THE WOMAN SUFFRAGE MOVEMENT IN MARYLAND FROM 1870 TO 1920 by Mal Hee Son 'rhesis submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Maryland in partial fullillment of the requirements for the degree of Maotcr of Arts .962 ( \ APPROVAL SHEET Title of Thesis: The Woman Suffrage Movement in Maryland from 1870 to 1920 Name of Candidate : Mal Hee Son Master of Arts, 1962 Thesis and Abstract Approved: Dr . Verne E. Chatelain Professor Department of History Date approved: f~e G_, Ift z . {. I ABSTRACT Title of Thesis: The Woman Suffrage Movement in Maryland from l870 to l920. Mal Hee Son, Master of Arts, l962. Thesis directed by: Professor Verne E. Chatelain A study of woman suffrage movement in Maryland in the period from the Civil War to the First World War reveals not only the stubborn opposi- tion and almost insunnountable difficulties con.fronting the crusaders in this cause, but also the unexpected capacity for organization and the courageous fighting qualities of women in this historic battle. In Mary- land's conservative society, the feminist movement was often ridiculed; and it faced repeated disappointments even until the enactment of the Federal Woman Suffrage Amendment in l920. Yet, it seems clear that, throughout the long struggle, the greatest single factor in achieving this major reform in Maryland society was the unquenchable spirit of the women who conducted the suffrage campaign . There were, in fact, many outstanding Maryland feminists during this period who plainly demonstrated the ability and intelligence to analize and to manage matters of great civic and political importance . Among these, Mrs. Caroline Miller, Mrs. J. William Funck, Mrs. Elizabeth King Ellicott, and Mrs. Donald R. Hooker possibly deserve the highest accolades, although there were also others hardly less worthy of atten- tion. This demonstrated capacity and competence in public affairs of women in Maryland was eventually recognized even after the Maryland State ABSTRACT--Continued Assembly had finally voted to reject the Federal Woman Suffrage Amendment on the grounds of its invasion of the sacred precincts of State Rights. And it is worth notice that while Maryland has not) to this day) seen fit to ratify the Nineteenth Amendment) it has now quite capitulated to the principle of equal rights for women. - FOREWORD When I was a little girl in Asia, I often heard about American women . I heard how these women shared equality with men and how they could do whatever they wished to do in life . Sometimes, I heard, the women of America were even better off than men, not only in social recog- nition but also in the pursuit of their professions, because they were highly regarded by ''gentlemen . 11 Gentlemen, I heard, gave their seats to women in the bus or in the theatre, volunteered to help whenever they saw women carrying a heavy load, and always showed, in their words and in their deeds, a profound respect for women. I found myself wondering how this enviable status of our American sisters had come about. Since my coming to the United States, I have discovered that American women in fact do enjoy equal privileges with men in the legal sense and in general social recognition to a greater degree than in any other part of the world, although, even yet, some of the traditional prejudices against women still remain. Above all, one thing appears to be definitely true: opportunities for American women in seeking an inde- pendent career as well as pursuing their own way in life exist abundantly. What has caused these major gains for the American woman? I have discovered that even a half century ago she was still ve-ry much restricted, perhaps somewhat like women in other parts of the world; and that she was regarded as inferior to men in the eyes of the law . Since colonial days, however, American womankind had been aware that this was a land of freedom and opportunity. She could gain inspiration from the writings of out- standing leaders like M.a-ry Wollenstonecraft and Margaret Fuller. ii ? FOREWORD--Continued Furthermore, even prior to the Civil War, many women began to join the anti-slavery crusade in the hope that abolition would remove other bar- riers in the American way of life. Thus, she helped to advance the cause of the Negro even before seeking full justice for herself. After the War and during the Reconstruction Period woman suffrage clubs began to be organized, and women began to demand suffrage. This action resulted from a realization that the door to complete bum.an equality might be opened, if women secured the ballot. The triumph of equal suffrage, as we shall see, was achieved only after a long and painstaking struggle, and it was related to other needed reforms in social, economic, and educational fields. Maryland women joined the movement for the ballot in the l870's. At first, the battle was confused, slow and tedious; and there were many unsuccessful efforts to persuade the General Assembzy to grant suffrage in the traditionalzy strong Old Line State. In fact, when compared with other states which bad a rather speedy success, Maryland women had a most difficult time in their desire for suffrage; and the fight was destined to continue for many years before it was finalzy won through the achieve- ment of the Nineteenth Amendment to the Constitution shortly after the First World War. The Minutes (MSS) of the Baltimore Suffrage Club and the Maryland Woman Suffrage Association are a most important source in understanding the embryonic stage of the suffrage movement in Maryland. And, under Mrs. Donald R. Hooker, as Editor-in-Chief, The Maryland Suffrage News publi- cized the cause of the suffrage movement in l9l2, and thereafter. These weekzy pamphlets reflect the strategy, tactics, propaganda, and political iii FOREWORD--Continued work of Maryland women . Also for tracing and analyzing public opinion during the fight in Maryland for woman suffrage, the issues of The Baltimore Sun have proved to be a useful source of info:rmation. I wish to acknowledge my debt of gratitude to my adviser, Dr. Verne E. Chatelain, who at all times encouraged and assisted me in the long and tedious hours of preparation of this thesis, with deepest kindness and utmost patience, to its ultimate conclusion. iv TABLE OF CONTEl.iITS Chapter Page FOREWORD ii I. THE HERITAGE. . . . l II. ORGANIZING FOR THE SUFFRAGE MOVEMENT ( 1889 - 1900) ? l3 III. EDUCATIONAL CAMPAIGN FOR WOMAN SUFFRAGE ( 1900 - l9l0) 32 IV. A CAMPAIGN FOR A STATE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENr 53 V. MARYLAND AND A CAMPAIGN FOR THE FEDERAL WOMAN SUFFRAGE AMENDMENT ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? 77 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . 104 V ILLUSTRATION Page r. Tabulat ed Vote in the Legislature of l 9l6 Relating to the Suffr age Amendment ? ? . ? . ? ? . ? ? ? ? . ? ? . . . ? 75 vi CHAPTER I THE HERITAGE Profound and significant modifications during the past century and a half have affected all phases of women's activities and have revolutionized their social, economic, and legal position . So altered is the status of modern women that it is difficult to realize that not too long ago they had few rights and were often classed with children, criminals, and idiots . This improved condition is partzy the result of the Women's Rights Movement, one phase of which was the crusade for equal suffrage . 1 It took decades of bitter experiences before women openzy asked for poll tical equality with men . Both law and tradition placed them in a position of great disadvantage and inferiority . It was on.1,y after the Civil War that the ballot seemed a logical weapon with which to fight for the removal of these disabilities and to improve women's legal and humane status . During the nineteenth century, the democratic principles of government became widespread . The American philosophy that all who submit to the law should have a voice in its making caused many thoughtful people to question the justice and wisdom of withholding the ballot from women on account of sex . By the beginning of the nineteenth century, the common law of England was the basic law of the land . Under this law women had many duties, but few rights . Married women in particular suffered "civil 1A. Elizabeth Taylor, The Woman Suffrage Movement in Tennessee (New York: Bookman Associates, l957J,:p. ll. l 2 death," having no right to property and no legal entity or existence apart from their husbands. A woman as soon as she was married was called covert, or in Latin, nupta, which means veiled. Her new self was her superior, her companion, her master . She could not sign con- tracts; she had no title to her own earnings, to property even when it was her own by inheritance or dower, or to her children in case of legal separation . Divorce, when granted at all by the court or by a legisla- tive action, was given only for the most flagrant abuse: adultery, disertion and non-support, and extreme cruelty . Next to the common law, the most potent force in maintaining wom.en 1 s subordinate position was religion . The colonists might have been dissenters of one kind or another against the Church of England, but they were at one with it in believing that women 1 s place was deter- mined by limitations of mind and body, a punishment for the original sin of Eve, and that, in order to fit her for her proper role of mother- hood, the Almighty had taken especial pains to endow her with virtues such as modesty, meekness, com.passion, affability, and piety.2 A married woman was to submit herself unto her husband as unto the Lord . Nevertheless, the question of equal status was not completely dormant. It was first raised by Anne Hutchinson in the earliest days of the founding of New England in l637 . She challenged the Puritan theocracy in Boston, not only in the religious field, but also in its assumption that no woman could have a voice in church affairs. The battle was implicit in her unprecedented demand that she, a woman, would be penni tted to think for herself' about God and to provoke others to do 2Eleanor Flexner, Century of Struggle (Cambridge: Harvard University, l959), p . 8. 3 so. Mrs. Hutchinson was convicted and banished from the Massachusetts Bay Colony. Scarcely more than a decade later, in l648, a valiant Maryland woman, Mistress Margaret Brent, demanded from the Maryland General Assembly a seat and two votes as a land owner and as an attorney of Lord Baltimore . The Assembly refused, unable even to conceive of the idea that a woman would sit with it. Mistress Brent was, however, allowed to address the Assembly on various occasions . She was the first woman pioneer to demand woman suffrage in America. She certainly would have been "more fitted for our times than her own . 113 Both of these heroines, Hutchinson and Brent, challenged the validity of the place assigned to their sex . The first "organizing" of women appeared as the Revolutionary fever ran high . In Boston in February, l770, 11the mistresses of three hundred families" subscribed their names to a league, binding themselves not to drink any tea until the Revenue Act was repealed . 4 The "young la.dies of Boston" followed suit with the same pledge after three d.ays . 5 During the Revolutionary War, the absence of men serving with the Continental armies created a vacuum which women had to fill to enable the family and farm to survive . Heroically, women kept the economy of the Thirteen States functioning . The most noble contribution of supplying clothing to the army was made by Mrs . Esther DeBerdt Reed's association, that was joined by women from Pennsylvania, Maryland, 3catherine c . Cannon, "Maryland's Valiant Lady, Margaret Brent," Month Publication of St . Mary's County Historical Society, II November, l959), p.-ll~ ~lexner, p . l3 . 5Ibid. 4 New Jersey, and Delaware . 6 Sporadic and incidental as these efforts were, they show that women were definitezy moving forward in organizing experience. When Independence was achieved, the new .American claimed certain natural, civil, and inalienable rights to be his and said such rights were derived from reason and the consent of the governed rather than from divinity. Why not the new .American woman as well? Mrs. Abigail Adams of Massachusetts, who was as far ahead of her time as had been Mistress Brent in Colonial Maryland, claimed such rights for women in her letter to her husband, John Adams, in l777: In the new code of laws which I suppose it will be necessary for you to make, I desire you would remember the ladies and be more generous and favorable to them than your ancestors. Do not put such unlimited power into the hands of the husbands. Remember, all men would be tyrants if they could . If particular care and atten- tion is not paid to the ladies, we are determined to foment a rebellion, and will not hold ourselves bound by any laws in which we have no voice or representation.7 Gradualzy, thoughtful people recognized that the state of society required women to be literate in the English language and in writing, geography, reading of history, biography and travel, vocal music, dancing, and religious instruction. The women's struggle for knowledge, for training, and for opportunity was well described in the writings of Mrs. Judith Sargent Murry. She wrote numerous articles about women. Her repzy of the l790's to those critics who feared that educated women might neglect their domestic responsibilities may be 7charles Francis Adams, Familiar Letters of John Adams and His Wife Abigail Adams During the Revolution (New York: Hurd & Houghton-,- J:877;), pp. 286-287, letter dated JuJ.J,- 3l, l777- 5 still applied to vast areas of the world in the twentieth century. She wrote: I would ca~ ask, is it reasonable, that a candidate for immortality, for the joys of heaven, an intelligent being, who is to spend an eternity in contemplating the works of Diety, should at present be so degraded, as to be the mechanism of a pudding, or the sewing of the seams of a garment? 11 8 Yet despite the fertilizing ideas of a few far-seeing individuals, etiquette strongly required a woman to be seen and not heard. It was emphasized that woman's power should come from her spirit of self- sacrifice at the shrine of her husband's wishes . 9 The number of employed women rose rapidly, but these women were unable to control their own earnings, manage their own property, or sign legal documents . A working woman could be compelled to hand over every penny of her wages to an irresponsible drunkard husband, even if she was left with nothing for her own subsistence or the maintenance of her children, and even if the husband was known to be making no provision for them. If she sought to divorce such a husband, he was legally entitled to sole guardianship of the children . When Robert D. Owen, legislator and social reformer, tried to amend the women's property act in Indiana in an effort to bring justice into the relationship between husband and wife, a legislator protested violently on the grounds that 11 a most essential injury would result to the enduring relations of married life ? nlO 8 Constantia, 11 The Equality of Sexes," Massachusetts Magazine (March-April, l790), pp. l32-l33 - Constantia was Mrs. Murray's pen name. 9carrie Chapman Catt, (ed.), Victory:: How Woman Won It (New York: The H. W. Wilson Co . , l94o), p . ll. lOibid., p . 7. 6 Theo~ group that gave its women equality with men was the quakers . Their women not only had an equal voice in church management but also could speak with authority as ministers . Men and women spoke and prayed with equal freedom and fervor in their meetings. Strict rules of conduct applied equaD.y to both sexes. Even here, however, the universal custom prevailed, and women teachers were paid on.Jy half as much as men, though the tuition for girls and boys was the same . While .American men t reated women with a deference that excited the comment of European travelers, the women themselves had to take the lead in the crusade for their own rights . So deep-seated was the preju- dice against women in any public capacity that Lucretia Mott and Elizabeth Cady Stanton were denied admission to a World ' s Anti-Slavery Convention held in London in l84o solely because they were women . These two women realized that if women were ever to accomplish anything as reformers they must first achieve a more honorable status for themselves . In this sentiment they were strongly supported by other able women reformers . Mrs . Sarah Josepha Hale, editor of Godey' s Lady's Book, which had the extremely large circulation (for that time) of 150,000, waged a number of tenacious and uncompromising campaigns, such as opening medical and nursing professions to women, admitting women to higher educa- tion, permitting physical education among girl students, and lessening the menace of corsets . ll Miss Margaret Fuller, the brilliant literary editor of the New York Tribune, published a scandalously frank book, ~ in the Nineteenth Century . Over a five year period, through her series of uconversations, 11 Miss Fuller lectured on such topics as Art, Culture, Ll.terature, and Woman and Ll.fe. uWhat woman needs is not as llFlexner, p. 65 . 7 a woman to act or rule," Miss Fuller demanded caJ.mly, "but as a nature to grow, as an intellect to discern, as a soul to live freely, and unimpeded to unfold such powers as were given her when we left our common home . uJ2 Doctor Elizabeth Blackwell won admission to the medical profession against almost insuperable obstacle, and Miss Dorothea L . Dix led the prison and insane asylum refonn movement. Finally, Mrs. Antoinette Louisa Brown Blackwell became the first woman preacher . Although the feminist movement was greeted with much ridicule and was not wholJ.y successful, some promising beginnings were made in education and property rights. High schools and nonnal schools for girls became increasingly common, and teaching in the elementary schools was soon recognized as almost a women's monopoly . In l833 Oberlin College opened its doors to women and Negroes . Coeducation was permitted by Antioch College in l853 . GradualJ.y most of the state-supported schools admitted both men and women . Following the lead of Mount Holyoke Seminary, which was founded in l837, many strictly women's colleges were founded under the guidance of Mary liYon. Women also made a def'ini te headway against the prejudice which had so long barred them from appearance on the public platform by becoming preachers and public lecturers . Besides the cause of their own emancipation, many feminine reformers were deeply devoted to temperance and prohibition. A few State legislatures amended the property acts and allowed married women to hold property separately from their husbands . For the most part, however, the refonns women sought were delayed until after the Civil War. The first American woman who led the equal suffrage crusade was Miss Lucy Stone . She won the title of the "morning star of the woman's 12Mason Wade, (ed.), Writings of Margaret Fuller (New York: The Viking Press, l94l), p . 125. 8 rights movement" by lecturing up and down the country from New England to Ohio and Wisconsin . In l847, the year she was graduated from Oberlin College, she gave her first lecture on woman's rights from the pulpit of her brother's church in Gardner, Massachusetts. The following year, as an "agent" for the Anti-Slavery Society, Miss Stone often faced and won over the worst mobs.l3 In her lectures on woman's rights, she chal- lenged the popular prejudice against women in the three phases of life: firstly, social and industrial disability; seconciJs-, legal and political handicaps; and thirciJs-, moral and religious discrimination. Fearful of the consequences of Miss Stone's activities, there were many who longed to silence her and hoped that her marriage to Henry Blackwell in l855 would put an end to her career . The Boston Post published a poem in this sentiment whose concluding stanza ran as below: A man like Curtius 1 shall be his On fame's loud trumpet blown, Who with a wedding kiss shuts up The mouth of Lucy Stone . l4 but the marriage made two and eventually three leading advocates for woman's rights where there had been one: Henry Blackwell, Lucy Stone, and their daughter, Alice Stone Blackwell . The first woman's rights convention was held in the summer of l848 in Seneca Falls, New York . The convention brought together the out- standing feminists, such as Lucy Stone, Lucretia Mott, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, and Susan B. Anthony . The convention demanded equal educational and vocational opportunities, equal political rights, more equitable l3Flexner, p . 69 . l 4Alice Blackwell, Lucy Stone (Boston: Little, Brown & Company, l93O), p . l6l. 9 divorce laws, improved legal rights concerning property ownership, and rights of women to their wages.l5 The inception of the woman's rights movement in the United States is commonly dated from the date of the Seneca Falls Convention . In this very year, an equal suffrage society was formed in South Bristol, New York. This society presented a woman suffrage petition to the New York State Legislature in January, l 849, and this has been recognized to be perhaps the first attempt of women to exert pressure on a legislative body in the United States . l 6 The eveni:l3of l848 and l849 began to direct public attention to the problems of woman's status throughout the country . When a woman's rights convention assembled in Worcester, Massachusetts in l 850, persons from as many as eleven states attended .l7 During the following decades woman's rights conventions met annually, except in l857. The last two meetings before the Civil War were held in New York . During the War, the suffrage movement ceased, but i t was resumed with the coming of peace, with an open demand for equal suffrage, and continued until women were fully enfranchised in l920 . In its inchoate phase, the woman suffrage movement was confined to the northern part of the United States . The ante-bellum South was not frien~ to the radical refonn movements of the North, and the woman's rights movement was no exception . This movement did not appear in the South until after the Civil War--in the majority of the cases, after the period of the Reconstruction rollowing the War . Although l5A . W. Littlefield, Ed . , Dictionary of American History, (Ames, Iowa: Littlefield, Adams & Co . , l956), p . 2l7. - ~ Taylor, p . l5 . l7c. C. Catt and N. Shuler, Women Suffrage and Politics (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, l 926 )~26 . 10 suffragists formed organizations in all of the Southern states before 1900, their active agitation did not begin until the early twentieth century. The nineteenth century Southern feminists were only able to prepare the foundations on which the coming generation could lead the active campaign . Among the more active and difficult Southern crusades was the one in Maryland. The organized movement in Maryland started in November, 1867, when the Maryland Equal Rights Society was fanned in Baltimore on the principle of equal opportunity for all mankind, irrespective of sex or color . Two weeks later, at the second meeting, the constitution was adopted and signed by fourteen persons, ten of whom were white and four colored . Officers consisting of a president, a vice-president, a secretary, and a treasurer were chosen, together with eight other mem- bers to act as an executive committee . Their regular monthly meetings were usua~ held at the Douglas Institute, where the colored people gave the society the space, free of charge, as their act of good will toward the movement .18 The Society received neither moral encouragement nor financial help. Its sole resource was to appeal to only those who were ready for service . Its members were conscious of having entered upon no easy task, but were ashamed of having so long left their Northern sisters to toil and endure alone in a cause which was not one of section but of all humanity. They pledged to come forward at last to assume a share of the hardship, trusting that what they had lost in their tardiness might be 18Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony, (ed.), The History of Woman Suffrage, 6 Vols . (New York: J. J. Ll.ttle & Ives Company, 1900-1922), III, 814. Hereafter this book will be referred to as History of Woman Suffrage. ll made up in earnestness and activity. Through the unbending efforts of Mrs. Lavinia C. Dtmdore, President of the Society, a delegate was sent to the national convention of the .American Woman Suffrage Association in As small and scattered as the Society's activities might have been, a considerable vitality is evident in the suffrage activities during the beginning days of the l870's. In April, l870, a petition asking for the right of suffrage and political justice was presented to the House of Delegates. It was signed by Eliza S. White, La.vinia C. Dundore, Ellen N. Harris, and one hundred fifty other ladies.l9 It was then referred to the Committee on Federal Relations and was quietly killed there. The following month at the election in Baltimore, three women, Mrs. L. C. Dtmdore, Mrs. A. M. Gardner, and Miss E. M. Harris, applied, in vain, to be registered as voters at the third-ward registry office. 20 To act as a stimulus to the Maryland public and to serve as a support for the Maryland suffrage movement, the annual convention of the American Woman Suffrage Association was held in Baltimore in l87l. The delegates to this convention received a favorable impression of the city and commented that: ? o ? in no one state of the Union has there been a more rapid advance in public sentiment, during the last ten years, upon all public questions than in the State of Maryland. 2l The attitude of the Baltimore press was more exceptionally favorable than anyone had ever expected, for it treated the convention with fairness l 9History of Woman Suffrage, IV, 248. 20ibid., II, 823. 2l Ibid., 835 . ]2 and courtesy. 22 Another convention by the Maryland Equal Rights Society followed in Raine's Hall. Mrs. Dun.dare presided over the convention with dignity and grace . Many national.JJT prominent and able champions of the causeJ such as Susan B. AnthonyJ Lucy StoneJ and Julia Ward HoweJ were present and they delivered eloquent speeches before an attentive audience . 23 It was a popular feeling among the friends of the cause that interest in the movement was rapidly increasing in Maryland . The following weekJ on March 20J l87lJ the Hon . Stevenson Archer made an exhaustive speech on the floor of the House of Representatives on "Woman Suffrage Not To Be Tolerated . 1124 As a Representative of Mary- landJ Mr. Archer's speech was not only against Senator Wilson's pending bill to enfranchise the women of the territoriesJ but also against the suffrage conventions held in his home State . In spite of the favorable impression thus gained, feminist activity tended to d.isappear after Representative Archer's strong opposition against the conventions held in Maryland . In those early daysJ when a woman was regarded as inferior to men in the eyes of the law and religion, feminists and their supporters represented an extremely small porti on of American society . In Maryland, although an equal rights society had begun its work} because of the lack of public interest and the feebly organized strengthJ the suffrage activity became donnant from l872 . ThenJ in a new effortJ Mrs. Caroline Hallowell Miller of Sandy Spring reorganized a suffrage club in l889J which helped to continue the movement until women were fully enfranchised in AugustJ l920. 22Ibid . , 839. 23Ibid. 24Ibid . J 840. CHAPI'ER II ORGANIZING FOR THE SUFFRAGE MOVEMENT (1889 - 1900) "If but one State in the Union allowed woman to re:present l h ersel f' " cl ai me d a tho ugh tfu.J. Ma ryl an d er, "1.?t should be Maryland. 11 "Maryland" was named for a woman . So was the capital city "Annapolis." Above all, a first woman suffragist, Mistress Margaret Brent, who demanded ":place and voyce" in the Assembly, was a Marylander. In line with the historic reputation of .Maryland womanhood, Mrs. Caroline Hallowell Miller gained distinction in the 188o 1 s and 1890 1 s as one of the first, and, perhaps, one of the most eloquent of suffrage advocates south of the Mason and Dixon Ll.ne . Mrs. Miller had become interested in woman suffrage in the early l870's, at a time when her husband, Francis Miller, a prominent l awyer, was one of the very few men in the State to advocate equal suffrage. As early as l874, Mr. Miller made an ap:peal before the United States House Judiciary Committee to enfranchise the women of the District of Columbia. 2 Not to be outdone by her husband, Mrs . Miller, paying her own expenses, attended the national suffrage convention for many years as a Maryland delegate . Her eloquent and humorous addresses pleased not only the audiences of the national convention, but people on the street as well. At the national convention of 1884, Mrs . Miller emphasized the need for a vigorous fight against apathy among the women themselves.3 Some years 1History of Woman Suffrage, IV, 695 . 2Ibid., 697. 3Ibid., 20 . l3 14 later, however, in l892, she confessed the belief tbat the powerless position of women arose not so much, as many would aver, from the luke- warmness of the fair sex as from the supreme indifference of men. And said she: Now if only men would take to betting on this question of woman suffrage, if we could open it up as a .field of speculation, if we could manipulate it by some sort of patent process into stocks or bonds and have it introduced into ihe Wall Street, we should very soon find ourselves emancipated . At the annual convention in l889, too, she expressed regret that the past fifty years of argument for woman's equality had not accomplished any notable success; and she proposed that women more finnly unite in demand for equal rightso Back again in her own home State, Mrs . Miller invited some of her friends to her Sandy Spring home and revived an old suffrage club . Thirteen men and women became members, all but one of whom belonged to the Society of Friends . 5 Most of these later beca.m.e _prominent leaders in the movement . For the first time, therefore, in l889, an accredited delegation was sent to the national convention from Maryland; and a state convention was also held in that year in Maryland. The press at this time gave little attention to the Maryland suf'fragists, and their work was seldom considered sufficiently important to warrant editorial comment . Thus , few news stories bearing on the status of woman, or on the suffrage activities in this period appeared in Maryland . Still occasionally, as on October 20, l890, when woman members of the Grace Methodist Episcopal Church on Beledere and Charles Streets in Baltimore debated on the topic "Shall there be female 4Ibid., l87 5Ibid., 678 . 15 delegates to the General Conference of the Grace M. E. Church?", this event was reported in a courteous manner, though it provoked little attention and there was no editorial comment . Nevertheless it was probably the first time in Baltimore that women publicly had taken the floor to debate the merits of suffrage.6 Mrs . J . T. King, one of those participants, opposed the admis- sion of women to the general church conference, saying that women ought rather to exercise their privilege of creating beautiful homes and of exercising that domestic influence assigned to them by God . She argued: Man does not stand today as the oppresser of women . Is our church corrupt to need woman as purifying influence . ? ? why then do we seek this new work?7 On the other hand, in favor of admitting women to the conference, Mrs . A.H . Easton declared: "wherever laws are made there women should b e. 118 She scorned the barriers set up against women, saying that God's original plan was to put both man and woman on an equal basis and that He made neither one superior to the other . And her calm, yet persuasive, arguments suggested a rising suffrage sentiment: The home in which the husband or the wife rules alone is not the properly governed one ??? As we want the father as well as the mother in the home, God knows we want the woman as well as the man to work in making the laws of our church and of our State as well. Look at our statute books and see the shameful laws on them. I am sure they would not have been there had woman had a part in making them and I believe our church would be more homelike, more lovely and more successful where the mother's heart is felt in the making of the laws . 9 6Baltimore Sun, 21 October, l89O, p . 6. 7Ibid . 81bid. 9Ibid . l6 After the debate, the choice was up to the Conference. The ballots were distributed and the vote was cast. All voters were of course men. Sixty opposed and forty-three favored admitting woman dele- gates to the general conference. Although the immediate goal was not achieved, the result signifi cantly revealed an unexpectedly strong sup- port in the congregation for a more active role for women. Following the debate of the suffrage issue in the Grace M. E. Church, other ministers in Baltimore began to give signs of interest in the subject, even to devoting some of their sennons to woman's rights. Not all were favorable to suffrage. "The home is woman's sphere," advised the Rev. Thomas o. Crosse, pastor of the Chatsworth Methodist Church. "There as mother, wife, sister, and daughter she may best develop her peculiar nature and gifts and exercise her influence. Let your ideal be nothing short of the hidden beauty of the heart--the ornament of a meek, chaste, affable, benevolent spirit. "lO '1.'he Rev. Edward A. Lawrence, pastor of the First Congregational Church, emphasized the importance of woman's opportunity to increase her sphere of life at home . She must get away from the snares of society which could only lead to "unwomanliness."ll It was wrong to demand a new role for woman in the world; and, said this churchman, the words of the church clearly supported the traditional position that "woman belongs at home."12 Public opinion in Baltimore, for the most part, however continued to be indifferent, if not actually unfriendly and hostile to the feminist movement. But this early activity, slowly but surely, was beginning to lOibid., 29 January, l89l, p. 5. llI bid., 2 February, l89l, p. 5. 12History of Woman Suffrage, IV, 696. ... l7 bear fruit, and the interest of women themselves was starting to be evident in the development of a formal suffrage organization. Thus, in l892, Mrs. Sarah H. Tudor was instrumental in forming what came to be called the Baltimore City Suffrage Club. And among the Club's effective workers from its beginning, was Mrs. Emma J. Maddox Funck, a leader destined to spread a wide influence in behalf of woman's rights. Mrs. Thuna J. Maddox Funck had already, at that time, a reputa- tion for ability for leadership and persuasion. When she joined the suffrage movement, she was well aware that Maryland was a most conserva- tive state and that, in all probability, the movement for woman's rights would face a fight against overwhelming odds. So, she was not surprised ,, when she received scarcely any encouragement or finanaial help at the outset. And she expected, too, the alm.ost universal ridicule and con- demnation of her endeavors.l3 In l894, the Baltimore Club elected Mrs. Funck its President. Keenly aware, moreover, of the need for a permanent state body, Mrs. Funck now proceeded to bring about a merger of the Baltimore Club and the Montgomery County Woman Suffrage Association into one organiza- tion, known as the Maryland State Woman Suffrage Association.l4 This effort, it was hoped, would attract more general support throughout the State. Subsequently, this new Association was to grow strong and influential; and, with the affiliation of other local clubs, as time went on, it was to play an important role in educating the people-- especially in the first decade of the twentieth century. l3Margie H. Luckett, Maryland Women (3 vols.: Baltimore: King Bros. Company, Inc., l942), I, l4l-l43~reafter this book will be referred to as Maryland Women. l4Ibid. The Montgomery County Association had developed possibly from Mrs. Miller's Sandy Spring group. l8 Although, with these steps by Mrs. Funck, the framework of a state-wide organization was brought about, most suffrage work was still carried on quietly; and there was scarcely any attention given to the matter by the press or the general public. Still, the small band of suffragettes kept working, turning, for the time being, to efforts to open opportunities for women in the higher professions, whereby they might exert wider leadership in community projects and cultural activi- ties. At the Association's annual state convention, in l897, Mrs. Annie R. Lamb, then President, recalled the early endeavors of the Baltimore Club, as follows: The woman's clubs were stimulating agencies for self-culture, and soon became important infl uences on the community . Needed reforms had been shown, and from this had arisen the growing desire to give women representation on many municipal boards.l5 The Convention that year adopted a resolution urging women to prepare themselves to assume larger duties, as well as to make careful study of the laws governing communities like Baltimore. Members were asked to pledge themselves to learn about municipal regulations and to peti- tion the State Legislature to correct certain evils.l6 In March, l897, the National American Woman Suffrage Association approached the Baltimore Club with a plan to grant financial aid to women in Baltimore, who might wish to make court tests of their legal rights, such as the right to vote.Y{ The Club, however, eventually turned aside the offer, not from any lack of interest, but out of fear l5The Baltimore City Suffrage Club Minutes MSS, Pratt Library, Baltimore, Maryland, Meeting of 26 February, l893. These minutes start from l897 and end at l902. Hereafter this Minutes will be referred to as Baltimore Club Minutes. l7Ibid., 5 March, l897. 19 that; i n bringing such\.uestion openly into court, they would only aggravate their condition, with no prospect of success. It was at this gl oomy hour that Mr. Edwin Higgins, 18 a long time fri end of the Club and a prominent lawyer, rose to make another proposal. He suggested that he would undertake to compile all Maryland laws relating to the status of women, namely, those concerning husband and wife, divorce, and the holding of property . Since this would be a use- ful study for the campaigns still to come, his idea was unanimously approved . It was hoped that it would give women a clearer picture of their legal status, as well as to lay the basis for improving it. About eight mont hs later (October, 1897), Mr . Higgi ns ' work having been com- pleted, fifty copies of~ _Compi lation of Laws of Interest to Women were published by the Baltimore Methodist Press. The small, red-covered handbook of eighty- three pages sold at fifty cents per copy. Several copies were donated to libraries for public reading.19 The Baltimore Club undertook various other programs. An essay contest was promoted among girls and boys on the subject, "Why should _Maryland women have the .ballot?", and the winners were awarded books . The members of the Club also listened to the formal reports of the .Maryl and delegates to the national convention, in order to get better understanding of the suffrage problems in all of the national aspects. And some of the club members attended Congressional hearings on woman suffrage, which related principaD.y to the "suffrage States" of Idaho, Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming. The experiences in these areas made a very deep impression, and converted many erstwhile lukewann women into staunch suffragists. Discussion of the experiences of suffragists in other States, 19rbid . , 12 November, 1897. 20 reported in newspaper clippings, now became a regular part of the routine in Club meetings; and enlightening, and often times eloquent lectures by outstanding guest speakers were frequently given on the referendum, the singl e tax system, co-education, and other subjects . In January, l899, the Baltimore Club considered the proposition 20 of petitioning the Congress to give Hawaiian women equal suffrage. But, after brief debate, the matter was postponed for later discussion, and was finally dropped in late February because of the feeling that the issue might generate hosti le public reacti on . In another connection, however, a letter of thanks and appreciat ion was written to Colonel Theodore Roosevelt for his endorsement of the suggestion to place some women in public offices . 2l Letter-writing and petitioning were discussed further but these discussions ended with no action . Maryland suffra- gists, although not lacking in courage, did not feel that the time was ripe to risk the chance of arousing open public opposition. Nevertheless, the activities of the Baltimore Club were not, in this period, totally fruitless, though marked somewhat with timidity and irresoluteness . A parlor meeting, held at Mrs . Lizzie Case's home in April, l899, in place of a regular monthly meeting, resulted in the largest and most successful gathering of the year .22 This type of meeting, because it was less public, was to become, as will be seen, an effective method of persuading many to take a more active part in suffrage matters . Another achievement was the gradual winning of the press to a more sympathetic attitude . In September, l899, The Baltimore Sun 20ibid . , 27 January, l 898 o 2libid . 22Ibid . , April, l 899 . .... 2l agreed to give the Baltimore Club regular space for "the advancement of women. 1123 Even though the space was never large enough to air long argumentative discussions, the Club used it effectively in announcing its meetings and the schedule of programs for lect ures, teas, and bazaars. Most of all, the fact that the Maryland suffragists were attracting some public attention was probably a most important fact, for it signified that the suffrage crusade in Maryland was now fast becoming a movement at least tolerated by the public. There continued to be serious problems, nonethel~ss. Finances were never- ending hardship. The only stable source of income was the annual membershi p of two dollars per person, along with occasional special contri bution. As for this latter, there was a legacy of fifty dollars, left to the Club by Mrs. L. W. Andor, a recently deceased member. 24 The sale of the Compilation of Maryland Laws_._._. had resulted in little profit, either, because a fifty per cent commission had to be paid on each copy sold. Club members were distressed whenever they could not comply with the appeals for financial aid of Mrs . Carrie Chapman Catt of the national Association. Mrs. Catt, furthermore, repeatedJ.y wrote the Club urging that efforts be made to increase its membership . Finally, in the late summer of 1897, Miss Annie v. Davenport proposed the organization of a branch in the eastern section of the city in an effort to incr ea s e membership. Her plan, in November of that year, was unanimously approved, and the Northeastern Section of the Baltimore Club was accordingly organized with Miss Davenport as temporary chairman. 25 After hardly 23Ibid., September, 1899 . 24Ibid., 24 February, 1897 ? 25rbid., l2 Novembe r , 1897. 22 three months had gone by, however, Miss Davenport and her group returned en masse to the parent organization due to sparse attendance and to failure to obtain a regular meeting place. This effort did result in the addition of some new members . After the unsuccessful venture of Miss Davenport, no other branch organizations were attempted until November, l900 . Then, in a new effort, the Club established two special sections, A and B, for a larger membership drive .26 Mrs. M. B. Holton headed Section A, and ~1rs . Gertrude Done, Section B. From that time on, meetings, for the purpose of attracting attention, began to include musical and other entertainment features . "Suffrage Teas" were also .. r held, and bazaars were frequently given to raise funds. Slowly, but surely, the Club was growing in confidence and strength. And, now, many members wished to establish a pennanent meeting place, instead of having to find a different chapel or school room each time a meeting was heldo After many lively discussions concerning the means of procuring funds to meet the rental expenses, finally, in l902, Mrs. Funck opened permanent "Suffrage Headquarters" at l07 West Franklin Street, on one of the city's main thoroughfares . 27 As a State body, the Maryland State Association called a State- wide convention each year, and served as a link between the local member clubs and the National Association, although this was a matter more of a paper organization than a reality . In truth, there were only two member clubs in the State, the Baltimore Club and the Montgomery County Association . Otherwise, the work for equal rights was largely on a person-to-person basis . And in general, too, since the Baltimore Club tended to dominate the Montgomery County Association in 26Ibid., l9 October, l900 . 27Maryland Women, I, l4l. 23 policy-making, the State Association's offices were largely held within the Baltimore Club's membership . This was true even though occasionally, as i? n 1 900, 28 the State Association's President, Mrs. Mary Bentley Thomas, was from the Montgomery County Association. During her term of office, it should be pointed out, she was not able to exert very strong leadership upon the other executive officers, who were all from the Baltimore Club. One of these was Mrs . Annie R. Lamb, president of the Baltimore Club for many years; she was now Corresponding Secretary. Recording Secretary, Mrs . Margaret Smyth Clarke, and Treasurer, Mrs . Mary E. Moore, were likewise both members of the Baltimore Club; and Mrs . Emma J . Funck, a member of the National Executive Committee, had been president of the Baltimore Club since 1898 . These conditions of course reflected the fact that interest in woman suffrage in Maryland not only tended to center chiefzy in Baltimore, in the period, but also that little, in the way of effective and genuine support for suffrage, yet existed elsewhere in the State . Still, the membership in Maryland was beginning to develop, and more interest was coming to be shown . Partly this was due to gains made by woman elsewhere in the nation, where numerous changes, in favor of women, had been effected since 1888 . In suffrage States, and elsewhere , as in Illinois and Ohio, legal changes had been made in response to the direct efforts of the women them.selves; generally, these meant a general trend alleviating conditions for women and in the direction of a long- delayed social justice . Influenced by possibzy what had been done in the neighboring States of Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Virginia, and West 28 Baltimore Club Minutes, February, 1900. History of Woman Suffrage, IV, 696. 24 Virginia, the Maryland State Assembly in l889 - l890 also passed legis- lation helping to eliminate age-old social and legal discrimination. For example, a drastic modification was made in the property law in l889, which granted married women more nearly equal property rights. 29 Now, modifying the doctrine of femme covert, married women were allowed to hold property, apart from the husband's control, for their separate use as if they were unmarried, and to have power to dispose of this property by deed, mortgage, lease, will, or any other instruments, just as their husbands could do . Also women now could contract, as "femme 30 sole ? " Laws governing inherit a.nee of property were also made the same for widow and widower . Correctly, Maryland suffragists considered these new laws a first step toward the emancipation of women from the condi- tion of subservience. These changes, of course, did not correct all inequalities by any means in the relationship of husband and wife . For non-support of the family, the husband was simply fined one hundred dollars, or might be imprisoned not exceeding one year, or both, at discretion of the court . 3l A wife-beater could be punished by flogging or imprisonment. And, among the five grounds for absolute divorce, one especiaDy angered women: the law stated that a man could divorce his wife "where the woman before marriage has been guilty of iDicit carnal intercourse with another man, the same being unknown to the husband at the time of 29History of Woman Suffrage, IV, 669 . 30.Annie Porritt, General Laws Affecting Women and Children in the Suffrage States and Non-Suffr~States (New York: National .American Woman Suffrage Association, l9l7), p . 35 . 3lEdwin Higgins,.?::_ Compilation of Maryland Laws of Interest to Women (Baltimore: Press of Baltimore Methodists, 18~p. 4l. 25 marriage. "32 However, a similar act on the part of the husband prior to the marriage did not entitle the wife to a divorce. There were other inequalities, too, to be corrected. A father, as the head of the family and the sole guardian of the children under the common law, for instance, had complete legal control over his daughter (or a son), and had the right to her service until she became twenty-one or was married . He also possessed the sole power to appoint a guardian by will, whose rights were generally regarded paramount . Only, when the father died without appointing a guardian, could the mother become the natural guardian . In l899, women succeeded in having the 11age of protection," or so-called the "age of consent" for girls, raised from fourteen to sixteen years of age . The age of consent ref'ers to the age of a girl prior to which it is a penal offense for a man to have carnal knowledge of her regardless of whether she may have consented to his action. Under the new law, girls below fourteen years of age were afforded greater protection, the penalties being increased against men committing such crimes in some cases to death, life imprisonment, and imprisonment varying from eighteen months to twenty-one years, depending upon the degree of the crime . A penalty of a fine of not more than five hundred dollars or imprisonment for not more than two years was set in the case of crimes against girls between fourteen and sixteen years of age.33 In other areas of legislation, for example, where women were employed for work at long hours with low wages, new laws compelled employers, under a penalty of one hundred fifty dollars, to provide seats for them in stores and in factories . Also, employers were 32 Ibid . , p. 2 6 . 33porrit, p. l49. 26 prohibited from employing women or girls in certain places of amusement, where conditions might be bad for health or morals. Now, too, additional jobs were opened to women. Until the late l890 ' s women held vecy few types of positions, but graduaJJJ,- they were employed as librarians, and, even in some cases, as nurses and doctors in charge of women patients at a state insane asylum . In other cases women became police matrons at the station houses in Baltimore, and at the jail and aJm.shouse of Harford County . 34 With regard to the right of suffrage, however, Article 7 of the Declaration of Rights of Macyland Constitution clearly stated that only men were qualified to vote, and the word, "male" was specificaJJJ,- used.35 Although there was no general right to female suffrage, it should be noted that the Legislature could and did, in certain instances, allow women to participate in puxezy local or municipal voting" For instance, the Legislature of 1900 passed an act, unanimouszy in the Senate and sixty-n:!ne to one in the House, authorizing the City of Annapolis to submit to the voters the question of issuing bonds to the amount of one hundred twenty-one thousand dollars to pay off then existing indebtedness, and to provide a fund for street and other improvements . It contained a paragraph entitling women to vote on that issue.36 The Maryland suffragists rejoiced in this act as a "remarkably progressive step" toward the granting of full suffrage to women;37 and The Baltimore Sun described the Annapolis voting arrangement, as follows: The novelty of their (the women's) presence did not disturb the serenity of the polling room or unnerve the ladies who were 34 History of Woman Suffrage, IV, 6 . 35Higgins, p. 25. 36Histor;y of Woman Suffrage, IV, 697. 37Ibidu 27 exercising their right to vote for the first time. They were as calm, direct and as unruffled as though it were the usual order of thing . Those who voted are of the highest social standing . They received the utmost co~esy at the polls and voted without any embarrassment whatever . 3 The number of women availing themselves of the vote for the first time in a very conservative society was not large, and it would har~ have warranted a special act of the Legislature, except as a progressive step toward full suffrage . For women, as the twentieth century began, the field of higher education was still very much limited; and of nine universities and colleges in Maryland, openings for women likewise were scant . The Colleges of Law and Dentistry, however, and the State Normal School were open to women; and the Baltimore College of Dentistry earned the praise of the Maryland suffragists for having conferred the degree of Doctor of Dental Surgery upon Miss Emilie Foeking of Prussia as early as 1873.39 The only state-aided school for women was the Women's College of Baltimore . The Medical College of the Johns Hopkins University was opened in 1893, thereafter being accessible to men and women alike with- out discrimination. At the same time, nevertheless, women were not admitted to any other departments of the University . Perhaps, the deci- sion to op~n the Medical school to women was the result of a contribu- tion to a "Women's Fund" of five hundred thousand dollars, which the trustees needed ba~ as an endowment . 40 38Baltimore Sun, 14 May, 1900, p. 5. 39History of Woman Suffrage, II, 820. 40Ibid., IV, 700 . Miss Garrett contributed $2000.00 to the Fund . 28 The campaign to raise this fund was launched in the fall of l890 by a committee of outstanding women. Among the committee women was Miss Mary F. Garrett, who had inheri ted a large fortune from her father, John W. Garrett, president of the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Company. Dr. M. Carey Thomas, president of Bryn Mawr College, Miss Mary Gwinn, co-founder of Bryn Mawr, and Miss Elizabeth King, Later Mrs. William Ellicott, were some of the distinguished promoters. Many educators and suffragists highly praised the achievement of the drive for the "Women's Fund, " and letters of appreciation poured in from many parts of the country. Coinciding with the nation-wi de suffrage movement and the gradual improvement of women's status, was the rise of the movement for the organization of women's clubs, leading to the Maryland Federation and the National Foundation of Women's Clubs. Civilization in the twentieth century had achieved a rapid development of household con- veniences which aided a growing number of middle-class women to escape at least somewhat from the busy domestic treadmill. Most probably, household conveniences such as gas lights, municipal water system, domestic p l umbing, canning, the commercial production of ice, the improvement of furnaces, stoves, and washtubs, and the popularization of the sewing-machine, resulted in affording women more leisure hours for club activities. Thus, now, they could give more time for outside activities than their parents had been able to, and hundreds and thousands of them joined women ' s clubs throughout the country. Each of the more than one hundred national associations of women in the United States held its annual, biennial, or triennial 4lF lexner, p. l79. 29 convention in some city. The sessions usually were presided over by a woman, discussions were carried on with due attention to parliamentary usage, and a large amount of business was transacted with system and accuracy. Some of the nationally known organizations are touched upon briefly below.42 Started in Cleveland, Ohio, in 1874, the National Woman's Christian Temperance Union was, in its day, one of the most systemati- cally organized . Its members solemnly promised "to abstain from all distilled, fermented and malt liquor, including wine, beer and cider, and to em.ploy all proper means to discourage the use of and traffic in the same. 1143 In the very next year (1875), the Maryland Woman's Christian Temperance Union was organized by Mrs . James Carey Thomas.44 As might be expected, the Maryland Union later worked closely with the suffrage clubs, and even a special section within the Union dealing with suffrage was created under the leadership of Mrs . Sarah T. Miller, who also was prominent in the Baltimore Suffrage Club . In 1896, six members of the Baltimore Woman's Christian Temperance Union demanded before the registrar that their names be placed on the polling books. Mrs. Thomas J. Boram, the spokeswoman of the group, claimed her right to vote as a tax-paying mother and a legitimate citizen under the Constitution of the United States . 45 She was bluntly infono.ed that the State Constitu- tion limited the suffrage to male citizens only. The other brave ladies 42The Volume Four of The History of Woman Suffrage gives a detailed account of the nationally organized women's groups . 43History of Woman Suffrage, IV, 1050 . 44Maryland Women, II, 390 . 45History of Woman Suffrage, IV, 696 . 30 were Dr. Emily G. Peterson, Miss Annie V. Davenport, Mrs . Jane H. Rupp, and Mrs . Adanda Pet ennan. All in all, the crusades for temperance and women ' s r i ghts appeared l ogicaD.y to go together, and both naturally were united at certain points with the aims and objectives of that influent ial and popular group, the General Federation of Women's Clubs. Of course the Federation's program was not all political, and, in fact, it was in its non-political aims of Art, Education, and Industries that it perhaps was able to make progress . The Maryland State Federat ion of Women ' s Clubs, organized much later (in l900) by Miss Elizabeth King, grew rapi dly, and continued to be non-political, although many individual members supported the suffrage movement . Perhaps it is well, too, to menti on at this point, some other well known women ' s organizations, such as the National Congress of Mothers, the National Woman's Relief Society, the National Council of Jewish Women, the National League for the Promotion of Social Purity, the National Kindergarten Union, the National Federation of Musical Clubs. Of the many religious organizations, the women's Missionary Society of the Methodist Episcopal Church and the International Board of Women's and Young Women ' s Christian Associations were outstanding. On the patriotic side, the Woman's Relief Corps, the Auxiliary to the Grand Army of the Republic, and the Society of the Daughters of the Revolution had already been most active. In the extent and scope of women's general interests and activi- ties, Maryland women were not very far behind the other states. National organizations had incorporated Maryland branches into their membership with the result that Maryland women were being trained on public affairs and leadership. Maryland suffragists were outgrowing 3l their earzy timi dity and i r:i.?esol uteness . Thus, during t he l ast decade of the nineteenth century, suffrage sentiment was strongly awakened, and the or ganized clubs put up on a more s ol i d foundation f or the struggle still ahead. CHAPI'ER III EDUCATIONAL CAMPAIGN FOR WOMAN SUFFRAGE (l9OO - l9lO) As a center of cultural and economic prosperity, with more than half the entire population of Maryland, the City of Baltimore was naturally destined to become the center of the Woman Suffrage Movement , stretching its leadership throughout the State . Joining Mrs . J . William Funck, the two Baltimore women, Mrs . EJizabeth King Ellicott and Mrs . Donald Hooker, ca.me forward to lead the movement . Another Baltimorean, Miss Etta H. Maddox, opened the way for the emancipation of women in higher professions, by becoming the first woman lawyer in l902. Miss Maddox, a sister of Mrs O Funck and a graduate from the Peabody Conservatory of Music, with a record of successful recitals in Baltimore, Washington, and Richmond, attained a law degree from the Baltimore College of Law in 2900 . l The following year, since her admis- sion to the bar association was refused, she brought her case to the State Supreme Court . Her petition was denied on November 2l, l9~SJ, by Justice D. J . McSherry's opinion that women were excluded from all occupations denied them by the English common law . The decision added that an exception would be made if "the disability could be removed by a statutory enactment . 112 Immediately taking advantage of this decision, State Senator Jacob M. Moses solicited the Legislature of l9O2 to pennit women to practice law in Maryland . The bill passed and Miss Maddox 1Maryland Women, II, p . 239 . 2History of~ Suffrage, IV, p . 695 . 32 33 became the first woman member of the bar. 'rhe Baltimore Sui'frage Club honored Senator Moses with a handsomely engraved resolution and presen- ted a gold pin bearing the State coat-of-anns to Miss Maddox. 3 While active as an attorney at law, and as Corresponding Secre- tary of the Maryland Woman Sui'frage Association, Miss Maddox reported at the annual convention in l904 the growing sentiment in favor of political equality in the state. By the fall of l904 the Baltimore Club had a membership of one hundred sixty women, while the Montgomery County Association had thirty-two members, making a total of one hundred ninety-two in the State .4 In addition five hundred others pledged themselves as supporters . The convention of l904, which elected Mrs. J . William Funck as President of the State Association, allowed her to assume the entire leadership and responsibility of the Maryland movement . As her initial work, Mrs . Funck restored the county organization which started in l902 with the guidance of Mrs . Carrie Chapman Catt and the Rev . Anna Howard Shaw of the National American Woman Sui'frage Associa- tion. Determined to double the membership, Mrs. Mary B. Holton, Chai:rman of the organization committee, again invited the Rev. Anna Howard Shaw to assist in the campaign to organize sui'frage clubs in the counties. The Rev . Shaw's inspiring speaking tour,which started in April, l905,5 was immediately fruitful: Mrs . John H. Richard fanned the 3Ibid., II, p. 253 . -Th-e -Ba-lt-im-or-e -Su-n, 20 April l9?-~--. 4Maryland Woman Sui'frage Association Minutes MSS, Pratt Library, Baltimore, Maryland,. l6 November l904 . These minutes date from February, l904, to December, l9l0 . Hereafter this Minutes will be referred to as State Association Minutes . 5Ibid., April l905 . 34 Bel Air Club Woman Su:ffrage Association in Harford County; .Mrs. Herring followed with the Era Club in Baltimore County; and Mrs" Edwardo. Janney organized the Livermore Equal Rights League in Baltimore . 6 The three new clubs joined the State Association in the following year. '?he pledge to double the membership was fulfilled as the entire membership increased to four hundred twenty-three women . With two hundred fifty- four members, the Baltimore Club was the largest; the Montgonery County Association had ninety-one members; the Live:rmore League thirty-eight; the Bel Air Club twenty-four; and the Era Club sixteen. In addition, two hundred sympathizers' signatures were obtained.7 Encouraged with the successful result, all the members were again urged to promote publicity vigorously. In order to gain the greatest possible publicity for the move- ment in Maryland, Mrs . Funck invited the National American Woman Suffrage Association in l904 and again in 1905 to hold its annual Convention in Baltimore . The invitation in l905 was accepted, and the National Convention was thus held in Baltimore from February 7 to l3, l906. Careful preparation for this event was made by the convention committee under its Chairman, Mrs . Mary Bentley Thomas . Mrs. Mary B. Holton worked on "hospitality", while Mrs . Worthington looked after the matters of "reception"; and "floral decoration" was assigned to Mrs. J. William Brown and "music programs" to Miss Mary Young. Mrs . Funck and the treasurers of Maryland's member clubs took responsibility for the finance . In addition, the work of "flag decoration" and "advertizing" was well taken care of by Dr. J . William Funck . "Supper and lunch" were served by the Maryland Woman's Christian Temperance Union, and the 6Ibid., 20 November l905. 7Ibid. 35 twenty per cent of the profit from the sales of food was given to the Maryland Association.8 The State Association sent out more than 20)000 invitations . The annual Convention of the National American Woman Suffrage Association was held at the lifric Theater} and the audience at the evening sessions numbered from lJ500 to 3,000. Music was provided by the Charles M. Stieff Piano Company} while clergymen from local churches came to conduct devotional services . 9 Three men, Dr. J. William Funck, Dr . Edward 0 . Janney, and Mr. Charles H. Holton, husbands of active suffragists, gave considerable time and assistance to the work of the Convention. The Convention was successful, attracting attention in the State, though it left a debt of one hundred dollars which the Baltimore Club 1.a.ter paid off _l0 Many people} previously lukewarm on the suffrage question, began to reconsider and some now broke their silence and joined the movement . Bringing the National Convention to Baltimore was accl.a.imed as the first outstanding success of the Maryland suffragists since this movement started in the early 1870's.ll Taking advantage of the publicity ai'forded by the National Con- vention of l906J the State Association requested the political parties and leading business and civic organizations to endorse equal suffrage. However, the Maryland State Grange and the Maryland Federation of I.a.bourJ although they had been impressed favorably, refused the plea of 9Histo:rz of Woman Suffrage} VI, p. 696. 10 state Association Minutes, 21 November 1907. 11Ma_rzland Women, I, p. 304. This is a comment of Dr. William J. Funck in his biographical sketch of his wife, Emma. 36 women when they were directly approached for an endorsem.ent.12 It may be well to note that, when Maryland women were just beginning in l906 to move toward the distant goal, women were already fully qualified to vote in Finland, Norway, Federated Australia, and New Zealand, as well as in the States of Wyoming, Colorado, Idaho, and Utah. Also, municipal suffrage had been granted to women in England, Scotland, Ireland, and Wales; and one half of the States in the Union had granted suffrage to women in school elections. The only time, probably, that women had ever voted in political elections in Maryland was when Annapolis women voted on "municipal bonds" in l900 . In an effort to tell the world of women's desire to stand equal to men in human dignity and in public affairs, suffragists found them- selves involved in educational, cultural, social, and economic matters leading to the improvement of women . Hoping to elevate the cultural interest of the community, the Maryland Association petitioned the Legislat'UJ::"e to grant permission to civic clubs to use the public build- ings for lectures and musicales . l3 The co-education system was being severely criticized on the grounds that it might degrade women; however, suffragists supported it, arguing that this system was the best and fastest way to attain equality between girls and boys. Realizing the great value of winning the teachers to its cause, the l908 goal of the State Association was to "convert public school teachers. 1114 Teachers were highly regarded as a band of progressive people who could readily 12History of Woman Suffrage, IV, p . 253. 13states Association Minutes, 23 November 1908. Women's clubs were not granted with any such pennission by a legislative action. 14-mstory of~ Suffrage, IV, p . 254. 37 understand the cause of equal suffrage. In November, l909, the Maryland State Association openly urged all teachers to cooperate in securing the franchise for Maryland wom.en.l5 Democratic ideals of the Revolutionary patriots, moreover, such as "taxation without representation is tyranny," or "all governments should derive their just powers from the consent of the governed," were frequently quoted by feminists . Suffragists further characterized woman's desire to participate directly in politics as a natural response to the growing democracy in a civilized society . In another direction, women, wishing to encourage parental responsibility and moral chastity equally upon father and mother, sought to end commercialized prostitution. Suffragists joined the Maryland Federation of Women's Clubs in petitioning the Legislature on January 2l, l900, in a demand to prohibit prostitution and to apply the severest punishment possible to the "wretches who are engaged in this most disgraceful traffic," for they "are the most wicked and dangerous enemies of mankind . "l6 Instead of responding to the cries of the ten thousand women who signed on the petition, a new legislative regulation was enacted compelling the prostitutes to take a periodical medical examination and treatment . l7 Resentment against the half-way legal and protective measure was bitterly expressed, and many women, who had been previously silent on the subject of equal suffrage, began to knock on the doors of the suffrage clubs to join a movement which appeared to offer hope for better moral conditions . l 5state Association Minutes, November 1909. For the purpose of winning teachers to the cause, Mrs. Funck obtained invitations to speak before the teachers' meetings in counties . l 6The Journal of the Senate, l 900 (Maryland), (Annapolis: William J. C. Dulaeycompany, State Printers, l900), p . 895 . 17state Association Minutes, 22 November l 909 . 38 There were numerous other political and social reforms the Mary- land suffragists desired . Women's lack of political power, for example, had resulted in low wages for woman workers. The traditional "women at home" was no longer an appropriate concept, with thousands of American women employed in earning a Jiving. Women deserved better pay, and needed better laws too, to safeguard public health. In a modern civilized society a mother needed to protect her family beyond the four walls of her house . Against some profit-minded businessmen, who opposed refo:rms, mothers demanded fresher air, cleaner water, and purer milk; and against the corrupt type of politicians, who cared for nothing but gaining power and position, they sought clean politics that would insure the building of more playgrounds for children and better and safer streets. Talking and petitioning for these reform measures before the legislature proved discouraging . It was becoming increasingly clear that direct action through the ballot alone could insure the means of bringing about sufficient pressure to get needed moral, economic, and social reforms, which men appeared to be unwilling to fight for. The State Association sent its first woman suf'frage petition to the Legislature of 1906 and requested tba.t the Legislature give prompt consideration. The matter was treated as a joke . 18 Again in 1907 the suffragists sought to have the Legislature revise the election laws by eliminating the word "male" from the Maryland Constitution. This also received no consideration .19 Such experiences showed that it would take careful planning to get even a hearing by the Legislature. At the state convention in 1908 18.History of Woman Suffrage, VI, P? 255. l9Ibid. 39 this matter was discussed in detail . Soon more effective methods led to decision, in l909, by the Maryl.and Grange and the State Federation of Labor giving formal endorsement to woman suffrage.20 Detailed prepara- tions for the state-wide suffrage bill to be presented in l9l0 were now undertaken by the membership of the State Association . Another step to broaden the scope of suffrage activity and organization had resulted in the Livermore Equal Rights League becoming the Equal Suffrage League of Baltimore, in l906, under the leadership of Mrs. Elizabeth King Ellicott .2l A daughter of Francis T. King, financier and philanthropist, and wife of William Miller Ellicott, architect, and heir to the EDicott flour mill industry on the Patapsco River, Mrs . Ellicott was always energetically and enthusiastically in the forefront of reform movements . She was a born l eader, as a club woman and a philanthropist; and her activity in behalf of the Maryland suffrage movement reflects her able fight for the enhancement of woman- hood . She was elected the first president of the Equal Suffrage League in l906, which was six hundred strong at the time; and she filled this office with wisdom and rare executive ability until her death in l9l4. Another great leader was Mrs. Donald R. Hooker. In l907, Mrs . Hooker, a social hygiene worker, together with her husband had founded the Guild of St. George, a home for unmarried mothers and their children .22 An authoress of numerous books and articles such as Life ' s Clinic, The Laws of Sex, and~ Spirit of Christmas, 23 Mrs. Hooker was intensely concerned with women's disability under the law . She joined the Equal 20state Association Minutes, 23 November l908 . 2l Luckett, Maryland Women, I, p . l22 . 22Ibid., p . 203 ? 23Ibid., p. 204. 40 Suffrage League in l907; and her name became widely known for her dis- tinguished service as chairman of the lecture committee. In l9()9 Mrs . Hooker organized the Just Government League in Baltimore and affiliated it directly with the National American Woman Suffrage Association . With the appearance of two such lively leaders as Mrs . Ellicott and Mrs . Hooker, Mrs . Funck no longer was the sole reliance in suffrage leader- ship in Maryland . A few days before the State Associ ation's long-planned state- wide suffrage bill was presented to the Legislature of l9l0, Mrs . Ellicott, acting independently of the State Association, achieved the honor of introducing the first suffrage bill to the Maryland Assembly. The bill, which was designed to enfranchise evezy resident of .Baltimore, male or female, of twenty- one years of age or more, with property and educational qualifications, was accompanied by eleven pounds of peti- tions bearing the names of l73,000 persons and by Mayor Mahool's Municipal Message endorsing woman suffrage .24 Judge Jacob M. Moses, legal adviser of the League, presided over the hearing before the House Committee on Elections on the afternoon of February l4, l9lO, and allowed a ten-minute period to each speaker. Dr. Thaddeus Thomas, Professor of Economics at Goucher College, intro- duced himself as a convert from the ignorance of an anti-woman suffrage position to the enlightenment of equal suffrage. He expressed his chagrin at the sort of discrimination which place women on a political plane even lower than male criminals in Mazyland, by allowing released male conVicts to vote while women could not .25 Mrs . Ellicott spoke on 2 4rustory of Woman Suffrage., VI, p. 263 . 25 -Th-e B-al-tim-o-re -Su-n, l7 Februazy l9l0, P? 7. 41 "Municipal Housekeeping," while other speakers argued that the ballot was a necessity for women in all phases of life: in property, in indus- try and in the professions, in education, and in parenthood. The crowd was friendly and broke into a spontaneous applause at the slightest provocation. All speakers emphasized the typical suffrage propaganda, namely, that society would be benefited if women were given the ballot. In the afternoon of March l, 1910, general legislative debate on the bill opened with the "fair and just" report from the House Commit- tee on Elections. Mr. Carr, Chairman of the Committee and an advocate of woman suffrage, led an exhaustive discussion in favour of granting suf'frage ? Mr. Carville D. Benson of Baltimore County, who led the opposition,charged immediately that Mr. Carr was "untrue at heart but was playing to the galleries. 1126 Appealing to the members of the House not to make drastic changes in the fo:rm of government, Mr. Benson indicated that the measure would result soon in Negroes entering the booths with their wives and daughters .27 Thus the fear of Negro voting was conveniently used in an effort to defeat the bill. Backed by Mr. Andrew J. Cummings of Montgomery County, Mr. Benson made a motion to postpone the bill indefinitely; and it was seconded by Mr. Girwood. Trying to defeat this motion, Mr. William H. Paire advised the men who were opposed to liberate themselves from the traditional prejudice against womanfolks.28 When one delegate called the bill unconstitu- tional, Mr. Carr sent the petition of 173,000 names to the Speaker's desk. Mr. Rose pleaded for the passage of the bill and informed the 26Ibid., l March 1910, P? l. 27Ibid., 2 March 1910, p. 2. 28Ibid. 42 delegates of the progress made by the equal suffrage system in England and other countries . When the motion was made for indefinite postponement of the bill, the vote was 67 for postponement and 24 against, despite the appeal of scores of women in the gallery . The Baltimore Sun editorial called these sixty-seven men "ungallant," but also referred to the little band of twenty-four suffrage supporters "as helpless as a woman in a polling 01129 booth Justifying his support of the indefinite postponement of the bill, Mr . Giddes said that he had acted "not on the ground of constitu- tionality but for their ( the women I s) true welfare . " Another delegate said that indefinite postponement was "for the feelings of the ladies, as such a motion would hurt their feelings less than killing the bill 1130 outright ? Those who were well acquainted with legislative matters predicted that no bill granting suffrage to women was likely to pass at that session. An Equal Suffrage League member told a newsman that "the men must be educated to demand suffrage" for women, for unf'ortunately only men could respond to the women's demand. 31 A spectator quipped: "Pity, that women's rights are so often children ' s wrongs . 1132 Some suffragists criticized the loud and militant conduct of Miss Janet Richards, President of D. c. Property Owners in Maryland, during her speech before the House Committee. An elderly politician, Mr. George M. Lewis, called the women workers in Annapolis "the poorest lobbyists" he had ever seen; women turned their backs in silence as if they were afraid, he said, whenever a member of the House walked toward them. 33 Some 29Ibid . 30ibid. , 3 March 1910, P? l. 3lrbid. 32~ b -, 17 February 1910, p . 7 ? 33~., 2 March 1910, p. 7- 43 Equal Suffrage League members blamed the defeat of the bill to the opposition of some members of the Maryland Woman Suffrage Association. The Association, to be sure, had introduced a state-wide suffrage bill during the House debate on the municipal suffrage bill . In justifying this step, it was argued, that if votes for women were so beneficial, it would be illogical to ask for suffrage only for Baltimore city women, and not for the whole State . 34 The proposal, in 1910, of the Maryl.and Woman Suffrage Associa- tion came in the fonn. of a resolution for a State constitutional amend- ment . So it was that the House Committee on Amendments greeted four hundred ladies from Baltimore at a public hearing on the resolution on February 24, 1910. Delegate Paire, Chair.man of the Committee and a sponsor of the resolution, aroused the enthusiasm of the ladies by introducing himself as the first man to offer a woman suffrage bill in the Maryland Assembly. It was he who called the hearing to order. Miss Etta H. Maddox, the real author of the proposed resolution, presided over the testimonies in favor of woman suffrage . The Rev . Dr . John Roach stranton of the Seventh Baptist Church of Baltimore testified that the splendid and pure influence of women would elevate the morals of poli- tics, saying that the ballot box stands next to the altar of God-- a pure and holy spot . 35 Mrs. Funck and the Rev . Shaw emphasized the position of modern women, which made it necessary, she said, to obtain the ballot as a legitimate means of protecting life and property . The Committee members heard repeatedzy" the plea that women suffrage would lead to the elevation of womanhood and to the betterment of conditions in the State. On March 24, the House, without debating the resolution., 35rbid. , 24 February 1910, p. 8 . 44 voted overwhe.1.zn:i.ngJ.y to defeat it. The vote was 61 to 18. Nq action was ta.ken in the Senate.36 Now, a new development took place, threatening the united front th of e women themselves. The executive committee of the Maryland Association startled some suffragists and the interested public by adopting a resolution expelling the Equal Suffrage League from the State Association for not having manifested any "interest in or desire to fulfill any of the obligations of the State Association" and for having uignored the right of the said Association" by assuming the pre- rogatives of the said Association . u37 The resolution reflected the Association's displeasure at the League ' s organizational efforts in the counties without going through Association channels, as well as its backing of the mun:i_cipal suffrage bill, contrary to.the wishes of the Association. At the state convention of November, 1910, Mrs. Funck charged Mrs . Ellicott With failure to abide by the rules and principles of the State Association. Mrs . Ellicott ignored several letters telling her about these alleged Violations and refusal to send delegates to the State convention, in 1909 ? Mrs . Ellicott denied the charges against her, arguing that the League had always lent a helping hand, wherever nE;eded for the advancement of the cause.38 "The League should be left affiliated," pleaded Mrs . Ellicott, "chiefzy for the fact that there should be hannony.u39 Miss Mary Magruder of the Montgomery County 36 Histoq 9!_ woman Suffrage, VI, p . 25 4 ? 37state Association Minutes, 18 June 1910. 38The Baltimore Sun, 30 October 1910, P? 8. 39rbid., 29 November 1910, P? 9. League characterized the expulsion of a thousand loyal members as a "sad state of af'fairs, 11 and moved that the convention reconsider the case . 4? When the debate was over Mrs. Funck had won her point, and the Equal Suffrage League was expelled. The Baltimore Sun, which watched the split between Mrs. Funck and Mrs. Ellicott, facetiously described the incident as a question of States' Rights, calling Mrs. Funck, the Ulysses S. Grant, and Mrs. Ellicott, the Robert E. Lee, of the movement I for woman s rights. The Sun, using still further the analogy on the Civil War, asserted that "other generals" played their roles so as to throw the tide of battle first to one side (Mrs. Ellicott) and then to the other (Mrs. Funck). 41 Miss Edna A. Beveridge I s resolution of love and appreciation for Mrs. Funck, af'ter the departure of the Equal Sui'- frage League, was unanimously adopted by the Convention. Most of the current officers were reelected. However, Miss Mary C. Cecil was chosen to fill the position of recording secretary, and Miss Laura Edward and Mrs. Berry Bourne became auditors. Miss Edna A. Beveridge was elected national executive committee member, while Mrs. Laura llolings - head became the press chairman . The Convention adjourned with Mrs. 1 Funck s confident assurance that the State Association would not be weakened by the loss of the Equal Suffrage League, and that all suffrage clubs should cooperate in securing the state-wide suffrage amendment in the State. Determined not to be disturbed by expulsion from the State Association, Mrs. Ellicott broadened the activities of the Equal Suffrage League. Field Secretaries were appointed to proceed with and strengthen county organization; and funds were raised through rummage sales, lawn ---~-------------- 46 fetes, and suppers. In l9ll the first suffrage paper, The New Voter, was published by the League, with Miss Anne Wagner as Editor-in-Chief.42 A special committee headed by Mrs. Charles E. Ellicott began a series of investigations into the Criminal Court's methods of conducting trials, when young girls were witnesses in cases of assault. Later the League employed the first woman probation officer, and paid her salary until l9l6, when Mayor Preston agreed to make the position a city office temporarily . 43 In l9ll, as had been predicted, 44 Mrs. Ellicott organized the State Franchise League and affiliated it directly with the National .American Woman Suffrage Association. Five societies joined the State Franchise League; they were the Equal Suffrage League of Baltimore, the Woman Suffrage Club of Thurmont and Emmitsburg, the Junior Suffrage League of Bryn Mawr School, and the Political League of Baltimore 45 County . Mrso Ellicott was elected the first President of the new State Franchise League, and was now more ready than ever to lead the State-wide campaign for woman suffrage. The eleventh annual meeting of the Maryland Federation of Women's Clubs on April 28, l9l0, witnessed the gathering of prominent woman leaders, including suffrage crusaders of every variety and point of view, both "municipal suffrage first" and "state-wide suffrage" advocates. At this juncture the official stand of the Maryland Federa- 1 tion of Women's Clubs was one of absolute neutrality, because the membership was rather evenly divided between those who favored women's 42 History of Woman Suffrage, VI, p. 264. 44The Baltimore Sun, 29 November 1910, P? 9. 45Ibid., 2 May l912, p. 7. 47 voting and those who opposed it. Still, despite the officially neutral stand on the issue, the majority of leading club women were suffragists and many of the Federation's proposed refonnscoincided with those of the suffrage groups. Mrs. Elizabeth King Ellicott, who was now President of the Equal Suffrage League of Baltimore as well as the State Equal Franchise League, had been the founder of the Maryland Federation of Women's Clubs and its first president. Mrs. Benjamin w. Corkran, the Federation's President in 1910 had recentzy been a guest speaker at the United Society for Woman Sui'f'rage in Cincinnati, where she prophesized that "within the next generation there will be upheavalsin the political forces in this country for woman's rights. 1146 The program of both the club women and suffragists stressed home improvement, as well as higher standards of literacy, charity, public schools, and hygiene. Women, by this time, were not alone in their crusade for politi- cal equality. A little band of men, for example, had assembled to fonn the Men's League for Woman Suffrage in the fall of 19()9 . 47 The Men's League elected Dr. Edwardo. Janney as President, and Dr. J. William Funck and Dr. Donald R. Hooker as Vice President. Dr . Warren H. Lewis was elected Secretary, and Mr. J. Henry Baker, Treasurer. Ten other members were appointed to serve on the executive committee. These men were ready and willing to assist the women in their fight for political equality. In September, 1912, the Men's League appointed the Rev. James 46 ~., 17 May 1910, p. 2. 47Ibid., 3 March 1910, p. 7. This date is only an approximate one ? Its name" first appeared when the Equal Suffrage League performed a play, "Legislative Circle" on March 14, 1910, at the Arundel Club, on North Charles Street in Baltimore. The members of the Men's League impersonated certain legislators. . .,, 48 Grathan Mythen, an Episcopal minister and eloquent speaker, as General Secreta:ry. The Rev. My-then campaigned in Anne Aru.udel County in October, and during November he helped Dr. Hen:ry Bu.lett to form the Pylesville Men's League in Harford County with thirty full-fledged members. 48 In 1912, the Ma:ryland Men's League for Woman Suffrage was fonnally affiliated with the National Men ' s League for Woman Suffrage, of which Mr. James Lee Laidlaw was President. Alarmed at the increasingly active equal suffrage campaign, anti- suffragists opened their own campaign to prevent any legislative enact- ments favorable to woman's rights. On March 13, l9ll, a large meeting was held with former Justice Brown, Mr. Everett P. Wheeler of New York, and M:r. William L. Marbu:ry as guest speakers; and they were loudly ap- plauded. Justice Brown reminded the audience of the "plainly manifested superiority of one sex over the other," and rejected the woman suffrage movement as fanciful, even though having a somewhat popular political appeai.49 At this gathering in contrast to the suffragists' meetings, one could note one strikingly different feature--namely, the absence of women participating in the meeting . At pro-suffrage meetings, an officer of the suffrage club nonnally presided, and there were generally women on the platform; however, at those meetings held to oppose suffrage, 1f women attended, they sat usually in the audience, while the men conducted the meeting. About this time, with the assistance of leading anti-suffrage men, M:rs. Robert Garrett, wife of a Baltimore Bank.er, organized the Ma:ryland Association Opposed to Woman Suffrage. A ten-plank plat.form 48The Maryland Suffrage News, 9 November 1912. '.l.'his official weekly pamphlet of the Just Government League will be hereafter referred to as Maryland News . 49The Baltimore Sun, 14 March l9ll, P? 9 . was announced, stating the purpose and principles of this Association.50 Wb..ile recognizing suffrage to be a duty of citizens, the Association pleaded for women's immunity from this duty on the grounds of engrossing responsi blit ies at home. This group also regretted that the ballot in some cases was no longer limited to men alone; and it determined to preserve "indirect" feminine influence for .American womanhood. Already, however, the campaign had begun to affect various church groups; and it was to be noted that certain churchmen, whose i nfluence was felt strongly by their congregation on the suffrage issue , began publicly to discuss suffrage in the pulpit itself. Thus, the traditional church position opposing the changing of the sphere of women as interpreted in the gospels was openly challenged by some leading ministers, who supported the direct political role for women . Before the Baptist Ministerial Union on February 28, l9lO, the Rev. John Roach Stranton of the Seventh Baptist Church in .Baltimore and the Rev. Dr. Henry A. Griesmer of the Franklin Square Baptist Church discussed the topic, "Ought Women to Have the Right to Vote?" Dr. Griesmer opposed women ' s voting because it was "unscriptural, unnatural and impolitic"; but Dr. Stranton favored the proposition, because, he said, women "have the knowledge and are well versed on all questions of government and economics,"--more so, in fact, than the Negroes who have gone to the polls and voted . 5l The Rev. Peter Ainslie, a well known pastor of the Christian Temple, proudly told his congregation of his experience; he had been laughed at eighteen years ago, when he first advocated equality for women, but now the movement had becane a serious 50Ma.ryland News, l3 April l9l2, p ? 3. 5 ~e Baltimore Sun, l March l9lO, p. 4. 50 proposition. 52 In opposition, the powerful Catholic Cardinal James Gibbons of Baltimore made a special effort to advise his people "not to follow in the steps of those who have become mannish in their ways and fight for a place in politics . 11 53 A great suffrage church victory was achieved at St. Peter ' s Episcopal Church of Baltimore, when women were allowed to vote at the vestry election in April, 2912. In full public view in this election, where many curious and anxious persons sought to see hew women would respond to the voting, women members of the church cast their ballots. The ladies were thanked for their mani.festation o.f interest and were cordial.ly invited to come again next year.54 The Maryland su.ffragists acclaimed the event to be evidence of a gradual social recognition of equality. In another area--public education--women boldly asked for better opportunities for their sex in the public schools. Schools were criti- cized for having been ope~ and shamelessly used by bosses as political spoils . One objective was to place a "woman on the School Board," who would help cleanse the administration and uplift the academic standards. The rumor was spread that Mayor Mahool of Baltimore City was considering a woman for the Board. On April 23, l9l0, Mayor Mahool yielded to the standpat elements in the Council, which threatened to reject all nominees if any one of them should be a woman . "One of the men will not be a woman, " ventured the Mayor laughingly, and put the rum.or to rest. 55 Thus, the year of l9lO passed without a woman on the School Board. 52Ibid . , 26 November l9l0, p. l6. 53rbid., l March l9lO, p. 9. 54wornan's Journal, (20April l912), P? 7. 55'I'he Baltimore Sun, 23 April l9lO, P? 6. ..~ .' 5l Nevertheless, sentiment favoring woman suffrage was definitely growing more fashionable . Mayor Mahool, about this time, endorsed woman suffrage in principle, saying, "let the women have the ballot. 11 56 A well known Odd-Fellow, Mr . George F . Clark, asserted that women "have keen perception and are quick and active, and in most instances take an interest in public affairs," strongly emphasizing that woman suffrage was the "only key to eradicate II corrupt politics . 57 Some people even dared to imagine "What women could do, if one should be chosen Mayor? 1158 At the interview on this subject, three suffrage leaders, Mrs. Hooker, Mrs . George W. Sadtler, and Dr. Nellie v. Mark, cheerfully opinioned that a woman mayor, when one was chosen, would manage the city govern- ment like a good housekeeper. Elaborating imaginatively and optimisti- cally, Mrs? Hooker predicted that a "woman mayor" would bring clean streets, markets, and docks, war against the smoke nuisance, add more playgro1lllds for children and secure greater efficiency in juvenile courts, and cleaner politics.59 So, it was that, instead of confining their activity merely to the suffrage campaign, the suffragettes, by l9l0, tended to campaign for a broad program of progressive refonns, suggesting that their strategy would be like paving a good road, which could lead ultimately toward the goal of votes for women . This feminine maneuver gained many men sup- porters who were naturally interested in better government. And the question of woman's voting rights, which the Legislature of l910 had refused to recognize, began to take on the appearance of a respectable and legitimate crusade. The period of preliminaries was over. The 56 ~-, 5 June l9lO, p . 9 . 57 Ibid., l March l910, p. 9. ~a J Ibid . , 24 June l9l0, p . 12 . 59Ibid. ' ., ?, 52 Maryland suffragettes were finally ready to turn their efforts seriouszy to a vigorous campaign for a State constitutional amendment for woman suffrage . CHAPTER IV A CAMPAIGN FOR A STATE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT Maryland women had been accively engaged in the crusade for woman suffrage for nearly twenty-five years when the Maryland delegation heard President Taft state, in an address to the forty-second National Woman Suffrage Convention in Washington, that he was not in sympathy with woman suffrage . Prior to this, American suffrage leaders had pursued an educational campaign and decried the militant political methods which English women had used in their efforts to obtain the ballot . After hearing the President's speech, however, Mrs . O. R. Belmont of New York and Miss Alice Paul, Chainnan of the Congressional Union, urgently advocated, as an absolute necessity, the launching of an active political campaign. Inspired by this new move, Mrs . Hooker of the Just Government League and Mrs. Ellicott of the Equal Suffrage League announced their decision to adopt the direct political campaign method, starting with open-air and parlor meetings . l For a woman to make a speech, especially in the public street, was regarded as a shockingly shameful thing in a conservative town like Baltimore . Yet, on May 26, l9lO, Mrs . Hooker stood on an automobile- platform, speaking to a crowd . With belief in the justice of her cause, Mrs . Hooker braved the jeers and ridicule of a curious and, perhaps, hostile audience . It was at such open-air meetings that hundreds of people learned about the woman suffrage movement. lBa.ltim.ore Sun, 2l April, l9lO, p . 8. 53 Prominent speakers often addressed street audiences . Miss Ray Costelloe, a charming and enthusiastic young suffragette, fresh from an exciting campaign in Engl and, spoke on a Baltimore street on one occasion; she was of the opinion that woman suffrage was hardly a different matter in America from what it was in England. Even Mayor Mahool came out to an open-air meeting held near the Odd Fellow Hall . Also, throngs of people heard Mr . Reed Lewis of Columbia University when he expressed his belief that women were fu.J.J.y able to think for themselves and would vote 0 ~ for what they knew to be most beneficial . A listener shouted: "Oh, they would all vote the same as their husbands, so it would only be a case of more votes to cow.1t. The result would be just the same . 112 Dr . Lewis objected that this would not be the case . A month after the open-air meetings had begun, they had became the talk of the town, and the newspapers were filled with reports of the speeches and crowd reactions . At one gathering on the corner of Lexing- ton and Liberty streets, the crowd grew so large that it filled both the streets and the windows of the adjoining buildings with attentive listeners ? Prominent local men like Mr. Nelson Poe and Dr. Hough H. Young, who were near the speaker's platform, were evidently impressed with the arguments presented . There were many questions from the audience at these rallies . For example, one listener asked, "What would the women have done to recover the $67,000 which was taken from the City Hall?" Another said: "What would you do with the baby while you went to vote?" To this question Mrs . Hooker replied: 2Ibid . , l9 July, l9lO, p. l4 . 55 Well, we have to leave the baby everyday while we attend market ? Sometimes baby is asleep, or we leave her with kind neighbors. If we can leave her everyday in the year to attend to the buying of home necessities, we can leave her one day in the year to vote.3 A yoW1gster complained that women always chased ball-playing boys off the street. "That may be true," replied Mrs. Hooker, "but they are onzy sorry that the boys do not have regular ball fields, which the boys would have if' women could vote."4 Mrs. Hooker's enormous success in winning audiences on the streets could be credited to her womanzy dignity, her gentleness of manner, and her appeal to the reason of her hearers . Her logical approach convinced many determined opponents of suffrage that there was something in her arguments, and that she was not merezy making a viru.J..ent attack on the comm.on prejudices against women.5 While speakers on the automobile-platform presented the case for woman's rights, other volunteer workers were busy spreading information about the work and pl.ans of suffrage clubs . The plan to request the major political parties to insert a suffrage plank was disclosed at this time, and voters were urged to elect onzy those legislators who favored equal suffrage . Meanwhile, hundreds of suffrage pamphlets were distri- buted. At the last open-air meeting of the season, a survey was taken to discover the opinions of those present. Sixty-one persons (thirty- three men and twenty-eight women) favored equal suffrage, while one hundred one persons (sixty-one men and forty women) opposed. 6 3Ibid. 4Ibid., 9 August, l9l0, P ? 12 . 5Maryland Women, I, 204 . 6Baltimore Sun, 3 August, l9l0, P ? 12. Commenting on this result, Mrs. Hooker expressed her gratification that nearly half of the crowd already favored woman suffrage . While more work remained to be done, the movement of direct public contact was beginning to look brighter at least. Im.pressed by this active and direct publicity, Mr. Linthicum of City Hall invited volunteers from the suffrage organizations to watch over the election of November, l9ll . It had not been long since women at the polls had been treated as a preposterous joke and subjected to every discourteous treatment, but now the women were received with marked respect when they went to watch the balloting . 7 Many men picked up the suffrage leaflets from the table, and women were pleased to see the change in their attitude . City Hall officials praised the female watchers for having performed their duties properly and faithfully. 8 Gradually society was growing accustomed to seeing women at the polls. In order to preclude any dissention among the suffrage organiza- tions and to fonnulate an effective and unified plan of action that would be supported by all, the leading suffrage organizations created a joint committee . As its initial move, the committee conducted a series of interviews of all delegates-elect to the Legislature on the subject of woman suffrage, receiving for the most part non-comm.ital replies. Under these circumstances, the committee could only provide these men with some facts about the suffrage movement and request them to give a suffrage bill fair consideration. The committee approved a state-wide suffrage bill which proposed a referendum to amend the Maryland Constitution, Article I, Section l, to read "all elections shall be ??. by every citizen, male or female, 7rbid., 9 November, l9ll, p . 16 . -~ , 57 of the United States of the age of twenty-one or more ..? " Further progressive refo:rm measures which the committee considered included the appointment of women to political boards; regulation of the working hours of women for either a ten-hour or an eight-hour day; control of child labor; and the practices of initiative, referendum, and recall.9 Never before in the history of Maryland politics had women taken such an active part as in the year of l9ll. "Woman suffrage" became a popular topic of discussion among various gro1.4>s . On the last day of November, l9ll, sixty Democrats of the Eleventh Ward debated on this very issue. When three judges were chosen, Mr. Harry Heckheimer, a well known supporter o.f woman's rights, protested that all three were known to be against equal su.ffrage, but he was ignored, and the debate continued. He pleaded for political equality for au citizens. What evidence have we that merely being a man qua?c5fies one to vote? ??? What we need is a little moral suasion. At the close of the debate, the judges voted in favor of Mr. Heckheimer, and a resolution was adopted to support women's right to su.ffrage on an equal footing with men. Another interesting meeting was a session at the Baltim ore Y.M.C.A., where, f or the fi rs t tim e, "anti? s " and "pros " met together to plead their cases . As soon as one speaker convinced the audience that his side was right, an opponent would present such a strong argument that the listeners were left helplessly confused, not knowing which one to believe. ll 9rbid., 20 November, l9ll, p. 9. lOibid., 2 January, 1912, p . 9 . 58 The Baltimore Sun also joined the timely talk by reporting about an amazing number of woman voters in the State of California . It announced that there were 87,000 more registered women than men in California, and that the women could seize the reins of power f'rom the Californian men . 12 .Another article described the delighted California woman politicans that "they can from now on control the politics of the State . "l3 Although this report made woman suffragists jubilant, it alanned many conservative people with the prospect of losing the "good old days . " On February l3, l912, eight hundred women gathered before the House Committee on Constitutional .Amendment with a petition signed by 38,ooo voters and with a large sum of money with which to pay for the referendum expense, if necessary. l4 In contrast to the previous hearing of l9lO, the atmosphere bore no trace of the militant, the blaring, the sensational, and the disorganized . The questions asked and the answers given were more sensible and reasonable. Twenty-two members of the House pledged their support to the passage of the bill; three times this number was necessary to pass it . A moving speech was delivered by Congressman Edward T. Taylor of Colorado, who urged the passage of the bill, calling it a "blessing": Gentlemen, there is too much said in the East for woman suffrage and there is too much said against it . It will not bring 12 ~ - , 27 December, 19ll, p . l . l3Ibid . , 28 December, 19ll, p . l. i 4In reply to a complaint of some delegates that the referendum would cost high, Mrs . Donald R. Hooker, President of the Just Government League, told the reporters, "The expenses will be paid by all those behind the bill . As of now, the Just Government League is able to pay the whole cost." Baltimore Sun, ll February, l912, P? 12. , ? ,,, I 59 the millennium, it will not destroy the evil passions of mankind and it will not keep the children from catching measles . But there are countless benefits to Maryland if you pass the bill. You members of the Legislature do not decide this question, you put it up to the peopl e. Chivalry demands that you do this . ul5 After praising Congressman Taylor's speech, Mr . John B. Hanna, chainnan of the Republican State central committee, endorsed the bill, declaring that he had never found even one reason why he should not . l 6 Mrs . Hooker, Mrs . Funck, and Miss Maddox also spoke before the Committee . Altogether, twenty-three organizations were represented at the hearing on behalf of the suffrage bill . l7 Women who were opposed to equal suffrage had their opportunity on February 27 to argue for the rejection of the pending suffrage bill. As a guest speaker for the anti - suffragi sts, Mr. WiJ.Jiam T. Warburton, the Republican floor leader of the Maryland House of' Delegates, revealed l5 ~ - , l4 February, l9.l2, p. l. l 7The following are the 23 organizations which supported the bill: The State Equal Franchise League of Maryland The Equal Suffrage League of Baltimore The College Equal Suffrage League The Men ' s League for Woman Suffrage The Just Government League of Maryland The Maryland State Wide Suffrage Association The Woman's Cooperative School Club The Guild of St . George The Maryland State Federation of labor ~The Mothers ' s Club The Maryland Association of Graduate Nurses The Woman's Medical College Alumnae The Woman's Christian Temperance Union The Friends Benevolent Society The Govans Improvement Society The Ladies of the Macabees The Baltimore Association of Jewish Women The Settlement Association The Delphian Club The Typographical Union The Social Service League of Goucher College The Spring Club The Myserheer Singing Society '!, ' 60 his shocking experiences in Colorado and urged a decided rejection of the bill. He said: Two years ago I traveled through Colorado . I was amazed and shocked beyond my expectation to find the theatres, the hotels, gambling houses wide open on Sunday . To one who was used to the sanctity of the Maryland Sunday, it came as a shock and I returned to this old commonwealth happy in the thought that it was my home ? ?? I shall never vote for woman, because I have too much respect for her and it is my humble judgment that good women themselves do not desire the ballot . You gentlemen of the Committee ought to be able tQ decide this question because you have seen both sides of it . lb When the Committee voted, onJ,y Mr . William H. Marble of Baltimore City and Mr. Thomas G. Campbell of Baltimore County favored the bill; the rest voted for the verdict laid by Chainnan Waters that "the best tbing to do with the suffrage bill is to wring its neck. ,,l9 A dreadful fate , a horrible ending for so noble a cause! The bill was sen4 to the House with an unfavorable report . The all day debate in the House the next day began with Mr. Warburton's speech, so called "one of the ablest speeches ever delivered in the House," which favored a rejection of the bill .20 In spite of the unfriendly atmosphere of the House, Mr . Campbell, the sponsor of the bill, moved to substitute the favorable minority report for that of the majority ? After explaining again the nature of the bill which proposed to substitute "he or she" whenever "he" occurred in the Constitution, Mr . Campbell reminded the delegates that voting for the bill would not be taken as a commitment to woman suffrage but merely as approval for submitting it to the people for their opinion and decision. 2l In reply 28Baltirnore Sun, 28 February, l9l2, P ? 2 . l9Ibid . , 29 February, l9l2, p . l . 2libid. 61 to Mr. Campbell, Mr. Cummings called the whole proposition a "wildest cat theory, 11 while Mr. Posey characterized the thirty-eight thousand voters who signed the petition as people who "will sign anything that is presented to them. 1122 The House rejected the suffrage bill by an over- whelming vote o:f 74 to lB. The Equal Suffrage League's bill, proposing to enf'ranchise tax-paying women o:f Baltimore, though passed by the Senate, was turned down without a discussion in the House. 23 The Maryland Anti-Suffrage Association was greatly encouraged by th~ Assembly's action on the bill and opened its own crusade to the e:ffect that women were more influential without the ballot than with it. Mrs. Robert Garrett, President of the Association, presiding over a large meeting on March 24, emphasized the old doctrine that man was woman's lord and master. Miss Minnie Bronson told the audience that without women's voting, thirty-four states had enacted protection laws for women and thirty-seven states had compelled employers to furnish seats :for women workers.24 Another long-time fighter against woman suffrage, Miss Emily Brissell, opposed woman's politicking on the grounds that it would only place a useless burden on mothers. In the meeting, woman suffrage was described as a ha:rmful threat that would unsex women. Some of the Talbot County ladies joined this crusade by holding weekly parlor meetings at which they discussed the effective ways and means of "defending the home against the vicious attacks o:f the suffragists."2 5 Women opposed to suffrage were becoming as zealous as those who wanted the ballot. 23Maryland News, 29 February, 1913, P? 208. 24Baltimore Sun, 26 March, 1912, p. 9. 25Ibid., 5 May, 1912, p . 7. 62 Upset by repeated failure in the General Assembly of l9l2, suffragists undertook a ser.I.ous investigation of their campaign methods and their effectiveness . The study revealed a singular lack of any clean-cut, consecutive plan of act ion . For example, presenting two suffrage bills, state-wide and municipal, for consideration meant that the suffrage forces were divided. The supporters of the state-wide bill did not back the municipal bill, and vice versa . The state-wide suffra- gists based their stand on basic principles as well as expediency. However, although everyone was a universal suffragist at heart, some often aimed at getting just a half loaf of bread, proverbially considered better than none, and the Equal Suffrage League sacrificed a real desire far- full suffrage for the limited municipal bill. Consequently, nothing was attained . In the future, the consolidation of all Maryland suffra- gists behind one common front would have to be maintained. lack of political experience was another obvious weakness . Suffragists were so a.ruct.ous to make fri ends for the movement at any cost that they never made an effort to appraise the value of such friends. The person who was first and foremost a Democrat or a philanthropist or the like and only secondly a suffragist offered no real value. Definitely a new policy of supporting and counting on only those who were first a suffragist and then something else had to be instituted and enforced . In the eagerness to revise campaign methods, the question of "what kind of suffrage bill" all should support became the most cogent topic. In March, l913, Dr . Florence R. Sabin, Associate Professor of Anatomy at Johns Hopkins University; Dr. Ll.llian Welsh, a p1ominent woman physician; and Miss Mary Cathcart met for a discussion of this Very topi C ? D r . Welsh was strongly for "universal suffrage first, last, and au the time."26 The other three leaders also agreed with Dr. Welsh on SU_p-n t? .,,,or ing the state-wide suffrage bill, which simply demanded an el.1.nu nation of the word 'inale," and which was most popular among suffrage and civi c clubs. Following suit, the Equal Suffrage League, which had twice deviated from the united front, pledged its full support for the state-wid ? 27 e bill. Now all were determined to refuse any- suffrage bill other th an a state-wide one . Specific methods of publicity and education, organization, and Political work recommended by the Just Government League, were adopted th by e joint committee. To start the publicizing and educational ca.zn- Paigu 'mass, open-air.,and parlor meetings were held to attract audiences. At these meetings, people were ini'orm.ed and enlightened on the subject of Why Women should vote; and many of them decided to render their service s to the movement . When a sufficient number of su.... i~. fr age suppor- ters Were gathered, a city or county organization was set up. Once an organization was established, the members started raising funds and gaining experience in working together through fairs, bazaars, theatre benefits, and sales of suffrage Christmas seals.28 As the next step, members prepared to undertake political work such as getting voters' Signatures for a suffrage petition, persuading voters to elect only eg-ua1_ -sU ff rage-endorsed candi date s, securing suffrage planks in the Party platfonna, putting the bill into the Legislature, and lobbying 26 Maryland News, 1+ May, 1912, P? 18? 27Ibid. 28..F, . in the nation, selling Suffrage Seals dur1 or the first time started by the Just Govern.ment League 1 ng the Christmas seasons was t n 1.9U. GradualJy it spread all over the coun ry. 64 for the passage of the bill. For the best results, good coordination of publici ty, and political work was an absolute necessity. At the initiative of the Just Government League, "speakers' classes" were conducted to train qualifi ed and able speakers. The classes were designed to help the women with instructions on speech topics and with ready-written answers to the frequently raised questions, so that they could effectively perform the front-line duty of publicity and education. In summer, whenever the weather was agreeable, a speaker would address a crowd from an automobile -platfonn. During the cold months, speaking engagements at parlor-meeting, called at the residence of some leading citizens, attracted both "antis II and "pros" to meet and talk at one pl.ace. Closer personal contact and acquaintance were most effective in bringi ng more converts to the suffrage cause. During l9l3, the Just Government League alone held 2l0 meetings of executive commit- tee, 2l4 organized parl or-meetings with a total attendance of l9,4lO, and 86 open-ai r meeti ngs, at which 9,500 men and women were addressed. Meantime, the suffrage message was spread to ll4,ooo Marylanders through literature.29 Suffrage signs and parades were also used to give publicity. At circus parades, athleti c meets, and concert intennissions, the suffrage sign "Votes for Women" were posted. The first spectacular parade appeared when the National Democratic Party held its national convention of l9J2 in Baltimore. With high hopes that an enthusiastic showing and a plea might influence the Democratic party to endorse woman suffrage, a colorful suffrage parade was launched on May 3l, in spite of rainy 2~aryland News, l8 April, l9l4, pp. lB-20. weather, attracting more than fifty thousand spectators . 30 Having delivered fervent speeches and hysterical oratory about noble Democratic principles, the convention, however, ended without caring about women's wishes, leaving one half' of the citizens deprived of suffrage on account o:f sex . Parades were used afterwards on all primary and regular elec- tion days in order to remind the voters that only suffrage-endorsed candidates should be elected . 0:f the twenty-eight (28) senators and one hundred two (102) dele- gates in the General Assembly, there were only four senators and twenty- four delegates to represent the ll7,264 registered voters of Baltimore City, while twenty-four senators and seventy-eight delegates were sent by the l75,674 registered voters in the counties . 31 In other words, the great majority of the Maryland delegates were elected :from the counties. For the immediate goal of passing the bill through the Legislature, it was obviously advantageous to concentrate efforts in the counties . The Just Government League took the most active and prominent leadership in promptly extending activity to the counties by appointing Miss L. C ? Trax, Mrs . Nannie Melvin, and Mrs . Marjorie Daw Johnson as field organizers . These three workers were to organize suffrage units in Allegany, Anne Arundel, Baltimore, Cecil, Carrol, Worcester, Frederick, Harford, Montgomery, Prince George's,Talbot, Washington, and Westminster counties . Through the successful work of field organizing in the counties, the Just Government League had an increase of 2, 000 members during March and April of 1913 . 32 All the new members partici- pated in the campaign o:f urging the voters to elect only 30rbid . , l6 June, l912, p . 48 ? 3lrbid., 14 September, 1912, p. 95 . 32rbid . , l9 April, l913, P? 20. 66 suffrage-endorsed candidates by having them sign a pledge slip in which they agreed to vote "in preference for such candidates as pledge them- selves to support Equal Suffrage until the Legislature submits the question to the voters for decision. 1133 The Socialist, Prohibition, and Progressive parties had already endorsed equal suffrage by the Spring of l9l3. As women's best politi- cal friend, the Prohibition party openly criticized the injustice of poll ti cal serfdom of woman citizens and inserted an equal suffrage plank. The Maryland Woman ' s Christian Temperance Union, co-worker of the Prohibition party, carried out a great deal of suffrage work, although it was not called a suffrage club. Another closely related organization, the Anti-Saloon League, endorsed woman suffrage as early as July, 1912, under Superintendent William H. Anderson. 34 Several Socialist clubs extended invitations to suffrage workers to speak at their meetings. The motives of these new or third parties' willing declaration in favor of woman suffrage might be accounted for by their own principles of reform, in which they believed women could help, and by their weak state, which made them ready to grasp at straws. While giving these parties full credit for suffrage endorsement, it was still clear that the franchise would have to cane from the dominant major parties. Because women seemed to divide themselves on main issues in much the same way as men, so that no one party seemed likely to get a definite majority of women's votes, neither the Republican nor the Democratic party saw any advantage in enfranchising women, while there would be the inconveniences of more work and higher expenses in 33 4Ibid. 3 Ibid., 3 August, l 9l 3, p. 72. campaigning. Women were asking these politicians to divide the power of which men had a monopoly; to give up a sure thing for an illlcertainty; and to sacrifice every selfish interest in the name of justice, a word which often had no pl.ace in politics. Moreover, the industrial, com- mercial, and liquor interests from whom the Republican and Democratic parties derived a considerable amount of monetary contribution were strongly opposed to women's demands . Also, the plain fact that women were wi~ng to support any individual candidate or party, if he only supported women's voting right, gained them. no favor from either major party. The Maryland Republican party, which was a minority group with a reputation for being both moderate and liberal in the General Assem- bly, ventured to adopt an initiative and referendum plank at its state convention of August l4, l9l3_35 Nevertheless, the really useful support which the women needed was that of the Democrats, who occupied a majority of seats in the Assembly . At the Democratic state conven- tion, Mr. Jackson H. Ralston of Prince George's County made an earnest plea for the adoption of an "initiative and referendum" plank. Mr. Ralston pleaded: Are we going to boast of our past achievements and ask people to support us on them alone? We must keep pace with the times and give the machinery of government which they need in this day . 36 At the first vote the proposal was carried by l4 to 13 ma.j ori ty ? Then, Mr . Carville Benson got busy, with a determined look on his face; as 35rbid . , l6 August, 19l3, P ? 83 . 36Baltimore Sun, l7 September, l9l3, p . 16 . 68 a resU].t it was reconsidered and defeated by a vote of 17 to 7, the Votes o;f W: ? asbington, Anne Arundel, and Caroline Counties having been switched 37 ? Mr. Arthur P. Gorman, another woman's rights supporter, 0 f':fered a woman sw=P~+ 'rage plank. Sp e akin g agai nst the proposal, Mr. Bellis brought up the frightening fact that if women were able to Vote "all Whites might have to move out," because there were only 85 Whi. tes t 0 379 Negroes in Annapolis. 38 The plank was refused by a vote Of' 20 to 7. The seven men who voted in the aff'innative justified their actio b n Y stating with broad smiles that they just had to stand with the ladies b ecause of' promises. Each explanation brought a gust of' laught 39 er. The whole ef'f'ort to secure Democratic support was lost amid a round of' men's laughter. Having failed to win the support of the .Democratic party, suffra- gists i Zlllllediately directed their campaign at individual delegates on a bi-partisan basis. Every delegate was interviewed and urged to vote :for a referendum on the woman suffrage question. This effort was not totaJ.J.;y Without success; a few long time anti-feminists recognized that the SUff'rage question deserved the opinion and decision of all Marylan- ders . Mr. Cummings had this to say: "I've come round that f'ar, but rm ay vote against the bill when it gets before t h e peopl e. rrlio Th e Women counted on the Republicans in the Assembly to vote according to their party pledge for a referendum. As the campaign seemed to be moving fairly well, many suffrage leaders optimistically voiced the 0Pinion that suf'frage might be granted to women by the direct approval. 37-Ibid. 4oMa.ryland ~, 20 September, 1913, PP 93-94-, Of' the enJ.ightened voters in a referendum rather than by the conserva- tive legislators. To spread suf'frage news widezy and to direct an effective cam- paign, a weekly-, The Maryland Sui'frage News, was published starting .April 6' 1912, with Mrs. Donald R. Hooker as its Editor-in-Cl;def and .Mi-s ? Dora G. Ogle as Business Manager. The Maryland Suffrage News and -The -Wom en , s Journal, official paper of the National American Woman S1.l.ff'rag e As sociation, were subscribed together, so that readers would be f'1..ll.J.y- in:fonned of both the local and the national suffrage movement. A. 11 subscription drive" was encouraged not onzy for the campaign but also f'or r-J.nanc:tal reasons. The Maryland Sui'frage News was circulated in Mary-land, Virginia, Pennsylvania, .Delaware, New York, and even as far as CaJ.i.f'0 ~,...?,,.,.u., ..a; and within a short time it won a reputation for being one of the best s u.ff rage papers in the cotmtry. l+l The Men's League for Woman Sui'frage, which engaged in activities ainong men, especialzy in labor unions, had an able champion in the General Secretary of the League, the Reverend u.,.a mes ?Mv,rv+h en. He was enthusiasticaizy welcomed at the Ca.!J)enters' Union and the Wage Earners' Union. The joint visit by the Rev. Mythen and Mrs. William J . Brown, P:i:-esident of the State Equal Franchise League, to the Ladies' Gannent Maker's Union resulted in the fonnation of a small suffrage club, which .lat 42 er joined the State Equal Franchise League. In none of the Eastern states bad there been so rapid a growth Of' 81.l.ff'rage sentiment during the past few years as in Maryland. Like the National l+lrnterview with Miss A.lice Paul, President of ~o~an's Party, in Washington, D, c., on June 20, 1960. 42.Ma.ryland ~' 26 April, 19J3, P? 25, 70 a ro.l.lin g snowball, suf'frage organizations grew stronger and larger in actiVit Y and in membership. Some people were optimistic enough to pre- dict tha t Maryland might be the first State in the East to reach the goaJ. of' woman suf'f'rage . "Votes for women" talk became so much a popuJ.ar SUbject 0 f' conversation, especially among women, that some even ridicuJ.ed it as a fad. For example, The .Baltimore Sun, which had once greeted the .tnovement with sympathy, now willingly carried a timely cartoon of a tY.Pica~11.. In..J .sc h aracten.z ed si.d e of the movement. The caption read: 'WaJ.k Sideburn ef'fects in their dressing, trouser-like skirts and f' ing canes are fashionable; also lap dogs. .But the Sprinf ads cannot be blamed on the I-want-to-vote woman after all. 3 By- What ever name the suf'frage movement might have been called, the M.a.ry-1. and Su.ff'ragists were content to have attracted the attention of' the PUbli c, especially of the womanfolk. As the first step in preparing for the 1914 campaign, the second joint committee of the State Equal Franchise League, the Men's League, the M.ary-J.and Woman Suf'frage Association, the College League, and the JUst Government League was formed to carry out the campaign in unity. The collUnittee renewed the pledge to support the state-wide suffrage bill 'Which had been drawn by Miss Maddox and tried twice in 1910 and 1912. btt-s ? Frank Ramey was appointed chainnan of the lobby committee in Annapolis With Mrs. Robert Moss, Mrs. s. Johnson Poe, and Mrs . Hooker as her aids. Constitutional .Amendment, after hearing The House committee on scores of' feminists' speeches at the public bearing on February 10, 1914, .Pre-nared to bb woman Suffrage Bill into a "Junk pile" by _,,, th.row the McNa 43Baltimore ~, 16 February, l9l4, P? 7? 71 a vote of 8 t o 3 ? 44 The disappointed suffragists accused House Speaker Trippe 0 f h aving purposely packed the Committee with well-known anti- SUffrage men. 45 The following day in the House, the bill, for which a 45 to 43 maJ. ori ty was cast on the fi.r.s t call, was defeated by a deci- sive vote of 43 to 60. 46 Of the twenty-four .Baltimore city delegates, Oll.J,y Mahool, Delaney, Hall, L. Wilkinson, and Grieble aligned themselves on the SJ? .de of suffragists. M.r . Wilkinson and M.r. Cummings, who bad .PreViou s..,. ..,. promised not to oppose the bill in the House, broke their .Personal prom.i ses and voted against it. The suffrage advocates and th? eir friends among men were helplessly depressed, while the opponents Of the b ill refrained fr9m applause in the gallery as though they appreciated the feelings of the situation. Most of the people, packed in the gallery and on the floor, were there to witness the impending fight on the oyster question and had little interest in the suffrage bilJ.. The same fate was met in the Senate. Disregarding their pledge of 1.1.nity in support of the state-wide suffrage bill, the Equal Suffrage League again independently introduced a partial suffrage bill with educational and property qualifications, which failed even to get a hearing.47 Some legislators sent the following message to the women: Do n , t come as. ki us for the ballot . We won 't give it to you. ng tak You are not wanted in K~e legislative halls. Go home and e care of the boys and girls. f 44-Ibid., 19 February, 1914, P? l. 4?ryland ~, 21 February, 1914, P? 396. 46Bal.timore ~, 19 February, 1914, P? 1. 47Ibid. 4A~.M- aryland ~, 14 March, 1914, P? 4o 4? 72 Considering all these persistent demands for political rights by women, why i s it that woman suffrage was continuously denied? Why were these d e ucated, property-owning, self-reliant, and public-spirl ted Women deprived of the r i ght of representation? Perhaps one of the main reasons 'Was the stubborn refusal of the General Assembly, composed of conservative men, to recognize the changing sphere of modern women's l:!.fe ? r~m~.. ese men in the Assembly held in their hands absolute authority to grant or withhold the right of suffrage from women. Throughout the act? ~Ve campaign, the Maryl.and suffragists had neither been successful in conve:rtin g the Assembly to the equal suffrage cause nor in preventing the re- election of die-hard anti-suffrage legislators to the Assembly. Usually refo:rms of every kind are inaugurated and carried forward bY a minority; and there certainly could be no reason -why this Pa:rtic1J.lar issue should prove an exception. Many revisions of 1.a.-ws un. JUst to -women had been gained by a few brave women; the ballot could be a].s o obtained by the foresight, courage, and toil ofth e f ew. The Voting right 'Was necessarily the most difficult one to obtain, because it required a constitutional amendment and involved a more radical revolution than all the others combined. May, 1914, in the crucial moment of restrengthening the movement, the Maryland suffragists were thrown into deep sorrow by the death of Mrs . Elizabeth King Ellicott, Whose unselfish devotion for women's advancement had resulted in the founding of the Maryland Federation of women's Clubs, tbe Equal Suffrage Lea gue, and the State Equal Franchi se .Tuc~; ;ag ue ? She left a legacy of $25 oo reague to be used for the bettennent of ' 0 with the Equal Suffrage -.romen.49 E. Ellicott assumed temporary chai:rmanship of the Mrs. Charles LeagUe. 49M.aryland ~' I, 12!+ . 73 Whenever the suffrage bill was defeated in the Legislature, the '1?0111.en l ooked forward to another opportunity with the next Legislature. As early as Januar,y 2.7, 1915, in order to assure victor,y in the General Assembly of 1916, Puu- s. Funck, M:r:s. Hooker, and Mrs. Charles E. Ellicott organized the Woman Suffrage Party of Baltimore. i/:v:n By a formal alJiance Of au the suffrage organizations under one central command, the Party hoped t 0 avoid any duplication of work in the city and to pursue an e.:f'fecti ve and economical campaign. .Furthermore, the Party led fu1J..- sca1e organizing work in the counties during 1915. At the end of 1915, as a resU].t of active work, the Just Government League alone had a lllembership t otalling approximately 17,000 women. 51 Securing suffrage endorsements from the two major parties in the Sta te became the main project during the fall of 1915. However, the Democratic state convention of September 23, 1915, denied the women even a .:f'ei-r min utes' plea. Al.though Mrs. Funck was granted a hearing before the .R~,,, _s Committee, the Republican convention, recalling we ll t he ll.UpopuJ.arity of' the suffrage bill of' 1914, refused to renew the re.:rerendmn plank which they had endorsed in 1913. With no party support, the SU.:f'.:f'rage bill of 1916 seemed hopeless indeed. Decisively, by the almost 2 to l ratio of 64 to 36, the 1916 IioUse of Delegates turned down the suffrage bill. To everyone's sur- :P .l:i. s e , h ow-ever, for the first time since the woman suffrage bill had been ? ,n~d General Assembly, an attentive discus-J.ntroduced into the ,Mary.J-CU~ s.ton i-ras carried on in the Senate the following day? Senators WiJ..1.iam J. 0gd of n~itiznore City, J. F. Mudd of Charles en of the Fourth District ~ 50Maryland ~' April 18, 1915, P? 19. 5libid., 24 July, 1915, P? 13o. / , I 74 County, and L. Atwood Bennett of Wicomico County addressed the Senate in favor of equal suffrage. .AJ.l Marylanders were certainly startled I when the Senate passed the Mudd Equal Suffrage Bill by the clear majority of 17 to 10, the House rejection of the previous day notwith- standing . All Republican Senators voted in the affirmative except Mr. William. F. Chesley . Although the Senate passage of the bill had no actual value without the House approval, the very fact that the bill passed the Senate was extremely gratifying and pleasing to the Maryland suffragists . The friends of the bill in the Senate managed so skill- fully that even those who had voted against it in the Senate Committee on Amendments reversed their votes, merely for the sake of having their names placed on record as being in favor.52 The Senate approval of woman suffrage did not stand on a f'inn foundati on but rather on the Senators' sympathy for the unbending courage of the suffrage leaders. The following map shows how the representatives and senators of each county cast their votes on the State-Wide Woman Sui'frage Amendment Bill of 1916.53 Because of disillusionment and exhaustion over the repeatedly unsuccessful. attempts to enfranchise women through the General Assembly, the morale of the movement fell drastically . Mrs . A. C, Hill, .President of the Anne Arundel League, reported its condition as a "set back," while the Carroll County League regretted its inactivity af'ter the failure of the 1916 bill . The Montganery County sui'fragists, who had the problem of many newcomers from Washington who took little interest in county affairs, came up with a more serious problem: the conservative 52.Ba.ltimore Sun, 24 February, 1916, p. 1. 53Maryland News, 8 April, 1916, p . 23. ~- --~~?~-"" TABULATED VOTE ON TBE PROPOSED STATE WOMEN SUFFRAGE AMENIMENT TO THE MARYIAND CONSTITUTION IN THE LEGISIATURE IN 1916 Ii OVerwheJJningly favorable to Suffrage Slightly favorable to suff~ A re1ativ ely balanced sentiment Pl Slight13' uni'avorabl# to su.t:frage ~ ~ opposed to suf.fntge -.:J VI .... . ._ -i.. .. ..,J. older generation had grown sharply hostile to the suffrage movement because of the impression that suffragists were opposing the Democratic party. 54 Other county clubs similarly reported slowness in all activi- ties. Unable .to win the favor of the General Assembly, the Maryland suffragists turned now, in their hour of disappointment, to the proposed Federal woman suffrage amendment . A resolution was adopted pledging full-hearted support and active participation to secure the passage of this am.endmento55 A moving appeal was made to the dignity and power of the 4,000,000 women voters in the United States, requesting them to organize an independent party of voters in order .to exert pressure on the party in power, which would be responsible for the passage of the amendment . Under the inf'luence of Miss Alice Paul, Chairman of the Congressional Union, Mrs . Townsand Scott and Mrs . Hooker organized the Congressional Union Maryland Branch in May, l9l5, and opened an active campaign for the Federal amendment. 54Ibid. , 2l October, l9l6, p. 236. 55Ibid. CHAPl'ER V MARYLAND AND A CAMPAIGN FOR THE FEDERAL WOMAN SUFFRAGE AMENDMENT Having been frustrated at every turn in efforts to secure favorable state action, Maryland leaders in 1915 began to concentrate their campaign in the hope of a Federal constitutional enactment, because it seemed, at this juncture, to be the surest, the most effec- tive and the most dignified course open . Thus, at the annual convention in that year of the Just Government League, a resolution was offered in support of the "Susan B. Anthony Amendment . 11 The text of the Amendment read as follows: Section I . The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State on account of sex. Section II . The Congress shall have power, by appropriate legislation, to enforce the provisions of this article . l This resolution, regularly introduced into Congress by Miss Susan B. Anthony since 1869, was being pushed by Miss Alice Paul of the Congressional Union and Mrs. Carrie Chapman Catt of the National American Woman Suffrage Association. But the two organizations aimed at the goal of a Federal Amendment from the opposite directions. The Congressional Union, later the National Woman's Party, pursued a mili- tantly active political policy, which looked toward quick results . The ?faryland News, 25 April, 1914, p. 26. 77 78 National Association preferred to move steadily on a long-range plan, which had as its objective persuading the President and the Nation of women's ~ights as a part of great democratic goals . The break between the Congressional Union and the National Asso- ciation had already come by the end of 1913 over the procedural question of supporting the Anthony amendment. It grew sharper in 1914 . The Congressional Union took the position that those who held power were responsible to the country not only for what they did but also for what they did not do . 2 The Democratic party's inaction on the issue was taken to be clear evidence of a policy of open hostility to woman's rights . The Union, hoping to swing the election in a section of the country where there were women's votes, campaigned against Wilson and the Democratic candid.ates in the West . The National Association, on the contrary, was opposed to Miss Paul's policy, fearing that it would alienate needed votes in the Congress and especially that it would result in driving Wilson farther away from suffrage instead of winning his support .3 So it happened that, by June of 1916, when the United States faced a Presidential contest, with the entire Rouse of Representatives and one third of the Senate also at stake, the Congressional Union met in Chicago to organize the National Woman's Party in the twelve States. For the first time in history, warren throughout a considerable part of the country ventured to raise their voice as a political party, backed by the ballot. The Woman's Party, in maintaining an anti-Democratic position, directed its principal attack against Mr. Wilson, whose 2Doris Stevens, Jailed for Freedom (New York: Boni & Ll.verwright, l920), p . 26 . 3Flexner, p . 267. 79 campaign largezy ignored the suffrage question, preferring to emphasize the fact that "he kept us out of war . 11 .An official pamphlet of the Woman's Party, The Suffragists, announced the Party's aims quite clearzy: In thirty-six states they (the male voters) are not attempting to hann a political hair of Mr . Wilson's head. They would view with composure the reelection of Mr . Wilson--but not in the equal suffrage states and not by the help of women's votes. One thing we have to teach Mr . Wilson and his party--and all on-looking parties--that the group which opposes national suffrage for women will lose women's support in twelve great commonwealths controlling nearzy a hundred electoral votes; too large a fraction to risk, or to risk twice, even if once risked successfully. If that is made clear, it is a matter of total indifference to the Woman's Party-- so far as suffrage is concerned--who is the next President of the United States . 4 These twelve suffrage States, it was stated, with their four million women constituted nearzy one-fourth of the electoral college and more than one-third of the votes necessary to elect a President . With enough women organized in each state to hold the balance of power, the 115 women's votes could "determine the presidency of the United States? The organization of the Woman's Party and the pronouncement of its aims did help to focus a greater attention upon the suffrage issue; and the major political parties adopted woman suffrage planks in their platforms, though they were vague as to the specific methods of securing it . The Republican convention in Chicago favored "the extension of suffrage to women 11 but recognized 11the right of each state to settle this question for itself . 116 The Democratic party at its St. Louis con- vention in June recommended 11the extension of the franchise to the 4The Suffragist, 30 September, 1916 . 5rbid ., 24 June, 1917. 6Maryland News, 24 June, l9l6, p. 98 . eo women of the country by the States upon the same terms as to men. 117 The National Woman ' s Party publicly approved of these favorable planks, as the logical result of its own convention work . Somewhat encouraged by these developments in the major political parties, Maryland suffragi sts once more resumed their campaign to influence the politici ans of their own State . Some of the men now seemed convi nced as, for example, .Mr . A. J . Cummings of Montgomery Countywho pledged "that I will not oppose (a) woman suffrage plank in the Democra- tic state convention . 118 The women had twice previously been disappointed at Mr. Cumm.ing's breaki ng similar promises, but were inclined to feel that this time he might mean what he said. Governor Tu.erson C. Harring- ton, however, when interviewed, avoided any commitment by saying that "I would rather not commit myself upon this question at this time. n9 Maryland, a strongly Democratic State, had cast its sixteen votes in opposi tion to the woman suffrage plank at the St. Louis convention; and it was clear that suffragists faced a hard campaign ahead. The Nati onal Woman ' s Party, concentrating its efforts against the reelection of Mr . Wilson and other Democratic members to the Congress in the twelve suffrage States, nevertheless found time to make some efforts even in Maryland, and displayed banners on the street corners, 10 urging voters to "Vote Against Wilson! 11 for "He Kept Us Out of Suffrage! " Democratic orators, rushing to the rescue of their candidate, tried to pacify the ladies, pleading, "Give the President time" He cannot do every- ll thing at once. Trust him once more; he will do it for you next time. 11 7Ibid . ~~land News, March 20, 1916, p. 59. 9Ibid., 13 May, 1916, P? 53 . lOstevens, p. 45. 11I bid . , p . 46. 81 When election day arrived, suf'frage leaders were forced to listen to results that fell far short of giving the desired lesson to either Wi lson or his party, for the President carried ten out of twelve suf'frage States, losing only Illinois and Oregon; and the cause was even less successful in defeating Democratic candidates to Congress. Especia~, in Maryland,acam.paign against Democratic Congressman Fred M. C. Talbott, strongly opposed to suffrage, also ended in failure, as Mr. Talbott was comfortably reelected.12 As has been noted, the National .American Woman Suffrage Associa- tion developed its policies somewhat differently from that of Miss Paul and the Woman's Party. Mrs. Catt, the President of the National Associ ation, had been bitterly disappointed in the Republicans' failure to include in their Chicago platform. "a suffrage plank that had any teeth in it., 1113 particularly after the heroic suffrage demonstration of five thousand women marching in a cold, drenching rainstonn, buffeted by gale winds from the lake front. 'I'he Democratic plank, favoring the "extension of suffrage to women state by state, on the same terms as to men," pleased Mrs. Catt no better. However, in these circumstances, Mrs. Catt wisely decided that the most obvious and first step, if possible, was to win over Mr. Wilson to support a Federal .Amendment. 14 To acccm- plish this, Mrs. Catt assigned to her cohorts a specific role to play. In the States, in which woman suffrage already existed, the women were to get their legislatures to importune Congress on behalf of a Federal amendment; and in those states, where favorable opportunities existed for a referendum to amend State constitutions, they were to continue such 12.Maryland News, l3 May, 1916, p. 530 . 13F l exner; p. 277. 14catt, pp. 123-124. 82 a campaign. A third group, primarily in the South, was instructed to work at least for suffrage in presidential and primary elections. Meanwhile relations with Germany were rapidly deteriorating. Following Germany I s announcement of unlimited submarine warfare, the United States declared war on Germany on April 6, 19l7. The war aims which the Wilson Administration gradually developed were summed up in the phrase "make the world safe :for democracy. 11 From this phrase, Mrs. Catt deduced that the success of suffrage would depend on whether women, too, were joined with the Administration in the war effort.15 Not so with the Woman's Party. A large number of its leaders being quakers, the Party took no steps toward participating in war work, though some individual members did so engage. Miss Paul and the Party leaders tried to win President Wilson's support by deputations, peti- tions, and parades. These women wished to hear the President "speak some favorable words" and promise to use his "good and great office to end this wasteful struggle of women. 11l6 As usual, Mr . Wilson answered them without enthusiasm. Out of despair, Mrs. Harriet Stanton Blatch, daughter of Mrs. Elizabeth Cady Stanton, called for a new type of action that should "keep the question before him (the President) all the time. 1117 Tb.us, the first suffrage picket stood outside the gates of the White House on January lO, l9l7. At the beginning picketing by women did not seem sufficiently important to warrant even the attention of the local newspapers . The banners rang with the insistent demand: "Mr. President! 18 Haw long Must Woman Wait for Ll.berty?" l~lexner, p. 284. l6stevens, P? 56 . l7Ibid., p. 59. l 8Ibid., p. 66. 83 As the pickets ca.me back day after day, the press began to call these women "undesirable," "unwomanly," and "dangerous." Yet, there were many who expressed words of approval and encouragement, and they said, "Keep it up; you are on the right track. 1119 Rain or shine, snow or cold, the pickets continued in front of the White House . The Con- gressional Union of Maryland and the Maryland Suffrage Clubs, whose demand had not been answered by their own State legislature for more than seventeen years, willingly joined the picket lines. When the Maryland legislature was sUIIID1oned in special session to deal with emergency wartime problems, the Woman Suffrage Party of Baltimore prepared to try for a bill, which would allow them to vote in Presidential and primary elections . Mrs . Hooker wrote to the President for bis personal support for the Maryland suffrage bill on April l2, 1917 . 20 Mr. Wilson replied through his Secretary, Mr . Joseph P . Tumulty, who wrote that "The President hopes with all his heart that the bill will pass . 1121 Governor Cox of Ohio came also to the support of the Maryland bill, reminding the Democratically dominant Legislature that passing the bill "is a matter of good faith . ? ? of patriotic officials. 1122 Suffragists visited the White House, requesting the President to "interpret the suffrage plank in the National Democratic Platfonn for the enlightenment of the Governor, the General Assembly, and the people of Ma ry1 and? 1123 Senators and Representatives from Maryland were also called on for sup- port. Congressman Linthicum. delighted women by saying that if he were 19Ibid . , p. 68 . 20Maryland News, l2 April, 1917, p. 20. 21Ibid., 28 April, 1917, p. 26. 22Ibid . , 26 May, 1917, p. 63 . 23Ibid . , 28 April, 1917, p . 28. 84 in the State Legislature, he would certainly vote for a suffrage amend- ment. 24 These favorable comments spurred the woman workers to renewed vigor . The Maryland suffrage forces were reorganized. Mrs. J. William Funck was elected the President of the Woman Suffrage Party of Baltimore, and close cooperation between Mrs . Funck, Mrs . Hooker, and others was resumed. The new motto carried an enthusiastic and persistent phrase, "Women now vote for President in nineteen states of the Union . Why should Maryland women be discriminated against? 1125 The day of victory seemed to be at hand with President Wilson's personal endorsement of the bill. Furthermore, many delegates assured women that the bill deserved to pass as a wartime measure. But Governor Harrington was hesitant to introduce the bill in the belief that the special session had been called to consider only important war legisla- tion.26 In order to quiet the Governor's objection, the Maryland suffra- gists invited Miss Jeannette Rankin, the first Congresswoman from Montana, to Baltimore on June 3, l9l7 . Miss Rankin, who had already sat unembarrassed among more than four hundred male members of the House of Representatives, was greeted by two thousand cheering persons at the Hippodrome . Only one-tenth of the audience were 11dyed-in-the-wool suffragists, 1127 who looked upon Miss Rankin as a means of deliverance from bondage; most of them were eager just to have a glimpse of the most talked-of lady from Montana . Nor were they disappointed, for the 24Ibid. 25Ibid., 18 May, 1917, P? 49. 26Ibid . , 2 June, l9l7, P? 66 . 27Baltimore Sun, 4 June, l9l7, p . 12 ? 85 Congresswoman, in a keen, intelligent, and attractive manner, proceeded to give a straightforward and unf'lattering address on suffrage. Some of the audience may have been disappointed that she was not a gray-haired, cynical, belligerent woman suffragist. 28 Lobbying :for the Presidential suffrage bill started with a sup- per and garden party in honor of' the delegates to the special session. The af'f'air was held at the residence of' Mrs. William Spencer in Annapo- lis. On the :first day of the session, Paul Revere's famous ride of 1775 was re-enacted by Miss Dorothy Ford, who rode into Annapolis bearing a message which read, "Keep not liberty from your own household. 1129 On June 12, l9l7, the suffrage bill was introduced into the special session of' the General Assembly. Former Secretary of Maryland, N. Winslow Williams, had drawn up the bill to grant women the right to vote in the Presidential and municipal elections in all cities but Baltimore.3? In the House, Delegates John Shartzer of Garrett County, L, Cleveland Nelson of' Somerset County, and Charles G, Griebel from the 4th District of' Baltimore city sponsored the bill, while Senator L. Atwood Bennett of Wicomico County sponsored it in the Senate. The Senate debate on June 19 was opened with the reading of a favorable report from the Judiciary Committee. Immediately upon the appearance of the bill, Senator Frick from Baltimore moved to postpone the debate, but lost the motion by 17 votes to 6. Senator Frick mo ved again to send the bill back to the Committee and continued with a long and tedious speech. The opponents of the bill were apparently trying to gain time in order to defeat the measure. 29Maryland News, 16 June, 1917, P? 84 . 30 Ibid., 23 June, l917, p. 91. 86 While Senator Frick was filibustering, a conf'erence of the sup- porters decided to make the bill, if possible, a special order on the f'ollowing day. Senator Frick's motion to return the bill to the Commit- tee was then turned down by 17 to 4, and Senator Norris' motion to make the bill the third special order for Jlllle 20 was carried. On Wednesday, after defeating a proposed amendment without roll call, the Presidential suffrage bill passed at its third reading by an l8 to 6 majority.3l Senator Frick still continued with his declaration that the bill was unconstitutional, and his friends predicted that the measure would meet the same fate as in 1916, namely passage by the Senate and defeat in the House.32 When the House considered the bill the following day, it was strongly believed to have a fair chance, although the House Judiciary Committee had reported on it unfavorably. Delegate Hall of Baltimore city at once moved to substitute the favorable minority report for the adverse majority statement . But that failed, and at length, after exhaustive debate the suffrage bill was fina.Lcy rejected by 41 ayes to 56 nays.33 Although it had passed the Senate, the Maryland Presidential suffrage bill was again lost in the House. As though the defeat in the special session had not discouraged the suffragists, the Presidential suffrage bill made its appearance again as soon as the regular session of the legislature convened in January, l9l8. In his opening address to the General Assembly, Governor Harrington recognized woman suffrage as an issue which "deserves a serious and thoughtful consideration, " for "the cause can no longer 3lrbid. 32:aaltimore Sun, 21 June, 1917, P? 7 ? 33Ibid., 22 June, 1917, p. 1. 87 be joked or laughed at by the Legislature. 1134 Delegate WiDiam M. Fisher, who had voted against equal suffrage at the last two sessions of the Assembly, now agreed that "in all questions affecting the morality of the state the woman folks should have a say. 1135 The Senate, which had previously passed practicaDy the same bill, now decided to postpone its action indefinitely. In the House, though the bill was reported favorably by Mr. Fisher of the Elections Committee, it was lost by 42 ayes and 53 nays, lacking only six affirma- tive votes for passage.36 For twenty years the women of Maryland had demanded in vain equal suffrage from their Legislature. The last hope that remained was a successful Federal suffrage amendment . The Maryland delegation had been sharing the burden of picketing the White House . As a silent protest against injustice, the picketing had created more criticism than any other demonstrations. Having been patient too long, the Maryland women tended to follow the campaign methods of the Woman's Party, especially in rebuking the frequently made charge that a majority of women did not want the ballot. The banners of the pickets began graduaD.y to carry sharper phrases that were inconsistent with the high-powered war propaganda aimed at arousing patriotism. Mr . Wilson was called a Kaiser, a King, and a Czar. Some banners read: Have you forgotten how you sympathized with the poor Ge:rmans because they were not seJ..f-governed?" or, 3\raryland News, 5 January, l9l8, p. 4l3. 35Ibid., l6 February, 1918, P? 364 . 36Toid., 16 March, 1918, p. 394. 88 England and Russia are enfranchising their women in war time. How long must women wait for 1iberty?37 Spectators broke into mob violence, when a banner informed the envoys of the Kerensky government, caDing at the White House, that this country was a democracy in name only. Thereafter it flared repeatedly among onlookers, who included servicemen in unifonn as well as outright hood- lums? Af'ter the picketing had continued unhindered for six months, arrests began on June 22. The pickets showed no inclination to give up. Tb.ere were always more ready to replace the women hauled off in police wagons. At first the pickets were dismissed without sentence. But as picketing and violence continued, the District Court began to sentence the women to jail, gradually increasing the term from a few days to six weeks and eventually to six months. The women were viola.ting no law and perpetra- ting no crime; they were actualJJ' among the earliest victims of the abrogation of civil liberties in wartime. The ouly charge ever made against the pickets was that of obstructing sidewalk traffic. A total of two hundred eighteen women from twenty-six states were arrested during the first session of the Sixty-fifth Congress; ninety-seven went to prison. Most of the arrested women were either young and well- educated college graduates or nationa.lly known professionals? These women protested against the illegality of the arrests, the bad condi- tions of the prison rooms, and the brutality of their treatment by going on hunger strikes. Mter receiving full reports on the arrests made since JuJ.y, President Wilson ordered unconditional release for all pickets on November 27 and 28.38 37stevens, p. 130. 38i,,1exner, p. 286 . Among the arrested suffragists, there were ten Maryland women. Miss Lucy G. Branham, organizer of the National Woman's Party, was sen- tenced for sixty days in the Occoquan and District jail s. Miss Mary Gertrude Fendall of Baltimore was sentenced for three days in January, l9l9, for applauding in court. Mrs. T. W. Forbes of the Just Government League served a five days ' sentence in the District jail. Miss Gladys Greiner of Baltimore was arrested three times and served sentences varying from fifteen to thirty days in the District jail. Miss .Anne Herimer, Mrs. Kate Winston were the other demonstrators who were arrested and sentenced. Certain gains from the picket incidents were undoubtedly taking place . The Senate Cornmi ttee on Woman Suffrage issued a favorable report on September l5, which was the very next day after Senator Jones of New Mexico had visited the Occoquan working house to see the conditions of women . The House Cammi ttee on Woman Suf'frage was finally appointed on September 24, and the voting date was set for January 12, l9l8. The Woman's Party claimed all these developments to be the outcome of the picketing. Indeed, the picketing had aroused nation-wide attention and accelerated the action of Congress. Furthermore the women's persistence brought the Administration to the realization that the only solution for the problem lay in granting women the ballot . Other forces other than just the picketing were influential in bringing the Administration to this point; among the most obvious was the role of women in the country now totally at war, especially the need for cooperation from the National Woman Suf'frage Associ ation. Like the Civil War, World War I brought many women out of their homes into new spheres of action. Thousands of women filled places in 90 all types of industries--transportation, textiles, and other occupations. It took four pages of small type in a government publication to list those occupations in which, in varying degrees, women were substituted for men in l9l7 and 1918.39 Women were making appearances in the govern- ment bodies connected with the general war effort. Dr. Shaw, as chair- man on a near]y full-time basis, and Mrs. Catt both served on the Women's Committee of the Council for National Defense, which tried to swing the nation's women into farming, kitchen gardening, food conservation, nursing, selling Liberty Bonds, and other kind of war activity. 40 While engaged in war work, suffrage work remained the number one fighting job among all National Association leaders. Full-fledged participation of women in the effort to win the war won the favor and sympathy of President Wilson, and proved women's competence to assume economic, social, and political responsibility to the nation. Miss Jeannette Rankin opened the general debate in the House on January lO, 1918. Opposition was main]y centered on the issues of States' Rights and the Southern bugbear of Negro suffrage. The tenn, "War" was used by speakers on both sides. "It is not a proper time to change the whole electoral system, 11 said one; and another replied, "There never was a more propitious time than this hour for America to grant the right of suffrage to the noble wan.en of this Republic. 1141 Then at long last crune the announcement of the third roll call of the a.mendment--274 in favor and 136 opposed. On the floor the friends of the amendment were shouting their cheers; outside the gallery someone started to sing "Praise God From Wham All Blessings Flow11 and hundreds 39I bi d., p. 288. 4oibid., p. 289. 4J.catt, p. l32. 9l of women's voice took up the refrain. The amendment, now forty-two years old, passed the House of Representatives. Among the Maryland representation, Mr. Linthicum. and Mr. Zihl.man cast their votes in favor, while Mr. Mudd, Mr. Talbott, Mr. Coady, and Mr. Price were against the amendment. Mr ? .J. F. Mudd, fonner State Senator and an ardent supporter of woman's rights, had been well known for his skillful maneuver in passing the Mudd Equal Suffrage Bill in the Maryland Senate in 1916. However, believing strongly in States ' Rights, Mr. Mudd opposed Federal interference in this matter. While the legislative committees of the National Association and the National Woman's Party looked forward, at this juncture, seriously and soberly to the action of the Senate, local suffrage organizations started active plans for a speedy ratification by the States. In Maryland, the Federal suffrage amendment was publicized at open-air meetings and demonstrations. The White House as well as cabi- net members were also visited. The Men's League campaigned among the male voters to collect endorsing signatures. A great number of requests for speakers on the Federal woman suffrage amendment came from the various clubs. Suffragists, generally speaking, were pleased with the rising tide of sentiment favorable to the Federal amendment. All suf- frage clubs prepared to work toward the goal of Maryland ratification. The largest and most influential women's group in Maryland, the Just Government League, accepted, in 1916, the offer of help from the National Woman's Party in the work -with the State legislature. It fol- lowed also the woman's Party's anti-Democratic attitude in the national campaign. Some of the League's officers joined the Woman's Party and engaged in the campaign against Wilson in the West . Mrs. Hooker 92 accepted the position of Editor-in-Chief of The Suffragist, official organ of the Woman's Party. In l9l8, the annual convention of the Just Government League adopted a resolution, urging Representative Ran.kin to introduce a bill which would raise the age of consent in the Federal law to twenty-one years of age. 42 The Woman's Party was often discontented with Miss Rankin for not doing enough in the Congress. Miss Lucy Branham, who was a National Woman's Party's organizer in Georgia, was appointed a state organizer for the Just Government League. The chairman of the Woman's Party Maryland Branch, Mrs. Townsend Scott, also accepted the position of Congressional committee chairman for the League. League leaders deserve some sympathy for drifting into an anti-Democratic posi- tion and looking to the Woman's Party for leadership. By now, Maryland women were very impatient with the Democrats, who held a big majority in the State Assem.bzy. Southern Senators, as well as Senator Henry Cabot Lodge of Massachusetts, had delayed the U.S. Senate voting on the Amendment as long as possible. But, they suddenly changed their tactics and decided to allow a vote in the Senate, scheduling five days of debate before it. Of the two Senators from Maryland, Joseph France, well known as moderate and liberal, supported the Amendment. But Senator John W. Smith, a poli- tician of the old school and a long-time veteran in the Senate, frankzy announced his unbending opposition. 43 Great pressure was brought to bear upon the President to intervene persona~. On September '2:7, 42Maryland News, 28 April, l9l8, p. 27. 43Baltimore Sun, 29 February, 1918, p . 6. Maryland News, 29 February, 1918, p~09. 93 Mr. Wilson telegraphed six Senators known to be doubtful, asking them to vote for the Am.endment.44 Advised by the Secretary of the Treasury Ma.cAdoo, on September 30, President proceeded to take the unusual step of addressing the Senate in support of the suffrage measure. The speech was an eloquent plea, but it did not make the slightest impression on the opposition. In fact, some favoring the .Amendment were aroused to hostility, feeling that the Chief Executive should not have pleaded for a measure which the Senate was in the act of considering . 45 Consequently, the measure was defeated by a vote of 62 in favor to 34 opposed--just two votes short of the necessary two-thirds favorable majority. Thirty Democrats and thirty-two Republicans had voted aye, while twenty-two Democrats and twelve Republicans were opposed. The Woman's Party was inclined to blame the President for having appealed too late to the Senate.46 At least the vote served to clear the air; the women knew where they stood. Both the National Association and the Woman's Party now began to take a hand in retiring certain Senators who were up for re-election . As a result, Senators Weeks of Massachusetts and Saulsbury of Delaware were defeated. Meanwhile, North Dakota and New York ushered in state woman suffrage in l9l7, making a total of 237 woman suffrage electoral votes. During January and February of 1919, twenty-four legis- latures importuned Congress, asking for submission of the suffrage amendment to the states; some five hundred resolutions poured into Con- gress from civic, church, labor, and farm organizations. This pressure 4~lexner, p. 307. 45Ibid., p. 309. ~-6stevens, p. 280. became so irksome that an old ruling was revived, prohibiting the print- ing of such materi a l in The Congressional Record.47 The Sixty- sixth Congress was convened in special session to reconsider the Federal suffrage amendment at the President's summons on May 20, l9l9. The House passed the Amendment, this time by the very decisive majority of 304 to 89, a margin of 42 over the necessary two thirds . The Senate was engaged in debate for two more days before it was_ ready for the business of voting. The opposition belabored the States' Rights issue, as well as the questi on of enfranchising Negro women, primarily as it affected the South. The voting went fast and smoothly . The .Amendment was adopted, 56 to 25; and not even one of the Senators whom the women counted on failed them this time.48 Rejoicing and celebrating over Congressional passage of the Amendment could not last long. Determined that Maryland should be among the thirty-six states to ratify Federal suffrage, the Maryland Suffrage Party of Baltimore inaugurated an i ntensive campaign in the Spring of l9l9 . Women asked for a special session of the Legislature to ratify the proposed Ni neteenth Amendment. On May 29, l9l9, the National Demo- cratic Central Committee also urged that the special session bring about a speedy ratification; 49 and the Attorney General, A. Mitchell PaJJner, likewise, wrote to Governor Harrington, suggesting that he act to put a "Democratic state like Maryland in line," by calling a special s e ssion . 50 In view of the close vote in the 1918 session, when the Presi- dential suffrage bill had failed by only one vote in the State Senate 47woman Citizens, April 5, 19l9, 48.Flexner, p. 313. 49Maryland News, 5 July, l9l9, p. l05 , 50ibid., 2 June, 1919. 95 and by six votes in the House, reconsideration by essentially the same group of men in both houses appeared likely to result this time in pas- sage of the measure. Many people regarded Maryland as a "pivotal state" in the ratification campaign.51 However, Governor Harrington was not enthusiastic about the idea of calling a special session. Said he: "This Legislature was not elected with the question of this Amendment before the people. 11 52 Thus, the Governor firmly advised waiting till the next regular session, and the ratification question had to be delayed. In this situation, and eager to aid women in making Maryland one of the thirty-six ratifying states, a formidable group of men now came forward . Among them were Jacob M. Moses, Charles J. Weber, Edwin L. Weber, J. Barry Mahool, Harry Mahool, and William Ogden. They called upon both the Democratic and Republi~an state conventions for ratifica- tion planks. But, notwithstanding this pressure, the Democratic con- vention flatly rejected the proposed favorable plank. Instead, the delegates resolved, as follows: We believe that the ~ethod of extending the suffrage to women by means of an Amendment to the Constitution of the United States is fundamentally wrong. We therefore pledge our p,ry against the ratification of the proposed Nineteenth Amendment. The failure to secure official Democratic party support was dis- couraging . However, a Committee of One Thousand Men for Ratification was organized in January, 1920, with the Hon. N. Winslow Williams as Chairman, and Mr. Thom. w. De Courney, Vice-Chairman. Mr. Arthur K. 51Ibid., 28 June, 1919, p. 98 . 52History of Woman Suffrage, VI, 257. 53Maryland News, 20 September, 1919, p . 171. Taylor was chosen to act as Secretary, while Dr. Donald R. Hooker was named Treasurer. Prominent men from every walk of Maryland life volun- teered to serve in the Committee of One Thousand from their respective counties.54 Women were more busily occupied than the men. The National Woman's Party sponsored a speaking tour in the State for Mrs. Harriet Stanton Blatch, Mrs. M. Toscon Bennett of Hartford, Connecticut, and Miss Maud Younger of California during September, October, November,and December, l9l9. M.a.ss meetings were held to alert the people regarding the coming Legislative showdown. Substantial assistance also was extended to Maryland from both the Woman's Party and the National Asso- ciation . The Maryland General Assembly of l92O had again a majority of Democrats, and Albert Cabell Ritchie, a Democrat, was the new Governor. 54Ibid., l7 January, l92O, p. 232. The following list of county chairmen will show the men of prominence in this move: Allegany (Francis J. Drum. Secretary, state Federation of Labor) Anne Arundel (Frank M. Duvall. Ex-Senator) Baltimore (B. John Black. Master state Grange) Calvert (Hon. Tom Parran) Caroline (Rev . E. w. McDowell) Carroll (Wade H. D. Warfield. Ex-Senator) Cecil (Frank E. Willia.ms. Ex-Senator) Charles (John F. Mudd. Ex-Senator) Dorchester (William F ? .Andres. Congressman) Frederick (Arthur D. Willard, Esq.l_ Garrett (B. H. Sincell, Esq.) Harford (John A. Robinson, Esq.) Howard (George Sweeten, Esq.) Kent (Dr. B. G. Simmons) Montgomery (Judge William Delacy) Prince George's (Jackson H. Palston) Queen .Anne's (James T. Knott) St ? Mary' s (Dr. Frank Greenwell, Mayor of Lenoard Town) Somerset (Rev . William F. Corkran, Harry T. Phoebus, Esq.) Talbot (Thomas M. Bartlett, Esq.) Washington (George D. Crawford, Esq.) Wicomico (L. Atwood Bennett, Ex-Senator) Worcester (Hon. E. M. Layton) 97 When the regular session convened on January 7, l920, twenty-four States had already ratified the Nineteenth .Amendment; and Oregon followed on January l6, Indiana on January l6, and Wyoming on January 27, making a total of twenty-seven states. Governor Ritchie submitted the ratifi- cation resolution to the General Assembly on February 6, with Senator Metzerott (Republican) and Delegate Cobourn (Democrat) sponsoring the resolution. Now followed a period of the utmost confusion. A hearing for the resolution was set before the House Committee on Constitutional Amendments for February ll, but postponement was made to February 18 due to a request from the suffragists themselves, since a considerable num- ber would be absent attending the National Suffrage Convention in Chicago. Surprise and confusion mounted when it was announced that the hearing would be held on schedule after all (on February ll), and this time, before the House Committee on Federal Relations, which was well known to be hostile to the .Amendment. Speak.er Tydings was accused of having brought the transfer from the favorable Committee on Constitu- tional .Amendment. 55 So the House hearing was held, without much support present for suffrage, but with some long speeches given by anti-suffrage women . The Senate Committee on Federal Relations granted a hearing on the morning of the l 7th. Mrs. Hooker presented a resolution and peti- tion signed by over 125,000 residents of Maryland. 56 These people belonged to labor groups, patriotic societies, the Grange, the Maryland Federation of Women's Clubs, the Women's Trade Union League, the State 55History of Woman Suffrage, VI, 258 . 56Baltimore Sun, l8 February, l920, p. l. 98 feachers' Association, the Graduate Nurses, a Goucher College Alumnae, and other clubs of several kinds. Following the Senate hearing, Mrs. Hooker and her fellow workers marched to the Governor's office to make another eloquent plea for ratification. The Governor answered that ratification was a question for the Legislature alone to determine; that the platform on which he ran pledged the Democratic Party against it; and that he could not ask the Legislators to repudiate his Party's platform. 57 In vigorous language, Mrs o Hooker replied that the Governor would be held responsible for the action the Legislature would take on the ratification resolution. Not unexpectedly, therefore, the Maryland General Assembly on February l7, J.920, rejected the Nineteenth .Amendment. After an all-day debate the House refused to ratify the .Amendment by the two-to-one ratio of 64 to 36. Thirty-two of the forty-ti ve Republicans and four of the fifty-six Democrats voted for the .Amendment. In the Senate the Amend- ment met with the same fate, losing decisively by a vote of lB to 9, seven Republicans and two Democrats voting aye.58 The resolution of rejection was presented to the Secretary of State by a delegation from the Anti-Suffrage Association. The formal rejection stated the Maryland determination to deny "the lawful right and power of Congress to propose the amendment as part of the Federal Constitution, even if ratified by three-fourth of the States. 1159 In both houses the voting had been done very much along party Jines. Major objections of the Democrats were based on the States' 57History of Woman Suffrage, VI, 260. 58Ba.ltimore Sun, lB February, l920, p. l. 59History of Woman Suffrage, VI, 260. 99 Rights argument and on the fear of Negro voting. And, it should be noted that several Democrats, who had favored woman suffrage by a state consti- tutional amendment now voted against the Federal amendment . It was very clear that Maryland's Democratic party finnly supported the belief that the extension of suffrage to women by amending the United States Constitution was wrong, even though the Democratic party nationally had come to support the .Amendment . And, so Maryland suffragists were caught up in a constitutional issue, in which woman suffrage was no longer the real target of objection . Perhaps, at this juncture, had the issue been brought up as a State question, instead of as a Federal amendment, Mary- land women might have won their right in the General Assembly. Of' some solace was the fact that the number of "pro" votes was rapidly increasing in the Assembly; and the entire Nati on was beginning to recognize suf- frage as a right of .American women . When interviewed by the press, Mrs. Hooker rebuked Governor Ritchie for his alleged disingenuousness in having schemed to bring about the defeat of the rati f i cation. "With 2,000 political jobs in his pocket" said Mrso Hooker, "Governor Ritchie knew that he could influence Democratic votes. 1160 An editorial of The Baltimore Sun scornfully treated Mrs. Hooker's opinion as a sla.nder upon the Governor, and asked her in return whether the Governor's refusal to "buy support for the suffrage amendment with these 2,000 jobs" was indeed a shame and dis- grace. 61 Maryland men were beginning to understand that women, too, could play the political game. The Baltimore Sun, which had occasionally been sympathetic, had become openly unfri endly to the suffrage movement and hostile to the 60Baltimore Sun, 18 February, 1920, p . 6. 100 Nineteenth Amendment. That newspaper was now carrying articles repre- senting Maryland's sentiment as favorable to rejection of the Nineteenth Amendment. One article read: Maryland has reason to feel proud that the Legislature ??. refused to listen to the voices of the suffrage charmers, although they charmed as wisely and seductively as they knew how .?? In backing the Nineteenth Amendment they have been guilty not onJs' for putting themselves behind what is virtually a force bill, but they have attempted to beguile Maryland men into committing a dishonorable act. So far as Democrats are concerned, they asked them to break their plighted word. The last national platform declared for State decision of the suffrage question, and no national connnittee had the right to repudiate what the party in general convention declared to be the party faith. The State plat- form reiterated this declaration in effect and every man who was elected on it was morally up to it. We say again we are proud that Maryland men have been true to honor in this matter as well as to the interests of the State. The Maryland suffragists have received the rebuke that they deserved.62 The Legislature was by no means satisfied merely to demonstrate its States' Rights in voting to reject the Nineteenth Amendment; it wished also to enlighten other states in this matter. On February 24, l920, the House of Delegates acted to set up a joint delegation of three senators and four delegates. The vote was 55 to 44. 63 These seven anti- Nineteenth Amendment members, after the Senate concurrence in the reso- lution, were sent to West Virginia in order to urge that General Assem- bly to follow Maryland in rejecting the Amendment. Mr. Marbury of the House of Delegates introduced another resolu- tion, calling for a "repeal and reca.D.. of the resolutions ratifying the 1164 so-called Eighteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. And, thereafter, the Legislature also passed a joint resolution, 63History of Woman Suffrage, VI, 26l. 64Ibid. lOl introduced by George Arnold Frick, authorizing and directing the Attorney General of' Maryland 11to bring suit or suits to prevent the Secretary of State of the United States from proclaiming the Federal .Amendment :prior to the holding of a referendum thereon in certain States, and to test the validity, should the same be ratified by the elected Legislators of three-fourth of the States. 1165 Maryland was prepared to take all the necessary legal procedures to prevent the Nineteenth Amend- ment from becoming a part of the Constitution of the United States. Despite Maryland's intervention, the thirty-fourth State to ratify the amendment was West Virginia, which did so in March. A few days later, the State of Washington became the thirty-fifth State by the unanimous consent of its Legislature. on:cy one more ratification was needed. Delaware, Connecticut, and Vermont considered the measure, but none of them acted to ratify. There remained only Florida, North Carolina, and Tennessee where no action had been taken. Of these, onzy Tennessee offered a favorable prospect for ratification. There was a great interest in all parts of the Nation in the outcome in Tennessee. The success or failure of woman suffrage was hanging in the balance. Tennessee's Governor Roberts called the Legis- lature in special session on August 7. Both Democratic and Republican parties decided to declare openzy for woman's rights, in a contest to win women's votes in the l920 election. The Presidential candidates, Governor Cox of Ohio and Senator Harding, wrote Mrs. Catt expressing their support.66 Against this turning of the tide, the anti-suffrage forces moved into Nashville under a new name, the American Constitutional League, of which Mr. Everett P. Wheeler of New York was Chaim.an. 65rbid. 66 Catt, p. l 4o ? 102 A great deal of the effort to create the League was due to the financial and active support of Maryland anti-suffragists. On the 9th of August, the Tennessee Senate adopted the ratifica- tion resolution by 24 ayes to 4 noes. But the House continued in dead- lock, the first vote being a tie of 48 to 48. Then came a desperate effort by both sides to seize the advantage. A young man, Mr. Harry Burn, who had promised his old mother to vote for ratification if his vote were needed, decided to support ratification. With the vote declared a tie, Mr. Burn voted aye on the second roll call, making it 49 to 47. At the third roll call, Speaker Walker also changed his vote t o aye, making the vote 50 in favor to 46 against! Tennessee had become the thirty-sixth State to ratify. And Governor Roberts promptly signed the necessary papers and sent them by registered mail to Secre- tary of State Bainbridge Colby in Washington. On receiving the Tennes- see ratification, Secretary Col by proclaimed the Nineteenth Amendment a part of the Constitution of the United States on August 26, 1920. With the proclamation of the Nineteenth Amendment, the woman s uffrage movement came to an end in Maryland as it did throughout the country. The same Maryland Legislature which was determined to deny the Nineteenth Amendment, "even if ratified by three-fourths of the States, 11 was now obliged to adjust to the new constitutional provision. An extra-ordinary session, called in September, 1920, adopted the following p olicy statement rel.a.ting to Maryland election laws: Whenever in this article words or phrases are used denoting the mas~uline gender they shall be taken to include the f eminine gender.b7 67state of Maryland, Registration and Election Laws of Maryland (Baltimore: Press of Meyer Thalheimer, 1924), p. l. II 103 Twenty-six million women of voting age had finally achieved the franchise, and subsequent court actions in Maryland by die-hard "antis" had no effect on women's voting at the polls in November, 1920, or sub- seg_uent1y.68 It had been a long road, since the steps first ta.ken at the Seneca Falls Convention in 1848, to improve the status of women. During all of that long struggle, heroic and devoted suffrage leaders in Maryland had fought the battle in the Old Line State. These wan.en had dreamed of bringing a wonderful new world and a true democracy to the State and Nation. Perhaps, they have given us the opportunity to :face our own future with more courage, and hope, through the example thus afforded in achieving this single important poll tical and social goal . 68i.-1exner, p. 324. SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY Books .Ad.ams, Charles Francis. Familiar Letters of John Ada.ms and His Wife Abigail .Adams During the Revolution . New York: Hurd & Houghton, l876. - Blackwell, Alice Stone. Lucy Stone. Boston: Little, Brown, & Company, l930. Catt, Mrs. Carrie Chapman. Woman Suffrage By Federal Constitutional Amendment. New York: National Woman Suffrage Publishing Company, Inc., l9l7. Flexner, Eleanor. Century of Struggle. Cambridge, Mass.: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1959. Goodwin, Grace Duffield. Anti-Suffrage: Ten Good Reasons. New York: Duffield & Company, l9l3? Harper, Ida Huster. The Life and Work of Susan B. Anthony. 3 vols. Indianapolis: Bowen-Merril Co~~l898. Hecker, Eugene A. .A Short History of Women's Rights. New York: G. P. Putman 1 s Sons,-1910. Higgins, Edwin. ! Compilation of Maryland Laws of Interest to Women. Baltimore: Press of Baltimore Methodist, l897. Irwin, Mrs. Inez H. The Story of the Woman's Party. New York: Harcourt, Brace, & Company, l92l. Johnson, Helen K. Woman and the Republic. New York: D. Appleton & Company, l897. Littlefield, A. w. (ed.) Dictionary of .American History. Ames, Iowa: Littlefield, Adams & Company, l95b? Luckett, Margie H. (ed.) Maryland Women. 3 vols. Baltimore: King Brothers Company, Inc., l93l-l~ National .American Woman Suffrage Association. Victory: ~ Women Won It. A Centennial Symposium, l840 - 1940. New York: The H. W. Wilson Company, 1940. Ossoll, Sarah Margaret (Fuller). Woman in the Nineteenth Century. 3 vols. Boston: Roberts Brothers, IB7"5-- 104 105 Paul} Nanette. The Great Woman Statesman. New York: Hogan-Paulus Corp., 1925. Porritt, Mrs? Annie? Laws Affecting Women and Children in the Suffrage and Non-Suf'frage States. New York: National .American Woman Suffrage Association, l9l7. Rem bough, Bertha. The Polit i cal Status of Women in the United States. New York: G. P. Putma.n's Sons, 19u-:- --- -- -- Seawell} MolJ.y E. The Ladies' Battle. New York: The MacMillan Company, l9ll. Shuler, Nettie R. and Catt, Carrie C. Woman Suffrage and Politics. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1926. Stanton} Elizabeth Cady (ed.). The History of Woman Suffrage. 6 vols. New York: Fowler & Wells, lffiIT-1922. Vols-:-r,-II, & III were edited by E. C. Stanton, Susan B ? .Anthony, and Matilda J. Gage. Vol. IV was edited by S. B. Anthony and Ida H. Harper. For Vols. V and VI Ida R. Harper was the editor. Stevens, Doris. Jailed for Freedom. New York: Boni & Liverwright, 1920. Taylor} Elizabeth A. Tennessee Woman Suffrage Movement. New York: Bookman Associates, l957. Wade, Ma.son (ed .). Writings of Margaret Fuller. New York: The Viking Press, l94l. Articles and Periodicals The Baltimore Sun. 1890-1920. The Maryland Suffrage News. An official organ of the Just Government League of Baltimore:- l9l2-l92l. Cannon, Catherine C. "Maryland's Valiant Lady, Margaret Brent." Monthly Publication of St. Mary's County Historical Society. Vol. No. II, St. Mary's County, Maryland, November, l959? Constantia. "The Equality of Sexes." Massachusetts Magazine. March- April, 1970. "Significance of the Woman Suffrage Movement." Annals of the .American Academy of Polit i cal and Social Science, XXXV (May, l9l0) ? The Suffragist. A weekly organ of the National Woman's Party. l913-l92l. Woman's Journal. .An official weekly paper of the National .American Woman Suffrage Association. l9l0-l920. 106 Public Documents The State of Maryland. The Journal of the Senate. 1900-1925. ____ ? The Journal of the House, 1900-1925. ? Maryland Ma.nnual: Legal, Historical and Statistical Informa- ---t-i-on. 1890-1920. ? Registration and Election Laws of Maryland. Baltimore: ---P-r-ess of Meyer and Thalheimer, 1924. - Unpublished Material Minutes of the Baltimore Suffrage Club. 1897-1902. The Anoch Pratt Library, Baltimore, Maryland. Minutes of the Maryland Woman Suffrage Association. 1904-1910. The Anoch Pratt Library, Baltimore, Maryland. Other Sources The National Woman's Party. Personal interview with Miss .AJice Paul, President of the Party, on June 20, 1960.