<h2><SPAN name="Page_307"></SPAN>CHAPTER XIX.</h2>
<h2>THE SPIRIT OF '76.</h2>
<br/>
<p>The year 1876 was one of intense excitement and laborious
activity throughout the country. The anticipation
of the centennial birthday of the Republic, to be
celebrated in Philadelphia, stirred the patriotism of the
people to the highest point of enthusiasm. As each
State was to be represented in the great exhibition,
local pride added another element to the public interest.
Then, too, everyone who could possibly afford the journey
was making busy preparations to spend the Fourth
of July, the natal day of the Republic, mid the scenes
where the Declaration of Independence was issued in
1776, the Government inaugurated, and the first national
councils were held. Those interested in women's
political rights decided to make the Fourth a woman's
day, and to celebrate the occasion, in their various
localities, by delivering orations and reading their own
declaration of rights, with dinners and picnics in the
town halls or groves, as most convenient. But many
from every State in the Union made their arrangements
to spend the historic period in Philadelphia. Owing,
also, to the large number of foreigners who came over
to join in the festivities, that city was crammed to its
utmost capacity. With the crowd and excessive heat,
comfort was everywhere sacrificed to curiosity.</p>
<p>The enthusiasm throughout the country had given a
<SPAN name="Page_308"></SPAN>fresh impulse to the lyceum bureaus. Like the
ferryboats
in New York harbor, running hither and thither,
crossing each other's tracks, the whole list of lecturers
were on the wing, flying to every town and city from
San Francisco to New York. As soon as a new railroad
ran through a village of five hundred inhabitants
that could boast a schoolhouse, a church, or a hotel,
and one enterprising man or woman, a course of lectures
was at once inaugurated as a part of the winter's entertainments.</p>
<p>On one occasion I was invited, by mistake, to a
little town to lecture the same evening when the
Christy Minstrels were to perform. It was arranged,
as the town had only one hall, that I should speak from
seven to eight o'clock and the minstrels should have the
remainder of the time. One may readily see that, with
the minstrels in anticipation, a lecture on any serious
question would occupy but a small place in the hearts
of the people in a town where they seldom had
entertainments of any kind. All the time I was speaking
there was a running to and fro behind the scenes, where
the minstrels were transforming themselves with paints
and curly wigs into Africans, and laughing at each other's
jests. As it was a warm evening, and the windows
were open, the hilarity of the boys in the street added
to the general din. Under such circumstances it was
difficult to preserve my equilibrium. I felt like laughing
at my own comical predicament, and I decided to
make my address a medley of anecdotes and stories,
like a string of beads, held together by a fine thread of
argument and illustration. The moment the hand of
the clock pointed at eight o'clock the band struck
up, thus announcing that the happy hour for the min<SPAN name="Page_309"></SPAN>strels
had come. Those of my audience who wished to
stay were offered seats at half price; those who did not,
slipped out, and the crowd rushed in, soon packing the
house to its utmost capacity. I stayed, and enjoyed the
performance of the minstrels more than I had my own.</p>
<p>As the lyceum season lasted from October to June,
I was late in reaching Philadelphia. Miss Anthony and
Mrs. Gage had already been through the agony of finding
appropriate headquarters for the National Suffrage
Association. I found them pleasantly situated on the
lower floor of No. 1431 Chestnut Street, with the work
for the coming month clearly mapped out. As it was
the year for nominating candidates for the presidency
of the United States, the Republicans and
Democrats were about to hold their great' conventions.
Hence letters were to be written to them
recommending a woman suffrage plank in their platforms,
and asking seats for women in the conventions,
with the privilege of being heard in their own behalf.
On these letters our united wisdom was concentrated,
and twenty thousand copies of each were published.</p>
<p>Then it was thought pre-eminently proper that a
Woman's Declaration of Rights should be issued.
Days and nights were spent over that document. After
many twists from our analytical tweezers, with a critical
consideration of every word and sentence, it was at
last, by a consensus of the competent, pronounced very
good. Thousands were ordered to be printed, and were
folded, put in envelopes, stamped, directed, and
scattered. Miss Anthony, Mrs. Gage, and I worked
sixteen hours, day and night, pressing everyone who
came in, into the service, and late at night carrying
immense bundles to be mailed. With meetings, recep<SPAN name="Page_310"></SPAN>tions,
and a succession of visitors, all of whom we plied
with woman suffrage literature, we felt we had accomplished
a great educational work.</p>
<p>Among the most enjoyable experiences at our headquarters
were the frequent visits of our beloved Lucretia
Mott, who used to come from her country home bringing
us eggs, cold chickens, and fine Oolong tea. As
she had presented us with a little black teapot that, like
Mercury's mysterious pitcher of milk, filled itself for
every coming guest, we often improvised luncheons
with a few friends. At parting, Lucretia always
made a contribution to our depleted treasury. Here
we had many prolonged discussions as to the part we
should take, on the Fourth of July, in the public celebration.
We thought it would be fitting for us to read
our Declaration of Rights immediately after that of the
Fathers was read, as an impeachment of them and their
male descendants for their injustice and oppression.
Ours contained as many counts, and quite as important,
as those against King George in 1776. Accordingly,
we applied to the authorities to allow us seats on the
platform and a place in the programme of the public
celebration, which was to be held in the historic old
Independence Hall. As General Hawley was in charge
of the arrangements for the day, I wrote him as
follows:</p>
<div class="blkquot">
<p style="text-align: right;">"1431 Chestnut Street, July 1, 1876.</p>
<p>"General Hawley.</p>
<p>"<i>Honored Sir</i>: As President of the National Woman's
Suffrage Association, I am authorized to ask you for
tickets to the platform, at Independence Hall, for the
celebration on the Fourth of July. We should like to
<SPAN name="Page_311"></SPAN>have seats for at least one representative woman
from
each State. We also ask your permission to read our
Declaration of Rights immediately after the reading of
the Declaration of Independence of the Fathers is finished.
Although these are small favors to ask as representatives
of one-half of the nation, yet we shall be under
great obligations to you if granted.</p>
<p style="margin-left: 40px;">"Respectfully Yours,</p>
<p style="margin-left: 80px;">"Elizabeth Cady Stanton."</p>
</div>
<p>To this I received the following reply:</p>
<div class="blkquot">
<p style="text-align: right;">"U.S.C.C. Headquarters, July 2.</p>
<p>"Mrs. Elizabeth Cady Stanton.</p>
<p>"<i>Dear Madam</i>: I send you, with pleasure, half a dozen
cards of invitation. As the platform is already crowded,
it is impossible to reserve the number of seats you desire.
I regret to say it is also impossible for us to make
any change in the programme at this late hour. We
are crowded for time to carry out what is already
proposed.</p>
<p style="margin-left: 40px;">"Yours Very Respectfully,</p>
<p style="margin-left: 80px;">"Joseph R. Hawley,<br/>
"President, U.S.C.C."</p>
</div>
<p>With this rebuff, Mrs. Mott and I decided that we
would not accept the offered seats, but would be ready
to open our own convention called for that day, at the
First Unitarian church, where the Rev. William H. Furness
had preached for fifty years. But some of our
younger coadjutors decided that they would occupy
the seats and present our Declaration of Rights. They
said truly, women will be taxed to pay the expenses of
<SPAN name="Page_312"></SPAN>this celebration, and we have as good a right to
that
platform and to the ears of the people as the men have,
and we will be heard.</p>
<p>That historic Fourth of July dawned at last, one of
the most oppressive days of that heated season.
Susan B. Anthony, Matilda Joslyn Gage, Sara Andrews
Spencer, Lillie Devereux Blake, and Phoebe W. Couzins
made their way through the crowds under the broiling
sun of Independence Square, carrying the Woman's
Declaration of Rights. This Declaration had been
handsomely engrossed by one of their number, and
signed by the oldest and most prominent advocates of
woman's enfranchisement. Their tickets of admission
proved an "open sesame" through the military barriers,
and, a few moments before the opening of the
ceremonies, these women found themselves within the
precincts from which most of their sex were excluded.</p>
<p>The Declaration of 1776 was read by Richard Henry
Lee of Virginia, about whose family clusters so much
historic fame. The moment he finished reading was
determined upon as the appropriate time for the
presentation of the Woman's Declaration. Not quite sure
how their approach might be met, not quite certain if,
at this final moment, they would be permitted to reach
the presiding officer, those ladies arose and made their
way down the aisle. The bustle of preparation for the
Brazilian hymn covered their advance. The foreign
guests and the military and civil officers who filled the
space directly in front of the speaker's stand, courteously
made way, while Miss Anthony, in fitting words,
presented the Declaration to the presiding officer.
Senator Ferry's face paled as, bowing low, with no word
he received the Declaration, which thus became part of
<SPAN name="Page_313"></SPAN>the day's proceedings. The ladies turned,
scattering
printed copies as they deliberately walked down the
platform. On every side eager hands were outstretched,
men stood on seats and asked for them, while General
Hawley, thus defied and beaten in his audacious denial
to women of the right to present their Declaration,
shouted, "Order, order!"</p>
<p>Passing out, these ladies made their way to a platform,
erected for the musicians, in front of Independence
Hall. Here, under the shadow of Washington's
statue, back of them the old bell that proclaimed "liberty
to all the land and all the inhabitants thereof," they
took their places, and, to a listening, applauding crowd,
Miss Anthony read the Woman's Declaration. During
the reading of the Declaration, Mrs. Gage stood beside
Miss Anthony and held an umbrella over her head,
to shelter her friend from the intense heat of the noonday
sun. And thus in the same hour, on opposite sides
of old Independence Hall, did the men and women express
their opinions on the great principles proclaimed
on the natal day of the Republic. The Declaration was
handsomely framed, and now hangs in the Vice President's
room in the Capitol at Washington.</p>
<p>These heroic ladies then hurried from Independence
Hall to the church, already crowded with an expectant
audience, to whom they gave a full report of the
morning's proceedings. The Hutchinsons of worldwide
fame were present in their happiest vein,
interspersing the speeches with appropriate songs and
felicitous remarks. For five long hours on that hot
midsummer day a crowded audience, many standing,
listened with profound interest and reluctantly
dispersed at last, all agreeing that it was one of the
<SPAN name="Page_314"></SPAN>most impressive and enthusiastic meetings they
had
ever attended.</p>
<p>All through our Civil War the slaves on the Southern
plantations had an abiding faith that the terrible conflict
would result in freedom for their race. Just so
through all the busy preparations of the Centennial, the
women of the nation felt sure that the great national
celebration could not pass without the concession of
some new liberties to them. Hence they pressed their
claims at every point, at the Fourth of July celebration
in the exposition buildings, and in the Republican and
Democratic nominating conventions; hoping to get a
plank in the platforms of both the great political parties.</p>
<p>The Woman's Pavilion upon the centennial grounds
was an afterthought, as theologians claim woman herself
to have been. The women of the country, after having
contributed nearly one hundred thousand dollars to
the centennial stock, found there had been no provision
made for the separate exhibition of their work. The
centennial board, of which Mrs. Gillespie was president,
then decided to raise funds for the erection of a separate
building, to be known as the Woman's Pavilion.
It covered an acre of ground, and was erected at an expense
of thirty thousand dollars—a small sum in comparison
with the money which had been raised by women
and expended on the other buildings, not to speak of
the State and national appropriations, which the taxes
levied on them had largely helped to swell.</p>
<p>The Pavilion was no true exhibit of woman's art.
Few women are, as yet, owners of the business which
their industry largely makes remunerative. Cotton
factories, in which thousands of women work, are owned
by men. The shoe business, in some branches of which
<SPAN name="Page_315"></SPAN>women are doing more than half the work, is
under the
ownership of men. Rich embroideries from India, rugs
of downy softness from Turkey, the muslin of Decca,
anciently known as "The Woven Wind," the pottery
and majolica ware of P. Pipsen's widow, the cartridges
and envelopes of Uncle Sam, Waltham watches, whose
finest mechanical work is done by women, and ten thousand
other industries found no place in the pavilion.
Said United States Commissioner Meeker of Colorado,
"Woman's work comprises three-fourths of the exposition;
it is scattered through every building; take it
away, and there would be no exposition."</p>
<p>But this pavilion rendered one good service to
woman in showing her capabilities as an engineer. The
boiler, which furnished the force for running its work,
was under the charge of a young Canadian girl, Miss
Allison, who, from childhood, had loved machinery,
spending much time in the large saw and grist mills of
her father, run by engines of two and three hundred
horse-power, which she sometimes managed for amusement.
When her name was proposed for running the
pavilion machinery, it caused much opposition. It was
said that the committee would, some day, find the pavilion
blown to atoms; that the woman engineer would
spend her time reading novels instead of watching the
steam gauge; that the idea was impracticable and
should not be thought of. But Miss Allison soon
proved her capabilities and the falseness of these
prophecies by taking her place in the engine room and
managing its workings with perfect ease. Six power
looms, on which women wove carpets, webbing, silks,
etc., were run by this engine. At a later period the
printing of <i>The New Century for Woman</i>, a paper pub<SPAN name="Page_316"></SPAN>lished
by the centennial commission in the woman's
building, was done by its means. Miss Allison declared
the work to be more cleanly, more pleasant, and infinitely
less fatiguing than cooking over a kitchen
stove. "Since I have been compelled to earn my own
living," she said, "I have never been engaged in work
I like so well. Teaching school is much harder, and one
is not paid so well." She expressed her confidence in her
ability to manage the engines of an ocean steamer,
and said that there were thousands of small engines
in use in various parts of the country, and no reason
existed why women should not be employed to manage
them,—following the profession of engineer as a regular
business,—an engine requiring far less attention than
is given by a nursemaid or a mother to a child.</p>
<p>But to have made the Woman's Pavilion grandly
historic, upon its walls should have been hung the
yearly protest of Harriet K. Hunt against taxation
without representation; the legal papers served
upon the Smith sisters when, for their refusal to
pay taxes while unrepresented, their Alderney cows
were seized and sold; the papers issued by the
city of Worcester for the forced sale of the house
and lands of Abby Kelly Foster, the veteran abolitionist,
because she refused to pay taxes, giving the
same reason our ancestors gave when they resisted
taxation; a model of Bunker Hill monument, its foundation
laid by Lafayette in 1825, but which remained
unfinished nearly twenty years, until the famous German
danseuse, Fanny Ellsler, gave the proceeds of a public
performance for that purpose. With these should have
been exhibited framed copies of all the laws bearing
unjustly upon women—those which rob her of her name,
<SPAN name="Page_317"></SPAN>her earnings, her property, her children, her
person; also
the legal papers in the case of Susan B. Anthony, who
was tried and fined for claiming her right to vote under
the Fourteenth Amendment, and the decision of Mr.
Justice Miller in the case of Myra Bradwell, denying
national protection for woman's civil rights; and the
later decision of Chief Justice Waite of the United
States Supreme Court against Virginia L. Minor, denying
women national protection for their political
rights; decisions in favor of State rights which imperil
the liberties not only of all women, but of every white
man in the nation.</p>
<p>Woman's most fitting contributions to the Centennial
Exposition would have been these protests, laws,
and decisions, which show her political slavery. But
all this was left for rooms outside of the centennial
grounds, upon Chestnut Street, where the National
Woman's Suffrage Association hoisted its flag, made its
protests, and wrote the Declaration of Rights of the
women of the United States.</p>
<p>To many thoughtful people it seemed captious and
unreasonable for women to complain of injustice in this
free land, amidst such universal rejoicings. When the
majority of women are seemingly happy, it is natural to
suppose that the discontent of the minority is the result
of their unfortunate individual idiosyncrasies, and
not of adverse influences in established conditions.
But the history of the world shows that the vast
majority, in every generation, passively accept the
conditions into which they are born, while those who
demanded larger liberties are ever a small, ostracized minority,
whose claims are ridiculed and ignored. From
our standpoint we would honor any Chinese woman
<SPAN name="Page_318"></SPAN>who claimed the right to her feet and powers of
locomotion;
the Hindoo widows who refused to ascend the
funeral pyre of their husbands; the Turkish women who
threw off their masks and veils and left the harem; the
Mormon women who abjured their faith and demanded
monogamic relations. Why not equally honor the intelligent
minority of American women who protest
against the artificial disabilities by which their freedom
is limited and their development arrested? That only
a few, under any circumstances, protest against the injustice
of long-established laws and customs, does not
disprove the fact of the oppressions, while the satisfaction
of the many, if real, only proves their apathy
and deeper degradation. That a majority of the
women of the United States accept, without protest,
the disabilities which grow out of their disfranchisement
is simply an evidence of their ignorance and
cowardice, while the minority who demand a higher
political status clearly prove their superior intelligence
and wisdom.</p>
<p>At the close of the Forty-seventh Congress we made
two new demands: First, for a special committee to consider
all questions in regard to the civil and political
rights of women. We naturally asked the question, As
Congress has a special committee on the rights of Indians,
why not on those of women? Are not women, as a
factor in civilization, of more importance than Indians?
Secondly, we asked for a room, in the Capitol, where
our committee could meet, undisturbed, whenever they
saw fit. Though these points were debated a long time,
our demands were acceded to at last. We now have
our special committee, and our room, with "Woman
Suffrage" in gilt letters, over the door. In our strug<SPAN name="Page_319"></SPAN>gle
to achieve this, while our champion, the senior
Senator from Massachusetts, stood up bravely in the
discussion, the opposition not only ridiculed the special
demand, but all attempts to secure the civil and
political rights of women. As an example of the arguments
of the opposition, I give what the Senator from
Missouri said. It is a fair specimen of all that was produced
on that side of the debate. Mr. Vest's poetical
flights are most inspiring:</p>
<div class="blkquot">
<p>"The Senate now has forty-one committees, with a
small army of messengers and clerks, one-half of whom,
without exaggeration, are literally without employment.
I shall not pretend to specify the committees
of this body which have not one single bill, resolution,
or proposition of any sort pending before them, and
have not had for months. But, Mr. President, out of all
committees without business, and habitually without
business, in this body, there is one that, beyond any
question, could take jurisdiction of this matter and do
it ample justice. I refer to that most respectable and
antique institution, the Committee on Revolutionary
Claims. For thirty years it has been without business.
For thirty long years the placid surface of that parliamentary
sea has been without one single ripple. If
the Senator from Massachusetts desires a tribunal for a
calm, judicial equilibrium and examination—a tribunal
far from the 'madding crowd's ignoble strife'—a tribunal
eminently respectable, dignified and unique; why not
send this question to the Committee on Revolutionary
Claims? It is eminently proper that this subject
should go to that committee because, if there is any
revolutionary claim in this country, it is that of woman
suffrage. (Laughter.) It revolutionizes society; it
<SPAN name="Page_320"></SPAN>revolutionizes religion; it revolutionizes the
Constitution
and laws; and it revolutionizes the opinions
of those so old-fashioned among us as to believe that
the legitimate and proper sphere of woman is the family
circle, as wife and mother, and not as politician and
voter—those of us who are proud to believe that</p>
</div>
<div class="poem">
<div class="stanza">
<p>"Woman's noblest station is retreat:</p>
<p>Her fairest virtues fly from public sight;</p>
<p>Domestic worth—that shuns too strong a light.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div class="blkquot">
<p>"Before that Committee on Revolutionary Claims
why could not this most revolutionary of all claims receive
immediate and ample attention? More than
that, as I said before, if there is any tribunal that could
give undivided time and dignified attention, is it not
this committee? If there is one peaceful haven of rest,
never disturbed by any profane bill or resolution of any
sort, it is the Committee on Revolutionary Claims. It
is, in parliamentary life, described by that ecstatic verse
in Watts' hymn—</p>
</div>
<div class="poem">
<div class="stanza">
<p>"There shall I bathe my wearied soul</p>
<p>In seas of endless rest.</p>
<p>And not one wave of trouble roll</p>
<p>Across my peaceful breast.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div class="blkquot">
<p>"By all natural laws, stagnation breeds disease and
death, and what could stir up this most venerable and
respectable institution more than an application of the
strong-minded, with short hair and shorter skirts, invading
its dignified realm and elucidating all the excellences
of female suffrage. Moreover, if these ladies
could ever succeed in the providence of God in obtaining
a report from that committee, it would end this
<SPAN name="Page_321"></SPAN>question forever; for the public at large and
myself included,
in view of that miracle of female blandishment
and female influence, would surrender at once, and female
suffrage would become constitutional and lawful.
Sir, I insist upon it that, in deference to this committee,
in deference to the fact that it needs this sort of regimen
and medicine, this whole subject should be so referred."</p>
</div>
<p>This gives a very fair idea of the character of the
arguments produced by our opponents, from the inauguration
of the movement. But, as there are no
arguments in a republican government in favor of an
aristocracy of sex, ridicule was really the only available
weapon. After declaring "that no just government
can be formed without the consent of the governed,"
"that taxation without representation is tyranny," it is
difficult to see on what basis one-half the people are
disfranchised.</p>
<hr style="width: 65%;">
<SPAN name="CHAPTER_XX"></SPAN>
<div style="break-after:column;"></div><br />