The hope was expressed that President Wilson"s conversion would be like that of St. Paul, "and that he will become a master- worker in the vineyards of the Lord for this proposition."
(Applause.)
Mr. Gallivan, Democrat, although a representative of Ma.s.sachusetts, "the cradle of American liberty," called upon a great Persian philosopher to sustain him in his support. " "Dogs bark, but the caravan moves on." . . . Democracy cannot live half free and half female."
Mr. Dill of Washington, Democrat, colored his support with the following tribute: " . . . It was woman who first learned to prepare skins of animals for protection from the elements, and tamed and domesticated the dog and horse and cow. She was a servant and a slave . . . . To-day she is the peer of man."
Mr. Little of Kansas, Republican, tried to bring his colleagues back to a moderate course by interpolating:
"It seems to me, gentlemen, that it is time for us to learn that woman is neither a slave nor an angel, but a human being, ent.i.tled to be treated with ordinary common sense in the adjustment of human affairs . . . ."
But this calm statement could not allay the terror of Representative Clark of Florida, Democrat, who cried: "In the hearings before the committee it will be found that one of the leaders among the suffragettes declared that they wanted the ballot for "protection", and when asked against whom she desired "protection" she promptly and frankly replied, "men." My G.o.d, has it come to pa.s.s in America that the women of the land need to be protected from the men?" The galleries quietly nodded their heads, and Mr. Clark continued to predict either the complete breakdown of family life . . . . or "they [man and wife] must think alike, act alike, have the same ideals of life,
{257}
and look forward with like vision to the happy consummation "beyond the vale." . . .
"G.o.d knows that . . . when you get factional politics limited to husband and wife, oh, what a spectacle will be presented, my countrymen . . . . Love will vanish, while hate ascends the throne . . . .
"To-day woman stands the uncrowned queen in the hearts of all right-thinking American men; to her as rightful sovereign we render the homage of protection, respect, love, and may the guiding hand of an all-wise Providence stretch forth in this hour of peril to save her from a change of relation which must bring in its train, discontent, sorrow, and pain," he concluded desperately, with the trend obviously toward "crowning" the queens.
There was the disturbing consideration that women know too much to be trusted. "I happen to have a mother," said Mr. Gray of New Jersey, Republican, "as most of us have, and incidentally I think we all have fathers, although a father does not count for much any more. My mother has forgotten more political history than he ever knew, and she knows more about the American government and American political economy than he has ever shown symptoms of knowing, and for the good of mankind as well as the country she is opposed to women getting into politics."
The perennial lament for the pa.s.sing of the good old days was raised by Representative Welty of Ohio, Democrat, who said:
"The old ship of state has left her moorings and seems to be sailing on an unknown and uncharted sea. The government founded in the blood of our fathers is fading away. Last fall, a year ago, both parties recognized those principles in their platforms, and each candidate solemnly declared that he would abide by them if elected. But lo, all old things are pa.s.sing away, and the lady from Montana has filed a bill asking
{258}
that separate citizenship be granted to American women marrying foreigners."
Representative Greene of Ma.s.sachusetts, Republican, all but shed tears over the inevitable amending of the Const.i.tution:
"I have read it [the Const.i.tution] many times, and there have been just 17 amendments adopted since the original Const.i.tution was framed by the master minds whom G.o.d had inspired in the cabin of the Mayflower to formulate the Const.i.tution of the Plymouth Colony which was made the basis of the Const.i.tution of Ma.s.sachusetts and subsequently resulted in the establishment of the Const.i.tution of the United States under which we now live . .
Fancy his shock at finding the pickets triumphant.
"Since the second session of the Sixty-fifth Congress opened," he said, "I have met several women suffragists from the State of Ma.s.sachusetts. I have immediately propounded to them this one question: "Do you approve or disapprove of the suffrage banners in front of the White House . . . ?" The answer in nearly every case to my question was: "I glory in that demonstration" . . .
the response to my question was very offensive, and I immediately ordered these suffrage advocates from my office."
And again the pickets featured in the final remarks of Mr. Small of North Carolina, Democrat, who deplored the fact that advocates of the amendment had made it an issue inducing party rivalry.
"This is no party question, and such efforts will be futile. It almost equals in intelligence the scheme of that delectable and inane group of women who picketed the White House on the theory that the President could grant them the right to vote."
Amid such gems of intellectual delight the House of the great American Congress pa.s.sed the national suffrage amendment.
We turned our entire attention then to the Senate.
{259}
Chapter 16
An Interlude (Seven Months)
The President had finally thrown his power to putting the amendment through the House. We hoped he would follow this up by insisting upon the pa.s.sage of the amendment in the Senate. We ceased our acts of dramatic protest for the moment and gave our energies to getting public pressure upon him, to persuade him to see that the Senate acted. We also continued to press directly upon recalcitrant senators of the minority party who could be won only through appeals other than from the President.
There are in the Senate 96 members-2 elected from each of the 48 states. To pa.s.s a const.i.tutional amendment through the Senate, 64 votes are necessary, a two-thirds majority. At this point in the campaign, 58 senators were pledged to support the measure and 48 were opposed. We therefore had to win 11 more votes. A measure pa.s.sed through one branch of Congress must be pa.s.sed through the other branch during the life of that Congress, otherwise it dies automatically and must be born again in a new Congress. We therefore had only the remainder of the first regular session of the 65th Congress and, failing of that, the short second session from December, 1918, to March, 1919, in which to win those votes.
Backfires were started in the states of the senators not yet committed to the amendment. Organized demand for action in the Senate grew to huge proportions.
We turned also to the leading influential members of the respective parties for active help.
{260}
Colonel Roosevelt did his most effective suffrage work at this period in a determined attack upon the few unconvinced Republican Senators. The Colonel was one of the few leaders in our national life who was never too busy to confer or to offer and accept suggestions as to procedure. He seemed to have imagination about women. He never took a patronizing att.i.tude nor did he with moral unction dogmatically tell you how the fight should be waged and won. He presupposed ability among women leaders. He was not offended, morally or politically, by our preferring to go to jail rather than to submit in silence. In fact, he was at this time under Administration fire, because of his bold attacks upon some of their policies, and remarked during an interview at Oyster Bay:
"I may soon join you women in jail. One can never tell these days."
His sagacious att.i.tude toward conservative and radical suffrage forces was always delightful and indicative of his appreciation of the political and social value of a movement"s having vitality enough to disagree on methods. None of the ba.n.a.l philosophy that "you can never win until all your forces get together" from the Colonel. One day, as I came into his office for an interview, I met a member of the conservative suffragists just leaving, and we spoke. In his office the Colonel remarked, "You know, I contemplated having both you and Mrs. Whitney come to see me at the same time, since it was on a similar mission, but I didn"t quite know whether the lion and the lamb would lie down together, and I thought I"d better take no chances . . . . But I see you"re on speaking terms," he added. I answered that our relations were extremely amiable, but remarked that the other side might not like to be called "lambs."
"You delight in being the lions-on that point I am safe, am I not?" And he smiled his widest smile as he plunged into a vivid expository attack upon the Senatorial opponents of
{261}
suffrage in his own party. He wrote letters to them. If this failed, he invited them to Oyster Bay for the week-end. Never did he abandon them until there was literally not a shadow of hope to bank on.
When the Colonel got into action something always happened on the Democratic side. He made a public statement to Senator Gallinger of New Hampshire, Republican leader in the Senate, in which lie pointed to the superior support of the Republicans and urged even more liberal party support to ensure the pa.s.sage of the amendment in the Senate. Action by the Democrats followed fast on the heels of this public statement.
The National Executive Committee of the Democratic party, after a referendum vote of the members of the National Committeemen, pa.s.sed a resolution calling for favorable action in the Senate.
Mr. A. Mitch.e.l.l Palmer wrote to the Woman"s Party saying that this resolution must be regarded as "an official expression of the Democratic Party through the only organization which can speak for it between national conventions."
The Republican National Committee meeting at the same time commended the course taken by Republican Representatives who had voted for the amendment in the House, and declared their position to be "a true interpretation of the thought of the Republican Party."
Republican and Democratic state, county and city committees followed the lead and called for Senate action.
State legislatures in rapid succession called upon the Senate to pa.s.s the measure, that they in turn might immediately ratify.
North Dakota, New York, Rhode Island, Arizona, Texas and other states acted in this matter.
Intermittent attempts on the Republican side to force action, followed by eloquent speeches from time to time, piquing their opponents, left the Democrats bison-like across
{262}
the path. The majority of them were content to rest upon the action taken in the House.
I was at this time Chairman of the Political Department of the Woman"s Party, and in that capacity interviewed practically every national leader in both majority parties. I can not resist recording a few impressions.
Colonel William Boyce Thompson of New York, now Chairman of Ways and Means of the Republican National Committee, who with Raymond Robins had served in Russia as member of the United States Red Cross. Mission, had just returned. The deadlock was brought to his attention. He immediately responded in a most effective way.
In a brief but dramatic speech at a great ma.s.s meeting of the Woman"s Party, at Palm Beach, Florida, he said: