{290}
pretation of democracy,-seen old governments like Great Britain, which did not profess to be democratic, promise readily and as of course this justice to women, though they had before refused it, the strange revelations of this war having made many things new and plain to governments as well as to peoples.
Are we alone to refuse to learn the lesson? Are we alone to ask and take the utmost that women can give,-service and sacrifice of every kind,-and still say that we do not see what t.i.tle that gives them to stand by our sides in the guidance of the affairs of their nation and ours? We have made partners of the women in this war; shall we admit them only to a partnership of sacrifice and suffering and toil and not to a partnership of privilege and of right? This war could not have been fought, either by the other nations engaged or by America, if it had not been for the services of the women, services rendered in every sphere,-not only in the fields of effort in which we have been accustomed to see them work, but wherever men have worked and upon the very skirts and edges of the battle itself. We shall not only be distrusted but shall deserve to be distrusted if we do not enfranchise them with the fullest possible enfranchis.e.m.e.nt, as it is now certain that the other great free nations will enfranchise them. We cannot isolate our thought or our action in such a matter from the thought of the rest of the world. We must either conform or deliberately reject what they propose and resign the leadership of liberal minds to others.
The women of America arc too n.o.ble and too intelligent and too devoted to be slackers whether you give or withhold this thing that is mere justice; but I know the magic it will work in their thoughts and spirits if you give it them. I propose it as I would propose to admit soldiers to the suffrage, the men fighting in the field for our liberties and the liberties of the world, were they excluded. The tasks of the women lie at the very heart of the war, and I know how much stronger that heart will beat if you do this just thing and show our women that you trust them as much as you in fact and of necessity depend upon them.
Have I said that the pa.s.sage of this amendment is a vitally necessary war measure, and do you need further proof? Do
{291}
you stand in need of the trust of other peoples and of the trust of our women? Is that trust an a.s.set or is it not? I tell you plainly, as commander-in-chief of our armies and of the gallant men in our fleets, as the present spokesman of this people in our dealings with the men and women throughout the world who are now our partners, as the responsible head of a great government which stands and is questioned day by day as to its purposes, its principles, its hopes, whether they be serviceable to men everywhere or only to itself, and who must himself answer these questionings or be shamed, as the guide and director of forces caught in the grip of war and by the same token in need of every material and spiritual resource this great nation possesses,-I tell you plainly that this measure which I urge upon you is vital to the winning of the war and to the energies alike of preparation and of battle.
And not to the winning of the war only. It is vital to the right solution of the great problems which we must settle, and settle immediately, when the war is over. We shall need then a vision of affairs which is theirs, and, as we have never needed them before, the sympathy and insight and clear moral instinct of the women of the world. The problems of that time will strike to the roots of many things that we have not hitherto questioned, and I for one believe that our safety in those questioning days, as well as our comprehension of matters that touch society to the quick, will depend upon the direct and authoritative partic.i.p.ation of women in our counsels. We shall need their moral sense to preserve what is right and fine and worthy in our system of life as well as to discover just what it is that ought to be purified and reformed. Without their counselings we shall be only half wise.
That is my case. This is my appeal. Many may deny its validity, if they choose, but no one can brush aside or answer the arguments upon which it is based. The executive tasks of this war rest upon me. I ask that you lighten them and place in my hands instruments, spiritual instruments, which I do not now possess, which I sorely need, and which I have daily to apologize for not being able to employ. (Applause).
It was a truly beautiful appeal.
{292}
When the applause and the excitement attendant upon the occasion of a message from the President had subsided, and the floor of the chamber had emptied itself of its distinguished visitors, the debate was resumed.
"If this resolution fails now," said Senator Jones of Washington, ranking Republican member of the Suffrage Committee, "it fails for lack of Democratic votes."
Senator c.u.mmins of Iowa, Republican, also a member of the Suffrage Committee, reminded opponents of the measure of the retaliatory tactics used by President Wilson when repudiated by senators on other issues. "I sincerely hope," he said tauntingly, "that the President may deal kindly and leniently with those who are refusing to remove this obstacle which stands in his way. It has not been very long since the President retired the junior Senator from Mississippi [Mr. Vardaman] from public life. Why?
Because he refused at all times to obey the commands which were issued for his direction. The junior Senator from Georgia [Mr.
Hardwick] suffered the same fate. How do you hope to escape? . .
. My Democratic friends are either proceeding upon the hypothesis that the President is insincere or that they may be able to secure an immunity from him that these other unfortunate aspirants for office failed to secure."
Senator c.u.mmins chided Senator Reed for denouncing "the so-called militants who sought to bring their influence to bear upon the situation in rather a more forcible and decisive method than was employed by the national a.s.sociation. . . I did not believe in the campaign they were pursuing (not one senator was brave enough to say outright that he did). . . .
"But that was simply a question for them to determine; and if they thought that in accordance with the established custom the President should bring his influence to bear more effectively than he had, they had a perfect right to burn his message; they had a perfect right to carry banners in Lafay-
{293}
ette Park, in front of the White House, or anywhere else; they had a perfect right to bring their banners into the Capitol and display them with all the force and vigor which they could command. I did not agree with them; but they also were making a campaign for an inestimable and a fundamental right.
"What would you have done, men, if you had been deprived of the right to vote? What would you have done if you had been deprived of the right of representation? Have the militants done anything worse than the revolutionary forces who gathered about the tea chests and threw them into the sea? . . .
"I do not believe they [the militants] committed any crime; and while I had no particle of sympathy with the manner in which they were conducting their campaign, I think their arrest and imprisonment and the treatment which they received while in confinement are a disgrace to the civilized world, and much the more a disgrace to the United States, which a.s.sumes to lead the civilized world in humane endeavor. They disturbed n.o.body save that disturbance which is common to the carrying forward of all propaganda by those who are intensely and vitally interested in it. I wish they had not done it, but I am not to be the judge of their methods so long as they confine themselves to those acts and to those words which are fairly directed to the accomplishment of their purposes. I cannot accept the conclusion that because these women burned a message in Lafayette Park or because they carried banners upon the streets in Washington therefore they are criminals."
The time had come to take the vote, but we knew we had not won.
The roll was called and the vote stood 62 to 34 [Oct. 1, 1918], counting all pairs. We had lost by 2 votes.
Instantly Chairman Jones, according to his promise to the women, changing his vote from "yea" to "nay," moved for a reconsideration of the measure, and thus automatically kept it on the calendar of the Senate. That was all that could be done.
{294}
The President"s belief in the power of words had lost the amendment. Nor could he by a speech, eloquent as it was, break down the opposition in the Senate which he had so long protected and condoned.
Our next task was to secure a reversal of the Senate vote. We modified our tactics slightly.
{295}
Chapter 19
More Pressure
Our immediate task was to compel the President to secure a reversal of two votes in the Senate. It became necessary to enter again the Congressional elections which were a month away.
By a stroke of good luck there were two senatorial contests-in New Jersey and New Hampshire-for vacancies in the short term.
That is, we had an opportunity to elect two friends who would take their seats in time to vote on the amendment before the end of this session. It so happened that the Democratic candidates were pledged to vote for the amendment if elected, and that the Republican candidates were opposed to the amendment. We launched our campaign in this instance for the election of the Democratic candidates. We went immediately to the President to ask his a.s.sistance in our endeavor. We urged him personally to appeal to the voters of New Jersey and New Hampshire on behalf of his two candidates. As Party leader he was at the moment paying no attention whatever to the success of these two suffragists. Both of the Democratic candidates themselves appealed to President Wilson for help in their contests, on the basis of their suffrage advocacy. His speech to the Senate scarcely cold, the President refused to lend any a.s.sistance in these contests, which with sufficient effort might have produced the last two votes.
At the end of two weeks of such pressure upon the President we were unable to interest him in this practical endeavor. It was clear that he would move again only under attack. We
{296}
went again, therefore, to the women voters of the west and asked them to withhold their support from the Democratic Senatorial candidates in the suffrage states in order to compel the President to a.s.sist in the two Eastern contests. This campaign made it clear to the President that we were still holding him and his party to their responsibility.
And as has been pointed out, our policy was to oppose the Democratic candidates at elections so long as their party was responsible for the pa.s.sage of the amendment and did not pa.s.s it.
Since there is no question between individuals in suffrage states-they are all suffragists-this could not increase our numerical strength. It could, however, and did demonstrate the growing and comprehensive power of the women voters.
Shortly before election, when our campaign was in full swing in the West, the President sent a letter appealing to the voters of New Jersey to support Mr. Hennessey, the Democratic candidate for the Senate. He subsequently appealed to the voters of New Hampshire to elect Mr. Jameson, candidate for Democratic Senator in New Hampshire.
We continued our campaign in the West as a safeguard against relaxation by the President after his appeal. There were seven senatorial contests in the western suffrage states. In all but two of these contests-Montana and Nevada-the Democratic Senatorial candidates were defeated. In these two states the Democratic majority was greatly reduced.
Republicans won in New Jersey and New Hampshire and a Republican Congress was elected to power throughout the country.
The election campaign had had a wholesome effect, however, on both parties and was undoubtedly one of the factors in persuading the President to again appeal to the Senate.
Immediately after the defeat in the Senate, and throughout the election campaign, we attempted to hold banners at the Capitol to a.s.sist our campaign and in order to weaken the
{297}
resistance of the senators of the opposition. The mottoes on the banners attacked with impartial mercilessness both Democrats and Republicans. One read:
SENATOR WADSWORTH"s REGIMENT IS FIGHTING FOR DEMOCRACY ABROAD.
SENATOR -WADSWORTH LEFT HIS REGIMENT AND IS FIGHTING AGAINST DEMOCRACY IN THE SENATE.
SENATOR WADSWORTH COULD SERVE HIS COUNTRY BETTER BY FIGHTING WITH HIS REGIMENT ABROAD THAN BY FIGHTING WOMEN AT HOME.
Another read:
SENATOR SHIELDS TOLD THE PEOPLE OF TENNESSEE HE WOULD SUPPORT THE PRESIDENT"S POLICIES.
THE ONLY TIME THE PRESIDENT WENT TO THE SENATE TO ASK ITS SUPPORT SENATOR SHIELDS VOTED AGAINST HIM.