decided to cancel all her lecture engagements and wait quietly until the storm passed and the public mood calmed down. A week later, she noted in her diary: "Some friends called, but the clouds over me are so heavy I could not greet them as I would have liked. I have never before felt so beaten down." She shared the story with her sister Mary, who replied:
I am so sorry for you. It will spoil your pleasure, and then I think of that load of debt which you hoped to lighten, yet I should have felt ashamed of you if you had failed to say a word in behalf of that wretched woman. I am sick of one-sided justice; for the same crime, men glorified and women gibbeted. If your words for Mrs. Fair have made your trip a failure, so let it be—it is no disgrace to you. It is scandalous the way the papers talk of you, but stick to what you feel to be right and let the world wag.
I really feel for you. This is going to spoil your enjoyment, and I think about that debt you wanted to pay down. Still, I would have felt embarrassed for you if you hadn't said anything to support that poor woman. I’m tired of unfair justice; for the same crime, men get praised while women are punished. If standing up for Mrs. Fair has messed up your trip, then so be it—it’s not something to be ashamed of. It’s outrageous how the media talks about you, but stick to what you believe is right and let the world handle it.
On July 22, Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton started for the Yosemite Valley, a harder trip in those days even than now. It is best described in her own words:
On July 22, Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton set out for Yosemite Valley, a tougher journey back then than it is today. It's best described in her own words:
Mrs. Stanton, writing to The Revolution, and S.B.A., scribbling home, are 393 thirty miles out of the wonderful valley of the Yosemite.... We shall have compassed the Calaveras Big Trees and the Yosemite Valley in twelve days out from Stockton, where we expect to arrive August 2. Mrs. Stanton is to speak there Thursday night and I at San Jose, where I shall learn whether the press has forgiven me. We both lecture the rest of the week, and Sunday get into San Francisco, speak at different points the 7th and 8th, and on the 9th go to the Geysers and stay two nights; then out again and on with meetings almost every night till the end of the month. We shall visit lakes Donner and Tahoe and some other points of interest as they come in our reach. Mr. Hutchings would not take a penny for our three days' sojourn in the valley, horses and all, so our trip is much less expensive than we had anticipated.
Mrs. Stanton, writing to The Revolution, and S.B.A., jotting down notes at home, are 393 thirty miles away from the stunning Yosemite Valley... We plan to explore the Calaveras Big Trees and Yosemite Valley twelve days after leaving Stockton, aiming to arrive there on August 2. Mrs. Stanton is set to speak that Thursday night, and I'll be in San Jose to see if the press has forgiven me. We both have lectures throughout the week, and on Sunday, we’ll head to San Francisco, speaking at different venues on the 7th and 8th. On the 9th, we’ll visit the Geysers and stay for two nights; after that, we’ll have meetings almost every night until the end of the month. We intend to check out Donner and Tahoe lakes and other interesting places as they come up. Mr. Hutchings kindly offered us a complimentary three-day stay in the valley, including horses, so our trip is shaping up to be much cheaper than we expected.
With our private carriage we drove three miles nearer the top of the mountain than the stage passengers go. Mrs. Stanton and I each had a pair of linen bloomers which we donned last Thursday morning at Crane's Flats, and we arrived at the brow of the mountain at 9 o'clock. Our horses were fitted out with men's saddles, and Mrs. Stanton, perfectly confident that she would have no trouble, while I was all doubts as to my success, insisted that I should put my foot over the saddle first, which I did by a terrible effort. Then came her turn, but she was so fat and her pony so broad that her leg wouldn't go over into the stirrup nor around the horn of a sidesaddle, so after trying several different saddles she commenced the walk down hill with her guide leading her horse, and commanded me to ride on with the other. By this time the sun was pouring down and my horse was slowly fastening one foot after another in the rocks and earth and thus carefully easing me down the steeps, while my guide baited me on by saying, "You are doing nicely, that is the worst place on the trail," when the fact was it hardly began to match what was coming.
With our private carriage, we drove three miles closer to the top of the mountain than the stagecoach passengers go. Mrs. Stanton and I each wore a pair of linen bloomers that we put on last Thursday morning at Crane's Flats, and we reached the mountain's summit at 9 o'clock. Our horses had men's saddles, and Mrs. Stanton, completely confident she wouldn't have any trouble, insisted that I go first, even though I was quite unsure about my success. I managed to swing my foot over the saddle with great difficulty. Then it was her turn, but she was too heavy and her pony was too wide for her leg to reach the stirrup or the horn of a sidesaddle. After trying several different saddles, she decided to walk down the hill with her guide leading her horse, telling me to ride on with the others. By this time, the sun was blazing, and my horse was carefully navigating the rocks and dirt, slowly easing me down the steep parts, while my guide kept encouraging me with, "You're doing great, that's the hardest part of the trail," even though it barely compared to what lay ahead.
At half-past two we reached Hutchings', and a more used-up mortal than I could not well exist, save poor Mrs. Stanton, four hours behind in the broiling sun, fairly sliding down the mountain. I had Mr. Hutchings fit out my guide with lunch and tea, and send him right back to her. About six she arrived, pretty nearly jelly. We both had a hot bath and she went supperless to bed, but I took my rations. Presently John K. McLean and party, of Oakland, came in. They had scaled Glacier Point that day and were about as tired and fagged as we. The next day Mrs. Stanton kept her bed till nearly noon; but I was up and on my horse at eight and off with the McLean party for the Nevada and Vernal Falls....
At 2:30, we reached Hutchings', and I couldn't have been more exhausted, except for poor Mrs. Stanton, who had spent four hours in the hot sun, nearly sliding down the mountain. I had Mr. Hutchings arrange for my guide to get lunch and tea and sent him right back to her. She finally arrived around six, almost like jelly. We both had a hot bath, and she went to bed without dinner, while I ate my rations. Soon after, John K. McLean and his group from Oakland arrived. They had climbed Glacier Point that day and were just as tired and worn out as we were. The next day, Mrs. Stanton stayed in bed until nearly noon; however, I was up and on my horse by eight, heading out with the McLean group to see Nevada and Vernal Falls....
Saturday morning, with Stephen M. Cunningham for my guide, I went up the Mariposa trail seven miles to Artist's Point, and there under a big pine tree, on a rock jutting out over the valley, sat and gazed at the wondrous walls with their peaks and spires and domes. I could take in not only the whole circuit of the mountain tops but the valley enshrined below, with the beautiful Merced river meandering over its pebbly bed among the grass and shrubs and towering pines. We reached the hotel at 7 P.M.—tired—tired. Not a muscle, not one inch of flesh from my heels to my hands that was not sore and lame, but I took a good rub-off with the powerful camphor from the 394 bottle mother so carefully filled for me, and went to bed with orders for my horse at 6 A.M.
Saturday morning, guided by Stephen M. Cunningham, I hiked up the Mariposa trail for seven miles to Artist's Point. There, under a large pine tree, I sat on a rock that jutted over the valley, admiring the stunning walls with their peaks, spires, and domes. I could see not only the complete circuit of the mountaintops but also the valley below, with the beautiful Merced River winding over its pebbly bed among the grass, shrubs, and towering pines. We reached the hotel at 7 P.M.—exhausted—truly exhausted. Every muscle and inch of flesh from my heels to my hands was sore and aching, but I treated myself to a good rub-down with the strong camphor from the 394 bottle my mother had filled for me, and went to bed, with my horse scheduled for 6 A.M.
Sunday morning's devotion for Minister McLean and the Rochester strong-minded was to ride two and a half miles to Mirror lake, and there wait and watch the coming of the sun over the rocky spires, reflected in the placid water. Such a glory mortal never beheld elsewhere. The lake was smooth as finest glass; the lofty granite peaks with their trees and shrubs were reflected more perfectly than costliest mirror ever sent back the face of most beautiful woman, and as the sun slowly emerged from behind a point of rock, the thinnest, flakiest white clouds approached or hung round it, and the reflection shaded them with the most delicate, yet most perfect and richest hues of the rainbow. And while we watched and worshipped we trembled lest some rude fish or bubble should break our mirror and forever shatter the picture seemingly wrought for our special eyes that Sunday morning. Then and there, in that holy hour, I thought of you, dear mother, in the body, and of dear father in the beyond, with eyes unsealed, and of Ann Eliza and Thomas King. I talked to John of them and wondered if they too sat not with us in that holy of holies not made with hands. O, how nothing seemed man-made temples, creeds and codes!
Sunday morning's devotion for Minister McLean and the Rochester strong-minded was to ride two and a half miles to Mirror Lake and wait there to watch the sunrise over the rocky peaks, reflected in the calm water. It was a beauty unlike anything else. The lake was as smooth as glass; the towering granite peaks, with their trees and shrubs, reflected even more perfectly than the most expensive mirror could ever reflect the face of the most beautiful woman. As the sun slowly rose from behind a rock, the thinnest, fluffiest white clouds drifted around it, tinted with the softest yet most vibrant hues of the rainbow. While we watched in awe, we felt a tinge of worry that a fish or ripple might disturb our mirror and ruin the image created just for us that Sunday morning. In that sacred moment, I thought of you, dear mother, in this life, and of dear father in the beyond, with open eyes, and of Ann Eliza and Thomas King. I spoke to John about them and wondered if they too were sitting with us in that sacred space not made by human hands. Oh, how insignificant man-made temples, beliefs, and rules seemed!
At San Jose Miss Anthony was the guest of Rev. and Mrs. Charles G. Ames. Her audience was small but appreciative, and the Mercury, edited by J.J. Owen, said: "After all the mean notices by certain of the daily papers in San Francisco, her hearers were astonished at the masterly character of her address. She held her audience delighted for an hour and forty minutes." From here she went to the Geysers, riding on the front seat with driver Foss, and she says in her diary: "On the way out he explained to me the philosophy of fast driving down the steep mountain sides; and on the way back he unfolded to me the sad story of his life."
At San Jose, Miss Anthony stayed with Rev. and Mrs. Charles G. Ames. Her audience was small but very appreciative, and the Mercury, edited by J.J. Owen, stated: "After all the unfavorable comments by some of the daily newspapers in San Francisco, her listeners were amazed by the impressive quality of her speech. She kept her audience engaged for an hour and forty minutes." From there, she traveled to the Geysers, sitting in the front seat with driver Foss, and she wrote in her diary: "On the way out, he explained to me the philosophy of fast driving down the steep mountain slopes; and on the way back, he shared with me the sad story of his life."
Miss Anthony spoke at a number of small towns but it did not seem advisable for her to try again in San Francisco, so she devoted herself to contributing in every possible way to the success of Mrs. Stanton's lectures. On August 22 the latter completed her tour and left for the East, but Miss Anthony decided to accept the numerous calls to go up into Oregon and Washington Territory. She went to Oakland for a brief visit with Mrs. Randall, the Mary Perkins who used to teach in her childhood's home more than thirty years before, and her diary says: "They are glad to see me and we have enjoyed talking over old times. They are wholly oblivious to our reform 395 agitation and I am glad to get out of it for a while." But a few days later she called on the Curtis family, who were interested in reforms, and wrote: "I got back into my own world again and the springs of thought and conversation were quickly loosened. It is marvelous how far apart the two worlds are." She started on the ship Idaho for Portland, August 25. The sea was very rough, they were seven days making the trip and, judging from the almost illegible entries in the diary, it was not a pleasant one:
Miss Anthony spoke in several small towns, but it didn’t seem wise for her to try again in San Francisco, so she focused on supporting Mrs. Stanton's lectures in every possible way. On August 22, Mrs. Stanton wrapped up her tour and headed East, but Miss Anthony decided to accept the many invitations to travel to Oregon and Washington Territory. She visited Oakland briefly to see Mrs. Randall, the Mary Perkins who had taught in her childhood home over thirty years ago. Her diary mentions: "They are happy to see me and we’ve enjoyed reminiscing about old times. They are completely unaware of our reform 395 efforts, and I’m glad to step away from it for a bit." A few days later, she visited the Curtis family, who were interested in reforms, and wrote: "I got back into my own world again, and the flow of thought and conversation quickly reemerged. It’s incredible how distant the two worlds are." She departed on the ship Idaho for Portland on August 25. The sea was quite rough, and the journey took seven days, and judging by the almost illegible entries in her diary, it wasn’t a pleasant trip:
1st day.—I feel forlorn enough thus left alone on the ocean but I am in for it and bound to go through.... Before 6 o'clock my time came and old ocean received my first contribution.
1st day.—I feel pretty alone out here on the ocean, but I have to tough it out and see this through.... Before 6 o'clock, my time came, and the sea got my first offering.
2d day.—Strong gale and rough sea. Tried to dress—no use—back to my berth and there I lay all day. Everybody groaning, babies crying, mothers scolding, the men making quite as much fuss as the women.
2nd day.—Strong wind and rough seas. I tried to get dressed—no luck—so I went back to bed and stayed there all day. Everyone was groaning, babies were crying, mothers were scolding, and the men were making just as much noise as the women.
3d day.—Tried to get up but in vain. In the afternoon staggered up on deck—men stretched out on all sides looking as wretched as I felt—glad to get back to bed. Captain sent some frizzled ham and hard tack, with his compliments. Sea growing heavier all the time.
3rd day.—I tried to get up but couldn't. In the afternoon, I managed to make it on deck—men sprawled out everywhere looking as miserable as I felt—and I was relieved to get back to bed. The captain sent some crispy ham and hardtack, with his regards. The sea kept getting rougher.
4th day.—Terribly rough all night. Could not sleep for the thought that every swell might end the ship's struggles. Felt much nearer to the dear ones who have crossed the great river than to those on this side. Out of sight of land all day and ship making only two and a half miles an hour.
4th day.—It was really rough all night. I couldn’t sleep because I kept thinking that each wave might be the end of the ship’s fight. I felt much closer to those I love who have passed away than to those here with me. We were out of sight of land all day, and the ship was only going two and a half miles an hour.
5th day.—The same pitching down into the ocean's depths, the same unbounded waste of surging waters, but a slight lessening of the sea-sickness.
5th day.—Still the same plunge into the ocean's depths, the same vast expanse of churning waters, but a slight decrease in the seasickness.
6th day.—Quite steady this morning. Went on deck and met several pleasant people. Took my spirit-lamp and treated the captain's table to some delicious tea.
6th day.—Pretty calm this morning. I went on deck and met some nice people. I brought my spirit lamp and made some delicious tea for the captain's table.
7th day.—First word this morning, "bar in sight." The shores look beautiful. All faces are bright and cheery and many appear not seen before. I felt well enough to discuss the woman question with several of the passengers. Arrived at Portland at 10 P.M., glad indeed to touch foot on land again.
7th day.—First word this morning, "land in sight." The shores look beautiful. Everyone's faces are bright and cheerful, and many look like people I haven’t seen before. I felt well enough to discuss the women's issues with several passengers. We arrived in Portland at 10 PM, really glad to be on solid ground again.
In the first letter home she says:
In the first letter home, she says:
Abigail Scott Duniway, editor of the New Northwest, was my first caller this morning. I like her appearance and she will be business manager of my lectures. The second caller was Mr. Murphy, city editor of the Herald, and the third Rev. T.L. Eliot, of the Unitarian church, son of Rev. William Eliot, of St. Louis. I am to take tea at his house next Monday. I am not to speak until Wednesday, and thus give myself time to get my head straightened and, I hope, my line of argument. Mrs. Duniway thinks I will find two months of profitable work in Oregon and Washington Territory, but I hardly believe it possible. If meetings pay so as to give me hope of adding to my 396 $350 in the San Francisco Bank (my share of the profits on Mrs. Stanton's and my lectures, which we divided evenly), making it reach $2,000 or even $1,000 by December first, I shall plod away.
Abigail Scott Duniway, the editor of the New Northwest, was my first visitor this morning. I really like her appearance, and she will manage the business aspect of my lectures. The second visitor was Mr. Murphy, the city editor of the Herald, and the third was Rev. T.L. Eliot from the Unitarian church, who is the son of Rev. William Eliot from St. Louis. I’m scheduled to have tea at his home next Monday. I won’t be speaking until Wednesday, giving myself time to organize my thoughts and hopefully clarify my arguments. Mrs. Duniway thinks I’ll find two months of valuable work in Oregon and Washington Territory, but I’m not so sure that’s possible. If the meetings are profitable enough to help me increase my 396 $350 in the San Francisco Bank (my share of the profits from the lectures by Mrs. Stanton and me, which we split evenly), to reach $2,000 or even $1,000 by December first, then I’ll continue.
I miss Mrs. Stanton, still I can not but enjoy the feeling that the people call on me, and the fact that I have an opportunity to sharpen my wits a little by answering questions and doing the chatting, instead of merely sitting a lay figure and listening to the brilliant scintillations as they emanate from her never-exhausted magazine. There is no alternative—whoever goes into a parlor or before an audience with that woman does it at the cost of a fearful overshadowing, a price which I have paid for the last ten years, and that cheerfully, because I felt that our cause was most profited by her being seen and heard, and my best work was making the way clear for her.
I miss Mrs. Stanton, but I find enjoyment in the fact that people come to me, and I appreciate the opportunity to sharpen my mind a bit by answering questions and having conversations, instead of just quietly listening to the brilliant ideas that come from her endless resource. There’s no choice—anyone who steps into a room or faces an audience with her does so knowing they might be overshadowed, a cost I've willingly paid for the last ten years because I believe our cause greatly benefits from her presence and my best contribution has been making space for her.
Miss Anthony could not entirely recover from the disappointment of her reception in San Francisco, but a letter written to Mrs. Stanton, just before her first lecture in Oregon, shows no regrets but a wish that she had put the case even more strongly:
Miss Anthony couldn't fully bounce back from the disappointment of her welcome in San Francisco, but a letter she wrote to Mrs. Stanton, just before her first lecture in Oregon, expresses no regrets, only a desire that she had presented her case even more forcefully:
I am awaiting my Wednesday night execution with fear and trembling such as I never before dreamed of, but to the rack I must go, though another San Francisco torture be in store for me.... The real fact is we ought to be ashamed of ourselves that we failed to say the whole truth and illustrate it too by the one terrible example in their jail. That would have caused not me alone but both of us to be hissed out of the hall and hooted out of that Godless city—Godless in its treading of womanhood under its heel. I assure you, as I rolled on the ocean last week feeling that the very next strain might swamp the ship, and thinking over all my sins of omission and commission, there was nothing undone which haunted me like that failure to speak the word at San Francisco over again and more fully. I would rather today have the satisfaction of having said the true and needful thing on Laura Fair and the social evil, with the hisses and hoots of San Francisco and the entire nation around me, than all that you or I could possibly experience from their united eulogies with that one word unsaid. To my mind the failure to put our heads together and work up that lecture grows every day a greater blunder, if nothing more. It was like going down into South Carolina and failing to illustrate human oppression by negro slavery. I hope you are not haunted with it as I am. God helping me, I will yet ease my spirit of the load.
I’m facing my execution on Wednesday night with a level of fear and anxiety I never thought I would experience, but I have to endure this torture, even though it feels like another nightmare waiting for me in San Francisco. The truth is, we should be ashamed for not fully speaking out and revealing the harsh reality of what we witnessed in that jail. If we had, it wouldn’t just have been me getting booed out of that hall; both of us would have faced the anger of that uncaring city—uncaring for how it treats women so poorly. I can tell you, as I floated in the ocean last week, feeling like the next wave might capsize our boat, and reflecting on all the things I didn’t handle correctly, nothing troubled me more than lacking the courage to speak out clearly about what happened in San Francisco. I would have preferred to face the boos and jeers of San Francisco and the entire nation for telling the truth about Laura Fair and the social issues involved rather than accept any praise while leaving that crucial word unspoken. To me, our failure to collaborate and prepare that lecture feels like an increasing mistake every day, if nothing else. It felt like going to South Carolina and ignoring the reality of human oppression through slavery. I hope you’re not burdened by this like I am. With God’s help, I will find a way to free my soul from this weight.
After this lecture she wrote again:
After this lecture, she wrote again:
The first fire is passed. I send you the Bulletin and Oregonian notices. I have not seen the Democratic paper—the Herald—but am told it says Miss Anthony failed to interest her audience. Not a person stirred save when I made them laugh. But tomorrow night's audience will tell the people's estimate. My speech then will be on the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments. Last 397 night I made the San Francisco speech, but was not nearly so free and easy in the brain-working; still I got my points clearly stated. The wet blanket is now somewhat off. I hope to present the fact of our right to vote under these amendments with a great deal more freedom. If I am able to do so, I shall talk to women alone Saturday afternoon on the social evil; then, if interest warrants, answer objections Monday evening, and close here. I have contracted for one-half the gross receipts of evening and the entire receipts of afternoon lectures.
The first event is done. I’m sending you the Bulletin and Oregonian announcements. I haven’t seen the Democratic paper—the Herald—but I’ve heard it claims Miss Anthony didn’t engage with her audience. No one reacted except when I made them laugh. But tomorrow night’s audience will really show how people feel. My speech then will focus on the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments. Last 397 night, I gave a speech in San Francisco, but I wasn’t as relaxed in my thinking; still, I managed to get my points across clearly. The initial pressure has lifted a bit now. I hope to present our right to vote under these amendments with much more confidence. If I can, I plan to talk to women alone on Saturday afternoon about social issues; then, if there’s enough interest, I’ll address objections on Monday evening and wrap things up here. I’ve arranged to receive half of the gross receipts from the evening lectures and all the receipts from the afternoon ones.
I want to tell you that with my gray silk I wore a pink bow at my throat and a narrow pink ribbon in my hair! Mrs. Duniway is delighted, so you see my tide is turning a little from that terrible, killing experience. You never received such wholesale praise—I never such wholesale censure. But enough; it is a comfort to get a little outside assurance again.
I want to share that with my gray silk dress, I wore a pink bow at my throat and a narrow pink ribbon in my hair! Mrs. Duniway is excited, so you see my luck is improving a bit after that awful, heartbreaking experience. You have never received such wide praise—I have never faced such wide criticism. But enough; it’s nice to get a little external reassurance again.
Miss Anthony met with a friendly reception from the press of Oregon. She was extensively interviewed by the leading papers and reported in a complimentary manner. The Oregonian thus closed a column account: "The audience, which listened attentively and with evident deep interest to this address, was large and chiefly composed of the intelligent portion of our citizens. Miss Anthony talked clearly, more concisely than the average speaker, kept the thread of her logic well in hand and, it must be confessed, made a strong argument, though we can hardly admit that it was conclusive. She is a fluent speaker and well sustains the cause she advocates." The Herald said in a lengthy interview: "Her conversation is fluent and concise, each word expressing its full complement of meaning. Her system of argument is logical and, in contradistinction to the sex in general, she does not depend on mere assertions but gives proofs to carry conviction."[59]
Miss Anthony received a warm welcome from the press in Oregon. She was interviewed extensively by the major papers, and the reports were highly complimentary. The Oregonian concluded a column about her visit: "The audience, who listened attentively and with clear interest to this address, was large and mainly made up of the educated members of our community. Miss Anthony spoke clearly, more concisely than most speakers, maintained a strong logical thread throughout, and, it must be said, made a compelling argument, although we can’t quite say it was definitive. She is an articulate speaker and effectively supports the cause she represents." The Herald mentioned in a detailed interview: "Her conversation flows smoothly and is concise, with each word conveying its full meaning. Her style of argument is logical and, unlike many, she doesn’t rely on mere claims but provides evidence to back up her points."[59]
The Bulletin thus began a fine report: "As a speaker she has the happy faculty of presenting her subject in a clear 398 and convincing manner. Her style is forcible and argumentative. She contents herself with facts—presenting them in plain language, resting her case upon these, unaided by sophistry and the blinding influence of oratory." This paper, however, was very severe upon her doctrines, declaring editorially that they were "mischievous, revolutionary and impracticable, and would result in anarchy in homes and chaos in society." Mrs. Duniway's paper, the New Northwest, said: "Miss Anthony is a stirring and vigorous worker, a profound and logical speaker, has a truly wonderful influence over her audiences and produces conviction wherever she goes.... She has a peculiarly happy manner of using the right word in the right place, never hesitates in her language, and is evidently as brimful of argument at the close of her lectures as at their beginning. She has awakened the dormant feelings of duty and true womanhood in many a woman's heart in Portland, and scores of ladies in our community who never before gave the question a moment's consideration are now eager for the ballot."
The Bulletin started with a great report: "As a speaker, she has the impressive ability to present her subject in a clear 398 and convincing way. Her style is strong and argumentative. She relies on facts—laying them out in straightforward language, supporting her case with these, without using trickery or the dazzling effects of rhetoric." However, this paper was very harsh on her beliefs, stating editorially that they were "harmful, revolutionary, and impractical, and would lead to chaos in homes and disorder in society." Mrs. Duniway's publication, the New Northwest, commented: "Miss Anthony is an inspiring and dynamic worker, a deep and logical speaker, has an extraordinary influence over her audiences, and creates conviction wherever she goes.... She has a unique talent for using the right word in the right place, never falters in her speech, and is obviously just as full of arguments at the end of her lectures as she is at the beginning. She has sparked feelings of duty and true womanhood in many women's hearts in Portland, and many women in our community who never considered the issue before are now eager for the vote."
From Portland Miss Anthony wrote to The Revolution:
From Portland, Miss Anthony wrote to The Revolution:
There is something lovely in this Oregon climate beyond any I have yet known on either side the Rocky mountains. It is neither too hot nor too cold, but a delightful medium which I enjoy as I sit this second September Sunday in my room at the St. Charles Hotel, with its windows opening upon the broad and beautiful Willamette. I am surprised at the size of this city, and the evidences of business and solid wealth all about....
There's something amazing about the Oregon climate that I haven't felt anywhere else near the Rocky Mountains. It’s neither too hot nor too cold; it’s a perfect mix that I truly enjoy while I sit here on this second September Sunday in my room at the St. Charles Hotel, looking out the windows over the wide and beautiful Willamette. I'm struck by how large this city is and the signs of bustling businesses and solid wealth all around...
John Chinaman too is here, cooking, washing and ironing, quiet and meek-looking as in San Francisco. The Republicans of this coast, like the Democrats, talk and resolve against him for political effect, merely to cater to the ignorant voters of their party. They say he can not be naturalized on account of some stipulation in the old treaty with China, when they know or ought to know that the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments have as effectually blotted the word "white" out of all United States treaties and naturalization laws, as out of all the State and Territorial constitutions and statutes. Their pretence that the Chinaman may not become a citizen of the United States, precisely the same as an African, German or Irishman, is matched only by their denial of citizenship to the women of the entire nation. Under the old regime it was the negro with whom we had to make common cause in our demand for the practical recognition of our right to representation. In snatching the black man from our side, the Republicans, out of pure sympathy doubtless, lest we should be without any "male" compeer in our degradation, 399 leave the innocent Chinaman to comfort and console us. Are we not most unreasonable in our dissatisfaction with the company our fathers and brothers constitutionally rank with us—idiots, lunatics, convicts, Chinamen?
John Chinaman is here too, cooking, washing, and ironing, looking quiet and humble just like in San Francisco. The Republicans on this coast, like the Democrats, talk and complain about him for political gain, trying to appeal to the misinformed voters in their party. They say he can’t be naturalized because of some provision in the old treaty with China, when they know—or should know—that the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments have effectively removed the word "white" from all U.S. treaties and naturalization laws, just as it has from all State and Territorial constitutions and statutes. Their assertion that the Chinaman can’t become a citizen of the United States, just like an African, German, or Irishman, is only rivaled by their refusal to grant citizenship to women nationwide. Under the old system, we had to ally ourselves with the black man in our demand for practical recognition of our right to representation. By removing the black man from the equation, the Republicans—with pure sympathy, no doubt, so we wouldn't be left without any "male" counterpart in our degradation— 399 leave the innocent Chinaman to comfort and console us. Aren't we being unreasonable in our dissatisfaction with the company our fathers and brothers constitutionally rank us with—idiots, lunatics, convicts, Chinamen?
While sailing up the Columbia, Mrs. Duniway wrote Mrs. Stan ton: "Miss Anthony has been holding large meetings in Portland, Salem and Oregon City, and has conquered the press and brought the whole fraternity to terms. She has also succeeded in holding important and successful meetings at The Dalles, and is now returning with me from a series of lectures in Walla Walla. We find the people everywhere enthusiastic and delighted. Her fund of logic, fact and fun seems inexhaustible. She speaks three and four consecutive evenings in one place, and each time increases the interest. We are all justly proud of her."
While sailing up the Columbia, Mrs. Duniway wrote to Mrs. Stanton: "Miss Anthony has been organizing big meetings in Portland, Salem, and Oregon City, and has gotten the press on our side and brought everyone to agreement. She has also managed to hold significant and successful meetings at The Dalles and is now coming back with me from a series of lectures in Walla Walla. We find people everywhere are enthusiastic and thrilled. Her supply of logic, facts, and humor seems endless. She speaks three or four nights in a row at the same place, and each time the interest grows. We are all very proud of her."
At Walla Walla the church doors were closed to her but she spoke in the schoolhouse. At Salem all the judges of the supreme court were in her audience and afterward called on her. She had good houses everywhere but money was hard to get, and she speaks in her letters of being almost frantic lest she may not be able to meet her notes on January first, "the one cherished dream of this year's work."
At Walla Walla, the church doors were shut to her, but she spoke in the schoolhouse. At Salem, all the judges of the supreme court were in her audience and later reached out to her. She had good venues everywhere, but getting money was tough, and she mentions in her letters that she was almost desperate, worrying that she might not be able to pay her bills by January first, "the one cherished dream of this year's work."
In a letter from Olympia describing the journey she said: "Here I am, October 22, at the head of Puget Sound. This was my route—Portland, down the Willamette river twelve miles to the Columbia; then down that river one hundred miles to the mouth of the Cowlitz, Monticello; then ninety miles stage-ride, full sixty of it over the roughest kind of corduroy. Twenty-five miles to Pumphrey's Hotel, arriving at 6 p.m.; supper and bed; called up at 2 o'clock, and off again at 2:30—perfectly dark—lantern on each side of coach—fourteen miles to breakfast at 7, horses walked every step of the way; eighteen more, walk and corduroy, to dinner; then thirty miles of splendid road, and arrival here at 5:30 p.m." At Seattle, November 4, she wrote home:
In a letter from Olympia describing the journey she said: "Here I am, October 22, at the head of Puget Sound. This was my route—Portland, down the Willamette River twelve miles to the Columbia; then down that river one hundred miles to the mouth of the Cowlitz, Monticello; then a ninety-mile stage ride, sixty of it over the roughest kind of corduroy. Twenty-five miles to Pumphrey's Hotel, arriving at 6 p.m.; supper and bed; called up at 2 o'clock, and off again at 2:30—completely dark—lantern on each side of the coach—fourteen miles to breakfast at 7, horses walked every step of the way; eighteen more, walking and corduroy, to dinner; then thirty miles of great road, and arrival here at 5:30 p.m." At Seattle, November 4, she wrote home:
For the first time I have seen the glory of the sunrise upon the entire Coast Range. The whole western horizon was one fiery glow on mountain tops, all cragged and jagged from two miles in height down to the line of perpetual 400 snow. It has been very tantalizing to be on this wonderful Puget Sound these ten days, and never see the clouds and fogs lift themselves long enough to give a vision of the majestic mountains on either side. My one hope now is that they may rise on both sides at the same time; but the rainy season has fairly set in. It has rained part of every twenty-four hours since we reached Olympia ten days ago. The grass and shrubbery are as green and delightful as with us in June, and roses and other flowers are blooming all fragrant and fresh. The forests are evergreen—mainly firs and cedars—and on the streets here are maple and other deciduous trees. The feeling of the air is like that during the September equinoctial storm. The sound, from twenty to forty miles wide, with inlets and harbors extending full two or three miles into the land, is the most beautiful sheet of water I ever have seen.
For the first time, I’ve witnessed the beauty of the sunrise over the entire Coast Range. The whole western horizon was a fiery glow on the mountain tops, all craggy and jagged from two miles high down to the line of perpetual 400 snow. It’s been really tempting to be at this amazing Puget Sound for these ten days, without seeing the clouds and fog lift long enough to reveal the majestic mountains on either side. My only hope now is that they clear up on both sides at the same time; however, the rainy season has truly begun. It has rained part of every twenty-four hours since we arrived in Olympia ten days ago. The grass and shrubs are as green and lovely as they are in June back home, and roses and other flowers are blooming, fragrant and fresh. The forests are evergreen—mainly firs and cedars—and in the streets here, there are maple and other deciduous trees. The air feels like it does during the September equinoctial storm. The sound, which is twenty to forty miles wide, with inlets and harbors stretching two or three miles into the land, is the most beautiful body of water I’ve ever seen.
I go to Port Madison this afternoon, and on Monday to Port Gamble; back to Olympia for the Territorial Convention Wednesday; then down to Portland and thence southward. I have traveled 1,800 miles in fifty-six days, spoken forty-two nights and many days, and I am tired, tired. Lots of good missionary work, but not a great deal of money.
I’m heading to Port Madison this afternoon, and on Monday to Port Gamble; back to Olympia for the Territorial Convention on Wednesday; then down to Portland and further south. I’ve traveled 1,800 miles in fifty-six days, spoken on forty-two nights and many days, and I’m exhausted, really exhausted. There’s been a lot of good missionary work, but not much money.
The last letter from Portland, November 16, said:
The last letter from Portland, November 16, said:
The mortal agony of speaking again in Portland is over, but the hurt of it stings yet. I never was dragged before an audience so utterly without thought or word as last night and, had there been any way of escape, would have taken wings or, what I felt more like, have sunk through the floor. It was the strangest and most unaccountable condition, but nothing save bare, bald points stared me in the face. Must stop; here is card of Herald reporter.
The intense pain of speaking in Portland is over, but the hurt still lingers. I've never been put in front of an audience that was so completely thoughtless or speechless like I was last night, and if I could have escaped, I would have flown away or honestly felt like sinking through the floor. It was the weirdest and most inexplicable situation, but all I could see were raw, straightforward points staring back at me. I need to stop; here’s a card from the Herald reporter.
Before the reporter left, some ladies called, among them Mrs. Harriet W. Williams, at whose house we all used to stop in Buffalo, in the olden days of temperance work. She is like a mother to me. Mrs. Eliot, wife of the Unitarian minister, also came. They formed a suffrage society here Tuesday with some of the best women as officers. What is more and most of all I received a letter from a gentleman, enclosing testimonials from half a dozen of the prominent men of the city, asking an interview looking to marriage! I also received a serenade from a millionaire at Olympia. If any of the girls want a rich widower or an equally rich bachelor, here is decidedly the place to get an offer of one. But tell brother Aaron I expect to survive them all and reach home before the New Year, as single-handed and penniless as usual.[60]
Before the reporter left, some women called, including Mrs. Harriet W. Williams, at whose house we all used to stay in Buffalo during the early days of the temperance movement. She feels like a mother to me. Mrs. Eliot, the wife of the Unitarian minister, also came by. They started a suffrage society here on Tuesday with some of the best women as officers. Most importantly, I got a letter from a gentleman, along with testimonials from several well-known men in the city, asking for a meeting about marriage! I also got serenaded by a millionaire at Olympia. If any of the girls are looking for a wealthy widower or a rich bachelor, this is definitely the place to get an offer. But tell brother Aaron I plan to outlive them all and get home before the New Year, as single and broke as usual.[60]
Miss Anthony was invited to address the legislature while at Olympia. Notwithstanding her extreme need of money she donated the proceeds of one lecture to the sufferers by the Chicago fire. Usually she had good audiences but occasionally would fall into the hands of persons obnoxious to the community and the meeting would be a failure. She writes in her diary, "It seems impossible to escape being sacrificed by somebody." The press of Washington was for the most part very favorable. The Olympia Standard said: "We had formed a high opinion of the ability of the lady and her remarkable talent as a public speaker, and our expectations have been more than realized. She presents her arguments in graceful and elegant language, her illustrations are ample and well chosen, and the hearer is irresistibly drawn to her conclusions.... There is no gainsaying the sound logic of her arguments. They appeal to a sense of right and justice which ought not longer be denied." There was sometimes, however, a discordant note, as may be shown by the following from the Territorial Despatch, of Seattle, edited by Beriah Brown:
Miss Anthony was invited to speak to the legislature while in Olympia. Despite her urgent need for money, she gave the proceeds from one lecture to help victims of the Chicago fire. She typically had good audiences, but sometimes she would encounter people who were unpopular in the community, resulting in a disappointing meeting. She writes in her diary, "It feels impossible to avoid being let down by someone." Most of the Washington press was quite supportive. The Olympia Standard said: "We had a high opinion of the lady's abilities and her remarkable talent as a public speaker, and our expectations have been more than met. She presents her arguments in elegant and graceful language, her examples are abundant and well-chosen, and the audience is irresistibly drawn to her conclusions.... There’s no denying the solid logic of her arguments. They appeal to a sense of right and justice that shouldn’t be denied any longer." However, there was sometimes a conflicting opinion, as shown by the following from the Territorial Despatch of Seattle, edited by Beriah Brown:
It is a mistake to call Miss Anthony a reformer, or the movement in which she is engaged a reform; she is a revolutionist, aiming at nothing less than the breaking up of the very foundations of society, and the overthrow of every social institution organized for the protection of the sanctity of the altar, the family circle and the legitimacy of our offspring, recognizing no religion but self-worship, no God but human reason, no motive to human action but lust. Many, undoubtedly, will object that we state the case too strongly; but if they will dispassionately examine the facts and compare them with the character of the leaders and the inevitable tendency of their teachings, they must be convinced that the apparently innocent measure of woman suffrage as a remedy for woman's wrongs in over-crowded populations, is but a pretext or entering wedge by which to open Pandora's box and let loose upon society a pestilential brood to destroy all that is pure and beautiful in human nature, and all that has been achieved by organized associations in religion, morality and refinement; that the whole plan is coarse, sensual and agrarian, the worst phase of French infidelity and communism....
It's a mistake to label Miss Anthony a reformer or to call the movement she’s part of a reform; she's a revolutionary, aiming to fundamentally change the foundations of society and dismantle every social institution established to uphold the sanctity of the church, the family, and the legitimacy of our children. She recognizes no religion except self-worship, no God but human reason, and no motive for human actions other than desire. Many will argue that we’re exaggerating; however, if they calmly examine the facts and consider the character of the leaders and the inevitable results of their teachings, they must realize that the seemingly innocent idea of women’s suffrage as a solution to women’s issues in crowded populations is simply a guise or a way to open Pandora’s box, unleashing harmful influences that will destroy everything pure and beautiful in human nature, as well as what has been achieved through organized efforts in religion, morality, and refinement. The entire plan is crude, sensual, and agrarian—the worst elements of French atheism and communism…
She did not directly and positively broach the licentious social theories which she is known to entertain, because she well knew that they would shock the sensibilities of her audience, but confined her discourse to the one subject of woman suffrage as a means to attain equality of competitive labor. This portion of her lecture we have not time to discuss. Our sole purpose 402 now is to enter our protest against the inculcation of doctrines which we believe are calculated to degrade and debauch society by demolishing the dividing lines between virtue and vice. It is true that Miss Anthony did not openly advocate "free love" and a disregard of the sanctity of the marriage relation, but she did worse—under the guise of defending women against manifest wrongs, she attempts to instil into their minds an utter disregard for all that is right and conservative in the present order of society.
She didn’t directly discuss the controversial social theories she’s known for because she knew they would upset her audience; instead, she chose to focus her talk on woman suffrage as a means to achieve equality in competitive labor. We don’t have time to explore this part of her lecture. Our only goal 402 now is to express our objection to the spread of ideas we believe could degrade and corrupt society by blurring the lines between right and wrong. It’s true that Miss Anthony didn’t openly advocate for “free love” or reject the importance of marriage, but she did something worse—under the guise of defending women against clear injustices, she tries to instill in them a complete disregard for everything that is right and traditional in today’s society.
Apparently Mr. Brown did not approve of woman suffrage. According to his own statement Miss Anthony confined her entire discourse to the one point of competitive labor. The editorial was founded wholly upon his own depraved imagination.
Apparently, Mr. Brown didn't support women's suffrage. According to his own words, Miss Anthony focused her entire speech on just the issue of competitive labor. The editorial was based entirely on his twisted imagination.
Miss Anthony went into British Columbia and spoke several times at Victoria. The doctrine of equal rights was entirely new in that city and on the first evening there was not a woman in the hall. At no succeeding lecture were twenty women present, although there were fair audiences of men. The press was respectful in its treatment of speaker and speeches, but some of the "cards" which were sent to the papers were amusing, to say the least.[61]
Miss Anthony traveled to British Columbia and gave several talks in Victoria. The idea of equal rights was completely unfamiliar in that city, and on the first night, not a single woman attended the event. In the following lectures, there were never more than twenty women present, even though there were decent-sized audiences of men. The media treated the speaker and her speeches with respect, but some of the "cards" sent to the newspapers were quite funny, to say the least.[61]
The journal depicts the hardships of a new country, the poor hotels, the long stage-rides, the inconvenient hours, etc. At one place, where there was an appalling prospect of spending 403 Sunday in the wretched excuse for a hotel, a lady came and took her to a fine, new home and Miss Anthony was delighted; but when the husband appeared he announced that he "did not keep a tavern," and so, after her evening lecture, she returned to her former quarters, the wife not daring to remonstrate. After meeting one woman who had had six husbands, and at least a dozen whose husbands had deserted them and married other women without the formality of a divorce, she writes in her journal, "Marriage seems to be anything but an indissoluble contract out here on the coast." Meanwhile she had received urgent invitations from California once more to try her fortune in that State. After lecturing to crowded houses at Oregon City, Eugene and other points, she continued southward, her rough experience on shipboard deciding her to go by stage. From Roseburg she wrote her mother, November 24:
The journal describes the challenges of a new country, the poor hotels, the long stage rides, the inconvenient hours, and so on. At one point, where there was a dreadful prospect of spending 403 Sunday in a terrible excuse for a hotel, a woman came and took her to a nice, new home, and Miss Anthony was thrilled; but when the husband showed up, he stated that he "did not run a tavern," so after her lecture that evening, she went back to her previous lodgings, with the wife not daring to protest. After meeting one woman who had been married six times and at least a dozen others whose husbands abandoned them to marry other women without bothering with a divorce, she wrote in her journal, "Marriage seems to be anything but a permanent contract out here on the coast." Meanwhile, she had received urgent invitations from California to try her luck in that state again. After lecturing to packed audiences in Oregon City, Eugene, and other locations, she continued south, deciding to travel by stage after her rough experience on the ship. From Roseburg, she wrote her mother on November 24:
I am now over one hundred miles on my stage-route south, and horrible indeed are the roads—miles and miles of corduroy and then twenty miles of "Joe Lane black mud," as they call it, because old Joseph Lane settled right here in the midst of it. It is heavy clay without a particle of loam and rolls up on the wheels until rim, spokes and hub are one solid circle. The wheels cease to turn and actually slide over the ground, and then driver and men passengers jump out and with chisels and shingles cut the clay off the wheels.
I’m now more than a hundred miles into my trip south, and the roads are really awful—endless stretches of corduroy followed by twenty miles of what they call "Joe Lane black mud," named after old Joseph Lane who settled right here in the middle of it. It’s thick clay with no loam at all, and it clings to the wheels until the rim, spokes, and hub become one solid mass. The wheels come to a stop and actually slide over the ground, then the driver and passengers have to jump out and use chisels and shingles to scrape the clay off the wheels.
How my thought does turn homeward, mother. I wanted always to be at home every recurring birthday of yours so long as you remained this side with us. I can not this year, but in spirit I shall be with you all that day, as I am so very, very often on every other day.
How my thoughts wander back home, Mom. I always wanted to be there for every birthday of yours while you were still here with us. I can’t be there this year, but in spirit, I’ll be with you all day long, just like I am so often on every other day.
The courtesy of a seat outside with the driver was usually extended to her and she picked up much information in regard to the people and customs, some of it perhaps not wholly reliable. On this journey she encountered a drenching rain and heavy snow, and finally was driven inside. When they stopped for the night she had a little, cold bedroom, sometimes next to the bar-room, where the carousing kept her awake all night. She wrote home from Yreka, November 28:
The driver usually offered her a seat up front, and she learned a lot about the people and customs, though some of it might not be completely accurate. On this trip, she faced pouring rain and heavy snow, and eventually had to move inside. When they stopped for the night, she got a small, cold bedroom, sometimes right next to the bar, where the partying kept her awake all night. She wrote home from Yreka on November 28:
Last evening I lectured in the courthouse to a splendid audience, and speak again this afternoon at 2 o'clock to answer objections. Several lawyers 404 threaten to be on hand and force me to the wall on legal points, but we shall see. Then at four I am to drive with Mrs. Jerome Churchill, and at seven board the stage again for Red Bluff, 125 miles, riding steadily all tonight and the next day and night. It is snowing here and southward, which delays us more and more every day.
Last night, I gave a lecture in the courthouse to a great audience, and I’m speaking again this afternoon at 2 o'clock to address some objections. Several lawyers 404 are threatening to show up and challenge me on legal issues, but we’ll see what happens. Then at four, I’ll be driving with Mrs. Jerome Churchill, and at seven, I’ll get back on the stagecoach for Red Bluff, which is 125 miles away, riding all night and into the next day. It’s snowing here and to the south, causing more and more delays every day.
I rode three miles yesterday for a full view of Mount Shasta, but the summit was hidden by a dense fog, and I saw only one of its side-points called the crater; so all hope of seeing this lofty snow-peak is over, unless it should clear off and I see it by moonlight as I go out tonight. This long stage route is a new and interesting experience to me, and I am so glad I returned this way. The first day, in spite of the corduroy ruckabuck jouncing, I felt a sort of halo of joy hovering around me. It was indescribable; it was like a benediction of "well done, decided right."
I rode three miles yesterday to get a full view of Mount Shasta, but the peak was covered by thick fog, and I could only see one of its features called the crater; so all hope of seeing this impressive snow-capped mountain is gone unless it clears up and I can see it by moonlight as I head out tonight. This long route is a new and interesting experience for me, and I'm really glad I took this way back. On the first day, despite the bumpy ride, I felt a kind of joyful glow surrounding me. It was indescribable; it felt like a blessing of "well done, right choice."
From the diary:
From the journal:
Snow storm today but a fine moonlight view of Mount Shasta at night. Rode all night in the stage, splendid sunrise view of Castle Rock. Today through Sacramento canyon, fine day and grand scenery. Supped at 9 P.M. and then nine of us were packed into a short wagon and did not arrive at Red Bluff till 3 A.M.... No arrangements had been made for my lecture. Sheriff refused to let me have the courthouse. Secured the schoolhouse, but no fire and small audience after all my hard trip to get here. Called at 2:30 A.M. to take the stage again.... Reached Chico at last. Mr. Allen, agent of General Bidwell, met me, and such a good cup of coffee and cosy, comfortable time as his wife Emma gave me! Good audience, although heavy storm.... At Marysville spoke in the theater to a small but select audience. Expenses $20 over receipts. The fates are opposed to my financial success, and the interest is piling up on my debts.... Mrs. Laura de Force Gordon and a dozen other ladies met me at Sacramento, and she and I went on to San Francisco where I found thirty letters awaiting me at the Grand Hotel.
Today we had a snowstorm, but the view of Mount Shasta in the moonlight at night was stunning. I rode all night in the stagecoach and caught a beautiful sunrise over Castle Rock. Today, we traveled through Sacramento Canyon on a lovely day with breathtaking scenery. We had dinner at 9 P.M., and then nine of us were squeezed into a small wagon, not getting to Red Bluff until 3 A.M.... No arrangements were made for my lecture. The sheriff wouldn't let me use the courthouse. I managed to secure the schoolhouse, but it was cold and I had a small audience despite my long journey. I was called at 2:30 A.M. to catch the stage again.... I finally reached Chico. Mr. Allen, General Bidwell's agent, met me, and his wife Emma treated me to a wonderful cup of coffee and a warm, comfortable time! The audience was good, even with the heavy storm.... In Marysville, I spoke at the theater to a small but select audience. I ended up $20 in the red after expenses. It feels like the odds are against my financial success, and the interest on my debts is stacking up.... Mrs. Laura de Force Gordon and a dozen other ladies welcomed me in Sacramento, and she and I traveled on to San Francisco, where I found thirty letters waiting for me at the Grand Hotel.
The flurry of prejudice against Miss Anthony had died out and she accepted an invitation for a public address signed by a number of influential citizens. She spoke several times to good audiences and was fairly treated by the press, but she was too frank and outspoken to be very popular, especially at that time. The people were greatly stirred up over what was known as the Holland Social Evil Bill, which was under consideration by the board of supervisors and had roused public opinion to white heat, both in favor and in opposition. Miss Anthony naturally made a fight against it, calling a meeting of women only and explaining to them, point by point, its vicious propositions. This provoked both favorable and adverse 405 criticism by the press. At Mayfield she was a guest at the handsome home of Judge and Mrs. Sarah Wallis. Mrs. Knox, Mrs. Watson, Mrs. McKee and a big omnibus load drove up from San Jose, seventeen miles. She spoke at a number of neighboring towns and the sympathizers with the cause she represented were delighted with her masterly efforts, but she felt everywhere the need of a good manager to make her lectures a financial success. On December 15 her friends in San Francisco tendered her a reception and banquet at the Grand Hotel. All the newspapers in the city gave complimentary accounts, of which the following from the Chronicle will serve as a specimen:
The wave of prejudice against Miss Anthony had faded, and she accepted an invitation for a public address signed by several influential citizens. She spoke multiple times to good crowds and was treated fairly by the press, but she was too candid and outspoken to be very popular, especially at that time. The public was deeply stirred over what was referred to as the Holland Social Evil Bill, which was being debated by the board of supervisors and had ignited public opinion to a boiling point, both in support and in opposition. Miss Anthony naturally took a stand against it, calling a meeting for women only and explaining to them, point by point, its harmful provisions. This sparked both positive and negative 405 criticism from the press. In Mayfield, she was a guest at the lovely home of Judge and Mrs. Sarah Wallis. Mrs. Knox, Mrs. Watson, Mrs. McKee, and a large omnibus filled with people drove up from San Jose, seventeen miles away. She spoke in several nearby towns, and her supporters were thrilled with her impressive efforts, but she felt the need for a good manager to make her lectures financially successful. On December 15, her friends in San Francisco hosted a reception and banquet for her at the Grand Hotel. All the newspapers in the city published favorable accounts, of which the following excerpt from the Chronicle will serve as an example:
The friends of Miss Susan B. Anthony, to the number of about fifty, comprising the more prominent leaders of the suffrage movement, assembled in the parlors of the Grand Hotel last evening. After an hour spent in social conversation and the interchange of congratulations upon the bright prospects of the cause they represent, the guests were ushered into the spacious dining-hall, where a bountiful collation had been spread....
Last night, around fifty of Miss Susan B. Anthony's friends, including key leaders of the suffrage movement, gathered in the lounges of the Grand Hotel. After an hour of chatting and celebrating the hopeful future of their cause, the guests were escorted into the large dining hall, where a generous spread had been prepared....
Miss Anthony said: "....I go from you freighted with a burden of love and gratitude, and no greetings have been more precious than those of working men and women. Tonight when the woman who earns her livelihood by selling flowers through the hotel came to the door of the parlor and, presenting me with the beautiful bouquet which I hold in my hand, asked, 'Will you accept this because you have spoken so nobly for us poor workingwomen?' it brought tears to my eyes, unused to weeping. I felt a thrill of gratitude that I had been permitted to prosecute this work. We who are seated around this board may have all the rights we need; we are not working for ourselves, but for those now suffering around us. For them, our sisters, and for future generations must we labor...."
Miss Anthony said: "....I leave you carrying a heavy load of love and appreciation, and no greetings have meant more to me than those from working men and women. Tonight, when the woman who sells flowers in the hotel came to the parlor door and handed me this beautiful bouquet I’m holding, asking, 'Will you accept this because you have spoken so passionately for us poor working women?' it brought tears to my eyes, which are not used to crying. I felt a surge of gratitude for the chance to do this important work. We who are gathered around this table may already have all the rights we need; we are not fighting for ourselves, but for those who are suffering around us. For them, our sisters, and for future generations, we must continue to strive....
She took her seat amid warm applause. A number of brief, pithy speeches were made and all dispersed with a hearty Godspeed to the talented lady in whose behalf they had assembled.
She took her seat to warm applause. Several brief, impactful speeches were made, and everyone left with a heartfelt "Godspeed" to the talented woman for whom they had gathered.
Laura de Force Gordon had arranged a number of lectures for Miss Anthony on the route eastward. At Nevada City she was the guest of A. A. Sargent, the newly elected United States senator, and his wife, both earnest friends of woman suffrage.[62] The 406 rainy season had set in and the diary says: "These storms which bring new life and hope to farmers and miners, mean empty benches for me." The mud, snow and wind in Nevada were terrible. At Virginia City, where she lectured, she was snowed in for several days and finally left in a six-horse sleigh, in the midst of a blinding storm, on Christmas Day.
Laura de Force Gordon had organized several lectures for Miss Anthony on her journey east. In Nevada City, she stayed with A. A. Sargent, the newly elected U.S. senator, and his wife, both passionate supporters of women's suffrage.[62] The 406 rainy season had begun, and the diary notes: "These storms, which bring new life and hope to farmers and miners, mean empty seats for me." The mud, snow, and wind in Nevada were awful. In Virginia City, where she gave a lecture, she got snowed in for several days and eventually left in a six-horse sleigh during a blinding storm on Christmas Day.

A. A. Sargent.
A. A. Sargent.
She arrived at Reno to find that the Sargents, whom she expected to join on their way to Washington, had passed through a day or two before but, as they were delayed by snowdrifts, she overtook them at Ogden, and enjoyed the privileges of their luxurious staterooms until they reached Chicago. It happened most fortunately that the Sargents were supplied with inexhaustible hampers of provisions, for the trip from Ogden to Chicago occupied twelve days. Senator Mitchell and family, of Oregon, and several other friends were on the train, but with all the pleasant companionship and all the entertainment which could be devised, the journey was long and tedious. The ever-faithful diary contains a brief record of each day:
She arrived in Reno to find that the Sargents, whom she expected to join on their way to Washington, had passed through a day or two earlier. However, since they were delayed by snowdrifts, she caught up with them in Ogden and enjoyed the comforts of their luxurious staterooms until they reached Chicago. Luckily, the Sargents had brought along endless supplies of food since the trip from Ogden to Chicago took twelve days. Senator Mitchell and his family from Oregon, along with several other friends, were on the train, but despite all the good company and entertainment they could come up with, the journey felt long and tedious. Her ever-reliable diary has a brief record of each day:
December 28.—The western-bound train arrived at noon, eight days from Omaha, a happy set of people to be so far along on their journey. We left Ogden at 3 p. M., three packed sleeping-cars. All went smoothly to Bitter Creek, then we waited three or four hours for an extra engine to take us up the grade.
December 28.—The westbound train got in at noon, eight days out from Omaha, with a happy group of people excited to be this far along in their trip. We left Ogden at 3 PM, with three packed sleeping cars. Everything went well until we got to Bitter Creek, where we had to wait three or four hours for an extra engine to help us up the hill.
December 29.—Starting and backing, then starting and backing again. Prospect very discouraging. Mr. Sargent makes the tea, unpacks the hampers and serves as general steward, but draws the line at washing the dishes. We 407 women-folks take that as our part. Delayed all night at Percy. Here overtook the passenger train which left Ogden last Monday.
December 29.—We kept starting and backing up, then starting and backing up again. It’s looking pretty bleak. Mr. Sargent makes the tea, unpacks the food, and acts as the main steward, but he won’t wash the dishes. We 407 women handle that. We were stuck all night at Percy. Here, we caught up with the passenger train that left Ogden last Monday.
December 30.—Detained all day and all night at Medicine Bow. Four passenger trains packed into two, and long freight trains passed us in the night.
December 30.—We were stuck here all day and all night at Medicine Bow. Four packed passenger trains combined into two, and long freight trains passed us during the night.
December 31.—Left Medicine Bow at noon, went through deep snow cuts ten miles in length. One heavy passenger and two long freight trains in front of us. Reached Laramie at 10 P.M. Thus closes 1871, a year full of hard work, six months east, six months west of the Rocky mountains; 171 lectures, 13,000 miles of travel; gross receipts $4,318, paid on debts, $2,271. Nothing ahead but to plod on.
December 31.—We left Medicine Bow at noon and traveled through deep snow for ten miles. There was one heavy passenger train and two long freight trains ahead of us. We arrived in Laramie at 10 P.M. This wraps up 1871, a year filled with hard work, spending six months on the east side and six months on the west side of the Rocky Mountains; I gave 171 lectures and traveled 13,000 miles; the total earnings were $4,318, with $2,271 paid on debts. Nothing to do now but keep pushing forward.
A few blank pages in an old account-book tell the rest of the story:
A few blank pages in an old notebook reveal the rest of the story:
January 1, 1872.—Laramie City. On Pullman car "America," Union Pacific R.R. Lay here all night and breakfasted at railway hotel. J.H. Hayford, editor Laramie Sentinel, told us of the bill to repeal the woman suffrage law in Wyoming. The law had been passed by a Democratic legislature as a jest, but five Democrats voted for repeal and four Republicans against it, in one house, and in the other, three Republicans voted against and every Democrat for the repeal. Governor Campbell, a Republican, vetoed this repeal bill and woman suffrage still stands, as a Territorial legislature can not pass a bill over the governor's veto.... Here we are at noon, stuck in a snowdrift five miles west of Sherman, on a steep grade, with one hundred men shovelling in front of us. Dined, Mr. Sargent officiating, on roast turkey, jelly, bread and butter, spice cake and excellent tea. At dark, wind and snow blowing terrifically, but a bright sky.
January 1, 1872.—Laramie City. On the Pullman car "America," Union Pacific R.R. We stayed here all night and had breakfast at the railway hotel. J.H. Hayford, the editor of the Laramie Sentinel, informed us about the bill to repeal the woman suffrage law in Wyoming. The law had originally been passed by a Democratic legislature as a joke, but five Democrats voted for the repeal while four Republicans voted against it in one house, and in the other house, three Republicans opposed it while every Democrat supported the repeal. Governor Campbell, a Republican, vetoed the repeal bill, so woman suffrage remains intact, as a Territorial legislature cannot pass a bill over the governor's veto. Here we are at noon, stuck in a snowdrift five miles west of Sherman, on a steep grade, with a hundred men shoveling in front of us. We had dinner, with Mr. Sargent in charge, featuring roast turkey, jelly, bread and butter, spice cake, and excellent tea. By nightfall, the wind and snow were howling fiercely, but the sky was clear.
January 2.—Still stationary. The railroad company has supplied the passengers with dried fish and crackers. Mrs. Sargent and I have made tea and carried it throughout the train to the nursing mothers. It is the best we can do. Five days out from Ogden! This is indeed a fearful ordeal, fastened here in a snowbank, midway of the continent at the top of the Rocky mountains. They are melting snow for the boilers and for drinking water. A train loaded with coal is behind us, so there is no danger of our suffering from cold. Mr. Sargent, Mr. Mitchell and Major Elliott walked to Sherman and an old man drove them back at dusk with two ponies. The train had moved up to Dale creek bridge and drawn into a long snow-shed. Here, we remained all night and, with the rarified air and the smoke from the engine, were almost suffocated, while the wind blew so furiously we could not venture to open the doors.
January 2.—Still stuck. The railroad company has provided the passengers with dried fish and crackers. Mrs. Sargent and I made tea and distributed it to the nursing mothers throughout the train. It's the best we can do. Five days out from Ogden! This is certainly a tough situation, trapped here in a snowbank, halfway across the continent at the top of the Rocky Mountains. They are melting snow for the boilers and drinking water. A coal train is behind us, so we’re not in danger of getting too cold. Mr. Sargent, Mr. Mitchell, and Major Elliott walked to Sherman, and an old man drove them back at dusk with two ponies. The train had moved up to the Dale Creek bridge and pulled into a long snow shed. We stayed there all night, and with the thin air and smoke from the engine, we nearly suffocated, while the wind howled so fiercely we couldn’t even consider opening the doors.
January 3.—Bright sunshine and perfectly calm. Ernest and Norman Melliss, sons of David M. Melliss, of New York City, came into our car from the other train, which is twelve days from Ogden. How they do revive The Revolution experiences, Train and the Wall street gossip! Stood still in the snow-shed till noon and reached Sherman about 6 P.M. Mr. Sargent had brought some potatoes which we roasted on top of the stove and they proved a delicious addition to our meal. In the car "Sacramento" we had a mock 408 trial, Judge Mitchell presiding and the jury composed of women. He wrote out a verdict, which the women insisted on bringing in, not because they agreed with it but because they wanted to please him and the other men, but I rebelled and hung the jury!
January 3.—Bright sunshine and completely calm. Ernest and Norman Melliss, sons of David M. Melliss from New York City, joined our car from the other train, which has been traveling for twelve days since Ogden. They really brought back memories of The Revolution experiences, Train, and the Wall Street gossip! We stayed in the snow-shed until noon and reached Sherman around 6 P.M. Mr. Sargent brought some potatoes that we roasted on top of the stove, and they turned out to be a delicious addition to our meal. In the car "Sacramento," we had a mock 408 trial, with Judge Mitchell presiding and a jury made up of women. He wrote a verdict, which the women insisted on bringing in, not because they agreed with it but because they wanted to please him and the other men, but I rebelled and hung the jury!
January 4.—Morning found us still at Sherman and we did not move till 1 P.M. There is another train ahead of us, and here we are, four passenger trains pushing on for Cheyenne. The people from the different ones visit among each other. Half-way to Granite Canyon the snowplow got off the track and one wheel broke, so a dead standstill for hours. Reached Granite Canyon at dark, a whole day getting there from Sherman, and remained over night.
January 4.—Morning found us still at Sherman, and we didn’t move until 1 P.M. There’s another train ahead of us, and here we are, four passenger trains making our way to Cheyenne. People from the different trains are visiting with each other. Halfway to Granite Canyon, the snowplow went off the track and one wheel broke, leaving us stuck for hours. We reached Granite Canyon at dark, taking a whole day to get there from Sherman, and stayed overnight.
January 5.—Bright and beautiful. Reached Cheyenne at 11:30 A.M. Little George Sargent coaxed his papa to let him walk over the bridge to the town and fell through and broke his arm. Mrs. Sargent, after holding him till the bone was set, fainted. Afterwards I called on Mrs. Amalia Post. It was at her house the Cheyenne women met and went in a body to Governor Campbell's residence in 1869, and announced their intention of staying till he signed the woman suffrage bill, which he did without further delay. Met the governor and several other notables. At 1:30 P.M. our train was off at first-class speed, and oh, what joy in every face!
January 5.—Bright and beautiful. Arrived in Cheyenne at 11:30 A.M. Little George Sargent convinced his dad to let him walk over the bridge to town, but he fell through and broke his arm. Mrs. Sargent held him until the bone was set but then fainted. Afterwards, I visited Mrs. Amalia Post. It was at her house that the Cheyenne women gathered and went together to Governor Campbell's home in 1869, announcing their plan to stay until he signed the woman suffrage bill, which he did without delay. I met the governor and several other prominent figures. At 1:30 P.M., our train took off at first-class speed, and oh, what joy was evident on every face!
January 6.—Arrived at Omaha at 3 P.M. Found letter from brother D.R., enclosing pass to Leavenworth and saying he had passes for me from there to Chicago and eastward. If I go to L. I shall miss the Washington convention, where I am so badly needed. If it had not been for this vexatious delay I could have had a day or two there and several more at Rochester. Now I must push straight on. It is my hard fate always to sacrifice affection and pleasure to duty and work.
January 6.—Arrived in Omaha at 3 PM. Found a letter from my brother D.R., which included a pass to Leavenworth and mentioned he had passes for me from there to Chicago and points east. If I go to L., I’ll miss the Washington convention, where I’m really needed. If it hadn’t been for this frustrating delay, I could’ve spent a day or two there and a few more in Rochester. Now, I have to keep moving. It’s always my unfortunate fate to give up love and enjoyment for duty and work.
January 7.—All the baggage had to be rechecked at Omaha and when I insisted upon attending to my own, because I had found that the only safe way, Mr. Sargent looked so offended that I at once handed over my checks.
January 7.—All the luggage had to be rechecked in Omaha, and when I insisted on handling my own because I had found that to be the safest approach, Mr. Sargent looked so offended that I immediately handed over my tags.
January 8.—Arrived at Chicago at 3 A.M. Went at once to my aunt Ann Eliza Dickinson's and visited with her till 7 o'clock, had breakfast and went to Fort Wayne depot where, as I feared, I found one of my checks called for the wrong piece of baggage; so I took one trunk, left the baggage-master to hunt up the other, and started straight for Washington on a train without a sleeper.
January 8.—Arrived in Chicago at 3 A.M. Went straight to my aunt Ann Eliza Dickinson's and spent time with her until 7 o'clock, had breakfast, and then headed to the Fort Wayne depot where, as I had feared, one of my tickets was for the wrong piece of luggage; so I took one trunk, left the baggage attendant to track down the other, and boarded a train to Washington without a sleeper.
January 9.—Passed Pittsburg at 2 A.M. Breakfasted at Altoona on top of the Alleghanies; scenery most beautiful, but not on so grand a scale as among the Rockies.
January 9.—Passed through Pittsburgh at 2 A.M. Had breakfast in Altoona on top of the Alleghenies; the scenery was very beautiful, but not as grand as it is among the Rockies.
This is the last entry. It is hardly necessary to add that Miss Anthony reached Washington in time for the opening of the convention on the morning of January 10. To the question whether she were not very tired, she replied: "Why, what would make me tired? I haven't been doing anything, for two weeks!"
This is the last entry. It's pretty clear that Miss Anthony arrived in Washington in time for the convention's opening on the morning of January 10. When asked if she was tired, she replied, "Why, what would make me tired? I haven't been doing anything for two weeks!"
[58] Miss Anthony's lecture was a decided success, judged either by the number and intelligence of those present or the able manner in which she discussed the salient points pertaining to woman suffrage. She displayed an ability, conciseness and force that must have carried conviction to every impartial listener.... Her visit here has done more to advance the cause of woman suffrage than can now be fully appreciated. She has sown the germ of a movement which can not fail to inoculate our people with a belief in the justice of her cause and the injustice of longer depriving the more intelligent, purer and consequently better portion of our inhabitants of that greatest of boons, the ballot.—Sioux City Daily Times.
[58] Miss Anthony's lecture was a clear success, whether you look at the number and intelligence of the attendees or the skillful way she tackled the key issues surrounding women's voting rights. She showed an ability, clarity, and impact that must have convinced every fair-minded listener.... Her visit here has done more to promote the cause of women's suffrage than we can fully appreciate right now. She has planted the seeds of a movement that will inevitably inspire our community to believe in the fairness of her cause and the unfairness of continuing to deny the more educated, virtuous, and therefore better part of our population the greatest benefit of all, the right to vote.—Sioux City Daily Times.
Miss Anthony's lecture was full of good, sound common sense, and an opponent of woman suffrage said it was the best speech he ever heard on the subject. Wyoming was highly complimented as being the first Territory to recognize the equality of woman, and pronounced as much ahead of her eastern sisters in civilization as she is higher in altitude. The lecture abounded with gems of wit, humor and pathos, and the audience would willingly have listened another hour.—Cheyenne Tribune.
Miss Anthony's lecture was packed with sensible ideas, and a critic of women's suffrage even called it the best talk he had ever heard on the topic. Wyoming received high praise for being the first Territory to acknowledge women's equality, being deemed much more advanced than its eastern counterparts in civilization, just as it is higher in elevation. The lecture was filled with moments of wit, humor, and emotion, and the audience would have happily listened for another hour. —Cheyenne Tribune.
The press sneers at Miss Anthony, men tell her she is out of her proper sphere, people call her a scold, good women call her masculine, a monstrosity in petticoats; but if one-half of her sex possessed one-half of her acquirements, her intellectual culture, her self-reliance and independence of character, the world would be the better for it.—Denver News.
The press mocks Miss Anthony, men say she’s stepping out of her place, people call her a nag, respectable women label her manly, a freak in a dress; but if half of her gender had even half of her knowledge, her education, her confidence, and her strong character, the world would be better off for it.—Denver News.
A large and attentive audience filled the Denver theater last night to hear Miss Susan B. Anthony, champion of the "new departure in politics," called the woman suffrage movement. The fact that there was not sitting room for all who came is evidence of deep interest in the subject, or great curiosity to hear the lady speak.... It is impossible to give an outline of her speech. It was a string of strong arguments put in a straightforward, clear and vigorous way, eliciting favor and inviting the attention of the audience throughout. The lecture was suggestive, and of the kind that sets people to thinking.—Denver Tribune.
A large and engaged crowd filled the Denver theater last night to hear Miss Susan B. Anthony, a leading advocate for the "new approach to politics," known as the women's suffrage movement. The fact that there wasn’t enough seating for everyone who showed up shows a strong interest in the topic, or a lot of curiosity about hearing her speak. It's hard to summarize her speech. It was a series of compelling arguments delivered in a straightforward, clear, and impactful way, capturing the audience's attention the entire time. The lecture was thought-provoking and the kind that encourages people to reflect.—Denver Tribune.
[59] Notwithstanding this tribute, the Herald printed a long string of verses with this introduction: "We trust our readers will not miss the perusal of this piece of rhythmical irony. It is certainly one of the happiest hits we have seen for many a day. No one can mistake the allusion to the 'Old Gal.' who has been so recently among us 'tooting her horn.'"
[59] Despite this tribute, the Herald published a long set of verses with this introduction: "We hope our readers will take the time to read this piece of rhythmic irony. It's definitely one of the funniest hits we've seen in a while. No one can miss the reference to the 'Old Gal,' who has recently been here 'tooting her horn.'"
"Along the city's thoroughfare,
"Along the city's main road,"
A grim Old Gal with manly air
A serious old woman with a strong presence
Strode amidst the noisy crowd,
Walked through the noisy crowd,
Tooting her horn both shrill and loud;
Tooting her horn, sharp and loud;
Till e'en above the city's roar,
Till even above the city's noise,
Above its din and discord, o'er
Above its noise and chaos, over
All, was heard, 'Ye tyrants, fear!
All, was heard, 'You tyrants, watch out!
The dawn of freedom's drawing near—
The dawn of freedom is approaching—
Woman's Rights and Suffrage.'
Women's Rights and Suffrage.
"A meek old man, in accents wild,
"A timid old man, with wild tones,
Cried,'Sal! turn back and nurse our child!'
Cried, 'Sal! Come back and take care of our child!'
She bent on him a withering look,
She gave him a scathing look,
Her bony fist at him she shook.
Her bony fist shook at him.
And screeched, 'Ye brute! ye think I'm flat
And shouted, 'You brute! You think I'm flat!
To mend your clo'es and nurse your brat?
To fix your clothes and take care of your kid?
Nurse it yourself; I'll change the plan,
Nurse it yourself; I'll revise the plan,
When I am made a congressman—
When I become a congressperson—
Woman's Rights and Suffrage,'" etc.
Women's Rights and Suffrage,'" etc.
[61] Two examples will suffice:
Two examples will do:
"EDITOR COLONIST: I have read with a feeling of thankfulness the letter of 'A Male Biped,' in this day's Colonist. The writer deserves the thanks of every good woman in the land for the bold and able manner in which he has administered a shaking to a shrewish old mischief-maker who, having failed to secure a husband herself, is tramping the continent to make her more fortunate sisters miserable by creating dissensions in their households. O, why do not some of our divines or lawyers upset this woman's sophistries, and convince even her that woman's true sphere is in 'submitting herself to her husband,' and religiously fulfilling the marriage vows the wise organizers of society have prescribed?
"EDITOR COLONIST: I have read with gratitude the letter from 'A Male Biped' in today’s Colonist. The writer deserves the thanks of every good woman in the country for the bold and effective way he has challenged a spiteful old troublemaker who, having failed to find a husband herself, is traveling around to make her more fortunate sisters miserable by stirring up conflicts in their homes. Oh, why don't some of our religious leaders or lawyers challenge this woman's arguments and convince even her that a woman's true role is to 'submit to her husband' and faithfully uphold the marriage vows that the wise founders of society have set?"
A WIFE AND A MOTHER."
A wife and mother.
"MR. EDITOR: America, the home of many humbugs, which produced Brigham Young, Barnum, Home, the medium, and many others, has, it appears, another human curiosity in Miss Anthony. This specimen from over the way comes amongst us, and because our ladies fail to recognize or encourage her in her vagaries, she gets very rabid and snarls and snaps at the 'women of Victoria who had so sunk their womanhood that they were happy even in their degradation.' The degradation referred to is that of whipping, which this female firebrand appears to believe is the rule hers. Surely the complete immunity from castigation of such a noxious creature as Miss Anthony is sufficient answer to this libel. Men in British Columbia no more countenance bad husbands than do the women a quack apostle in petticoats. They look upon such persons as sexual mistakes, like the two-headed lady or the four-legged baby, and as safe guides on social questions as George Francis Train is in politics.
"MR. EDITOR: America, the land of many fakes, which gave us Brigham Young, Barnum, Home, the medium, and others, seems to have yet another oddity in Miss Anthony. This figure from across the way comes among us, and because our women don’t acknowledge or support her eccentricities, she grows quite agitated and lashes out at the 'women of Victoria who have so lost their femininity that they find happiness even in their humiliation.' The humiliation she mentions refers to punishment, which this fiery woman seems to think is the norm for her. Surely the fact that someone as troublesome as Miss Anthony has never faced repercussions is enough to counter this slander. Men in British Columbia do not tolerate bad husbands any more than women tolerate a quack preacher in a skirt. They regard such individuals as anomalies, like a two-headed woman or a baby with four legs, and they see just as much sense in their views on social issues as they do in George Francis Train’s political opinions."
AN INSULTED HUSBAND."
"An insulted husband."
And yet during the few days she was in Victoria no leas than half a dozen women came to her to protest against the law which allowed the husband to whip his wife.
And yet during the few days she was in Victoria, no less than half a dozen women came to her to protest against the law that allowed a husband to beat his wife.
CHAPTER XXIV.
REPUBLICAN SPLINTER——MISS ANTHONY VOTES.
1872.
The leading women in the movement for suffrage, supported by some of the ablest constitutional lawyers in the country, continued to claim the right to vote under the following:
The leading women in the suffrage movement, backed by some of the most skilled constitutional lawyers in the country, kept asserting their right to vote based on the following:
FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT, JULY 28, 1868.
FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT, JULY 28, 1868.
SECTION 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law, nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Anyone born or naturalized in the United States and subject to its laws is a citizen of the United States and the state where they reside. No state can create or enforce any law that restricts the rights or privileges of U.S. citizens; nor can any state take away a person's life, freedom, or property without due process of law, or deny any person within its authority equal protection under the law. FIFTEENTH AMENDMENT, MARCH 30, 1870.
FIFTEENTH AMENDMENT, MARCH 30, 1870.
SECTION 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States, or by any State, on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.
SECTION 1. The right of U.S. citizens to vote cannot be denied or restricted by the United States or any state on the basis of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.
Many of the Republican leaders admitted that these amendments might be construed to include women, but were silenced by the cry of "party expediency." The fear of defeating the attempt to enfranchise the colored male citizen made them refuse to add the word "sex" to the Fifteenth Amendment, which would have placed this question beyond debate and put an end to the agitation that has continued for thirty years. The women insisted that the exigency which compelled the ratification of the Fifteenth Amendment by the various State legislatures was strong enough to carry it, even with the word 410 "sex" included. Having failed to gain this point, the National Association determined to maintain the position that women were already enfranchised, and embodied it in the call for the Washington convention of 1872: "All those interested in woman's enfranchisement are invited to consider the 'new departure'—women already citizens, and their rights as such secured by the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments of the Federal Constitution."
Many Republican leaders acknowledged that these amendments could be interpreted to include women, but they were silenced by the call for "party strategy." The fear of jeopardizing the effort to grant voting rights to Black men led them to avoid adding the term "sex" to the Fifteenth Amendment, which would have settled the issue and ended the debate that had persisted for thirty years. The women argued that the urgency behind the ratification of the Fifteenth Amendment by the various state legislatures was strong enough to support it, even with the word 410 "sex" included. After failing to secure this change, the National Association decided to uphold the stance that women were already entitled to vote, integrating it into the invitation for the Washington convention of 1872: "Everyone interested in women's voting rights is invited to consider the 'new approach'—women are already citizens, and their rights as such are protected by the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments of the Federal Constitution."
The same position was re-asserted in the resolutions adopted at that meeting, which declared that "while the Constitution of the United States leaves the qualifications of electors to the various States, it nowhere gives them the right to deprive any citizen of the elective franchise which is possessed by any other citizen; the right to regulate not including the right to prohibit the franchise;" that "those provisions of the several State constitutions which exclude women from the franchise on account of sex, are violative alike of the letter and spirit of the Federal Constitution;" and that "as the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the Constitution have established the right of women to the elective franchise, we demand of the present Congress a declaratory act which shall secure us at once in the exercise of this right."
The same stance was reaffirmed in the resolutions approved at that meeting, which stated that "while the Constitution of the United States allows each State to set the qualifications for voters, it does not give them the authority to deny any citizen the right to vote that is granted to other citizens; the ability to regulate does not include the ability to restrict voting rights;" that "the sections of various State constitutions that exclude women from voting because of their gender violate both the letter and spirit of the Federal Constitution;" and that "since the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the Constitution have established women's right to vote, we call on the current Congress to enact a declaratory law that will immediately secure our ability to exercise this right."
Miss Anthony and other leaders officially asked the privilege of addressing the Senate and House upon this momentous question. This was refused, as contrary to precedent, but a hearing was granted before the Senate Judiciary Committee,[63] Friday morning, January 12. Not only the committee room but the corridors were crowded. Mrs. Stanton and Mrs. Hooker spoke grandly,[64] and as usual Miss Anthony was chosen to clinch the argument, which she did as follows:
Miss Anthony and other leaders officially requested the opportunity to speak to the Senate and House about this important issue. This request was denied, as it went against precedent, but a hearing was scheduled with the Senate Judiciary Committee,[63] on Friday morning, January 12. Both the committee room and the hallways were packed. Mrs. Stanton and Mrs. Hooker spoke eloquently,[64] and, as usual, Miss Anthony was selected to wrap up the argument, which she did as follows:
You already have had logic and Constitution; I shall refer, therefore, to existing facts. Prior to the war the plan of extending suffrage was by State action, and it was our boast that the National Constitution did not contain a word which could be construed into a barrier against woman's right to vote. But at the close of the war Congress lifted the question of suffrage for men above 411 State power, and by the amendments prohibited the deprivation of suffrage to any citizen by any State. When the Fourteenth Amendment was first proposed in Congress, we rushed to you with petitions praying you not to insert the word "male" in the second clause. Our best friends on the floor of Congress said to us: "The insertion of that word puts up no new barrier against woman; therefore do not embarrass us but wait until we get the negro question settled." So the Fourteenth Amendment with the word "male" was adopted.
You’ve already been taught about logic and the Constitution, so I'll get straight to the point. Before the war, the idea for expanding voting rights was through state action, and we took pride in the fact that the National Constitution didn’t block women’s right to vote. However, after the war, Congress removed control over voting rights for men from the states, and with the amendments, they prohibited states from taking away the right to vote from any citizen. When the Fourteenth Amendment was first introduced in Congress, we rushed to you with petitions asking not to include the word "male" in the second clause. Our closest allies in Congress told us, "Including that word doesn’t create any new barriers for women, so please don’t complicate things for us; just wait until we sort out the issue with Black voters." And so, the Fourteenth Amendment passed with the word "male" included.
Then, when the Fifteenth was presented without the word "sex," we again petitioned and protested, and again our friends declared that the absence of that word was no hindrance to us, and again begged us to wait until they had finished the work of the war. "After we have enfranchised the negro we will take up your case." Have they done as they promised? When we come asking protection under the new guarantees of the Constitution, the same men say to us that our only plan is to wait the action of Congress and State legislatures in the adoption of a Sixteenth Amendment which shall make null and void the word "male" in the Fourteenth, and supply the want of the word "sex" in the Fifteenth. Such tantalizing treatment imposed upon yourselves or any class of men would have caused rebellion and in the end a bloody revolution. It is only the close relations existing between the sexes which have prevented any such result from this injustice to women.
Then, when the Fifteenth Amendment was proposed without the word "sex," we once again petitioned and protested. Our supporters insisted that the absence of that word didn’t hold us back and they asked us to be patient until they finished their wartime efforts. "Once we secure rights for Black people, we’ll tackle your issue." Have they kept that promise? When we seek protection under the new guarantees of the Constitution, those same people tell us our only choice is to wait for Congress and state legislatures to adopt a Sixteenth Amendment that will remove the word "male" from the Fourteenth Amendment and address the lack of the word "sex" in the Fifteenth. Such frustrating treatment towards any group would have triggered rebellion and possibly a bloody revolution. It’s only the close relationships between genders that have prevented such an outcome from this injustice towards women.
Gentlemen, I should be sure of your decision could you but realize the fact that we, who have been battling for our rights now more than twenty years, feel precisely as you would under such circumstances. One of the most ardent lovers of freedom (Senator Sumner) said to me two winters ago, after our hearing before the committee of the District: "I never realized before that you or any woman could feel the disgrace, the degradation of disfranchisement precisely as I should if my fellow-citizens had conspired to deprive me of my right to vote." Although I am a Quaker and take no oath, yet I have made a most solemn "affirmation" that I will never again beg my rights, but will come to Congress each year and demand the recognition of them under the guarantees of the National Constitution.
What we ask of the Republican party is simply to take down its own bars. The facts in Wyoming show how it is that a Republican party can exist in that Territory. Before women voted, there was never a Republican elected to office; after their enfranchisement, the first election sent one Republican to Congress and seven to the Territorial Legislature. Thus the nucleus of a Republican party there was formed through the enfranchisement of women. The Democrats, seeing this, are now determined to disfranchise them. Can you Republicans so utterly stultify yourselves, can you so entirely work against yourselves, as to refuse us a declaratory law? We pray you to report immediately, as Mrs. Hooker has said, "favorably, if you can; adversely, if you must." We can wait no longer.
What we’re asking of the Republican Party is simply to remove its own barriers. The situation in Wyoming shows how a Republican Party can succeed in that territory. Before women had the right to vote, no Republicans were elected; after they gained that right, the first election sent one Republican to Congress and seven to the Territorial Legislature. This is how the Republican Party took root there, thanks to women getting the vote. The Democrats, seeing this, now want to take that right away. Can you Republicans really undermine yourselves and refuse to pass a declaratory law? We urge you to report back immediately, as Mrs. Hooker has said, "favorably, if you can; adversely, if you must." We can’t wait any longer.
The committee reported adversely on the question of woman's right to vote under the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments. 412
The committee reported negatively on the issue of women's right to vote under the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments. 412
At the close of the convention, Miss Anthony hastened to her home in Rochester, which she had not seen since her departure to California eight months before. Soon after her arrival she was invited to meet a number of her acquaintances at the home of her dear friend, Amy Post, and give them an account of her experiences on the Pacific slope. At its conclusion she was surprised by the presentation of a purse containing $50, with a touching address by Mrs. Post asking her to accept it as a testimonial of the appreciation in which her friends and neighbors held her work for woman and humanity. At the same time she received a gift of money from Sarah Pugh, in an envelope marked, "For thine own dear self." In her acknowledgment she says:
At the end of the convention, Miss Anthony rushed back to her home in Rochester, which she hadn’t seen since leaving for California eight months earlier. Shortly after getting back, she was invited to meet some friends at the home of her close friend, Amy Post, where she was to share her experiences from the Pacific coast. After her talk, she was amazed to receive a purse containing $50, along with a heartfelt message from Mrs. Post asking her to accept it as a gesture of appreciation from her friends and neighbors for her work on behalf of women and humanity. At the same time, she got a cash gift from Sarah Pugh in an envelope labeled, "For your own dear self." In her thank-you note, she says:
The tears started when I read your sweet letter. Were it not for the loving sympathy and confidence of the little handful of ever-faithful such as you, my spirit, I fear, would have fainted long ago. There are yourself, dear Lucretia and her equally dear sister, Martha, who never fail to know just the moment when my purse is drained to the bottom and to drop the needed dollar into it. It is really wonderful how I have been carried through all these years financially. I often feel that Elijah's being fed by the ravens was no more miraculous than my being furnished with the means to do the great work which has been for the past twenty years continuously presenting itself—yes, presenting itself, for it has always come to me. My thought has been to escape the hardships but they come ever and always, and so I try to accept the situation and work my way through as best I can.
I started crying when I read your sweet letter. If it weren't for the loving support and trust of a small group of loyal friends like you, my dear, I think I would have lost hope a long time ago. There’s you, dear Lucretia, and your equally dear sister, Martha, who always seem to know when my funds are running low and hand me a much-needed dollar. It's truly amazing how I've managed to get through all these years financially. I often feel that Elijah being fed by the ravens was no more miraculous than the way I've been provided with the means to do the important work that has continuously come my way over the past twenty years—yes, it has always found me. I’ve tried to dodge the hardships, but they keep coming, so I do my best to accept what is and find a way through it.

Amy Post
Amy Post
She was soon off again, lecturing in various cities and towns, going as far west as Nebraska. Early in April, while waiting at a little railroad station in Illinois, a gentleman came in 413 and handed her a copy of Woodhull and Claflin's Weekly containing this double-leaded announcement:
She was soon on her way again, giving talks in different cities and towns, reaching as far west as Nebraska. Early in April, while waiting at a small train station in Illinois, a man walked in and handed her a copy of Woodhull and Claflin's Weekly that featured this prominent announcement:
The undersigned citizens of the United States, responding to the invitation of the National Woman Suffrage Association, propose to hold a convention at Steinway Hall, in the city of New York, the 9th and 10th of May. We believe the time has come for the formation of a new political party whose principles shall meet the issues of the hour and represent equal rights for all. As women of the country are to take part for the first time in political action, we propose that the initiative steps in the convention shall be taken by them.... This convention will declare the platform of the People's party, and consider the nomination of candidates for President and Vice-President of the United States, who shall be the best possible exponents of political and industrial reform....
The undersigned citizens of the United States, responding to the invitation of the National Woman Suffrage Association, propose to hold a convention at Steinway Hall in New York City on May 9th and 10th. We believe the time has come to create a new political party that tackles current issues and advocates for equal rights for all. As women across the nation prepare to engage in political action for the first time, we suggest they take the lead during the convention.... This convention will set the platform for the People's Party and discuss the nomination of candidates for President and Vice President of the United States, who will best represent political and industrial reform....
ELIZABETH CADY STANTON, SUSAN E. ANTHONY, ISABELLA B. HOOKER, MATILDA JOSLYN GAGE.
It was followed by the call of Mrs. Woodhull and others for a delegate convention to form a new party. Miss Anthony was thunderstruck. Not only had she no knowledge of this action, but she was thoroughly opposed both to the forming of a new party and to the National Association's having any share in such a proceeding. She immediately telegraphed an order to have her name removed from the call, and wrote back indignant letters of protest against involving the association in such an affair. A month prior to this, on March 13, she had written Mrs. Stanton and Mrs. Hooker from Leavenworth:
It was followed by Mrs. Woodhull and others calling for a delegate convention to create a new party. Miss Anthony was shocked. Not only was she unaware of this action, but she was also completely against forming a new party and the National Association being involved in it. She immediately sent a telegram to have her name removed from the call and wrote back angry letters protesting the association's involvement in such a matter. A month earlier, on March 13, she had written to Mrs. Stanton and Mrs. Hooker from Leavenworth:
We have no element out of which to make a political party, because there is not a man who would vote a woman suffrage ticket if thereby he endangered his Republican, Democratic, Workingmen's or Temperance party, and all our time and words in that direction are simply thrown away. My name must not be used to call any such meeting. I will do all I can to support either of the leading parties which may adopt a woman suffrage plank or nominee; but no one of them wants to do anything for us, while each would like to use us....
We can't establish a political party because there isn’t a man who would vote for a women's suffrage ticket if it risked his Republican, Democratic, Workingmen's, or Temperance party. All our efforts and talks in that direction are just a waste. My name shouldn’t be used to organize any such meeting. I will do everything I can to support either of the major parties that might adopt a women's suffrage platform or candidate, but none of them really wants to help us, even though each would love to take advantage of us....
I tell you I feel utterly disheartened—not that our cause is going to die or be defeated, but as to my place and work. Mrs. Woodhull has the advantage of us because she has the newspaper, and she persistently means to run our craft into her port and none other. If she were influenced by women spirits, either in the body or out of it, in the direction she steers, I might consent to be a mere sail-hoister for her; but as it is, she is wholly owned and dominated by men spirits and I spurn the control of the whole lot of them, just precisely the same when reflected through her woman's tongue and pen as if they spoke directly for themselves.
I have to say, I feel completely discouraged—not because our cause will fail or be defeated, but because of my role and contributions. Mrs. Woodhull has the advantage because she has the newspaper, and she is determined to push our efforts toward her agenda and no one else's. If she were motivated by women spirits, whether in person or not, I might consider being just a supporter for her; but as it stands, she is entirely influenced and controlled by men spirits, and I reject their control, whether it comes through her voice and writing or directly from them.
After sending this letter she had supposed the question settled until she saw this notice, hence her anger and dismay can be imagined.
After sending this letter, she thought the issue was resolved until she saw this notice, so her anger and frustration can be imagined.
The regular anniversary meeting of the National Association was to begin in New York on May 9, and on the 6th Miss Anthony reached the city to prevent, if possible, the threatened coalition with the proposed new party. She engaged the parlors of the Westmoreland Hotel for headquarters and then hastened over to Tenafly to get Mrs. Stanton. As soon as the suffrage committee opened its business session, Mrs. Woodhull and her friends appeared by previous arrangement made during Miss Anthony's absence in the West, and announced that they would hold joint sessions with the suffrage convention the next two days at Steinway Hall. It was only by Miss Anthony's firm stand and indomitable will that this was averted, and that the set of resolutions which they brought, cut and dried, was defeated in the committee. She positively refused to allow them the use of Steinway Hall, which had been rented in her name, and at length they were compelled to give up the game and engage Apollo Hall for their "new party" convention. Mrs. Stanton and Mrs. Hooker called her narrow, bigoted and headstrong, but the proceedings of the "people's convention" next day, which nominated Mrs. Woodhull for President, showed how suicidal it would have been to have had it under the auspices of the National Suffrage Association.
The regular anniversary meeting of the National Association was set to start in New York on May 9, and on the 6th, Miss Anthony arrived in the city to try to stop a potential alliance with the proposed new party. She booked the parlors of the Westmoreland Hotel as headquarters and then quickly went over to Tenafly to pick up Mrs. Stanton. As soon as the suffrage committee opened its business session, Mrs. Woodhull and her friends showed up, having arranged this during Miss Anthony's time in the West, and announced that they would hold joint sessions with the suffrage convention for the next two days at Steinway Hall. It was only through Miss Anthony's strong stance and determination that this plan was stopped, and the set of resolutions they brought, already prepared, was defeated in the committee. She firmly refused to let them use Steinway Hall, which had been reserved in her name, and eventually, they had to concede and book Apollo Hall for their "new party" convention. Mrs. Stanton and Mrs. Hooker called her narrow-minded, bigoted, and stubborn, but the events of the "people's convention" the next day, which nominated Mrs. Woodhull for President, demonstrated how damaging it would have been to hold it under the National Suffrage Association's banner.
The forces of the latter, however, were greatly demoralized, the attendance at the convention was small, and Mrs. Stanton refused to serve longer as president. Miss Anthony was elected in her stead and, just as she was about to adjourn the first evening session, to her amazement Mrs. Woodhull came gliding in from the side of the platform and moved that "this convention adjourn to meet tomorrow morning at Apollo Hall!" An ally in the audience seconded the motion, Miss Anthony refused to put it, an appeal was made from the decision of the chair, Mrs. Woodhull herself put the motion and it was carried overwhelmingly. Miss Anthony declared the whole proceeding out of order, as the one making the motion, 415 the second, and the vast majority of those voting were not members of the association. She adjourned the convention to meet in the same place the next morning and, as Mrs. Woodhull persisted in talking, ordered the janitor to turn off the gas.
The forces of the latter, however, were really disheartened, the attendance at the convention was low, and Mrs. Stanton declined to continue as president. Miss Anthony was elected in her place and, just as she was about to end the first evening session, to her surprise, Mrs. Woodhull came gliding in from the side of the platform and suggested that "this convention adjourn to meet tomorrow morning at Apollo Hall!" An ally in the audience supported the motion, but Miss Anthony refused to put it to a vote. There was an appeal against the chair's decision, Mrs. Woodhull herself presented the motion, and it passed with strong support. Miss Anthony declared the entire process out of order, as the person making the motion, the one seconding it, and the large majority of those voting were not members of the association. She adjourned the convention to meet at the same place the next morning, and when Mrs. Woodhull continued to speak, she instructed the janitor to turn off the gas.
The next day, almost without assistance and deserted by those who should have stood by her, she went through with the remaining three sessions and brought the convention to a close. In her diary that evening is written: "A sad day for me; all came near being lost. Our ship was so nearly stranded by leaving the helm to others, that we rescued it only by a hair's breadth." She stopped at Lydia Mott's and then at Martha Wright's for comfort and sympathy, finding them in abundant measure, and reached home strengthened and refreshed, ready again to take up the work.
The next day, almost completely alone and abandoned by those who should have supported her, she finished the last three sessions and wrapped up the convention. That evening in her diary she wrote: "A sad day for me; it all came close to being lost. Our ship was nearly stranded because I left the steering to others, and we only saved it by a hair's breadth." She stopped by Lydia Mott's and then Martha Wright's for comfort and support, finding plenty of it, and returned home feeling strengthened and refreshed, ready to tackle the work again.
At the request of many suffrage advocates, Miss Anthony and Laura De Force Gordon went to the National Liberal Convention, at Cincinnati, May 2, 1872, with a resolution asking that as liberal Republicans they should hold fast to the principles of the Declaration of Independence and recognize the right of women to the franchise. The ladies were politely treated and invited to seats on the platform, but were not allowed to appear before the committee and no attention was paid to their resolution. They expected no favors from the presiding officer, Carl Schurz, the foreign born, always a bitter opponent of woman suffrage, but they had hoped for assistance from B. Gratz Brown, George W. Julian, Theodore Tilton and other leading spirits of the meeting, who had been open and avowed friends; but it was the old, old story—political exigency required that women must be sacrificed, and this so-called Liberal convention was no more liberal on this subject than all which had preceded it. Miss Anthony is quoted in an interview as saying:
At the request of many suffrage advocates, Miss Anthony and Laura De Force Gordon attended the National Liberal Convention in Cincinnati on May 2, 1872, with a resolution asking that as liberal Republicans, they should uphold the principles of the Declaration of Independence and acknowledge women's right to vote. The ladies were treated politely and invited to sit on the platform, but they were not allowed to present their case to the committee, and their resolution was ignored. They didn't expect any favors from the presiding officer, Carl Schurz, who was foreign-born and a longtime opponent of woman suffrage, but they had hoped for support from B. Gratz Brown, George W. Julian, Theodore Tilton, and other prominent figures at the meeting who had been openly supportive friends. However, it was the same old story—political necessities demanded that women be sidelined, and this so-called Liberal convention was just as unyielding on this issue as all its predecessors. Miss Anthony is quoted in an interview as saying:
You see our cause is just where the anti-slavery cause was for a long time. It had plenty of friends and supporters three years out of four, but every fourth year, when a President was to be elected, it was lost sight of; then the nation was to be saved and the slave must be sacrificed. So it is with us 416 women. Politicians are willing to use us at their gatherings to fill empty seats, to wave our handkerchiefs and clap our hands when they say smart things; but when we ask to be allowed to help them in any substantial way, by assisting them to choose the best men for our law-makers and rulers, they push us aside and tell us not to bother them.
Our cause is just as worthy as the anti-slavery movement was for a long time. It had a lot of supporters three years out of four, but every fourth year, when it was time to elect a President, it got pushed aside; then the nation had to be rescued, and the rights of the enslaved had to be compromised. It’s the same for us 416 women. Politicians love to use us at their events to fill seats, wave our handkerchiefs, and clap when they say something smart; but when we want to actually help them by supporting the right candidates for our lawmakers and leaders, they dismiss us and tell us not to disturb them.
On June 7 Miss Anthony and other prominent suffrage leaders attended the National Republican Convention, at Philadelphia, which adopted the following compromise:
On June 7, Miss Anthony and other key suffrage leaders attended the National Republican Convention in Philadelphia, which adopted the following compromise:
The Republican party is mindful of its obligations to the loyal women of America for their noble devotion to the cause of freedom; their admission to wider fields of usefulness is received with satisfaction; and the honest demands of any class of citizens for equal rights should be treated with respectful consideration.
The Republican Party acknowledges its duty to the dedicated women of America for their commitment to the cause of freedom; their pursuit of greater opportunities is encouraged; and the valid demands of any group of citizens for equal rights should be given respectful attention.
At the close of this meeting, the faithful Sarah Pugh slipped $20 into Miss Anthony's hand, telling her to go and confer with Mrs. Stanton. She did so and they prepared a strong letter for the New York World, calling upon the Democrats at Baltimore to adopt a woman suffrage plank if they did not wish to compel the women of the country to work for the success of the Republican ticket. Immediately after the Philadelphia convention, Henry B. Blackwell, editor of the Woman's Journal, wrote Miss Anthony:
At the end of this meeting, the devoted Sarah Pugh slipped $20 into Miss Anthony's hand, telling her to go talk to Mrs. Stanton. She did that, and they drafted a compelling letter for the New York World, urging the Democrats in Baltimore to include a woman suffrage plank if they didn't want to force the women of the country to support the Republican ticket. Right after the Philadelphia convention, Henry B. Blackwell, editor of the Woman's Journal, wrote to Miss Anthony:
I have given my views to Mrs. Stanton as to the wisdom of concentrating the woman suffragists in support of the Republican candidates and platform. I think if this is done earnestly, heartily and unselfishly, upon the ground of anti-slavery principle and of progressive tendencies, a strong and general reaction will set in and that, instead of "recognition," as in 1872, we shall have endorsement and victory in 1876.... I believe you love the cause better than yourself. I hope that you will see the wisdom of accepting the resolution in the friendly, generous spirit of the convention and, by accepting it, making it mean what we desire it should, which we can do if we will.
I’ve talked with Mrs. Stanton about how crucial it is for women suffragists to support the Republican candidates and their platform. I truly believe that if we take this on with sincerity, passion, and selflessness, rooted in anti-slavery principles and progressive values, we’ll see a strong and widespread response. Instead of just aiming for "recognition" like we did in 1872, we can secure endorsement and achieve victory in 1876... I believe you care more about the cause than yourself. I hope you can appreciate the importance of accepting the resolution in the friendly, generous spirit of the convention, and by doing so, help shape it to reflect our goals, which we can achieve if we decide to.
To this she replied on June 14:
To this, she replied on June 14:
Your note is here. My view of our true position is to hold ourselves as a balance of power, "to give aid and comfort," as the Springfield Republican says, to the party which shall inscribe on its banners "Freedom to Woman." If I am a Republican or Liberal or Democrat per se and work for the party right or wrong, then I make of myself and my co-workers no added power for or against the one which adopts or rejects our claim for recognition.
Your note is here. I think our best approach is to act as a balance of power, "to give aid and comfort," as the Springfield Republican says, to the party that adopts the slogan "Freedom for Women." If I identify as a Republican, Liberal, or Democrat and support that party regardless of its actions, then I don't give myself or my colleagues any extra influence for or against the party that acknowledges or ignores our call for recognition.
I do not expect any man to see and act with me here, but I do not understand 417 how any woman can do otherwise than refuse to accept any party which ignores her sex. I will not work with a party today on the war issues or because it was true to them in the olden time; but I will work with the one which accepts the living, vital issue of today—freedom to woman—and I scarcely have a hope that Baltimore will step ahead of Philadelphia in her platform. Grant's recognition of citizens' rights evidently means to include women, and Wilson's letter openly and boldly declares the new mission of Republicanism. I, therefore, now expect to take the field—the stump, if you please to call it so—for the Republican party, but not because of any of its nineteen planks save the fourteenth, which makes mention of woman, although faintly. It is "the promise of things not seen," hence I shall clutch it as the drowning man the floating straw, and cling to it until something stronger and surer shall present itself. It is a great step to get this first recognition; it carries the discussion of our question legitimately into every school district and every ward meeting of the presidential canvass. It is what my soul has waited for these seven years. From this we shall go rapidly onward.
I don't expect any man to see things my way here, but I really can't understand 417 how any woman can do anything but reject a party that disregards her gender. I won't align with a party today on war issues or because it was loyal to them in the past; I will support the one that focuses on the crucial issue of the moment—women's freedom—and I hardly believe that Baltimore will surpass Philadelphia in its platform. Grant's acknowledgment of citizens' rights clearly means to include women, and Wilson's letter openly outlines the new mission of Republicanism. So, I now plan to take the stage—the stump, if you will—for the Republican Party, but not because of any of its nineteen points except the fourteenth, which mentions women, though in vague terms. It’s "the promise of things not seen," so I’ll hold onto it like a drowning person clings to a piece of floating straw, and I’ll keep holding on until something stronger and more certain comes along. This initial recognition is a massive step; it brings our issue into every school district and local meeting of the presidential campaign. This is what my soul has been waiting for these seven years. From here, we’ll move forward quickly.
Miss Anthony and Mrs. Hooker attended the National Democratic Convention at Baltimore, July 9. The latter some time before had repudiated her life-long allegiance to the Republican party, because of its treatment of woman's claims, and had declared her belief that their only chance was with the Democrats. The Baltimore Sun thus describes an interview in the corridor between the Hon. James R. Doolittle, president of the convention, and Miss Anthony and Mrs. Hooker: "Mr. Doolittle's erect and commanding figure was set off to great advantage by his elegantly-fitting dress-coat; Mrs. Hooker, tall and erect as the lord of creation she was bearding, with her abundant tresses of beautiful gray and her intellectual, sparkling eyes; Miss Anthony, the peer of both in height, with her gold spectacles set forward on a nose which would have delighted Napoleon; the two ladies attired in rich black silk—the attention of the few who lingered was at once attracted to the picture." But Mr. Doolittle justified his name, as far as extending any assistance was concerned, and the ladies had not even seats on the platform.
Miss Anthony and Mrs. Hooker attended the National Democratic Convention in Baltimore on July 9. Mrs. Hooker had previously rejected her long-standing loyalty to the Republican Party due to its treatment of women's issues and declared her belief that their only hope lay with the Democrats. The Baltimore Sun describes an interaction in the corridor between Hon. James R. Doolittle, president of the convention, and Miss Anthony and Mrs. Hooker: "Mr. Doolittle's tall and commanding figure was complemented by his well-fitted dress coat; Mrs. Hooker, standing tall as the man she was confronting, had her beautiful gray hair cascading and her sharp, sparkling eyes; Miss Anthony, equally tall, sported gold spectacles perched on a nose that would have pleased Napoleon; both ladies were dressed in rich black silk, capturing the attention of the few onlookers." However, Mr. Doolittle didn’t offer any support, and the ladies didn’t even have seats on the platform.
As an example of the way in which the politicians tried not to do it and yet seem to sufficiently to secure such small influence as the women might possess, may be quoted a letter from 418 Hon. John Cochran, of New York City, to Mrs. Stanton, his cousin: "I think Baltimore should speak on the subject. I am sorry Cincinnati did not. Any baby could say that fourteenth formula in the Philadelphia platform; but I would say something more if I said anything at all. Come, see if you can rig up this shaky plank and give something not quite suffrage, but so like it that all the female Sampsons will vote that it is good." The Baltimore convention, however, could not be induced to adopt even a rickety plank which might fool the women. Miss Anthony writes in her diary: "The Democrats have swallowed Cincinnati, hoofs, horns and all. No hope for women here."
As an example of how politicians tried to avoid making a real commitment while still seeming to grab hold of any small influence women might have, a letter from 418 Hon. John Cochran, from New York City, to his cousin Mrs. Stanton reads: "I think Baltimore should address this issue. I’m sorry Cincinnati didn’t. Anyone could recite that fourteenth formula in the Philadelphia platform; but I’d say something more if I had to say anything at all. Come on, see if you can fix this shaky plank and provide something that’s not quite suffrage, but similar enough that all the female Sampsons will think it’s good." However, the Baltimore convention couldn’t be convinced to adopt even a flimsy plank that might trick women. Miss Anthony writes in her diary: "The Democrats have completely consumed Cincinnati, hoofs, horns and all. No hope for women here."
While the Republican plank was unsatisfactory, it was the first time Woman ever had been mentioned in a national platform and so many glittering hopes were held out by the Republican leaders that the officers of the National Association felt justified in giving their influence to this party. They were the more willing to do this as General Grant, the nominee, had been the first President to appoint women postmasters and was known to be friendly to their claim for equal opportunities, and as Henry Wilson, candidate for Vice-President, was an avowed advocate of woman suffrage. Therefore, Miss Anthony, president, and Matilda Joslyn Gage, chairman of the executive committee, on July 19 sent out a ringing address which began:
While the Republican platform was disappointing, it was the first time women were mentioned in a national platform, and the Republican leaders offered so many bright hopes that the officers of the National Association felt justified in supporting this party. They were even more inclined to do so since General Grant, the nominee, was the first President to appoint women as postmasters and was known to support their demand for equal opportunities, and Henry Wilson, the candidate for Vice-President, was a known advocate for women's suffrage. So, Miss Anthony, the president, and Matilda Joslyn Gage, chair of the executive committee, sent out an emphatic address on July 19 that started:
Women of the United States, the hour for political action has come. For the first time in the history of our country, woman has been recognized in the platform of a large and dominant party. Philadelphia has spoken and woman is no longer ignored. She is now officially recognized as a part of the body politic.... We are told that the plank does not say much, that in fact it is only a "splinter;" and our Liberal friends warn us not to rely upon it as a promise of the ballot to women. What it is, we know even better than others. We recognize its meagerness; we see in it the timidity of politicians; but beyond and through all, we see a promise of the future. It is the thin side of the entering wedge which shall break woman's slavery in pieces and make us at last a nation truly free—a nation in which the caste of sex shall fall down by the caste of color, and humanity alone be the criterion of all human rights. The Republican has been the party of ideas; of progress. Under its leadership, the nation came safely through the fiery ordeal of the rebellion; under it slavery was destroyed; under it manhood 419 suffrage was established. The women of the country have long looked to it in hope, and not in vain; for today we are launched by it into the political arena, and the Republican party must hereafter fight our battles for us. This great, this progressive party, having taken the initiative step, will never go back on its record.
Women of the United States, the time for political action is now. For the first time in our country's history, women have been acknowledged by a major political party. Philadelphia has spoken, and women are no longer ignored. They are officially recognized as part of the political community…. We're told that the statement doesn't say much, that it's just a “splinter;” and our Liberal friends warn us not to expect it to mean a promise of voting rights for women. We understand its limitations better than anyone. We see the hesitation of politicians; but beyond that, we see a sign of hope for the future. It is the first step that will break the chains of women and finally make us a truly free nation—a nation where gender divisions crumble alongside racial divisions, and humanity sets the standard for all human rights. The Republican Party has been the party of ideas and progress. Under its leadership, the nation successfully navigated the difficult times of rebellion; with it, slavery was abolished; with it, men gained the right to vote. The women of this country have long looked to it with hope, and not in vain; for today we are entering the political arena, and the Republican Party must champion our causes going forward. This great, progressive party, having taken the first step, will never retreat from its commitment.
In July Miss Anthony, continuing the correspondence with Mr. Blackwell, wrote:
In July, Miss Anthony continued her correspondence with Mr. Blackwell and wrote:
Letters are pouring in upon me because of my announcement that I shall work for the Republican party, second only in numbers and regret to those of 1868—because of my accepting Train's words, works and cash, given me to push on the cause of woman suffrage as best I knew. It is marvelous that the friends can not see what a gain it is to have the question of woman's claims introduced into politics. It is the hour I have longed and worked for with might and main because I have seen that so soon as we could get this, the editors and orators of both parties must of necessity discuss the subject pro and con, and of course the party which introduced it favorably into politics, must be the one to give the reasons for so doing.
I’m receiving a lot of letters after announcing my support for the Republican Party, second only to those from 1868—because I accepted Train's words, efforts, and money, which were given to me to promote women’s suffrage as best as I could. It's amazing that friends can’t see how important it is to have women's rights included in politics. This is the moment I’ve been waiting for and working toward with all my strength because I believe that once we achieve this, the editors and speakers from both parties will have to debate the issue, both for and against. Naturally, the party that brings it into politics in a positive way will be the one to explain their motives.
As I endured the growling when I was charged with giving too much "aid and comfort" to the Democracy, because I thanked them for what they did to agitate our demand in Congress and out, I think I shall be equal to the fire now for affiliating with the Republicans. You did me the grossest injustice in the Woman's Journal, when you called me a "woman suffrage Democrat," just as gross as the Liberals will be likely to do, when they shall call me a "woman suffrage Republican." I belong to neither party, and approve of one or the other only as it shall speak and work for the enfranchisement of woman. Had Cincinnati declared for woman, and Philadelphia not, I should have worked with might and main for the Liberals. All I know or care of parties now and until women are free, is "woman and her disfranchised—crucified!"
As I dealt with the pushback for being too supportive of the Democrats because I acknowledged their role in pushing our demands in Congress, I feel ready to face criticism now for associating with the Republicans. You seriously wronged me in the Woman's Journal by calling me a "woman suffrage Democrat," just as the Liberals are likely to do when they label me a "woman suffrage Republican." I don’t belong to either party and only support one or the other if it fights for women's voting rights. If Cincinnati had supported women's rights and Philadelphia hadn’t, I would have fought hard for the Liberals. Right now, what I care about regarding parties, until women are free, is "woman and her disfranchised—crucified!"
It is most touching to observe Miss Anthony's joy over this quasi-recognition on the part of Republicans, the more especially at the beginning of the campaign. In her journal of July 26 she says: "It is so strange that all can not see the immense gain to us to have the party in power commit itself to a respectful treatment of our claims. Already the tone of the entire Republican press is elevated. It is wonderful to see the change. None but the Liberals deride us now, and Theodore Tilton stands at their head in light and scurrilous treatment." To her old friend Mrs. Bloomer, she sent this rallying cry: "Ho for the battle now! The lines are clearly drawn.... Slight as is the Republicans' mention of our claim in their 420 plank, it surely is vastly more and better than the disrespect of no mention at all by the Democrats, coupled with the fact that their nominee, Mr. Greeley, is an out-and-out opponent of our movement, and does not now refrain from saying to earnest suffrage women that he 'neither desires our help nor believes we are capable of giving any.'"
It’s really touching to see Miss Anthony’s happiness over this kind of acknowledgment from the Republicans, especially at the start of the campaign. In her journal from July 26, she writes: "It’s so strange that not everyone can see the huge benefit for us having the party in power commit to treating our claims with respect. Already the tone of the entire Republican press has improved. It’s amazing to see the change. Only the Liberals mock us now, and Theodore Tilton leads them with his light and nasty comments." To her old friend Mrs. Bloomer, she sent this rallying cry: "Let’s get ready for battle now! The lines are clearly drawn... As minimal as the Republicans’ mention of our claim is in their 420 plank, it’s definitely more and better than the Democrats completely ignoring us, especially since their nominee, Mr. Greeley, is a full-on opponent of our movement and openly tells serious suffrage women that he 'neither wants our help nor believes we can offer any.'"
To Mrs. Stanton she wrote: "The Democrats have now abandoned their old dogmas and accepted those of the Republicans, while the latter have stepped up higher to labor reform and woman suffrage. Forney's editorial in the Philadelphia Press of July 11 states positively that the woman suffrage cause is espoused by the Republican party. I tell you the Fort Sumter gun of our war is fired, and we will go on to victory almost without a repulse from this date." But Mrs. Stanton could not share in her optimism, and replied: "I do not feel jubilant over the situation; in fact I never was so blue in my life. You and Mr. Blackwell write most enthusiastically, and I try to feel so and to see that the 'Philadelphia splinter' is something. Between nothing and that, there is no choice, and we must accept it. With my natural pride of character, it makes me feel intensely bitter to have my rights discussed by popinjay priests and politicians, to have woman's work in church and State decided by striplings of twenty-one, and the press of the country in a broad grin because, forsooth, some American matrons choose to attend a political convention. Now do I know how Robert Purvis feels when these 'white mules' turn round their long left ears at him. But let the Democrats and Liberals do what they may, the cat will mew, the dog will have his day. Dear friend, you ask me what I see. I am under a cloud and see nothing."
To Mrs. Stanton she wrote: "The Democrats have now ditched their old beliefs and embraced those of the Republicans, while the Republicans have pushed even further towards labor reform and women's suffrage. Forney's editorial in the Philadelphia Press from July 11 claims that the Republican party supports the women's suffrage cause. I tell you, the gunshot at Fort Sumter in our war has been fired, and we will move toward victory almost without any setbacks from this point on." But Mrs. Stanton couldn't share her optimism and replied: "I don’t feel cheerful about the situation; in fact, I’ve never felt so down in my life. You and Mr. Blackwell write so enthusiastically, and I try to feel that way and to see that the 'Philadelphia splinter' is significant. Between nothing and that, there’s no choice, and we have to accept it. With my natural pride, it makes me feel extremely bitter to have my rights discussed by showy priests and politicians, to have women's contributions in church and State decided by twenty-one-year-olds, and the press of the country laughing because, of all things, some American women choose to attend a political convention. Now I understand how Robert Purvis feels when those 'white mules' turn their long left ears at him. But let the Democrats and Liberals do what they want, the cat will meow, the dog will have its day. Dear friend, you ask me what I see. I’m under a cloud and see nothing."
Under date of August 19, Henry Wilson wrote Miss Anthony: "Your cheerful and cheering note came to me in Indiana. In great haste I can only say that I like its spirit, believe in its doctrines, and will call the attention of the Republican committees, both national and New York, to your suggestions, and trust and believe that much good may result from carrying into effect its suggestions." 421
Under the date of August 19, Henry Wilson wrote to Miss Anthony: "Your uplifting and encouraging note reached me in Indiana. In a hurry, I can only say that I appreciate its spirit, believe in its ideas, and will bring your suggestions to the attention of the Republican committees, both at the national level and in New York. I trust that we can achieve great things by putting your suggestions into action." 421
On July 16 Miss Anthony had received a telegram from Washington to come at once for a conference with the Republican committee. Her sister and mother were very ill and she would not leave them, even for such a summons. On the 24th another telegram came, but it was not until the 29th that she felt safe in leaving the invalids. When she reached Washington, the chairman of the committee said: "At the time we sent our first telegram we were panic-stricken and had you come then, you might have had what you pleased to carry out your plan of work among the women; but now the crisis has passed and we feel confident of success; nevertheless, we will be glad of your co-operation." He gave her a check of $500, to which the New York committee added $500 more, to hold meetings in that State.
On July 16, Miss Anthony received a telegram from Washington asking her to come immediately for a meeting with the Republican committee. Her sister and mother were very sick, and she wouldn’t leave them, even for such a request. On the 24th, another telegram arrived, but it wasn’t until the 29th that she felt it was safe to leave the invalids. When she got to Washington, the chairman of the committee said, "At the time we sent our first telegram, we were in a panic, and had you come then, you could have done whatever you needed to execute your plans with the women; but now the crisis has passed, and we feel confident of success; however, we would appreciate your help." He gave her a check for $500, which the New York committee added another $500 to, to hold meetings in that State.

Henry Wilson
Henry Wilson
The same change of feeling was noticeable in the press. Immediately after the Baltimore convention, when it looked as if Greeley might be elected, the Republican newspapers were filled with appeals to the women, and the plank was magnified to suit any interpretation they might choose, but as the campaign progressed and the danger passed, it was almost wholly ignored by both press and platform. The Republicans did, however, employ a number 422 of women speakers during the campaign, but Miss Anthony received no money except this $1,000, all of which she expended in public meetings. The first was at Rochester, September 20, and, the daily papers said, "far surpassed any rally held during the season." Mayor Carter Wilder presided, and the speakers were Mrs. Stanton, Mrs. Gage and Rev. Olympia Brown. The series closed with a tremendous meeting at Cooper Institute, Hon. Luther R. Marsh presiding, and Peter Cooper, Edmund Yates and a number of other prominent men on the stage. Henry Ward Beecher had agreed to preside and to speak at this meeting, but at the last moment was called away.
The same shift in sentiment was noticeable in the press. Right after the Baltimore convention, when it seemed like Greeley might actually be elected, the Republican newspapers were full of appeals to women, and the platform was exaggerated to
Miss Anthony was considerably at variance with some of the Republican politicians, however, because she and her associates, through all the campaign, persisted in speaking on the woman's plank in the platform and advocating equal suffrage, instead of ignoring these points, as the men speakers did, and making the fight on the other issues of the party. Her position is best stated in one of her own letters to Mrs. Stanton early in the autumn:
Miss Anthony strongly disagreed with some of the Republican politicians because she and her supporters continued to emphasize the women's rights issue in their campaign. They advocated for equal suffrage, while the male speakers chose to overlook these topics and focus on other party issues. Her views are best expressed in one of her letters to Mrs. Stanton early in the autumn:
If you are ready to go forth into this canvass saying that you endorse the party on any other point or for any other cause than that of its recognition of woman's claim to vote, I am not and I shall not thus go. To the contrary, I shall work for the Republican party and call on all women to join me, precisely as we thanked the Democrats of Wyoming and Kansas, and Hon. James Brooks and Senator Cowan, viz: for what that party has done and promises to do for woman, nothing more, nothing less.
If you're ready to support this initiative by backing the party for reasons other than recognizing women's right to vote, I am not, and I won’t take that route. On the contrary, I will support the Republican Party and urge all women to join me, just as we showed our appreciation to the Democrats of Wyoming and Kansas, and Hon. James Brooks and Senator Cowan, specifically for what that party has done and promises to do for women—nothing more, nothing less.
Then again, I shall not join with the Republicans in hounding Greeley and the Liberals with all the old war anathemas of the Democracy. Greeley and all the Liberals are just as good and true Republicans as ever; and the fact that old pro-slavery men propose to vote for him no more makes him pro-slavery than the drunkards' or rum-sellers' vote for him makes him a friend and advocate of the liquor traffic. My sense of justice and truth is outraged by the Harpers' cartoons of Greeley and the general falsifying tone of the Republican press. It is not fair for us to join in the cry that everybody who is opposed to the present administration is either a Democrat or an apostate.
However, I won’t team up with the Republicans to attack Greeley and the Liberals using the same old insults from the Democrats. Greeley and all the Liberals are still just as good and true Republicans as ever; and the fact that old pro-slavery individuals plan to vote for him doesn’t make him pro-slavery any more than the votes from drunkards or rum-sellers for him make him a supporter of the liquor industry. My sense of justice and truth is appalled by the Harpers' cartoons of Greeley and the overall misleading tone of the Republican press. It’s wrong for us to claim that everyone who opposes the current administration is either a Democrat or a traitor.
I shall try to be "careful and not captious," as you suggest, but more than all, I shall try not to run myself or my cause into the slough of political schemes or schemers. And I pray you, be prudent and conscientious, and do not surrender one iota of true principle or of our philosophy of reform to aid mere Republican partisanship.
I’ll do my best to be “careful and not picky,” as you suggest, but above all, I’ll ensure that I don’t get myself or my cause caught up in political schemes or schemers. And please, be wise and principled, and don’t compromise even a bit of true principle or our philosophy of reform just to support mere Republican partisanship.
Miss Anthony never has abandoned this position and the leading advocates of woman suffrage stand with her squarely upon the ground that no party, whatever its principles, shall have their sanction and advocacy until it shall make an unequivocal declaration in favor of the enfranchisement of women and support this by means of the party press and platform.
Miss Anthony has always maintained this stance, and the main supporters of women's suffrage fully agree that no political party, regardless of its principles, should receive their backing or endorsement until it clearly declares its support for women's voting rights and promotes this through the party's press and platform.
There was a desire on the part of many women to test the right to vote which they claimed was conferred on them by the Fourteenth Amendment, and in 1872 a number in different places attempted to cast their ballots at the November election. A few were accepted by the inspectors, but most of them were refused. On Friday morning, November 1, Miss Anthony read, at the head of the editorial columns of the Rochester Democrat and Chronicle, the following strong plea:
There was a desire among many women to assert their right to vote, which they believed was granted to them by the Fourteenth Amendment. In 1872, several women in various locations tried to cast their ballots during the November election. A few of their votes were accepted by the officials, but most were turned away. On the morning of Friday, November 1, Miss Anthony read a powerful plea at the top of the editorial columns of the Rochester Democrat and Chronicle:
Now register! Today and tomorrow are the only remaining opportunities. If you were not permitted to vote, you would fight for the right, undergo all privations for it, face death for it. You have it now at the cost of five minutes' time to be spent in seeking your place of registration and having your name entered. And yet, on election day, less than a week hence, hundreds of you are likely to lose your votes because you have not thought it worth while to give the five minutes. Today and tomorrow are your only opportunities. Register now!
Register now! Today and tomorrow are your last chances. If you weren’t allowed to vote, you’d fight for that right, go through struggles for it, and maybe even risk your life for it. You have that right now, and it only takes five minutes to find out where to register and get your name on the list. Yet, on election day, which is less than a week away, many of you will likely miss the chance to vote because you didn’t think those five minutes were worth it. Today and tomorrow are your final opportunities. Register now!
There was nothing to indicate that this appeal was made to men only, it said plainly that suffrage was a right for which one would fight and face death, and that it could be had at the cost of five minutes' time. She was a loyal American citizen, had just conducted a political campaign, was thoroughly conversant with the issues and vitally interested in the results of the election, and certainly competent to vote. She summoned her three faithful sisters and going to the registry office of the Eighth ward (in a barber's shop) they asked to be registered. There was some hesitation, but Miss Anthony read the Fourteenth Amendment and the article in the State constitution in regard to taking the oath, which made no sex-qualification, and at length their names were duly entered by the inspectors, Beverly W. Jones and Edwin F. Marsh, Republicans; William B. Hall, Democrat, objecting. Miss Anthony then called 424 upon several other women in her ward, urging them to follow her example, and in all fifteen registered. The evening papers noted this fact and the next day enough women in other wards followed their example to bring the number up to fifty.
There was nothing to suggest that this appeal was aimed only at men; it clearly stated that the right to vote was something worth fighting for, even risking death, and that it could be obtained in just five minutes. She was a dedicated American citizen, had just run a political campaign, knew the issues inside and out, was deeply invested in the election's outcome, and was definitely qualified to vote. She gathered her three loyal sisters and went to the registry office in the Eighth ward (which was located in a barber's shop) to request registration. There was some hesitation, but Miss Anthony read the Fourteenth Amendment and the relevant section of the State constitution regarding the oath, which imposed no gender qualifications, and eventually their names were officially entered by the inspectors, Beverly W. Jones and Edwin F. Marsh, both Republicans, while William B. Hall, a Democrat, raised objections. Miss Anthony then called 424 several other women in her ward, encouraging them to follow her lead, and a total of fifteen registered. The evening papers reported on this, and the following day enough women in other wards did the same, raising the total to fifty.
The Rochester Express and the Democrat and Chronicle (Republican) noted the circumstance, expressing no opinion, but the Union and Advertiser (Democratic) denounced the proceeding and declared that "if the votes of these women were received the inspectors should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law." This attack was kept up till the day of election, November 5, with the result of so terrorizing the inspectors that all refused to accept the votes of the women who had registered except those in the Eighth ward where the ballots of the fifteen[65] were received.
The Rochester Express and the Democrat and Chronicle (Republican) acknowledged the situation without taking a stance, but the Union and Advertiser (Democratic) condemned the action and stated that "if the votes of these women were accepted, the inspectors should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law." This criticism continued up to election day, November 5, resulting in the inspectors being so intimidated that they all refused to accept the votes of the registered women, except for those in the Eighth ward, where the ballots of the fifteen[65] were accepted.
In a letter to Mrs. Stanton, Miss Anthony says: "Well, I have been and gone and done it, positively voted this morning at 7 o'clock, and swore my vote in at that. Not a jeer, not a rude word, not a disrespectful look has met one woman. Now if all our suffrage women would work to this end of enforcing the constitutional supremacy of National over State law, what strides we might make from now on; but oh, I'm so tired! I've been on the go constantly for five days, but to good purpose, so all right. I hope you too voted."
In a letter to Mrs. Stanton, Miss Anthony says: "Well, I went ahead and did it—I voted this morning at 7 o'clock and confirmed my vote then. Not a single jeer, not a rude word, not a disrespectful look has come from any woman. Now, if all our suffrage supporters would work towards enforcing the constitutional authority of National law over State law, think of the progress we could make from now on; but oh, I’m so tired! I’ve been busy non-stop for five days, but it’s been worthwhile, so that’s good. I hope you voted too."
The news of the acceptance of these votes was sent by the Associated Press to all parts of the country and created great interest and excitement. There was scarcely a newspaper in the United States which did not contain from one to a dozen editorial comments. Some of these were flippant or abusive, most of them non-committal but respectful, and many earnest, dignified and commendatory;[66] a few, notably the New York Graphic, contained outrageous cartoons. 425
The news about the acceptance of these votes was sent by the Associated Press to all corners of the country and generated a lot of interest and excitement. Almost every newspaper in the United States included anywhere from one to a dozen editorial comments. Some of these were casual or harsh, most were neutral but respectful, and many were earnest, dignified, and commendatory; [66] a few, particularly the New York Graphic, featured outrageous cartoons. 425
Immediately after registering Miss Anthony had gone to a number of the leading lawyers in Rochester for advice as to her right to vote on the following Tuesday, but none of them would consider her case. Finally she entered the office of Henry R. Selden, a leading member of the bar and formerly judge of the court of appeals. He listened to her attentively, took the mass of documents which she had brought with her—Benjamin F. Butler's minority report, Francis Minor's resolutions, Judge Riddle's speech made in Washington in a similar case the year previous, various Supreme Court decisions, an incontrovertible array of argument—and told her he would give her an answer on Monday. She called then and he said: "My brother Samuel and I have spent an entire day in examining these papers and we believe that your claim to a right to vote under the Fourteenth Amendment is valid. I will protect you in that right to the best of my ability."
Immediately after registering, Miss Anthony consulted several top lawyers in Rochester to find out if she had the right to vote the following Tuesday, but none of them would take her case. Finally, she went to see Henry R. Selden, a prominent lawyer and former judge of the court of appeals. He listened carefully as she presented the documents she had gathered—Benjamin F. Butler's minority report, Francis Minor's resolutions, Judge Riddle's speech from a similar case in Washington the year before, various Supreme Court rulings, a compelling set of arguments—and he promised to give her an answer on Monday. When she returned, he said, "My brother Samuel and I have spent the whole day reviewing these papers, and we believe your claim to vote under the Fourteenth Amendment is valid. I will do my best to protect that right for you."
Armed with this authority she cast her vote the next day, and advised the other women to do the same. As the inspectors 426 hesitated to receive the votes, Miss Anthony assured them that should they be prosecuted she herself would bear all the expenses of the suit. They had been advised not to register the women by Silas J. Wagner, Republican supervisor. All three of the inspectors and also a bystander declared under oath that Daniel J. Warner, the Democratic supervisor, had advised them to register the names of the women; but on election day this same man attempted to challenge their votes. This, however, already had been done by one Sylvester Lewis, who testified later that he acted for the Democratic central committee. The general belief that these ladies voted the Republican ticket may have influenced this action.
Armed with this authority, she cast her vote the next day and encouraged the other women to do the same. As the inspectors 426 hesitated to accept the votes, Miss Anthony assured them that if they were prosecuted, she would cover all the legal expenses. They had been told not to register the women by Silas J. Wagner, the Republican supervisor. All three inspectors and a bystander swore an oath that Daniel J. Warner, the Democratic supervisor, had advised them to register the women's names; however, on election day, this same man tried to challenge their votes. This had already been done by someone named Sylvester Lewis, who later testified that he was acting on behalf of the Democratic central committee. The general belief that these ladies voted for the Republican ticket may have influenced this action.
About two weeks after election, Monday, November 18, Miss Anthony received a call from Deputy United States Marshal E.J. Keeney who, amid many blushes and much hesitation and stammering, announced that it was his unpleasant duty to arrest her. "Is this your usual method of serving a warrant?" she calmly inquired. The marshal, thus encouraged, produced the necessary legal document.[67] As she wished to make some change in her dress, he told her she could come down alone to the commissioner's office, but she refused to take herself to court, so he waited until she was ready and then declined her suggestion that he put handcuffs on her. She had intended to have suit brought against those inspectors who refused to register the women, but it never had occurred to her that those who voted would themselves be arrested.
About two weeks after the election, on Monday, November 18, Miss Anthony got a call from Deputy United States Marshal E.J. Keeney, who, blushing and hesitating, reluctantly announced that he had to arrest her. "Is this your usual way of serving a warrant?" she asked calmly. Encouraged, the marshal then presented the necessary legal document.[67] When she said she wanted to change her outfit, he told her she could come down to the commissioner's office alone, but she refused to go to court by herself. So, he waited until she was ready and declined her suggestion that he put handcuffs on her. She had planned to sue the inspectors who had refused to register the women, but it had never crossed her mind that the voters themselves would be arrested.
Under date of November 27, Judge Selden wrote her: "I suppose the commissioner will, as a matter of course, hold you for trial at the circuit court, whatever your rights may be in the matter. In my opinion, the idea that you can be charged with a crime on account of voting, or offering to vote, when you honestly believed yourself entitled to vote, is simply 427 preposterous, whether your belief were right or wrong. However, the learned gentlemen engaged in this movement seem to suppose they can make a crime out of your honest deposit of your ballot, and perhaps they can find a respectable court or jury that will be of their opinion. If they do so I shall be greatly disappointed."
On November 27, Judge Selden wrote to her: "I assume the commissioner will automatically hold you for trial at the circuit court, no matter what your rights are in this situation. In my opinion, the idea that you can be charged with a crime for voting, or trying to vote, when you genuinely believed you had the right to vote, is simply 427 ridiculous, whether your belief whether it was right or wrong. However, the learned gentlemen involved in this movement seem to think they can turn your honest act of casting a ballot into a crime, and maybe they can find a respectable court or jury that agrees with them. If that happens, I will be very disappointed."
Miss Anthony and the fourteen other ladies who voted, went before U. S. Commissioner Storrs, U. S. District-Attorney Crowley and Assistant U. S. District-Attorney Pond, and were ordered to appear for examination Friday, November 29. Following is a portion of the examination of Miss Anthony by the commissioner:
Miss Anthony and the fourteen other women who voted went before U.S. Commissioner Storrs, U.S. District Attorney Crowley, and Assistant U.S. District Attorney Pond, and were ordered to appear for questioning on Friday, November 29. Below is part of Miss Anthony's examination by the commissioner:
Previous to voting at the 1st district poll in the Eighth ward, did you take the advice of counsel upon your voting?—Yes, sir.—Who was it you talked with?—Judge Henry E. Selden.—What did he advise you in reference to your legal right to vote?—He said it was the only way to find out what the law was upon the subject—to bring it to a test case.—Did he advise you to offer your vote?—Yes, sir.—State whether or not, prior to such advice, you had retained Mr. Selden. No, sir.—Have you anything further to say upon Judge Selden's advice?—I think it was sound.—Did he give you an opinion upon the subject?—He was like the rest of you lawyers—he had not studied the question.—What did he advise you?—He left me with this opinion: That he was a conscientious man; that he would thoroughly study the subject of woman's right to vote and decide according to the law.—Did you have any doubt yourself of your right to vote?—Not a particle.
Before voting at the 1st district poll in the Eighth ward, did you consult a lawyer about your right to vote? — Yes, I did. — Who did you speak with? — Judge Henry E. Selden. — What did he advise you about your legal right to vote? — He mentioned that the only way to clarify the law on the subject was to bring it to a test case. — Did he advise you to cast your vote? — Yes, he did. — Did you hire Mr. Selden before receiving that advice? — No, I hadn't. — Do you have anything else to say about Judge Selden's advice? — I believe it was sound. — Did he give you an opinion on the matter? — He was like most lawyers—he hadn’t studied the issue. — What did he advise you? — He left me with this opinion: That he was a conscientious man; that he would thoroughly study the topic of women's right to vote and decide based on the law. — Did you have any doubts about your right to vote? — Not at all.
Cross-examination—Would you not have made the same efforts to vote that you did, if you had not consulted with Judge Selden?—Yes, sir.—Were you influenced in the matter by his advice at all?—No, sir.—You went into this matter for the purpose of testing the question?—Yes, sir; I had been resolved for three years to vote at the first election when I had been at home for thirty days before.
Cross-examination—Would you have made the same effort to vote if you hadn't spoken to Judge Selden?—Yes, sir.—Did his advice influence your decision in any way?—No, sir.—You approached this to test the question?—Yes, sir; I had been determined for three years to vote in the first election after I had been home for thirty days.
It is an incident worthy of note that this examination took place and the commissioner's decision was rendered in the same dingy little room where, in the olden days, fugitive slaves were examined and returned to their masters. While the attorneys were endeavoring to agree upon a date for the hearing of arguments, Miss Anthony remarked that she should be engaged lecturing in central Ohio until December 10. "But you are supposed to be in custody all this time," said the district-attorney. "Oh, is that so? I had forgotten all about that," 428 she replied. That night she wrote in her diary: "A hard day and a sad anniversary! Ten years ago our dear father was laid to rest. This evening at 7 o'clock my old friend Horace Greeley died. A giant intellect suddenly gone out!"
It’s notable that this examination happened and the commissioner’s decision was made in the same grim little room where, back in the day, runaway slaves were assessed and sent back to their owners. While the attorneys were trying to agree on a date for the hearing of arguments, Miss Anthony mentioned that she would be busy lecturing in central Ohio until December 10. “But you’re supposed to be in custody the whole time,” the district attorney said. “Oh, really? I had totally forgotten about that,” 428 she replied. That night, she wrote in her diary: “A tough day and a sad anniversary! Ten years ago our dear father was laid to rest. This evening at 7 o’clock, my old friend Horace Greeley passed away. A brilliant mind just gone like that!”
The second hearing took place December 23 in the common council chamber, in the presence of a large audience which included many ladies, the newspapers stating that it had rather the appearance of a social gathering than an arraignment of criminals. Of those on trial one paper said: "The majority of these law-breakers were elderly, matronly-looking women with thoughtful faces, just the sort one would like to see in charge of one's sick-room, considerate, patient, kindly."
The second hearing happened on December 23 in the common council chamber, with a large crowd present, including many women. Newspapers noted it felt more like a social event than a trial for criminals. About the defendants, one article stated: "Most of these law-breakers were older women who looked matronly, with thoughtful expressions—just the kind of people you’d want in charge of your sickroom: caring, patient, and kind."
At Judge Selden's request, Hon. John Van Voorhis, one of the ablest lawyers in Rochester, had been associated with himself for the defense. Both made strong, logical arguments, and Miss Anthony herself spoke most earnestly in behalf of the three inspectors, who also had been arrested. The commissioner held all of them guilty, fixed their bail at $500 each, and gave them until the following Monday to furnish it. All did so except Miss Anthony, who refused to give bail and applied for a writ of habeas corpus from U. S. District-Judge N. K. Hall. The Rochester Express, which stood nobly by her through this ordeal, said editorially:
At Judge Selden's request, Hon. John Van Voorhis, one of the best lawyers in Rochester, was brought on board for the defense. Both presented strong, logical arguments, and Miss Anthony spoke passionately on behalf of the three inspectors who had also been arrested. The commissioner found all of them guilty, set their bail at $500 each, and gave them until the following Monday to pay it. Everyone complied except for Miss Anthony, who refused to post bail and requested a writ of habeas corpus from U.S. District Judge N. K. Hall. The Rochester Express, which stood firmly by her during this challenging time, stated in an editorial:
Miss Anthony had a loftier end in view than the making of a sensation when she registered her name and cast her vote. The act was in harmony with a life steadily consecrated to a high purpose from which she has never wavered, though she has met a storm of invective, personal taunt and false accusation, more than enough to justify any person less courageous than she in giving up a warfare securing her only ingratitude and abuse. But Miss Anthony has no morbid sentiment in her nature. There is at least one woman in the land—and we believe there are a good many more—who does not whine others into helping her over a hard spot, or even plead for help, but bravely helps herself and puts her hand to the plough without turning back. Those who are now regarding her as practically condemned to State prison or the payment of a fine of $500, need not waste their sympathy, for she would suffer either penalty with heroic cheerfulness if thereby she might help bring about the day when the principle "no taxation without representation" meant something more than it does. In writing lately to a friend, she thus expressed herself:
Miss Anthony had a bigger goal than just making a statement when she registered her name and voted. This action was part of a life committed to a noble cause, which she has never strayed from, despite enduring countless insults, personal attacks, and false accusations—enough to make anyone less courageous consider giving up a fight that only brings her disrespect and mistreatment. But Miss Anthony doesn’t focus on the negative. There’s at least one woman in this country—and we believe many more—who doesn’t wait for others to help her through hard times or even ask for help; instead, she bravely takes charge and works hard without looking back. Those who think of her as practically sentenced to prison or facing a $500 fine shouldn’t waste their sympathy, because she would face either consequence with heroic optimism if it would help achieve the day when the principle of "no taxation without representation" actually means something. In a recent letter to a friend, she expressed herself this way:
"Yes, I hope you will be present at the examination, to witness the grave 429 spectacle of fifteen native born citizens, of sound mind and not convicted of any crime, arraigned in the United States criminal courts to answer for the offense of illegal voting, when the United States Constitution, the supreme law of this land, says, 'All persons born or naturalized in the United States ... are citizens; no State shall deny or abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens;' and 'The right of citizens to vote shall not be denied.' The one question to be settled is, are personal freedom and personal representation inherent rights and privileges under democratic-republican institutions, or are they things of legislation, precisely as under old monarchical governments, to be given and taken at the option of a ruling class or of a majority vote? If the former, then is our country free indeed; if the latter, then is our country a despotism, and we women its victims!"
"Yes, I hope you will attend the trial to witness the serious 429 situation of fifteen native-born citizens, who are mentally competent and not convicted of any crime, being tried in the U.S. criminal courts for the offense of illegal voting. The U.S. Constitution, the highest law of our land, states, 'All persons born or naturalized in the United States ... are citizens; no State shall deny or abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens;' and 'The right of citizens to vote shall not be denied.' The central question to address is whether personal freedom and representation are innate rights and privileges under democratic-republican systems, or if they are just legislative matters, like in old monarchies, to be granted or taken away by a ruling class or a majority vote. If they are inherent, then our country is genuinely free; if not, then our country is a tyranny, and we women are its victims!"
Under date of December 12, Benjamin F. Butler, then a member of Congress, wrote Miss Anthony regarding her case:
Under date of December 12, Benjamin F. Butler, who was a member of Congress at the time, wrote to Miss Anthony about her case:
I do not believe anybody in Congress doubts that the Constitution authorizes the right of women to vote, precisely as it authorizes trial by jury and many other like rights guaranteed to citizens. But the difficulty is, the courts long since decided that the constitutional provisions do not act upon the citizens, except as guarantees, ex proprio vigore, and in order to give practical force to them there must be legislation. As, for example, in trial by jury, a man can invoke the Constitution to prevent his being tried, in a proper case, by any other tribunal than a jury; but if there is no legislation, congressional or other, to give him a trial by jury, I think, under the decisions, it would be very difficult to see how it might be done. Therefore, the point is for the friends of woman suffrage to get congressional legislation.
No one in Congress doubts that the Constitution gives women the right to vote, just like it grants the right to a jury trial and many other rights for citizens. The problem is that the courts have long ruled that constitutional provisions don’t apply to citizens directly, only as guarantees, and to make them effective, there needs to be legislation. For example, in the case of a jury trial, a man can use the Constitution to avoid being tried by any tribunal other than a jury when appropriate; however, if there’s no legislation from Congress or elsewhere to ensure he gets a jury trial, it would be tough to see how that could happen based on current rulings. So, the main point for supporters of women's suffrage is to advocate for congressional legislation.

Benjamin F. Butler
Benjamin F. Butler
The results of the trial showed that General Butler was right in thinking that further legislation would be required to enable women to vote under the Constitution of the United States. It proved also that a judge could set aside the right of a citizen to a trial by jury, supposed to be guaranteed by every safeguard which could be thrown around it by this same Constitution.
The results of the trial showed that General Butler was correct in believing that more laws would be needed to allow women to vote under the Constitution of the United States. It also demonstrated that a judge could overturn a citizen's right to a jury trial, which was supposed to be protected by every measure provided by this same Constitution.
[66] When a jurist as eminent as Judge Henry R. Selden testifies that he told Miss Anthony before election that she had a right to vote, and this after a careful examination of the question, the whole subject assumes new importance.... How grateful to Judge Selden must all the suffragists be! He has struck the strongest and most promising blow in their behalf that has yet been given. Dred Scott was the pivot on which the Constitution turned before the war. Miss Anthony seems likely to occupy a similar position now.—New York Commercial Advertiser.
[66] When a respected jurist like Judge Henry R. Selden testifies that he told Miss Anthony before the election that she had the right to vote, especially after carefully examining the issue, it makes the entire topic significantly more important.... All the suffragists must be incredibly grateful to Judge Selden! He has delivered the strongest and most promising support for their cause yet. Dred Scott was the key case that influenced the Constitution before the war. Miss Anthony now seems poised to take on a similar role.—New York Commercial Advertiser.
The arrest of the fifteen women of Rochester, and the imprisonment of the renowned Miss Susan B. Anthony, for voting at the November election, afford a curious illustration of the extent to which the United States government is stretching its hand in these matters. If these women violated any law at all by voting, it was clearly a statute of the State of New York, and that State might safely be left to vindicate the majesty of its own laws. It is only by an over-strained stretch of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments that the national government can force its long finger into the Rochester case at all.—New York Sun.
The arrest of fifteen women in Rochester and the imprisonment of the famous Miss Susan B. Anthony for voting in the November election show just how far the U.S. government is reaching in these matters. If these women broke any laws by voting, it was clearly a law in the State of New York, and that State should be able to uphold its own laws. The national government can only get involved in the Rochester case by bending the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments beyond their limits.—New York Sun.
Whatever may be said of Susan B. Anthony, there is no doubt but she has kept the public mind of the country agitated upon the woman's rights question as few others, male or female, could have done. She has displayed very superior judgment and has seldom been led into acts of even seeming impropriety. She has won the respect of all classes by her ability, her consistency and her spotless character, and she today stands far in advance of all her co-workers in the estimation of the people. The fact that she voted at Rochester at the presidential election has created no little commotion on the part of the press, but if women are to become voters, who but the one who has taken the lead in the advocacy of that right should be among the first to cast the vote?—Toledo Blade.
Whatever you might say about Susan B. Anthony, there's no doubt that she has kept the public focused on the women's rights issue like few others, whether male or female, could. She has shown exceptional judgment and has rarely been drawn into actions that might seem improper. She has earned the respect of all social classes through her competence, consistency, and unblemished character, and she now stands significantly ahead of all her colleagues in the public's view. The fact that she voted in Rochester during the presidential election has sparked quite a bit of debate in the media, but if women are going to become voters, who better than the person who has led the fight for that right to be among the first to cast a vote? — Toledo Blade.
We pause in the midst of our pressing duties to admire the zeal and courage which find in the course of these ladies a challenge to battle, while evils a thousandfold worse, such as bribery, etc., are permitted to pass unnoticed.... The ladies who voted in this city on the 5th of this month did so from the conviction that they had a constitutional right to the ballot. In that they may or may not have been mistaken, but they certainly can not be justly classed with the ordinary illegal voter and repeater. The latter always vote for a pecuniary consideration, knowingly and intentionally violating our laws to get gain. The former voted for a principle and to assert what, they esteem a right. The attempt by insinuation to class them among the ordinary illegal voters will react upon its movers.—Rochester Evening Express.
We take a moment from our busy tasks to appreciate the passion and bravery of these women, who see their journey as a fight worth engaging in, while much worse issues like bribery go unchecked. The women who voted in this city on the 5th of this month did so out of a belief that they had a constitutional right to vote. They might be mistaken in that belief, but they cannot fairly be grouped with regular illegal voters and repeat offenders. The latter always vote for money, knowingly breaking our laws for personal gain. In contrast, these women voted for a principle and to assert what they believe is their right. To suggest otherwise and categorize them as typical illegal voters will backfire on those making the insinuation. —Rochester Evening Express.
CHAPTER XXV.
TRIAL FOR VOTING UNDER FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT.
1873.
In the midst of these harassing circumstances Miss Anthony made the usual preparations for holding the annual woman suffrage convention in Washington, January 16 and 17, 1873, and presided over its deliberations. In her opening speech she said:
In the midst of these challenging circumstances, Miss Anthony made the usual preparations for the annual women's suffrage convention in Washington on January 16 and 17, 1873, and led its discussions. In her opening speech, she said:
There are three methods of extending suffrage to new classes. The first is for the legislatures of the several States to submit the question to those already voters. Before the war this was the only way thought of, and during all those years we petitioned the legislatures to submit an amendment striking the word "male" from the suffrage clause of the State constitutions. The second method is for Congress to submit to the several legislatures a proposition for a Sixteenth Amendment which shall prohibit the States from depriving women citizens of their right to vote. The third plan is for women to take their right under the Fourteenth Amendment of the National Constitution, which declares that all persons are citizens, and no State shall deny or abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens.
There are three ways to expand voting rights to new groups. The first is for the legislatures of different States to consult current voters for their views on the issue. Before the war, this was the only method considered, and for many years, we urged the legislatures to suggest an amendment that would remove the word "male" from the voting rights section of the State constitutions. The second method is for Congress to present a proposal for a Sixteenth Amendment to the State legislatures, which would stop States from taking away the voting rights of women citizens. The third option is for women to assert their voting rights under the Fourteenth Amendment of the National Constitution, which states that everyone is a citizen and that no State can deny or limit the privileges or rights of citizens.
Again, there are two ways of securing the right of suffrage under the Constitution as it is, one by a declaratory act of Congress instructing the officers of election to receive the votes of women; the other by bringing suits before the courts, as women already have done, in order to secure a judicial decision on the broad interpretation of the Constitution that all persons are citizens, and all citizens voters. The vaults in yonder Capitol hold the petitions of 100,000 women for a declaratory act, and the calendars of our courts show that many are already testing their right to vote under the Fourteenth Amendment. I stand here under indictment for having exercised my right as a citizen to vote at the last election; and by a fiction of the law, I am now in custody and not a free person on this platform.
Additionally, there are two ways to ensure the right to vote under the current Constitution. One is through a declaratory act of Congress instructing election officials to accept women’s votes. The other is by filing lawsuits in court, which women have already started to do, to obtain a judicial ruling on the broad interpretation of the Constitution that declares all persons are citizens and all citizens can vote. The vaults in that Capitol hold petitions from 100,000 women requesting a declaratory act, and our court calendars show that many are already challenging their right to vote under the Fourteenth Amendment. I stand here facing charges for having exercised my right as a citizen to vote in the last election; and due to a legal technicality, I am now in custody and not free on this platform.
Among the forcible resolutions adopted were one asserting "that States may regulate all local questions of property, 432 taxation, etc., but the inalienable personal rights of citizenship must be declared by the Constitution, interpreted by the Supreme Court, protected by Congress, and enforced by the arm of the Executive;" and another declaring "that the criminal prosecution of Susan B. Anthony by the United States, for the alleged crime of exercising the citizen's right of suffrage, is an act of arbitrary and unconstitutional authority and a blow at the liberties of every citizen of this nation." Mrs. Gage, Mrs. Stanton, Mrs. Blake, Mrs. Belva A. Lockwood, Rev. Olympia Brown and others made ringing speeches on the right of women to vote under the Fourteenth Amendment, defended the course of Miss Anthony and denounced her arrest. This was the tenor of all the addresses. She was unanimously elected president for the ensuing year, notwithstanding prison walls loomed up before her; and then she hastened back to prepare for her legal battle.
Among the forceful resolutions adopted was one stating "that states may regulate all local issues of property, 432 taxation, etc., but the inalienable personal rights of citizenship must be defined by the Constitution, interpreted by the Supreme Court, protected by Congress, and enforced by the power of the Executive;" and another declaring "that the criminal prosecution of Susan B. Anthony by the United States for the supposed crime of exercising the citizen's right to vote is an act of arbitrary and unconstitutional authority and a threat to the liberties of every citizen in this nation." Mrs. Gage, Mrs. Stanton, Mrs. Blake, Mrs. Belva A. Lockwood, Rev. Olympia Brown, and others delivered passionate speeches on the right of women to vote under the Fourteenth Amendment, defended Miss Anthony's actions, and condemned her arrest. This was the essence of all the speeches. She was unanimously elected president for the upcoming year, despite prison walls looming before her; and then she rushed back to prepare for her legal fight.
Miss Anthony met her counsel at Albany, and on January 21 Judge Selden made a masterly argument before U.S. District-Judge N.K. Hall, in support of her demand for a writ of habeas corpus, and asked the discharge of the prisoner on the grounds: 1st, That in the act complained of she discharged a duty or, at all events, exercised a right, instead of committing a crime; that she had a constitutional and lawful right to offer her ballot and to have it received and counted; that she, as well as her brothers, was entitled to express her choice as to the persons who should make, and those who should execute the laws, inasmuch as she, as well as they, would be bound to observe them. 2d, That, if she had not that right, she in good faith believed that she had it and, therefore, her act lacked the indispensable ingredient of all crime, a corrupt intention.
Miss Anthony met with her lawyer in Albany, and on January 21, Judge Selden made a powerful argument before U.S. District Judge N.K. Hall, supporting her request for a writ of habeas corpus and asking for the release of the prisoner on the grounds that: 1st, in the action she was accused of, she fulfilled a duty or, at the very least, exercised a right instead of committing a crime; that she had a constitutional and legal right to offer her vote and to have it accepted and counted; that she, just like her male counterparts, was entitled to express her choice about who should create and enforce the laws, as she, like them, would be obligated to follow them. 2nd, that if she did not have that right, she honestly believed that she did, and therefore, her action lacked the essential element of all crime, which is a corrupt intention.
The judge denied the writ and increased her bail to $1,000. From the first Miss Anthony had been determined not to recognize the right of the courts to interfere with her exercise of the franchise, and again she refused to give bail, insisting that rather than do this she preferred to go to jail. Judge Selden, however, in kindness of heart, said there were times when a 433 client must be guided by advice of her counsel, and himself went on her bond. As she came out of the courtroom she met her other lawyer, Mr. Van Voorhis, and told him what had been done. He exclaimed, "You have lost your chance to get your case before the Supreme Court by writ of habeas corpus!" In her ignorance of legal forms she had not understood this, and at once she rushed back and tried to have the bond cancelled, but, to her bitter disappointment, this was impossible. When she demanded of Judge Selden, "Did you not know that you had estopped me from carrying my case to the Supreme Court?" he replied with his old-time courtesy, "Yes, but I could not see a lady I respected put in jail."
The judge denied the writ and raised her bail to $1,000. From the beginning, Miss Anthony had been determined not to acknowledge the courts' authority to interfere with her right to vote, and again she refused to post bail, insisting that she'd rather go to jail than comply. Judge Selden, out of kindness, said there are times when a client must follow her lawyer's advice, and he himself signed her bond. As she left the courtroom, she ran into her other lawyer, Mr. Van Voorhis, and told him what had happened. He exclaimed, "You've missed your chance to take your case to the Supreme Court with a writ of habeas corpus!" Not understanding the legal implications, she immediately rushed back to try to cancel the bond, but to her great disappointment, that was not possible. When she asked Judge Selden, "Did you not realize that you made it impossible for me to bring my case to the Supreme Court?" he answered with his usual politeness, "Yes, but I couldn't bear to see a lady I respected go to jail."
The following day, January 22, the commission then in session at Albany for the purpose of revising the State Constitution was addressed by Miss Anthony on woman's right to vote under the Constitution of the United States. Her attorneys, Selden and Van Voorhis, were present and, when she finished, the former said to her, "If I had heard this address first I could have made a far better argument before Judge Hall." Immediately following the judge's decision, Miss Anthony was indicted by the grand jury.[68]
The next day, January 22, the commission meeting in Albany to revise the State Constitution heard from Miss Anthony about women’s right to vote under the United States Constitution. Her lawyers, Selden and Van Voorhis, were there, and when she finished, Selden told her, "If I had heard this speech first, I could have made a much stronger argument before Judge Hall." Right after the judge's ruling, Miss Anthony was indicted by the grand jury.[68]
During this winter she attended the Ohio and Illinois Suffrage conventions, and in a number of cities in these States and in Indiana made her great constitutional argument on the right of women to vote under the Fourteenth Amendment. Every newspaper in the country took up the points involved and the interest and agitation were wide-spread. She spoke at Ft. Wayne on February 25, an intensely cold night. Above her was an open scuttle, from which a stream of air poured 434 down upon her head, and when half through her lecture she suddenly became unconscious. She was the guest of Mrs. Mary Hamilton Williams, and was taken at once to her home where she received every possible kindness and attention. As soon as she recovered consciousness she begged that steps be taken immediately to keep the occurrence from the Associated Press, as she feared that, on account of her mother's extremely delicate health, the shock and anxiety would prove fatal. Three nights later, although not wholly recovered, she spoke to a large audience at Marion, Ind.; the diary says, "going on the platform with fear and trembling."
During that winter, she attended the suffrage conventions in Ohio and Illinois, and in several cities in those states and Indiana, she made her strong constitutional argument for women's right to vote under the Fourteenth Amendment. Every newspaper in the country covered the issues, and the interest and activism were widespread. She spoke in Fort Wayne on February 25, on a brutally cold night. Above her was an open hatch, through which a draft of cold air poured 434 down on her head, and halfway through her lecture, she suddenly lost consciousness. She was staying with Mrs. Mary Hamilton Williams and was quickly taken to her home, where she received all possible care and attention. As soon as she regained consciousness, she insisted that measures be taken immediately to keep the incident from the Associated Press, fearing that the shock and worry would be fatal for her mother, who was in extremely delicate health. Three nights later, although she wasn't fully recovered, she spoke to a large audience in Marion, Indiana; her diary notes that she went on stage "with fear and trembling."
She returned home, and on March 4 cast her ballot at the city election without any protest. Only two other ladies could be induced to vote, Mrs. Mary Pulver and Mrs. Mary S. Hebard. All of the others who had voted in the fall were thoroughly frightened, and their husbands and other male relatives were even more panic-stricken.
She went back home, and on March 4, she cast her ballot at the city election without any complaints. Only two other women could be convinced to vote, Mrs. Mary Pulver and Mrs. Mary S. Hebard. Everyone else who had voted in the fall was really scared, and their husbands and other male relatives were even more terrified.
In the midst of her own perplexities Miss Anthony did not forget to issue the call[69] for the May Anniversary in New York, where she made an address, detailing the incidents of her arrest and defending her rights as a citizen. All the speeches and letters of the convention were deeply sympathetic, and among the resolutions bearing on this question was one stating that since the underlying principle of our government is equality of political rights, therefore "the trial of Susan B. 435 Anthony, though ostensibly involving only the political status of woman, in reality questions the right of every man to share in the government; that it is not Susan B. Anthony or the women of the republic who alone are on trial today, but it is the government of the United States, and that as the decision is rendered for or against the political rights of citizenship, so will the men of America find themselves free or enslaved."
In the middle of her own struggles, Miss Anthony didn’t forget to call for the May Anniversary in New York, where she gave a speech detailing her arrest and defending her rights as a citizen. All the speeches and letters from the convention were very supportive, and one of the resolutions related to this issue stated that since the basic principle of our government is equality of political rights, therefore "the trial of Susan B. 435 Anthony, while seemingly focusing only on the political status of women, actually questions the right of every man to participate in the government; that it is not just Susan B. Anthony or the women of the republic who are on trial today, but the government of the United States, and that depending on the decision made about the political rights of citizenship, the men of America will find themselves either free or enslaved."
A reception was given by Dr. Clemence Lozier, founder of the Woman's Homeopathic College of New York, who was always Miss Anthony's faithful and devoted friend, never shaken in her trust by any storm that raged. During the darkest days of her paper, The Revolution, when the generosity of all others had been exhausted, Dr. Lozier gave her $50 every Saturday for many weeks and helped her by so much to bear the weight of the financial burden. For more than a quarter of a century her hospitable doors were always ajar for her, and it was to be expected that, at this crucial moment, she would again express her loyalty.
A reception was hosted by Dr. Clemence Lozier, the founder of the Woman's Homeopathic College of New York, who was always a loyal and dedicated friend to Miss Anthony, never wavering in her support despite any challenges that arose. During the toughest times of her publication, The Revolution, when everyone else's generosity had run out, Dr. Lozier gave her $50 every Saturday for many weeks and greatly eased the financial strain. For over 25 years, her welcoming home was always open to her, and it was only natural that, at this critical moment, she would once more demonstrate her loyalty.
Miss Anthony's trial was set for the term of court beginning May 13, and she decided to make a canvass of Monroe county, not to argue her own case but in order that the people might be educated upon the constitutional points involved. Commencing March 11, she spoke in twenty-nine of the post-office districts. Being informed that District-Attorney Crowley threatened to move her trial into another county because she would prejudice the jury, she notified him she would see that that county also was thoroughly canvassed, and asked him if she were prejudicing a jury by reading and explaining the Constitution of the United States.
Miss Anthony's trial was scheduled for the court session starting May 13, and she chose to tour Monroe County, not to defend herself but to educate the public on the constitutional issues at stake. Starting March 11, she spoke in twenty-nine post-office districts. When she learned that District Attorney Crowley planned to move her trial to another county because he claimed she would bias the jury, she informed him that she would ensure that county was also thoroughly canvassed, and asked if reading and explaining the Constitution of the United States was prejudicing a jury.
The speech delivered by Miss Anthony during these weeks was a masterpiece of clear, strong, logical argument in defense of woman's right to the ballot which never has been equalled.[70] Her audiences were large and attentive and public sentiment was thoroughly aroused. One of the papers gives this description: "Miss Anthony was fashionably dressed in black silk with demi-train, basque with flowing sleeves, heavily trimmed 436 in black lace; ruffled white lace undersleeves and a broad, graceful lace collar; with a gold neck chain and pendant. Her abundant hair was brushed back and bound in a knot after the fashion of our grandmothers."
The speech delivered by Miss Anthony during these weeks was a remarkable example of clear, strong, logical reasoning in support of women's right to vote, unmatched to this day.[70] Her audiences were large and engaged, and public sentiment was fully awakened. One of the newspapers described her this way: "Miss Anthony was stylishly dressed in black silk with a short train, a fitted bodice with flowing sleeves, and heavily trimmed in black lace; she wore ruffled white lace undersleeves and a wide, elegant lace collar, with a gold neck chain and pendant. Her thick hair was styled back and tied in a bun, reminiscent of our grandmothers."
When the time for trial came, true to his promise, District-Attorney Crowley obtained an order removing the cause to the U.S. Circuit Court which was held at Canandaigua. This left just twenty-two days and, calling to her aid Matilda Joslyn Gage, Miss Anthony spoke in twenty-one places on the question, "Is it a crime for a United States citizen to vote?" and Mrs. Gage in sixteen on "The United States on trial, not Susan B. Anthony." Their last meeting was held in Canandaigua the evening before the trial, and resolutions against this injustice toward woman were heartily endorsed by the audience. The Rochester Union and Advertiser condemned her in unmeasured terms, having editorials similar to this:
When trial time arrived, as he had promised, District Attorney Crowley got an order to move the case to the U.S. Circuit Court, which was held in Canandaigua. This left only twenty-two days, and with the help of Matilda Joslyn Gage, Miss Anthony spoke at twenty-one events about the question, "Is it a crime for a United States citizen to vote?" and Mrs. Gage spoke at sixteen events on "The United States on trial, not Susan B. Anthony." Their final meeting was in Canandaigua the night before the trial, and the audience enthusiastically supported resolutions against this injustice toward women. The Rochester Union and Advertiser strongly criticized her, publishing editorials like this:
SUSAN B. ANTHONY AS A CORRUPTIONIST.—We give in another column today, from a legal friend, a communication which shows very clearly that Miss Anthony is engaged in a work that will be likely to bring her to grief. It is nothing more nor less than an attempt to corrupt the source of that justice under law which flows from trial by jury. Miss Anthony's case has passed from its gayest to its gravest character. United States courts are not stages for the enactment of comedy or farce, and the promptness and decision of their judges in sentencing to prison culprits convicted before them show that they are no respecters of persons.
SUSAN B. ANTHONY AS A CORRUPTIONIST.—In another section today, we share a note from a legal colleague that clearly indicates Miss Anthony is part of a venture that is likely to turn out poorly for her. It’s simply an attempt to weaken the core of justice that comes from a jury trial. Miss Anthony's circumstances have moved from carefree to grave. U.S. courts are not venues for humor or ridiculousness, and the swift and firm actions of the judges in sentencing those found guilty before them show that they do not play favorites.
Many influential newspapers, however, spoke in the highest terms of her courage and ability and the justice of her cause.[71]
Many major newspapers, however, praised her courage, skills, and the fairness of her cause.[71]
The trial[72] opened the afternoon of June 17, at the lovely village of Canandaigua, Associate-Justice Ward Hunt on the bench, U.S. District-Attorney Richard Crowley prosecuting, Hon. Henry R. Selden and John Van Voorhis, Esq., defending. Miss Anthony, most of the ladies who had voted with her, and also Mrs. Gage, were seated within the bar. On the right sat the jury. The courtroom was crowded, many prominent men being present, among them ex-President Fillmore. Judge 437 Hall, of Buffalo, was an interested spectator and Miss Anthony's counsel endeavored to have him try the case with Judge Hunt in order that, if necessary, it might go to the Supreme Court, which was not possible with only one judge, but he refused.
The trial[72] started on the afternoon of June 17 in the charming village of Canandaigua, with Associate Justice Ward Hunt presiding. U.S. District Attorney Richard Crowley was the prosecutor, while Hon. Henry R. Selden and John Van Voorhis, Esq., represented the defense. Miss Anthony, most of the women who had voted alongside her, and Mrs. Gage were seated inside the bar. The jury was on the right. The courtroom was packed, with many notable figures in attendance, including former President Fillmore. Judge 437 Hall from Buffalo was a keen observer, and Miss Anthony's legal team tried to have him join Judge Hunt in hearing the case so that it could be escalated to the Supreme Court if necessary, but he declined.

C S Lozier
C.S. Lozier
It was conceded that Miss Anthony was a woman and that she voted on November 5, 1872. Judge Selden, for the second time in all his practice, offered himself as a witness, and testified that he advised her to vote, believing that the laws and Constitution of the United States gave her full authority. He then proposed to call Miss Anthony to testify as to the intention or belief under which she voted, but the Court held she was not competent as a witness in her own behalf. After making this decision, the Court then admitted all the testimony, as reported, which she gave on the preliminary examination before the commissioner, in spite of her counsel's protest against accepting the version which that officer took of her evidence. The prosecution simply alleged the fact of her having voted. Mr. Selden then addressed the judge and jury in a masterly argument of over three hours' duration, beginning:
It was acknowledged that Miss Anthony was a woman and that she voted on November 5, 1872. Judge Selden, for the second time in his career, offered himself as a witness and stated that he advised her to vote, believing that the laws and Constitution of the United States granted her full authority. He then suggested calling Miss Anthony to testify about the intention or belief she had when she voted, but the Court ruled that she was not qualified to be a witness in her own case. After making this ruling, the Court admitted all the testimony she provided during the preliminary examination before the commissioner, despite her lawyer's objections to accepting the account that officer took of her evidence. The prosecution simply claimed that she had voted. Mr. Selden then addressed the judge and jury in a brilliant argument lasting over three hours, beginning:
The defendant is indicted under the 19th Section of the Act of Congress of May 31, 1870 (16th St. at L., 144), for "voting without having a lawful right to vote." The words of the statute, so far as they are material in this case, are as follows:
The defendant is charged under Section 19 of the Act of Congress from May 31, 1870 (16th St. at L., 144), for "voting without a legal right to vote." The relevant wording of the statute in this case is as follows:
"If at any election for representative or delegate in the Congress of the United States, any person shall knowingly ... vote without having a lawful right to vote ... every such person shall be deemed guilty of a crime ... and on conviction thereof shall be punished by a fine not exceeding $500, or by imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years, or by both, in the discretion of the Court, and shall pay the costs of prosecution."
"If, in any election for a representative or delegate in the Congress of the United States, someone knowingly votes without a legal right to do so, that person will be considered guilty of a crime. Upon conviction, they may be punished with a fine of up to $500, or imprisonment for up to three years, or both, depending on the Court's discretion, and they will have to cover the costs of prosecution."
The only alleged ground of illegality of the defendant's vote is that she is a woman. If the same act had been done by her brother under the same circumstances, the act would have been not only innocent but honorable and laudable; but having been done by a woman it is said to be a crime. The crime therefore consists not in the act done but in the simple fact that the person doing it was a woman and not a man. I believe this is the first instance in which a woman has been arraigned in a criminal court merely on account of her sex....
The only reason cited for the defendant's vote being illegal is that she is a woman. If her brother had done the same thing under the same circumstances, it would be viewed as innocent, honorable, and commendable; but since it was done by a woman, it’s regarded as a crime. So the issue isn’t the act itself but the fact that the person who did it is a woman and not a man. I believe this is the first time a woman has been charged in a criminal court solely because of her sex....
Women have the same interest that men have in the establishment and 438 maintenance of good government; they are to the same extent as men bound to obey the laws; they suffer to the same extent by bad laws, and profit to the same extent by good laws; and upon principles of equal justice, as it would seem, should be allowed, equally with men, to express their preference in the choice of law-makers and rulers. But however that may be, no greater absurdity, to use no harsher term, could be presented, than that of rewarding men and punishing women for the same act, without giving to women any voice in the question which should he rewarded and which punished.
Women have the same interest as men in establishing and 438 maintaining good government; they are just as required to obey the laws as men are; they suffer equally from bad laws and benefit equally from good laws. Based on principles of equal justice, it seems they should have the same right as men to express their preferences in choosing lawmakers and rulers. However, regardless of this, there is no greater absurdity, to put it mildly, than rewarding men and punishing women for the same actions without giving women any say in deciding who should be rewarded and who should be punished.
I am aware, however, that we are here to be governed by the Constitution and laws as they are, and that if the defendant has been guilty of violating the law, she must submit to the penalty, however unjust or absurd the law may be. But courts are not required to so interpret laws or constitutions as to produce either absurdity or injustice, so long as they are open to a more reasonable interpretation. This must be my excuse for what I design to say in regard to the propriety of female suffrage, because with that propriety established there is very little difficulty in finding sufficient warrant in the Constitution for its exercise. This case, in its legal aspects, presents three questions which I propose to discuss.
I understand, though, that we are here to be governed by the Constitution and the laws as they are, and that if the defendant has broken the law, she must face the consequences, no matter how unfair or ridiculous the law may seem. But courts aren't required to interpret laws or constitutions in a way that leads to absurdity or injustice, especially if a more reasonable interpretation is available. This is my justification for what I intend to say about the validity of women's voting rights, because once that validity is established, it’s easy to find solid support in the Constitution for its implementation. This case, in its legal aspects, presents three questions that I plan to discuss.
1. Was the defendant legally entitled to vote at the election in question?
1. Was the defendant legally allowed to vote in the election in question?
2. If she was not entitled to vote but believed that she was, and voted in good faith in that belief, did such voting constitute a crime under the statute before referred to?
2. If she wasn't allowed to vote but believed she could and voted in good faith thinking so, did that voting count as a crime under the statute mentioned earlier?
3. Did the defendant vote in good faith in that belief?
3. Did the defendant vote sincerely based on that belief?
He argued the case from a legal, constitutional and moral standpoint and concluded:
He presented the case from a legal, constitutional, and moral perspective and concluded:
One other matter will close what I have to say. Miss Anthony believed, and was advised, that she had a right to vote. She may also have been advised, as was clearly the fact, that the question as to her right could not be brought before the courts for trial without her voting or offering to vote, and if either was criminal, the one was as much so as the other. Therefore she stands now arraigned as a criminal, for taking the only step by which it was possible to bring the great constitutional question as to her right before the tribunals of the country for adjudication. If for thus acting, in the most perfect good faith, with motives as pure and impulses as noble as any which can find place in your honor's breast in the administration of justice, she is by the laws of her country to be condemned as a criminal, she must abide the consequences. Her condemnation, however, under such circumstances, would only add another most weighty reason to those which I have already advanced, to show that women need the aid of the ballot for their protection.
One last point to conclude my thoughts. Miss Anthony believed, and was advised, that she had the right to vote. She may have also been informed, as was clearly the case, that the issue of her right couldn't be taken to court for trial without her voting or trying to vote, and if either action was a crime, then both are equally criminal. So, she is now charged as a criminal for taking the only step that could bring the important constitutional question about her right before the courts for judgment. If for acting this way, with the utmost good faith and with motives as pure and intentions as noble as anyone would have in administering justice, she is to be condemned as a criminal by her country's laws, she must face the consequences. However, her condemnation under these circumstances would only provide another strong reason, in addition to those I've already mentioned, to show that women need the power of the ballot for their protection.
The district-attorney followed with a two hours' speech. Then Judge Hunt, without leaving the bench, delivered a written opinion[73] to the effect that the Fourteenth Amendment, 439 under which Miss Anthony claimed the authority to vote, "was a protection, not to all our rights, but to our rights as citizens of the United States only; that is, the rights existing or belonging to that condition or capacity." At its conclusion he directed the jury to bring in a verdict of guilty.
The district attorney gave a two-hour speech. Then Judge Hunt, without leaving the bench, delivered a written opinion[73] stating that the Fourteenth Amendment, 439 which Miss Anthony used to justify her right to vote, "was a protection, not to all our rights, but to our rights as citizens of the United States only; that is, the rights that exist or belong to that status or role." At the end, he instructed the jury to return a verdict of guilty.
Miss Anthony's counsel insisted that the Court had no power to make such a direction in a criminal case and demanded that the jury be permitted to bring in its own verdict. The judge made no reply except to order the clerk to take the verdict. Mr. Selden demanded that the jury be polled. Judge Hunt refused, and at once discharged the jury without allowing them any consultation or asking if they agreed upon a verdict. Not one of them had spoken a word. After being discharged, the jurymen talked freely and several declared they should have brought in a verdict of "not guilty."
Miss Anthony's attorney argued that the Court had no authority to give such a directive in a criminal case and insisted that the jury should be allowed to deliver their own verdict. The judge did not respond except to instruct the clerk to record the verdict. Mr. Selden requested that the jury be polled. Judge Hunt denied the request and immediately dismissed the jury without letting them discuss or ask if they had reached a verdict. Not a single one had said anything. After being dismissed, the jurors spoke openly, and several stated they would have returned a verdict of "not guilty."
The next day Judge Selden argued the motion for a new trial on seven exceptions, but this was denied by Judge Hunt. The following scene then took place in the courtroom:
The next day, Judge Selden presented the motion for a new trial based on seven exceptions, but Judge Hunt denied it. The following scene then unfolded in the courtroom:
Judge Hunt.—(Ordering the defendant to stand up). Has the prisoner anything to say why sentence shall not be pronounced?
Judge Hunt.—(Ordering the defendant to stand up). Does the defendant have anything to say about why the sentence shouldn’t be announced?
Miss Anthony.—Yes, your honor, I have many things to say; for in your ordered verdict of guilty you have trampled under foot every vital principle of our government. My natural rights, my civil rights, my political rights, my judicial rights, are all alike ignored. Robbed of the fundamental privilege of citizenship, I am degraded from the status of a citizen to that of a subject; and not only myself individually but all of my sex are, by your honor's verdict, doomed to political subjection under this so-called republican form of government.
Miss Anthony.—Yes, your honor, I have a lot to say; because in your guilty verdict, you have ignored every fundamental principle of our government. My natural rights, my civil rights, my political rights, my judicial rights, have all been completely overlooked. Stripped of the basic privilege of citizenship, I am reduced from being a citizen to being a subject; and not just me, but all women are, by your honor’s ruling, condemned to political subjugation under this so-called republican government.
Judge Hunt.—The Court can not listen to a rehearsal of argument which the prisoner's counsel has already consumed three hours in presenting.
Judge Hunt.—The Court cannot hear a repetition of the argument that the defendant’s lawyer has already presented for three hours.
Miss Anthony.—May it please your honor, I am not arguing the question, but simply stating the reasons why sentence can not, in justice, be pronounced against me. Your denial of my citizen's right to vote, is the denial of my right of consent as one of the governed, the denial of my right of representation as one of the taxed, the denial of my right to a trial by a jury of my peers as an offender against law; therefore, the denial of my sacred right to life, liberty, property and—
Miss Anthony.—If it pleases the court, I’m not arguing that point; I’m just explaining why you can’t justly sentence me. Denying me my right to vote is denying my right to consent as a citizen, denying my right to representation as a taxpayer, and denying my right to a trial by a jury of my peers if I’m accused of a crime; therefore, it’s a denial of my fundamental rights to life, liberty, property, and—
Judge Hunt.—The Court can not allow the prisoner to go on.
Judge Hunt.—The court can't allow the defendant to continue.
Miss Anthony.—But your honor will not deny me this one and only poor privilege of protest against this high-handed outrage upon my citizen's rights. May it please the Court to remember that, since the day of my arrest last 440 November, this is the first time that either myself or any person of my disfranchised class has been allowed a word of defense before judge or jury—
Miss Anthony.—But your honor can’t deny me this one small privilege of protesting against this blatant violation of my rights as a citizen. I ask the Court to remember that, since the day of my arrest last 440 November, this is the first time that either I or anyone from my disfranchised class has been allowed to speak in defense before a judge or jury—
Judge Hunt.—The prisoner must sit down—the Court can not allow it.
Judge Hunt.—The defendant has to sit down—the Court cannot permit it.
Miss Anthony.—Of all my prosecutors, from the corner grocery politician who entered the complaint, to the United States marshal, commissioner, district-attorney, district-judge, your honor on the bench—not one is my peer, but each and all are my political sovereigns; and had your honor submitted my case to the jury, as was clearly your duty, even then I should have had just cause of protest, for not one of those men was my peer; but, native or foreign born, white or black, rich or poor, educated or ignorant, sober or drunk, each and every man of them was my political superior; hence, in no sense, my peer. Under such circumstances a commoner of England, tried before a jury of lords, would have far less cause to complain than have I, a woman, tried before a jury of men. Even my counsel, Hon. Henry R. Selden, who has argued my cause so ably, so earnestly, so unanswerably before your honor, is my political sovereign. Precisely as no disfranchised person is entitled to sit upon a jury, and no woman is entitled to the franchise, so none but a regularly admitted lawyer is allowed to practice in the courts, and no woman can gain admission to the bar—hence, jury, judge, counsel, all must be of the superior class.
Miss Anthony.—Of all the people prosecuting me, from the local politician who filed the complaint to the U.S. Marshal, commissioner, district attorney, and district judge—you on the bench—not one of them is my equal, but every single one of them holds political authority over me. If you had presented my case to the jury, as you clearly should have, I still would have had valid reasons to protest because not one of those men was my equal. Whether they were native or foreign born, white or black, rich or poor, educated or uneducated, sober or drunk, each one of them was my political superior; therefore, in no way my equal. In this situation, a commoner in England tried by a jury of lords would have far less reason to complain than I do, a woman tried by a jury of men. Even my lawyer, Hon. Henry R. Selden, who has represented my case so effectively, earnestly, and convincingly before you, is my political authority. Just as no disenfranchised person can serve on a jury, and no woman can vote, only a licensed attorney can practice in the courts, and no woman can gain admission to the bar—therefore, jury, judge, and lawyer must all come from the superior class.
Judge Hunt.—The Court must insist—the prisoner has been tried according to the established forms of law.
Judge Hunt.—The Court needs to emphasize that the defendant has been tried according to all established legal procedures.
Miss Anthony.—Yes, your honor, but by forms of law all made by men, interpreted by men, administered by men, in favor of men and against women; and hence your honor's ordered verdict of guilty, against a United States citizen for the exercise of the "citizen's right to vote," simply because that citizen was a woman and not a man. But yesterday, the same man-made forms of law declared it a crime punishable with $1,000 fine and six months' imprisonment to give a cup of cold water, a crust of bread or a night's shelter to a panting fugitive tracking his way to Canada; and every man or woman in whose veins coursed a drop of human sympathy violated that wicked law, reckless of consequences, and was justified in so doing. As then the slaves who got their freedom had to take it over or under or through the unjust forms of law, precisely so now must women take it to get their right to a voice in this government; and I have taken mine, and mean to take it at every opportunity.
Miss Anthony.—Yes, your honor, but all these laws are made by men, interpreted by men, and enforced by men, benefiting men and discriminating against women. Therefore, your honor's guilty verdict against a United States citizen for exercising the "citizen's right to vote," solely because that citizen is a woman and not a man, is unjust. Just yesterday, those same man-made laws made it a crime, punishable by a $1,000 fine and six months in jail, to offer a cup of cold water, a piece of bread, or a place to stay to a desperate fugitive trying to escape to Canada. Every person, man or woman, who had even a little human compassion broke that unjust law, dismissing the consequences, and was right to do so. Just as the slaves who gained their freedom had to navigate unfair laws, women now must do the same to claim their right to have a voice in this government; and I have claimed mine, and I will continue to claim it at every opportunity.
Judge Hunt.—The Court orders the prisoner to sit down. It will not allow another word.
Judge Hunt.—The Court orders the defendant to sit down. It will not allow another word.
Miss Anthony.—When I was brought before your honor for trial, I hoped for a broad and liberal interpretation of the Constitution and its recent amendments, which should declare all United States citizens under its protecting aegis—which should declare equality of rights the national guarantee to all persons born or naturalized in the United States. But failing to get this justice—failing, even, to get a trial by a jury not of my peers—I ask not leniency at your hands but rather the full rigor of the law.
Miss Anthony.—When I was brought before you for trial, I hoped for a fair and open-minded interpretation of the Constitution and its recent amendments, which would protect all United States citizens—declaring equality of rights as the national guarantee for everyone born or naturalized in the United States. But since I didn’t receive this justice—since I didn’t even receive a trial by a jury not of my peers—I’m not asking for mercy from you, but rather the full consequences of the law.
Judge Hunt—The Court must insist—[Here the prisoner sat down.] The prisoner will stand up. [Here Miss Anthony rose again.] The sentence of the Court is that you pay a fine of $100 and the costs of the prosecution. 441 Miss Anthony.—May it please your honor, I will never pay a dollar of your unjust penalty. All the stock in trade I possess is a debt of $10,000, incurred by publishing my paper—The Revolution—the sole object of which was to educate all women to do precisely as I have done, rebel against your man-made, unjust, unconstitutional forms of law, which tax, fine, imprison and hang women, while denying them the right of representation in the government; and I will work on with might and main to pay every dollar of that honest debt, but not a penny shall go to this unjust claim. And I shall earnestly and persistently continue to urge all women to the practical recognition of the old Revolutionary maxim, "Resistance to tyranny is obedience to God."
Judge Hunt.—The Court must insist—[Here the defendant sat down.] The defendant will stand up. [Here Miss Anthony rose again.] The sentence of the Court is that you pay a fine of $100 and the costs of the prosecution. 441 Miss Anthony.—May it please your honor, I will never pay a dollar of your unfair penalty. All the assets I have are a debt of $10,000 from publishing my paper—The Revolution—the sole purpose of which was to empower all women to do exactly what I've done: rebel against your man-made, unjust, unconstitutional laws that tax, fine, imprison, and execute women while denying them the right to representation in government; and I will work tirelessly to pay every dollar of that honest debt, but not a penny will go to this unjust claim. I will earnestly and persistently continue to encourage all women to embrace the old Revolutionary saying, "Resistance to tyranny is obedience to God."
Judge Hunt.—Madam, the Court will not order you to stand committed until the fine is paid.
Judge Hunt.—Ma'am, the Court will not require you to remain in custody until the fine is paid.
Thus ended the great trial, "The United States of America vs. Susan B. Anthony." From this date the question of woman suffrage was lifted from one of grievances into one of Constitutional Law.
Thus ended the great trial, "The United States of America vs. Susan B. Anthony." From this point on, the issue of women's suffrage was elevated from a matter of complaints to a matter of Constitutional Law.
This was Judge Hunt's first criminal case after his elevation to the Supreme Bench of the United States. He was appointed at the solicitation of his intimate friend and townsman, Roscoe Conkling, and had an interview with him immediately preceding this trial. Mr. Conkling was an avowed enemy of woman suffrage. Miss Anthony always has believed that he inspired the course of Judge Hunt and that his decision was written before the trial, a belief shared by most of those associated in the case.
This was Judge Hunt's first criminal case after he was elevated to the Supreme Bench of the United States. He was appointed at the request of his close friend and fellow townsman, Roscoe Conkling, and he had a meeting with him right before this trial. Mr. Conkling was openly against women's suffrage. Miss Anthony has always believed that he influenced Judge Hunt's actions and that his decision was predetermined before the trial, a belief that most people involved in the case also shared.
Miss Anthony says in her journal: "The greatest judicial outrage history ever recorded! No law, logic or demand of justice could change Judge Hunt's will. We were convicted before we had a hearing and the trial was a mere farce." Some time afterwards Judge Selden wrote her: "I regard the ruling of the judge, and also his refusal to submit the case to the jury, as utterly indefensible." Scarcely a newspaper in the country sustained Judge Hunt's action. The Canandaigua Times thus expressed the general sentiment in an editorial, soon after the trial:
Miss Anthony writes in her journal: "The biggest judicial injustice in history! No law, logic, or sense of justice could sway Judge Hunt's determination. We were found guilty before we even had a chance to speak, and the trial was just a joke." Later, Judge Selden corresponded with her: "I find the judge's ruling, as well as his refusal to let the jury hear the case, completely unjustifiable." Hardly any newspaper in the country supported Judge Hunt's actions. The Canandaigua Times captured the overall opinion in an editorial soon after the trial:
The decisions of Judge Hunt in the Anthony case have been widely criticised, and it seems to us not without reason. Even among those who accept the conclusion that women have not a legal right to vote and who do not hesitate 442 to express the opinion that Miss Anthony deserved a greater punishment than she received, we find many seriously questioning the propriety of a proceeding whereby the proper functions of the jury are dispensed with, and the Court arrogates to itself the right to determine as to the guilt or innocence of the accused party. If this may be done in one instance, why may it not in all? And if our courts may thus arbitrarily direct what verdicts shall be rendered, what becomes of the right to trial "by an impartial jury," which the Constitution guarantees to all persons alike, whether male or female? These are questions of grave importance, to which the American people now have their attention forcibly directed through the extraordinary action of a judge of the Supreme Court. It is for them to say whether the right of trial by jury shall exist only in form, or be perpetuated according to the letter and spirit of the Constitution.
The decisions made by Judge Hunt in the Anthony case have faced significant criticism, and we believe it's justified. Even among those who agree that women don’t have a legal right to vote and who readily assert that Miss Anthony deserved a harsher penalty than what she received, many are questioning the suitability of a process where the jury's proper role is ignored and the Court takes it upon itself to determine the accused's guilt or innocence. If this can happen in one case, why not in others? And if our courts can arbitrarily dictate what verdicts should be reached, what happens to the right to a trial "by an impartial jury," guaranteed by the Constitution to everyone, regardless of gender? These are serious concerns that Americans must now consider because of the unusual actions of a Supreme Court judge. It’s up to them to decide whether the right to a jury trial will exist only in theory or be upheld in line with the letter and spirit of the Constitution.
The New York Sun scored the judge as follows:
The New York Sun rated the judge like this:
Judge Hunt allowed the jury to be impanelled and sworn, and to hear the evidence; but when the case had reached the point of the rendering of the verdict, he directed a verdict of guilty. He thus denied a trial by jury to an accused party in his court; and either through malice, which we do not believe, or through ignorance, which in such a flagrant degree is equally culpable in a judge, he violated one of the most important provisions of the Constitution of the United States. It is hardly worth while to argue that the right of trial by jury includes the right to a verdict by the jury, and to a free and impartial verdict, not one ordered, compelled and forced from them by an adverse and predetermined court. The language of the Constitution of the United States is that "in all criminal prosecutions the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury." Do the words an "impartial jury" mean a jury directed and controlled by the court, and who might just as well, for all practical purposes, be twelve wooden automatons, moved by a string pulled by the hand of the judge?
Judge Hunt allowed the jury to be selected and sworn in to hear the evidence; however, when it came time to deliver the verdict, he instructed them to find the defendant guilty. By doing this, he denied the accused a trial by jury in his court. It’s unclear whether this was out of malice, which we don’t believe, or out of ignorance—which is equally unacceptable for a judge. He violated one of the most essential provisions of the United States Constitution. It’s hardly debatable that the right to a trial by jury includes the right to a verdict from that jury, as well as a fair and impartial verdict, not one dictated or coerced by a biased and predetermined court. The Constitution states that "in all criminal prosecutions the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury." Do the words "an impartial jury" really mean a jury that is directed and controlled by the court, which could easily be replaced by twelve wooden puppets, manipulated by the judge’s strings?
The Rochester Democrat and Chronicle commented:
The Rochester Democrat and Chronicle said:
In the action of Judge Hunt there was a grand, over-reaching assumption of authority, unsupported by any point in the case itself, but adopted as an established legal principle. If there is such a principle, Judge Hunt did his duty beyond question, and he is scarcely lower than the angels so far as personal power goes. The New York Sun assumes that there is no such principle; that if there were, "Judge Hunt might on his own ipsedixit, and without the intervention of a jury, fine, imprison or hang any man, woman or child in the United States." And the Sun proceeds to say that Judge Hunt "must be impeached and removed. Such punishment for the commission of a crime like his against civil liberty is a necessity. The American people will not tolerate a judge like this on the bench of their highest court. To do it would be to submit their necks to as detestable a tyranny as ever existed on the face. of the earth. They will not sit quietly by to see their liberties, red and radiant with the blood of a million of their sons, silently melted away in the judicial 443 crucible of a stolid and tyrannical judge of their Federal Court." This is forcible, certainly; but it ought to be speedily decided, at least, whether there is such a legal principle as we have mentioned.
Judge Hunt acted on a grand, unfounded assumption of authority that had no real basis in the case, yet he treated it as if it were a solid legal principle. If such a principle were real, Judge Hunt would have carried out his responsibilities flawlessly, appearing almost saintly in his exercise of personal power. The New York Sun argues that no such principle exists; if it did, "Judge Hunt could, on his own say-so, and without a jury's involvement, fine, imprison, or execute any man, woman, or child in the United States." The Sun further states that Judge Hunt "must be impeached and removed. Such punishment for the crime he committed against civil liberty is essential. The American people will not tolerate a judge like this on their highest court. Allowing this would mean submitting to a tyranny as repugnant as any that has ever existed. They will not passively watch their liberties, hard-earned through the sacrifice of millions of their sons, slowly erode in the judicial machinery of a cold and tyrannical federal judge." This is certainly powerful rhetoric; however, it should be quickly clarified whether such a legal principle, as discussed, actually exists.
The Utica Observer gave this opinion:
The Utica Observer stated this opinion:
We have sought the advice of the best legal and judicial minds in our State in regard to the ruling of Justice Ward Hunt in the case of Susan B. Anthony. While the written opinion of the judge is very generally commended, his action in ordering a verdict of guilty to be entered, without giving the jury an opportunity of saying whether it was their verdict or not, is almost universally condemned. Such a case never before occurred in the history of our courts, and the hope is very general that it never will again. Between the indictment and the judgment stands the jury, and there is no way known to the law by which the jury's power in criminal cases can be abrogated. The judge may charge the jury that the defense is invalid; that it is their clear duty to find the prisoner guilty. But beyond this he can not properly go. He has no right to order the clerk to enter a verdict which is not the verdict of the jury. In doing this thing Justice Hunt outraged the rights of Susan B. Anthony. It would probably puzzle him to tell why he submitted the case of the inspectors to the jury after taking the case of Miss Anthony out of their hands. It would also puzzle his newspaper champions.
We've talked to some of the top legal and judicial experts in our state about Justice Ward Hunt's ruling in Susan B. Anthony's case. While the judge's written opinion is mostly praised, his decision to have a guilty verdict recorded without allowing the jury to express whether that was their verdict is almost universally criticized. This has never happened before in our courts, and there's a strong hope it won’t happen again. The jury is the barrier between the indictment and the judgment, and there's no legal way to take away the jury's power in criminal cases. The judge can tell the jury that the defense is invalid and that it's their clear duty to find the defendant guilty, but that’s as far as he can go. He has no right to instruct the clerk to record a verdict that isn't from the jury. By doing this, Justice Hunt violated Susan B. Anthony's rights. It would likely confuse him to explain why he submitted the case of the inspectors to the jury after taking Miss Anthony's case away from them. It would probably confuse his newspaper supporters too.
The Legal News, of Chicago, edited by Myra Bradwell, made this pertinent comment: "Judge Ward Hunt, of the Federal Bench, violated the Constitution of the United States more in convicting Miss Anthony of illegal voting, than she did in voting; for he had sworn to support it, and she had not."
The Legal News, of Chicago, edited by Myra Bradwell, made this relevant comment: "Judge Ward Hunt, of the Federal Bench, violated the Constitution of the United States more in convicting Miss Anthony of illegal voting than she did by voting; for he had sworn to uphold it, and she had not."
The Albany Law Journal, however, after indulging in a few vulgar platitudes on the fact of Miss Anthony's having admitted that she was a woman, declared that Judge Hunt transcended his rights but that "if Miss Anthony does not like our laws she'd better emigrate!" This legal authority failed to advise where she could emigrate to find laws which were equally just to men and to women. It might also have answered the question, "Should a woman be compelled to leave the land of her nativity because of the injustice of its laws?"
The Albany Law Journal, however, after throwing around a few basic clichés about Miss Anthony admitting she was a woman, stated that Judge Hunt overstepped his authority but that "if Miss Anthony doesn't like our laws, she should just move!" This legal source didn’t suggest where she could go to find laws that treated men and women fairly. It could have also addressed the question, "Should a woman have to leave her home country because of unfair laws?"
Miss Anthony's trial closed on Wednesday and she remained in Canandaigua to attend that of the three inspectors, which followed at once. She was called as a witness and inquired of Judge Hunt: "I should like to know if the testimony of a person convicted of a crime can be taken?" "They call you 444 as a witness, madam," was his brusque reply. Later, thinking to trap her, he asked, "You presented yourself as a female, claiming that you had a right to vote?" Quick as a flash came her answer: "I presented myself not as a female, sir, but as a citizen of the United States. I was called to the ballot-box by the Fourteenth Amendment, not as a female but as a citizen."
Miss Anthony's trial ended on Wednesday, and she stayed in Canandaigua to attend the trial of the three inspectors that followed immediately. She was called as a witness and asked Judge Hunt, "I’d like to know if the testimony of someone convicted of a crime can be accepted?" "They’re calling you 444 as a witness, ma'am," was his blunt response. Later, trying to catch her off guard, he asked, "You came forward as a woman, claiming that you had the right to vote?" Her reply was quick: "I came forward not as a woman, sir, but as a citizen of the United States. I was called to the ballot box by the Fourteenth Amendment, not as a woman but as a citizen."
The inspectors were defended by Mr. Van Voorhis but, after the testimony was introduced, the judge refused to allow him to address the jury. He practically directed them to bring in a verdict of guilty, saying, "You can decide it here or go out." The jury returned a verdict of guilty. The motion for a new trial was denied. One of the inspectors (Hall) had been tried and convicted without being brought into court. They were fined $25 each and the costs of the prosecution but, although neither was paid, they were not imprisoned at that time.
The inspectors were defended by Mr. Van Voorhis, but after the testimony was presented, the judge refused to let him speak to the jury. He basically instructed them to return a guilty verdict, saying, "You can decide it here or go out." The jury came back with a guilty verdict. The request for a new trial was denied. One of the inspectors, Hall, had been tried and convicted without ever stepping foot in court. They were each fined $25 and had to cover the prosecution costs, but although neither paid, they were not imprisoned at that time.
When asked for his opinion on the case, after a lapse of twenty-four years, Mr. Van Voorhis gave the following:
When asked for his opinion on the case, after a break of twenty-four years, Mr. Van Voorhis provided the following:
There never before was a trial in the country of one-half the importance of this of Miss Anthony's. That of Andrew Johnson had no issue which could compare in value with the one here at stake. If Miss Anthony had won her case on the merits, it would have revolutionized the suffrage of the country and enfranchised every woman in the United States. There was a pre-arranged determination to convict her. A jury trial was dangerous, and so the Constitution was openly and deliberately violated.
There has never been a trial in this country as important as Miss Anthony's. Andrew Johnson's trial didn't have an issue that could compare to what was at stake here. If Miss Anthony had won her case, it would have transformed the suffrage movement in the country and granted voting rights to every woman in the United States. There was already a decision made to convict her. A jury trial was risky, so the Constitution was deliberately and openly ignored.
The Constitution makes the jury, in a criminal case, the judges of the law and of the facts. No matter how clear or how strong the case may appear to the judge, it must be submitted to the jury. That is the mandate of the Constitution. As no one can be convicted of crime except upon trial by jury, it follows that the jury are entitled to pass upon the law as well as the facts. The judge can advise the jury on questions of law. He can legally do no more. If he control the jury and direct a verdict of guilty, he himself is guilty of a crime for which impeachment is the remedy.
The Constitution states that the jury, in a criminal case, is responsible for judging both the law and the facts. No matter how clear or strong the case appears to the judge, it must be presented to the jury. That's what the Constitution requires. Since no one can be convicted of a crime without a jury trial, the jury has the right to evaluate both the law and the facts. The judge can guide the jury on legal questions, but that's where his power ends. If he controls the jury and mandates a guilty verdict, he is committing a crime himself, which could lead to impeachment.
The jury in Miss Anthony's case was composed of excellent men. None better could have been drawn anywhere. Justice Hunt knew that. He had the jury impanelled only as a matter of form. He said so in the inspectors' case. He came to Canandaigua to hold the Circuit Court, for the purpose of convicting Miss Anthony. He had unquestionably prepared his opinion beforehand. The job had to be done, so he took the bull by the horns and directed the jury to find a verdict of guilty. In the case of the inspectors he refused to defendants' counsel the right of addressing the jury. 445
The jury in Miss Anthony's case consisted of outstanding men. There couldn't have been a better group anywhere. Justice Hunt was aware of this. He assembled the jury just to go through the motions. He mentioned this in the inspectors' case. He came to Canandaigua to conduct the Circuit Court with the intention of convicting Miss Anthony. He had obviously prepared his opinion beforehand. The job needed to be done, so he faced it directly and instructed the jury to deliver a guilty verdict. In the inspectors' case, he denied the defendants' lawyer the chance to address the jury. 445
Judge Hunt very adroitly, in passing sentence on Miss Anthony imposing a fine of $100, refused to add, what is usual in such cases, that she be imprisoned until the fine be paid. Had he done so, Miss Anthony would have gone to prison, and then taken her case directly to the Supreme Court of the United States by writ of habeas corpus. There she would have been discharged, because trial by jury had been denied her. But as Miss Anthony was not even held in custody after judgment had been pronounced, she could not resort to habeas corpus proceedings and had no appeal.
When sentencing Miss Anthony and imposing a $100 fine, Judge Hunt cleverly chose not to include the usual condition that she would be imprisoned until the fine was paid. Had he done so, Miss Anthony would have gone to prison and could have taken her case directly to the Supreme Court of the United States via a writ of habeas corpus. There, she would have been released because her right to a trial by jury was denied. However, since Miss Anthony wasn't even held in custody after the judgment, she couldn't pursue habeas corpus proceedings and had no way to appeal.
But the outrage of ordering a verdict of guilty against the defendant was not the only outrage committed by this judge on these trials:
But the outrage of delivering a guilty verdict against the defendant wasn’t the only injustice this judge committed during these trials:
It was an outrage to refuse the right of a defendant to poll the jury.
It was outrageous to deny a defendant the right to question the jury.
It was an outrage for the judge to refuse to hold that if the defendant believed she had a right to vote, and voted in good faith in that belief, she was not guilty of the charge.
It was outrageous for the judge to ignore that if the defendant genuinely believed she had the right to vote and cast her vote in good faith based on that belief, she was not guilty of the charge.
It was an outrage to hold that the jury, in considering the question whether she did or did not believe she had a right to vote, might not consider that she took the advice of Judge Selden before she voted, and acted on that advice.
It was ridiculous to assume that the jury, when deciding whether she believed she had the right to vote, wouldn’t consider that she followed Judge Selden’s advice before voting and acted on it.
It was an outrage to hold that the jury might not take into consideration, as bearing upon the same question, the fact that the inspectors and supervisor of election looked into the question, and came to the conclusion that she had the right to be registered and vote, and told her so, and so decided.
It was outrageous to think that the jury might overlook that the inspectors and election supervisor investigated the matter, concluded she had the right to register and vote, and communicated that conclusion to her.
It was an outrage for the judge to hold that the jury had not the right to consider the defendant's motive, and to find her innocent if she acted without any intent to violate the law.
It was outrageous for the judge to state that the jury couldn't consider the defendant's motive and to find her innocent if she acted without any intention to break the law.
In the case of the inspectors, it was an outrage to refuse defendants' counsel the right to address the jury.
In the inspectors' case, it was unacceptable to deny the defendants' lawyers the opportunity to address the jury.
It was an outrage to refuse to instruct the jury that if the defendants, being administrative officers, acted without any criminal motive but in accordance with their best judgment, and in perfect good faith, they were not guilty.
It was disgraceful to withhold jury instructions that if the defendants, as administrative officers, acted without any criminal intent but based on their best judgment and in good faith, they should not be found guilty.
Judge Selden has passed to his eternal rest and lies beneath a massive monument of granite in beautiful Mount Hope cemetery. Mr. Van Voorhis thus paid tribute to his associate in this noted case: "His argument on the constitutional points involved is one of the ablest and most complete to be found in history. As a lawyer he had no superior; he was a master in his profession. He had a most discriminating mind and a marvellous memory. He was familiar with the books, and possessed a power of statement equal to that of Daniel Webster. I predict that the verdict of history will be that Judge Selden was right and the Court wrong upon the constitutional question involved in this case."
Judge Selden has passed away and is resting beneath a large granite monument in the beautiful Mount Hope Cemetery. Mr. Van Voorhis honored his colleague in this famous case by saying: "His argument on the constitutional issues involved is one of the most skilled and thorough in history. As a lawyer, he had no equal; he was a master of his craft. He had an exceptionally sharp mind and an incredible memory. He was well-versed in the law and had a level of expression comparable to that of Daniel Webster. I believe that history will show that Judge Selden was right and the Court was wrong regarding the constitutional question at the heart of this case."
To the heavy debts of The Revolution which, with all her efforts, Miss Anthony had been able to reduce but a fraction, 446 were now added the costs of this suit. She did not propose to pay the fines, but she did intend to see that the inspectors were relieved of all expense in connection with the trial. Her indomitable courage did not fail her even in this emergency, and as usual she was sustained by the substantial appreciation of her friends. Letters of sympathy and financial help poured in from acquaintances and strangers in all parts of the country. Indignation meetings were held and contributions sent also by various reform clubs and societies.[74] All were swallowed up in the heavy and unavoidable expenses of the suits of herself and the inspectors. Neither of her lawyers ever presented a bill. She had 5,000 copies made of Judge Selden's argument on the habeas corpus at Albany, which she scattered broadcast. She also had printed 3,000 pamphlets, at a cost of $700, containing a full report of the trial, and sent them to all the law journals in the United States and Canada, to the newspapers, etc. The Democrat and Chronicle said of this book, "We believe it is the most important contribution yet made to the discussion of woman suffrage from a legal standpoint." None of the other cases ever were brought to trial.[75]
To the heavy debts from The Revolution, which Miss Anthony had managed to reduce only slightly despite her efforts, 446 were now added the costs of this lawsuit. She didn’t plan to pay the fines, but she was determined to ensure that the inspectors didn’t have to cover any expenses related to the trial. Her unwavering courage didn't waver even in this situation, and as always, she was supported by the strong appreciation from her friends. Letters of sympathy and financial support flooded in from both acquaintances and strangers across the country. Indignation meetings were held, and contributions were also sent by various reform clubs and societies.[74] All funds went towards covering the heavy and unavoidable expenses of the lawsuits involving herself and the inspectors. Neither of her lawyers ever presented a bill. She had 5,000 copies made of Judge Selden's argument on habeas corpus at Albany, which she distributed widely. She also printed 3,000 pamphlets at a cost of $700, containing a full report of the trial, and sent them to all the law journals in the United States and Canada, as well as to newspapers, etc. The Democrat and Chronicle remarked about this book, “We believe it is the most important contribution yet made to the discussion of woman suffrage from a legal standpoint.” None of the other cases were ever brought to trial.[75]
Miss Anthony had no fears of not being able to raise money to pay her debts if she could be free to give her time to the lecture platform, but an entire year had been occupied with her trial, and the money received during this period had been 447 required to meet its expenses. She had a vital reason, however, for feeling that she could not leave home—the rapidly-failing health of her beloved sister Guelma, her senior by only twenty months, for more than half a century her close companion, and for the past eight years living under the same roof. Her heart had been broken by the death, a few years before, of her two beautiful children just at the dawn of manhood and womanhood, and the fatal malady consumption met with no resistance. Day by day she faded away, the physician holding out no hope from the first. Her mother, now eighty years of age, was completely crushed; the sister Mary was principal of one of the city schools and busy all day, and Miss Anthony felt it her imperative duty to remain beside the invalid, even could she have overcome her grief sufficiently to appear in public. Invitations to lecture came to her from many points but she refused them and remained by the gentle sufferer day and night.[76] At daybreak on November 9 the loved one passed away, and the tender hands of sisters and of the only daughter performed the last ministrations.[77]
Miss Anthony wasn't worried about raising money to pay her debts as long as she could dedicate her time to speaking engagements, but an entire year had been consumed by her trial, and the money earned during that time was needed to cover its costs. However, she had a compelling reason to stay home—the rapidly declining health of her beloved sister Guelma, who was only twenty months older than her and had been her close companion for more than fifty years, living under the same roof for the past eight. Her heart had been shattered by the deaths of her two beautiful children a few years earlier, just as they were entering adulthood, and the deadly illness of tuberculosis was making no attempt to fight back. Day by day, she was growing weaker, with the doctor providing no hope from the start. Her mother, now eighty years old, was completely devastated; her sister Mary was the principal of a city school and occupied all day, leaving Miss Anthony feeling that it was her duty to stay by the side of the ailing sister, even if she could have pushed through her grief enough to appear in public. She received invitations to lecture from various places, but she turned them down and remained with the gentle sufferer day and night. At dawn on November 9, the beloved one passed away, and the caring hands of sisters and the only daughter provided the final comforts.
With Miss Anthony the love of family was especially intense as she had formed no outside ties, and the parents, the brothers and sisters filled her world of affection. The sundering of these bonds wrenched her very heartstrings and upon every recurring anniversary the anguish broke forth afresh, scarcely assuaged by the lapse of years. A short time after this last sorrow she writes:
With Miss Anthony, her love for family was particularly strong since she had no outside connections, and her parents, brothers, and sisters filled her world with affection. The breaking of these bonds tore at her heart, and every anniversary brought fresh pain, barely eased by the passing years. Shortly after this last heartbreak, she writes:
MY DEAR MOTHER: How continually, except the one hour when I am on the platform, is the thought of you and your loss and my own with me! How little we realize the constant presence in our minds of our loved and loving ones until they are forever gone. We would not call them back to endure again their suffering, but we can not help wishing they might have been spared to us in health and vigor. Our Guelma, does she look down upon us, does she still live, and shall we all live again and know each other, and work together and love and enjoy one another? In spite of instinct, in spite of faith, these questions will come up again and again.... She said you 448 would soon follow her, and we know that in the nature of things it must be so. When that time comes, dear mother, may you fall asleep as sweetly and softly as did your eldest born; and as the sands of life ebb out into the great eternal, may all of us be with you to make the way easy. It does seem too cruel that every one of us must be so overwhelmingly immersed in work, but may the Good Father help us so to do that there may be no vain regrets for things done or left undone when the last hour comes.
MY DEAR MOM: I think about you constantly, except for the hour I’m on stage, and I feel your loss deeply, along with my own. We often don’t realize how much our loved ones are on our minds until they’re gone forever. We wouldn’t want them back just to suffer again, but we can’t help wishing they had stayed with us, healthy and strong. Our Guelma, does she look down on us? Is she still alive, and will we all live again, recognize each other, work together, love, and enjoy each other’s company? Despite what we instinctively believe and have faith in, these questions keep resurfacing... She said you 448 would follow her soon, and we know that’s how nature works. When that time comes, dear mom, I hope you fall asleep as gently and peacefully as your firstborn did; and as the sands of life flow into eternity, may we all be with you to ease the way. It seems so unfair that each of us is completely caught up in work, but may the Good Father help us so we have no regrets about what we did or didn’t do when the final moment arrives.
A beautiful incident cast a flood of light through the heavy shadows of this trying year, and made November 27 in truth a day of Thanksgiving for one brave woman. At his urgent invitation, Miss Anthony had spent it in the home of her cousin, Anson Laphain, at Skaneateles. After a pleasant day, as she sat quietly and sadly by the window, watching the deepening twilight, the noble-hearted cousin took from his desk her notes for $4,000, which he had so generously loaned her during the stormy days of The Revolution, cancelled all and presented them to her. She was overwhelmed with surprise and when she attempted to express her gratitude, he stopped her with words of respect, confidence and encouragement which seemed to roll away a stone from her heart and in its place put new hope, ambition and strength.
A beautiful moment brought a ray of light into the heavy shadows of this challenging year, making November 27 truly a day of Thanksgiving for one brave woman. At his suggestion, Miss Anthony spent the day at her cousin, Anson Laphain's home in Skaneateles. After a pleasant day, as she sat quietly and sadly by the window watching the twilight deepen, her kind-hearted cousin took her notes for $4,000 from his desk, which he had generously loaned her during the tough times of The Revolution, canceled them all, and gave them back to her. She was stunned with surprise, and when she tried to express her gratitude, he stopped her with respectful, confident, and encouraging words that seemed to lift a weight from her heart and replace it with new hope, ambition, and strength.
CHAPTER XXVI.
NO CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO JURY OR FRANCHISE.
1874.
Miss Anthony's case continued to attract widespread attention, Judge Hunt's arbitrary action finding few apologists even among opponents of woman suffrage. It was finally decided by her counsel and herself to make an appeal to Congress for the remission of the fine, which, if granted, would be in effect a declaration of the illegality of Judge Hunt's act and a precedent for the future. Judge Selden based his authority for such an appeal on a case in the United States Statutes at Large, chap. 45, p. 802, where a fine of $1,000 and costs, illegally imposed upon Matthew Lyon under the Alien and Sedition Laws, 1799, were refunded with interest to his heirs. Mr. Van Voorhis found an authority also in an act passed by the British Parliament in 1792, correcting the departure from the common law, in respect to the rights of juries, by Lord Mansfield and his associates in the cases of Woodfall and Shipley. This act was passed through the exertions of Lord Camden and Mr. Fox in order to prevent the erroneous decisions of the judges from becoming the law of England.
Miss Anthony's case kept drawing significant attention, with Judge Hunt's arbitrary decision receiving little support, even from those against woman suffrage. Ultimately, she and her lawyers decided to appeal to Congress for the cancellation of the fine, which, if approved, would essentially declare Judge Hunt's action illegal and set a precedent for the future. Judge Selden based his authority for this appeal on a case found in the United States Statutes at Large, chap. 45, p. 802, where a fine of $1,000 and costs, wrongfully imposed on Matthew Lyon under the Alien and Sedition Laws of 1799, was refunded with interest to his heirs. Mr. Van Voorhis also referenced an act passed by the British Parliament in 1792, which corrected the divergence from common law regarding jury rights, caused by Lord Mansfield and his associates in the cases of Woodfall and Shipley. This act was pushed through by Lord Camden and Mr. Fox to prevent the judges' mistaken decisions from becoming the law in England.
Both of the attorneys keenly resented the action of Judge Hunt, Mr. Selden pronouncing it "the greatest judicial outrage ever perpetrated in the United States;" and Mr. Van Voorhis asserting that "trial by jury was completely annihilated in this case, and there is no remedy except to appeal to the justice of Congress to remit the fine and declare that trial by jury does and shall exist in this country." The appeal, or petition, was 450 prepared and Miss Anthony carried it to Washington when she went to the National Convention, January 15, 1874. It was an able document, reciting the facts in the case and the action of the judge, and concluding:
Both attorneys were strongly against Judge Hunt's actions, with Mr. Selden calling it "the greatest judicial outrage ever committed in the United States," while Mr. Van Voorhis insisted that "trial by jury was completely destroyed in this case, and the only remedy is to appeal to Congress to overturn the fine and affirm that trial by jury does and will exist in this country." The appeal, or petition, was 450 prepared, and Miss Anthony took it to Washington when she attended the National Convention on January 15, 1874. It was a well-crafted document, detailing the facts of the case and the judge's actions, and ended with:
Your petitioner respectfully submits that, in these proceedings, she has been denied the rights guaranteed by the Constitution to all persons accused of crime, the right of trial by jury and the right to have the assistance of counsel for their defense. It is a mockery to call hers a trial by jury; and, unless the assistance of counsel may be limited to the argument of legal questions, without the privilege of saying a word to the jury upon the question of the guilt or innocence in fact of a party charged, or the privilege of ascertaining from the jury whether they do or do not agree to the verdict pronounced by the Court in their name, she has been denied the assistance of counsel for her defense.
Your petitioner respectfully states that, in these proceedings, she has been denied the rights guaranteed by the Constitution to everyone accused of a crime, specifically the right to a jury trial and the right to have legal counsel for her defense. It's ridiculous to call this a jury trial; unless legal counsel is allowed to argue legal questions but cannot address the jury about the actual guilt or innocence of the accused, or to find out from the jury whether they agree with the verdict given by the Court in their name, she has been denied the assistance of legal counsel for her defense.
Of the decision of the judge upon the question of the right of your petitioner to vote, she makes no complaint. It was a question properly belonging to the Court to decide, was fully and fairly submitted to the judge, and of his decision, whether right or wrong, your petitioner is well aware she can not here complain. But in regard to her conviction of crime, which she insists, for the reasons above given, was in violation of the principles of the common law, of common morality, of the statute under which she was charged, and of the Constitution—a crime of which she was as innocent as the judge by whom she was convicted—she respectfully asks, inasmuch as the law has provided no means of reviewing the decisions of the judge, or of correcting his errors, that the fine imposed upon your petitioner be remitted, as an expression of the sense of this high tribunal that her conviction was unjust.
Regarding the judge's decision on your petitioner's right to vote, she has no complaints. This was a matter that the Court was right to decide, it was fully and fairly presented to the judge, and regardless of whether his decision was right or wrong, your petitioner understands that she cannot complain about it here. However, concerning her conviction for a crime, which she asserts, for the reasons stated above, violated common law principles, common morality, the statute under which she was charged, and the Constitution—a crime she was as innocent of as the judge who convicted her—she respectfully requests that, since the law provides no means to review or correct the judge's decisions, the fine imposed on her be waived, as a statement from this esteemed court that her conviction was unjust.
This was presented in the Senate by A.A. Sargent, of California, and in the House by William Loughridge, of Iowa, and was referred to the judiciary committees. In May, Lyman Tremaine, from the House Judiciary Committee, reported adversely on the petition in a lengthy document, which incorporated a letter from District-Attorney Crowley, urging the committee "not to degrade a just judge and applaud a criminal;" and declaring that "Miss Anthony's trial was fair and constitutional and by an impartial jury." (!) Mr. Tremaine's report said: "Congress can not be converted into a national court of review for any and all criminal convictions where it shall be alleged the judge has committed an error." Thus did he deliberately ignore the point at issue, the refusal of a trial by jury. It concluded by saying: "Since the discussion of 451 this question has arisen in the committee, the President has pardoned Miss Anthony for the offense of which she was convicted and this seems to furnish a conclusive reason why no further action should be taken by the judiciary committee." (!) The learned gentleman probably referred to the pardon of the inspectors by the President. Miss Anthony had not asked executive clemency for herself.
This was presented in the Senate by A.A. Sargent from California, and in the House by William Loughridge from Iowa, and was sent to the judiciary committees. In May, Lyman Tremaine from the House Judiciary Committee reported negatively on the petition in a lengthy document, which included a letter from District Attorney Crowley, urging the committee "not to undermine a just judge and support a criminal;" and stating that "Miss Anthony's trial was fair and constitutional and conducted by an impartial jury." (!) Mr. Tremaine's report stated: "Congress cannot be turned into a national court of review for any and all criminal convictions where it is claimed that the judge has made an error." Thus, he deliberately overlooked the key issue, which was the denial of a trial by jury. It concluded by stating: "Since the discussion of 451 this issue has come up in the committee, the President has pardoned Miss Anthony for the offense she was convicted of, and this appears to provide a definitive reason for no further action to be taken by the judiciary committee." (!) The learned gentleman probably referred to the pardon of the inspectors by the President. Miss Anthony had not requested executive clemency for herself.
Benjamin F. Butler presented an able and exhaustive minority report which closed with the following declaration: "Therefore, because the fine has been imposed by a court of the United States for an offense triable by jury, without the same being submitted to the jury, and because the court assumed to itself the right to enter a verdict without submitting the case to the jury, and in order that the judgment of the House of Representatives, if it concur with the judgment of the committee, may, in the most signal and impressive form, mark its determination to sustain in its integrity the common law right of trial by jury, your committee recommend that the prayer of the petitioner be granted."
Benjamin F. Butler submitted a thorough minority report that concluded with this statement: "Therefore, since the fine was imposed by a court of the United States for an offense that should be tried by a jury, without it being presented to the jury, and since the court took it upon itself to deliver a verdict without submitting the case to the jury, and in order for the judgment of the House of Representatives, if it aligns with the judgment of the committee, to officially and clearly show its commitment to uphold the fundamental common law right to a jury trial, your committee recommends that the petitioner's request be granted."
In June George F. Edmunds made an adverse report from the Senate Judiciary Committee in this remarkable language: "That they are not satisfied that the ruling of the judge was precisely as represented in the petition, and that if it were so, the Senate could not legally take any action in the premises, and they move that the committee be discharged from the further consideration of the petition, and that the bill be postponed indefinitely."
In June, George F. Edmunds gave a negative report from the Senate Judiciary Committee, stating: "They are not convinced that the judge's ruling was accurately reflected in the petition, and even if it were, the Senate couldn't legally take any action regarding this matter. They propose that the committee be released from any further consideration of the petition, and that the bill be postponed indefinitely."
Senator Matthew II. Carpenter presented a long and carefully prepared minority report which concluded:
Senator Matthew II. Carpenter delivered a detailed and thoughtfully crafted minority report that concluded:
Unfortunately the United States has no "well-ordered system of jurisprudence." A citizen may be tried, condemned and put to death by the erroneous judgment of a single inferior judge, and no court can grant him relief or a new trial. If a citizen have a cause involving the title to his farm, if it exceed $2,000 in value, he may bring his cause to the Supreme Court; but if it involve his liberty or his life, he can not. While we permit this blemish to exist on our judicial system, it behooves us to watch carefully the judgments inferior courts may render; and it is doubly important that we should see to it that twelve jurors shall concur with the judge before a citizen shall be hanged, incarcerated or otherwise punished. 452
Unfortunately, the United States doesn't have a "well-ordered system of jurisprudence." A citizen can be tried, condemned, and executed based on the wrong judgment of one lower court judge, and no court can provide relief or a new trial. If a citizen has a case regarding ownership of their farm and it’s valued at over $2,000, they can take it to the Supreme Court; however, if it impacts their freedom or life, they cannot. As long as this flaw exists in our legal system, we need to closely monitor the decisions made by lower courts; it's even more important to ensure that twelve jurors agree with the judge before a citizen can be hanged, imprisoned, or otherwise punished. 452
I concur with the majority of the committee that Congress can not grant the precise relief prayed for in the memorial; but I deem it to be the duty of Congress to declare its disapproval of the doctrine asserted and the course pursued in the trial of Miss Anthony; and all the more for the reason that no judicial court has jurisdiction to review the proceedings therein.
I agree with most of the committee that Congress can't provide the specific relief requested in the memorial; however, I believe it is Congress's duty to express its disapproval of the doctrine claimed and the actions taken in the trial of Miss Anthony, especially since no court has the power to review those proceedings.
I need not disclaim all purpose to question the motives of the learned judge before whom this trial was conducted. The best of judges may commit the gravest of errors amid the hurry and confusion of a nisi prius term; and the wrong Miss Anthony has suffered ought to be charged to the vicious system which denies to those convicted of offenses against the laws of the United States a hearing before the court of last resort—a defect it is equally within the power and the duty of Congress speedily to remedy.
I don't need to deny that I'm questioning the motives of the judge who oversaw this trial. Even the best judges can make serious mistakes during the rush and chaos of a trial; and the injustice Miss Anthony has faced should be attributed to the flawed system that denies those convicted of crimes against U.S. laws the chance to be heard by the highest court—a problem that Congress can and must fix quickly.
When Miss Anthony returned to Rochester in February, she found the inspectors were about to be put into jail because, acting under advice, they still refused to pay their fines. She wrote Benjamin F. Butler, who replied under date of February 22: "I would not, if I were they, pay, but allow process to be served; and I have no doubt the President will remit the fine if they are pressed too far." They were imprisoned February 26. Miss Anthony went at once to the jail and urged them not to pay the fine, for the sake of principle, promising to see that they were soon released. She waded through a heavy snow to consult her attorneys and then to the newspaper offices to talk with the editors in regard to the prisoners, reaching home at dark, and in her diary that night she writes, "I could not bear to come away and leave them one night in that dolorous place."
When Miss Anthony returned to Rochester in February, she found that the inspectors were about to be thrown in jail because, following advice, they still refused to pay their fines. She wrote to Benjamin F. Butler, who replied on February 22: "If I were them, I wouldn't pay, but let them serve the process; and I have no doubt the President will cancel the fine if they are pushed too far." They were imprisoned on February 26. Miss Anthony immediately went to the jail and urged them not to pay the fine for the sake of principle, promising to ensure they would be released soon. She trudged through heavy snow to consult her attorneys and then went to the newspaper offices to talk with the editors about the prisoners, getting home after dark. In her diary that night, she wrote, "I couldn't bear to leave them even one night in that sorrowful place."
She went out for a few lectures in neighboring towns, and at the Dansville Sanitarium was presented by the patients with a purse of $62. Arriving in Rochester at 7 A. M., March 2, she went straight to the jail and breakfasted with the inspectors; then to see the marshal and succeeded in having them released on bail. She did not reach home till 1 p. M., and here she found this telegram from Senator Sargent: "I laid the case of the inspectors before the President today. He kindly orders their pardon. Papers are being prepared." Benjamin F. Butler also had interceded with the President and sent Miss Anthony a telegram of congratulation on the result. In a few days the inspectors were pardoned and their 453 fines remitted by President Grant. They were in jail just one week and during that time received hundreds of calls, while each day bountiful meals were sent them by the women whose votes they had accepted. After their pardon a reception was given them at the home of Miss Anthony's sister, Mrs. Mosher, by the ladies of the Eighth ward, and in the spring they were re-elected by a handsome majority. Miss Anthony's fine stands against her to the present day.
She went out for a few lectures in nearby towns, and at the Dansville Sanitarium, the patients presented her with a purse of $62. Arriving in Rochester at 7 A.M. on March 2, she went straight to the jail and had breakfast with the inspectors; then she met with the marshal and managed to get them released on bail. She didn’t get home until 1 P.M., where she found a telegram from Senator Sargent: "I presented the case of the inspectors to the President today. He kindly orders their pardon. Papers are being prepared." Benjamin F. Butler had also intervened with the President and sent Miss Anthony a telegram congratulating her on the outcome. A few days later, the inspectors were pardoned and their 453 fines were waived by President Grant. They were in jail for just one week, and during that time, they received hundreds of visits while each day, generous meals were sent to them by the women whose votes they had accepted. After their pardon, a reception was hosted for them at the home of Miss Anthony's sister, Mrs. Mosher, by the ladies of the Eighth ward, and in the spring, they were re-elected by a significant majority. Miss Anthony's fine still stands against her to this day.
This case was the dominating feature of the National Convention at Washington in the winter of 1874; the key-note of all the speeches and the arguments before the judiciary committees was woman's right to vote under the Fourteenth Amendment. The women did not relinquish this claim until all ground for it was destroyed by a decision of the United States Supreme Court in 1875, in the case of Virginia L. Minor, of St. Louis. Francis Minor, a lawyer of that city, was the first to assert that women were enfranchised by both the letter and the spirit of the Fourteenth Amendment, and, acting under his advice, his wife attempted to register for the presidential election of 1872. Her name was refused and she brought suit against the inspector for the purpose of making a test case. After an adverse decision by the lower courts, the case was carried to the Supreme Court of the United States and argued before that tribunal by Mr. Minor, at the October term, 1874. It is not too much to say that no constitutional lawyer in the country could have improved upon this argument in its array of authorities, its keen logic and its impressive plea for justice.[78]
This case was the main topic at the National Convention in Washington during the winter of 1874; the focus of all the speeches and discussions before the judiciary committees was women's right to vote under the Fourteenth Amendment. The women didn't give up this claim until it was completely undermined by a decision of the United States Supreme Court in 1875, in the case of Virginia L. Minor from St. Louis. Francis Minor, a lawyer in that city, was the first to argue that women were entitled to vote by both the literal wording and the intent of the Fourteenth Amendment. Following his advice, his wife tried to register for the presidential election of 1872. Her registration was denied, and she sued the inspector to challenge the decision. After losing in the lower courts, the case was taken to the Supreme Court, where Mr. Minor argued it during the October term in 1874. It's safe to say that no constitutional lawyer in the country could have made a stronger case, with its well-cited references, sharp logic, and compelling appeal for justice.[78]
The decision was adverse, the opinion of the court being delivered March 29, 1875, by Chief-Justice Waite, himself a strong advocate of the enfranchisement of women. The court admitted that "women are persons and citizens," but found that the "National Constitution does not define the privileges and immunities of citizens. The United States has no voters of its own creation. The National Constitution does not confer the right of suffrage upon any one, but the franchise must 454 be regulated by the States. The Fourteenth Amendment does not add to the privileges and immunities of a citizen; it simply furnishes an additional guarantee to protect those he already has. Before the passage of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments, the States had the power to disfranchise on account of race or color. These amendments, ratified by the States, simply forbade that discrimination, but did not forbid that against sex."
The decision was unfavorable, with the court's opinion delivered on March 29, 1875, by Chief Justice Waite, who was a strong supporter of women's rights. The court acknowledged that "women are persons and citizens," but concluded that the "National Constitution does not define the privileges and immunities of citizens. The United States does not have voters created by itself. The National Constitution does not grant the right to vote to anyone; instead, the voting rights must 454 be regulated by the States. The Fourteenth Amendment does not add to the privileges and immunities of a citizen; it simply provides an extra guarantee to protect the rights they already have. Before the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments were passed, the States had the authority to disenfranchise individuals based on race or color. These amendments, ratified by the States, only prohibited that type of discrimination, but they did not prohibit discrimination based on sex."
This is in direct contradiction to the decision of Chief-Justice Taney in the Dred Scott case: "The words 'people of the United States' and 'citizens' are synonymous terms and mean the same thing; they describe the political body who, according to our republican institutions, form the sovereignty and hold the power, and conduct the government through their representatives. They are what we familiarly call the sovereign people, and every citizen is one of this people, and a constituent member of this sovereignty."
This directly contradicts Chief Justice Taney's decision in the Dred Scott case: "The terms 'people of the United States' and 'citizens' are interchangeable and mean the same thing; they refer to the political body that, according to our republican institutions, creates the sovereignty, holds the power, and runs the government through their representatives. They are what we commonly refer to as the sovereign people, and every citizen is one of these people, a key member of this sovereignty."
Although Miss Anthony and her co-workers still believed that, with a true interpretation, women were voters under these amendments, they were obliged to accept the decision of the highest court of appeal. They then returned to the work of petitioning Congress for a Sixteenth Amendment to the National Constitution which should prohibit disfranchisement on account of sex. They continued also the original plan of endeavoring to secure amendments to the constitutions of the different States abolishing the word "male" as a qualification for voting.[79] Bitterly disappointed at the decision of the Supreme Court, it was nevertheless a source of pride to the women that they had made their claim for representation in the government, carried it to the highest tribunal and gone down in honorable defeat.
Although Miss Anthony and her colleagues still believed that, with a proper interpretation, women were voters under these amendments, they had to accept the ruling of the highest court. They then went back to petitioning Congress for a Sixteenth Amendment to the National Constitution that would ban disenfranchisement based on sex. They also continued with the original plan of trying to secure amendments to the constitutions of various states to remove the word "male" as a requirement for voting.[79] While they were deeply disappointed by the Supreme Court's decision, it was still a source of pride for the women that they had made their case for representation in government, taken it to the highest court, and faced defeat with honor.

Virginia L. Minor
Virginia L. Minor
Miss Anthony never hesitated to ask the most distinguished men to speak on the woman suffrage platform, and Henry Wilson writes from the chamber of the Vice-President his regrets that he can not accept her invitation. Benjamin F. Butler replies: "As a rule I have refused to take part in any 455 convention in the District of Columbia about any matter which might come before Congress. I have gone farther out of my way in that regard in the matter of woman suffrage than in any other. Having given evidence that I am most strongly committed to the legality, propriety and justice of granting the ballot to woman, I do not see how I can add anything to it. Hoping that your cause may succeed, I have the honor to be, very truly yours."
Miss Anthony never hesitated to invite the most prominent men to speak on the woman suffrage platform, and Henry Wilson writes from the Vice President's office expressing his regrets that he cannot accept her invitation. Benjamin F. Butler responds: "Generally, I have declined to participate in any 455 convention in the District of Columbia regarding any issue that may come before Congress. I have gone further out of my way on the subject of woman suffrage than on any other matter. Having shown that I am strongly in favor of the legality, appropriateness, and fairness of giving women the right to vote, I don’t see how I can contribute anything further. Wishing you success in your cause, I am, sincerely yours."
Her cousin, Elbridge G. Lapham, M. C., of New York, says in a letter: "I am persuaded the time is fast hastening when woman will be accorded the exercise of the right your association demands. With that secured, many other advantages, now denied, will surely and speedily follow. I can see no valid objection to the right of suffrage being conferred, while there are many and very cogent reasons in favor of it. As has been said, you may go on election day to the most degraded elector you can find at the polls, who would sell his vote for a dollar or a dram, and ask him what he would take for his right to vote and you couldn't purchase it with a kingdom."
Her cousin, Elbridge G. Lapham, M.C., of New York, states in a letter: "I’m convinced we’re quickly approaching the time when women will be granted the right your organization is advocating for. Once that’s achieved, many other benefits that are currently denied will definitely and swiftly follow. I see no valid reason against giving women the right to vote, while there are plenty of strong arguments in its favor. As it has been said, you could go to the polls on election day and find the most corrupt voter, one willing to sell his vote for a dollar or a drink, and ask him what he would take for his right to vote, and you couldn’t buy it with an entire kingdom."

Elbridge G. Lapham
Elbridge G. Lapham
She found it possible even to interview the President of the United States on this question. During a conversation with General Grant one day on Pennsylvania Avenue, she said, "Well, Mr. President, what are you going to do for woman suffrage?" In a hearty, pleasant way he answered, "I have already done more for women than any other President, I have recognized the right of 5,000 of them to be postmasters." There were always distinguished men to champion this cause, but the chief drawback was expressed in a letter from that staunch supporter, Hon. A.G. Riddle, in 1874:
She even managed to interview the President of the United States about this issue. During a chat with General Grant one day on Pennsylvania Avenue, she asked, "Well, Mr. President, what are you going to do for women's suffrage?" In a friendly, cheerful manner, he replied, "I've already done more for women than any other President; I've recognized the right of 5,000 of them to be postmasters." There were always notable men supporting this cause, but the main challenge was pointed out in a letter from that committed ally, Hon. A.G. Riddle, in 1874:
There is not, I think, the slightest hope from the courts; and just as little from politicians. They never will take up this cause, never! Individuals will, parties never—till the thing is done. The Republicans want no new issues or disturbing elements. The Democrats are certain that the Republicans 456 are about to dissolve; and they want to hold on as they are. Both think this thing may, perhaps will come, but now is not the time; and with both, there never will be a "now." The trouble is that below all this lies the fact that man can govern alone and that, though woman has the right, man wants to do it; and if she wait for him to ask her, she will never vote.
I don't think there's any chance of getting help from the courts or politicians. They will never support this cause—never! Individuals might, but political parties won’t step in until it's already resolved. The Republicans are not looking for any new issues or controversies. The Democrats believe the Republicans are about to collapse, and they just want to keep things as they are. Both sides think this change might happen eventually, but not right now; for both, there will never be a "right now." The issue is that, fundamentally, men can govern on their own, and even though women have the right to vote, men prefer to handle it alone. If women wait for men to invite them, they'll never get the chance to vote.
There never was a cause with so much unembodied strength, and with so little working power; and the problem is how to vitalize and organize it. One of two things, I think, must occur; either man must be made to see and feel, as he never has done yet, the need of woman's help in the great field of human government, and so demand it; or woman must arise and come forward as she never has, and take her place. I still think that one of the main hindrances is with women. The fact is, that the worst bugbear is the never-seen, ever-felt law of caste which has always walled woman around, and which few have the courage to step over.
There's never been a cause with so much potential energy but so little actual impact; the challenge is figuring out how to energize and organize it. I believe one of two things needs to happen: either men must come to understand and deeply appreciate the importance of women’s contributions to governance and then demand it; or women must step up and claim their rightful role, as they’ve never done before. I still think that a major barrier lies with women themselves. The reality is that the biggest challenge is the invisible but ever-present barrier of social class that has always constrained women, and few have the courage to overcome it.
![]()
A.G. Riddle
A.G. Riddle
At the close of the convention Miss Anthony accepted the invitation of Mrs. Hooker, the State president, to join her in a month's tour through Connecticut. They spoke in nineteen different cities and towns, Mrs. Hooker assuming all financial responsibility and paying Miss Anthony $25 for each lecture. They had excellent audiences and were entertained in many beautiful homes. In Miss Anthony's diary, March 11, she says: "Senator Sumner died today, the noblest Roman of them all; true to the negro, but never a public word for woman. How I have pleaded with him for years, and he always admitted that his principles logically carried out gave woman an equal guarantee with man."
At the end of the convention, Miss Anthony accepted an invitation from Mrs. Hooker, the state president, to join her for a month-long tour of Connecticut. They spoke in nineteen different cities and towns, with Mrs. Hooker covering all expenses and paying Miss Anthony $25 for each lecture. They drew large audiences and were welcomed in many beautiful homes. In Miss Anthony's diary, on March 11, she wrote: "Senator Sumner died today, the noblest Roman of them all; loyal to the Black community, but never publicly advocated for women. How I have pleaded with him for years, and he always recognized that his principles logically extended equal rights to women as well as men."
In the spring of 1874 the women's temperance crusade began in Rochester and, although their methods were very different from those Miss Anthony would have employed, she met with them at their request to help them organize. After this was effected they called on her for a speech and she said in brief: 457
In the spring of 1874, the women’s temperance movement began in Rochester. Even though their methods were quite different from what Miss Anthony would have preferred, she met with them at their request to help organize. After that was completed, they asked her to give a speech, and she said briefly: 457
I am always glad to welcome every association of women for any good purpose, because I know that they will quickly learn the impossibility of accomplishing any substantial end. Women never realize their inability to effect a reform until they attempt it, and then they find how closely interwoven with politics are all such matters, and how entirely without political power are they themselves.... Now my good women, the best thing this organization will do for you will be to show you how utterly powerless you are to put down the liquor traffic. You never can talk down or sing down or pray down an institution which is voted into existence. You never will be able to lessen this evil until you have votes. Frederick Douglass used to tell how, when he was a Maryland slave and a good Methodist, he would go into the farthest corner of the tobacco field and pray God to bring him liberty; but God never answered his prayers until he prayed with his heels. And so, dear friends, He never will answer yours for the suppression of the liquor traffic until you are able to pray with your ballots.[80]
I’m always happy to welcome any group of women for a good cause because I know they’ll quickly realize how hard it is to achieve real goals. Women often don’t understand their inability to create change until they actually try, and then they see how connected those issues are with politics, and how powerless they are in that area. Now, my dear women, the main thing this organization will show you is just how powerless you are regarding the liquor trade. You can’t talk, sing, or pray an institution out of existence if it’s been established through votes. You won’t be able to address this problem until you have voting rights. Frederick Douglass used to share how, when he was a slave in Maryland and a devoted Methodist, he would go to the farthest corner of the tobacco field and pray for his freedom; but his prayers weren’t answered until he took action. Similarly, dear friends, your prayers for ending the liquor trade won’t be answered until you can pray with your ballots.[80]
Miss Anthony's sentiments on this question are further expressed in a letter to her brother Daniel R., editor Leavenworth Times:
Miss Anthony's thoughts on this issue are further conveyed in a letter to her brother Daniel R., editor of the Leavenworth Times:
I like the Times' article on the women's whiskey war. Emerson says, "God answers only such prayers as men themselves answer." After ignorant and helpless mothers have transmitted to their children the drunkard's appetite, God can not answer their prayers to prevent them from gratifying it. But this crusade will educate the women who engage in it to use the one and only means of regulating or prohibiting the traffic in liquor—that of the ballot. As soon as they find this crusade experiment a failure, which they certainly will, because all spasmodic, sensational religious efforts are transient and fleeting, they will realize the enduring strength and usefulness of the franchise. However little that is permanent may come of this movement, it is good in itself because anything is better for women than tame submission to the evils around them; and when they find kind words, entreaties and tears avail nothing, they will surely try the virtue of stones (votes) to bring down the great demon that desolates their homes.
I like the Times' article about the women's whiskey war. Emerson says, "God answers only such prayers as men themselves answer." When unaware and helpless mothers pass their cravings for alcohol on to their children, God can't fulfill their prayers to stop those cravings. However, this movement will teach the women involved how to effectively control or ban the liquor trade—by voting. Once they see that this campaign fails, which it definitely will since all desperate, attention-seeking religious efforts are short-lived, they'll realize the lasting power and value of the right to vote. Even if not much permanent comes from this movement, it's still helpful because anything is better for women than silently enduring the issues around them; and when they find that kind words, pleas, and tears don't get them anywhere, they will surely turn to the power of stones (votes) to overcome the terrible force that destroys their homes.
An entry in the journal made soon afterward says: "I dropped into the Industrial Congress today and was invited to speak. I told the men that the degraded labor of women made them quite as heavy a millstone round the necks of working-men as is the Heathen Chinese." And a few days later: "Dr. Dio Lewis called today, and I went to hear him speak this evening. Same old story—men make and break the laws, and women by love and persuasion must soften their hearts to 458 abandon their wickedness. Never a hint that women should have anything to do with the making and enforcing of the laws. They must only coax."
An entry in the journal made soon afterward says: "I dropped into the Industrial Congress today and was invited to speak. I told the guys that the degraded labor of women is just as much a burden on working men as the Heathen Chinese." And a few days later: "Dr. Dio Lewis stopped by today, and I went to hear him speak this evening. Same old story—men create and break the laws, and women must use love and persuasion to get them to abandon their wrongdoing. Never a hint that women should have anything to do with making and enforcing the laws. They can only persuade."
The diary shows over one hundred letters written by Miss Anthony's own hand in arranging for the May Anniversary in New York, while she sat at the bedside of her mother, who was very ill. Many cordial answers were received, among them one from Josephine E. Butler, of England. Mary L. Booth thus closed her reply: "Pray believe that I always hold you in affectionate remembrance as one of the most sincere, earnest and disinterested women whom it has ever been my fortune to meet, and whom I shall always be glad to hear from or to see." Mrs. Stanton sent an extract from a letter of Martha C. Wright, saying: "Our only hope is in the gradual accession of thinking men and women, and in our indomitable Susan."
The diary contains over a hundred letters written by Miss Anthony while she was organizing the May Anniversary in New York, all while sitting by her very ill mother’s bedside. Many warm responses were received, including one from Josephine E. Butler in England. Mary L. Booth ended her reply with: "Please know that I always keep you in affectionate memory as one of the most genuine, dedicated, and selfless women I have ever had the pleasure to meet, and I will always be happy to hear from you or see you." Mrs. Stanton included a quote from a letter by Martha C. Wright, which said: "Our only hope lies in the gradual support of thoughtful men and women, and in our indomitable Susan."
At Miss Anthony's earnest desire, Mrs. Wright was elected president of the association and this proved to be her last appearance on that platform which she had graced for many years. An interesting feature of the meeting was the presence of the veteran worker, Ernestine L. Rose, who was back from England on a visit. During this May meeting a telegram was sent over the country stating: "Miss Anthony stalked down the aisle with faded alpaca dress to the top of her boots, blue cotton umbrella and white cotton gloves, perched herself on the platform, crossed her legs, pulled out her snuff-box and passed it around. On the platform were Mrs. Stanton, Mrs. Wright, Mrs. Gage, Mrs. Rose and other noted women, all dressed in unmentionables cut bias, and smoking penny drab cigars. Susan was quite drunk." The New York Herald, which rarely had a good word for the suffrage conventions, in a long and respectful account of this same meeting, said:
At Miss Anthony's strong suggestion, Mrs. Wright was elected president of the association, marking her final appearance on a platform she had been a part of for many years. An interesting aspect of the meeting was the attendance of the veteran activist, Ernestine L. Rose, who was back from her visit to England. During this May meeting, a telegram was sent out nationwide stating: "Miss Anthony strode down the aisle in a faded alpaca dress that reached the tops of her boots, carrying a blue cotton umbrella and wearing white cotton gloves. She took her place on the platform, crossed her legs, pulled out her snuff-box, and passed it around. On the platform were Mrs. Stanton, Mrs. Wright, Mrs. Gage, Mrs. Rose, and other prominent women, all dressed in unconventional outfits and smoking cheap cigars. Susan was quite drunk." The New York Herald, which rarely had anything positive to say about suffrage conventions, published a lengthy and respectful account of this same meeting, stating:
There was a perfume of Fifth Avenue about the audience. Carriages in livery rolled up to the door. The striking contrast of this audience with that of other years, in the almost perfect conformity of the manner and dress of the women to those of other women who rule in the fashionable world and 459 are supposed to look down upon these knights-errant of the sex, was not greater than that between the treatment of Miss Anthony now and in other times. In former years they came to scoff at this wiry and resolute champion of her sex. Now every word she utters is received with almost reverent rapture. Yesterday brought together as intelligent and perhaps as refined an audience of ladies as might he gathered in the city. Miss Anthony was dressed with her usual simplicity in black silk. She read the call for the convention and made thereon one of her characteristic addresses, full of fire and prophecy.
The audience had a Fifth Avenue vibe. Carriages in formal wear arrived at the door. The striking contrast between this crowd and those from previous years, with the nearly identical style and attire of the women to others who dominate the fashion scene and are expected to look down on these chivalrous men, was not more significant than the change in how Miss Anthony is perceived now compared to the past. Previously, they came to ridicule this determined and resolute advocate for women. Now, every word she speaks is met with almost reverent admiration. Yesterday brought together a group of women who were as intelligent and possibly as refined as could be assembled in the city. Miss Anthony was simply dressed, as usual, in black silk. She read the call for the convention and delivered one of her signature speeches, full of passion and insight.
During the summer of 1874 Miss Anthony lectured in many places in Massachusetts and New York, striving to pay the interest and reduce by a little her pressing debts, and slipping home occasionally to see her mother who was carefully tended by the devoted sister Mary. At one of these times she writes in her diary: "It is always so good to get into my own humble bed." August 22 she sent a letter of congratulation on his fiftieth birthday to her brother Daniel R. After referring to the $50 he sent to her at the close of her half century, she says:
During the summer of 1874, Miss Anthony gave lectures in various locations across Massachusetts and New York, attempting to cover her debt interests and slightly reduce her mounting debts, while occasionally returning home to visit her mother, who was being lovingly cared for by her dedicated sister Mary. On one of these visits, she wrote in her diary: "It always feels so good to sleep in my own humble bed." On August 22, she wrote a congratulatory letter to her brother Daniel R. for his fiftieth birthday. After mentioning the $50 he sent her at the end of her first fifty years, she says:
Though I can not return my love and wishes in the same kind, they are none the less for your joy and peace in the future, neither is my rejoicing less over the success of your first half of life. From your many experiences, whether they have been such as you would have chosen or not, strength, growth, discipline have resulted, and sometimes I think all the adverse winds of life are needed to check our ever-rising vain-glory in our own power and success.... Whatever comes to those closely united by marriage or by blood, the one lesson from recent developments in Brooklyn is that none of the parties ever should take in an outside person as confidant. If the twain can not themselves restore their oneness, none other can. If parents and children, brothers and sisters, can not adjust their own differences among themselves, it is in vain they look to friends outside.
While I can’t reciprocate your love and good wishes in the same way, they still mean a lot for your happiness and peace in the future. I’m genuinely happy about the success you've achieved in the first half of your life. Through all your experiences, whether chosen or not, you've gained strength, growth, and discipline. I often think that all the challenges in life are essential to keep our pride in check regarding our abilities and accomplishments... No matter what happens to those closely connected by marriage or blood, the main takeaway from recent events in Brooklyn is that no one involved should bring in an outsider as a confidant. If the couple can’t restore their bond, no one else can. If parents and children, brothers and sisters can’t settle their differences on their own, there’s no point in seeking help from outside friends.
What lessons we are having that not only is honesty the best policy, but that there is nothing but most dreadful disaster in any policy which is not based on absolute honesty. The fact is, nothing is worth the getting, if that has to be done by cunning, falsehood, deception. Whether it be wealth, position, office or the society of one we love, if we have to steal it, though it may be sweet and seemingly real and lasting, the exposure of the illicit means of gaining it is sure to come, and then the thing itself turns to dross. When will the children of men learn this fact, that nothing pays but that which is obtained fairly, openly and honestly?
The lessons we’re learning are that honesty is not just the best policy; anything built on dishonesty is bound to lead to disaster. The truth is, nothing is worth having if it comes from trickery, lies, or deceit. Whether it’s wealth, status, a job, or the company of someone we love, if we have to take it, no matter how sweet and real it seems at first, the truth about how we got it will eventually come out, and then what we have becomes worthless. When will people understand that only what is earned fairly, openly, and honestly is truly valuable?
This year the Michigan Legislature submitted a woman suffrage amendment to the voters, and Miss Anthony decided to 460 canvass the State. To do this would ruin her own lecture season for the autumn, and those in charge of the suffrage campaign could offer her no salary. She did not hesitate, however, but without any financial guarantee, began her work there September 24. On the eve of going she wrote to a friend: "I leave home without having had one single week of rest this summer—not this year, indeed, nor for twenty-five years." She made a forty days' canvass, taking out three days for the Illinois convention at Chicago, and during that time spoke in thirty-five different places. Everywhere she addressed immense and enthusiastic crowds. She was frequently preceded by Senator Zach. Chandler, speaking for the Republican party, and often her audiences were much larger than the senator's.[81] Toward the close of the campaign she wrote home:
This year, the Michigan Legislature put a woman suffrage amendment up for a vote, and Miss Anthony decided to 460 canvass the state. Doing this would mess up her lecture season for the fall, and the people running the suffrage campaign couldn’t offer her any salary. However, she didn’t hesitate and, without any financial backing, started her work there on September 24. The day before she left, she wrote to a friend: "I'm leaving home without having had a single week of rest this summer—not this year, and not for twenty-five years." She spent forty days canvassing, taking three days off for the Illinois convention in Chicago, and during that period, she spoke in thirty-five different locations. Everywhere she went, she addressed large and enthusiastic crowds. She was often preceded by Senator Zach Chandler, who spoke for the Republican party, and her audiences were often much larger than his.[81] Toward the end of the campaign, she wrote home:
If these meetings of mine were only by and in favor of an enfranchised class, they would carry almost the solid vote of every town for the measure advocated; but alas, they are for a class powerless to help or hinder any party for good or for evil. It is wonderful to see how quickly the prejudices yield to a little common sense talk. If only we had speakers and time, we could carry the vote of this State, but we have neither, and so all we can hope for is a respectable minority. I enclose $200 left above travelling expenses, hall rent, etc., from collections and the sale of my trial pamphlets. If I could 461 have had even a twenty-five cents admission, I should have cleared over $1,000, but I could not have it said that I went to Michigan, at such a crisis, to make money for myself; it would have ruined the moral effect of my work. Now they are calling on me from Washington to stay in that city all next winter to get our measure considered by Congress, but I ought to go to work to earn money, for I need it if ever anybody did. If I have to get it, however, at the cost of losing our golden opportunity there, it will be too dear a price to pay.
If these meetings were just for a motivated group, they would easily get almost all the votes from every town for the cause we support. Unfortunately, they’re for a group that can’t positively or negatively influence any party. It’s surprising how quickly biases disappear with a little sensible conversation. If we had more speakers and time, we could win the vote in this state, but we don’t have either, so all we can hope for is a respectable minority. I’m including $200 after covering travel expenses, hall rental, and so on, from donations and selling my trial pamphlets. If I could have charged even twenty-five cents for admission, I would have made over $1,000, but I didn’t want it to be said that I went to Michigan during such a critical time to profit personally; it would have damaged the moral impact of my work. Now, they're asking me from Washington to stay in the city all winter to get our proposal reviewed by Congress, but I really should go earn some money since I need it more than ever. However, if getting it means missing this incredible opportunity, that’s too high a price to pay.
Miss Anthony was correct in her forecast, the suffrage amendment was defeated in Michigan by more than three to one, but there is no doubt her able canvass contributed largely to secure "a respectable minority."
Miss Anthony was right in her prediction; the suffrage amendment was defeated in Michigan by more than three to one. However, there’s no doubt that her skilled campaigning played a significant role in securing "a respectable minority."
In the summer of 1874 the so-called Beecher-Tilton scandal, which had been smouldering a long time, burst into full blaze. Miss Anthony had been for many years on intimate terms with all the parties in this unfortunate affair, and there was a persistent rumor that she had at one time received a confession from Mrs. Tilton which, if given by her to the public, would settle the vexed question beyond a doubt. It is scarcely possible to describe the pressure brought to bear to force her to disclose what she knew. During her lecture tours of that summer and fall, while the trial was in progress before the church committee, she never entered a railroad car, an omnibus or a hotel but there was somebody ready to question her. In every town and city she was called upon for an interview before she had time to brush off the dust of travel. One of the New York papers detailed a reporter to follow her from point to point, catch every word she uttered, ferret out all she said to her friends and in some way extort what was wanted. She often remarked that "in this case men proved themselves the champion gossips of the world."
In the summer of 1874, the so-called Beecher-Tilton scandal, which had been simmering for a long time, exploded into a full-blown controversy. Miss Anthony had been close to all the people involved in this unfortunate situation for many years, and there were persistent rumors that she had once received a confession from Mrs. Tilton that, if made public, would settle the heated debate once and for all. It’s hard to describe the intense pressure put on her to reveal what she knew. During her lecture tours that summer and fall, while the trial was taking place in front of the church committee, she couldn’t board a train, bus, or check into a hotel without someone ready to question her. In every town and city, she was asked for an interview before she had a chance to shake off the travel dust. One of the New York papers even assigned a reporter to follow her from place to place, capturing every word she said, probing all her conversations with friends, and somehow trying to extract the information that was wanted. She often commented that "in this case, men proved themselves to be the biggest gossips in the world."
Papers which had befriended her and her cause reminded her of this fact and urged her to return the favor by telling them what she knew. Telegrams and letters poured in upon her from strangers and friends, some commending and begging her to continue silent; others censuring and urging her to tell the whole story. Lawyers connected with the case wrote her the shrewdest of pleas, telling her how the other side were trying 462 to defame her character and urging her to speak in self-defense; but it is a significant fact that she received no official summons either during the church committee investigation or the trial in court.
Papers that had supported her and her cause reminded her of this fact and encouraged her to return the favor by sharing what she knew. Telegrams and letters flooded in from both strangers and friends, some praising her and asking her to stay silent; others criticizing her and pushing her to reveal the whole story. Lawyers involved in the case sent her persuasive messages, explaining how the other side was trying 462 to tarnish her reputation and urging her to speak up in her defense; however, it is notable that she didn't receive any formal summons during the church committee investigation or the court trial.
The Chicago Tribune, having failed to secure an interview, said: "Miss Anthony keeps her own counsel in this matter with a resolution which would do credit to General Grant." Several papers manufactured interviews with her out of whole cloth. Everybody else, man or woman, who had the slightest knowledge of the affair, rushed into print, but under all the pressure she remained as immovable and silent as the granite mountains amid which she was born. The universal desire to have her speak was because of the value placed upon her integrity and veracity. John Hooker, the eminent lawyer of Hartford, Conn., brother-in-law of Mr. Beecher, voiced the opinion of her friends when he wrote under date of November 9, 1874: "A more truthful person does not live. The whole world could not get her to go into a conspiracy against one whom she believed to be innocent. I have perfect confidence in her truthfulness and always stoutly assert it."
The Chicago Tribune, unable to land an interview, stated: "Miss Anthony keeps her own thoughts on this matter with a determination that would impress General Grant." Several papers fabricated interviews with her out of nothing. Everyone else, regardless of gender, who had even a bit of insight into the situation, rushed to publish their take, but despite all the pressure, she remained as steadfast and quiet as the granite mountains where she was born. The widespread desire for her to speak came from the high regard people had for her integrity and honesty. John Hooker, a prominent lawyer from Hartford, Conn., and brother-in-law of Mr. Beecher, expressed the sentiment of her supporters when he wrote on November 9, 1874: "There isn't a more truthful person alive. The whole world couldn't get her to conspire against someone she believed to be innocent. I have complete confidence in her honesty and always defend it."
The New York Sun expressed the general sentiment of the press when it said in this connection: "Miss Anthony is a lady whose word will everywhere be believed by those who know anything of her character." Her home paper, the Democrat and Chronicle, paid this tribute: "Whether she will make any definite revelations remains to be seen, but whatever she does say will be received by the public with that credit which attaches to the evidence of a truthful witness. Her own character, known and honored by the country, will give importance to any utterances she may make."
The New York Sun reflected the overall feeling of the press when it commented: "Miss Anthony is a woman whose word will be trusted by anyone familiar with her character." Her local paper, the Democrat and Chronicle, honored her with this statement: "Whether she will share any specific details remains to be seen, but whatever she does say will be taken seriously by the public, given the credibility that comes with being a truthful witness. Her character, recognized and respected across the country, will add significance to any statements she may make."
Most of the charges made against her during this ordeal were so manifestly absurd they did not need refuting, but the oft-repeated assertions that she believed in what was popularly termed "free love" were a source of great annoyance. In a letter written at this time to Elizabeth Smith Miller she thus definitely expressed herself: "I have always believed the 'variety' system vile, and still do so believe. I am convinced 463 that no one has yet wrought out the true social system. I am sure no theory can be correct which a mother is not willing for her daughter to practice. Decent women should not live with licentious husbands in the relation of wife. As society is now, good, pure women, by so living, cover up and palliate immorality and help to violate the law of monogamy. Women must take the social helm into their own hands and not permit the men of their own circle, any more than the women, to be transgressors."
Most of the accusations against her during this ordeal were so obviously ridiculous they didn't need to be defended, but the repeated claims that she believed in what was commonly called "free love" were very frustrating. In a letter written at that time to Elizabeth Smith Miller, she clearly stated: "I've always thought the 'variety' system is awful, and I still believe that. I'm convinced 463 that no one has truly figured out the right social system. I'm sure no theory can be right if a mother isn't willing for her daughter to follow it. Decent women shouldn't stay with unfaithful husbands as wives. In today's society, good, pure women, by doing so, cover up and excuse immorality and help break the law of monogamy. Women must take control of their social lives and not allow the men in their circles, just like the women, to misbehave."
To Mr. Hooker, on this same subject, she wrote: "In my heart of hearts I hate the whole doctrine of 'variety' or 'promiscuity.' I am not even a believer in second marriages after one of the parties is dead, so sacred and binding do I consider the marriage relation." A few extracts from her diary during these days will show the trend of her thoughts:
To Mr. Hooker, on this same subject, she wrote: "In my heart of hearts, I hate the whole idea of 'variety' or 'promiscuity.' I don't even believe in second marriages after one of the partners has passed away; I consider the marriage relationship to be so sacred and binding." A few excerpts from her diary during these days will show the direction of her thoughts:
Silence alone is all there is for me at present. I appreciate as never before the value of having lived an open life.... The parlor, the street corner, the newspapers, the very air seem full of social miasma.... Sad, sad revelations! There is nothing more demoralizing than lying. The act itself is scarcely so base as the lie which denies it.... It is almost an impossibility for a man and a woman to have a close, sympathetic friendship without the tendrils of one soul becoming fastened around the other, with the result of infinite pain and anguish.... The great financial rings, Christian Union, Life of Christ and Plymouth church, the three in one, most powerful trinity, seem to have subsidized the entire New York press.
Right now, all I have is silence. I’ve come to appreciate more than ever the importance of living openly. The parlor, the street corner, the newspapers, even the air around me feel filled with social poison. What sad, sad truths! There’s nothing more demoralizing than lying. The act itself isn’t as low as the lie that denies it. It’s almost impossible for a man and a woman to have a close, supportive friendship without one person getting entangled with the other, leading to endless pain and suffering. The major financial groups, Christian Union, Life of Christ, and Plymouth Church—the three together form a powerful alliance—seem to have funded the entire New York press.
In her positive refusal to speak the word which would criminate a woman, Miss Anthony was actuated by the highest sense of honor. She loved Mr. and Mrs. Tilton as her own family. She had enjoyed the hospitality of their beautiful home and seen their children grow up from babyhood. Mrs. Tilton was one of the loveliest characters she ever had known, an exquisite housekeeper, an ideal mother; a woman of wide reading and fine literary taste, of sunny temperament and affectionate disposition. To violate the confidence of such a woman, given in an hour of supreme anguish, would have been treachery unparalleled. In answer to the charge that Mrs. Tilton was a very weak or a very wicked woman, Miss Anthony always maintained that none ever was called upon to 464 suffer such temptation. On the one hand was her husband, one of the most brilliant writers and speakers of the day, a man of marvellously attractive powers in the home as well as in the outside world. At his table often sat Phillips, Garrison, Sumner, Wilson and many other prominent men, who all alike admired and loved him.
In her firm decision not to say anything that could incriminate a woman, Miss Anthony was driven by a strong sense of honor. She cared for Mr. and Mrs. Tilton like family. She had enjoyed their welcoming home and watched their children grow from infancy. Mrs. Tilton was one of the most wonderful people she had ever known, an excellent homemaker, an ideal mother; a woman with a broad range of reading and great literary taste, a cheerful personality, and a loving nature. Betraying the trust of such a woman, especially during a time of deep distress, would have been an unforgivable act. In response to claims that Mrs. Tilton was either very weak or very wicked, Miss Anthony consistently argued that no one had ever faced such an overwhelming temptation. On one side was her husband, one of the most talented writers and speakers of the time, a man with remarkable charm both at home and in the public eye. Often at their dinner table were Phillips, Garrison, Sumner, Wilson, and other distinguished men, all of whom admired and cherished him.
On the other hand was her pastor, the most powerful and magnetic preacher and orator not only in Brooklyn but in the nation. When he spoke on Sunday to his congregation of 3,000 people, there was not a man present but felt that he could get strength by touching even the hem of his garment. If his power were such over men, by the law of nature it must have been infinitely greater over women. Since it was thus irresistible in public, how transcendent must it have been in the close and intimate companionship of private life!
On the other hand was her pastor, the most powerful and captivating preacher and speaker not only in Brooklyn but in the country. When he spoke on Sunday to his congregation of 3,000 people, every man present felt that he could gain strength just by touching the hem of his garment. If his influence was that strong over men, it must have been even greater over women. Since it was so compelling in public, how extraordinary must it have been in the close and personal companionship of private life!
The house of the Tiltons was the second home of Mr. Beecher, and scarcely a day passed that he did not visit it. He found here the brightness, congeniality, sympathy and loving trust which every human being longs for. The choicest new literature was sent hither for the delicate appreciation it was sure to receive. When he came in from his Peekskill country place with great baskets of flowers, the most beautiful always found their way to this household. Miss Anthony recalls one occasion when Mrs. Tilton, slipping her hand through her arm, drew her to the mantelpiece over which hung a lovely water color of the trailing arbutus, and said, "My pastor brought that to me this morning." At another time, when she went on Saturday evening to stay over Sunday, Mrs. Tilton said, as she dropped into a low chair: "Mr. Beecher sat here all the morning writing his sermon. He says there is no place in the world where he can get such inspiration as at Theodore's desk, while I sit beside him in this little chair darning the children's stockings."
The Tilton house was like a second home for Mr. Beecher, and hardly a day went by without him visiting. He found the warmth, friendliness, understanding, and loving trust that everyone craves. The best new literature was sent there, knowing it would be appreciated. Whenever he returned from his country house in Peekskill with big baskets of flowers, the most beautiful ones always ended up at this home. Miss Anthony remembers one time when Mrs. Tilton, wrapping her arm around her, led her to the mantelpiece where a beautiful watercolor of trailing arbutus was hanging, and said, "My pastor brought that to me this morning." Another time, when she came over on Saturday evening to stay for Sunday, Mrs. Tilton said as she settled into a low chair, "Mr. Beecher sat here all morning writing his sermon. He says there’s no place in the world where he finds as much inspiration as at Theodore’s desk, while I sit beside him in this little chair darning the kids' stockings."
In all of these and many similar occurrences Miss Anthony saw nothing but a warm and sincere friendship. To Mr. Tilton Mr. Beecher was as a father or an elder brother. He had placed the ambitious and talented youth where he could achieve 465 both fame and fortune, had introduced him into the highest social circles and shown to the world that he regarded him as his dearest confidential friend, and for years the two men had enjoyed the closest and strongest intimacy. Mrs. Tilton had been born into Plymouth church, baptized by Mr. Beecher, had taught in his Sunday school, visited at his home. He loved her as his own, and she adored him as a very Christ. To these two great intellectual and spiritual magnets, first to one, then to the other, she was irresistibly and uncontrollably drawn. When troubles arose and the two became bitterly hostile, her situation was most pitiable. After matters had culminated and the battle was on, Beecher still spoke of her as "the beloved Christian woman," and Tilton, as "the whitest-souled woman who ever lived." Weak she may have been through her emotions, never wilfully wicked, and far less sinning than sinned against. She was wholly dominated by two powerful influences. Between the upper and the nether millstone her life was crushed.
In all these instances and many similar ones, Miss Anthony only saw a warm and genuine friendship. To Mr. Tilton, Mr. Beecher was like a father or an older brother. He had placed the ambitious and talented young man in a position where he could achieve 465 both fame and fortune, introduced him to the highest social circles, and demonstrated to the world that he considered him his closest and most trusted friend. For years, the two men shared a deep and strong bond. Mrs. Tilton was born into Plymouth Church, baptized by Mr. Beecher, taught in his Sunday school, and visited his home. He loved her as his own, and she worshipped him like a saint. She felt an undeniable and overwhelming attraction to these two great intellectual and spiritual figures, first to one, then to the other. When conflicts arose and they became bitter enemies, her situation was truly distressing. Even as the conflicts escalated, Beecher still referred to her as "the beloved Christian woman," while Tilton called her "the purest-souled woman who ever lived." She may have been emotionally weak, but she never acted with malice and was wronged far more than she sinned. She was completely influenced by two powerful forces. Her life was caught between a rock and a hard place.
[81] Not far from three times as many were at Miss Anthony's lecture as gathered to hear Senator Chandler.—Jackson Patriot.
[81] Not far from three times as many people attended Miss Anthony's lecture as showed up to hear Senator Chandler.—Jackson Patriot.
One of the largest audiences ever in the opera house gathered last evening on the occasion of the lecture of Miss Susan B. Anthony.—Adrian Times and Expositor.
One of the biggest crowds ever at the opera house gathered last night for a lecture by Miss Susan B. Anthony.—Adrian Times and Expositor.
Probably the largest audience ever assembled in Clinton Hall convened to hear-Miss Susan B. Anthony, the celebrated expounder of the rights of women.—Pontiac Gazette.
Probably the largest crowd ever gathered in Clinton Hall convened to hear Miss Susan B. Anthony, the famous advocate for women's rights.—Pontiac Gazette.
Since the great Children's Jubilee there has not been so large an audience in the Academy of Music as that assembled to hear Miss Anthony's lecture.—East Saginaw Daily Republican.
Since the big Children's Jubilee, there hasn't been such a large crowd at the Academy of Music as the one that gathered to hear Miss Anthony's lecture.—East Saginaw Daily Republican.
Miss Anthony spoke at Hillsdale to a densely crowded opera house, while full 1,000 people were unable to gain admission.—Grand Rapids Post.
Miss Anthony spoke at Hillsdale to a packed opera house, while over 1,000 people were unable to get in.—Grand Rapids Post.
Miss Susan B. Anthony spoke last evening to the largest audience that ever greeted a lecturer in Marshall, and we have had Mrs. Stanton, Theodore Tilton, Mark Twain and Olive Logan. She had at least 1,200 hearers.—Telegram to Detroit Evening News.
Miss Susan B. Anthony spoke last night to the largest audience that has ever attended a lecture in Marshall, and we've had Mrs. Stanton, Theodore Tilton, Mark Twain, and Olive Logan. She had at least 1,200 listeners.—Telegram to Detroit Evening News.
Last evening the aisles were double-seated, and the anterooms, staircases and vestibules densely packed with standing hearers. No such house ever was had at this place. She spoke with wonderful power. At Pigeon, between trains, she spoke to a great throng who would not consider her strength and take "no" for an answer.—Three Rivers Reporter.
Last night, the aisles were filled with double rows of seats, and the anterooms, staircases, and lobbies were crowded with people standing to listen. No other venue has ever experienced such a turnout here. She spoke with amazing strength. At Pigeon, between train arrivals, she addressed a huge crowd that wouldn't accept her refusal or take "no" for an answer.—Three Rivers Reporter.
A woman with whose public sayings and doings we have been familiar since the fall of 1867, and for whom our respect and admiration has never wavered during that period, spoke to the largest indoor audience ever assembled in this village. The courthouse was literally packed, and the speaker had to stand on a table in front of the judge's desk.—Cassopolis National Democrat.
A woman whose public words and actions we've known since the fall of 1867, and for whom our respect and admiration have remained strong throughout that time, spoke to the largest indoor crowd ever gathered in this village. The courthouse was completely full, and the speaker had to stand on a table in front of the judge's desk.—Cassopolis National Democrat.
CHAPTER XXVII.
REVOLUTION DEBT PAID—WOMEN'S FOURTH OF JULY.
1875-1876.
At the close of 1874, December 28, the cause of woman suffrage lost a strong supporter by the death of Gerrit Smith. Miss Anthony felt the loss deeply, as he had been her warm personal friend for twenty-five years and always ready with financial aid for her projects; but she suffered a keener shock one week later when the news came of the sudden death of Martha C. Wright, January 4, 1875. She says in her diary: "It struck me dumb, I could not believe it; clear-sighted, true and steadfast almost beyond all other women! Her home was my home, always so restful and refreshing, her friendship never failed; the darker the hour, the brighter were her words of encouragement, the stronger and closer her support. I can not be reconciled."
At the end of 1874, on December 28, the fight for women's suffrage lost a strong supporter with the death of Gerrit Smith. Miss Anthony felt this loss deeply, as he had been her close friend for twenty-five years and was always ready to provide financial support for her projects. However, she experienced an even greater shock a week later when she learned of the sudden death of Martha C. Wright on January 4, 1875. She wrote in her diary: "It left me speechless; I couldn't believe it. Clear-minded, true, and steadfast, almost unlike any other woman! Her home felt like mine—always so soothing and refreshing. Her friendship never wavered; the darker the time, the brighter her words of encouragement, and the stronger her support. I can't come to terms with this."
But for this earnest advocate there could be no cessation of work and the 14th of January found her again in Washington at the National Convention. These annual meetings, with their advertising, hall rent, expenses of speakers, etc., were costly affairs. Before every one Miss Anthony always received scores of letters from the other workers begging that it might be given up for that year, insisting that for various reasons it would be a failure, and declaring that they could not and would not attend. Mrs. Stanton usually headed the list of the objectors, for she hated everything connected with a convention. On the back of one of these vehement protests, carefully filed away, is written in Miss Anthony's penmanship, "Mrs. Stanton's chronic letter before each annual meeting." She 468 never paid the slightest heed to any of these appeals, but went straight ahead, wheeled all of them into line, engaged the speakers, raised the money and carried the convention to a finish. When the funds were lacking she advanced them from her own, usually ending one or two hundred dollars out of pocket. Then she went about among the friends and secured enough to replace the loan or, failing in this, worked so much the harder to make it up out of her earnings.
But for this determined advocate, there was no end to her work, and on January 14th, she found herself back in Washington for the National Convention. These annual meetings were expensive affairs, with costs for advertising, venue rental, speaker fees, and more. Every year, Miss Anthony received numerous letters from fellow workers urging her to cancel the event, insisting that it would fail for various reasons, and declaring that they could not and would not attend. Mrs. Stanton often topped the list of dissenters because she disliked anything related to a convention. On the back of one of these passionate protests, carefully saved, is written in Miss Anthony's handwriting, "Mrs. Stanton's chronic letter before each annual meeting." She 468 never paid any attention to these pleas but pressed on, organized everyone into action, arranged for the speakers, raised the funds, and saw the convention through to the end. When the money ran short, she used her own funds, often ending up one or two hundred dollars in the red. Then she would reach out to friends and gather enough to replace the loan or, if that didn’t work, worked even harder to make it up from her earnings.
On her way home from Washington, Miss Anthony stopped for a visit with her loved cousin Anson Lapham and on leaving he handed her a check for $1,000, saying, "Susan, this is not for suffrage but for thee personally." Nevertheless she at once applied it on the debt still hanging over her from The Revolution. Francis & Loutrel, of New York, who had furnished her with paper, letter-heads, etc., also presented her at this time with their receipted bill for $200.
On her way home from Washington, Miss Anthony stopped to visit her dear cousin Anson Lapham, and when she left, he gave her a check for $1,000, saying, "Susan, this isn't for suffrage but for you personally." However, she immediately used it to pay off the debt that was still hanging over her from The Revolution. Francis & Loutrel, from New York, also presented her at this time with their paid bill for $200.
In the winter of 1875, Miss Anthony prepared her speech on "Social Purity" and gave it first at the Grand Opera House, Chicago, March 14, in the Sunday afternoon Dime lecture course.[82] When she reached the opera house the crowd was so dense she could not get inside and was obliged to go through the engine room and up the back way to the stage. The gentleman who was to introduce her could not make his way through the throng and so this service was gracefully performed by "Long John" Wentworth, who was seated on the stage. At the close of the address, to her surprise, A. Bronson Alcott, Parker Pillsbury and A.J. Grover came up to congratulate her. She had not known they were in the city. Mr. Alcott said: "You have stated here this afternoon, in a fearless manner, truths that I have hardly dared to think, much less to utter." No other speaker, man or woman, ever had handled this question with such boldness and severity and the lecture produced a great sensation. Even the radical Mrs. Stanton wrote her she would never again be asked to speak in Chicago, and Mr. Slayton said that she had ruined 469 her future chances there; nevertheless she was invited by the same committee the following winter.
In the winter of 1875, Miss Anthony prepared her speech on "Social Purity" and delivered it for the first time at the Grand Opera House in Chicago on March 14, during the Sunday afternoon Dime lecture series.[82] When she arrived at the opera house, the crowd was so thick that she couldn't get inside and had to go through the engine room and up the back way to the stage. The gentleman who was supposed to introduce her couldn’t get through the crowd, so this task was gracefully handled by "Long John" Wentworth, who was sitting on the stage. At the end of her speech, to her surprise, A. Bronson Alcott, Parker Pillsbury, and A.J. Grover came up to congratulate her. She hadn’t known they were in the city. Mr. Alcott said: "You have shared some truths this afternoon in a fearless way that I have hardly dared to think, let alone say." No other speaker, man or woman, had ever addressed this issue with such boldness and intensity, and the lecture created quite a stir. Even the radical Mrs. Stanton wrote to her that she would never be invited to speak in Chicago again, and Mr. Slayton said she had ruined 469 her future opportunities there; however, she was invited back by the same committee the following winter.
It was given at several places in Wisconsin, Illinois,[83] Iowa, Kansas and Missouri to crowded houses and the newspaper comments were varied. On the occasion of its delivery in Mercantile Library Hall, St. Louis, in the Star lecture course, the Democrat said: "The audience was large and composed of the most respectable and intelligent of our citizens, a majority being ladies. Miss Anthony is one of the most remarkable women of the nineteenth century—remarkable for the purity of her life, the earnestness with which she promulgates her peculiar views, and the indomitable courage and perseverance with which she bears defeat and misfortune. No longer in the bloom of youth—if she ever had any bloom—hard-featured, guileless, cold as an icicle, fluent and philosophical, she wields today tenfold more influence than all the beautiful and brilliant female lecturers that ever flaunted upon the platform as preachers of social impossibilities."
It was presented at various locations in Wisconsin, Illinois,[83] Iowa, Kansas, and Missouri to packed audiences, and the newspaper reviews were mixed. When it was delivered at Mercantile Library Hall, St. Louis, as part of the Star lecture series, the Democrat noted: "The audience was large and made up of the most respectable and informed members of our community, with a majority being women. Miss Anthony is one of the most extraordinary women of the nineteenth century—remarkable for the integrity of her life, the passion with which she promotes her unique views, and the unyielding courage and determination with which she handles defeat and hardship. No longer in her youthful prime—if she ever had one—she is tough-looking, honest, serious, and articulate, wielding today much more influence than all the attractive and talented female speakers who have ever appeared on stage as advocates for social challenges."
The metropolitan press generally acknowledged the necessity for such a lecture and complimented Miss Anthony's courage in undertaking it, but the country papers were greatly distressed, as a specimen extract will show:
The city newspapers usually recognized the need for such a lecture and praised Miss Anthony's bravery in taking it on, but the rural papers were quite upset, as one example will demonstrate:
There is very little satisfaction in observing that Miss Anthony is following in the wake of Anna Dickinson, in publicly lecturing upon subjects that no modest woman ought, in respect for her sex, to acknowledge that she is so familiar with. Miss D. expatiates upon the "Social Evil," and Miss A. enlarges upon "Social Purity"—topics that maidenly delicacy, we repeat, should refuse to discuss. It would be suggestively coarse for a married woman to deliberately select such questionable themes for a public discourse; but these two ladies are spinsters yet, and spinsters are presumed to be wholly innocent of the necessary information—are supposed, in truth, to be too pure-minded to contemplate vice in its most repulsive shape, not to say analyze it, and dwell oratorically before the world upon its nauseous details. The women's crusade against liquor effected nothing, for the simple reason that women were out of their proper sphere in attempting it; but if so, how much 470 more do they degrade their sex when they go out of the way to ask us to believe that they are intimate with a corruption infinitely more debasing and more destructive? The best lecture a woman can give the community on "moral purity" is the eloquent one of a spotless life. The best discourse she can furnish us on the sad "evil" alluded to is the sincerity of her profound ignorance of the subject.
It’s hard to find satisfaction in seeing that Miss Anthony is following in Anna Dickinson’s footsteps by openly discussing topics that no respectable woman should publicly admit to knowing about. Miss D. talks extensively about the "Social Evil," while Miss A. focuses on "Social Purity"—subjects that we believe shouldn't be discussed in polite society. It would be quite inappropriate for a married woman to address such questionable topics in a public setting; however, these two women are still single, and singles are expected to be completely innocent of such knowledge—assumed to be too pure-minded to even think about vice in its worst forms, let alone analyze and discuss its horrifying details publicly. The women’s campaign against alcohol achieved nothing, simply because women were out of their depth in tackling it; but if that’s the case, how much more do they undermine their gender when they try to convince us that they understand a corruption that is even more degrading and destructive? The best lecture a woman can deliver to her community on "moral purity" is the strong example of a virtuous life. The most meaningful insight she can provide regarding the unfortunate "evil" mentioned is the genuine depth of her ignorance on the subject. 470
A woman suffrage bill was under consideration by the legislature of Iowa and Miss Anthony felt that missionary work ought to be done in that State, so she wrote to the friends in one hundred different towns, offering to speak for $25 or one-half the gross receipts. Sixty of them accepted and during the spring and autumn of 1875 she filled these engagements, the sixty lectures averaging $30 apiece. In order to reach the different places she had to take trains at all hours of the night, occasionally to ride in a freight car, sometimes to drive twenty-five or thirty miles across country in mud and snow and prairie winds, and frequently to go on the platform without having eaten a mouthful or changed her dress. Even these ills were not so hard to bear as the cold, dirty rooms, hard beds, and poorly cooked food sometimes found in small hotels. Frequently she had to sit by the kitchen stove all day as not a bedroom would have a fire and the only sitting-room contained the bar and was black with tobacco smoke. The path of the lecturer is uphill, over stony roads, with briar hedges on both sides.
A woman suffrage bill was being discussed by the Iowa legislature, and Miss Anthony believed that outreach was needed in that state. So, she wrote to friends in one hundred different towns, offering to speak for $25 or half of the gross receipts. Sixty of them agreed, and during the spring and fall of 1875, she fulfilled these commitments, with the sixty lectures averaging $30 each. To get to the different locations, she had to take trains at all hours of the night, sometimes riding in a freight car, and occasionally driving twenty-five or thirty miles across muddy and snowy country in harsh winds. Often, she had to go on stage without eating anything or changing her clothes. Even these difficulties were easier to handle than the cold, dirty rooms, hard beds, and poorly cooked food found in some small hotels. Many times, she had to sit by the kitchen stove all day because no bedroom had a fire, and the only sitting area was the bar, filled with tobacco smoke. The lecturer's journey is tough, over rocky roads, with thorny hedges on either side.
While Miss Anthony was in attendance at the May Suffrage Anniversary in New York, a telegram came announcing that her brother Daniel R., of Leavenworth, had been shot and fatally wounded. Her friends feeling that they could not go through with the meeting without her, retained the telegram until after her speech in the evening, and then she could get no train before the next day. She did not go to bed that night but, in the midst of her grief, she examined every bill for the convention and put each in an envelope with the money to pay it. In the early morning she took a local train for Albany and stopped off to bid a last farewell to her old friend, Lydia Mott, who was dying of consumption. Her sisters met her at the Rochester station with wrapper, slippers and comfortable things 471 for the sickroom, and she learned that her brother was still alive. Telegrams came to her at intervals during the journey, and, after a most distressing delay at Kansas City, she finally reached Leavenworth at midnight, May 14, and was gladly received by her brother who had watched the clock and counted her progress every hour. The shooting had grown out of some criticisms in his paper. The ball had fractured the clavicle and severed the subclavian artery. His devoted wife and brother Merritt were in constant attendance.
While Miss Anthony was attending the May Suffrage Anniversary in New York, she received a telegram announcing that her brother Daniel R., from Leavenworth, had been shot and was fatally wounded. Her friends felt they couldn’t continue the meeting without her, so they held onto the telegram until after her speech that evening, and she couldn’t catch a train until the next day. She didn’t go to bed that night; instead, amid her grief, she reviewed every bill for the convention and placed each in an envelope with the payment. Early the next morning, she took a local train to Albany and stopped to say a final goodbye to her old friend, Lydia Mott, who was dying of tuberculosis. Her sisters met her at the Rochester station with a wrapper, slippers, and other comfortable items 471 for the sickroom, and she learned that her brother was still alive. Telegrams arrived for her at intervals during the journey, and after a very stressful delay in Kansas City, she finally arrived in Leavenworth at midnight on May 14, welcomed by her brother, who had been anxiously tracking her progress every hour. The shooting stemmed from some criticisms in his newspaper. The bullet had fractured his collarbone and severed the subclavian artery. His devoted wife and brother Merritt were by his side the whole time.
Then began the long struggle for life. For nine weeks Miss Anthony sat by his bedside giving the service of a born nurse, added to the gentleness of a loving sister. At the end of the first month the physicians decided on a continued pressure upon the artery above the wound to prevent the constant rush of blood into the aneurism which had formed. Owing to its peculiar position this could be done only by pressing the finger upon it, and so the family and friends took turns day and night, sitting by the patient and pressing upon this vital spot. After five weeks, to the surprise of the whole medical fraternity, the experiment proved a success and recovery was no longer doubtful. The papers were filled with glowing accounts of Miss Anthony's devotion, seeming to think it wonderful that a woman whose whole life had been spent in public work should possess in so large a degree not only sisterly affection but the accomplishments of a trained nurse.[84]
Then began the long fight for survival. For nine weeks, Miss Anthony stayed by his bedside, providing care like a natural nurse, combined with the tenderness of a loving sister. At the end of the first month, the doctors decided to apply continued pressure on the artery above the wound to prevent the constant flow of blood into the aneurysm that had developed. Because of its unique position, this could only be done by pressing a finger on it, so family and friends took turns day and night, sitting by the patient and pressing on this critical spot. After five weeks, to everyone's surprise, the experiment turned out to be successful and recovery was no longer in question. The newspapers were filled with praise for Miss Anthony's dedication, seeming to find it remarkable that a woman who had devoted her entire life to public service could possess not only strong sisterly love but also the skills of a trained nurse.[84]
Miss Anthony took back to Rochester her little four-year-old niece and namesake, Susie B., and many touching entries in her journal show how closely the child entwined itself about her heart. She found that Lydia Mott still lived, and, allowing herself only two days' rest after all the hard weeks of physical and mental strain, she went to Albany to stay with her friend till the end came, a month later. The diary of August 20 says: "There passed out of my life today the one who, next to my own family, has been the nearest and dearest to me for thirty years." 472
Miss Anthony returned to Rochester with her little four-year-old niece, Susie B., who shares her name, and many heartfelt entries in her journal reveal how deeply the child captured her affection. She discovered that Lydia Mott was still alive, and after only allowing herself two days of rest following all the weeks of physical and mental exhaustion, she went to Albany to stay with her friend until the end came, a month later. The diary entry from August 20 states: "Today, the one who has been the closest and dearest to me for thirty years, next to my own family, passed out of my life." 472
On October 2, 1875, she heard Frances E. Willard lecture for the first time, and comments, "A lovely, spirited and spiritual woman, characterized by genuine Christian simplicity." Miss Anthony was a guest with Miss Willard at the home of Professor and Mrs. Lattimore. When they reached the hall Miss Willard asked her to sit on the platform, but Miss Anthony declined, saying, "No, you have a heavy enough load to carry without taking me." November 4 Miss Anthony gave her lecture on "Social Purity" in Rochester, introduced by Judge Henry R. Selden, and writes, "I had a most attentive and solemn listening." The rest of the year was spent in finishing the interrupted lectures in Iowa, and the beginning of 1876 found her in the far West with so many engagements that she decided, for the first time in all the years, not to go to Washington to the National Convention. This was in the capable hands of Mrs. Gage, who was then president; so she sent an encouraging letter and a liberal contribution.
On October 2, 1875, she heard Frances E. Willard speak for the first time and commented, "A lovely, spirited, and spiritual woman, marked by true Christian simplicity." Miss Anthony was a guest at the home of Professor and Mrs. Lattimore alongside Miss Willard. When they arrived at the hall, Miss Willard asked her to sit on the platform, but Miss Anthony declined, saying, "No, you have a heavy enough load to carry without taking me." On November 4, Miss Anthony delivered her lecture on "Social Purity" in Rochester, introduced by Judge Henry R. Selden, and wrote, "I had a very attentive and serious audience." The rest of the year was spent wrapping up the interrupted lectures in Iowa, and at the beginning of 1876, she found herself in the far West with so many engagements that she decided, for the first time in all those years, not to go to Washington for the National Convention. This event was in the capable hands of Mrs. Gage, who was then president; so she sent an encouraging letter and a generous contribution.
Miss Anthony still continued on her weary round-through the inclement winter and spring, sometimes lecturing to meager and sometimes to crowded houses but netting an average of $100 a week, which was religiously applied to the payment of the debt. She returned to Chicago to lecture again in the Dime course, Sunday, March 26, and says in her diary: "An immense audience, hall packed, my speech was free, easy and happy, my audience quick to see and appreciate." The address on this occasion was "Bread and the Ballot."[85] She returned at once to Iowa, Kansas and Missouri, and by May 1, 1876, was able to write, "The day of Jubilee for me has come. I have paid the last dollar of The Revolution debt!" It was just six years to the very month since she had given up her cherished paper and undertaken to pay off its heavy indebtedness, and all her friends rejoiced with her that it was finally rolled from her shoulders and she was free. Even the newspapers 473 offered congratulations in pleasant editorial paragraphs.[86] In a long notice, the Chicago Daily News said:
Miss Anthony continued her exhausting journey through the harsh winter and spring, sometimes speaking to small crowds and other times to packed houses, averaging $100 a week, which she dedicated to paying off the debt. She returned to Chicago to speak again in the Dime course on Sunday, March 26, and wrote in her diary: "An enormous audience, the hall was packed, my speech was relaxed, easy, and joyful, and my audience was quick to understand and appreciate." The topic this time was "Bread and the Ballot."[85] She immediately went back to Iowa, Kansas, and Missouri, and by May 1, 1876, she was able to write, "The day of Jubilee for me has come. I have paid the last dollar of The Revolution debt!" It had been exactly six years to the month since she had given up her beloved paper and taken on the responsibility of settling its heavy debts, and all her friends celebrated with her that it was finally off her shoulders and she was free. Even the newspapers 473 offered their congratulations in cheerful editorials.[86] In a detailed notice, the Chicago Daily News said:
Her paper lived a few years and then went down. In the heart of the woman whose hopes went down with it, the little paper that cost so much and died so prematurely occupies, perhaps, the place which in other women's hearts is occupied by the remembrance of a baby's face, now shrouded in folds of white satin and hushed in death. But The Revolution left behind a debt of several thousand dollars. Susan B. Anthony was poor, yet she stepped forward and assumed, individually, the entire indebtedness. By working six years and devoting to the purpose all the money she could earn she has paid the debt and interest. And now, when the creditors of that paper and others who really know her, whatever they may think of her political opinions, hear the name of Susan B. Anthony, they feel inclined to raise their hats in reverence.
Her newspaper ran for a few years before it closed down. In the heart of the woman whose dreams faded with it, the little paper that meant so much and ended too soon occupies a space that, for other women, is filled with the memory of a baby's face, now wrapped in white satin and silenced by death. But The Revolution left behind a debt of several thousand dollars. Susan B. Anthony was poor, yet she took it upon herself to cover the entire debt. By working for six years and dedicating all the money she could earn to this cause, she paid off the debt and interest. Now, when the creditors of that newspaper and anyone who truly knows her, regardless of their opinions on her politics, hears the name Susan B. Anthony, they feel compelled to tip their hats in respect.
The Rochester Post-Express thus voiced the opinion of her own townspeople:
The Rochester Post-Express expressed the views of her own community:
The thousands of friends of the plucky and noble woman of whom we speak will rejoice with her over this success. There are a good many men who have hidden behind their wives' petticoats for a much smaller sum than $10,000. It should be remembered, furthermore, that Miss Anthony has 474 labored indefatigably in the cause of woman suffrage, paying her own expenses most of the time; has undergone a contemptible and outrageous persecution at the hands of the United States court for violating the election laws; has bent for months over the bed of a brother wounded almost to death by an assassin's bullet; has watched tenderly over the steps of an aged mother; and has always, everywhere, been the soul of helpfulness and benevolence. Here is an example, in a woman, who our laws say is not fit to exercise the active and defensive privilege of citizenship, that puts to shame the lives of ninety-nine in every hundred men.
The thousands of friends of the brave and admirable woman we're discussing will celebrate this achievement with her. There are plenty of men who have hidden behind their wives for a lot less than $10,000. It's important to remember that Miss Anthony has 474 worked tirelessly for women's suffrage, often paying her own way; she has faced disgraceful and outrageous persecution from the U.S. court for breaking election laws; she has spent months caring for a brother who was nearly killed by an assassin's bullet; she has lovingly looked after her elderly mother; and she has always been a source of support and kindness wherever she goes. Here is a woman whose actions put to shame the lives of ninety-nine out of a hundred men, even though our laws say she is unfit to enjoy the rights of citizenship.
It is not surprising that the letters of her friends during these past months should speak of "the pale, sad face, so worn by lines of care and toil," but now all was over and she returned home. To rest? Far from it. The third day found her en route for New York to attend the Suffrage Anniversary, May 10 and 11.
It’s no surprise that her friends’ letters from the past few months mention "the pale, sad face, so worn by lines of care and toil," but now everything was done, and she was heading home. To relax? Not at all. On the third day, she was on her way to New York to attend the Suffrage Anniversary on May 10 and 11.
The thinking women of the country were justly indignant, in this great centennial year of the Republic, at the high-handed manner in which they had been ignored in the vast preparations for its celebration, in spite of their protests and in face of the fact that women had purchased $100,000 of the centennial stock issued to pay expenses. It had been decided at the Washington convention that the National Association should open headquarters in Philadelphia, and at this May meeting Miss Anthony was made chairman of the 1876 campaign committee. The resolutions adopted show the spirit of the convention:
The thoughtful women of the country were rightly upset, in this significant centennial year of the Republic, about the way they had been overlooked in the extensive preparations for its celebration, despite their objections and the fact that women had contributed $100,000 towards the centennial stock issued to cover expenses. It had been decided at the Washington convention that the National Association would establish headquarters in Philadelphia, and at this May meeting, Miss Anthony was appointed chair of the 1876 campaign committee. The resolutions adopted reflect the spirit of the convention:
WHEREAS, The right of self-government inheres in the individual before governments are founded, constitutions framed or courts created; and whereas, Governments exist to protect the people in the enjoyment of their natural rights, and when one becomes destructive of this end, it is the right of the people to resist and abolish it; and whereas, The women of the United States for one hundred years have been denied the exercise of their natural right of self-government; therefore
WHEREAS, the right to self-governance belongs to individuals even before governments are formed, constitutions are created, or courts are established; and whereas, governments exist to protect people's natural rights, and when a government fails in this duty, the people have the right to resist and remove it; and whereas, women in the United States have been denied their natural right to self-governance for a hundred years; therefore
Resolved, That it is their natural right and most sacred duty to rebel against the injustice, usurpation and tyranny of our present government.
Resolved, that it is their natural right and most sacred duty to stand up against the injustice, usurpation, and tyranny of our current government.
WHEREAS, The men of 1776 rebelled against a government which did not claim to be of the people, but on the contrary upheld the "divine right of kings;" and whereas, The women of this nation today, under a government which claims to be based upon individual rights, in an infinitely greater degree are suffering all the wrongs which led to the war of the Revolution; and whereas, the oppression is all the more keenly felt because our masters, 475 instead of dwelling in a foreign land, are our husbands, fathers, brothers and sons; therefore
WHEREAS, the men of 1776 rebelled against a government that claimed to not represent the people but instead supported the "divine right of kings;" and whereas, the women of this nation today, under a government that asserts it is based on individual rights, are enduring even greater injustices that ignited the Revolution; and whereas, the oppression is felt even more acutely because those in power, 475 rather than being from a foreign land, are our husbands, fathers, brothers, and sons; therefore
Resolved, That the women of this nation, in 1876, have greater cause for discontent, rebellion and revolution, than had the men of 1776.
Resolved, that the women of this nation, in 1876, have more reason for dissatisfaction, uprising, and change than the men of 1776.
Resolved, That with Abigail Adams we believe "the passion for liberty can not be strong in the breasts of those who are accustomed to deprive their fellow-creatures of liberty;" that, as she predicted in 1776, "we are determined to foment a rebellion, and will not hold ourselves bound by laws in which we have no voice or representation."
Resolved, that along with Abigail Adams, we believe "the passion for freedom cannot be strong in the hearts of those who are used to taking away the freedom of others;" that, as she cautioned in 1776, "we are determined to instigate a rebellion and will not consider ourselves bound by laws in which we have no voice or representation."
WHEREAS, We believe in the principles of the Declaration of Independence and of the Constitution of the United States, and that a true republic is the best form of government in the world; and whereas, This government is false to its underlying principles in denying to women the only means of self-government, the ballot; and one-half of the citizens of this nation, after a century of boasted liberty, are still political slaves; therefore
WHEREAS, we believe in the principles of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States, and that a true republic is the best form of government in the world; and whereas, this government is contradicting its core principles by denying women the one means of self-governance, the right to vote; and half of the citizens of this nation, after a century of claimed liberty, are still politically enslaved; therefore
Resolved, That we protest against calling the present centennial a celebration of the independence of the people of the United States.
Resolved, that we protest against referring to the current centennial as a celebration of the independence of the people of the United States.
Resolved, That we meet in our respective towns and districts on the Fourth of July, 1876, and declare ourselves no longer bound to obey laws in whose making we have had no voice and, in presence of the assembled nations of the world gathered on this soil to celebrate our nation's centennial, demand justice for the women of this land.
Resolved, that we gather in our towns and districts on July 4, 1876, and declare that we are no longer obligated to follow laws we had no role in creating. In front of the nations of the world gathered here to celebrate our country’s 100th anniversary, we demand justice for the women of this land.
Miss Anthony, Mrs. Stanton and Mrs. Gage had long had in view the preparation of a history of the woman's rights movement, which they expected to be a pamphlet of several hundred pages, and they offered this as a premium to every one who should send $5 toward the contemplated headquarters.[87] Fifty-two women responded at once, and with this $260 they ventured to rent fine, large parlors in a desirable part of Philadelphia and fit them up in an attractive manner. By the laws of Pennsylvania a married woman could not make a contract and Miss Anthony, being the only femme sole, was obliged to assume the financial responsibility. She and Mrs. Gage took charge of the headquarters May 25, and issued the following announcement:
Miss Anthony, Mrs. Stanton, and Mrs. Gage had long been planning to create a history of the women's rights movement, which they envisioned as a pamphlet of several hundred pages. They offered this as a reward to anyone who contributed $5 toward the planned headquarters.[87] Fifty-two women immediately stepped up, and with the $260 they raised, they decided to rent nice, spacious parlors in a well-regarded area of Philadelphia and furnished them attractively. According to Pennsylvania law, a married woman couldn’t enter into contracts, so Miss Anthony, being the only single woman, had to take on the financial responsibility. She and Mrs. Gage took over the headquarters on May 25 and released the following announcement:
The National Woman Suffrage Association has established its Centennial headquarters in Philadelphia at No. 1431 Chestnut street. The parlors, in charge of the officers of the association, are devoted to the special work of the year, pertaining to the centennial celebration and the political party conventions; also to calls, receptions, etc. On the table a Centennial autograph book receives the names of visitors.... 476
The National Woman Suffrage Association has established its Centennial headquarters in Philadelphia at 1431 Chestnut Street. The meeting rooms, overseen by the association's officers, are dedicated to this year's special initiatives related to the centennial celebration, political party conventions, and various events like calls and receptions. An autograph book for the Centennial is available on the table to gather the names of visitors.... 476
On July 4th, while the men of this nation and the world are rejoicing that "all men are free and equal" in the United States, a declaration of rights for women will be issued from these headquarters, and a protest against calling this Centennial a celebration of the independence of the people, while one-half are still political slaves. Let the women of the whole land, on that day, in meetings, in parlors, in kitchens, wherever they may be, unite with us in this declaration and protest; and immediately thereafter send full reports for record in our centennial book, that the world may see that the women of 1876 know and feel their political degradation no less than did the men of 1776.
On July 4th, while men in this nation and around the world are celebrating that "all men are free and equal" in the United States, a declaration of rights for women will be made from these headquarters, along with a protest against labeling this Centennial a celebration of the people's independence when half of them are still political slaves. We urge women across the country to gather on that day in meetings, living rooms, kitchens, or wherever they may be, to join us in this declaration and protest; and afterward, send detailed reports to be recorded in our centennial book, so the world can see that the women of 1876 recognize and feel their political oppression just as much as the men of 1776 did.
In commemoration of the twenty-eighth anniversary of the first woman's rights convention, the National Suffrage Association will hold in Philadelphia, July 19 and 20, of the present year, a grand mass convention, in which eminent reformers from the new and the old world will take part.
To commemorate the twenty-eighth anniversary of the first women's rights convention, the National Suffrage Association will hold a major convention in Philadelphia on July 19 and 20 of this year, featuring notable reformers from both the new and old worlds.
From these headquarters eloquent letters were written to the national political conventions and sent by delegations of prominent women, asking for a woman suffrage plank. The Democrats ignored the question in their platform; the Republicans adopted the following: "The Republican party recognizes with approval the substantial advance recently made toward the establishment of equal rights for women by the many important amendments effected by the Republican legislatures, in the laws which concern the personal and property relations of wives, mothers and widows, and by the election and appointment of women to the superintendence of education, charities and other public trusts. The honest demands of this class of citizens for additional rights, privileges and immunities should be treated with respectful consideration." In a letter from Mrs. Duniway, of Oregon, she says, "Well, the Republicans have thickened the old sop and re-served it."
From these headquarters, powerful letters were sent to the national political conventions by delegations of influential women, requesting a plank for women's suffrage. The Democrats ignored the issue in their platform, while the Republicans included the following: "The Republican Party acknowledges with approval the significant progress recently made towards establishing equal rights for women through the numerous important amendments implemented by Republican legislatures in laws concerning the personal and property rights of wives, mothers, and widows, as well as through the election and appointment of women to oversee education, charities, and other public responsibilities. The sincere demands of this group for additional rights, privileges, and protections should be met with respectful consideration." In a letter from Mrs. Duniway in Oregon, she states, "Well, the Republicans have thickened the old sop and re-served it."
The women were determined to obtain a recognition at the centennial celebration to be held July 4, in Independence Square. "It is the hour, the golden hour, for woman to speak her word which shall roll down our second century as has man's Fourth of July manifesto through the last one hundred years," wrote Miss Anthony. Then she and Mrs. Stanton and Mrs. Gage put their heads together and framed a document which had all the holy fire of the immortal Declaration of Independence, and this they proposed to have made a part 477 of the-great day's proceedings.[88] Their efforts to this end, their repulse and their subsequent action are so delightfully described in the History of Woman Suffrage that it would be presumptuous to attempt to improve upon it. Their utmost efforts could obtain but four seats on the platform. Miss Anthony had a ticket as reporter for her brother's paper. The earnest request of Mrs. Stanton, president of the National Suffrage Association, to General Joseph R. Hawley, president of the Centennial Commission, not that the women might read but simply might present their declaration, was refused on the ground that the program could not be changed. The report thus continues:
The women were determined to get recognition at the centennial celebration happening on July 4 in Independence Square. "This is the time, the golden hour, for women to voice their thoughts that will carry through our second century just as men’s Fourth of July manifesto has done over the last hundred years," wrote Miss Anthony. Then she, along with Mrs. Stanton and Mrs. Gage, collaborated to create a document infused with the passionate spirit of the immortal Declaration of Independence, which they intended to have included as part 477 of the great day's events.[88] Their attempts to achieve this, the pushback they faced, and their subsequent actions are so wonderfully detailed in the History of Woman Suffrage that it would be presumptuous to try to enhance it. Despite their best efforts, they could secure only four seats on the platform. Miss Anthony had a ticket as a reporter for her brother's newspaper. Mrs. Stanton, the president of the National Suffrage Association, earnestly requested General Joseph R. Hawley, president of the Centennial Commission, not so that the women could read but simply to present their declaration, but this was denied on the grounds that the program couldn’t be altered. The report then continues:
As President Grant was not to attend the celebration, the acting Vice-President, Thomas W. Ferry, representing the government, was to officiate in his place and he, too, was addressed by note, and courteously requested to make time for the reception of this declaration. As Mr. Ferry was a well-known sympathizer with the demands of woman for political rights, it was presumable that he would render his aid. Yet he was forgetful that in his position that day he represented, not the exposition, but the government of a hundred years, and he too refused; thus the simple request of woman for a half moment's recognition on the nation's centennial birthday was denied by all in authority.
Since President Grant wasn’t going to attend the celebration, the acting Vice-President, Thomas W. Ferry, was supposed to step in for him. He was also informed by note and politely asked to take a moment for this declaration. Given that Mr. Ferry was a well-known supporter of women’s political rights, it was expected that he would help. However, he seemed to forget that he represented not just the exposition but the government that had lasted a hundred years, and he also declined. Thus, the simple request from women for recognition on the nation’s centennial birthday was denied by all in authority.
While the women of the nation were thus absolutely forbidden the right of public protest, lavish preparations were made for the reception and entertainment of foreign potentates and the myrmidons of monarchial institutions. Dom Pedro, emperor of Brazil, a representative of that form of government against which the United States is a perpetual defiance and protest, was welcomed with fulsome adulation, and given a seat of honor near the officers of the day; Prince Oscar of Sweden, a stripling of sixteen, on whose shoulders rests the promise of a future kingship, was seated near. Count Rochambeau of France, the Japanese commissioners, high officials from Russia and Prussia, from Austria, Spain, England, Turkey, representing the barbarism and semi-civilization of the day, found no difficulty in securing recognition and places of honor upon that platform, where representative womanhood was denied.
While the women of the nation were entirely banned from public protest, elaborate preparations were made to welcome and entertain foreign leaders and supporters of monarchies. Dom Pedro, the emperor of Brazil, representing a government that the United States consistently opposes, received excessive praise and was given a place of honor next to the day’s officials. Prince Oscar of Sweden, a sixteen-year-old with the potential for future kingship, was seated nearby. Count Rochambeau from France, the Japanese commissioners, and high-ranking officials from Russia, Prussia, Austria, Spain, England, and Turkey—symbolizing both barbarism and semi-civilization of the time—had no trouble securing recognition and positions of honor on that platform, which was denied to representative women.
Though refused by their own countrymen a place and part in the centennial celebration, the women who had taken this presentation in hand were not to be conquered. They had respectfully asked for recognition; now that it had been denied, they determined to seize upon the moment when the reading of the Declaration of Independence closed, to proclaim to the world the tyranny and injustice of the nation toward one-half its people. Five officers of the National Suffrage Association, with that heroic spirit which has ever 478 animated lovers of liberty in resistance to tyranny, determined, whatever the result, to present the Woman's Declaration of Rights at the chosen hour. They would not, they dared not sacrifice the golden opportunity to which they had so long looked forward; their work was not for themselves alone, nor for the present generation, but for all women of all time. The hopes of posterity were in their hands and they determined to place on record for the daughters of 1976 the fact that their mothers of 1876 had asserted their equality of rights, and impeached the government of that day for its injustice toward woman. Thus, in taking a grander step toward freedom than ever before, they would leave one bright remembrance for the women of the next Centennial.
Although denied a place and role in the centennial celebration by their own countrymen, the women who organized this presentation refused to be defeated. They had requested recognition respectfully; now that it had been denied, they decided to seize the moment after the reading of the Declaration of Independence to proclaim the tyranny and injustice faced by half the population. Five officers of the National Suffrage Association, inspired by the heroic spirit that has always driven advocates of liberty to resist oppression, resolved that, regardless of the outcome, they would present the Woman's Declaration of Rights at the designated time. They would not, nor could they, miss the golden opportunity they had eagerly anticipated; their work was not just for themselves or the current generation, but for all women throughout history. The hopes of future generations rested in their hands, and they were determined to ensure that the daughters of 1976 would know that their mothers of 1876 had asserted their equality and held the government accountable for its injustices toward women. Therefore, by taking a bold step toward freedom like never before, they would leave a lasting legacy for the women of the next Centennial.
That historic Fourth of July dawned at last, one of the most oppressive days of that terribly heated season. Susan B. Anthony, Matilda Joslyn Gage, Sara Andrews Spencer, Lillie Devereux Blake and Phoebe Couzins made their way through the crowds under the broiling sun to Independence Square, carrying the Woman's Declaration of Rights. This declaration had been handsomely engrossed by Mrs. Spencer and signed by the oldest and most prominent advocates of woman's enfranchisement. Their tickets of admission proved an open sesame through the military and all other barriers, and a few moments before the opening of the ceremonies, these women found themselves within the precincts from which most of their sex were excluded.
The historic Fourth of July finally arrived, one of the hottest days of that intensely warm summer. Susan B. Anthony, Matilda Joslyn Gage, Sara Andrews Spencer, Lillie Devereux Blake, and Phoebe Couzins made their way through the crowds under the blazing sun to Independence Square, carrying the Woman's Declaration of Rights. This declaration had been beautifully written by Mrs. Spencer and signed by the oldest and most prominent advocates for women’s rights. Their admission tickets acted as a key, allowing them to bypass the military and other barriers, and just moments before the ceremonies began, these women found themselves in a place from which most of their gender were excluded.
The declaration of 1776 was read by Richard Henry Lee, of Virginia, about whose family clusters so much of historic fame. The close of his reading was deemed the appropriate moment for the presentation of the Woman's Declaration. Not quite sure how their approach might be met—not quite certain if at this final moment they would be permitted to reach the presiding officer—these ladies arose from their seats at the back of the stage and walked down the aisle. The bustle of preparation for the Brazilian hymn covered their advance. The foreign guests, the military and civil officers who filled the space directly around the speaker's stand, courteously made way, while Miss Anthony in fitting words presented the Declaration. Mr. Ferry's face paled, as bowing low, with no word, he received it, and it thus became a part of the day's proceedings; the ladies turned, scattering printed copies as they deliberately passed up the aisle and off the platform. On every side eager hands were stretched; men stood on seats and asked for them, while General Hawley, thus defied and beaten in his audacious denial to women of the right to present their Declaration, shouted, "Order, order!"
The declaration of 1776 was read by Richard Henry Lee from Virginia, a family with significant historical importance. At the end of his reading, it seemed like the ideal moment to present the Woman’s Declaration. Not entirely certain how their approach would be received and unsure if they’d be allowed to reach the presiding officer, the women rose from their seats at the back of the stage and walked down the aisle. The preparations for the Brazilian hymn helped conceal their approach. The foreign guests, along with the military and civil officials surrounding the speaker's stand, kindly made way as Miss Anthony presented the Declaration with appropriate words. Mr. Ferry turned pale, bowed deeply, and accepted it without a word, incorporating it into the day’s agenda. The women then turned, handing out printed copies as they confidently walked back up the aisle and off the platform. Eager hands reached out from all sides; men stood on their seats asking for copies, while General Hawley, frustrated and defeated by his bold attempt to deny women their right to present their Declaration, shouted, “Order, order!”
Going out through the crowd, they made their way to a platform erected for the musicians in front of Independence Hall. Here on this historic ground, under the shadow of of Washington's statue, back of them the old bell which proclaimed "liberty to all the land and all the inhabitants thereof," they took their places, and to a listening, applauding crowd, Miss Anthony read a copy of the Declaration just presented to Mr. Ferry. It was warmly applauded at many points, and after again scattering a number of printed copies, the delegation descended from the platform and hastened to the convention of the National Association. A meeting had been appointed at 12 o'clock, in the First Unitarian church, where Rev. William H. Furness preached for fifty years, but whose pulpit was then filled by Joseph May, a son of Rev. 479 Samuel J. May. They found the church crowded with an expectant audience, which greeted them with thanks for what they had just done; the first act of this memorable day taking place on the old centennial platform in Independence Square, the last in a church so long devoted to equality and justice.
As they made their way through the crowd, they headed to a platform set up for musicians in front of Independence Hall. Here, on this historic ground, under the shadow of Washington's statue, with the old bell that proclaimed “liberty to all the land and all the inhabitants thereof” behind them, they took their places. In front of a listening, applauding crowd, Miss Anthony read a copy of the Declaration that had just been presented to Mr. Ferry. It received warm applause at various points, and after handing out several printed copies, the delegation stepped down from the platform and hurried to the National Association convention. A meeting was scheduled for 12 o'clock at the First Unitarian Church, where Rev. William H. Furness had preached for fifty years, but at that moment, the pulpit was taken by Joseph May, a son of Rev. Samuel J. May. They found the church packed with an eager audience, who thanked them for what they had just accomplished; the first act of this memorable day took place on the old centennial platform in Independence Square, and the last in a church long committed to equality and justice.
The venerable Lucretia Mott, then in her eighty-fourth year, presided. Belva A. Lockwood took up the judiciary, showing the way that body lends itself to party politics. Matilda Joslyn Gage spoke upon the writ of habeas corpus, pointing out what a mockery to married women was that constitutional guarantee. Lucretia Mott reviewed the progress of the reform from the first convention. Sara Andrews Spencer illustrated the evils arising from two codes of morality. Lillie Devereux Blake spoke upon trial by jury; Susan B. Anthony upon taxation without representation, illustrating her remarks by incidents of unjust taxation of women during the present year. Elizabeth Cady Stanton pictured the aristocracy of sex and the evils arising from manhood suffrage. Judge Esther Morris, of Wyoming, said a few words in regard to suffrage in that territory. Phoebe Couzins, with great pathos, told of woman's work in the war. Margaret Parker, president of the women's suffrage club of Dundee, Scotland, and of the newly formed International W.C.T.U., declared this was worth the journey across the Atlantic. Mr. J.H. Raper, of Manchester, England, characterized it as the grandest meeting of the day, and said the patriot of a hundred years hence would seek for every incident connected with it, and the next Centennial would be adorned by the portraits of the women who sat upon that platform.
The esteemed Lucretia Mott, then eighty-four years old, presided over the meeting. Belva A. Lockwood addressed the judiciary, highlighting how that body can be swayed by party politics. Matilda Joslyn Gage discussed the writ of habeas corpus, calling attention to how much of a joke that constitutional guarantee was for married women. Lucretia Mott reviewed the progress of the reform since the first convention. Sara Andrews Spencer illustrated the issues that arise from having two sets of moral codes. Lillie Devereux Blake spoke about trial by jury; Susan B. Anthony addressed taxation without representation, using examples of the unfair taxation of women during that year. Elizabeth Cady Stanton described the aristocracy of gender and issues stemming from manhood suffrage. Judge Esther Morris from Wyoming shared a few words about suffrage in that territory. Phoebe Couzins, with deep emotion, spoke about women’s contributions during the war. Margaret Parker, president of the women’s suffrage club in Dundee, Scotland, and of the newly established International W.C.T.U., stated that this meeting was worth the trip across the Atlantic. Mr. J.H. Raper from Manchester, England, called it the greatest meeting of the day and said the patriot a hundred years from now would look for every detail related to it, and the next Centennial would feature portraits of the women who were on that platform.
The Hutchinsons were present and in their best vein interspersed the speeches with appropriate and felicitous songs. Lucretia Mott did not confine herself to a single speech but, in Quaker style, whenever the spirit moved made many happy points. As her sweet and placid countenance appeared above the pulpit, the Hutchinsons burst into, "Nearer, My God, to Thee." The effect was marvellous; the audience at once arose, and spontaneously joined in the hymn. For five long hours of that hot midsummer day, that crowded audience listened earnestly to woman's demand for equality of rights before the law. When the meeting at last adjourned, the Hutchinsons singing, "A Hundred Years Hence," it was slowly and reluctantly that the great audience left the house.
The Hutchinsons were there and at their best, mixing the speeches with fitting and joyful songs. Lucretia Mott didn’t stick to just one speech but, in true Quaker fashion, made many uplifting points whenever she felt inspired. As her gentle and calm face rose above the pulpit, the Hutchinsons began singing "Nearer, My God, to Thee." The impact was incredible; the audience immediately stood up and joined in the hymn. For five long hours on that hot midsummer day, that packed audience listened intently to women’s demand for equal rights under the law. When the meeting finally ended, with the Hutchinsons singing "A Hundred Years Hence," the large crowd left the venue slowly and with reluctance.
The headquarters were kept open for two months, the weekly receptions were largely attended and the rooms each day crowded with visitors. The immense autograph book was signed by hundreds, most of whom also affixed their names to the Woman's Declaration of Rights. Lucretia Mott always came in after attending the mid-week meeting of the Friends, and the ladies had a pot of tea ready for her coming.[89] When she left she never failed to hand them $5 "to pay for the trouble she had made," her contributions in this way amounting to 480 $50. George W. Childs gave $100, Dr. Clemence Lozier, $100, Ellen C. Sargent, $50, Elizabeth B. Phelps, $50, Miss Anthony herself contributed $175, and altogether about two hundred people donated nearly $1,700, all of which was expended in keeping up the headquarters and printing and circulating thousands of documents. When the accounts were audited they showed a balance of just $4.64.
The headquarters were open for two months, with weekly receptions that were well attended and rooms filled with visitors each day. The huge autograph book was signed by hundreds, most of whom also added their names to the Woman's Declaration of Rights. Lucretia Mott always came in after attending the mid-week Friends meeting, and the ladies had a pot of tea ready for her. When she left, she never forgot to give them $5 "for the trouble she had caused," her contributions adding up to $50. George W. Childs donated $100, Dr. Clemence Lozier gave $100, Ellen C. Sargent contributed $50, Elizabeth B. Phelps also gave $50, and Miss Anthony herself added $175. In total, around two hundred people contributed nearly $1,700, all of which was spent on maintaining the headquarters and printing and distributing thousands of documents. When the accounts were audited, they showed a balance of just $4.64.
At this time Mrs. Mott sent Miss Anthony this little note, accompanied by a large package of fine tea: "I forgot to take the tea I promised thee, so please accept it now. Thank thee for so oft remembering me with the delicious drinks of it. After leaving thee so hurriedly yesterday, I feared that thou wast still short of an even balance, and now enclose another $10 for thy own personal use. It is too hard for our widely extended national society to suffer thee to labor so unceasingly without a consideration." But Miss Anthony did not work for personal reward and said in a letter to her old friend Clarina Howard Nichols: "The Kansas women say, 'All we have of freedom we owe to Mrs. Nichols and yet we never have given her a testimonial.' Well, you and I and all who labor to make the conditions of the world better for coming generations, must find our testimonials in the good accomplished through our work."
At this time, Mrs. Mott sent Miss Anthony a little note along with a large package of fine tea: "I forgot to bring the tea I promised you, so please accept it now. Thank you for always thinking of me with those delicious drinks. After leaving you so suddenly yesterday, I worried that you might still be short on balance, so I’m enclosing another $10 for your personal use. It's too hard for our large national society to let you work so tirelessly without some recognition." But Miss Anthony didn’t work for personal gain and wrote to her old friend Clarina Howard Nichols: "The Kansas women say, 'All the freedom we have we owe to Mrs. Nichols, but we’ve never given her a testimonial.' Well, you, I, and all who strive to improve the world for future generations must find our testimonials in the good we accomplish through our efforts."
As soon as the Centennial headquarters were closed Miss Anthony proceeded to carry out her cherished plan of writing the history of the woman's rights movement. She had sent the most peremptory orders to Mrs. Stanton not to make a lecture engagement before December 1, so that in August, September, October and November they might prepare this history. She then shipped to Mrs. Stanton's home several large trunks and boxes full of letters, reports and various documents which she had carefully preserved during the past quarter of a century, and the first day of August they set to work. The entries in the diary for the next two months give some idea of her state of mind: "I am immersed to my ears and feel almost discouraged.... The work before me is simply appalling.... The prospect of ever getting out a 481 satisfactory history grows less each day.... Would that the good spirits in my own brain would come to the rescue!... O, these old letters! It makes me sad and tired to read them over, to see the terrible strain I was under every minute then, have been ever since, am now and shall be, I think, the rest of my life."[90]
As soon as the Centennial headquarters closed, Miss Anthony began to pursue her long-held dream of writing the history of the women's rights movement. She had issued strict instructions to Mrs. Stanton not to schedule any lectures before December 1, so they could work on this history during August, September, October, and November. She then sent several large trunks and boxes filled with letters, reports, and various documents she had meticulously preserved over the past twenty-five years to Mrs. Stanton's home, and on the first day of August, they got to work. The entries in the diary over the next two months give a glimpse into her state of mind: "I am overwhelmed and feel almost discouraged.... The work ahead of me is truly daunting.... The chance of ever producing a 481 satisfactory history seems to shrink day by day.... I wish the good spirits in my own mind would come to my aid!... Oh, these old letters! It makes me sad and exhausted to read them again, to see the immense pressure I endured every single minute back then, which I have felt ever since, and I believe I will continue to feel for the rest of my life."[90]
On August 24 occurred the death of Paulina Wright Davis and, at the husband's request, Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton spoke at the funeral. The former felt that again she had lost a friend who never could be replaced. Mrs. Davis was a woman of beauty, culture, wealth and social position and a life-long advocate of woman suffrage. In October the dear cousin Anson Lapham passed away, and in the diary that night was written: "No man except my father ever gave me such love and confidence, and his acts were equal to his faith."
On August 24, Paulina Wright Davis passed away, and at her husband's request, Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton spoke at the funeral. Miss Anthony felt she had lost a friend who could never be replaced. Mrs. Davis was a beautiful, cultured, wealthy woman with a high social standing and a lifelong supporter of women's suffrage. In October, dear cousin Anson Lapham also passed away, and that night in the diary, it was written: "No man except my father ever gave me such love and trust, and his actions matched his belief."

Pauline Wright Davis.
Pauline Wright Davis.
Work was pressing upon her from every side. In the spring of this year she had been engaged by the editors of Johnson's Universal Cyclopedia to write the chapter on suffrage and prepare the biographies of a number of eminent women. Amidst all the other cares of the summer and fall, she had been endeavoring to collect the materials for these sketches, having the usual experience. Some failed to answer; others wrote asking a score of questions; many sent four 482 times as many words as were requested, with the statement that not one single line could be cut out; while a number forwarded a mass of unintelligible matter and requested her to make a good sketch out of it. The history also was occupying her waking and sleeping thoughts, and the depleted condition of her pocket-book foreshadowed the necessity of another lecture tour. Meanwhile, the mother at home was growing very feeble, and on Thanksgiving Day Miss Anthony wrote to her: "I feel as if I were robbing myself of the last moments which I may ever have to be with you, but I can not see the way clear to stay at home this coming winter. It is ever thus with me, so hard to know which is the strongest duty, the one that ought to be done first, and so I grope on in the dark. That I am always away from home may look to the world as if I care less for it than other people, whereas my longing for it almost makes me weak; but you, dear mother, understand my love."
Work was closing in on her from all sides. In the spring of this year, she had been hired by the editors of Johnson's Universal Cyclopedia to write the chapter on suffrage and prepare biographies of several notable women. Amid all the other responsibilities during the summer and fall, she had been trying to gather the materials for these sketches, having the usual experience. Some people didn’t reply; others sent a ton of questions; many returned four times as many words as requested, insisting that not a single line could be cut; while several sent a bunch of confusing stuff and asked her to create a decent sketch from it. The history was also occupying her thoughts, both waking and sleeping, and the empty state of her wallet hinted at the need for another lecture tour. Meanwhile, her mother at home was becoming very frail, and on Thanksgiving Day, Miss Anthony wrote to her: "I feel like I'm stealing away the last moments I might have with you, but I can't see a way to stay home this winter. It’s always like this for me—it’s so hard to determine which duty is the most important, the one that should come first, and so I stumble around in the dark. That I’m always away from home might make it seem to the world like I care less for it than other people do, but my desire for it almost makes me weak; but you, dear mother, understand my love."
[86] From a large number of clippings, the following are selected as specimens:
[86] From a large number of clippings, the following are chosen as examples:
Miss Anthony has now earned the money and discharged the last obligation of her paper. This is the work of a brave and good woman.... She is a woman who pays her debts and sets a watch upon her lips.—Cincinnati Enquirer.
Miss Anthony has now earned the money and fulfilled the last obligation of her paper. This is the work of a brave and good woman.... She is a woman who pays her debts and keeps her words in check.—Cincinnati Enquirer.
It is the fashion among fools of both sexes to sneer at Susan B. Anthony and use her name to point witless jokes. But it seems to us—and we differ from her most emphatically on the question of woman suffrage—that her brave, unselfish life reflects a credit on womanhood which the follies of a thousand others can not remove.—Utica Observer.
It’s a trend among clueless people of all genders to mock Susan B. Anthony and use her name for silly jokes. But we believe—despite strongly disagreeing with her on the issue of women’s voting rights—that her courageous, selfless life brings honor to women that the foolishness of a thousand others can’t take away.—Utica Observer.
"She has paid her debts like a man," says an exchange. Like a man? Not so. Not one man in a thousand but would have "squealed," "laid down" and settled at ten or twenty cents on the dollar. As people go in this wicked world, it is no more than fair to say in good faith that Miss Anthony is a very admirable person. She is in business, as in other matters, one of the few—the select few—who steer by their own compass and not by the shifting winds.—Buffalo Express.
"She has paid her debts like a man," says an exchange. Like a man? Not really. Not one man in a thousand wouldn’t have just "squealed," given in, and settled for ten or twenty cents on the dollar. As people are in this corrupt world, it's only fair to say honestly that Miss Anthony is a truly admirable person. In business, as in other areas, she is one of the few— the select few—who navigates by her own principles and not by the changing tides. —Buffalo Express.
Miss Susan B. Anthony has done a noble thing, which deserves to be widely known. She has lectured 120 times during this season and has paid off the last debt of The Revolution. That she has felt obliged to work thus for years when thousands of men avail themselves of the privileges of the bankrupt act, is a phenomenal exhibition of personal honor. A woman is thoroughly qualified to plead for the claims of her own sex when she respects the rights of human nature so keenly.—New York Graphic.
Miss Susan B. Anthony has done something amazing that deserves to be recognized everywhere. She has given 120 lectures this season and has cleared the last debt of The Revolution. The fact that she has felt the need to work this hard for years while thousands of men take advantage of bankruptcy laws is an incredible display of personal integrity. A woman is fully qualified to advocate for her own gender when she values the rights of all people so deeply.—New York Graphic.
We are thankful to see the recognition accorded to the worth of our townswoman. She has been often misjudged and sometimes abused; but unfalteringly and unselfishly she has devoted herself to her life-work, and despite cavilling and sneers, has deeply impressed her thought upon the age in which she has been placed. Her executive talent has unceasingly declared itself and her character has been without reproach. She is today a power in the land, respected even by those who oppose her. She may not witness the full triumph of her cause; but her fame as a brave, truthful and consistent advocate of a conquering cause is secure. Even in her lifetime she is receiving something of the reward to which her fidelity to principle entities her.—Rochester Democrat and Chronicle.
We are grateful to see the acknowledgment given to the value of our townswoman. She has often been misjudged and sometimes mistreated, but without hesitation and selflessness, she has dedicated herself to her life's work, and despite criticism and mockery, she has made a significant impact on the era in which she exists. Her leadership skills have continuously shown themselves, and her character remains untarnished. Today, she is a force in the country, respected even by those who disagree with her. She may not see her cause fully prevail, but her reputation as a courageous, honest, and steadfast advocate for a winning cause is secure. Even in her lifetime, she is receiving some of the recognition that her loyalty to her principles deserves.—Rochester Democrat and Chronicle.
CHAPTER XXVIII.
COLORADO CAMPAIGN—POLITICAL ATTITUDE.
1877-1878.
The decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in the case of Virginia L. Minor rendered useless any further efforts to obtain suffrage under the National Constitution until it should be amended for this special purpose. The agitation of the last eight years, however, had not been without its value. The student of history will observe that the ablest constitutional arguments ever made in favor of the practical application of the great underlying principles of our government, were those of Benjamin F. Butler, A.G. Riddle, Henry R. Selden, William Loughridge, Francis Minor, Susan B. Anthony, Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Matilda Joslyn Gage on the right of women to vote under the Fourteenth Amendment. These were reviewed by the newspapers and law journals and widely discussed by the people, while the congressional debates, published in the Record, became a part of history.
The Supreme Court's decision in the case of Virginia L. Minor effectively ended any attempts to secure voting rights under the National Constitution until it could be amended specifically for that purpose. However, the activism over the past eight years had its worth. Anyone studying history will notice that some of the strongest constitutional arguments for putting the fundamental principles of our government into practice came from Benjamin F. Butler, A.G. Riddle, Henry R. Selden, William Loughridge, Francis Minor, Susan B. Anthony, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, and Matilda Joslyn Gage regarding women's voting rights under the Fourteenth Amendment. These arguments were covered by newspapers and legal journals and were widely talked about by the public, while the congressional debates published in the Record became a part of history.
Although from the standpoint of justice these arguments were unanswerable, they did not succeed in establishing the political rights of women, and the advocates therefore were compelled to return to their former policy of demanding a Sixteenth Amendment to the Constitution, which should protect them as the Fifteenth protected the negroes. To this end, in November, 1876, an earnest appeal was sent out by Mrs. Stanton, president; Miss Anthony, secretary; and Mrs. Gage, chairman of the executive committee of the National Association, asking the women to secure petitions for the amendment 484 and send them to the annual meeting. Two letters received by Miss Anthony in January, 1877, illustrate the wide difference of opinion which prevailed. Wm. Lloyd Garrison wrote:
Although these arguments were undeniable from a justice perspective, they didn’t manage to secure political rights for women. Therefore, the advocates had to revert to their previous strategy of pushing for a Sixteenth Amendment to the Constitution, which would protect them just as the Fifteenth protected African Americans. To promote this, in November 1876, an earnest appeal was sent out by Mrs. Stanton, president; Miss Anthony, secretary; and Mrs. Gage, chair of the executive committee of the National Association, asking women to gather petitions for the amendment 484 and send them to the annual meeting. Two letters received by Miss Anthony in January 1877 highlight the significant differences in opinion that existed. Wm. Lloyd Garrison wrote:
You desire me to send you a letter, to be read at the Washington convention, in favor of a petition to Congress, asking that body to submit to the several States a Sixteenth Amendment securing suffrage for all, irrespective of sex. On fully considering the subject, I must decline doing so, because such a petition I deem to be quite premature. If its request were complied with by the present Congress—a supposition simply preposterous—the proposed amendment would be rejected by every State in the Union, and in nearly every instance by such an overwhelming majority as to bring the movement into needless contempt. Even as a matter of "agitation," I do not think it would pay. Look over the whole country and see in the present state of public sentiment on the question of woman suffrage what a mighty primary work remains to be done in enlightening the masses, who know nothing and care nothing about it and, consequently, are not at all prepared to cast their vote for any such thing. I think it is a mistake to look for a favorable consideration of the question on the part of legislators under such circumstances. More light is needed for the popular mind.
You want me to send a letter to be read at the Washington convention, supporting a petition to Congress that calls for a Sixteenth Amendment guaranteeing the right to vote for everyone, regardless of gender. After thinking it over, I have to decline because I believe this petition is way too early. If the current Congress were to agree to it—which is very unlikely—the proposed amendment would be rejected by every state in the country, and in almost every case by such a large majority that it would undermine the entire movement. Even just for the sake of "agitation," I don't think it's worth it. Look around the country and consider the current public sentiment on women's suffrage; there is still a lot of work to do to educate the public, who are mostly uninformed and indifferent about this issue, and as a result, they aren't ready to support something like this. I think it’s a mistake to expect legislators to view this favorably under these circumstances. We need to raise more awareness among the public.
In the early days of the anti-slavery agitation, Mr. Garrison never waited for the popular mind to become prepared but, by the ploughshare of bold, aggressive action, he turned up the soil and made it ready for the seed. When "more light" was needed, by vigorous effort he stirred up a blaze which illuminated the world.
In the early days of the anti-slavery movement, Mr. Garrison never waited for public opinion to catch up; instead, with bold, aggressive action, he broke the ground and made it ready for change. When "more light" was needed, he put in a strong effort to ignite a fire that brightened the world.
From Wendell Phillips came the old-time clarion note: "I think you are on the right track—the best method to agitate the question—and I am with you, though, between you and me, I still think the individual States must lead off and that this reform must advance piecemeal, State by State. But I mean always to help everywhere and every one."
From Wendell Phillips came the classic rallying call: "I believe you’re on the right path—the best way to stir up this issue—and I’m on your side. However, between us, I still think the individual States need to take the lead and that this reform should progress gradually, State by State. But I always intend to support everyone and everywhere."
The convention met in Lincoln Hall, January 16 and 17. Although there had been but a few weeks for the work, petitions asking a Sixteenth Amendment were received from twenty-six different States, aggregating over 10,000 names. The History says: "To Sara Andrews Spencer we are indebted for the great labor of receiving, assorting, counting, rolling-up and planning the presentation of the petitions. It was by a well-considered coup d'état that, with her brave coadjutors, she 485 appeared on the floor of the House and gave each member a petition from his own State. Even Miss Anthony, always calm in the hour of danger, on finding herself suddenly whisked into those sacred enclosures, amid a crowd of stalwart men, spittoons and scrap-baskets, when brought vis-a-vis with our champion, Mr. Hoar, hastily apologized for the intrusion, to which the honorable gentleman promptly replied, 'I hope, madam, yet to see you on this floor in your own right and in business hours too.'"
The convention took place in Lincoln Hall on January 16 and 17. Even though there were only a few weeks to prepare, petitions calling for a Sixteenth Amendment came from twenty-six different states, totaling over 10,000 signatures. The History states: "We owe a lot to Sara Andrews Spencer for the huge effort she put into receiving, sorting, counting, organizing, and planning how to present the petitions. It was through a carefully thought-out move that she and her brave team 485 appeared on the floor of the House and handed each member a petition from their own state. Even Miss Anthony, who usually remains composed in times of trouble, found herself unexpectedly in those sacred spaces, surrounded by a group of strong men, spittoons, and scrap-baskets. When she encountered our champion, Mr. Hoar, she quickly apologized for the intrusion, to which the honorable gentleman promptly replied, 'I hope, madam, to see you on this floor in your own right and during business hours too.'"
The spectacle is variously described.[91] The trustworthy correspondent of the Independent, Mary Clemmer, looked at the proceedings with a woman's eyes and, in her weekly letter, thus vented her indignation:
The spectacle is described in many ways.[91] The reliable correspondent for the Independent, Mary Clemmer, viewed the events from a woman's perspective and expressed her outrage in her weekly letter:
A few read the petitions as they would any other, with dignity and without comment; but the majority seemed intensely conscious of holding something unutterably funny in their hands. They appeared to consider it a huge joke. The entire Senate presented the appearance of a laughing-school practising side-splitting and ear-extended grins. Mr. Wadleigh leaned back in his chair and shook with laughter, after portraying to his next neighbor, Pinkney Whyte, of Maryland, the apparition of Pinkney's landlady descending upon the polls like a wolf on the fold, to annihilate his election. Oglesby, erst warrior of Illinois, spake with such endearing gallantry of his "dear constituents," whom he did all his wit could do to make ridiculous, that the Senate laughed, and even Roscoe Conkling, who never condescends to sneer at a woman in public, turned and listened and smiled his most sardonic smile. Then Thurman blew his loudest regulation blast—sure portent of approaching battle—and 486 rose and moved that the petition be referred to the committee on public lands, of which Oglesby is chairman. At this proposition—intended to be equally humorous and contemptuous—the whole Senate laughed aloud.
A few people read the petitions seriously, with dignity and no comments; but most seemed fully aware that they were holding something absurdly funny. They treated it like a big joke. The entire Senate resembled a group of comedians rehearsing their best laughs and goofy grins. Mr. Wadleigh leaned back in his chair, shaking with laughter as he described to his neighbor, Pinkney Whyte from Maryland, the image of Pinkney's landlady coming to the polls like a wolf ready to sabotage his election. Oglesby, once a fighter from Illinois, spoke with such charming exaggeration about his "dear constituents," whom he cleverly mocked, that the Senate erupted in laughter, and even Roscoe Conkling, who usually keeps it classy and never makes fun of women openly, turned to listen and flashed his most sarcastic smile. Then Thurman let out his loudest official signal—an unmistakable sign of an upcoming conflict—and 486 stood up and suggested that the petition be sent to the committee on public lands, which Oglesby chaired. With this suggestion—meant to be both funny and scornful—the entire Senate burst into laughter.
There was one senator man enough and gentleman enough to lift the petition from this insulting proposition. It was Senator Sargent, of California, the husband of the woman who, though a senator's wife, is brave enough to be the treasurer of the National Suffrage Association. He turned to Mr. Thurman and demanded for the petition of more than 10,000 women at least the courtesy which would be given to any other.... Then the craven Senate declared Thurman's motion, which was only an insult, carried. Let it be recorded of the Senate of the Forty-fifth Congress that the one petition which it received as a preposterous joke and treated with utter contempt and outrage was that of tens of thousands of the mothers, wives and daughters of the land.
There was one senator who was strong and dignified enough to take the petition seriously. It was Senator Sargent from California, the husband of the woman who, despite being a senator's wife, bravely serves as the treasurer of the National Suffrage Association. He turned to Mr. Thurman and argued that the petition from over 10,000 women deserved at least the same respect as any other. Then the spineless Senate agreed to Thurman's motion, which was nothing but an insult. It should be noted that the Senate of the Forty-fifth Congress received one petition, which it treated as a ridiculous joke and showed complete disdain for, and that petition came from tens of thousands of the mothers, wives, and daughters of this nation.
The Capital of Sunday was perfectly correct when it said: "The ladies managed the business badly. If they had employed the female lobby, the venerable Solons would have softened and thrown open their doors as readily as their hearts." It seems an ungracious thing to say; but it is the truth. The woman who wins her way with the majority of these men is the siren of the gallery and the anteroom, who sends in her card and her invitation to the senator at his desk. She never talks of "rights." She cares for no "cause" but her own cause of ease and pelf. She shakes her tresses, "banged" and usually blonde; she lifts her alluring eyes, and nine times out of ten makes him do as she listeth. No wonder when the earnest appeal of honest women reaches his hands, he has neither response, honor nor justice to give it.
The Capitol's Sunday edition was right when it said: "The women handled the situation poorly. If they had enlisted the female lobby, the respected lawmakers would have softened and opened their doors just as easily as their hearts." It may sound harsh, but it’s the truth. The woman who gets her way with most of these men is the one who charms them from the gallery and waiting area, who sends her card and her invitation to the senator at his desk. She never talks about "rights." She cares only about her own agenda of comfort and wealth. She styles her hair, often blonde with bangs; she lifts her captivating eyes, and nine times out of ten makes him do what she wants. It's no wonder that when the sincere plea of genuine women reaches him, he has no response, honor, or justice to offer in return.
Miss Anthony had been speaking in all parts of the country for a quarter of a century and generally had been her own manager. The preceding year she had given the Slayton Lyceum Bureau a partial trial and at the beginning of 1877 made a contract with it, commencing the last of January. The entire first page of the circular for the season was devoted to this new engagement and began:
Miss Anthony had been speaking all over the country for 25 years and usually managed herself. The year before, she gave the Slayton Lyceum Bureau a partial try, and at the start of 1877, she signed a contract with them, starting at the end of January. The whole first page of the circular for the season was dedicated to this new engagement and began:
The manager takes pride in announcing the name of Susan B. Anthony, the most earnest, fearless advocate of the ballot for woman. She has hitherto confined herself entirely to this one question, which to her is most sacred and righteous, but this season we are to have something different, as will be seen from the titles of her new lectures. Her great speeches, "Woman and the Sixteenth Amendment," and "Woman wants Bread, not the Ballot," will still be called for, and committees will have their choice in all cases.... A certain gentleman frequently wrote us last year to avoid "all night rides" after his lectures; Miss Anthony never makes such a request. She can lecture every night in the season.... When a list of fifty or one hundred engagements has been mapped out and fixed, nothing but an act of 487 God will prevent her filling them.... Of nearly fifty consecutive lectures, delivered by Miss Anthony last spring in the State of Illinois alone, only two failed to realize a profit.... She is always making converts among the men as well as the women.
The manager is excited to announce the name of Susan B. Anthony, the most dedicated and fearless advocate for women's voting rights. Until now, she has focused entirely on this important cause, which she views as sacred and just, but this season we will see something different, as indicated by the titles of her new lectures. Her impactful speeches, "Woman and the Sixteenth Amendment," and "Woman Wants Bread, Not the Ballot," will still be in demand, and committees can choose from them in any case.... A certain gentleman often wrote to us last year asking to avoid "all night rides" after his lectures; Miss Anthony never makes such a request. She can lecture every night during the season.... Once a list of fifty or one hundred engagements has been planned and confirmed, only an act of 487 God will stop her from completing them.... Out of nearly fifty consecutive lectures delivered by Miss Anthony last spring in Illinois alone, only two did not turn a profit.... She consistently wins over both men and women.
Among the notices quoted is one from Col. John W. Forney, of the Philadelphia Press, saying: "I must accept woman suffrage as I did negro emancipation; as a necessity made urgent and imperative by the times in which we live. Put me down then, if you please, as being an ardent woman's rights man, fighting under the banner of Susan B. Anthony, and proud of following such a leader."
Among the notices quoted is one from Col. John W. Forney, of the Philadelphia Press, saying: "I have to support women's suffrage just like I supported the emancipation of African Americans; it's a necessity that's become urgent and crucial because of the times we live in. So, if you don't mind, count me as an enthusiastic advocate for women's rights, fighting under the banner of Susan B. Anthony, and I’m proud to follow such a leader."

J W Forney
J.W. Forney
Miss Anthony found both advantages and disadvantages in this new arrangement; for while it relieved her of much responsibility, it took away the control of her own time and movements, a situation which she soon found very trying. She lectured through February and March, but by this time her sister, Mrs. Hannah Mosher, whose failing health had sent her to Kansas in the hope of benefit, was declared by the physicians beyond recovery. Miss Anthony's first impulse was to hasten to her side, but she was confronted with her lecture engagements and told that it would be impossible to release her until May. She was almost desperate to be with the loved one and at last could bear it no longer, so telegraphing Mr. Slayton to cancel everything after April 5, regardless of consequences, she took the train at Chicago and reached Leavenworth on the 7th. She found her sister rapidly declining with the same inexorable disease which had claimed another four years before, and at once installed herself beside the invalid, who was rejoiced indeed to have her companionship and ministrations. All that loving hands could do she had had from husband, children and brothers, but she had longed for the presence of her sister and it filled her with joy and peace.
Miss Anthony saw both pros and cons in this new arrangement; while it relieved her of a lot of responsibility, it also took away control over her own time and movements, a situation that she soon found very frustrating. She lectured through February and March, but by then her sister, Mrs. Hannah Mosher, whose health had been declining and had sent her to Kansas in hopes of improvement, was declared by the doctors to be beyond recovery. Miss Anthony's first instinct was to rush to her side, but she was faced with her lecture commitments and was told it would be impossible to let her go until May. She was almost frantic to be with her loved one and finally couldn’t stand it any longer, so she telegraphed Mr. Slayton to cancel everything after April 5, no matter the consequences, took the train from Chicago, and arrived in Leavenworth on the 7th. She found her sister rapidly deteriorating from the same relentless illness that had taken another sibling four years earlier, and immediately settled in next to the patient, who was indeed delighted to have her company and care. She had received all the love and support that her husband, children, and brothers could provide, but she had longed for her sister's presence, which brought her immense joy and peace.
In just a week, though her heart was breaking, Miss Anthony 488 was obliged to return to Illinois to fill four or five engagements in places which threatened claims for damages if this were not done. She hastened back to Leavenworth, reaching the bedside of her sister at midnight, April 20, and scarcely leaving it a moment until the end came, May 12. Between herself and this sister, just nineteen months younger, beautiful in character and strong in affection, there ever had existed the closest sympathy. For the last decade they had been separated only by a dooryard, they had shared each other's every joy and sorrow, and the severing of these ties of over a half-century seemed more than she could endure.
In just a week, even though her heart was breaking, Miss Anthony 488 had to go back to Illinois to fulfill four or five commitments in places that threatened to file claims for damages if she didn’t. She rushed back to Leavenworth, arriving at her sister's bedside at midnight on April 20, and barely left it until the end came on May 12. Between her and this sister, who was just nineteen months younger, beautiful in character and strong in affection, there had always been the closest bond. For the past decade, they had lived right next door to each other, sharing every joy and sorrow, and the thought of losing this connection after more than fifty years felt like more than she could handle.
She remained at Leavenworth,[92] trying to renew her strength and courage, until the last of June, when she returned to Rochester, taking with her the orphaned daughter Louise. Many comforting letters and tokens of affection came to her during these months, among them a gift of $100 from Helen Potter, the famous impersonator. Her imitations of Gough, Ristori, Charlotte Cushman, Anna Dickinson, Mrs. Stanton and even Miss Anthony herself were most remarkable. During the Centennial they had become warm personal friends, and in giving the money she said: "Now, this is not for any society or committee or cause, but for your very self."
She stayed at Leavenworth,[92] trying to regain her strength and courage, until the end of June, when she went back to Rochester, bringing with her the orphaned daughter, Louise. Throughout those months, she received many comforting letters and tokens of affection, including a $100 gift from Helen Potter, the famous impersonator. Her impressions of Gough, Ristori, Charlotte Cushman, Anna Dickinson, Mrs. Stanton, and even Miss Anthony herself were outstanding. During the Centennial, they had become close friends, and when she gave the money, she said, "Now, this is not for any society or committee or cause, but for you personally."
Mrs. Stanton wrote her: "Do be careful, dear Susan, you can not stand what you once did. I should feel desolate indeed with you gone." When the lecturing had commenced she again wrote: "As I go dragging around in these despicable hotels, I think of you and often wish we had at least the little comfort of enduring it together. When is your agony over?" Referring to a young woman speaker who was being spoiled by flattery, she said: "We should be thankful, Susan, for the ridicule and abuse on which we have fed." To one who tried to make trouble between Miss Anthony and herself she sent this reply: "Our friendship is of too long standing and has too deep roots to be easily shattered. I think we have said worse things to each other, face to face, than we 489 have ever said about each other. Nothing that Susan could say or do could break my friendship with her; and I know nothing could uproot her affection for me." And to Miss Anthony she wrote: "I send you letters from our children. As the environments of the mother influence the child in prenatal life, and you were with me so much, there is no doubt you have had a part in making them what they are. There are a depth and earnestness in these younger ones and a love for you that delight my heart." Such letters as these are scattered thickly through the correspondence of nearly fifty years, and while Miss Anthony seldom put her own feelings into words, her absolute loyalty and devotion to Mrs. Stanton during all the half-century bear their own testimony.
Mrs. Stanton wrote to her: "Please be careful, dear Susan, you can't handle what you used to. I'd be really lonely if you were gone." Once the lectures began, she wrote again: "As I drag myself around these awful hotels, I think of you and often wish we could at least find some comfort in enduring it together. When does your suffering end?" Referring to a young woman speaker who was being spoiled by compliments, she said: "We should be grateful, Susan, for the criticism and insults that have nourished us." To someone trying to stir up trouble between Miss Anthony and herself, she replied: "Our friendship has lasted too long and has too deep roots to be easily broken. I think we've said worse things to each other in person than we've ever said about each other. Nothing Susan could say or do could damage my friendship with her; and I know nothing could shake her feelings for me." And to Miss Anthony she wrote: "I'm sending you letters from our children. Since a mother's surroundings affect the child during prenatal life, and you were with me so much, there's no doubt you've played a part in shaping them into who they are. There’s a depth and sincerity in these younger ones and a love for you that brings me joy." Such letters as these are spread throughout nearly fifty years of correspondence, and while Miss Anthony rarely expressed her own feelings in words, her steadfast loyalty and devotion to Mrs. Stanton over half a century speak for themselves.
The talented contributor to the Philadelphia Sunday Republic, Annie McDowell, paid a beautiful tribute to Miss Anthony at this time, illustrating how much she was loved by women:
The talented writer for the Philadelphia Sunday Republic, Annie McDowell, paid a heartfelt tribute to Miss Anthony at this time, showcasing how much she was loved by women:
"Some one wishes to know which of the advocates of woman's rights we think the ablest. Why, Susan B., of course. Without her, the organization would have been utterly broken to pieces and scattered. She is the guiding spirit, the executive power that leads the forlorn hope and brings order out of chaos. Others seek to promote their own interests, but Susan, earnest, honest, self-sacrificing, much-enduring, thinks only of the work she has in hand, and speculates solely on the chances of living long enough to accomplish it. She has given up home, friends, her profession of teacher and the modest competence acquired by her labor; has been caricatured, ridiculed, maligned and persecuted, but has never turned aside or faltered in the work to which she has given her life. Whatever may be the opinion of the conservative or fogy world with regard to Susan B. Anthony, those who know her well and have watched her career most attentively, know her to be rich in all the best and most tender of womanly virtues, and possessed of as brave and noble a spirit and as great integrity of character as ever fell to the lot of mortal woman."
"Someone wants to know who we think is the strongest advocate for women's rights. Well, it's definitely Susan B. Without her, the organization would have completely fallen apart and scattered. She is the driving force, the executive power that leads the charge and brings order to chaos. While others try to advance their own interests, Susan, earnest, honest, selfless, and enduring, focuses solely on the work at hand and worries only about having enough time to finish it. She has given up her home, friends, her teaching career, and the modest savings she earned through her work; she has been mocked, ridiculed, slandered, and persecuted, but she has never wavered or stepped back from the mission she has dedicated her life to. Whatever the conservative or old-fashioned world thinks of Susan B. Anthony, those who know her well and have closely followed her journey understand that she embodies all the best and most compassionate qualities of womanhood, possessing a brave and noble spirit and a level of integrity that is unmatched."
The legislature of Colorado had submitted the question of woman suffrage to be voted on October 2, 1877, and notwithstanding the lucrative business under the lyceum bureau, Miss Anthony could not resist offering her services to the women of Colorado with their little money and few speakers. From Dr. Alida C. Avery, president of the State Suffrage Association, came the quick response: "Your generous proposal was duly 490 received, and laid before the executive committee, who resolved that the thanks of the association be tendered you for your friendly offer, which we gratefully accept."
The Colorado legislature had put the question of women's suffrage to a vote on October 2, 1877, and despite her successful work with the lyceum bureau, Miss Anthony couldn’t resist offering her help to the women of Colorado, who had limited funds and few speakers. Dr. Alida C. Avery, president of the State Suffrage Association, quickly replied: "Your generous proposal was duly 490 received and presented to the executive committee, who decided to extend their gratitude for your friendly offer, which we gratefully accept."
Although inured to hardship, Miss Anthony found this Colorado campaign the most trying she ever had experienced, not excepting that of Kansas ten years before. The country was new, many of the towns were off the railroad among the mountains and in most of them woman suffrage never had been heard of; there was no one to advertise the meetings, nobody to meet her when she reached her destination, hotels were of the most primitive nature and there were few public halls. There were, of course, some oases in this desert, and occasionally she found a good hotel or was hospitably entertained in a comfortable home. At one place she spoke in the railroad station to about twenty-five men who could not understand what it was she wanted them to do, though all were voters. Sometimes a landlord would clear out the hotel dining-room and she would gather her audience there, but they would have to stand and soon would grow tired. The mining towns were filled with a densely ignorant class of foreigners, and some of the southern counties were almost wholly populated by Mexicans. It was to these men that an American woman, her grandfather a soldier of the Revolution, appealed for the right of women to representation in this government.
Although used to difficulties, Miss Anthony found this Colorado campaign to be the toughest she had ever faced, even more so than the one in Kansas ten years earlier. The area was new, many towns were far from the railroad, nestled in the mountains, and in most of them, the idea of women’s suffrage had never been heard of; there was no one to promote the meetings, nobody to greet her upon her arrival, hotels were very basic, and there were few public halls. However, there were a few bright spots in this challenging situation, and occasionally she would find a nice hotel or be warmly welcomed in a comfortable home. At one site, she spoke at the train station to about twenty-five men who couldn’t grasp what she was asking them to do, even though they were all voters. Sometimes a hotel owner would clear out the dining room, allowing her to gather an audience there, but they would have to stand and quickly grow tired. The mining towns were filled with a largely uninformed group of immigrants, and some of the southern counties were almost entirely made up of Mexicans. It was to these men that an American woman, whose grandfather was a soldier in the Revolution, appealed for the right of women to have representation in this government.
To reach Del Norte Miss Anthony rode sixty-five miles by stage over a vast, arid tract evidently once the bed of an inland sea, but the terrible discomforts of the journey were almost overlooked in the enjoyment of the magnificent scenery. She travelled all the next night; at Wagon Wheel Gap the stage stopped for a while and, taking a cup, she went alone down to the river, drank of its icy waters and stood a long time absorbed in the glory of the moonlight on the mountain peaks. In all this weary journey of two days, she was the only woman in a stage filled with men. When she reached Lake City she was delightfully entertained, finding her hostess to be a college graduate, and spoke in the evening from a dry-goods box 491 on the courthouse steps to an enthusiastic audience of a thousand persons. Ouray was the next place marked on the route sent her, but to reach it would require a ride of fifty miles over a dangerous mountain trail or a three days' journey of 150 miles around, for which she must hire a private conveyance, so she gave it up.
To get to Del Norte, Miss Anthony rode sixty-five miles by stagecoach across a vast, dry area that clearly used to be the bottom of an inland sea. The awful discomforts of the journey were almost forgotten in the enjoyment of the stunning scenery. She traveled all night, and at Wagon Wheel Gap, the stagecoach stopped for a bit. Taking a cup, she went alone down to the river, drank from its icy waters, and spent a long time absorbed in the beauty of the moonlight on the mountain peaks. Throughout this exhausting two-day journey, she was the only woman in a coach filled with men. When she arrived in Lake City, she was warmly welcomed, finding her hostess to be a college graduate, and in the evening, she spoke from a dry-goods box 491 on the courthouse steps to an enthusiastic crowd of a thousand people. Ouray was the next stop on her route, but to get there, she would have to ride fifty miles over a dangerous mountain trail or take a three-day journey of 150 miles around, for which she would need to hire a private vehicle, so she decided to skip it.
She rested one whole day and night and started at 6 A.M. on a buckboard for the next place, wound around the mountainsides by the picturesque Gunnison river, and reached her destination at 5 o'clock. She found a disbeliever of equal rights in her landlady, whom she describes as "a weak, silly woman and a wretched cook and housekeeper." To be an opponent of suffrage and a poor housekeeper Miss Anthony always regarded as two unpardonable sins. The husband, however, intended to vote for it. At the next stopping-place her hostess was a cultured woman, her house neatly kept and meals well-cooked, and she wanted to vote. The husband in this case was violently opposed and expected to cast his ballot against the amendment. Thus it is that wives are "represented by their husbands."
She took a full day and night to rest and set out at 6 A.M. on a buckboard for the next location, winding around the beautiful Gunnison river through the mountainsides, and arrived at her destination at 5 o'clock. She encountered a landlady who didn't believe in equal rights, describing her as "a weak, silly woman and a terrible cook and housekeeper." Miss Anthony always considered being against suffrage and a poor housekeeper as two unforgivable faults. However, the husband planned to vote in favor of it. At the next stop, her hostess was an educated woman, with a well-kept house and tasty meals, who wanted to vote. In this case, the husband was strongly against it and intended to vote against the amendment. This is how wives are "represented by their husbands."
On she went, over mountain and through canyon, across the "great divide," sometimes having large audiences, more often only a handful, and enduring every possible hardship in the way of travel, sleep and food. At Oro City she lectured in a saloon, as she had done at a number of places, and Governor Routt, happening to be in town, stood by her and spoke also in favor of woman suffrage. At many places she slept on a straw-filled tick laid on planks, with sometimes a "corded" bed for a luxury. A door with a lock scarcely ever was found. Once she had a room with a board partition which extended only half-way up, separating it from one adjoining where half a dozen men slept. It is hardly necessary to say that this was a wakeful night and the dawn was hailed with rejoicing. At Leadville the gold fever was at its height and she spoke in a big saloon to the roughest crowd she had encountered. They were good-natured, however, and when they saw she was coughing from the tobacco smoke, put out their pipes and 492 made up for the sacrifice by more frequent drinks. At Fair Play she found the Democratic editor had placarded the town with bills announcing in big letters: "A New Version! Suffrage! Free Love in the Ascendency. Anthony! On the Gale Tonight." The citizens were indignant, there was a large and respectful audience, Miss Anthony was introduced by Judge Henry and resolutions were unanimously passed denouncing the posters.
On she went, over mountains and through canyons, across the "great divide," sometimes speaking to large crowds, more often to just a handful, and enduring every possible hardship related to travel, sleep, and food. In Oro City, she gave a lecture in a saloon, just like she had done in several other places, and Governor Routt, being in town, stood by her side and also spoke in favor of women's suffrage. In many places, she slept on a straw-filled mattress laid on planks, occasionally enjoying the luxury of a "corded" bed. A door with a lock was rarely found. Once, she had a room with a board partition that only went halfway up, separating it from an adjoining room where half a dozen men slept. It goes without saying that it was a sleepless night and dawn was greeted with relief. In Leadville, the gold rush was at its peak, and she spoke in a large saloon to the roughest crowd she had encountered. They were, however, good-natured, and when they noticed her coughing from the tobacco smoke, they put out their pipes and made up for it by having more frequent drinks. In Fair Play, she discovered that the Democratic editor had plastered the town with posters declaring in large letters: "A New Version! Suffrage! Free Love in the Ascendancy. Anthony! On the Gale Tonight." The citizens were outraged, there was a large and respectful audience, Miss Anthony was introduced by Judge Henry, and resolutions were unanimously passed condemning the posters.
On election day, her work finished, she started on a stage ride of eighty-five miles to Denver. The collections at her twenty-four meetings amounted to $165. Her fare to Colorado and return, exclusive of some passes furnished by her brother and including sleeper and meals, was $100, and her expenses during the tour more than used up the other $65, so it hardly could be called a good financial speculation. Soon afterwards she received from Mr. and Mrs. Israel Hall, of Ann Arbor, Mich., a deed for 320 acres of well-timbered land in St. Francis county, Ark., "as a tribute to her life-work for woman suffrage and especially her hard campaign in Colorado." There came also a letter from the ever-generous and faithful Mrs. Knox Goodrich, of San Jose, Cal., with a draft for $50 "to be used for your campaign expenses;" and in her diary Miss Anthony writes: "It is a great comfort, after all these years of financially unrequited work, to receive such marks of appreciation."
On election day, after finishing her work, she set out on an eighty-five-mile stagecoach ride to Denver. The collections from her twenty-four meetings totaled $165. Her round-trip fare to Colorado, not counting some passes her brother provided and including sleeper accommodations and meals, was $100, and her expenses during the tour consumed the remaining $65, so it couldn't really be considered a good financial investment. Soon after, she received a deed for 320 acres of well-timbered land in St. Francis County, Arkansas, from Mr. and Mrs. Israel Hall of Ann Arbor, Michigan, "as a tribute to her life work for woman suffrage and especially her hard campaign in Colorado." She also got a letter from the always generous and supportive Mrs. Knox Goodrich of San Jose, California, with a check for $50 "to be used for your campaign expenses"; and in her diary, Miss Anthony wrote: "It's a great comfort, after all these years of financially unrewarded work, to receive such tokens of appreciation."
At Denver she met Margaret Campbell, of Iowa, and Matilda Hindman, of Pennsylvania, who also had been campaigning in Colorado. They had an amusing time comparing notes, but as Mrs. Campbell had travelled in her own carriage with her husband, and Miss Hindman had spoken mostly in towns along the railroad, their experiences had been less picturesque and less harrowing. She also met here Abby Sage Richardson, who was giving a course of readings in Denver. It was in this locality that her sister Hannah had spent many weary weeks the year before, seeking for health, and Miss Anthony hunted up every person who had known her, hoping each would recall some incident of her stay; visited every spot 493 her sister had loved, and felt the whole place haunted with her hallowed memory.
At Denver, she met Margaret Campbell from Iowa and Matilda Hindman from Pennsylvania, who had also been campaigning in Colorado. They had a fun time sharing their experiences, but since Mrs. Campbell had traveled in her own carriage with her husband and Miss Hindman had mostly spoken in towns along the railroad, their stories were less colorful and less intense. She also met Abby Sage Richardson, who was doing a series of readings in Denver. This was the area where her sister Hannah had spent many exhausting weeks the year before, looking for health, and Miss Anthony sought out everyone who had known her, hoping each would remember some moment from her stay; she visited every place 493 her sister had cherished and felt the entire area filled with her cherished memory.
Dr. Alida C. Avery was going East for some time, but was to leave two young women medical students in her house and she invited Miss Anthony to stay there while she remained in Denver. She was soon installed in the large, airy front chamber of this lovely home, looking down on a grassy and well-irrigated lawn and outward towards the rugged and massive Rocky mountains. It was an inspiring spot and, as she had promised a new lecture for the Slayton Bureau, she decided to remain and write it here. Her surroundings recalled the many charming homes made and maintained by unmarried women whom she had visited, and so in the three weeks that she enjoyed Dr. Avery's hospitality, she wrote her lecture, "Homes of Single Women." During this time she spoke at Boulder; and also in the opera house at Denver under the auspices of a committee, receiving $100.
Dr. Alida C. Avery was heading East for a while but planned to leave two young female medical students in her home. She invited Miss Anthony to stay there while she was in Denver. Miss Anthony quickly settled into the large, airy front room of this beautiful house, which overlooked a well-kept grassy lawn and offered views of the rugged, impressive Rocky Mountains. It was an inspiring place, and since she promised to prepare a new lecture for the Slayton Bureau, she decided to stay and write it there. The surroundings reminded her of the charming homes created and maintained by single women she had visited, and during the three weeks she enjoyed Dr. Avery's hospitality, she wrote her lecture, "Homes of Single Women." During this time, she also spoke in Boulder and performed at the opera house in Denver with a committee, earning $100.
She started, October 23, on a long lecture tour arranged for her through Nebraska,[93] Kansas, Missouri, Iowa and Wisconsin, which lasted the remainder of the year. She almost perished with cold and fatigue before it was finished but found some compensation in the $30 a night which the lectures yielded. At this time she received an urgent request from a San Francisco lecture committee to come to that State, but was unable to accept. "If I only could have sister Mary with me over Sunday in these dull and lonely little towns, I could stand it the rest of the week," she wrote; and to a friend who sent her an account of a visit to her mother: "I am very glad you do go occasionally to see dear mother, sitting there in her rocking-chair by the window as life ebbs out and out. O, how I fear the final ebb will come when I am away, but still I hope and trust it may not, and work and work on."
She began on October 23 a lengthy lecture tour set up for her in Nebraska,[93] Kansas, Missouri, Iowa, and Wisconsin, which continued for the rest of the year. She almost froze and wore herself out before it wrapped up but found some comfort in the $30 per night the lectures brought in. During this time, she received a pressing request from a San Francisco lecture committee to come to that state, but she couldn't accept. "If only I could have sister Mary with me over the weekend in these dull and lonely little towns, I could handle the rest of the week," she wrote; and to a friend who shared an update about visiting her mother: "I'm really glad you go see dear mother now and then, sitting there in her rocking chair by the window as life slowly fades away. Oh, how I dread that the final moment will come when I’m not there, but I still hope and trust it won’t happen, and I keep working and working on."
As Miss Anthony was still under contract with the lecture bureau, she was once more compelled to forego the satisfaction 494 of attending the annual convention in Washington, January 8 and 9, 1878, but as in 1876 she sent $100 of the money she had worked so hard to earn. "It is not quite just to myself to do it," she wrote a friend, "but if the women of wealth and leisure will not help us, we must give both the labor and the money." While this convention was a success as to numbers and enthusiasm, several things occurred which the ladies thought might have been avoided if Miss Anthony had been in command with her cool head and firm hand. Especially was this true in regard to a prayer meeting which some of the religious zealots, in spite of the most urgent appeals from the other members, persisted in holding in the reception room of the Capitol directly after a morning session of the convention. The affair itself was most inopportune but, to make it still worse, the cranks and bores who always are watching for an opportunity, gained control and turned it into a farce.
As Miss Anthony was still under contract with the lecture bureau, she had to miss the annual convention in Washington on January 8 and 9, 1878, again. But just like in 1876, she sent $100 of the money she had worked so hard to earn. "It's not entirely fair to myself to do it," she wrote to a friend, "but if wealthy and leisurely women won’t help us, we have to provide both the work and the money." While this convention was successful in terms of attendance and enthusiasm, some issues arose that the women felt could have been avoided if Miss Anthony had been in charge with her calm demeanor and strong leadership. This was especially true concerning a prayer meeting that some overly zealous members insisted on holding in the Capitol's reception room immediately after a morning session of the convention, despite urgent appeals from the other attendees. The timing of the meeting was highly inappropriate, and to make matters worse, the cranks and dullards looking for an opportunity took control and turned it into a joke.
In her disgust and wrath Mrs. Stanton wrote Miss Anthony: "Mrs. Sargent and I did not attend the prayer meeting. As God has never taken a very active part in the suffrage movement, I thought I would stay at home and get ready to implore the committee, having more faith in their power to render us the desired aid." Mrs. Sargent, with her usual calm and beautiful philosophy, wrote: "Do not let yourself be troubled. We can not take down and rebuild without a great deal of dirt and rubbish, and we must endure it all for the sake of the grand edifice that is to appear in due time. Work and let work, each in her own way. We can not all work alike any more than we can look alike. We must not require impossibilities. All action helps us, it shows life; inaction, we know, means death. I hope you can be with us next convention. The women of this country and of the world owe you a debt they never can repay. I know, however, that you will get your reward."
In her frustration and anger, Mrs. Stanton wrote to Miss Anthony: "Mrs. Sargent and I didn’t go to the prayer meeting. Since God hasn’t played a major role in the suffrage movement, I thought I’d stay home and prepare to ask the committee for help, believing more in their ability to give us the support we need." Mrs. Sargent, with her usual calm and insightful perspective, replied: "Don’t let yourself get upset. We can’t take down and rebuild without a lot of mess, and we have to endure it all for the sake of the great structure that will emerge in time. Work and let others work, each in their own way. We can’t all work the same way any more than we can all look the same. We shouldn’t expect the impossible. Every action helps us; it shows life; inaction, as we know, means death. I hope you can join us at the next convention. The women of this country and the world owe you a debt that they can never repay. I know, however, that you will receive your reward."
Virginia L. Minor sent this earnest plea: "Can not you and Mrs. Stanton, before another convention, manage in some way to civilize our platform and keep off that element which is 495 doing us so much harm? I think the ship never floated that had so many barnacles attached as has ours.... I have a compliment for you, my dear. Wendell Phillips has just told a reporter of the St. Louis Post that, 'of all the advocates of the woman's movement, Miss Anthony stands at the head.'"
Virginia L. Minor sent this heartfelt request: "Can you and Mrs. Stanton, before the next convention, find a way to refine our platform and exclude that group which is 495 causing us so much trouble? I don't think any ship has ever sailed with as many barnacles attached as ours.... I have a compliment for you, my dear. Wendell Phillips just told a reporter from the St. Louis Post that, 'of all the advocates of the women's movement, Miss Anthony is the leader.'"
In her usual racy style Phoebe Couzins concluded her description by saying: "It seems very strange that when you are not about, things generally break loose and no woman can be found who unites the moderation, brains and common sense necessary to carry matters to a respectable conclusion. That meeting was like those they used to have in the District of Columbia. Not until the National Association, in the persons of Mrs. Stanton and yourself, came to the rescue and raised them to a dignified standard did they attain any degree of hearing from the thoughtful people of the capital." And so Miss Anthony determined that no lecture bureau should keep her away from another National convention.
In her usual bold style, Phoebe Couzins wrapped up her comments by saying: "It's pretty odd that when you're not around, everything tends to fall apart, and no woman can be found who has the balance, intelligence, and common sense needed to bring things to a proper conclusion. That meeting was just like those they used to hold in the District of Columbia. It wasn't until the National Association, represented by Mrs. Stanton and you, stepped in and lifted them to a respectable standard that they gained any attention from the thoughtful people in the capital." And so Miss Anthony decided that no lecture bureau would prevent her from attending another National convention.
The entire year of 1878, with the exception of the three summer months, was spent in the lecture field. On July 19 Miss Anthony and other workers arranged a celebration at Rochester of the thirtieth anniversary of the first woman's rights convention. This was held in place of the usual May Anniversary in New York and was attended by a distinguished body of women. The Unitarian church, in spite of the intense heat, was filled with a representative audience. The noble Quaker, Amy Post, now seventy-seven years old, who had been the leading spirit in the convention of thirty years before, assisted in the arrangements. The usual brilliant and logical speeches were made by Mrs. Mott, Mrs. Stanton, Miss Anthony, Mrs, Gage, Dr. Lozier, Mrs. Spencer, Mrs. Sargent, Frederick Douglass, Miss Couzins and others. This was the first appearance on the National platform of Mrs. May Wright Sewall, of Indianapolis, from that time one of the leaders of the movement. Almost one hundred interesting and encouraging letters were received from Phillips, Garrison, Senator 496 Sargent, Frances E. Willard, Clara Barton and many others in this country and in England.
The whole year of 1878, except for the three summer months, was spent in the lecture circuit. On July 19, Miss Anthony and other activists organized a celebration in Rochester to mark the thirtieth anniversary of the first women's rights convention. This event replaced the usual May Anniversary in New York and attracted a distinguished group of women. The Unitarian church, despite the intense heat, was packed with a representative audience. The noble Quaker, Amy Post, now seventy-seven years old and a key figure from thirty years earlier, helped with the arrangements. The usual brilliant and logical speeches were delivered by Mrs. Mott, Mrs. Stanton, Miss Anthony, Mrs. Gage, Dr. Lozier, Mrs. Spencer, Mrs. Sargent, Frederick Douglass, Miss Couzins, and others. This was the first time that Mrs. May Wright Sewall from Indianapolis appeared on the national platform, becoming one of the movement's leaders from that point onward. Nearly a hundred interesting and encouraging letters were received from Phillips, Garrison, Senator 496 Sargent, Frances E. Willard, Clara Barton, and many others both in this country and in England.
This was the last convention Lucretia Mott ever attended, and she had made the journey hither under protest from her family, for she was nearly eighty-six years old, but her devoted friend Sarah Pugh accompanied her. She spoke several times in her old, gentle, half-humorous but convincing manner and was heard with rapt attention. As she walked down the aisle to leave the church, the whole audience arose and Frederick Douglass called out with emotion, "Good-by, Lucretia." The convention received a telegram of congratulation from the International Congress at Paris, presided over by Victor Hugo. Mrs. Stanton was re-elected president and Miss Anthony chairman of the executive committee. The Rochester Democrat and Chronicle said:
This was the last convention Lucretia Mott ever attended, and she had made the trip here despite her family's objections since she was nearly eighty-six years old, but her loyal friend Sarah Pugh went with her. She spoke several times in her familiar, gentle, somewhat humorous yet persuasive way and was listened to with captivated attention. As she walked down the aisle to leave the church, the entire audience stood, and Frederick Douglass called out emotionally, "Goodbye, Lucretia." The convention received a congratulatory telegram from the International Congress in Paris, led by Victor Hugo. Mrs. Stanton was re-elected as president and Miss Anthony was named chair of the executive committee. The Rochester Democrat and Chronicle said:
The assemblage was composed of as fine a body of American women as ever met in convention or anywhere else. Among them were many noted for their culture and refinement, and for their attainments in the departments of literature, medicine, divinity and law. As Douglass said, to which the president bowed her acquiescence, any cause which could stand the test of thirty years' agitation, was bound to succeed. The foremost ladies engaged in the movement today are those who initiated it in this country and have bravely and grandly upheld their cause from that day to this. Among them we must first speak of Susan B. Anthony, one of the most sensible and worthy citizens of this republic, a lady of warm and tender heart but indomitable purpose and energy, and a resident of whom Rochester may well be proud.
The gathering featured some of the most incredible American women to ever come together in a convention or anywhere else. Many were celebrated for their culture and sophistication, as well as their accomplishments in literature, medicine, religion, and law. As Douglass pointed out, with the president nodding in agreement, any cause that could endure thirty years of activism was sure to succeed. The leading women in today's movement are those who started it in this country and have bravely supported their cause ever since. Among them, we must first mention Susan B. Anthony, one of the most sensible and admirable citizens of this nation, a woman with a warm and caring heart, but also relentless determination and energy, and a resident that Rochester can be very proud of.
Miss Anthony was very tired after the labors of this convention and was glad to remain with the invalid mother while sister Mary went to the White mountains for rest and change. She received an invitation from the board of directors to address the Kansas State Fair in September, and also one from Col. John P. St. John, Republican candidate for governor, to speak at a Grand National Temperance Camp Meeting near Lawrence, but was obliged to decline both.
Miss Anthony was really tired after the hard work of this convention and was happy to stay with her sick mother while her sister Mary went to the White Mountains for a break. She got an invitation from the board of directors to speak at the Kansas State Fair in September, as well as one from Col. John P. St. John, the Republican candidate for governor, to talk at a Grand National Temperance Camp Meeting near Lawrence, but she had to turn down both.
During the summer of 1878 reports were so constantly circulated declaring woman suffrage a failure in Wyoming that Miss Anthony wrote to J.H. Hayford, postmaster and editor of the Sentinel at Laramie City, in regard to one of these in the New 497 York World, which paper declared it would vouch for the integrity of the writer. She received the following answer:
During the summer of 1878, reports were frequently shared claiming that woman suffrage was a failure in Wyoming, prompting Miss Anthony to write to J.H. Hayford, the postmaster and editor of the Sentinel in Laramie City, about one of these articles in the New 497 York World. That paper stated it would vouch for the integrity of the writer. She received the following response:
The enclosed slander upon Wyoming women I had seen before, but did not deem it worthy reply. Some of my Cheyenne friends took pains to ascertain the writer and they assure me (and the Cheyenne papers have published the fact) that he is a worthless, drunken dead-beat, who worked out a ten days' sentence on the streets of that city with a ball and chain to his leg.
The negative comments about women in Wyoming that I found here are things I've seen before, but I didn’t think they deserved a response. Some of my Cheyenne friends took the time to find out who wrote it and assured me (and the Cheyenne papers have reported this) that he is a lazy, drunk loser who served a ten-day sentence in that city with a ball and chain on his leg.
I have not time to go into a detailed history of the practical working of woman suffrage in Wyoming, but I can add my testimony to the fact that its effect has been most salutary and beneficial. Not one of the imaginary evils which its opponents predicted has ever been realized here. On this frontier, where the roughest element is supposed to exist, and where women are so largely in the minority—even here, under these adverse circumstances, woman's influence has redeemed our politics. Our elections are conducted as quietly and civilly as any other public gatherings. Republicans are not always elected, the most desirable men are not always elected, perhaps; but the influence of our women is almost universally given for the best men and the best laws, and we would as soon be without woman's assistance in the government of the family as in that of the Territory.
I don’t have time to provide a thorough history of how women’s suffrage has worked in Wyoming, but I can say that its impact has been very positive and beneficial. Not one of the fake problems that opponents predicted has ever occurred here. On this frontier, supposedly filled with rough characters, and where women are a minority—even here, despite the tough conditions, women's influence has improved our politics. Our elections are conducted as calmly and respectfully as any other public events. Republicans aren’t always elected, and maybe the best candidates don’t always win, but women’s support is almost always given to the best candidates and the best laws, and we would just as soon do without women’s help in running a family as in governing the Territory.
After having tried the experiment for nine years, it is safe to say there is not one citizen of the Territory—man or woman—who desires good order, good laws and good government, who would be willing to see it abolished. Woman's influence in the government of our Territory is a terror only to evil-doers, and they, and they only, are the ones who desire its repeal. Such base slanders as the specimen you sent me excite in the minds of Wyoming citizens only feelings of disgust and contempt for the author, and wonder at the ignorance of any one who is gullible enough to believe them.
After trying this experiment for nine years, I can confidently say that there isn’t a single person in the Territory—man or woman—who wants to see good order, good laws, and good government eliminated. Women's influence in the governance of our Territory only intimidates wrongdoers, and they are the only ones who want it gone. The disgusting accusations like the one you sent me only provoke feelings of disgust and contempt among Wyoming citizens for the author, along with disbelief at how anyone could be naive enough to believe them.
In August she received a letter from Lucy Stone, asking if she had been correctly reported by the papers as saying that "the suffragists would advocate any party which would declare for woman suffrage," to which she replied:
In August, she got a letter from Lucy Stone, asking if the newspapers had accurately reported her saying that "the suffragists would support any party that declared for woman suffrage," to which she replied:
I answer "yes," save that I used the pronoun "I" instead of the word "suffragists." I spoke for myself alone, because I know many of our women are so much more intensely Republican or Democratic, Hard-Money or Green-back, Prohibition or License, than they are "Equal Rights for All," that now, as in the past, they will hold the question of woman's enfranchisement in abeyance, while they give their money and their energies to secure the success of one or another of the contending parties, even though it wholly ignore their just claim to a voice in the government. It is not that I have no opinions or preferences on the many grave questions which distract and divide the parties; but it is that, in my judgment, the right of self-government for one-half the people is of far more vital consequence to the nation than any or all other questions. 498
I say "yes," but I used "I" instead of "suffragists." I'm speaking only for myself because I know many women are much more dedicated to their Republican or Democratic beliefs, Hard-Money or Greenback ideas, Prohibition or License views, than they are to "Equal Rights for All." So, just like before, they will postpone the issue of women's voting rights while they spend their time and money supporting one political party or another, even if it completely overlooks their rightful claim to have a say in the government. It’s not that I don't have opinions or preferences on the serious issues that divide the parties; it’s just that, in my opinion, the right to self-govern for half the population is far more important for the nation than any other issue. 498
This has been my position ever since the abolition of slavery, by which the black race were raised from chattels to citizens, and invested also with civil rights equally with the cultured, tax-paying, white women of the country. Have you forgotten the cry "This is the negro's hour," which came back to us in 1866, when we urged the Abolitionists to make common cause with us and demand suffrage as a right for all United States citizens, instead of asking it simply as an expediency for only another class of men? Do you not remember, too how the taunt "false to the negro" was flung into the face of every one of us who insisted that it was "humanity's hour," and that to talk of "freedom without the ballot" was no less "mockery" to woman than to the negro?
This has been my position since the end of slavery, which elevated Black people from property to citizens, granting them civil rights equal to those of educated, tax-paying white women in the country. Have you forgotten the rallying cry "This is the negro's hour," which resonated back to us in 1866 when we urged the Abolitionists to join forces with us and demand voting rights as a right for all U.S. citizens, rather than merely asking for it as an expediency for just another group of men? Do you not also remember how we were accused of being "false to the negro" if we argued that it was "humanity's hour," and that talking about "freedom without the ballot" was just as much a "mockery" to women as it was to Black people?
If, in those most trying reconstruction years, I could not subordinate the fundamental principle of "Equal Rights for All" to Republican party necessity for negro suffrage—if, in that fearful national emergency, I would not sacrifice the greater to the less—I surely can not and will not today hold any of the far less important party questions paramount to that most sacred principle of our republic. So long as you and I and all women are political slaves, it ill becomes us to meddle with the weightier discussions of our sovereign masters. It will be quite time enough for us, with self-respect, to declare ourselves for or against any party upon the intrinsic merit of its policy, when men shall recognize us as their political equals, duly register our names and respectfully count our opinions at the ballot-box, as a constitutional right—not as a high crime, punishable with "$500 fine or six months' imprisonment, or both, at the discretion of the court."
If, during those difficult years of reconstruction, I couldn’t prioritize the fundamental principle of "Equal Rights for All" over the Republican party’s need for Black suffrage—if, in that serious national crisis, I wouldn’t sacrifice what’s more important for something lesser—then I certainly can’t and won’t today prioritize any of the much less significant party issues over that sacred principle of our republic. As long as you, I, and all women are political slaves, it’s inappropriate for us to interfere in the more significant debates of our ruling masters. It will be plenty for us, with self-respect, to declare our support or opposition to any party based on the actual merits of its policies when men recognize us as their political equals, formally register our names, and respectfully count our opinions at the ballot box, as a constitutional right—not as a serious crime, punishable by "$500 fine or six months' imprisonment, or both, at the discretion of the court."
If all the "suffragists" of all the States could see eye to eye on this point, and stand shoulder to shoulder against every party and politician not fully and unequivocally committed to "Equal Rights for Women," we should become at once a moral balance of power which could not fail to compel the party of highest intelligence to proclaim woman suffrage the chief plank of its platform. "In union alone there is strength." Until that good day comes, I shall continue to invoke the party in power, and each party struggling to get into power, to pledge itself to the emancipation of our enslaved half of the people; and in turn, I shall promise to do all a "subject" can do, for the success of the party which thus declares its purpose "to undo the heavy burdens and let the oppressed go free."
If all the "suffragists" from every state could unite on this issue and collectively stand against any party and politician that isn't fully and clearly committed to "Equal Rights for Women," we would immediately become a moral force that would prompt the most intelligent party to make women's suffrage the main focus of its platform. "There is strength in unity." Until that day comes, I will continue to urge the current party in power, and every party aiming for power, to commit to freeing our oppressed half of the population; and in return, I will promise to do everything a "subject" can do to support the party that openly states its intent "to lift the heavy burdens and set the oppressed free."
[91] That women will, by voting, lose nothing of man's courteous, chivalric attention and respect is admirably proven by the manner in which Congress, in the midst of the most anxious and perplexing presidential conflict in our history, received their appeals for a Sixteenth Amendment protecting the rights of women. In both Houses, by unanimous consent, the petitions were presented and read in open session, and the most prominent senators impressed upon the Senate the importance of the question.... The ladies naturally feel greatly encouraged by the evident interest of both parties in the proposed amendment.—Washington Star.
[91] Women voting won’t take away from the courteous and respectful attention they receive from men, as demonstrated by how Congress handled the appeals for a Sixteenth Amendment to protect women's rights during one of the most challenging presidential conflicts in our history. In both Houses, the petitions were presented and read in open session with unanimous consent, and prominent senators emphasized the importance of the issue to the Senate.... The women understandably feel encouraged by the clear interest from both parties in the proposed amendment.—Washington Star.
The time has evidently arrived when demands for a recognition of the personal, civil and political rights of one-half—unquestionably the better half—of the people can not be laughed down or sneered down, and recent indications are that they can not much longer be voted down. The speaker of the House set a commendable example by proposing that the petitions be delivered in open session, to which there was no objection. The early advocates of equal rights for women—Hoar, Kelley, Banks, Kasson, Lawrence and Lapham—were, if possible, surpassed in courtesy by those who are not committed, but are beginning to see that a finer element, in the body politic would clear the vision, purify the atmosphere and help to settle many vexed questions on the basis of exact and equal justice. In the Senate the unprecedented courtesy was extended to women of half an hour's time on the floor and while this kind of business has usually been transacted with an attendance of from seven to ten senators, it was observed that only two out of the twenty-six who had Sixteenth Amendment petitions to present were out of their seats.—National Republican.
The time has clearly come when the demands for recognizing the personal, civil, and political rights of half—definitely the better half—of the population can no longer be dismissed or mocked, and recent signs show that they won't be able to vote them down much longer. The Speaker of the House set a great example by suggesting that the petitions be presented in an open session, to which there were no objections. The early supporters of equal rights for women—Hoar, Kelley, Banks, Kasson, Lawrence, and Lapham—were, if anything, outdone in courtesy by those who aren't yet committed but are starting to realize that including a more refined element in the political system would clarify perspectives, improve the environment, and help resolve many complicated issues based on true and equal justice. In the Senate, women were given an unprecedented half-hour on the floor, and while this type of business usually occurs with seven to ten senators present, it was noted that only two of the twenty-six who had petitions for the Sixteenth Amendment were not in their seats.—National Republican.
CHAPTER XXIX.
SENATE COMMITTEE REPORT—PRESS COMMENT.
1879-1880.
At the beginning of 1879 Miss Anthony put all lecture work aside until after the Washington convention, January 9 and 10. The thunderbolts forged by the resolution committee were a little more fiery even than those of former years, and the combined workmanship of the two Vulcans, Mrs. Stanton and Miss Anthony, is quite apparent, with vivid sparks from the chairman, Mrs. Spencer:
At the start of 1879, Miss Anthony paused all lecture work until after the Washington convention on January 9 and 10. The resolutions created by the committee were even more intense than in previous years, and it's clear that the combined efforts of the two leaders, Mrs. Stanton and Miss Anthony, are evident, with lively contributions from the chairwoman, Mrs. Spencer.
Resolved, That the Forty-fifth Congress, in ignoring the individual petitions of more than 300 women of high social standing and culture, asking for the removal of their political disabilities, while promptly enacting special legislation for the removal of those of every man who petitioned, illustrates the indifference of Congress to the rights of a sex deprived of political power.
Resolved, That the Forty-fifth Congress, by ignoring the petitions of over 300 educated women of high social standing who requested the removal of their political restrictions, while quickly passing legislation to remove those for every man who petitioned, shows Congress's disregard for the rights of a gender that is denied political power.
WHEREAS, Senator Blaine says it is the very essence of tyranny to count any citizens in the basis of representation who are denied a voice in the laws and a choice in their rulers; therefore
WHEREAS, Senator Blaine states that it is truly tyrannical to include any citizens in the basis of representation who are denied a voice in laws and a say in their leaders; therefore
Resolved, That counting women in the basis of representation, while denying them the right of suffrage, is compelling them to swell the number of their tyrants and is an unwarrantable usurpation of power over one-half the citizens of this republic.
Resolved, That including women in the basis of representation while denying them the right to vote forces them to increase the number of their oppressors and represents an unjust seizure of power over half the citizens of this republic.
WHEREAS, In President Hayes' last message, he makes a truly paternal review of the interests of this republic, both great and small, from the army, the navy and our foreign relations, to the ten little Indians in Hampton, Va., our timber on the western mountains, and the switches of the Washington railroads; from the Paris Exposition, the postal service, the abundant harvests, and the possible bulldozing of some colored men in various southern districts, to cruelty to live animals and the crowded condition of the mummies, dead ducks and fishes in the Smithsonian Institute—yet forgets to mention 20,000,000 women robbed of their social, civil and political rights; therefore
WHEREAS, In President Hayes' last message, he provides a genuinely paternal overview of the interests of this republic, big and small, from the army, the navy, and our foreign relations, to the ten little Indians in Hampton, Va., our timber in the western mountains, and the rail switches in Washington; from the Paris Exposition, the postal service, the plentiful harvests, and the potential intimidation of some Black men in various southern districts, to the cruelty towards living animals and the overcrowded conditions of the mummies, dead ducks, and fish in the Smithsonian Institute—yet fails to mention 20,000,000 women deprived of their social, civil, and political rights; therefore
Resolved, That a committee of three be appointed to wait upon the President and remind him of the existence of one-half the American people .... 500
Resolved, That a committee of three be appointed to meet with the President and remind him of the presence of half of the American population .... 500
WHEREAS, All the vital principles involved in the Thirteenth, Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments have been denied in their application to women by courts, legislatures and political parties; therefore
WHEREAS, All the essential principles in the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments have been denied in their application to women by courts, legislatures, and political parties; therefore
Resolved, That it is logical that these amendments should fail to protect even the male African for whom said courts, legislatures and parties declare they were expressly designed and enacted.
Resolved, That it is reasonable to conclude that these amendments fail to protect even the male African whom these courts, legislatures, and parties claim they were specifically created and intended to help.
WHEREAS, The general government has refused to exercise federal power to protect women in their right to vote in the various States and Territories; therefore
WHEREAS, The federal government has chosen not to use its power to protect women's voting rights in various States and Territories; therefore
Resolved, That it should forbear to exercise federal power to disfranchise the women of Utah, who have had a more just and liberal spirit shown them by Mormon men than Gentile women in the States have yet received from their rulers.
Resolved, That it should refrain from using federal authority to deny voting rights to the women of Utah, who have received a more fair and generous attitude from Mormon men than Gentile women in the States have received from their leaders.
WHEREAS, The proposed legislation for Chinese women on the Pacific slope and for outcast women in our cities, and the opinion of the press that no respectable woman should be seen in the streets after dark, are all based upon the presumption that woman's freedom must be forever sacrificed to man's license; therefore
WHEREAS, The proposed laws regarding Chinese women on the Pacific Coast and marginalized women in our cities, along with the media's belief that no respectable woman should be out after dark, are all based on the idea that women's freedom must always be compromised for men's desires; therefore
Resolved, That the ballot in woman's hand is the only power by which she can restrain the liberty of those men who make our streets and highways dangerous to her, and secure the freedom which belongs to her by day and by night.
Resolved, That a woman's right to vote is the only power she has to protect herself from the men who make our streets and highways unsafe for her and to ensure the freedom that rightfully belongs to her both during the day and at night.
An address to President Hayes, asking that in his next message he recommend that women should be protected in their civil and political rights, was signed by Mrs. Stanton, Miss Anthony and Mrs. Gage. Several ladies, by appointment, had a private audience in the President's library and a courteous and friendly hearing. The petition for a Sixteenth Amendment was sent in printed form to every member of Congress, presented in the Senate by Vice-President Wheeler and, at the request of Senator Ferry, was read at length and referred to the committee on privileges and elections. This was done by the special desire of its chairman, Senator Oliver P. Morton, of Indiana, who stated that he wished to bring in a report in favor of the amendment.[94]
An appeal to President Hayes, urging him to recommend protection for women's civil and political rights in his next message, was signed by Mrs. Stanton, Miss Anthony, and Mrs. Gage. Several women had a private meeting with the President in his library, where they were received courteously and with kindness. The petition for a Sixteenth Amendment was sent in printed form to every member of Congress, presented in the Senate by Vice-President Wheeler and, at the request of Senator Ferry, was read in detail and referred to the committee on privileges and elections. This was done at the specific request of the committee's chairman, Senator Oliver P. Morton of Indiana, who indicated that he wanted to prepare a report supporting the amendment.[94]

O.P. Morton
O.P. Morton
Before the committee could act upon this question Senator Morton passed away. An adverse report was presented by his successor, Senator Bainbridge Wadleigh, of New Hampshire, June 14, 1878. Among many severe scorings received by this honorable gentleman, the following from Mary Clemmer will serve as an example:
Before the committee could address this issue, Senator Morton passed away. An unfavorable report was presented by his successor, Senator Bainbridge Wadleigh of New Hampshire, on June 14, 1878. Among the many harsh criticisms directed at this respected gentleman, the following from Mary Clemmer serves as an example:
... You can not be unconscious of the fact that a new race of women is born into the world who, while they lack no womanly attribute, are the peers of any man in intellect and aspiration. It will be impossible long to deny to such women that equality before the law granted to the lowest creature that crawls, if he happen to be a man; denied to the highest creature that asks it, if she happen to be a woman.
... You can't overlook the fact that a new generation of women is rising up who, while embodying all the qualities of womanhood, are just as intelligent and ambitious as any man. It won’t be long before you can’t deny these women the same legal rights that are granted to even the lowest male, while the highest female is still denied them.
On what authority, save that of the gross regality of physical strength, do you deny to a thoughtful, educated, tax-paying person the common rights of citizenship because she is a woman? I am a property-owner, the head of a household. By what right do you assume to define and curtail for me my prerogatives as a citizen, while as a tax-payer you make not the slightest distinction between me and a man? Leave to my own perception what is proper for me as a lady, to my own discretion what is wise for me as a woman, to my own conscience what is my duty to my race and to my God. Leave to unerring nature to protect the subtle boundaries which define the distinctive life and action of the sexes, while you as a legislator do everything in your power to secure to every creature of God an equal chance to make the best and most of himself.
On what authority, beyond simple physical strength, do you deny a thoughtful, educated, tax-paying individual the basic rights of citizenship just because she is a woman? I own property and manage a household. By what right do you restrict my rights as a citizen, while as a taxpayer, you treat me the same as a man? Let me determine what’s right for me as a woman, what’s wise for me, and what my responsibilities are to my community and my faith. Trust nature to uphold the natural differences that define the unique lives and actions of men and women, while you, as a lawmaker, do everything in your power to ensure that everyone has an equal chance to achieve their full potential.
If American men could say, as Huxley says, "I scorn to lay a single obstacle in the way of those whom nature from the beginning has so heavily burdened," the sexes would cease to war, men and women would reign together, the equal companions, friends, helpers and lovers that nature intended they should be. But what is love, tenderness, protection, even, unless rooted in justice? Tyranny and servitude, that is all, brute supremacy, spiritual slavery. By what authority do you say that the country is not prepared for a more enlightened franchise, for political equality, if even six women citizens, earnest, eloquent, long-suffering, come to you and demand both?
If American men could say, like Huxley does, "I refuse to put any obstacles in the way of those whom nature has burdened from the start," then the conflict between the sexes would end, and men and women would work together as equal partners, friends, supporters, and lovers, just as nature intended. But what are love, tenderness, protection, or anything else, if they aren’t based on justice? They’re just tyranny and oppression, pure dominance, and spiritual enslavement. By what authority do you argue that the country isn't ready for a more progressive voting system or political equality, even when six women citizens, who are sincere, articulate, and have suffered for so long, come to you and demand both?
All the women's papers expressed indignation, and there was general rejoicing when, at the next election, Mr. Wadleigh was superseded by Hon. Henry W. Blair.
All the women's newspapers showed outrage, and there was widespread celebration when, in the next election, Mr. Wadleigh was replaced by Hon. Henry W. Blair.
The first favorable consideration this question ever received from the Senate was the minority report of this committee, 502 signed by Senators George F. Hoar, John H. Mitchell and Angus Cameron, an unanswerable argument for the enfranchisement of women.[95] It declared that "the people of the United States are committed to the doctrine of universal suffrage by their constitution, their history and their opinions, and by it they must stand or fall." One week later the bill admitting women to practice before the Supreme Court passed the Senate, grandly advocated by Senators McDonald, Sargent and Hoar.
The first positive attention this issue ever got from the Senate was the minority report from this committee, 502 signed by Senators George F. Hoar, John H. Mitchell, and Angus Cameron, which made a compelling case for women's voting rights.[95] It stated that "the people of the United States are committed to the principle of universal suffrage through their constitution, history, and beliefs, and they must uphold it or face the consequences." A week later, the bill allowing women to practice before the Supreme Court passed the Senate, strongly supported by Senators McDonald, Sargent, and Hoar.

Geo F Hoar
Geo F. Hoar
After the convention Miss Anthony went to Tenafly with Mrs. Stanton for a few days, to aid in disentangling the mass of material which was being prepared for the History; then started again into the lecture field, commencing at Skowhegan, Me. She lectured through New Hampshire and Vermont, taking long sleigh-rides from point to point, through wind and sleet, but comforted by the thought that many of her audience had done likewise to receive the gospel she preached. On her way westward she stopped at home for one short day, the first for four months, and then started on the old route through the States of the Middle West, this year adding Kentucky to the list. It is not essential to a full appreciation of her work to follow in detail these tours, which extended through a number of years and were full of pleasant as well as disagreeable features; nor is it possible to quote extensively the comments of the press. Miss Anthony undoubtedly has been as widely written up as any lecturer, and she seldom received less than a column in each paper of every town visited. Large numbers of these notices have been carefully preserved in those wonderful scrap-books which cover a period of fifty years.
After the convention, Miss Anthony went to Tenafly with Mrs. Stanton for a few days to help sort through the huge amount of material being prepared for the History. Then she hit the lecture circuit again, starting in Skowhegan, Maine. She lectured throughout New Hampshire and Vermont, enjoying long sleigh rides from one place to another, braving the wind and sleet, but comforting herself with the thought that many in her audience had also made the effort to hear the message she shared. On her way west, she stopped at home for just one short day, the first in four months, and then set off again on the familiar route through the Middle West, adding Kentucky to her itinerary this year. It’s not necessary to follow her tours in detail to fully appreciate her work; these trips spanned several years and included plenty of enjoyable moments as well as some unpleasant ones. It’s also not possible to extensively quote the press comments. Miss Anthony has definitely been covered as widely as any lecturer, usually receiving at least a column in each local paper. Many of these articles have been carefully kept in those amazing scrapbooks that cover a fifty-year span.
At first her demands seemed so radical and the idea of a woman on the platform was so contrary to the precedent of all the ages, that the tone of the press, almost without exception, was contemptuous or denunciatory. As the justice of her 503 claims began to dawn upon the minds of enlightened people, as many other prominent women joined in advocating the same reforms, and as these were adopted, one after another, without serious consequences, the public mind awakened to the remarkable change which was being wrought, and in a large measure gave its approval. When the masses of people throughout the country came to see and hear and know Miss Anthony, they resented the way in which she had been misrepresented. There was in her manner and words so much of dignity, earnestness and sincerity that "those who came to scoff remained to pray," and this change of sentiment was nowhere so marked as in the newspapers. Even those who differed radically from her views paid tribute to the persistence with which she had urged them and the sacrifices she had made for them during the past thirty years. Not only had there been developed a recognition of her high purposes and noble life, but also of her great intellectual ability and clear comprehension of all the issues of the day. An extract from the Terre Haute Express, February 12, 1879, illustrates this:
At first, her demands seemed so extreme, and the idea of a woman on the platform was so against the norm of all past ages, that the media, almost universally, responded with contempt or criticism. As the fairness of her 503 claims began to resonate with more open-minded people, as many other prominent women joined in supporting the same reforms, and as these changes were adopted one by one without serious consequences, public opinion started to recognize the significant shift that was happening and largely supported it. When people across the country came to see, hear, and learn about Miss Anthony, they were upset by how she had been misrepresented. Her demeanor and words exuded dignity, earnestness, and sincerity, leading to the saying that "those who came to scoff remained to pray." This shift in sentiment was especially notable in newspapers. Even those who fundamentally disagreed with her views acknowledged the determination with which she had championed them and the sacrifices she had made for them over the past thirty years. Not only did people come to appreciate her noble intentions and admirable life, but also her considerable intellectual capabilities and clear understanding of all the current issues. An excerpt from the Terre Haute Express, February 12, 1879, illustrates this:
Miss Anthony's lecture was full of fine passages and strong appeals, and replete with well-stated facts in support of her arguments. She has wonderful command of language, and her speech at times flows with such rapidity that no reporter could do her justice or catch a tithe of the brilliance of her sayings. Moreover, there are not half of our public men who are nearly so well posted in the political affairs of our country as she, or who, knowing them, could frame them so solidly in argument. If the women of the nation were half so high-minded or even half so earnest, their title to the franchise might soon be granted.[96]
Miss Anthony's lecture was full of great points and powerful arguments, filled with well-presented facts that backed up her claims. She has an incredible command of language, and her speech often flows so fast that no reporter could fully capture her brilliance. Additionally, very few public leaders are as knowledgeable about our country’s political issues as she is, or can articulate them as effectively. If the women of the nation were even half as principled or sincere, they might soon gain the right to vote.[96]
Another Indiana paper thus voiced the changing sentiment: "The fact is, that like the advance agent of any great reform—especially if a woman—Susan B. Anthony has been so belied and maligned by the press in years gone by that many who do not stop to think had come to believe her a perfect ogre, a cross-grained, incongruous old maid whom nobody could like, when the truth of the matter is, one has but to look at and 504 listen to her, either in public or private, to realize that she is a pure, generous, deep-thinking, womanly woman. Simply because she has lived her own life, spoken her own thoughts and stood upon her own platform, the masses have condemned her; but history has already recorded her as one of the most earnest, hard-working reformers of the day. If the women of this country only knew how many changes and ameliorations have been made in the laws regarding themselves through her unselfish, persistent efforts, at her approach they would all rise up and call her blessed." But that there still existed editors of the old-time caliber, this extract from the Richmond, Ky., Herald, October 29, 1879, shows:
Another Indiana newspaper expressed the changing attitude: "The truth is, just like the advance agent of any major reform—especially if it’s a woman—Susan B. Anthony has been so misrepresented and slandered by the press over the years that many who don’t take the time to think have come to see her as a real monster, a cantankerous, mismatched old maid whom nobody could like. But the reality is, if you just look at her and listen, whether in public or private, you’ll see that she is a kind, generous, thoughtful, and very feminine woman. Simply because she has lived her own life, voiced her own opinions, and stood on her own values, the public has judged her harshly; however, history has already recognized her as one of the most dedicated and hardworking reformers of her time. If the women in this country truly understood how many changes and improvements have been made in the laws affecting them thanks to her selfless, relentless efforts, they would all rise up and call her blessed." That there are still editors of the old-school type is evidenced by this excerpt from the Richmond, Ky., Herald, October 29, 1879:
Miss Anthony is above the medium height for women, dresses plainly, is uncomely in person, has rather coarse, rugged features and masculine manners. Her piece, which doubtless she has been studying for thirty or forty years, was very well delivered for a woman, containing no original thought, but full of old hackneyed ideas, which every female suffrage shrieker has hurled from the stump against "ignorant men and small boys," for time out of mind all over this country and every other country where they could command an audience of curious people willing to throw away an hour or two on a vain, futile and foolish harangue, proposing to transform men into women and women into men. Such dissatisfied females should not hurl anathemas at men, forsooth, because they happened to be born into the world women instead of men. God alone is responsible for the difference between the sexes, and he is able to bear it. Men are not to blame that women are women, for there is not a man in this whole land who wouldn't rather have a boy baby than a gal baby any time. There never was a newly-married man when he learned that his first born was a girl, that didn't try to tear out his hair by the roots because it wasn't a boy.... If this tirade against men is to be persisted in, we see no escape for man except to quit his foolishness and have no more children, unless he can have some sort of guarantee that they will all be boys. It will have come to a strange pass indeed when the good women of this land, who, as mothers, have the nurture, training and admonition of every boy from his cradle to mature manhood, are unwilling to trust in the hands of their own offspring the destinies of the nation.
Miss Anthony is taller than average for women, dresses simply, isn't conventionally attractive, has somewhat rough, rugged features, and displays a slightly masculine demeanor. Her speech, which she's likely been preparing for thirty or forty years, was well delivered for a woman. It didn't contain any original ideas but was filled with familiar arguments that every female suffrage advocate has thrown out against "ignorant men and small boys" for ages, across this country and anywhere else there was an audience willing to waste an hour or two on a pointless and foolish speech aimed at reversing gender roles. These unhappy women shouldn't blame men just because they were born female instead of male. God alone is responsible for the differences between the sexes, and He can handle it. Men aren’t to blame for women being women, because there's not a man in this country who wouldn't prefer to have a baby boy rather than a baby girl. There’s never been a newly-married man who, upon finding out his firstborn is a girl, didn't feel like tearing his hair out because it wasn't a boy... If this attack on men continues, we see no way for men to escape except to stop having children altogether, unless they can ensure that all their children will be boys. It would be quite strange indeed if the good women of this country, who as mothers nurture, train, and guide every boy from infancy to adulthood, are unwilling to trust their own children with the future of the nation.
That such an attack can not be attributed to sectional prejudice may be proved by this extract from a column of vituperation in the Grand Rapids, Mich., Times, during this same trip, headed "Spinster Susan's Suffrage Show:"
That such an attack cannot be blamed on regional bias can be shown by this excerpt from a column filled with insults in the Grand Rapids, Mich., Times, during this same trip, titled "Spinster Susan's Suffrage Show:"
A "miss" of an uncertain number of years, more or less brains, a slimsy 505 figure, nut-cracker face and store teeth, goes raiding about the country attempting to teach mothers and wives their duty.... As is the yellow-fever to the South, the grasshopper to the plains, and diphtheria to our northern cities, so is Susan B. Anthony and her class to all true, pure, lovely women. The sirocco of the desert blows no hotter or more tainting breath in the face of the traveller, than does this woman against all men who do not believe as she does, and no pestilence makes sadder havoc among them than would Susan B. Anthony if she had the power. The women who make homes, who are sources of comfort to husbands, fathers, brothers, sisters or themselves, who wish to keep sacred all that goes to make their lives noble, refined and worth the living, will be as diametrically opposed to the lecturer of last evening as are most intelligent men. Susan B. Anthony may find her remedy in suffrage, but alas! there is no remedy for us against Susan and her ilk.
A woman of indeterminate age, with a not-so-bright mind, a slight 505 physique, a pinched face, and a fake smile, is traveling around the country trying to teach mothers and wives what they should do.... Just like yellow fever in the South, grasshoppers on the plains, and diphtheria in our northern cities, Susan B. Anthony and her group pose a threat to all true, pure, and lovely women. The desert wind doesn't blow any harder or more dangerously than this woman does against all men who don’t share her beliefs, and no disease causes more damage among them than Susan B. Anthony would if she had the chance. Women who create homes, who provide comfort to their husbands, fathers, brothers, sisters, or themselves, and who want to keep everything that makes their lives noble, refined, and worthwhile, will be just as opposed to the speaker from last night as most intelligent men are. While Susan B. Anthony may see her solution in the right to vote, unfortunately, there's no solution for us against Susan and her kind.
Each lecture usually was followed by letters not only from friends but from entire strangers, asking her forgiveness for having misjudged her so many years, and closing something like this from a lady in St. Paul, Minn.: "For the last ten years your name has been familiar to me through the newspapers, or rather through newspaper ridicule, and has always been associated with what was pretentious and wholly unamiable. Your lecture tonight has been a revelation to me. I wanted to come and touch your hand, but I felt too guilty. Henceforth I am the avowed defender of woman suffrage. Never again shall a word of mine be heard derogatory to the noble women who are working with heart and hand for the best welfare of humanity."
Each lecture was usually followed by letters not just from friends, but also from complete strangers, asking her forgiveness for misjudging her all those years. One letter came from a lady in St. Paul, Minnesota, which closed with something like this: "For the last ten years, I’ve seen your name in the newspapers, or rather in newspaper ridicule, and it has always been linked to something pretentious and completely unlikable. Your lecture tonight has opened my eyes. I wanted to come up and shake your hand, but I felt too guilty. From now on, I’m a dedicated supporter of women’s suffrage. I will never again say anything negative about the incredible women who are tirelessly working for the greater good of humanity."
A two-column interview in the Chicago Tribune during this tour gives Miss Anthony's views on many public matters, concluding thus:
A two-column interview in the Chicago Tribune during this tour shares Miss Anthony's opinions on various public issues, concluding with:
"If men would only think of the question without paying attention to prejudice or precedent, simply as one of political economy, they would soon begin to regard woman, and woman's rights, just as they regard themselves and their own rights," said she.
"If men would just think about the issue without letting bias or tradition get in the way, looking at it purely as a matter of political economy, they would soon start to view women and women's rights the same way they view themselves and their own rights," she said.
"The W.C.T.U. are doing good work, are they not?"
"The W.C.T.U. is doing great work, aren't they?"
"Yes, Miss Willard is doing noble work, but I can not coincide with her views, and my new lecture, 'Will Home Protection Protect,' will combat them. The officer who holds his position by the votes of men who want free whiskey, can not prosecute the whiskey-sellers. The district-attorney and the judge can not enforce the law when they know that to do so will defeat them at the next election. If women had votes the officials would no longer 506 fear to enforce the law, as they would know that though they lost the votes of 5,000 whiskey-sellers and drinkers, they would gain those of 20,000 women. Miss Willard has a lever, but she has no fulcrum on which to place it."
"Yes, Miss Willard is doing important work, but I don't agree with her views, and my new lecture, 'Will Home Protection Protect,' will challenge those ideas. An officer who keeps his job because of votes from people wanting free alcohol can’t go after the alcohol dealers. The district attorney and the judge can’t enforce the law when they know it will hurt their chances in the next election. If women could vote, officials wouldn’t hesitate to enforce the law, knowing that even if they lost votes from 5,000 alcohol dealers and drinkers, they would gain the support of 20,000 women. Miss Willard has a lever, but she has no fulcrum to place it on."
"Where do you find the strongest antipathy to woman suffrage?"
"Where do you see the strongest opposition to women's right to vote?"
"In the fears of various parties that it might he disastrous to their interests. The Protestants fear it lest there should be a majority of Catholic women to increase the power of that church; the free-thinkers are afraid that, as the majority of church-members are women, they would put God in the Constitution; the free-whiskey men are opposed because they think women would vote down their interests; the Republicans would put a suffrage plank in their platform if they knew they could secure the majority vote of the women, and so would the Democrats, but each party fears the result might help the other. Thus, you see, we can not appeal to the self-interest of anybody and this is our great source of weakness."
"In the fears of different groups that it might hurt their interests. The Protestants are worried that there might be a majority of Catholic women who could boost that church's influence; the free-thinkers are concerned that, since most church members are women, they would push for God to be included in the Constitution; the free-whiskey supporters are against it because they believe women would vote against their interests; the Republicans would add a suffrage plank to their platform if they thought they could win the majority vote from women, and the same applies to the Democrats, but each party fears that the outcome might benefit the other. So, as you can see, we can't rely on anyone's self-interest, and this is our major vulnerability."
It was decided to bold this year's May Anniversary in St. Louis instead of New York, and all arrangements having been made by Virginia L. Minor and Phoebe Couzins, the convention opened formally on the evening of May 7, to quote the newspapers, "in the presence of a magnificent audience which packed every part of St. George's Hall, crowding gallery and stairs and leaving hardly standing room in the aisles." They also paid many compliments to the intellectual character of the audience, its evident sympathy with the cause for which the convention was assembled, and the elegant costumes worn by the ladies both in the body of the house and on the platform. Mrs. Minor presided and a beautiful address of welcome was delivered by Miss Couzins. The ladies were invited to the Merchants' Exchange by its president, and also visited the Fair grounds by invitation of the board. Miss Couzins gave a reception at her home, and the evening before the convention opened, Mrs. Minor entertained the delegates informally. Of this latter occasion the Globe-Democrat said:
It was decided to hold this year's May Anniversary in St. Louis instead of New York. With all arrangements made by Virginia L. Minor and Phoebe Couzins, the convention officially opened on the evening of May 7. According to the newspapers, it was "in the presence of a magnificent audience that packed every part of St. George's Hall, crowding the gallery and stairs, leaving hardly any standing room in the aisles." They also praised the intellectual quality of the audience, their clear support for the cause the convention represented, and the elegant outfits worn by the women both in the audience and on the platform. Mrs. Minor presided over the event, and Miss Couzins delivered a lovely welcome address. The ladies were invited to the Merchants' Exchange by its president and also visited the Fair grounds at the invitation of the board. Miss Couzins hosted a reception at her home, and the evening before the convention started, Mrs. Minor entertained the delegates informally. The Globe-Democrat commented on this latter event:
Miss Susan B. Anthony, perhaps the only lady present of national reputation, commanded attention at a glance. Her face is one which would attract notice anywhere; full of energy, character and intellect, the strong lines soften on a closer inspection. There is a good deal that is "pure womanly" in the face which has been held up to the country so often as a gaunt and hungry specter's crying for universal war upon mankind. The spectacles sit upon a nose strong enough to be masculine, but hide eyes which can beam with kindliness as well as flash with wit, irony and satire. Angular she may 507 be—"angular as a Lebanon Shakeress" she said the New York Herald once termed her—but if so, the irregularities of outline were completely hidden under the folds of the modest and dignified black silk which covered her most becomingly.
Miss Susan B. Anthony, likely the only nationally recognized woman present, immediately captured everyone's attention. Her face is one that stands out anywhere; it's full of energy, character, and intelligence, and her strong features soften upon closer inspection. There’s a lot of what’s “purely feminine” in her expression, which has often been depicted nationwide as a haunting figure urging for a universal fight for humanity. The glasses rest on a nose strong enough to seem masculine, yet they hide eyes that shine with kindness and sparkle with wit, irony, and satire. She may be angular—once described by the New York Herald as “angular as a Lebanon Shakeress”—but if that’s true, any irregularities in her shape were completely concealed by the elegant and respectful black silk that draped her so attractively.
At this convention occurred that touching scene which has been so often described, when May Wright Sewall presented Miss Anthony, to her complete surprise, with a beautiful floral offering from the delegates. The Globe-Democrat thus reports:
At this convention, there was a heartfelt moment that has been described many times, when May Wright Sewall unexpectedly presented Miss Anthony with a lovely floral gift from the delegates. The Globe-Democrat reports:
Miss Anthony, visibly affected, responded: "Mrs. President and Friends: I am not accustomed to demonstrations of gratitude or of praise. I don't know how to behave tonight. Had you thrown stones at me, had you called me hard names, had you said I should not speak, had you declared I had done women more harm than good and deserved to be burned at the stake; had you done anything, or said anything, against the cause which I have tried to serve for the last thirty years, I should have known how to answer, but now I do not. I have been as a hewer of wood and a drawer of water to this movement. I know nothing and have known nothing of oratory or rhetoric. Whatever I have done has been done because I wanted to see better conditions, better surroundings, better circumstances for women. Now, friends, don't expect me to make any proper acknowledgments for such a demonstration as has been made here tonight. I can not; I am overwhelmed."
Miss Anthony, clearly moved, replied: "Mrs. President and Friends: I'm not used to being shown gratitude or praise. I don’t know how to handle this tonight. If you had thrown stones at me, called me awful names, told me I shouldn’t speak, or claimed I’ve caused more harm to women than good and deserved punishment; if you had done or said anything against the cause I’ve dedicated the last thirty years to, I would have known how to react. But right now, I don’t. I have been like someone chopping wood and carrying water for this movement. I know nothing about public speaking or rhetoric. Everything I've done has been out of a desire to see better conditions, environments, and circumstances for women. Now, friends, don’t expect me to properly acknowledge the demonstration that’s happened here tonight. I can’t; I am overwhelmed."
As the association wished to continue Mrs. Stanton at the head, they created the office of vice-president-at-large and elected Miss Anthony to fill it. Senator Sargent's term having expired, he returned with his family to San Francisco, and Mrs. Jane H. Spofford was elected national treasurer in place of Mrs. Sargent, who had served so acceptably for six years. Her return to California was deeply regretted by Miss Anthony. From the time of their first acquaintance, on that long snow-bound journey in 1871, they had been devoted friends, and on all her annual trips to Washington she was a guest at the spacious and comfortable home of the Sargents. The senator always was a true and consistent friend of suffrage, and frequently said to Miss Anthony: "Tell my wife what you want done and, if she indorses it, I will try to bring it about." Mrs. Sargent was of a serene, philosophical nature, with an unwavering faith in the evolution of humanity into a broader and better life. She was thoroughly without personal 508 ends to serve, ready to receive new ideas and those who brought them, weigh them carefully in her well-balanced mind and pronounce the judgment which was usually correct. The closing of their Washington house was a severe loss to the many who had enjoyed their free and gracious hospitality.
As the association wanted Mrs. Stanton to continue leading, they created the position of vice-president-at-large and elected Miss Anthony to take it. With Senator Sargent's term ending, he returned with his family to San Francisco, and Mrs. Jane H. Spofford was elected national treasurer to replace Mrs. Sargent, who had served admirably for six years. Miss Anthony deeply regretted Mrs. Sargent's return to California. From their first meeting during that long, snowbound journey in 1871, they had been close friends, and every year on her trips to Washington, Miss Anthony was a guest at the spacious and comfortable Sargent home. The senator was always a true and consistent supporter of suffrage, often telling Miss Anthony, "Tell my wife what you want done, and if she agrees, I’ll make it happen." Mrs. Sargent had a calm and philosophical nature, with an unwavering belief in humanity's growth towards a broader and better life. She had no personal goals to fulfill, always open to new ideas and those who brought them, considering them thoughtfully in her balanced mind and usually offering the right judgment. The closing of their home in Washington was a significant loss for all those who had enjoyed their warm and generous hospitality.
On May 24, 1879, Miss Anthony received notice of the death of her old and revered fellow-laborer, Wm. Lloyd Garrison. She could not attend the funeral but wrote at once, saying in part:
On May 24, 1879, Miss Anthony got the news about the death of her old and respected colleague, Wm. Lloyd Garrison. She wasn’t able to attend the funeral but immediately wrote, saying in part:
The telegrams of the last few days had prepared us for this morning's tidings that your dear father and humanity's devoted friend had passed on to the beyond, where so many of his brave co-workers had gone before; and where his devoted life-companion, your precious mother, awaited his coming.... It is impossible for me to express my feelings of love and respect, of honor and gratitude, for the life, the words, the works, of your father; but you all know, I trust, that few mortals had greater veneration for him than I. His approbation was my delight; his disapproval, my regret.... That each and all of you may strive to be to the injustice of your day and generation what he was to that of his, is the best wish—the best aspiration—I can offer. Blessed are you indeed, that you mourn so true, so noble, so grand a man as your loved and loving father.
The messages we received over the past few days prepared us for today’s news that your dear father, a true friend to humanity, has passed away, joining many of his brave colleagues who went before him; and where his devoted life partner, your beloved mother, is waiting for him. It's hard for me to fully express my feelings of love, respect, honor, and gratitude for your father's life, words, and deeds; but I hope you all know that few people held him in higher regard than I did. His approval brought me joy, while his disapproval brought me regret. My greatest wish—the best aspiration I can offer—is that each of you strives to confront the injustices of your time just as he did in his. Truly, you are fortunate to mourn such a genuine, noble, and remarkable man as your beloved father.
In her diary that night she wrote: "I sent a letter, but how paltry it seemed compared to what was in my heart. Why can I not put my thought into words?"
In her diary that night she wrote: "I sent a letter, but it felt so inadequate compared to what was in my heart. Why can’t I express my thoughts in words?"
The last of May she went home, having lectured and worked every day since the previous October. She records with much delight that she has now snugly tucked away in bank $4,500, the result of her last two lecture seasons. During the one just closed she spoke 140 nights, besides attending various conventions. This bank account did not represent all she had earned, for she always gave with a lavish hand. How much she has given never can be known, but in the year 1879, for instance, one friend acknowledges the receipt of $50 to enable her to buy a dress and other articles so that she can attend the Washington convention. Another writes: "I have just learned that the $25 you handed me to pay my way home from the meeting had been given you to pay your own." To an old and faithful fellow-worker, now in California, she 509 sends by express a warm flannel wrapper. There is scarcely a month which does not record some gift varying from $100 in value down to a trinket for remembrance. Each year she contributed $100 to the suffrage work, besides many smaller sums at intervals, and the account-books show that her benefactions were many. She never spared money if an end were to be accomplished, and never failed to keep an engagement, no matter at what risk or expense. On several occasions she chartered an engine, even though the cost was more than she would receive for the lecture. As she was now approaching her sixtieth birthday, relatives and friends were most anxious that she should lay aside part of her earnings for a time when even her indomitable spirit might have to succumb to physical weakness, but she herself never seemed to feel any anxiety as to the future.
At the end of May, she went home after lecturing and working every day since the previous October. She happily notes that she has saved up $4,500 in the bank, the result of her last two lecture seasons. During the most recent season, she spoke for 140 nights, alongside attending various conventions. This bank account didn’t reflect all her earnings since she was always generous. The exact amount she has given can never be known, but for example, in 1879, one friend acknowledged receiving $50 to help her buy a dress and other items to attend the Washington convention. Another person wrote, “I just found out that the $25 you gave me to cover my way home from the meeting had been given to you to cover your own.” To an old and devoted colleague now in California, she 509 sent a warm flannel wrapper by express. There is hardly a month without some gift ranging from $100 in value down to a small keepsake. Each year, she donated $100 to the suffrage cause, along with many other smaller contributions from time to time, and the accounting records show that her donations were numerous. She never hesitated to spend money if it meant achieving a goal and always kept her commitments, no matter the risk or cost. On several occasions, she even chartered an engine, even though the expense was more than she would make from the lecture. As she neared her sixtieth birthday, her relatives and friends were eager for her to save some of her earnings for a time when even her unyielding spirit might face physical limitations, but she herself never appeared to worry about the future.
Notwithstanding her own disastrous experiment, Miss Anthony never ceased to desire a woman's paper, one which not only should present the questions relating directly to women but should be edited and controlled entirely by women, and discuss all the issues of the day. Scattered through the correspondence of years are letters on this subject, either wanting to resurrect The Revolution or to start a new paper. At intervals some wealthy woman would seem half-inclined to advance money for the purpose and then hope would be revived, only to be again destroyed. During the summer of 1872 a clever journalist, Mrs. Helen Barnard, had edited a paper called the Woman's Campaign, supported by Republican funds. Miss Anthony had hoped to convert this into her ideal paper after the election, and spent considerable time in trying to form a stock company. A large amount was subscribed but not enough, and all was returned by Mrs. Sargent, then national treasurer. Sarah L. Williams, editor of the woman's department of the Toledo Blade, started a bright suffrage paper called the Ballot-Box and edited it for several years. Miss Anthony assisted her in every possible way, and spoiled the effect of many a fine speech by asking at its close for subscribers to this paper. In 1878, '79 and '80 she secured 2,500 names. In 510 1878 Mrs. Williams turned her paper over to Matilda Joslyn Gage, who added National Citizen to the title. Miss Anthony's and Mrs. Stanton's names were placed at the head as corresponding editors, and the paper was ably conducted by Mrs. Gage, but it had not the financial backing necessary to success; when Miss Anthony ceased lecturing, new subscribers no longer came and, after much tribulation, it finally suspended in 1881.
Despite her own failed attempt, Miss Anthony never stopped wanting a women's paper—one that would not only address the issues affecting women directly but also be completely edited and run by women, discussing all the relevant topics of the day. Throughout the years, there are letters scattered in the correspondence that either sought to revive The Revolution or to launch a new publication. Occasionally, a wealthy woman would seem somewhat inclined to fund the project, which would temporarily boost hopes, only for them to be dashed again. In the summer of 1872, a talented journalist, Mrs. Helen Barnard, edited a paper called the Woman's Campaign, backed by Republican funds. Miss Anthony hoped to transform it into her dream publication after the election and spent a lot of time trying to set up a stock company. A significant amount of money was pledged, but it wasn’t enough, and all funds were returned by Mrs. Sargent, who was the national treasurer at the time. Sarah L. Williams, who edited the women's section of the Toledo Blade, started an engaging suffrage newspaper called the Ballot-Box and ran it for several years. Miss Anthony helped her in every way possible and often undermined many great speeches by asking for subscribers to this paper at the end. In 1878, '79, and '80, she collected 2,500 names. In 510 1878, Mrs. Williams handed over her paper to Matilda Joslyn Gage, who added National Citizen to the title. Miss Anthony's and Mrs. Stanton's names were listed at the top as corresponding editors, and the paper was skillfully managed by Mrs. Gage, but it lacked the financial support needed for success. When Miss Anthony stopped lecturing, new subscribers stopped coming, and after much struggle, it ultimately ceased publication in 1881.
While Miss Anthony continued for many years to cherish this idea of a distinctively woman's paper, the daily press grew more and more liberal, devoting larger space to the interests of women every year, and she became of the opinion that possibly the most effective work might be accomplished through this medium. She held, however, that there should be one woman upon each paper whose special business it should be to look after this department, and who should be permitted to discuss not only the "woman question" but all others from a woman's standpoint. As newspapers are now managed, the readers have only man's views of all the vital issues attracting public attention. Woman occupies a subordinate position and must write on all subjects in a spirit which will be acceptable to the masculine head of the paper; so the public gets in reality his thought and not hers. She had come to see, also, that the newspaper work should be a leading and distinctive feature of the National Association to a far greater extent than hitherto had been attempted, and which, until of late years, had not been possible. No man or woman ever had a higher opinion of the influence of the press, which she considered the most powerful agency in the world for good or for evil.
While Miss Anthony continued for many years to hold onto the idea of a paper specifically for women, the daily press became increasingly progressive, dedicating more space to women's interests each year. She started to think that the most effective work might actually be done through this medium. However, she believed that there should be at least one woman on each paper responsible for overseeing this area and who would be allowed to discuss not just the "woman question" but all issues from a woman's perspective. As newspapers are currently run, readers only get men's views on critical issues capturing public interest. Women are in a subordinate role and have to write about all topics in a way that fits the masculine leadership of the paper, meaning the public primarily hears his thoughts rather than hers. She also realized that newspaper work should be a major and distinct focus of the National Association, much more than it had been in the past, which hadn't really been feasible until recent years. No one ever had a higher regard for the impact of the press, which she viewed as the most influential tool in the world, for better or worse.
In the summer of 1879, Miss Anthony received from her friend, A. Bronson Alcott, a complimentary ticket for three seasons of lectures at the Concord School of Philosophy; but the living questions of the day were too pressing for her to withdraw to this classic and sequestered retreat, outside the busy and practical world.
In the summer of 1879, Miss Anthony got a complimentary ticket for three seasons of lectures at the Concord School of Philosophy from her friend, A. Bronson Alcott. However, the important issues of the day were too urgent for her to step back into this classic and secluded retreat, away from the busy and practical world.

A. Bronson Alcott
A. Bronson Alcott
During the decade from 1870 to 1880, there was a large 511 accession of valuable workers to the cause of woman suffrage and many new friends came into Miss Anthony's life. Among these were May Wright Sewall; the sisters, Julia and Rachel Foster; Clara B. Colby; Zerelda G. Wallace; Frances E. Willard; J. Ellen Foster; the wife and three talented daughters of Cassius M. Clay, Mary B., Laura and Sallie Clay Bennett; M. Louise Thomas; Elizabeth Boynton Harbert and others, who became her devoted adherents and fellow-workers, and whose homes and hospitality she enjoyed during all the years which followed.
During the decade from 1870 to 1880, many valuable advocates joined the woman suffrage movement, and Miss Anthony welcomed numerous new friends into her life. Among them were May Wright Sewall; sisters Julia and Rachel Foster; Clara B. Colby; Zerelda G. Wallace; Frances E. Willard; J. Ellen Foster; Mary B., Laura, and Sallie Clay Bennett, the wife and three talented daughters of Cassius M. Clay; M. Louise Thomas; Elizabeth Boynton Harbert; and others who became her dedicated supporters and collaborators, enjoying their hospitality throughout the years that followed.
At the close of her lecture season in 1879 she was able to spend Christmas and New Year's at her own home for the first time in many years; but she left on January 2 to fill engagements, reaching Washington on the eve of the National Convention, which assembled at Lincoln Hall, January 21, 1880. As Mrs. Stanton was absent, Miss Anthony presided over the sessions. During this meeting, 250 new petitions for a Sixteenth Amendment, signed by over 12,000 women, were sent to Congress, besides over 300 petitions from individual women praying for a removal of their political disabilities. These were presented by sixty-five different representatives. Hon. T.W. Ferry, of Michigan, in the Senate, and Hon. George B. Loring, of Massachusetts, in the House, introduced a resolution for a Sixteenth Amendment. This with all the petitions was referred to the judiciary committees, each of which granted a hearing of two hours to the ladies. Among the delegates who addressed them was Julia Smith Parker, of Glastonbury, Conn., at that time over eighty years old, who with her sister Abby annually resisted the payment of taxes because they were denied representation, and whose property was in consequence annually seized and sold. Mrs. Zerelda G. Wallace, the mother so beautifully pictured in Ben Hur, addressed a congressional committee for the first time, and among the other speakers were Mrs. Gage, Mrs. Blake, Miss Couzins, Mrs. Emma Mont McRae, of Indiana, and Mrs. Elizabeth Lyle Saxon, of Louisiana. It was at this hearing that Senator Edmunds complimented Miss Anthony by saying, 512 "Most speeches on this question are platform oratory; yours is argument." Through the influence of Hon. E.G. Lapham, all these addresses were printed in pamphlet form.
At the end of her lecture season in 1879, she was finally able to spend Christmas and New Year's at her own home for the first time in many years. However, she left on January 2 to fulfill commitments, arriving in Washington on the eve of the National Convention, which took place at Lincoln Hall on January 21, 1880. With Mrs. Stanton absent, Miss Anthony led the sessions. During this meeting, 250 new petitions for a Sixteenth Amendment, signed by over 12,000 women, were sent to Congress, along with over 300 petitions from individual women asking for the removal of their political disabilities. These were presented by sixty-five different representatives. Hon. T.W. Ferry from Michigan, and Hon. George B. Loring from Massachusetts, introduced a resolution for a Sixteenth Amendment. This, along with all the petitions, was referred to the judiciary committees, each of which allowed a two-hour hearing for the ladies. One of the delegates who spoke to them was Julia Smith Parker from Glastonbury, Conn., who was over eighty years old at the time and, along with her sister Abby, annually resisted paying taxes because they were denied representation, resulting in their property being seized and sold each year. Mrs. Zerelda G. Wallace, the mother beautifully portrayed in Ben Hur, addressed a congressional committee for the first time, and other speakers included Mrs. Gage, Mrs. Blake, Miss Couzins, Mrs. Emma Mont McRae from Indiana, and Mrs. Elizabeth Lyle Saxon from Louisiana. During this hearing, Senator Edmunds complimented Miss Anthony by saying, 512 "Most speeches on this issue are just rhetoric; yours is actual argument." Thanks to the influence of Hon. E.G. Lapham, all these speeches were printed in pamphlet form.
During this convention Miss Anthony was the guest of Mrs. Spofford, whose husband was proprietor of the Riggs House. The place of hostess, which had been so beautifully filled by Mrs. Sargent, was assumed at once by Mrs. Spofford, a lady of culture and position. For twelve years a suite of rooms was set apart for Miss Anthony in this commodious hotel whenever she was at the capital, whether for days or for months, and she received every possible courtesy and attention, without price. Miss Anthony wrote her many times: "You can not begin to know what a blessing your home is to me, or how grateful I am to you for its comfort and luxury. You are indeed Mrs. Sargent's successor in love and hospitality, and my hope is always to deserve them."
During this convention, Miss Anthony was a guest of Mrs. Spofford, whose husband owned the Riggs House. The role of hostess, which had previously been so wonderfully filled by Mrs. Sargent, was immediately taken on by Mrs. Spofford, a woman of culture and status. For twelve years, a suite of rooms was reserved for Miss Anthony in this spacious hotel whenever she was in the capital, whether for days or months, and she received every possible courtesy and attention, free of charge. Miss Anthony wrote to her many times: "You can’t begin to understand what a blessing your home is to me, or how grateful I am for its comfort and luxury. You truly are Mrs. Sargent's successor in love and hospitality, and I always hope to be worthy of them."
After a brilliant reception at the Riggs House to the delegates, Miss Anthony left for Philadelphia, in company with the venerable Julia Smith Parker, and went to Roadside, the suburban home of Lucretia Mott, "where," she writes, "it was a wonderful sight to see the two octogenarians talking together, so bright and wide awake to the questions of the present." She never again saw Lucretia Mott or heard her sweet voice.
After a great reception at the Riggs House for the delegates, Miss Anthony left for Philadelphia with the esteemed Julia Smith Parker and went to Roadside, the suburban home of Lucretia Mott. "It was a wonderful sight," she writes, "to see the two octogenarians chatting together, so lively and aware of the current issues." She never saw Lucretia Mott again or heard her sweet voice.

Jane H. Spofford
Jane H. Spofford
The health of Miss Anthony's mother was now so precarious that she did not dare go far from home and a course of lectures was arranged for her through Pennsylvania by Rachel Foster, a young girl of wealth and distinction, who was growing much interested in the cause of woman and very devoted to Miss Anthony personally. Frequent trips were made to the home in Rochester through the inclement weather, and toward the last of March she saw that the end was near and did not go away. The beloved mother fell asleep on the morning of April 3, 1880, the two remaining daughters by her side. She was in her eighty-seventh year, her long life had been passed entirely within the immediate circle of home, but her interest in outside matters was strong. The husband and children, in 513 whatever work they were engaged, felt always the encouragement of her sanction and sympathy. Her ambition was centered in them, their happiness and success were her own; she was content to be the home-keeper, to have the house swept and garnished and the bountiful table ready for their return, finding a rich reward in their unceasing love and appreciation. She was extremely fond of reading, had read the Bible from cover to cover many times, and could give the exact location and wording of many texts of Scripture. She enjoyed history, was familiar with the works of Dickens and Scott and knew by heart The Lady of the Lake. In old age, when memory failed, she lived among historical personages and characters in books and would speak of them as persons she had known in her youth. As the four children gathered about the still form and looked lovingly upon the placid face, they could not remember that she ever had spoken an unkind word. And so, with tenderness and affection, they laid her to rest by the side of the husband whose memory she had so faithfully cherished for eighteen years.
The health of Miss Anthony's mother had become so fragile that she didn’t dare go far from home, and Rachel Foster, a young woman of privilege and distinction who was becoming increasingly interested in the women's cause and very devoted to Miss Anthony personally, arranged a series of lectures for her throughout Pennsylvania. Frequent trips were made to the home in Rochester despite the harsh weather, and by late March, she realized that the end was near and chose to stay. The beloved mother passed away on the morning of April 3, 1880, with her two remaining daughters by her side. She was eighty-seven years old; her long life had been entirely spent within the immediate family circle, but she had a strong interest in the outside world. The husband and children, in 513 whatever work they were doing, always felt her encouragement and support. Her ambitions revolved around them, and their happiness and success felt like her own; she was happy to be the homemaker, keeping the house tidy and preparing a generous meal for their return, finding great joy in their constant love and appreciation. She loved reading, had gone through the Bible from cover to cover many times, and could pinpoint the exact location and wording of many Bible verses. She was interested in history, was familiar with the works of Dickens and Scott, and could recite The Lady of the Lake from memory. In her old age, as her memory faded, she inhabited the world of historical figures and characters from books, speaking of them as if they were people she had known in her youth. As the four children gathered around her still form and looked affectionately at her peaceful face, they could not recall her ever having said an unkind word. And so, with love and care, they laid her to rest beside the husband she had cherished in memory for eighteen years.
A month later Miss Anthony again set forth on the weary round, leaving her sister Mary in the lonely house with two young nieces, Lucy and Louise, whose education she was superintending. Just before going she wrote to Rachel Foster: "Yes, the past three weeks are all a dream—such constant watching and care and anxiety for so many years all taken away from us! But my mother, like my father, if she could speak would bid us 'go forward' to greater and better work. She never asked me to stop at home when she was living, not even after she became feeble, but always said, 'Go and do all the good you can;' and I know my highest regard for her and for my father and sisters gone before will be shown by my best and noblest doing."
A month later, Miss Anthony set off again on her tiring journey, leaving her sister Mary alone in the house with two young nieces, Lucy and Louise, whose education she was overseeing. Just before leaving, she wrote to Rachel Foster: "Yes, the past three weeks feel like a dream—after so many years of constant watching, caring, and anxiety, it's all gone! But my mother, like my father, would tell us to 'keep moving forward' to do greater and better work if she could speak. She never asked me to stay home when she was alive, not even when she became weak, but always said, 'Go and do all the good you can;' and I know that my deepest respect for her, my father, and my sisters who have passed will be shown through my best and most noble actions."
[94] In 1874, when a bill was pending to establish the Territory of Pembina, Senator Sargent wished to so amend it as to incorporate woman suffrage. After he had finished a matchless argument, in which he was supported by Senators Stewart, of Nevada, and Carpenter, of Wisconsin, Senator Morton made one of those grand speeches for which he was famous. He based his demands for woman suffrage on the Declaration of Independence, whose principles, he declared, did not apply to man alone but to the human family; and he demonstrated that no man or woman could "consent" to a government except through a vote.
[94] In 1874, when there was a bill being considered to create the Territory of Pembina, Senator Sargent wanted to amend it to include women's voting rights. After he delivered an incredible argument, supported by Senators Stewart from Nevada and Carpenter from Wisconsin, Senator Morton gave one of his famous grand speeches. He argued for women's suffrage by referencing the Declaration of Independence, stating that its principles applied to everyone, not just men; and he showed that neither men nor women could truly "consent" to a government without having the right to vote.
For Sargent's and Morton's speeches see History of Woman Suffrage, Vol. II, pp. 546 and 549.
For Sargent's and Morton's speeches, see History of Woman Suffrage, Vol. II, pp. 546 and 549.
Download ePUB
If you like this ebook, consider a donation!