NAWSA Gen. Corresp. Washington Suffrage Assocs. Mar 7, 1906 1025 Seneca St Seattle "Recall" carried in every ward. Unanimous vote in some precincts. 9259 to 1191 Total vote in election 17,000. The "recall" campaign- i.e., the Charl[?] to use of the 15% initiative on amendment and the referendum for the first time has been a valuable experience. With kind regards. Adella M. Parker [*Adella Parker*] United States Of America SEATTLE, WASH. MAR 8 230PM 1906 Postage One Cent 1843-M9KINLBY-1901. THE SPACE ABOVE IS RESERVED FOR POSTMARK. POSTAL CARD. THE SPACE BELOW IS FOR THE ADDRESS ONLY. The Woman's Journal. No. 3. Park St. Boston, Mass. 1910 Washington From 1896 to 1910 - fourteen years - no addition was made to the suffrage states. Washington became the fifth in 1910. Up to that date, there had been seventeen referenda of woman suffrage to state voters and fifteen had met with defeat. In 1883 the Territorial Legislature of Washington, following the examples of Wyoming and Utah, extended full suffrage to women. In 1887 a man, convicted by a jury, some of which were women, contested the verdict upon the ground that women were not legal voters. By appointment of Grover Cleveland, several Southern Democrats had been appointed to the Supreme Court and these men were deeply prejudiced against woman suffrage. The Court declared the Washington Suffrage law invalid, because its object had not been properly described in its title. The next Legislature, 1889, reenacted the law with the defects corrected. Liquor interests arranged with election judges to refuse the vote of the wife of a saloon-keeper. She brought action and the case was decided by the Supreme Court of the Territory that the Legislature had no authority to enfranchise women. The woman refused to appeal and no one else could. The Constitutional Convention, preparing for statehood, submitted a separate suffrage amendment to male voters. The liquor forces secured a defeat. In 1909 an amendment was again submitted to be voted on in 1910. Mrs. Emma Smith DeVoe had gone to Washington from South Dakota to live and had become president of the suffrage association. The National Convention met in Seattle. The campaign was modest and the cost did not exceed $6,000 but the nation was astounded by a victory of 24,000 majority. Washington gave a remarkable impulse to the suffrage cause throughout the nation. PRESIDENT, FANNIE LEAKE-CUMMINGS, M. D. 2925 FIRST AVENUE, SEATTLE VICE-PRES., MRS. SUSAN CURRIER ORNES MT. VERNON HONORARY PRES., MRS. HOMER M. HILL 504 PACIFIC BLOCK, SEATTLE REC. SEC., MRS. SARAH WILCOX PUYALLUP Washington Equal Suffrage Association [*1906] CORRESPONDING SECRETARY, MRS. ELLEN S. LECKENBY BRIGHTON BEACH TREASURER, MRS. E. PALMER SPINNING PUYALLUP AUDITOR, MISS IDA AGNES BAKER BELLINGHAM CHAIRMAN PRESS COM., MRS. S. H. PIERCE MT. VERNON MISS ADELLA M. PARKER, MEM. NAT. EX. COM. 1025 SENECA ST., SEATTLE Dear Miss Blackwell, We are just now doing little, every one is holding breath, figuratively, until the voting is over in Oregon, and then if our cause wins, Washington is hoping to make the next star on the flag. We have held several Memorial services over the state, I dont know if the Cor. Sec. has restored all, I dont think she did The meeting in Bellingham; but the Apphatha Club of Bellingham held splendid exercises for Miss Anthony and then [lahi?] on there was also conducted a meet satisfactory and educational church service, in which the President of the Club Miss Ida Agnes Baker, a Prof. in The Normal School at Bellingham, filled the pulpit in the Unitarian Church and [hik, kik?] for her theme "Miss Anthony's life and work." Yours truly Fannie Leak-Cummings. P.S. Miss Blackwell do you know any facts as to a Jew in Goldendale, Wash. who used the law passed in this state in 1896 giving the father "Testamentary guardianship" of his children, in willing his unborn child to his mother, who took it from its mother at about 2 weeks of age? I was referred to you for data, If this be true I have so far been unable to prove it. Of course it could be [lt?]. I want it for use in arousing public entitlement if it is true I will thank you for facts if you know any- [*F. Leake Cummings*] Magazine Section 'The Seattle Sunday Times' August 23, 1908 How Washington Women Lost Suffrage With Story of Long Territorial Struggle in Which a Boss Gambler Figured: How Ballots Were Marked in Advance of the Election, and the Supreme Court Made a Strange Decision Reversing Itself -King Country Political Equality Club -College Suffrage League -Equality Protect American Industries and American Labor Republican Ticket Election October 1st, 1889. For Representative to [5?] [Congres?]: John I. Wilson For Governor: Elisha P. Ferry For Lieutenant Governor: Charles E. Laughton For Secretary of State: Allen Weir For State Treasurer: Addison A. Lindsley For State Auditor: Thomas M. Reed For Attorney General: William C. Jones For Superintendent of Public Instruction: Robert B. Bryan For Commissioner of Public Lands: William T. Forrest For Judges of the Supreme Court: Ralph O. Dunbar Theodore L. Stiles John P. Hoyt Thomas J. Anders. Elmon Scott First-For the [Constitution] Against the Constitution Second-For Woman Suffrage Against Woman Suffrage Third-For Prohibition Against Prohibition Fourth-For the Permanent Location of the Seat of Government King County Republican Ticket For Judge of the Superior Court, Julius A. Stratton. For County Clerk, M M. Holmes [Legisla????] [For St?] By ADELLA M. PARKER. How the women of Washington lost the ballot, though the men twice voted it to them; how Tacoma's "boss" gambler attacked the law to get "his man" out of the "pen;" how a bartender's wife rushed a case through the courts and refused to let it go higher; how, in '89, the ballots were "marked" before they came from the press - this is the story of how Washington women were tricked out of their political rights. Women first voted in Washington in 1884. They were enfranchised by the Legislature of the previous year. They voted during '85 and '86, and they voted so well that they drove most of the thugs and gamblers over into British Columbia, and the British themselves were forced to enfranchise women "in self-protection," as was stated by the honorable member who bought in the bill. The women of British Columbia still have the ballot. There are no courts on the British side to question acts of Parliament. But in Washington, though the suffrage laws have never been repealed, woman's right to vote was denied by the courts in '87, the power of the Legislature to give her the right to vote was denied in '88, and in '89 she was counted out by a ballot "marked" in the printing. Harry Morgan, "boss" gambler of Tacoma, made the first attack upon the suffrage laws. It was he who was back of the famous case of Harland vs. Territory (3 W.T.), which first denied the women the right to vote. Harland was a henchman of Morgan who had been convicted on a felony charge and sent to prison. Both men and women sat on the jury which brought in the verdict, and Morgan challenged the right of women to act as jurors. The right of women to serve on the jury depended upon their right to vote. For three years they had been voting, unchallenged, and they had been serving as jurors with such marked ability as to call forth the most favorable comment for their capacity to enforce the law. But woman's capacity in this respect did not recommend her to Harry Morgan and he was determined to drive her from the courtroom. Defeated in Harland vs. Territory in the lower court, he appealed to the higher. And he won. Harland vs. Territory was decided in favor of Harland. Judge George Turner wrote the opinion, holding that women had no right to sit on the jury because the law granting them the privilege was not given the proper title. The title of the bill was "An act to amend Section 3050 of Chapter 238 of the Code of Washington." Nineteen other laws have passed by the same Legislature had been headed in the same way and the very bill authorizing the sitting of the court which pronounced this decision was one of them. Yet, though nothing was urged against these other laws, the suffrage law was declared void. This decision was made by a divided court. Chief Justice Roger S. Greene and Judge John P. Hoyt both held the suffrage law to be valid. But Judge Hoyt was disqualified from sitting in the case because he had been the trial judge in the lower court. Had he been qualified to act the validity of the law would have been sustained, but as it was, it was possible for two men - Justices George Turner and William Langford, both appointees of Grover Cleveland (peace to his ashes!) - to deprive all the women in Washington of the ballot on a mere technicality which was not urged against scores of other laws and one which was later overthrown by a unanimous court; for this ruling was completely reversed in Marston vs. Humes (3 Wash.) four years later. Judge Hoyt, with the full bench concurring, delivered the opinion of the court, and after making an exhaustive survey of the cases cited in support of the decision in Harland vs. Territory, he makes the comment that if the learned judges who made that decision had read the cases which they cited they would have decided the case the other way. He excuses them on the ground that there were few books in the territory and that digests are often misleading. But Harland vs. Territory did not finally take away from Washington women the right to vote. This case was decided in February, 1887. The Legislature which met the following winter had already been chosen by the votes of both men and women, and during that session a new suffrage law was passed, having a sufficient title to bring it within the ruling of the court. This law was passed early in 1888. In April of that year women voted at the spring elections, but in Spokane one woman's vote was challenged, while the votes of all the others were accepted by the election officials. The vote for Mrs. Nevada Bloomer was refused. Mrs. Nevada Bloomer was a bartender's wife, [?...] brought an action for $5,000 damages against Todd and other election officers for the injury she sustained by being deprived of her vote. On April 9, 1888, George Turner resigned from the supreme bench and became an attorney in this suit, defending the election officials. The case of Bloomer vs. Todd (3 W.T.) was rushed through the courts at a lively rate. Though the supreme court was a year behind its docket, this was advanced on the calendar and decided in four months. Four of the five judges then making up the court concurred in the view that Mrs. Nevada Bloomer had suffered no injury because she had no right to vote. Chief Justice Jones wrote this opinion, which followed closely Judge Turner's brief. The Territorial Legislature had failed to give Mrs. Nevada Bloomer the right to vote, not because it had meant to without the right or had wished to do so. The Legislature had passed a suffrage law and there was this time no defect in its title. But the Legislature hadn't given Mrs. Nevada Bloomer the right to vote because it couldn't. In this decision the court did not assume that Congress had no right to authorize the territory to enfranchise women, nor does it claim that the organic act under which the territory was organized expressly excludes women from the ballot. In fact the court admits that Congress does authorize the territory to enfranchise "citizens," barring the criminal and the insane, and the court will not, of course, claim that woman is not a citizen; but the court, following closely still the brief of the Hon. George Turner, did find that Congress should have put the word "male" before the word "citizens" in the organic act, and inasmuch as Congress did not put it in, but, in fact left it out, the court took the liberty to amend this act of Congress by inserting it. The amended act now read that the territory could enfranchise only "male" citizens, and, of course, this barred Mrs. Nevada Bloomer. Now, at this time the women of Wyoming Territory had been voting for twenty years, and in Utah also women were voting, and in at least two cases Utah women had taken to the United States supreme court questions similar to that involved in this action and had won them. So, willing friends at once came to the aid of Mrs. Bloomer. Funds were placed at her disposal. That $5,000 might still be hers if she would carry the case to the United States court. But Mrs. Nevada Bloomer refused. She was perhaps convinced that she had no right to vote, for nothing could induce her to pursue that $5,000, even with all her expenses paid. Bloomer vs. Todd was decided in August, 1888. When the statehood bill was rushed through the next winter the reason for the haste was plain. Women were to be excluded from voting for members of the constitutional convention, and suffrage was to be left out of the new state government. As four-fifths of the women were voting at the previous elections, no other method could have been successful in accomplishing this result. Members of the constitutional convention were to be elected in May. Had Mrs. Bloomer consented to carry the case up, the federal question involved might have been decided before this time. To start a new action and reach a decision within this time was impossible, and any other course might delay statehood. The women were begged not to do this, and all were eager for admission to the Union. Furthermore, the women were assured that if they would trust to the chivalry of the men suffrage would be incorporated into the new constitution. So the women trusted to the chivalry of the men, and when the constitutional convention met two of the seventy-five members were in favor of suffrage for women. This is the statement of Henry C. Blackwell, who canvassed it thoroughly. Neither woman suffrage nor prohibition was inserted in the constitution, but they were presented as separate amendments at the same election. Considering the make-up of the convention, this may seem a remarkable concession, but in the light of later events but little risk of enacting them into law appears to have been run. The prohibitionists at the fall election had not put any ticket in the field, with the understanding that the Republicans would not oppose the amendments, but when election day came it was found that the Republicans had printed a ballot marked in advance, voting down the amendments, and had even printed it on the prohibition printing press. There are men in Seattle who know just how this trick was turned. It was generally believed at the time that agents of a large wholesale liquor house now having its headquarters in Portland, had offered to print all the Republican ballots for the whole state without cost to the party if allowed this privilege. (There was no Australian ballot system in the territory. Each party got out its ballots and gave them out at the polls). These facts are known. The small printing office of The Leader - the prohibition paper - at Third and Wall Streets, in Seattle, was hired for forty-eight hours, under lock and key, to print the Republican ballots. No one in The Leader office was employed on the work. Printers were brought from elsewhere, the work was done and the office had been thoroughly cleaned up when The Leader staff regained possession. In cleaning up the press a crumpled ballot was found shoved down behind it. This was the first intimation of any irregularity. A member of the Republican committee was confronted with it. He claimed that only 2,000 or 3,000 of these fraudulent ballots had been printed - "vest pocket" votes for the liquor interests. He finally admitted that thee were 60,000 or 70,000, but the press registered 180,000. It was three days before election. The prohibitionists sent out 125 telegrams, "Watch for fraudulent Republican votes." Many points, of course, could not be reached. Large numbers of the ballots were returned to headquarters and clean ones demanded or none. But thousands of these marked ballots were given out on election day, and in spite of challenges thousands were voted and counted. The amendments wee lost, but a change of one vote in twelve would have carried them. _____ Here is shown a reproduction of the marked ballot as it came from the press. Ex-Senator George Turner, formerly Justice of the Territorial Supreme Court, wrote the opinion in the case of Harland vs. Territory which overthrew the statute granting suffrage to women, on the ground that the title to the law was defective. John P. Hoyt, formerly Justice of the Territorial Supreme Court, wrote the opinion in Marston vs. Humes reversing Harland vs. Territory, the full bench concurring. Roger S. Greene, formerly Chief Justice of the Territorial Supreme Court, in dissenting from the majority opinion in Harland vs Territory, used these words: "From all that is decisive and from much that is not decisive in the able opinion of Justices Turner and Langford, I totally dissent." _____ SECOND - The Woman Suffrage. Against Woman Suffrage. THIRD - For Prohibition. Against Prohibition FOURTH - For the Permanent Location of the Seat of Government. King County Republican Ticket. For Judge of the Superior Court, JULIUS A. STRATTON. For County Clerk, M. M. HOLMES. Legislative Ticket. For State Senators 19th Senatorial District, W. D. WOOD, J. H. JONES, O. D. GUILFOIL, J. R. KINNEAR, W. V. RINEHART. For RepresentativeS King County, J. T. BLACKBURN W. C. RUTTER, W. H. HUGHES, ALEXANDER ALLEN, W. J. SHINN, GEO. BOTHELL, F. W. BIRD, FRED J. GRANT. JOHN P. HOYT JUDGE ROGER S. GREEN FORMER SENATOR GEORGE TURNER 7 JUDGE SNELL ANSWERED Ex-Mayor William W. Seymour of Tacoma, Washington, has written the following comment upon a recent attack made on equal suffrage by Judge Snell of that city, in a newspaper interview: "My attention has been called to a newspaper article by Judge Snell of Tacoma, upon the operation of woman suffrage in the state of Washington, which was printed in the Boston Post, March 31. "It is one of the surprising things in life that people of the highest character and attainment so often differ with respect to important questions, whether military, legal, religious or political, even though they may have given the subject unprejudiced study. It certainly is most amazing that Judge Snell should have written the sentiments expressed in the article mentioned, and I can only account for it by the fact that he has been outside the state a good deal, and in recent years not closely connected with local political questions. "In the spring of 1911 I was elected mayor of Tacoma, receiving a majority of the women's vote, and occupied the position for three years, my term having expired May 5, 1914. I wish to say that, as a result of my experience and observations, my conclusions are directly opposed to those of Judge Snell. I believe that if the question of women's suffrage were again submitted in the state of Washington it would carry by the vote of the men, by a much greater majority than in 1910. "As some reason for my opinion, I may stay that last fall I attended a rally of the young men's Republican club at Tacoma, at which Mayor Gill of Seattle was the principal speaker. The hall was well filled. While the question of women suffrage is now very seldom discussed publicly, because it is such an accepted fact in the state of Washington, Mayor Gill did refer to it in his speech, commenting upon the aid which the women in Seattle had given to a more conservative action on the part of the city in the issuance of bonds; that men would vote for bonds for almost any purpose, provided that they could get even a few days' employment; whereas the women, having the home always in view, and being more experience in making money go a long way, were far more conservative, the result being that the municipal debt of Seattle was not increasing since the women had a vote at the rate it had before. He further took occasion to comment upon the blessings that had accrued to the state and city by reason of the fact that women had the franchise. The part of his speech referring to women's suffrage received hearty applause throughout the house, and as it was a gathering composed entirely of men, and representative men, the sentiment there expressed, I think, is indicative of that generally prevailing among men throughout the state. "Judge Snell refers to women taking part in politics from selfish motives. It cannot be that he has had experience with the women actively engaged in bettering political conditions. For instance, during by campaign, it was universally conceded that the women had a remarkable organization and worked hard, some of them being actively engaged for several weeks, but so far as I know (and I was in a position to know) not one of them worked for pay or for office. Most of the women appointed to office in my department during my term as mayor had taken no part in the campaign whatever, nor was I ever criticised to any extent by any woman or by a collection of women because of my appointments. In fact, the office of district nurse (which was created during my administration) was filled from Boston. Judge Snell's error in this regard needs no elaborate comment. Every business man appreciates how much more honest and unselfish ordinarily are the services of women than of men: how much more devoted to principle in the home, in the office, in the church, anywhere, than are men. "In the state of Washington and the city of Tacoma we owe a great deal to the active participation of women in politics. It is true, as Judge Snell states, that on some questions their influence is not particularly felt. On the other hand, I am firmly convinced that their influence complements that of men, and that women take an active interest in certain vital questions about which the majority of men are not particularly keen. I refer to health, sanitation, education and morals. Judge Snell very well knows, for instance, what the women through the leadership of Mrs. (Judge) O. G. Ellis of Tacoma have done both locally and in the state in regard to the pure food laws. "The progress made in the state and city against the plague of tuberculosis can be largely credited to the women. I believe Washington is one of the leading states in fighting the "Great White Scourge." Miss Beals of Seattle and others associated with her (many of them men), have worked indefatigably throughout the state and at the sessions of the legislature to bring about better conditions. Indeed, Pierce County, in which Judge Snell and I live, has just completed a tuberculosis hospital, devoted exclusively to this disease. "Judge Snell certainly must be con- his support: if so, I am somewhat surprised he should now complain against the women whose influence as a whole was exercised in the same direction. "In his last paragraph Judge Snell really answers his own contention. In the beginning he charges women with a lack of influence, and at the end he accuses them of being too thoroughly organized." - Selected. Hon. A.V. Fawcett, Mayor of Tacoma, has written a vigorous letter to the Boston Post of April 17 in defense of that city's women, who were lately criticised as voters by Judge Snell. He says, in part: "Judge Snell holds no brief to speak in opposition to woman suffrage for the people of this state. Although he may have changed his mind about it, he is the only man in the State I have heard say so, and he had to go 3,000 miles away before he so expressed himself. I believe the people of this State are more firmly committed to the principle of woman suffrage now than when they adopted it. "If Judge Snell, as he said, voted for woman suffrage with the sole idea that it would immediately 'purify politics,' he certainly had a very superficial view of this great question. But it has not made the situation any worse at least, and in view of the fact that the State last fall, with the aid of the woman vote, wiped out the liquor traffic, which is conceded is one of the principal sources of corruption in politics, woman suffrage might possibly be credited with at least offering a good chance for improvement. "Neither has woman suffrage, as charged by Judge Snell, resulted in a 'hodge-podge' of ill-digested, sentimental, socialistic legislation, which is a menace to the welfare of the State.' With a dozen questions submitted to the people at the last election of private employment agencies - were passed. "It is true some women do not rise to the heights of the ideal in citizenship, nor do men. It is true also that many women, deceived by shrewd politicians of the special interests which I had opposed, helped to recall me four years ago, and some of them, when they saw the trick that had been played on them, last year helped to place me back in office by three times as large a majority as that against me when I was recalled. But if suffrage is to be denied to all who ever made a mistake in exercising it we will have to tear up our constitution, cease to attempt to establish democratic government, and go to Russia for our ideals." - Selected. PAGE FOUR Spokane Daily Chronicle EVERY EVENING EXCEPT SUNDAY Official Paper of Spokane County. Official City Paper. Entered at the postoffice at Spokane, Wash., as second-class matter Eastern representative: W.J. Morton, New York, Fifth Ave. building, 200 Fifth Ave.: Chicago, Tribune building NEW YORK CALLS ON WASHINGTON FOR THE TRUTH ABOUT SUFFRAGE "Eleven states of the union have already given women the franchise," states the editor of the Literary Digest in a letter to the Spokane Chronicle. "The question is to be voted on this fall in the four great eastern states of New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Massachusetts. It is evident that the issue has become one for the consideration of the man in the street and the practical politician no less than for the attention of the political theorist. Does your experience in a woman suffrage state incline you to favor this extension of the vote in other states? Is the sentiment of the community in which your paper circulates favorable or unfavorable to woman suffrage?" Fair, square questions. They deserve a fair and square reply. A five-year test of equal suffrage has not converted the state of Washington into a sweet and snakeless Garden of Eden; but it has brought into action a tremendous new force for honesty, better morals, temperance and cleaner living. It has multiplied the list of independent voters. It has aroused keener interest in the duties of governments toward the poor, the sick, the unfortunate. It has put fresh support behind every lawmaker and every official who cares more for humanity than for dollars. It has made it foolish for the rounder to run for office or for the grafted or the boodler, once exposed, to seek election again. THe people of Washington favor equal suffrage heartily; but not unanimously. It is not enthusiastically supported by the liquor sellers who must close their saloons less than four months from now, because women's votes ordered state-wide prohibition. It is not warmly endorsed by dive landlords who just now are earnestly dodging the red light abatement law, passed since equal suffrage came. It is not admired by the lazy husband who has been sent to the county wood camp to earn bread for his children, nor by the old-line political boss whose machine has been sadly battered by this new voting element which does not care how it scratches ballots. But the average voter has been seeing, thinking, learning; and the average voter knows now that women are not "going crazy over politics" or "rushing after office"; knows that husbands are not being scorned, nor children neglected, nor divorce courts crowded on account of suffrage; knows that the baby is not "left wailing in its cradle," but is taken right along to the polling booth when it's time to mark the ballot; knows that a woman is not made less womanly, a wife less devoted or a mother less consecrated in her love by knowing more and caring more about her state and her country that she did five years ago; knows that he has seen awful bugaboo after another shrink to a white sheet and a shriveled pumpkin - and that voter does favor equal suffrage for Washington today, tomorrow and as long as this republic stands. VOTES TO WOMEN A FAILURE [?notation] Washington Regrets Suffrage, Says Judge Snell Woman suffrage has proved such a failure in the State of Washington that thousands of those who helped to adopt it four years ago would today gladly vote for a return to male suffrage if given the opportunity, according to Judge W.H. Snell of Tacoma, who is staying at the Beaconsfield, Brookline, with his wife and family. In an interview yesterday, Judge Snell said: SORRY HE VOTED FOR IT "I favored woman suffrage in Washington and voted for it. But, in common with thousands of others who looked at the question as an abstract proposition, and hoped for the best, I am so greatly disappointed at the way it has worked out that I would today welcome an opportunity to vote for its withdrawal: and I believe if it were resubmitted to the people of Washington, and every man and women of voting age were compelled to vote upon it, woman suffrage would be defeated by an overwhelming majority. "Many of us were led to support woman suffrage in Washington by the familiar argument that it would tend to purify politics and make for better government. But, after four years of experience we are forced to conclude that it has done neither. On the contrary, it has done neither. On the contrary, it has simply added to the numbers of those who can be used in the interest of corrupt politics, and has resulted in a hodge-podge of ill-digested, sentimental, socialistic legislation, which is a menace to the welfare of the State. "The suffragist theory is that women are as much entitled to the ballot as men, but however this may be considered in the abstract, I am now convinced that we should have done much better for the State of Washington if, instead of extending the franchise to women, we had adopted a more restrictive franchise for men. "It is unquestionably true that many men have the privilege of the franchise who are clearly unfit to exercise it. This, however, as we have learned to our cost in Washington, is no reason for extending the suffrage to women. When we gave women the vote, we enfranchised the wife and daughter who were no more fit to cast the ballot than the unfit husband and father from whom the ballot should have been taken away. In other words, we simply added one wrong to another and called it a right. "In Washington we have found that the same motives which control men in their exercise of the franchise also control women. Women are hired to do political work at so much per day just as men are hired, except that women work cheaper. Women are actuated in their use of the ballot by the same selfish motives as men, and they look forward to securing political 'plums' for themselves or relatives in return for their political influence, just as men do - and they get their reward, too. "Our experience with woman suffrage in Washington is that women divide on public questions just as men divide, and when I say public questions I mean to include moral questions. And they are at least as inconsistent and vacillating in their judgments as men. In Seattle the women tied up with the ministers and secured the recall of Hy Gill; and then, when he became a candidate for the same office at the next election women gave him their hearts support and elected him. With Saloon Element "In Tacoma the women tied up with the saloon element and secured the recall of Mayor Fawcett, and then when he became a candidate for re-election they worked and voted for him and he was returned. "And just as in the case of men, there is an element among the women of Washington who do make a business of politics. And by business I mean mercenary and selfish business. They form political organizations, pass resolutions presuming to represent the women of the State, when as a matter of fact they are only a few busybodies who represent a small faction of the women of the State." 000605 "In the spring of 1911 I was elected mayor of Tacoma, receiving a majority of the women's vote, and occupied the position of three years, my term having expired May 5, 1914. I wish to say that, as a result of my experience and observations, my conclusions are directly opposed to those of Judge Snell. I believe that if the question of women's suffrage were again submitted in the state of Washington it would carry by the vote of the men, by a much greater majority than in 1910. "As some reason for my opinion, I may state that last fall I attended a rally of the Young Men's Republican club at Tacoma, at which Mayor Gill of Seattle was the principal speaker. The hall was well filled. While the question of women suffrage is now very seldom discussed publicly, because it is such an accepted fact in the state of Washington, Mayor Gill did refer to it in his speech, commenting upon the aid which the women in Seattle had given to a more constructive action on the part of the city in the issuance of bonds; that men would vote for bonds for almost any purpose, provided that they could get even a few days' employment; whereas the women, having the home always in view, and being more experience in making money go a long way, were far more conservative, the result being that the municipal debit of Seattle was not increasing since the women had a vote at the rate it had before. He further took occasion to comment upon the blessings that had accrued to the state and city by reason of the fact that women had a franchise. The part of his speech referring to women's suffrage received hearty applause throughout the house, and as it was a gathering composed entirely of men, and representative men, the sentiment there expressed, I think, is indicative of that generally prevailing among men throughout the state. "Judge Snell refers to women taking part in politics from selfish motives. It cannot be that he has had experience with the women actively engaged in bettering political conditions. For instance, during by campaign, it was universally conceded that the women had a remarkable organization and worked hard, some of them being actively engaged for several weeks, but so far as I know (and I was in a position to know) not one of them worked for pay or for office. Most of the women appointed to office in my department during my term as mayor had taken no part in the campaign whatever, nor was I ever criticised to any extent by any woman or by a collection of women because of my appointments. In fact, the office of district nurse (which was created during my administration) was filled from Bos- ton. Judge Snell's error in this regard needs to elaborate comment. Every business man appreciates how much more honest and unselfish ordinarily are the services of women than of men: how much more devoted to principle in the home, in the office, in the church, anywhere, than are men. "In the state of Washington and the city of Tacoma we owe a great deal to the active participation of women in politics. It is true, as Judge Snell states, that on some questions their influence is not particularly felt. On the other hand, I am firmly convinced that their influence complements that of men, and that women take an active interest in certain vital questions about which the majority of men are not particularly keen. I refer to health, sanitation, education and morals. Judge Snell very well knows, for instance, what the women through the leadership of Mrs. (Judge) O.G. Ellis of Tacoma have done both locally and in the state in regard to the pure food laws. "The progress made in the state and city against the plague of tuberculosis can be largely credited to the women. I believe Washington is one of the leading states in fighting the "Great White Scourge." Miss Beals of Seattle and others associated with her (man of them men), have worked indefatigably throughout the state and at the sessions of the legislature to bring about better conditions. Indeed, Pierce County, in which Judge Snell and I live, has just completed a tuberculosis hospital, devoted exclusively to this disease. "Judge Snell certainly must be conversant with the influence of the women in carrying the state for prohibition last November, and while the law will be enforced by the co-operation of the men and women of Washington, the inspiration and effectiveness of enforcement will come more from the zeal and faithfulness of the women than the men. "Judge Snell refers to women returning to office Mayor Gill, whom they had helped to recall, ignoring the fact that Mayor Gill, since his return to office, has established a record differing far from that made when elected by the votes of the men alone. Indeed, I think that Mayor Gill is now making a record which will rank among the best administrations of Seattle's mayors. "The Judge also mentions that women voted with the saloonkeepers (at my election), yet he very well knows that the most effective laws against the saloon were passed during my administration, and the laws were better enforced than at any previous time. I may say I have always believed that Judge Snell voted for my election and that my official acts had [next column top line cut off] "If Judge Snell, as he said, voted for woman suffrage with the sole idea that it would immediately 'purify politics,' he certainly had a very superficial view of this great question. But it has not made the situation any worse at least, and in view of the fact that the State last fall, with the aid of the woman vote, wiped out the liquor traffic, which it is conceded is one of the principal sources of corruption in politics, woman suffrage might possibly be credited with at least offering a good chance for improvement. "Neither has woman suffrage, as charged by Judge Snell, resulted in a 'hodge-podge of ill-digested, sentimental, socialists legislation, which is a menace to the welfare of the State.' With a dozen questions submitted to the people at the last election, only two - prohibition and abolition of private employment agencies - were passed. "It is true some women do not rise to the heights of the ideal in citizenship, nor do men. It is true also that many women, deceived by shrewd politicians of the special interests which I had opposed, helped to recall me four years ago, and some of them, when they saw the trick that had been played on them, last year helped to place me back in office by three times as large a majority as that against me when I was recalled. But if suffrage is to be denied to all who ever made a mistake in exercising it we will have to tear up our constitution, cease to attempt to establish democratic government, and go to Russia for our ideals." - Selected. PAGE FOUR SPOKANE DAILY CHRONICLE EVERY EVENING EXCEPT SUNDAY Official Paper of Spokane County. Official City Paper. Entered at the postoffice at Spokane, Wash., as second-class matter. Eastern representative: W.J. Morton, New York, Fifth Ave. building, 200 Fifth Ave.; Chicago, Tribune building. NEW YORK CALLS ON WASHINGTON FOR THE TRUTH ABOUT SUFFRAGE "Eleven states of the union have already given women the franchise," states the editor of the Literary Digest in a letter to the Spokane Chronicle. "The question is to be voted on this fall in the four great eastern states of New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Massachusetts. It is evident that the issue has become one for the consideration of the man in the street and the practical politician no less than for the attention of the political theorist. Does your experience in a woman suffrage state incline you to favor this extension of the vote in other states? Is the sentiment of the community in which your paper circulates favorable or unfavorable to woman suffrage?" Fair, square questions. They deserve a fair and square reply. A five-year test of equal suffrage has not converted the state of Washington into a sweet and snakeless Garden of Eden; but it has brought into action a tremendous new force for honesty, better morals, temperance and cleaner living. It has multiplied the list of independent voters. It has aroused keener interest in the duties of government toward the poor, the sick, the unfortunate. It has put fresh support behind every lawmaker and every official who cares more for humanity that for dollars. It has made it foolish for the rounder to run for office or for the grafted or the boodler, once exposed, to seek election again. The people of Washington favor equal suffrage heartily; but not unanimously. It is not enthusiastically supported by the liquor sellers who must close their saloons less than four months from now, because women's votes ordered state-wide prohibition. It is not warmly endorses by dive landlords who just now are earnestly dodging the red light abatement law, passed since equal suffrage came. It is not admired by the lazy husband who has been sent to the county wood camp to earn bread for his children, nor by the old-line political boss whose machine has been badly bettered by this new voting element which does not care how it scratches ballots. But the average voter has been seeing, thinking, learning; and the average voter knows now that women are not "going crazy over politics" or "rushing after office"; knows that husbands are not being scorned, nor children neglected, nor divorce courts crowded on account of suffrage; knows that the baby is not "left wailing in its cradle," but is taken right along to the polling booth when it's time to mark the ballot; knows that a woman is not made less womanly, a wife less devoted or a mother less consecrated in her love by knowing more and caring more about her state and her country than she did five years ago; knows that he has seen one awful bugaboo after another shrink to a white sheet and a shriveled pumpkin - and that voters does favor equal suffrage for Washington today, tomorrow and as long as this republic stands. VOTES TO WOMEN A FAILURE Washington Regrets Suffrage, Says Judge Snell Woman suffrage has proved such a failure in the State of Washington that thousands of those who helped to adopt it four years ago would today gladly vote for a return to male suffrage if given the opportunity, according to Judge W.H. Snell of Tacoma, who is staying at the Beaconsfield, Brookline, with his wife and family. In an interview yesterday, Judge Snell said: SORRY HE VOTED FOR IT "I favored woman suffrage in Washington and voted for it. But, in common with thousands of others who looked at the question as an abstract proposition, and hoped for the best, I am so greatly disappointed at the way it has worked out that I would today welcome an opportunity to vote for its withdrawal; and I believe if it were resubmitted to the people of Washington, and every man and women of voting age were compelled to vote upon it, woman suffrage would be defeated by an overwhelming majority. "Many of us were led to support woman suffrage in Washington by the familiar argument that it would tend to purify politics and make for better government. But, after four years of experience we are forced to conclude that it has done neither. On the contrary, it has simply added to the numbers of those who can be used in the interest of corrupt politics, and has resulted in a hodge-podge of ill-digested, sentimental, socialistic legislation, which is a menace to the welfare of the State. "The suffragist theory is that women are as much entitled to the ballot as men, but however this may be considered in the abstract, I am now convinced that we should have done much better for the State of Washington if, instead of extending the franchise to women, we had adopted a more restrictive franchise for men. "It is unquestionably true that many men have the privilege of the franchise who are clearly unfit to exercise it. This, however, as we have learned to our cost in Washington, is no reason for extending the suffrage to women. When we gave women the vote we enfranchised the wife and daughter who were no more fit to cast the ballot than the unfit husband and father from whom the ballot should have been taken away. In other words, we simply added one wrong to another and called it a right. "In Washington we have found that the same motives which control men in their exercise of the franchise also control women. Women are hired to do political work at so much per day, just as men are hired, except that women work cheaper. Women are actuated in their use of the ballot by the same selfish motives as men, and they look forward to securing political 'plums' for themselves or relatives in return for their political influence, just as men do - and they get their reward, too. "Our experience with woman suffrage in Washington is that women divide on public questions just as men divide, and when I say public questions I mean to include moral questions. And they are at least as inconsistent and vacillating in their judgements as men. In Seattle the women tied up with the ministers and secured the recall of Hy Gill; and then, when he became a candidate for the same office at the next election women gave him their hearty support and elected him. With Saloon Element "In Tacoma, the women tied up with the saloon element and secured the recall of Mayor Fawcett, and then when he became a candidate for re-election they worked and voted for him and he was returned. "And just as in the case of men, there is an element among the women of Washington who do make a business of politics. And by business I mean mercenary and selfish business. They form political organizations, pass resolutions and present petitions for legislation, presuming to represent the women of the State, when as a matter of fact they are only a few busybodies who represent but a small faction of the women of the State." Transcribed and reviewed by contributors participating in the By The People project at crowd.loc.gov.