After his victory at Fort Lee, Lord Cornwallis marched his army to New Jersey, encamping at Elizabethtown. His presence on New Jersey soil so soon after Gen. Howe"s proclamation, and the many defeats of the patriot army, had a very depressing effect. Of this period Dr. Ashbel Green wrote: "I heard a man of some shrewdness once say, that when the British troops overran the State of New Jersey, in the closing part of the year 1776, the whole population could have been bought for eighteen pence a head."
But however true this statement may have been of the men of New Jersey, it could not be justly made in regard to its women, one of whom, at least, did much to stem the tide of panic so strong at this point where Cornwallis was encamped. A number of men of Elizabeth a.s.sembled one evening in one of the s.p.a.cious mansions for which this place was rather famous, to discuss the advisability of accepting the proposed amnesty. The question was a momentous one, and the discussion was earnest and protracted. Some were for accepting this proffer at once; others hesitated; they canva.s.sed the subject from various points, but finally decided that submission was all that remained to them. Their hope was gone, and their courage with it; every remnant of patriotic spirit seemed swept away in the darkness of the hour. But there was a listener of whom they were ignorant; a woman, Hannah Arnett, the wife of the host, sitting at her work in an adjoining room. The discussion had reached her ears, rousing her intense indignation. She listened until she could sit still no longer; springing to her feet she pushed open the parlor door, confronting the amazed men. The writer from whom we glean these facts, says: "Can you fancy the scene? A large, low room, with the dark, heavy furniture of the period, dimly lighted by the tall wax candles and the wood fire which blazed on the hearth. Around the table the group of men, pallid, gloomy, dejected, disheartened. In the door-way the figure of the woman in in antique costume, with which in these Centennial days we have become so familiar. Can you not fancy the proud poise of her head, the indignant light of her blue eyes, the crisp, clear tones of her voice, the majesty, and defiance, and scorn, which clothed her as with a garment?"
The men were appalled and started at the sight. She seemed like some avenging angel about to bring them to judgment for the words they had spoken; and, indeed, such she proved. It was strange to see a woman thus enter the secret councils of men, and her husband hastily approaching her, whispered: "Hannah, Hannah, this is no place for you, we do not want you here just now;" and he tried to take her hand to lead her from the room. But she pushed him gently back, saying to the startled group: "Have you made your decision, gentlemen? Have you chosen the part of men, or traitors?"
They stammered and blundered as they tried to find answer. Things appeared to them in a new light as this woman so pointedly questioned them. Their answers were a mixture of excuses and explanations. They declared the country to be in a hopeless condition; the army starving, half-clothed, undisciplined, the country poor, while England"s trained troops were backed by the wealth of a thousand years.
Hannah Arnett listened in silence until the last abject word was spoken, when she rapidly inquired: "But what if we should live after all?" The men looked at each other, but not word was spoken. "Hannah, Hannah," cried her husband, "do you not see these are no questions for you? We are discussing what is best for us all. Women do not understand these things; go to your spinning-wheel and leave us to discuss these topics. Do you not see that you are making yourself ridiculous?"
But Mrs. Arnett paid no heed. Speaking to the men in a strangely quiet, voice, she said: "Can you not tell me? If, after all, G.o.d does not let the right perish; if America should win in the conflict, after you have thrown yourselves upon British clemency, where will you be then?" "Then?" spoke a hesitating voice, "why then, if it ever could be so, we should be ruined. We must then leave home and country forever. But the struggle is an entirely hopeless one. We have no men, no money, no arms, no food, and England has everything."
"No," said Mrs. Arnett, "you have forgotten one thing which England has not, and which we have--one thing which outweighs all England"s treasures, and that is the right. G.o.d is on our side; and every volley from our muskets is an echo of His voice. We are poor and weak and few, but G.o.d is fighting for us. We counted the cost before we began; we knew the price and were willing to pay; and now, because for the time the day is going against us, you would give up all and sneak back like cravens, to kiss the feet that have trampled upon us! And you call yourselves men; the sons of those who gave up homes and fortune and fatherland to make for themselves and for dear liberty a resting-place in the wilderness! Oh, shame upon you, cowards!"
The words had rushed out in a fiery flood which her husband had vainly striven to check. Turning to the gentlemen present, Mr. Arnett said: "I beg you will excuse this most unseemly interruption to our council.
My wife is beside herself, I think. You all know her, and that it is not her custom to meddle with politics. To-morrow she will see her folly; but now I beg your patience."
But her words had roused the slumbering manhood of her hearers. Each began to look upon himself as a craven, and to withdraw from the position he had taken. No one replied to her husband, and Mrs. Arnett continued. "Take your protection if you will. Proclaim yourselves traitors and cowards, false to your country and your G.o.d, but horrible will be the judgment upon your heads and the heads of those that love you. I tell you that England will never conquer. I know it and feel it in every fiber of my heart. Has G.o.d led us thus far to desert us now?
Will He who led our fathers across the stormy winter seas forsake their children who have put their trust in Him? For me, I stay with my country, and my hand shall never touch the hand, nor my heart cleave to the heart of him who shames her"; and she turned a glance upon her husband; "Isaac, we have lived together for twenty years, and for all of them I have been a true and loving wife to you. But I am the child of G.o.d and of my Country, and if you do this shameful thing, I will never again own you for my husband."
"My dear wife!" he cried, aghast, "you do not know what you are saying. Leave me for such a thing as this?" "For such a thing as this!" she cried, scornfully. "What greater cause could there be? I married a good man and true, a faithful friend, and it needs no divorce to sever me from a traitor and a coward. If you take your amnesty you lose your wife, and I--I lose my husband and my home!"
With the last words her voice broke into a pathetic fall, and a mist gathered before her eyes. The men were deeply moved; the words of Mrs.
Arnett had touched every soul. Gradually the drooping heads were raised, and eyes grew bright with manliness and resolution. Before they left the house that night they had sworn a solemn oath to stand by the cause they had adopted, and the land of their birth through good or evil, and to spurn as deadliest insult the proffered amnesty of their tyrannical foe.
Some of the men who met in this secret council afterward fought n.o.bly, and died upon the field of battle for their country. Others lived to rejoice when the day of triumph came; but the name of this woman was found upon no heroic roll, nor is it on the page of any history that men have since written, although she made heroes of cowards, and helped to stay the wave of desolation which, in the dark days of "76, threatened to overwhelm the land.
At one time some British officers quartered themselves at the house of Mrs. Dissosway, situated at the western end of Staten Island, opposite Amboy. Her husband was a prisoner; but her brother, Captain Nat.
Randolph, was in the American army, and gave much annoyance to the tories by his frequent incursions. A tory colonel promised Mrs.
Dissosway to procure the release of her husband on condition of her prevailing on her brother to stay quietly at home. "And if I could,"
she replied, with a look of scorn, drawing up her tall figure to its utmost height, "if I could act so dastardly a part, think you General Washington has but one Captain Randolph in his army?"
At a period when American prospects were most clouded, and New Jersey overrun by the British, an officer stationed at Borden-town (said to be Lord Cornwallis) endeavored to intimidate Mrs. Borden into using her influence over her husband and son, who were absent in the American army. The officer promised her that if she would induce them to quit the standard they followed and join the royalists, her property should be protected; while in case of refusal, her estate would be ravaged and her elegant mansion destroyed. Mrs. Borden answered, "Begin your threatened havoc then; the sight of my house in flames would be a treat to me; for I have seen enough to know that you never injure what you have power to keep and enjoy. The application of a torch to my dwelling I should regard as a signal for your departure." The house was burned in fulfillment of the threat, and the estate laid waste; but, as Mrs. Borden predicted, the retreat of the spoiler quickly followed.
During the battle of Monmouth a gunner named Pitcher was killed, and the call was made for some one to take his place; his wife, who had followed him to the camp and thence to the field of conflict, unhesitatingly stepped forward and offered her services. The gun was so well managed as to draw the attention of General Washington to the circ.u.mstance, and to call forth an expression of his admiration of her bravery and fidelity to her country. To show his appreciation of her virtues and her highly valuable services, he conferred on her a lieutenant"s commission. She afterward went by the name of "Captain Molly."
As early as 1706, Thomas Chalkley, visiting the Conestogae Indians, near Susquehannah, says: "We treated about having a meeting with them in a religious way, upon which they called a council, in which they were very grave, and spoke one after another without any heat or jarring (and some of the most esteemed of their women do sometimes speak in their councils). I asked our interpreter why they suffered or permitted the women to speak; he answered: "Some women are wiser than some men." Our interpreter told me that they had not done anything for many years without the counsel of an ancient, grave woman, who, I observed, spoke much in their councils, for I was permitted to be present, and asked what she said. He replied that she was an empress, and that they gave much heed to what she said amongst them; that she then said to them that she looked upon our coming to be more than natural, because we did not come to buy nor sell nor get gain, but came in love and respect to them, and desired their well doing both here and hereafter; and that our meeting among them might be very beneficial to their young people. She related a dream she had three days before, and interpreted it, advising them to hear us and entertain us kindly, etc., which they did.
Chief Justice Green, in behalf of Miss Leake, of Trenton, presented to the New Jersey Historical Society copies of the correspondence between Colonel Mawhood of the British forces, and Colonel Hand of the American army, proposing to the latter to surrender, and each man to go to his home, etc., dated Salem County, March, 1778. The New Jersey Historical Society has a photographic copy of a print, contemporary with the event, representing the triumphal arch erected by the ladies of Trenton in honor of Washington, on his pa.s.sage through the place in April, 1779, and a photographic copy of the following original note (now in possession of the lady who received it), which was written by Washington at the time:
General Washington can not leave this place without expressing his acknowledgements to the Matrons and Young Ladies who received him in so novel and grateful a manner at the Triumphal Arch in Trenton, for the exquisite sensations he experienced in that affecting scene. The astonishing contrast between his former and actual situation at the same spot, the elegant taste with which it was adorned for the present occasion, and the innocent appearance of the _white-robed choir_, who met him with the gratulatory song, have made such an impression on his remembrance as he a.s.sures them will never be effaced.
TRENTON, _April 21, 1789_.
THE ORIGIN, PRACTICE, AND PROHIBITION OF FEMALE SUFFRAGE IN NEW JERSEY.
William A. Whitehead, Corresponding Secretary of the New Jersey Historical Society, read the following paper at their annual meeting, January 21, 1858:
By the Proprietary laws, the right of suffrage in New Jersey was expressly to the _free men_ of the province; and in equally explicit terms a law pa.s.sed in 1709 prescribing the qualifications of electors, confined the privilege to male freeholders having one hundred acres of land in their own right, or worth fifty pounds, current money of the province, in real and personal estate, and during the whole of the colonial period these qualifications remained unaltered.
By the Const.i.tution adopted July 2, 1776, the elective franchise was conferred upon all inhabitants of this colony, of full age, who are worth fifty pounds, proclamation money, clear estate in the same, and have resided within the county in which they claim a vote for twelve months immediately preceding the election; and the same, or similar language, was used in the different acts regulating elections until 1790; but I have not discovered any instance of the exercise of the right by females, under an interpretation which the full import of the words, "all inhabitants," was subsequently thought to sanction, during the whole of this period.
In 1790, however, a revision of the election law then in force was proposed, and upon the committee of the Legislature to whom the subject was referred was Mr. Joseph Cooper, of West Jersey, a prominent member of the Society of Friends. As the regulations of that society authorized females to vote in matters relating thereto, Mr. Cooper claimed for them the like privilege in matters connected with the State, and to support his views, quoted the provisions of the Const.i.tution as sanctioning such a course. It was therefore to satisfy him that the committee consented to report a bill in which the expression, "he or she,"
applied to the voter, was introduced into the section specifying the necessary qualifications; thus giving a legislative endors.e.m.e.nt of the alleged meaning of the Const.i.tution. Still, no cases of females voting by virtue of this more definite provision are on record, and we are warranted in believing that the women of New Jersey then, as now, were not apt to overstep the bounds of decorum, or intrude where their characteristic modesty and self-respect might be wounded.
This law and its supplements were repealed in 1797, and it is some proof that the peculiar provision under review had not been availed of to any extent, if at all (as its evil consequences would otherwise have become apparent), that we find similar phraseology introduced into the new act. The right of suffrage was conferred upon "all free inhabitants of this State of full age," etc., thus adopting the language of the Const.i.tution with the addition of the word "free," and "no person shall be ent.i.tled to vote in any other township or precinct than that in which he or she doth actually reside," etc., and in two other places is the possible difference in the s.e.x of the voters recognized.
The first occasion on which females voted, of which any precise information has been obtained, was at an election held this year (1797) at Elizabethtown, Ess.e.x County, for members of the Legislature. The candidates between whom the greatest rivalry existed, were John Condit and William Crane, the heads of what were known a year or two later as the "Federal Republican" and "Federal Aristocratic" parties, the former the candidate of Newark and the northern portions of the county, and the latter the candidate of Elizabethtown and the adjoining country, for the Council. Under the impression that the candidates would poll nearly the same number of votes, the Elizabethtown leaders thought that by a bold _coup d"etat_ they might secure the success of Mr. Crane. At a late hour of the day, and, as I have been informed, just before the close of the poll, a number of females were brought up, and under the provisions of the existing laws, allowed to vote; but the manoeuvre was unsuccessful, the majority for Mr. Condit, in the county, being ninety-three, notwithstanding. These proceedings were made the topic of two or three brief articles in the _Newark Sentinel_, in one of which the fact that "no less than seventy-five women were polled at the late election in a neighboring borough," was used as a pretended argument for the admission of females to office, and to service in the diplomatic corps; while another ironically a.s.serts that "too much credit can not be given to the Federal leaders of Elizabethtown for the heroic virtue displayed in advancing in a body to the poll to support their favorite candidates."
So discreditable was this occurrence thought, that although another closely contested election took place the following year, we do not find any other than male votes deposited then, in Ess.e.x County, or elsewhere, until the Presidential election of 1800, between Mr. Adams and Mr. Jefferson, at which females voted very generally throughout the State; and such continued to be the practice until the pa.s.sage of the act positively excluding them from the polls. At first the law had been so construed as to admit single women only, but as the practice extended, the construction of the privilege became broader and was made to include females eighteen years old, married or single; and even women of color. At a contested election in Hunterdon County, in 1802, the votes of two or three such, actually electing a member of the Legislature. It is remarkable that these proceedings did not sooner bring about a repeal of the laws which were thought to sanction them; but that event did not occur until 1807, and it is noticeable that, as the practice originated in Ess.e.x County, so the flagrant abuses which resulted from it reached their maximum in that county, and brought about its prohibition.
[Ill.u.s.tration: ANTOINETTE L. BROWN (with autograph).]
The circ.u.mstances attendant upon this event afford abundant matter for a most interesting chapter of local history, which I am happy to say has been written by a member of the Society (Mr.
James Ross),[78] and will be communicated before long, I trust, for insertion in our Proceedings. But the scope of this paper merely calls for a statement of facts. These are as follows:
In the year 1806 a new Court House and Jail were to be erected in the county of Ess.e.x. Strenuous exertions were made to have them located elsewhere than at Newark, which had been the county town from a very early period. Sufficient influence was brought to bear upon the Legislature to secure the pa.s.sage of an act (approved November 5th of that year) authorizing a special election, at which "the inhabitants" of the county, "qualified to vote in elections for members of the State Legislature," etc., were described as the qualified electors to determine by their votes where the buildings should be located. The contest caused a great excitement throughout the county, and, under the existing laws, when the election was held in February, 1807, women of "full age," whether single or married, possessing the required property qualification, were permitted by the judges of election to vote. But as the conflict proceeded, and the blood of the combatants waxed warmer, the number of female voters increased, and it was soon found that every single and every married woman in the county was not only of "full age," but also "worth fifty pounds proclamation money, clear estate," and as such ent.i.tled to vote if they chose. And not only once, but as often as by change of dress or complicity of the inspectors, they might be able to repeat the process.
This was not confined to any one precinct, but was more or less the case in all, and so apparent were these and many other frauds that the Legislature at the ensuing session did not hesitate to sat it aside as having been illegally conducted; and, by repealing the act authorizing it, left the buildings to be erected in Newark, to which they legitimately belonged. And, in order that no future occurrence of the kind should take place, an act was pa.s.sed (approved November 16, 1807), the preamble to which is as follows:
"Whereas, doubts have been raised and great diversities in practice obtained throughout the State in regard to the admission of aliens, females, and persons of color or negroes to vote in elections, as also in regard to the mode of ascertaining the qualifications of voters in respect to estate; and whereas, it is highly necessary to the safety, quiet good order and dignity of the State to clear up the said doubts by an act of the representatives of the people declaratory of the true sense and meaning of the Const.i.tution, and to ensure its just execution in these particulars according to the intent of the framers thereof: Therefore," etc., etc.
This act confined the right of suffrage to free white male citizens twenty-one years of age, worth fifty pounds proclamation money, clear estate; and disposed of the property qualification by declaring that every person otherwise ent.i.tled to vote whose name should be enrolled on the last tax-lists for the State or County should be considered as worth the fifty pounds, thus by legislative enactment determining the meaning of the Const.i.tution and settling the difficulty. The law remained unchanged until the adoption of the new Const.i.tution a few years since, which instrument is equally restrictive as to persons who shall vote, and removes the property qualification altogether.
Very recently a refusal to respond to a demand for taxes legally imposed, was received from a distinguished advocate of "Woman"s Rights" in one of the northern counties; who gave as her reasons "that women suffer taxation, and yet have no representation, which is not only unjust to one-half of the adult population, but is contrary to our Theory of Government"--and that when the attention of men is called to the wide difference between their theory of government and its practice in this particular, that they can not fail to see the mistake they now make, by imposing taxes on women when they refuse them the right of suffrage.[79]
Similar arguments were advanced by a sister of Richard Henry Lee, in 1778,[80] when, if ever, they were calculated to receive due consideration, yet the distinguished Virginian did not hesitate to show the unreasonableness of the demand; in the course of his able answer remarking that (setting aside other motive for restricting the power to males) "perhaps "twas thought rather out of character for women to press into those tumultuous a.s.semblages of men where the business of choosing representatives is conducted!" And as it is very evident that when in times past the right was, not only claimed, but exercised in New Jersey, it never accorded with public sentiment; so it maybe safely predicted that, as was the case in 1807, "the safety, quiet, good order, and dignity of the State," will ever call for its explicit disavowal in times to come.
In his speech at the Woman"s Rights Convention, 1853, in New York, Rev. John Pierpont said: "I can go back forty years; and forty years ago, when most of my present audience were not in, but behind, their cradles, pa.s.sing a stranger, through the neighboring State of New Jersey, and stopping for dinner at an inn, where the coach stopped, I saw at the bar where I went to pay, a list of the voters of the town stuck up. My eye ran over it, and I read to my astonishment the names of several women. "What!" I said, "do women vote here?" "Certainly,"
was the answer, "when they have real estate." Then the question arose in my mind, why should not women vote: Laws are made regulating the tenure of real estate, and the essence of all republicanism is, that they who feel the pressure of the law should have a voice in its enactment."
DEFECTS IN THE CONSt.i.tUTION OF NEW JERSEY.
In a very singular pamphlet published in Trenton, 1779, called "Eumenes: A collection of papers on the Errors and Omissions of the Const.i.tution of New Jersey," the writer is very severe upon the fact that women were allowed to exercise the same right as the sterner s.e.x; observing that "Nothing can be a greater mockery of this inalienable right, than to suffer it to be exercised by persons who do not pretend any judgment on the subject."[81]
Extract from "Eumenes," page 31, No. 8: "Defects of the Const.i.tution respecting the Qualification of Electors and Elected":
It will not be denied that a Const.i.tution ought to point out what persons may elect and who may be elected; and that it should as distinctly prescribe their several qualifications, and render those qualifications conformable to justice and the public welfare. Indeed, on the proper adjustment of the elective franchise depends, in a great measure, the liberty of the citizen and the safety of the Government. Upon examination it will be found that the Const.i.tution requires amendment upon this head in several particulars.
It has ever been a matter of dispute upon the Const.i.tution, whether females, as well as males, are ent.i.tled to elect officers of Government. If we were to be guided by the letter of the charter, it would seem to place them on the same footing in this particular; and yet, recurring to _political right_ and the nature of things, a very forcible construction has been raised against the admission of _women_ to partic.i.p.ate in the public suffrage.
The 4th Article of the Const.i.tution declares that "_all the inhabitants_ of this colony of full age who are worth fifty pounds, shall be ent.i.tled to vote for representatives."
Those who support the rights of women say, that "all inhabitants"
must mean "_all women_" inhabitants as well as "_all men_."
Whereas, it is urged on the other side that the makers must have meant "all _male_ inhabitants," and that the expression is to be restrained so as to arrive at the _intent_ of the framers of the instrument.