NAWSA GENERAL CORRESPONDENCE Irwin, Inez H., 1932-36 INEZ HAYNES IRWIN SCITUATE MASSACHUSETTS September 15, 1932 Dear Miss Blackwell: How very delightful to get a word from you! Whenever I see your name in print---and I always read everything to which your name is signed---how many lovely memories surge! Chief among them, that great occasion in 1898 when Maud Wood Park asked you to come to talk to the girls at Radcliffe College and two hundred and more of us listened, breathlessly thrilled, to your wisdom, your wit, your vital eloquence. I have always admired you more than I know how to define, describe or measure. You say, "as you are compiling a history of the political activities of women since we got the vote, etc." The book is really quite different in character. It is a study of the progress of American women in the last hundred years. However I thank you for your letter and I was most interested in what you told me. Affectionately yours, Inez Haynes Irwin Inez Haynes Irwin INEZ HAYNES IRWIN 240 WEST ELEVENTH STREET NEW YORK CITY March 4, 1933 Dear Maud: I am sending you under separate cover something which will seem like a voice out of the past to you --- a copy of the Radcliffe magazine of February 1911 which contains on page 91 a brief account of your life under the heading PROMINENT GRADUATE. You may have forgotten all about an incident which has always haunted me. Years ago, I wrote to the American Magazine and asked them if I could not write a sketch about you for their department called Interesting People. I had never done anything of that sort and was not interested to do it. I did want to write about you however. I appealed to you for data and you sent me this. Do you know I never could write that account! And you will never guess why. I could not hold myself down to the limits of a quiet, sane account. I wrote three or four different versions, but all were either so enthusiastic that they showed a profound personal bias or they were so dull that nobody would have printed them. I could not --- I could not --- seem to strike a happy medium. I can't tell you how my sense of failure in this respect haunted me. I could never open the subject with you. And all these years I've kept this book. However, when I came to write my latest book, which I would like to call Angels and Amazons, the opportunity came to write about you. And of course long experience in the writing game had taught me how to separate my emotions from my judgments. And after I had accomplished the thing that I set out to do twenty-two years ago, I cleaned up the book, very soiled with the passage of years, mounted it with a bit of surgical tape, and with a conscience clear of all sense of guilt, I am returning it to you. Don't you think the whole passage is amusing --- the combination of ardent friendship, New England conscience, continuing sense of duty and final accomplishment. Affectionately, Inez Inez Haynes Irwin 240 West 11 Street New York City March 22, 1933 Mrs. Carrie Chapman Catt 120, Paine Avenue New Rochelle New York My dear Mrs. Catt: Miss Lena Madesin Phillips has sent me your criticisms of my book. I am very glad to receive them. I thank you for the many kindly things that you have said and I am extremely grateful for your suggestions. Let me take your criticisms on which I wish to make a comment, in the order in which you make them in your letter. I am mortified to think that I substituted the name Pomerene for Penrose. I knew it was Penrose as well as I know that my own name is Irwin --- all suffragists have plenty of reason to remember that name. And yet that slip occurred. And I was inaccurate in saying that the young man who won the day in Tennessee was called Banks. You corrected the name on my manuscript to Burns. But you were wrong too. The name is not Burns, but Burn. I consulted your book and my book to be sure on this matter. You say you do not like the name Angels and Amazons --- that it is not "saleable." And you say that women in reality were not called angels or amazons. But in fact, they were called angels all the time. That comparison is a tiresomely inevitable part of the equipment of the early-Victorian and the mid-Victorian poet, novelist and dramatist. Also whenever women make any move for a new freedon, they are always called Amazons. I have had much discussion with Miss Phillips in regard to the name. I am open to conviction on the subject; the publisher will however have the last word. The only thing I am certain of is that it must --- in the modern manner --- have color or movement; preferably both. There is a modern manner. My friend, Lyman Beecher Stowe --- did name ever more perfectly betray lineage --- is writing a book to be called "Saints, Sinners and Beechers." A young man named Gulick has just made a success with a life of John Brown, called God's Angry Man. Here is a subject on which I am a bit of an expert. My husband has written over a score of books; his brother, Wallace Irwin, has written over a score of books; Mrs. Wallace Irwin has written a play and a book; my niece, Phyllis Duganne, is the author of two books; I am myself the author of twenty-two books. I have numberless author friends. Moreover I am president of the Author's League of America --- an organisation of nearly two thousand authors. Discussion of book titles is a part of the conversational fabric of our household. Author friends are always asking advice on this matter. Nobody knows what a "saleable" title is. If you know, dear lady, there is a position worth at least $75,000 a year waiting for you from the combined publishers of America because they don't know either. In regard to the Tilton scandal, I quote your letter and then what I said in my manuscript. You say: The story of the Tilton scandal is not quite accurate. I do not recall having discussed with Miss Anthony, herself, the story of that scandal, but I had two very exhaustive discussions about it with Mrs. Harper, who wrote Miss Anthony's Life. She said that when Miss Anthony went to see Mrs. Tilton one day, Mrs. Tilton did "sob out on her shoulder" the confession of her affair with Beecher. It was an enormous shock to Miss Anthony, naturally, since Mr. Beecher was one of the great men of the country and one of the heroes in the suffrage movement. Naturally, she was filled with this excitement when she saw Mrs. Stanton and she confided the story to her. A short time later Mrs. Woodhull came to pay Mrs. Stanton a visit. Mrs. Stanton poured the confession into Mrs. Woodhull's ear, although she had promised not to pass the story on. Mrs. Woodhull published it, as Mrs. Irwin says, in her paper and Tilton eventually sued Beecher and 3 "the fat was in the fire." The newspapers tried their best to get from Miss Anthony some confession of her complicity in the spreading of the tale, but she never admitted it to any of them. She did not spread it. She did not talk of it and, indeed, more than once she denied any knowledge of it. They never did get involved in that affair. I think Mrs. Irwin lays unjust blame upon her. Tainting the memory of persons who are dead and gone is not the best way to record history. I say: One night after a quarrel, Elizabeth Tilton sobbed out the whole story on the shoulder of Susan B. Anthony and about the same time, the humorless Tilton, by way of proving a point, told it to Mrs. Stanton. Before ever they fell under the spell of Mrs. Woodhull all of the inner suffrage circle knew about this affair, were worrying over it. On May 3, 1871, to be very precise, Mrs. Woodhull learned from them the whole story. Of course I knew as well as anybody --- it is, I am quite certain recorded in the testimony of the Beecher-Tilton case --- that Mrs. Stanton told Victoria Woodhull. But I did not say that because Mrs. Stanton has a living daughter. I do not think there is any implication in what I have written that Susan Anthony spread the Tilton-Beecher gossip. If you still find it there, please make it explicit to me. In my whole writing experience, I have never received such a stab as your words, "Tainting the memory of persons who are dead and gone is not the best way to record History." I respect, revere, venerate the memory of Susan Anthony beyond my poor powers of expression. In my opinion she is the greatest of American women. It will be centuries before any other American woman will accomplish a work equal to hers. But I feel that you would not agree with this because in your letter you say, "As an honor to Miss Anthony, it may be courteous to give that amendment her name. But it can no more justly be given her name than that of several other suffragists who stood by her side at that date." What other suffragists? Possibly Elizabeth Cady Stanton. But who else? I will, however, make it plain that the Susan B. Anthony Amendment -4- is the National Woman's Party name --- not that of the National American Woman Suffrage Association. In regard to the National American Woman Suffrage Association and the National Woman's Party, I will state that I am very glad to submit to criticism. I have no doubt that my account of the National Woman's Party sounds prejudiced. Naturally I do not want to seem prejudiced. I did my best not to be so. But it is perhaps beyond my poor powers to be cool and impartial on what was after all was the most precious civic experience of my life. I will however go over it carefully to eliminate anything that looks like bias. It is true that I wrote nothing about the part that the National American Woman Suffrage Association took in the Washington struggle from the time it established its big Headquarters there. The truth of this is --- not a deliberate suppression --- but a difficulty in getting the data. I have read your own book three times; it is marked from cover to cover --- passages I wished to consider more deeply. You speak of my leaving out the fact that Maud Wood Park led your fight in Washington. Maud Wood Park is one of my dearest and oldest friends; I would delight to honor her. I accompanied my husband to the great war during the years 1916-17 with the result that I have never known that fact. Your own book does not state it. I realize perfectly why you did not put Mrs. Park's name in your book. You were writing of recent and crowded events. If you began to cite names, you could leave out nobody who deserved credit. Your book is bare of names. Ida Husted Harper's History, which is of course a monumental work, is necessarily cluttered with them. Now I could from your book and from her History make out a brief, general account of your work in Washington, but I felt quite sure --- I still feel so --- that it would be inaccurate, that, again and again, I would have to 5 cover a lack of knowledge by the specious, general statement. I have just written Miss Phillips that I will be very glad if you or Mrs. Park will write an account of the work of the National American Woman Suffrage Association in Washington. I will say that it should run between five and ten pages of double spaced typewriting. I shall have to reserve for myself the privilege of such rewriting as will make it consonant with the general style of my book but of course I shall not tamper with the facts. I will embody any criticism you wish to make of the National Woman's Party, but in that case, I must quote you. I would prefer to have you do this; first, because you are the head of your Party and second, because you can write of Mrs. Park's work in a way that she could not. My book has to be out by the middle of July and I shall have to get this data within a week. I would also be very grateful if you will tell me what your association and its auxiliaries numbered at its maximum between 1916 and 1919. This is the story as I remember it of the way the National Woman's Party left the National American Woman Suffrage Association. As I recall it, the constitution of the National organization permitted a suffrage body to join it in one of two ways. By one, it paid a 5% tax in dues upon its budget. By the other, it paid annual $100 dues. The Congressional Union, feeling that the 5% tax would cripple its budget, asked to be placed on the other basis. The National American Woman Suffrage Association informed them that in order to join on the second basis, they must withdraw from the organization and re-apply for membership. They did that and the National American Woman Suffrage Association denied their application. I may say --- I believe with complete truth --- that the Congressional Union resigned technically; it did not resign spiritually. The Union wanted very 6 much at this period to be a part of the mother organization. In my book, I did not say that the National American Woman Suffrage Association dismissed the Congressional Union. I felt --- I still feel --- that the way that the Congressional Union was dismissed was a reflection on the older body. Now that I have your confirmation of it, I shall be very glad if there is another opportunity to revise my Woman's Party book to add that to it. In that book, I made no criticism of any sort of the National American Woman Suffrage Association. Of course, just as you have plenty of criticism of the National Woman's Party, I have plenty of criticism of the National American Woman Suffrage Association. Alice Paul so often and earnestly impressed it upon every member of the Party that she must never criticize other suffragists, that I have never been able to bring myself to criticize the National American Woman Suffrage Association in print. Alice Paul's words were: "Never make any criticism of other suffragists. Your fight is not with other suffragists." But after a careful examination of your book and Ida Husted Harper's book, I feel, that the day for that chivalry is past. And of course in my reminiscences, I shall have to tell the truth as I see it. One thing that I shall have to say that in a life which has been devoted to the cause of women ever since I was old enough to think about it, I have had but one disillusion. And that is the treatment of the National American Woman Suffrage Association of the National Woman's Party. It appalled and horrified me at the time; it appals and horrifies me now. At a dinner party just a week ago, a woman said to Mr. Irwin, "You know the National American Woman Suffrage Association spits on the Woman's Party." I am afraid that I think that is an accurate description. 7 Now that all my inhibitions of chivalry and gallantry are off, I feel that I should be deeply renegade if I did not say this to you. Very truly yours, (signed) Inez Haynes Irwin Inez Haynes Irwin 240 West Eleventh Street New York City March 23, 1933 Dear Maud: The National Council of Women submitted the manuscript of my book to Mrs. Catt. She sent me six pages of criticism. I have just answered that. She said --- and with justice --- that I had not given the National American Woman Suffrage Association sufficient credit for their work for the Suffrage Amendment in Washington. I replied that that was true, but that it had been most difficult to find the data. Her own book is not very explicit on this point and Ida Husted Harper's book is, as you know -- though a monumental work --- most scattering on this particular subject. Mrs. Catt said that I had paid a "beautiful tribute" to you but that I had neglected to say that you were in charge of the [*I was at the War 1916 1917*] work in Washington. That was true. Maud, I did not know that; have never known it. I called Mrs. Catt's attention to the fact that she had not mentioned that fact in her book. Of course I added that I knew why she had not put names into Women and Politics. She wrote soon after the event. If she inserted a few names, she must insert many. Between ourselves, however, I think she should have mentioned you. In my return letter, I begged her to write her own account of this period. I said that I might have to change the writing here and there to make it consonant with the tenor of my own book but that, of course, I would tamper with no facts. I said if she had any criticisms to make of the National Woman's Party I should have to quote them as from her. I said to her frankly that I would rather she would write it than you; first, because she was the head of the Association and second, 2 she could say things about you that you could not say about yourself. But Maud, my angel, forgive me if I tell you that I think Mrs. Catt is a magnificent speaker and a dull writer. Could you send me in the course of the next few days any illuminating experiences that would make her account more vivid; you know what I mean -- incident, episode, color, sparkle. One thing Mrs. Catt said hurt me more than anything that has ever been said in to me in all my writing life. In regard to the Beecher-Tilton scandal, her letter runs: The story of the Tilton scandal is not quite accurate. I do not recall having discussed with Miss Anthony, herself, the story of that scandal, but I had two very exhaustive discussions about it with Mrs. Harper, who wrote Miss Anthony's Life. She said that when Miss Anthony went to see Mrs. Tilton one day, Mrs. Tilton did "sob out on her shoulder" the confession of her affair with Beecher. It was an enormous shock to Miss Anthony, naturally, since Mr. Beecher was one of the great men of the country and one of the heroes in the suffrage movement. Naturally, she was filled with this excitement when she saw Mrs. Stanton and she confided the story to her. A short time later Mrs. Woodhull came to pay Mrs. Stanton a visit. Mrs. Stanton poured the confession into Mrs. Woodhull's ear, although she had promised not to pass the story on. Mrs. Woodhull published it, as Mrs. Irwin says, in her paper and "the fat was in the fire." The newspapers tried their best to get from Miss Anthony some confession of her complicity in the spreading of the tale, but she never admitted it to any of them. She did not spread it. She did not talk of it and, indeed, more than once she denied any knowledge of it. They never did get her involved in that affair. I think Mrs. Irwin lays unjust blame upon her. Tainting the memory of persons who are dead and gone is not the best way to record history. This is the quotation to which she refers from my manuscript: One night after a quarrel, Elizabeth Tilton sobbed out the whole story on the shoulder of Susan B. Anthony and about the same time, the humorless Tilton, by way of proving a point, told it to Mrs. Stanton. Before ever they fell under the spell of Mrs. Woodhull all of the inner suffrage circle knew about this affair, were worrying over it. On May 3, 1871, to be very precise, Mrs. Woodhull learned from them the whole story. It is, of course, that last sentence: "Tainting the memory of persons who are dead and gone is not the best way to record history" which was the stab. 3 Am I crazy and is Will Irwin crazy? Have I accused Susan Anthony of telling that story? Of course, I knew that she did in confidence tell Mrs. Stanton and of course, I knew that Mrs. Stanton told Virginia Woodhull. But with Harriot Stanton Blatch still living, I did not want to seem to vilify her mother. It seems to me I made it definitely hazy. Another thing Mrs Catt said amused me enormously. She said that my title, Angels and Amazons, was not a "saleable" one. I could not resist telling her in my letter that Will Irwin had written more than a score of books; Wallace Irwin more than a score; Mrs. Wallace one; my niece, Phyllis Duganne, two; myself, more than a score; that we had dozens of author friends; that I was president of the Authors' League of America-- that, in brief, talk about book titles was a part of the conversational warp and woof of our family. We do not know what is a saleable title; publishers do not know; and if she knows, there is a salary of at least $75,000 a year awaiting her from the combined publishers of America. My beautiful and beloved Maud, I could not resist that. If it hurts you, I am sorry. I am afraid I shall have to emphasize the necessity for speed in this matter. Your adoring friend, Inez COPY Carrie Chapman Catt 120, Paine Avenue New Rochelle New York March 31, 1933 Mrs. Inez Haynes Irwin 240, West 11th Street New York, N.Y. My dear Mrs. Irwin: I note in Ida Husted Harper's "History of Woman Suffrage," Chapter XV, Volume V, the paragraph on the enclosed sheet. There is considerable more about the incident about which we have been corresponding, if you care to pursue it further. Sincerely yours, (signed) Carrie Chapman Catt COPY Extract from Vol. V, Chapter XV, History of Woman Suffrage by Ida Justed Harper "At the conference Mrs. Catt explained to Miss Paul that the association could not accept as an affiliated society one which was likely to defy its policy held since its foundation in 1869, which was neither to support not oppose any political party, nor to work for or against any candidate except as to his attitude toward woman suffrage. Miss Paul would give no guarantee that the Congressional Union would observe this policy. It was thought that some way of dividing the lobby work might be found but in a short time the Union announced its program of fighting the candidates of the Democratic party without reference to their position on the Federal Amendment or their record on woman suffrage. They offered as a reason that as the Democratic party was in control of the Government, it should have the Federal Amendment submitted. There never was a time when the Democrats had the necessary two-thirds of the members of each house of Congress, but enough of them favored it so that it could have been carried if enough of the Republicans had voted for it. It was plainly evident that it would require the support of both parties. The policy of the Congressional Union, put into action throughout the presidential campaign of 1916, made any cooperation impossible." COPY Inez Haynes Irwin 240, West 11 Street New York City April 8, 1933 Mrs. Carrie Chapman Catt 120, Paine Avenue New Rochelle New York My dear Mrs. Catt: Thank you for your letter of March 29, for the subsequent one of March 31 containing the excerpt from Ida Husted Harper's History of Woman Suffrage and again for the pleasant things you say about my book. After I had sent my letter, it gradually dawned on me that it was rather an egregious thing for me to ask you to contribute to a book that somebody else was writing. But at the moment it seemed the fairest thing I could do to allow you to write the story of the work of the National American Woman Suffrage Association in Washington. My letter, making this offer, was posted on March 22 and in it I told that I would have to have any manuscript you wrote by the end of the week. When, however, by the following Saturday I had not heard from you, I began to think that you would not care to do it. I immediately wrote to Mrs. Park asking for her help. She responded instantly with six pages of typewritten data. In the next few days, Will Irwin and I took your book, Volumes V and VI of the History of Woman Suffrage and went through them marking all passages which had to do with the work of the National American Woman Suffrage Association for the Federal Suffrage Amendment. We talked every fact over, weighed it in the balance of our two minds. I said to Mr. Irwin: "Wherever statements are 2 general or un-concrete, let us in every case give the N.A.W.S.A. the benefit of the doubt." Between us we wrote what seemed to us a clear and fair account of that work to which, of course, Mrs. Park had added facts of a pristine and golden value. The result was that I added a chapter to the story of suffrage from 1900 to 1933. You may not like it or agree with it; but I think you will believe that I have made an honest effort to tell the truth. I am sorry that I have not time to read all the bound minutes of the National Association. But as I could only add about ten type- written pages on the work of the National American Woman Suffrage Association, perhaps I would have only been confused by a great deal of evidence. After all, I could cite no better authority than your book and the Harper History. I think you may say that this is not the best way to write history and I shall agree with you. But when the National Council of Women asked me last June to write this book, they told me that all the investigation had been done; they had hired two women, trained in research, to do all this work. This investigation was embodied in 1000-odd cards, half typewriter paper size, typewritten single space, often on both sides. The cards were perfectly satisfactory until I came to the period from 1900 to 1933. And then because recent history is not written, they became so thin that I had to do a tremendous amount of reading and investigation myself. Indeed, I read between thirty and forty books. As I was writing every morning, including Sundays and holidays, and often afternoons, that put so great a strain on my vitality that once I had to go away for a week. I wish to say in passing that this is the way much history is written; the material for the Outline of History was assembled for H.G. Wells; he merely wrote it. 3 Also, I must add that I hold no brief for my book. I can say with a clear conscience that I have done the best I could and that in all my life I have never worked so hard and often so hopelessly. I have had the great good fortune of being able to command the constant advice, suggestion and supervision of Will Irwin who is an expert in this matter. Not a day has passed since October first that he has not given hours -- I mean that literally -- hours -- to working with me. I mention that; but he – no more than I – would hold any brief for this book. It is only a beginning -- better books on the same subject will be written again and I hope, again and again. And of course naturally as time goes on and historians can look down a long perspective to this period, they will see it quite differently from you or me. How I wish I could write a second book then! It is of course the biographies, autobiographies, memoirs and letters which give a rich patina to history. It would have helped me incalculably if any of the living members of the National American Woman Suffrage Association had published memoirs but they are too young. They'll be coming in the next decade. I hope you are writing yours and that Mrs. Park is writing hers. All this is to assure you that I do not think too highly of my book. I do think that perhaps I have done it as well as anybody could in the time and in the circumstances. But that is not because of what I have done; it is because of the invaluable assistance Will Irwin has given me. I reread for this work the Harper Life of Susan B. Anthony and read for the first time Elizabeth Cady Stanton by Stanton and Blatch and Lucy Stone by Alice Stone Blackwell. You have probably read all these yourself and know them much better than I do but I was so charmed with the two pictures embodied in the enclosed 4 excerpts from Elizabeth Cady Stanton that I am sending them to you. What a theme for a great painter is the second of these! What color! What a composition! Very truly yours, (signed) Inez Hayes Irwin P.S. I cannot forbear mentioning --- that you may know the difficulties of the work -- that Miss Phillips submitted my book to Mrs. Ella A. Boole, Dr. Kathryn McHale (who worked on the research,) and Mrs. Estelle Sternberger who is highly influential in the Council of Jewish Women. The result was fifty-six typewritten pages of detailed criticism and suggestion. I weighed every one of them; and made changes wherever historically possible. Indeed, I think I will have satisfied these ladies at least 95%. But the result was that after I had supposed I had finished my book, re-writing compelled the re-copying of 136 pages [*1*] At this stage of her development I met my future friend and coadjutor for the first time. How well I remember that day in 1851! George Thompson and William Lloyd Garrison having announced an anti-slavery meeting in Seneca Falls, Miss Anthony came to attend it. These gentlemen were my guests. Walking home, after the adjournment, we met Mrs. Bloomer and Miss Anthony on the corner of the street, waiting to greet us. There she stood, with her good, earnest face and genial smile, dressed in gray delaine, hat and all the same color, relieved with pale blue ribbons, the perfection of neatness and sobriety. I liked her thoroughly, and why I did not at once invite her home with me to dinner, I do not know. She accuses me of that neglect, and has never forgiven me, as she wished to see and hear all she could of our noble fiends. I suppose my mind was full of what I had heard, or my coming dinner, or the probable behavior of three mischievous boys who had been busily exploring the premises while I was at the meeting. ELIZABETH CADY STANTON, VOLUME I. Page 152 I am in the toils of another thousand-paged volume --- the second of our History. My large room with a bay-window is the literary workshop. In the middle is a big library table, and there Susan and I sit vis-a-vis, laughing, talking, squabbling, day in and day out, buried in illegible manuscripts, old newspapers and reams of yellow sheets. We have the sun pouring in 2 on us on all sides, and a bright wood fire in the grate, while a beautiful bouquet of nasturtiums of every color stands on the tale with a dish of grapes and pears. These last came from Julius. Susan has taken charge of them. She has put them in a dark closet, examines them every day and selects those for our dish which have reached the right stage of ripeness. At noon, we take a walk in the sun, then I have a nap, and we dine at two. My only regret is that we have not more experience in book-making. But this labor will at least produce what the French call a collection of documents pour servir. ELIZABETH CADY STANTON, VOLUME II. Page 187 INEZ HAYNES IRWIN 240 WEST ELEVENTH STREET NEW YORK CITY April 15, 1933 Dear Maud: I suppose you are wondering why you have not heard from me. Whatever you do, please believe that no woman could possibly be more grateful than I am. You saved my life in sending me that last-minute data. I used almost all of it, employing every ounce of discretion I could summon. In addition I had Bill Irwin's advice every word of the way. He knows more about the laws of libel than most lawyers. He has tremendous discretion and taste. I am going to tell you, Maud, of the difficulties I have had in writing this book and I am going to ask you to regard it as confidential. I have told nobody else. In the summer, the National Council of Women came to me and asked me if I would write this book. It must be published, they said, in time for sale at that World's Fair in Chicago, or by the middle of July 1933. They said that they had had two experts on research collecting data and that it would be unnecessary for me to do any reading or study. Lest you think that this is a strange way of doing things, I will state that it is often done in the literary game. Almost all the data for instance of H.G. Wells's The Outline of History was collected for him by reputable scientists. Hergesheimer always sets research experts at work to procure the atmosphere of his historical fiction. At that, I would much have preferred -- had I been a younger woman -- to do all my own reading and studying; but without training, it would have taken me from one to three years. The National Council of Women offered me a price ($5000) which I would not have considered in other times, or not at all if the subject had not 2 happened to allure me. Moreover, I thought I could do it in three months. I was writing the first version of the second novel in my trilogy -- Middle Age Must Weep. I told them that I would have to finish that first version before I began work on the book. We agreed that, if possible, I would get the manuscript to them by January first; March first being the deadline. Then they sent me the research cards. The first thing I did was to number them; there were 1000-odd; the size of a half typewriter sheet of paper; many of them covered with single space typewriting on both sides. They were extremely interesting. Both Will Irwin and I looked them over very carefully. Even after we had signed the contract I had some difficulty in pinning the National Council of Women down to a basic theme. I could not write an all-embracing history of American women of the last century. There was not time; the cards were inadequate. There were other objections. I did not want to include a history of the arts, although in one way nothing would delight me more than to trace the literary stream. Yet too I quailed at the thought of a critical summing-up of my contemporary women writers, so many of whom are friends. I did not feel competent to go into art, or music. And as for science . . . ! However, no more than I, did the National Council of Women want so vast a work. Finally between us we decided on the history of women as evidenced through their organizations. That pulled the book together and made the whole thing comparatively simple. I had done some preliminary work before I left Scituate, but I went to work really on October first. The instant I began, I saw for the first time what a whale of a job I had undertaken. Really I had to write six books in one; education; trade unions; temperance; anti-slavery; suffrage; women's clubs. I have worked every day since I began except for the one week when I actually went to pieces with nervous 3 exhaustion and departed for Charleston, South Carolina. I have worked Sundays. I have worked holidays. I have often worked afternoons and evenings. Even at that, I could never had finished the book if Will Irwin had not worked along steadily with me; rereading, revising, cutting out, amending, suggesting; going to the New York library innumerable times. We thought from the first inspection that the research cards and everything we would need. They would of course have amounted to two huge solid volumes in themselves. Immediately however organizations, affiliated with the National Council of Women, began to rain data on me -- books, magazines, reports, typewritten essays, letters, leaflets, folders. It became a blizzard. And the psychological effect was terrific because I never felt that anything I wrote would stand through the next mail. Incidentally I will add that on my own account I read between thirty-five and forty books. Then the National Council of Women broke to me that they had three drawer-fulls of cards on organizations; one small and thin; the others big and full. Bill Irwin visited their office and went through them for me. I did not have the time. I overcame all these difficulties, but when I reached the third period of the book, I came on one that seemed almost insuperable. Roughly I had divided it into three books -- Book One. 1833 to the Civil War; Book Two from the Civil War to 1900; Book Three from 1900 to 1933. There--Book Three--the cards were as thin as theatre programs or restaurant menus. In one way it was not the fault of the research experts because recent history, as you know, is not written. It lies in casual newspaper stories, magazine articles; the annual reports of organizations; the memories of living people. The suffrage cards in particular were frightfully inadequate. Although they once mentioned Alice Paul, there was nothing about the National 4 Woman's Party. Even if I hated the Party, of course in any just history of women's organizations, I should have to consider it. They did not mention Mrs. Eddy. Although I have absolutely no sympathy with Christian Science, it seemed obvious that any consideration of the women organizations of the last century which did not include Mrs. Eddy and the Christian Science Church would be ridiculous. Then when it came to finding out about the work of the National American Woman Suffrage Association in Washington, I really came up against what seemed to me a dead wall. And so I committed the mistake of writing one chapter about the N.A.W.S.A. generally up to the birth of the Woman's Party; another about the National Woman's Party generally up to Ratification; and a third about them both in Ratification. I see now and I am humbly apologetic about it that this was an injustice to N.A.W.S.A. After I had finished my book, the National Council of Women sent it for criticism to Mrs. Catt, Mrs. Ella A. Boole, of the W.C.T.U., a Dr. McHale who was one of the research workers and Mrs. Estelle Sternberger, vice president and former president of the National Council of Jewish Women. In all their criticisms amounted to fifty-six typewritten pages. Mrs. Sternberger's criticisms were confined to one page of typewriting. Mrs. Boole's covered many pages but they were extremely definite, clear and helpful; Dr. McHale's covered many pages too and were the most patronizing that I have ever received in my life. She said that my style was at times grandiloquent and at times journalistic. She criticized constantly any use of metaphor and all such words --- for what reason God only knows -- as "notable." such phrases as "mother wit," "Protestant saint," a chapter heading called Gibson Girl. Subsequently the National Council of Women told me that Dr. McHale had apparently gone out of her way to be disagreeable in her 5 criticisms. They had paid her and her companion research worker, Judith Clark, $5,000 for six months of research work. At the end of the six months, they wanted another $5,000 saying that they had not been able to do the work thoroughly in that time. Naturally, the National Council of Women refused to give them any more money. Will Irwin says that it was a sheer case of hold-up; that he could have done it in three months. It is my strong impression that the National Council of Women also paid for a stenographer for this work, so that these two women had none of the arduous work of copying from sources. Moreover Dr. McHale begged the National Council of Women to employ Judith Clark to write the book. But she was young and I believe had had no special writing experience. The National Council of Women wanted a name. They refused to give the girl the writing job; they refused to advance another $5,000. You can imagine how I feel about their research -- especially on those subjects like education, for instance, about which I personally know very little. To put it mildly, I feel horribly shaky. And yet, I could not have gone over the whole research track and written the book in six months. Moreover, I knew nothing about this calm statement of Dr. McHale, in regard to the inadequacy of the research cards, until a few weeks ago. Then nothing but an act of God could have helped me. However, on her criticisms she offered some suggestions that were helpful and I used them wherever I could. When I read Mrs. Catt's criticism, I knew at once that I must revise my suffrage chapters. But her book, as I wrote her, happened to have very little about the N.A.W.S.A. in Washington and Ida Husted Harper's History is scattered. I wrote on Wednesday, March 22, asking her if she would herself write a chapter on the N.A.W.S.A. in Washington and telling her that I must have the manuscript at the end of a week. It was more 6 than a week before I heard from her. In the meantime I had realized that it was rather an egregious thing for me to do. Nobody wants to write for anybody else's book. But it was the only fair way out that I could think of at the moment and very urgently I wanted a yes or a no from her. My letter was posted on Wednesday and as I had not heard from her by the following Sunday, Will Irwin and I spent that entire day going through the History of Woman Suffrage by Ida Husted Harper and Mrs. Catt's book, marking every sentence that had to do with the work in Washington. In the meantime, in despair, I had written to you and your blessed data arrived to save my life. Bill always says, "To think we had Maud Park in this house for a whole afternoon and never asked her a question!" But at that time we both thought the research cards were full and fair. Dearest Maud, I am sending you transcripts of my correspondence with Mrs. Catt. I want you to know all about it. If I hurt you, again I apologize. When Will Irwin read my first letter he said to me: "That is the kind of letter one writes and destroys." But I could not destroy it. I would not have been happy not to have said my say. I could not endure that Mrs. Catt should think that I was traducing the memory of Susan Anthony. And, it happened that just the night before, Bill Irwin had met Marjorie Shuler at a conference regarding a publicity campaign for the book of a few members of the National Council of Women. I was not present. Marjorie Shuler, by an ironic chance, has been appointed the publicity agent for the book. She asked Bill if there was anything about the National Woman's Party in the book. Bill answered; "Yes, a chapter." She replied: "That will hurt the sale of the book for the National American Woman Suffrage Association spits on the National Woman's Party." I did not so much mind her saying that, I did not even mind the ways she phrased it, but I did mind frightfully her saying it to 7 Bill Irwin. Of course she knew that I was the historian of the Party and of course she knew in the social circumstances there was nothing Bill could say. I was still whirring with indignation about that. Please understand, Maud, I do not care what anybody thinks of the National Woman's Party. That's not my business! But I hated that (??) taking advantage of Bill's being a gentleman. Parenthetically, I almost regret saying anything about her beloved Mrs. Eddy. And my irritation spilled over in my letter to Mrs. Catt. Another thing that added enormously to my work and fatigue. We agreed -- the National Council of Women and I -- that the book should be about 100,000 words. When I finished it, it had grown to 150,000 words. The additions, after the fifth-six pages of criticism and suggestions, added another 10,000 words. Of course you have enough sense of humor to know -- as I knew before I wrote the Story of the National Woman's Party -- that this book will alienate all my friends and turn people who are indifferent to me into active enemies. Every organization on earth will say, "Why didn't she write more fully about US?" Everybody who has been active in any organization movement or who has had a relative or friend in it will say: "Why didn't she write more fully about ME or HER?" I have refused consistently to mention organizations except as they came naturally into the story of this development. Fortunately the National Council of Women realized the good sense of this policy. They are going to add an appendix which lists every one of the organizations of women in this country. What a sex! One other thing, dearest Maud! When I came to run in the extra chapter about the N.A.W.S.A. in Washington, naturally I wrote a great deal more about you. I became a little frightened that I had made you more prominent than Mrs. Catt. I did not mean to do that, of course, and it seems to me I have done well by Mrs. Catt. But I 8 had that feeling. So did Will Irwin. The result was I cut out one paragraph about you. Of how I hated to do that -- but you will understand the situation. Anyway here is the whole passage. You will note its deletions in the book. However, when I write my reminiscences, you will be all there. . . . She (Mrs. Catt) retired; and at the first session of the new League, Maud Wood Park was elected to her place. She held the post of national chairman through four years of hard pioneer work and then, retiring, in turn, gave the work into the capable hands of Belle Sherwin. Mrs. Park had advanced to the position of Mrs. Catt's logical successor. In her quiet way, she had lived an extraordinary life. She espoused woman suffrage early; worked for it in her student days at Radcliffe --- an atmosphere in which that idea was extremely unpopular. As aforesaid, she celebrated her graduation by founding the College Equal Suffrage League of which she was the first president. This later developed into a national organization and Mrs. Park became its vice-president. She married early, was early widowed. The philanthropic interest and a burning intellectual curiosity about life drew her into social work. At one time in her Boston days, she was president of a Civic Club in a slum neighborhood -- a club whose members were working women --- president of the College Equal Suffrage League whose active members were college women; the executive secretary of the Boston Equal Suffrage Association for Good Government whose members were of the leisure class and chairman of the Board of Directors of the Massachusetts Woman Suffrage Association whose membership was drawn from all walks of life. She had traveled widely; always on her business of working for women. No other American, up to 1920, stood so closely in touch with feminist movements the world over -- from China and Persia to Sweden and England. In the long, state-by- state struggle toward the goal, she was quietly all-permeating. She has integrity and charm; force and suavity; adaptability and efficiency --- always humor. She is an able speaker; cultivated, logical, incisive; her argument clothes itself in a chiseled diction. She is a great organizer. Mrs. Park took over the machinery of the old Association and, very largely its membership, established a new orientation. What I substituted -- your work in Washington -- is really much more valuable than these compliments. But I think I do not have to tell you what I would have written if I could have made this book 9 two volumes long. I enclose your letter from Mrs. Catt, your letter from Henry F. Hollis, your telegram from McAdoo and copies of my whole correspondence with Mrs. Catt. Affectionately, Inez INEZ HAYNES IRWIN SCITUATE MASSACHUSETTS August 1, 1933 Dear Maud: I am indeed glad that you like Angels and Amazons. Of course you must always remember that I had to hold myself back in writing about you; for I couldn't throw Carrie Chapman Catt all out of focus by placing you in the foreground. I would have liked to do that of course; for I have always thought you the abler of the two. Of course you won't agree with this, but what the hell do I care for that? I did mean to ask you If you thought I did justice to Alice Stone Blackwell. Of course you know how I wanted to do that too; for we have always had a kind of unformulated pact that we would always play her game. However she was pleased, as the enclosed letter seems to prove. Will you send it back in the enclosed stamped envelope. All the time I was writing the book, she kept sending me suggestions --- always good ones---but always, as you would know, about somebody else. I do so want to come to see you! But after a barren year in which the two Irwins have nearly starved to death, the magazine game has again broken for Will Irwin. He 2 is doing a series of articles at present on the things he most loathes in the world --- taxation and finances. The instant that is finished he must start on another series --- this a little more picturesque; the coast guard service. I don't know when we will have a day or two at our disposal. Perhaps in September we might motor up to Portland for a few days. But I cannot be sure. You will know how I want to come. Affectionately, Inez From Inez Haynes Irwin [*1933*] Of course she knew that I was the historian of the Party and of course she knew in the social circumstances there was nothing Bill could say. I was still whirring with indignation about that. Please understand, Maud, I do not care what anybody thinks of the National Woman's Party. That's not my business! But I hated that [bitch] taking advantage of Bill's being a gentleman. Parenthetically, I almost regret saying anything about her beloved Mrs. Eddy. And my irritation spilled over in my letter to Mrs. Catt. Another thing that added enormously to my work and fatigue. We agreed -- the National Council of Women and I -- that the book should be about 100,000 words. When I finished it, it had grown to 150,000 words. The additions, after the fifty-six pages of criticism and suggestions, added another 10,000 words. Of course you have enough sense of humor to know -- as I knew before I wrote the Story of the National Woman's Party -- that this book will alienate all my friends and turn people who are indifferent to me into active enemies. Every organization on earth will say: "Why didn't she write more fully about US?" Everybody who has been active in any organization movement or who has had a relative or friend in it will say: "Why didn't she write more fully about ME or HER?" I have refused consistently to mention organizations except as they came naturally into the story of this development. Fortunately the National Council of Women realized the good sense of this policy. They are going to add an appendix which lists every one of the organizations of women in this country. What a sex! One other thing, dearest Maud! When I came to run in the extra chapter about the N.A.W.S.A. in Washington, naturally I wrote a great deal more about you. I became a little frightened that I had made you more prominent than Mrs. Catt. I did not mean to do that, of course, and it seems to me I have done well by Mrs. Catt. But I Inez Haynes Irwin -2 had that feeling. So did Will Irwin. The result was I cut out one paragraph about you. Of how I hated to do that -- but you will understand the situation. Anyway here is the whole passage. You will note its deletions in the book. However, when I write my reminiscences, you will be all there. . . . She (Mrs. Catt) retired; and at the first session of the new League, Maud Wood Park was elected to her place. She held the post of national chairman through four years of hard pioneer work and then, retiring, in turn, gave the work into the capable hands of Belle Sherwin. Mrs. Park had advanced to the position of Mrs. Catt's logical successor. In her quiet way, she had lived an extraordinary life. She espoused woman suffrage early; worked for it in her student days at Radcliffe - an atmosphere in which that idea was extremely unpopular. As aforesaid, she celebrated her graduation by founding the College Equal Suffrage League of which she was the first president. This later developed into a national organization and Mrs. Park became its vice-president. She married early, was early widowed. The philanthropic interest and a burning intellectual curiosity about life drew her into social work. At one time in her Boston days, she was president of a Civic Club in a slum neighborhood -- a club whose members were working women -- president of the College Equal Suffrage League whose active members were college women; the Executive Secretary of the Boston Equal Suffrage Association for Good Government whose members were of the leisure class, and chairman of the Board of Directors of the Massachusetts Woman Suffrage Association whose membership was drawn from all walks of life. She had traveled widely; always on her business of working for women. No other American, up to 1920, stood so closely in touch with feminist movements the world over -- from China and Persia to Sweden and England. In the long, state- by-state struggle toward the goal, she was quietly all- permeating. She has integrity and charm; force and suavity; adaptability and efficiency -- always humor. She is an able speaker; cultivated, logical, incisive; her argument clothes itself in a chiseled diction. She is a great organizer. Mrs. Park took over the machinery of the old Association and, very largely its membership, established a new orientation. What I substituted -- your work in Washington -- is really much more valuable than these compliments. But I think I do not have to tell you what I would have written if I could have made this book two volumes long. Inez Haynes Irwin 240 West Eleventh Street New York City April 16th, 1934. Dearest Maud: This is to say that several days ago, I sent you a copy of my latest book, Strange Harvest --- the second in the series of the Hart family chronicle. Probably you have guess this. But of course I had you in mind in writing the book called "Rebellion". I amuses me to think that you first appeared in Angel Island as Julia. I hope we would see you this spring. Affectionately, Inez P.S. You once told me that I might use any part of your life – properly disguised. You may feel differently about that now. If you have not changed your mind the story of Eunice in the third book – Winter Morning will include a secret marriage. WORLD CENTER FOR WOMEN'S ARCHIVES, Inc. Temporary Headquarters 40 East 42d Street New York BOARD OF DIRECTORS Chairman Mrs. Inez Haynes Irwin, 240 West 11th St., New York. Vice-Chairman Miss Emma Hirth, 600 Lexington Ave., New York. Treasurer Miss Mina Bruère, 40 East 42d St., New York. Secretary Miss Ruth Savord, 45 East 65th St., New York. Directors Miss Mary Louise Alexander Mrs. Mary R. Beard Miss Bessie Beatty Mrs. Sidney C. Borg Miss Edna Brezee Mrs. Eleanor Herrick Mrs. Arthur C. Holden Miss Irene Lewisohn Dr. Kathryn McHale Mrs. Edward A. Norman Mrs. Caroline O'Day Miss Lena Madesin Phillips Dr. Lorine Pruette Mrs. Lionel Sutro Mrs. Frank Vanderlip Dr. Charl O. Williams November 13, 1936 Miss Alice Stone Blackwell 3 Monadnock Street Boston, Mass. Dear Miss Blackwell: [*Dear Lady – do say yes if you humanly can. It involves you neither in the responsibility of money nor labor. And we do need you – need your great name very very much. Affectionately Inez Haynes Irwin*] I have as yet received no answer to my invitation to you to become a sponsor of the World Center for Women's Archives. It is possible always for a busy woman to overlook an item in the flood of modern mail, and when that flood is increased by a political campaign to an inundation it is almost inevitable. But as the project of the World Center for Women's Archives is so novel, so thrilling, and, above all, so important and significant, I venture again to call your attention to it. I am convinced that it is as mighty a job along intellectual lines as American women have ever undertaken – as, indeed, any women have ever undertaken. It is significant and important now, but that significance and importance will grow with the years, will roll to huge proportions with the centuries. Future generations of women will rise up and call us blessed. Mary Beard has pointed out that one of the reasons why women make so poor a showing in written history is that the documents which describe their activities were not preserved. Inevitably, it is women themselves who are more interested in what women have done than men. Somebody has pointed out that Wilson's history of the United States contains the name of no woman. This is not deliberate or conscious neglect. It happens in the first place because man must inevitably write from the man's point of view, and in the second place because it is difficult, or impossible, for historians to find detailed data about women. WORLD CENTER FOR WOMEN'S ARCHIVES, Inc. Temporary Headquarters 40 East 42d Street New York BOARD OF DIRECTORS Chairman Mrs. Inez Haynes Irwin, 240 West 11th St., New York. Vice-Chairman Miss Emma Hirth, 600 Lexington Ave., New York. Treasurer Miss Mina Bruère, 40 East 42d St., New York. Secretary Miss Ruth Savord, 45 East 65th St., New York. Directors Miss Mary Louise Alexander Mrs. Mary R. Beard Miss Bessie Beatty Mrs. Sidney C. Borg Miss Edna Brezee Mrs. Eleanor Herrick Mrs. Arthur C. Holden Miss Irene Lewisohn Dr. Kathryn McHale Mrs. Edward A. Norman Mrs. Caroline O'Day Miss Lena Madesin Phillips Dr. Lorine Pruette Mrs. Lionel Sutro Mrs. Frank Vanderlip Dr. Charl O. Williams Miss A.S. Blackwell -2- November 13, 1936 Every week we read in the newspapers of the death of women of ability and distinction. Before the World Center for Women's Archives was formed, I gave, beyond my natural regret, no thought to these events. Now always I say to myself, "I wonder what will become of her archives?" If they have passed into a public trust, they are safe. If they have passed into private hands, they may be safe. If they have been destroyed by careless heirs, they are, of course, gone forever. Such were my thoughts, for instance, at the death of Jane Adams, M. Carey Thomas, and Mary Austin. Will you pardon the intrusion into this letter of a bit of personal history? In my own family, the manuscripts of two histories have been destroyed by careless or ignorant heirs. The World Center for Women's Archives hopes to repair the colossal negligence of history. It has for its object the collection of data about women and the establishment of a repository where future historians may consult them. The World Center for Women's Archives is an enormous undertaking. We need all the assistance we can get. We need assistance especially from women. Can you not help us by becoming a sponsor? Very truly yours, [*Inez Haynes Irwin*] Inez Haynes Irwin Chairman Inez Haynes Irwin Ans. World Centre for Women's Archives Inc 40 E. 42nd St. N.Y. Transcribed and reviewed by contributors participating in the By The People project at crowd.loc.gov.