NAWSA  Subject File  Congressional Union: NAWSA, policy differences with [Woman Suffrage Association]

Miss Paul then presented her report,
This Congressional Committee was appointed about Christmas time and began 
work on the first of January.  On the first of next January we shall publish a 
printed report which will be sent to every one who has subscribed to our funds.
Now we felt a committee of five people could do very little in getting 
through the Federal amendment and we formed, therefore, the Congressional Union.  
This is a body of women in all parts of the country who want to aid in the work 
of getting through the Federal Amendment, Each member pays 25¢ and becomes a 
member for life.
Now the Congressional Committee is a committee of the National Association 
but the Congressional Union and the Congressional Committee are so closely 
allied that we must give the report as one, we cannot say something is the work of 
the Congressional Union and something is the work of the Congressional Committee, 
everything is a work of the two.
We have about one thousand members.  We opened Headquarters in Washington 
on the 2nd of January and at that time there were no headquarters in the city.  
Our particular work, of course, has been legislative work with Congress, trying to 
get this amendment through.  On the opening day of Congress, April 7th, the Suffrage 
amendment was introduced in both houses.  Now the first step accomplished in 
the Senate was securing a majority suffrage committee.  There had been for many 
years a minority suffrage committee and this had never amounted to anything, so a 
majority suffrage committee was secured in the Senate.  Then in May a unanimous 
favorable report was voted by this committee.  In June this report was submitted 
to the Senate, and it is the first time that I know of in the history of this country 
that we have had a unanimous favorable report in the body of Congress.  On 
July 31st, thirty-two senators spoke on the floor of the Senate in favor of this 
amendment.  On September 18th, Senator Jones spoke in favor of the question and 
demanded immediate action.
Now then more significant perhaps than the favorable report is the 
discussion[ of the subject] that has taken place this summer, because never since 
1877 has a discussion of the subject been taken on the floor of Congress and this 
summer we have had lengthy discussions extending over hours.  The bill was presented 
to the Judiciary Committee and still remains there.  We have tried to get a 
majority suffrage committee in the House the same as we obtained in the Senate.  
In the Senate our measure is waiting the third reading, in the House it is still 
before the Judiciary Committee and the proposal to elect a suffrage committee 
before the Rules Committee.  So that is, in substance, the legislative position 
of our measure.
In order to get this amendment through we have done a good deal beside 
watching this bill, nothing has happened that is not known to us, but we 
thought we had to get a great deal more public opinion in Washington.  In order 
to do this we have held three processions here in Washington, the first one the 
day before the Inauguration of the new administration, March 3rd, when about ten



thousand women marched through the streets of Washington.  It was designed to impress 
the new administration with the strength of this movement.  Then on the opening 
day of Congress, April 7th, another procession went to Congress, and on that 
occasion there was one woman for every Congressional district from the United States.  
We had about a thousand women who went to Congress and gave petitions to their representatives 
there, so there was not one Congressional District in this country 
which was not represented.  Then in the middle of summer we got up another automobile 
procession, which went to welcome the pilgrimage which came from all over 
the country and escorted these pilgrims to the Senate.  There have been then these 
three big processions.
We have arranged for three Hearings, one before the Suffrage Committee 
in Senate, which resulted in a favorable report, and two before the Rules 
Committee, one this week and one last summer, when the National Council of Women 
Voters presented arguments.
In July pilgrims started from every part of the country, the most remote 
from Montana and Colorado, and they met here on July 31st, having occupied a 
month, one of them, in coming.  Each one of these tours were financed and organized 
in Washington.  They met here July 31st, when they were welcomed by the 
Woman Suffrage Committee of the Senate and were taken up to the Senate where they 
presented about 800,000 signatures to the Petition.  It was this action which 
called for this favorable report that same day.
Then we have organized four delegations to the President, three in co-operation 
with other societies last Spring before Congress opened, asking the President 
to ,make suffrage an administration measure.  This Autumn, since he had taken 
no action, we organized another from the women of his own State.  It was organized 
by Mrs. Beard.  They went to see the President and asked him to make the measure an
administrative one and he was, for the first time, made to face the suffrage question 
and brought face to face with it and, for the first time we got from him something 
that might be called encouragement.
We have organized two National Conventions, one during the summer of the 
National Council of Women Voters, where 4,000 women voters assembled in the capital 
which did more than anything I think ever did.  Then this Convention, financed by 
the women of Washington.  We felt, no matter how much we did in Washington, people 
out through the country were not doing very much about this Federal Amendment.  We 
organized three salaried campaigned to go out through the remote parts of the district 
and urge them to write to their representatives in Congress.  We had one campaign 
which went, through New Jersey, Long Island and Rhode Island.  This lasted 
through July, August and September.  We had another such campaign which went through 
New York, Delaware and Maryland, and also under a salaried organizer, and a third 
which went through North Carolina.  In North Carolina we could get no pressure 
brought to bear and as a result of this we established a suffrage society there 
which has its delegation in this body.  We also had this campaign in New Jersey 
as a result of the campaign in Delaware.  We felt that a great deal could be done 
with the Senators if we have a strong movement, so we opened headquarters in Delaware

Delaware and have them there under a salaried organizer from our Washington headquarters.
One of the most important things connected with our work is the 
Press Department. We have had a salaried press representative almost all the 
time since we have been here who has seen all the Washington papers every day, 
the national press. Every paper in the country which amounts to anything has 
a press correspondent here. We have every day from the office a mimeograph copy 
sent out of the status of the Federal Amendment. This copy is sent to every one 
of these correspondents. In that way it goes all over the United States. If 
you see a story in Texas, you will know it has come from our press chairman in 
Washington, if it is about the Federal Amendment. 
The work has cost us $25,000 of this $21,000 has been raised here in 
Washington and only 4,000 has come from the United States and of this nearly all 
has come from the city of Philadelphia. You have raised something like 12000 to 
carry on the office in New York. Nothing has been raised to carry through the 
Federal Amendment which is, in my opinion, the great work before us as a nation. 
The women in Washington have done more than they could have done this past year 
but they absolutely must have some help from the United States to carry this 
through. There is no reason why the little District of Columbia should have to 
carry this whole amendment. We ask if you believe in this amendment and policy 
that you send us some funds from over the United States to back up this amendment. 
It was moved and seco nded to accept the report of the Congressional.
 Committee. 
Motion Carried
Mrs. Catt. I want to begin by saying that I want everyone here to understand 
my admiration and appreciation of all this wonderful committee has done is not exceeded 
by that of anyone of you, but I confess I am a good deal razzle-dazzled 
about the situation. When I take the time to ask questions I feel that my point 
of view is that of many others in this association. I think perhaps Miss Paul 
could answer some and perhaps the Board should answer others and perhaps the Cbnvention 
should answer still others. I want to ask what is the relationship of the 
Cbngressional Committee to the National Association. If it is a Committee appointed
by the Association how then does it happen that the National has made no appropriation
for its work? and has not included any support  of the work.  What is the relation 
of the Congressional Union to the Cbngressional Committee. If the Union is 
organized all over the country and has become a national organization and has, I 
believe, been admitted into the National Association, as an organization, how does 
it happen that the committee is the same thing as the Union. How can it be a committee 
appointed by the National Association and, at the same time be a national 
body which is a member of the National Association? I want to ask how it happens 
that in the work in connection with the amendment, that apparently not only the 
work which is done in Congress as a committee, but the very proper work which belongs


belongs with it, and which it has seemed to me has been the weakness of the National 
Association, has been done by this body? That is it has done everything which the 
National ought to do. It has organized in the field, it has kept a political line 
upon the State, published literature, established a press bureau and paper. It 
is a national association composed of those who believe strongly in the National 
Amendment. The question arises to which society are we to owe loyalty? How does 
it happen that the two societies can be related as a committee in the National body. 
In this Convention there has been more or less gossip, I have purposely avoided asking 
these two questions but it has added further to the razzle-dazzlement of my understanding 
in this matter. Mrs. Belmont made a motion at an unfortunate moment  
yesterday, because she had to take a train and I overheard the delegates remarking 
to each other that it would be a terrible pity if the National should come to Washington 
because it would only put a quietus upon the work of the Committee in doing here. 
In other words they seemed to regard the National Association as too incompetent, 
in this respect, to carry on the work. At the same time in a conversation about 
the removal of Headquarters to Washington it was said by a lady, who is a personal 
friend of the National Board that if the motion which Mrs. Belmont present was carried 
by the Cbnvention and it was decided that the Headquarters ought to come to 
the city of Washington, that every member of the Board would resign. Now if it is 
true that any remarks made by the National Board, which I do not believe could possible 
have been have been this, but if anything quite so emphatic was said, is it not their 
duty to do as the Cbnvention desires. It is a question not for gossip but for 
those of us who belong to this Association to ask the reason why both societies 
could not exist in Washington, because it looks as if there was not harmony between 
these two. In a short time we are coming to a point where it will be necessary to 
concentrate. I see progress ahead. I want to know why the National is not going 
to do this work. These are the things I fail utterly to understand in the present 
situation. I realize all is going very well just now, but I also realize if it 
goes this way there is going to be a division of labor. If we want a victory we are 
going to support one and if we want - I don't know just what the other will support. 
I believe we ought to do our work under the direction of one association.
It appears to me, whatever may have been true in the past, the time has 
come now for the National Association to adopt a slightly different policy. I 
don't know how many others may agree with me about this. I believe there are a 
good many, especially of the older workers, who have felt keen interest in the 
National Amendment and believed that, when the proper time came it was the way to 
finish off our task, but we have felt that the days when there were only a few 
States upon our side that it was impossible to have any success or prospects of 
success. Of course it will always be an open question as to what time we have secured 
enough prestige to go through with success. I believe that the Board of Officers 
should put aside the one with the best political head and that she should get 
right] on the political job at this time. I express a conviction which has been 
growing upon me through this Cbnvention and that is that it has accentuated States

rights rather than Nationalism, simply because there has been no National policy,
there has been a budget and support of the budget but there has been presented to
this Convention no national policy to pull all of us together. Now what I think
this political head should do is to go over all the States and assign to them the
work which they can best do in order to make whole, and I believe there are a number
of States which ought to be worked and worked by the National, to secure Presidential
suffrage. Now with the enormous prestige which the State of Illinois gives
to this business it could be secured in a number of States. Think of the enormous
slump there is going to be if, by chance, we lose at the polls now. I believe that
all these other efforts should be made that we have a gain as a whole and that if,
by chance, we lose it Pennsylvania, and New York we ought to follow the example of
the abolutionists in 1867 and go to Congress as they did when the amendment was
sugmitted in the state of New York and they could not win it at the polls and they
came to Congress and said "It was impossible to secure it in this way, we must go
to Congress." Now if New York is going to be in a position to do that, if we need
to do it in two years hence, you must be busy in getting the United States ready for
this movement.
I want to know if it is true that there has been a caucus of the Southern
States and they hold the attitude that there is no particular task for us to perform.
I think we all realize that the Democratic party is not going to be in a position
to speak for us without some sort of sanction and approval of the great South and
I am breaking the solid South on this question.
Now, Madam President, while I realize that I have taken more time than
we ought to take for this thing, yet I believe the points I have raised here are
those of crucial importance to this Convention. May we have those questions answered
in order that we may not criticise each other and not find fault but so
we may get together on one unified programme that is going to carry us to success.
Applause.


Miss Addams. I wish to answer one of the questions which I think would be
less embarrassing if a representative from the Association answered. I had the honor
of making the motion in the Philadelphia Convention which created this committee.
The young ladies came and said that the Convention that if appointed by the consent
of the National they would organize their own work and pay their expenses. The
National made no appropriation because it was asked to make none and they desired
no appropriation from the National. That perhaps answers one of Mrs. Catt's questions
in regard to the appropriation.
The confusion which it is easy to see there is between the Committee
and the Union, I think Miss Paul explained that the actual Committee appointed by
the National are also Executive Committee of the Union. The Committee is a creature
of this Convention and the Union is organized as any other suffrage Association
might have been organized. Mrs. Catt asks why the National Association is
not doing this work. I contend that if this Committee is a committee of the National
Association the National is doing this work because this committee is giving
its entire attention, its entire time to one thing. Spinola once said that
one way to succeed in this life is to look at life through a goodsequill and they
have done better than if distracted by other work of the National.
I am sure that the National Board, which you elected and which you are
responsible for has no one on its membership who could give all of her time and at
the same time present to the committee any such political acumen as they have displayed.
Miss Paul.  The Congressional Committee received official notice of its appointment
a few days before last Christmas. The Union was organized about the
first of last May.
?  Who presented the bill to Congress.
Miss Paul. The bill was presented to Congress on the opening day. It was
presented at Dr. McNaughton's request. This particular bill was presented by the
Federal Woman's Equality Association who has really been doing the Congressional
work in Washington. I am a member of the National Association.
?    As a delegate from Georgia and from the solid South and as a
Democrat I will take great pleasure in answering one question which Mrs. Catt put
to this Convention. The solid South is not solid on this question. There are men
red-blooded in Georgia who are lining up in a Men's Equal Suffrage League and I
feel that with the impression that has gone abroad that all the South is organized
on questions of State Rights, I owe it to Georgia to say this.
Miss Gordon   I would like first for information to ask was there any caucus
of any Southern delegates called in this Convention.
No, No.
Miss Gordon  No, it is only in line with a great deal that has been said

in regard to the Southern States. It is not reliable. I suppose that they are alluding to the little caucus pulled in Louisiana. 
        Mrs. Roessing Pennsylvania is not yet clear as to who represented, in whose name was the general work of presenting that bill?
        Miss Paul We felt that it was far better to have the bill brought in by a suffrage committee than by an individual. It would be very bad policy, from my point of view, to get one individual back of a bull if you could get a committee. We arranged with the chairman of the Woman Suffrage Committee that that committee would bring in the bill. However, another society, the Federal Woman's Suffrage Association asked two men, Mondell and Chamberlain, the woman suffrage committee of the Senate  were very much annoyed that this should be done, so we adopted the first bill and asked the suffrage committee to adopt it also and after a good any visits to Senator Thomas he adopted this bill. We are, therefore, supporting this bill. It was just as good a bill. 
        Miss Shaw The National Suffrage Association has, for many years, regularly at every Congress presented this same bill. The Federal Suffrage Association has presented a Federal suffrage bill, but it happened this year that the Federal Association presented the same bull which we have been presenting for many, many years, so that it practically is our bill.
The Federal Suffrage Association  is an association organized to ask for Federal suffrage, not for the right of women to vote for Federal Officers, and the bill has been presented for many years until this year. Since that bill, which was worded exactly as ours has been worded for years and was presented, our Committee did not feel that it was best to put in another bill, exactly the same wording, to create in Congress an impression that there was a division. The Federal Association must have known that we would have presented our bill again this year, as we will until it passes. 
**********
        Mrs. Roessing. Is not a National Committee supposed to report to the National Association? Also may I ask, as State President, that it be the ruling of this Convention that a report shall go to the President and Secretary of each State Association.
        Miss Paul We should be obliged to send the report to everyone in the world.
        Mrs. Roessing. I understand also that a press letter is sent out every day. Is it the Committee or the Union sending out this press letter?
        Miss Paul We have not gone into these points, if we did we would not have gotten this work done. The situation is this. I felt very strongly for two years that this work should be done. I could not do anything very much being at the University, but I spent a great deal of time trying to get the work taken up by 

the National Association.
        Mrs. Catt. Was it because you could not get the State Associations to do the definite work. It is said that you formed this Union because the States were so inefficient.
        Miss Paul. Some states have co-operated splendidly. New Jersey is the only State we have gained, but from Mrs. Hooker's and all societies we have come in contact with have done more than I thought it was possible to get.
        Mrs. [?onks] I would suggest this National re-affirm this appointment to the Committee to take care of this work and Appoint Miss Paul as the person of special ability but the National Board to take charge of the work. 
Motion was ruled out 66 order. 
        Miss Shaw. May I answer one question. I have heard a great deal of criticism of the National Officers. When we appointed this committee we, of course, had not the remotest idea in the world what this Committee was going to do. At the second Official Board meeting, held in Chicago, when the subject of the parade was before us as to whether or not the National would stand back of and endorse the parade, then we began to realize that the Congressional Committee felt that in doing its work it must branch along lines which were not directly Congressional work, in the sense of a committee with Congress. Then we realized that there must be a more intimate relation between the Committee than we had expected of then, so the National telegraphed that we would co-operate with the Committee for the parade. We sent word that all contributions in money raised for the National work should be sent to the Treasurer of the National and go through the treasury of the Association. Miss Paul accepted this, but afterwards, and that is one of the points I wish to raise, whether or not the Committee appointed by the National Association is responsible to the National Association, or to some other which may be back of it. Now we want to know where we stand and the National Officers do not wish to be blamed for things which they have not done. I think there should be a distinct and clear understanding, but it is now a quarter to twelve and we are compelled to vacate this hall at exactly twelve o'clock. 
        Miss Hay called for question on the adoption of this report.
        Mrs Lawrence Lewis We cannot remain after twelve o'clock but we can adjourn to the room below.
        ? If the report is the report of a committee of this National Association we are prepared to adopt it. We want to support the National Association and its committee and hold the committee responsible for reports to the National Association.
        Miss Adder The Board Meeting was held in Chicago, December 17. The Commit-

tee did not get to work until January 1st.
Mrs.Harvey Do we understand that the money that the Congressional Union and Committee raised did pass through the bands of the National Treasurer?
Mrs.McCormick I was responsible, of course, the Board having instructed the Committee to snd the accounts to my office and I was responsible for seeing that that was done. I was unable to get it done and a further source of embar-
rassment to me officially was a recent for contributions that went out, I believe, to the State Associations, as it were from the National Treasurer's of-
fice. I did not know that this request was to be sent out. They certainly did not go from the National Treasurer's office. but i believe they went in the name of the National. On that and other occasions in respect to this Committee the Treasurer has been considerably embarrassed. 
Miss.Hay moved the previous question.
Chair All in favor of adopting the report of the Congressional Committee and the Congressional Union, please signify.
Miss Hay I thing the motion made was the adopting of the Congressional Committee report .
Miss Addams After all any work done by the Committee we have used the name of the Union.
Miss Hay There is a difference.
Miss Shaw The previous question is called and the motion before us is to adopt that part of the report which is the Congressional Committee report.
Motion carried.
Miss Paul's Report.
Receipts to Dec. 1st.
Sale of tickets - - - - - - - - - - - $ 7848.40
Sale of literature - - - - - - - - - - - 2173.45
Sale of costumes - - - - - - - - - - - 1472.64
Advertisements - - - - - - - - - - - 710.75
Membership fees - - - - - - - - - - - 170.87
Miscellaneous - - - - - - - - - - - 247.21
Subscriptions to SUFFRAGIST - - - - - - - - - - - 567.40
Collected for other Suffrage Societies 95.05
Contributions - - - - - - - - - - - 12062.21
- - - - - - - - - - -
Total - $25,348.83
Of this sum $4,200 cam from outside of the District of Columbia, leaving $21,148.88 that was collected in the District
Expense to Dec. 1st.
Procession March 3rd, - - - - - - - - - - -$ 7171.09
(Bands, banners, costumes, gloats automobiles grandstands)
Tableau on Treasury Steps- - - - - - - - - - - 1050.50
(costumes, bands, stage properties, traveling expenses of participants)
Convention of National Woman  Suffrage Association - - - - - - - - - - - 1125.25 
(rent or Mafonic Hall, badges, advertising)
Convention, National Council Women Voters - - - - - - - - - - - 558.04
(rent of hall, tickets, advertising, travelling expenses, printing, stationery, postage)
Summer campaign N.J. Long Island, Rhode Island in July, August Sept.
(Salary & expenses of organizer, advertising meetings etc.)
Delaware Headquarters for Sept. Oct. Nov. - - - - - - - - - - - 390.63
(rent office expenses, salary of organizer, printing stationery, rent of halls, advertising etc.)
Demonstration, July 31st, - - - - - - - - - - - 607.00
(automobiles, baquet, petitions, decorations, printing, stationery etc.)
"The Suffragist"- - - - - - - - - - - 435.63
(salary business manager and assistant business manager, rent of offices, printing, engraving etc.)
Press - - - - - - - - - - - 667.45
(salary press agent, photographs etc.)
Literature - - - - - - - - - - - 4079.69
Advertising - - - - - - - - - - - 286.85
Postage, - - - - - - - - - - - 729.65
Hospitality Committee - - - - - - - - - - - 50.00
Suffrage Luncheon Oct. 1 - 4 - - - - - - - - - - - 475.09
Furniture - - - - - - - - - - - 153.46
Banquet, Mar. 2[?]- - - - - - - - - - - 105.00
Flowers - - - - - - - - - - - 53.25

Donations to other suffrage societies, boxes taken for other societies etc. ----------- $ 235.23
Hauling, express, transportation etc. ------------------------------------------------     251.01
Music and bands, -------------------------------------------------------------------     307.00
Telephone and telegrams ------------------------------------------------------------    567.98
Rent of halls ------------------------------------------------------------------------    642.00
Rent of headquarters ---------------------------------------------------------------    1053.75
Stenographers, typists, telephone operator, messenger boy, typewriting machines. --   1646.67
Decorations ------------------------------------------------------------------------       130.13
Regalia ------------------------------------------------------------------------------      73.98
Pennants ----------------------------------------------------------------------------   465.00
Programs ---------------------------------------------------------------------------   1031.25
Printing, Statiokery etc. --------------------------------------------------------------   1511.46
Office expenses ---------------------------------------------------------------------    265.32
Salary Financial Secretary ------------------------------------------------------------     80.00
Traveling and other expenses --------------------------------------------------------   678.55
Miscellaneous, -----------------------------------------------------------------------   311.28
Refunds. -----------------------------------------------------------------------------     25.75
                                                                                            Total --------------   $24,987.50

To Dec. 1st.
Total receipts $25,34[?].88
" expenses     24, 967.[60]
balance      378.83

Supplies on Hand (Approximate)
Tableau Costumes               $748.
Procession costumes           1000.
Banners and pennants         650.
Literature                                500.
                                           [$2?33/.]

REPORT OF CONGRESSIONAL WORK.
1. Situation in Congress

(a) Senate and House Joint Resolution Number One introduced in Congress 
April 7, 1913.
(b) Majority Woman Suffrage Committee secured in Senate.
(c) Woman Suffrage Committee of Senate voted on May 14th to report the 
Resolution favorably.
(d) Woman Suffrage Committee  of Senate submitted on June 13th a unanimous 
favorable report to the Senate. 
(e) On July 31st, twenty-two Senators spoke in favor of the Suffrage Resolu-
tion, and three against it.
(f) On Sept. 18th Senator Jones spoke on the floor of the Senate in favor 
of the Suffrage Resolution, and asked for immediate
action upon it.
On the same day Senator Ashram announced on the floor of the Senate that 
he would press the measure to a vote at the earliest
possible opportunity.
(g) Three Resolutions were introduced in the House for the creation of a 
Woman Suffrage Committee. These Resolutions were re-
feared to the Rules Committee.
(h) PRESENT STATUS: 
Suffrage Resolution is awaiting third reading in the 
Senate, and is before the Judiciary Committee in the 
House. Resolutions for creation of Suffrage Committee
in the House are still before the Rules Committee.

WORK CARRIED ON IN EFFORT TO AID PASSAGE OF THE AMENDMENT:
1. HEADQUARTERS opened in Washington, Jan. 2, 1913.
2. Hearings arranged-
         (a) Before the Woman Suffrage Committee of Senate.
         (b) Before Rules Committee of the House when members of National Council
                            of Women Voters were the speakers.
         (c) Before Rulea Committee during present Convention.
3. Processions:
          (a) March 3, when from 8,000 to 10,000 women participated
          (b) April 7, when one woman from each Congressional district in the 
                              country went to Congress with petitions and resolution from
                              her district. 
          (c) July 31, when an automobile procession met the pilgrimages which
                    had come from all parts of the country, and escorted them through
                    the streets of Washington to the United States Senate. This 
                    procession was headed by an automobile in which rode a number
4. PILGRIMAGES:
                    Pilgrimages coming from all parts of the country and extending over
                    the month of July, or part of July, were organized last summer, there
                    being about twelve pilgrimages in all. These pilgrimages all ended in 
                    Washington on July 31st, when approximately  200,000 signatures to 
                    petitions were presented to the Senate. 
5. DEPUTATIONS:
                  Three deputations to the President were organized immediately precedi-
                   ing the calling of the special session of Congress, in order to ask the 
                   President to give the administration support to suffrage during the 
                   special session. One of these deputation was from the National Associa-
                   tion, one from the College Suffrage League, and one from the National 
                   Council of Women Voters.                                                    

On November 17th a fourth deputation, composed of 73 women from New Jersey, was sent to the President in order to urge him to take up suffrage during the regular session of Congress. 
6. CONVENTIONS.
Local arrangements were made for the Convention of the National Council of Women Voters and the Convention of National American Woman Suffrage Association. 
7. SUMMER CAMPAIGNS.
(a) A campaign under a salaried organizer was conducted through the resort regions of New Jersey, Long Island, and Rhode Island, during the months of July, August, and September.
(b) A campaign under a salaried organizer was conducted through New Jersey, Delaware, and Maryland during the month of July.
(c) A month's campaign was carried on in North Carolina. As a result of this campaign, a suffrage organization was, for the first time, started in North Carolina.
8. NEW JERSEY CAMPAIGN;
A month's campaign was carried on In New Jersey which culminated in the deputation of 78 New Jersey women to the President. 
9. DELAWARE HEADQUARTERS
On September 1st permanent headquarters were opened in Wilmington in charge of a salaried organizer and since that time a vigorous campaign has been carried on in Delaware in the attempt to influence the attitude of the Senators and Representatives from that State.
10. PRESS;
A salaried press chairman has been employed throughout the year who has furnished daily press copy to the local papers, to the Washington correspondents of the various papers to the various papers throughout the country, and to all of the telegraphic bureaus in Washington.
11. Literature;
Approximately 120,000 pieces of literature have been printed and distributed.
12. SUFFRAGIST.
A weekly paper, under the editorship of Mrs. Rheta Childe Dorr, was established on November 13th. This now has a paid subscription of about 1800 names, and is self-supporting from the advertisements. 
13 MEN'S LEAGUE; 
A men's league was organized, General Anson Mills, U.S.A. being the temporary and Dr. Harvey W. Wiley the permanent chairman. A large number of Congressmen are members.
14. MEETINGS;
Eight theatre meetings, exclusive of those during the Convention, have been held in Washington. Smaller meetings both indoor and out have been held almost daily, and frequently as many as five or teen meetings a day have been held.
15. TABLEAU;
A tableau was given on the Treasury steps at the time of the Suffrage procession of March 3rd, under the direction of Miss Hazel Mackaye.
16. PLAY;
A suffrage play was given


17. SOCIAL EVENTS;
Two banquets, a reception, and a luncheon were given.
18. MONEY RAISING EVENTS;
A benefit and a luncheon were given, for the purpose of raising funds.
19. PARTICIPATION OF EVENTS IN OTHER SOCIETIES;
(a) A delegation in two special cars went to New York for the progression of May 3rd.
(b) An even larger delegation went to Baltimore for the progression of May 31st.
(c) The suffrage play given in Washington was reproduced in Baltimore for the benefit of one of the suffrage societies there.
(d) A week's campaign was conducted in the four southern counties of Maryland prior to the primary elections, at the request of one of the Maryland societies.
(e) Speakers have been supplied for a large number of meetings in Maryland and Virginia.
The  CONGRESSIONAL UNION was formed during the latter part of April. It now numbers over a thousand members.

[*W -*]
Random notes taken at the discussion between members of the National American Woman Suffrage Association and members of the Congressional Union, February 12th, 1914, at 505 Fifth Avenue, New York.
[*(Mary Ware Demult sec)*]
MISS PAUL: First of all, we planned to have a nation-wide demonstration on the 2nd of May in order to show that the whole country is back of this amendment.  We are going to every one.  Second, we want to discuss our political policy.  I think you know what our plan is.  We want each state to get up some sort of demonstration.  If possible, an open-air rally or meeting of some kind. We have been through New England and asked each of the state's societies to get it up and so far they have agreed to do it.  Sent one worker through the middle West.  Sent another worker South; also through some of the suffrage states.  In part of the country we sent no one.  In this work we have found only one thing which has hindered us.  
It seems to use that we have --- that no matter what you think of us, it really is not any reason for the suffrage work being snatched out.  We cannot afford to put it through without co-operation of the Official Board.  It would have a great deal better effect on Congress if we have the co-operation of the National Board.  Also went to Massachusetts.  We understood these people were already getting up this demonstration.  
We asked them if they would not change from the 16th to the 2d, and they agreed to do so.  We have just gotten back from New York.  I received a telegram from Mrs. Dennett.  Went to 


Boston and was informed that one person who spoke to the National Board (Mrs. Dexter) had called the suffragists together and urged members not to have anything to do with the Congressional Union.
[*Do you mean*] 
MRS. McCORMICK: My mother, Mrs. Dexter. [*?*]
MISS PAUL: I talked with them and tried to get them to agree and they did.  Waste of time and money.  Called together leader of all the societies.  They agreed to have a procession on the 2nd. They received a letter from Dr. Shaw in response to a letter which one of their members had written and the results were this letter.  They thought it was just possible to still have this procession on the 2nd and still be loyal.  I didn't see this letter.  The person who wrote the letter was Miss Pearson in Philadelphia.  This happened in my absence.  I had to see members of societies in Philadelphia.  See heads and get them to put back procession to 2nd.  This simply means that we are spending out time, energy and money in undoing work of the National Board.  It seems to me that you disapprove of every one of us, and it seems to me that there is no reason for breaking up this plan of the National procession. I see the National Board has planned for some National demonstration on the 2nd --- I see by the Tribune.  Of course, if this is so it disposes of the whole thing.  If you think this plan is good, we would like to have you act in co-operation.  It is not a Congressional Union matter after all. Simply a demon-

-2-

stration on the part of the states.  So far we have met with nothing but opposition.
DR. SHAW: The plan we had seen and heard and read about had always been a procession, and the National Board felt that was not a plan adapted to the entire country, so we suggested to Mrs. Mc ---- there should be some such demonstration adaptable to all part of the country, and this other plan was suggested, and in order that it might be uniform all over the country, a resolution was passed that we accept the fact that all these demonstrations take place on the 2nd day of May.
MISS PAUL: Even after we got Philadelphia back to the 2nd - after I got back I was paralyzed with the news that Dr. M. Carey Thomas had asked that the whole thing be considered and announced that they would withdraw if it were on the 2nd.  They are still under the impression that they cannot, without absolute disloyalty to the National, have it on the 2nd.  Are you willing to have it on the 2nd?
DR. SHAW: Our suggestion is that all should have it on the 2nd.  End meeting at 12:30.  Propose resolution sent by National all over the country and present at all meetings to be read and adopted at all meetings wherever held, whether processions or meetings, in regard to Congressional action on our measure. 
MISS PAUL: I should be very grateful if we could consult with these people so we shall not have bodies presenting two different plans to Congress.
DR. SHAW: We also propose a song.
-3-

MISS PAUL: We had the unfortunate --- warning against the demonstration coming and this does away with all our work.
MISS SHAW: Who wrote to the president?
MISS PAUL: Mrs. Medill McCormick, saying we were militant, making it very difficult for us to get to them.  Is the Board behind that letter sent to the president by Mrs. Medill McCormick?
DR. SHAW: The Board has taken no action on it. 
MISS PAUL: We were told that every statement involving the National should be submitted to the board.
DR. SHAW: I don't think this letter, as far as I heard anything about it, involved any National policy.
MISS PAUL: It discredits the Congressional Union.  I thought the point was that this should be submitted to the National Board. 
DR. SHAW: If you suggest a new policy it is another thing, but a new policy should be taken up with the National.
MISS PAUL: We are very sorry that such a letter should have gone to the president.  Women who cam from all over the country,-
If the statement was made that the women would go to the President, whether he would receive them or not - that was militant.
DR. SHAW: Written by Mrs. Elinor - - -
MISS PAUL: Well, if you agree on May 2nd, which is the most important, then 2nd is our political policy.  Now, the policy we our are policy is which we had thought was endorsed by the National Board throughout last year.  We talked the policy over with Mrs. Dennett and Dr. Shaw.

-4-

DR. SHAW: Beg your pardon, Miss Paul.  
MISS PAUL: I thought we did.  We talked about Democrats being responsible party.  Miss Byrns tells me Mrs. Dennett said: We are quite with you on this democratic policy.  At the Convention, three people of our committee spoke, and all took good care to make our policy clear.  Miss Byrns, Miss Baird,- and in my report I talked about open strategic point. I quite agree we did not make ourselves clear, because people tell us they did not comprehend our policy.  To people outside of Washington our words did not have the same thought.
MISS RUUTZ-REES: There is nothing in your report that could possibly misplace your policy I don't think it could be ----
MISS PAUL: I admit we did not make it clear.  All I say is that we were under the impression that this policy which was so clear to us was something with which you would concur. 
MISS BURNS: In November we began to issue a paper.  In every following number we have set forth our policy.  Simply, I say that in every way we have made our point clear that the Democratic party is responsible.
STRANGER: ? They never made it clear to me that their recently announced policy was the one they held.  Heading the Democratic party is not the same. 
MISS RUUTZ-REES: I give you my word there was nothing in the report that could possibly mean this policy until January 17th, I think. 
MISS PAUL: In planning our policy for the coming year, we have to consider whether a policy is wise.  It was the policy in
-5-


our own minds for the coming year, and we are sure we did not make it clear. 
DR. SHAW: What right has this society to have a policy directly opposed to the society with which it is connected?
MISS PAUL: We thought our policy was a policy approved by the National.
DR. SHAW: A lot of Progressives made speeches which we should have put down if we had had opportunity to speak.  The only thing was the report by Miss Paul. 
MISS PAUL: If we did not make it clear to the public it was our misfortune.
Probably MISS BENEDICT: Those phrases in Miss Burns' report holding the Democratic party responsible, may be simply a phrase which means if you do not do this, we will hold you responsible. I think this phrase appeared in many connections during the Convention.
MRS. FUNK: Officers making speech in no way binds an organization
until the Official Board takes action upon it.  No
organization can be responsible for speeches by members of
Board until action is taken by Board.
MISS ADAMS: Where a man has got in by a small vote the party sends some one to work against him.  I understand that this was the sort of thing contemplated in difficult situations.  I did not understand that this was to be the policy.
MEMBER OF CONGRESSIONAL UNION: Thought we would work that out later. 
MISS BAIRD: In the first place, we feel there is a climax.  After the Democrats had been given a full chance when they
-6-

failed to carry out their policy, we thought it was time to
get after them ---.  Our policy is not to oppose all of the
House Democratic members.  We could not do that, but we can
reduce the power of the Democrats in Congress, if we reduce
three senatorial seats.  They have a majority of five; we
only have to reduce three.  One of our friends might go out
if we did this, but it is a question of holding one's friends
and losing the chance of putting out three men promote our
policy.  That is what we must decide upon.  There is a
misunderstanding that this is English.  This Democratic
party in power assumes complete responsibility for what is
doing.  This gives the impression that we are militant. 
We are not militant in this country, whatever you may think
about England.  We say this is American; it is political
action.  In the Congressional Record the same thing appeared
between Underwood -- Dendruff (?) said the Democrats had assumed
responsibility for this,---- They understand our policy,
think it is politically wise and consider it American. 
Mr. Dendruff understands our policy. Another thing, to
put the blame for the defeat in Congress upon the Congressional
Union is bad policy; even if we were to blame, it is bad
suffrage politics, because it gives the impression that suffragists
are divided, and they know they do not have to get
busy; it is not partisan.  I am not Progressive or Republican.
It is simply a question of political suffrage first
and partisan afterward.  And then, for the National not
only to send this to Congress that they will oppose us where
we go to weaken the power of senators ---- all of this is
bad suffrage politics, even if we are absolutely wrong, we
-7-


all lose by this. 
. FUNK: I have done some work up in the Capitol, and I am
in a measure, together with Mrs. McCormick (Mrs. Medill)
responsible for the stand taken and ready to defend it. 
As amatter of fact this is not a Democratic policy.  There
has never been a measure passed in United States Congress that
was a strictly partisan measure, and there is the difference
between our position and the English situation.  English
parties will stand by some settled policy, but there has never
been a time in the history of American politics when the party
in this United States has stood by a measure.  Now, the vote
the other day showed conclusively that all the Democrat
are not against us, but the policy of the majority party
is not and never has been the policy of the whole party.
We must get suffrage through the states, and I want to call
your attention to what happened when Miss Paul set forth
her policy at Mrs. Kent's house. ---------------
There are some Democrrayic members in Illinois who will vote
for suffrage if they have to, and they made this their excuse;
individually we are for suffrage, but we can't go back to our
constituents when you women go back.
*********************
Our belief differs fundamentally from yours, and we felt it
was disastrous to go out and defeat senators.  This might
not make any difference but does make an enemy of the whole
Democratic Party - - the people we must get it from if we
get it at all.  A great many individual politicians do not
-8-

welcome this movement. The minute we give them a weapon of
this kind they use it as a weapon and a shield. It is our
business to show them that the larger party believes in a different
policy from what you set forth. I want to say that in
talking with their own friends, including Mr. Henwood (?)
they say your policy is a bad policy. I have not yet found
one man in Congress - one man in the Senate - who does not think
it bad and disastrous. We are bound to make our stand clear,
because we cannot be responsible for your policy, which we consider
bad and disastrous.
[M]RS. GARDNER: I could change and state the opposite from what
Mrs. Funk has said. Some very important Democrats have said
it was a wonderful policy if we could defeat them. It would
make them sit up so that not another one would get through. -----
I found a stir of interest in the Capitol and men all said that
they admired our stand and said that the way to deal with politicians
was to pick a click and beat them. Asking a man to
sign a petition for caucus could not do it, because he had a
letter from state association saying it would be a good idea
not to have anything to do with women lobbying there. We
have had very interesting talks with newspaper men, etc.
MISS BURNS: The caucus votes show some members with us and some
against us. The vote was four Democrats against and three
Democrats for our proposal. That would show, as Mrs. Funk
said, some against and some for. The whole Committee is
bound by the action of the majority of Democratic members. 
-9-


Mr. Henry stayed away: Mr. Hugh voted against in obedience to
his Committee and only one member continued to vote for us.
That is the way the caucus decision acts. When the majority
votes their action it binds all the other members.
RS. MEDILL Mc[C]ORMIC: Your policy is to attack the Democratic Party.
Our policy is that we hold the Democratic Party responsible
and are waiting until the end of the season to make them help
us, but if we find that at the end of the season they give us
no help whatever, we shall then form our election policy
and decide how we shall act. We shall do it on the principle
that the party in power is responsible for us - then what will
you do?
We will do all we can to reduce the strength of the two parties -
Republican and Democratic. Miss Baird will check over the
whole status of the Democratic Party and see where it is we
can weaken them. They can afford to lose all we can attack
from the House and not feel the difference. 
MISS PAUL: (?)  Suppose the National feel it must come through the
states as a moral measure, through the conscience, etc. -
that is Mrs. Funk's position. You can see how it would seem
to us a mistake, and that is the difference between the Congressional
Union and the National. It is a matter of the best
method of how to proceed in Congress. 
MISS BURNS: In the states the women are entirely disfranchised
and their best line is appeal.
-10-

MISS ADAMS: The woman vote is not to be counted on in various
states as much as we think it is. They have so many other
things, suffrage does not seem paramount, and we can not get
the defeat of Democrats, even in states where women have votes.

MISS PAUL: Robinson said she was located by nine votes.
The State of Colorado it would be fearful to try to change one 
hundred votes or so; they could not do it.  I put suffrage
before the Democratic Party.  This idea of friend and foe we
do not like.  In suffrage states every one is a friend.
If we go into suffrage where we can use the vote, all of those
men are good, but one of them belongs to a party which is voting
against us.

MISS ADAMS,  Here we have Montana, Idaho, North and South Dakota
and can't get the vote in any of these states unless we get the
vote of the Democratic Party, and we are going in here to defeat
Democrats - going to ask the Democrats to give the vote
here in this state and defeat them in this state.  Do you suppose
men are going to vote for suffrage in one state if we are
over in another state, defeating Democrats in another state?

WOMAN WITH PURPLE HAT: IF you think this policy bad for the National Association,
do you not think it wise for us?

DR. SHAW: No, I would go into that state and work for the men
you were trying to defeat.

MISS PAUL:  Went to Henry asking for committee in August.
He refused.  Sent to ----- and she asked for special committee
----- promised committee for middle of August.  He expected
Keating.  It is killing our party in the West.  We would
not have got that committee excepting that Henry assured us
that we would get that committee all the press men said so-  -11-



Democratic Congressmen assured us.  Then it was announced
by the National President in the Washington papers that the
Democrats need not bother with the Congressional Union, as
it was an institution of 800 members.  If they did, it, the
National, with a following of 25,000 members, would come to
their rescue.  An editor told me that.

DR. SHAW:  You are not quoting the clipping correctly.  Had
you said anything about fighting the Democratic Party before?

MISS PAUL:  You have brought out the point that we have been
vague during the last year.  We want to be vague.  We
thought with Henry and Thomas ----- but we intended to be
frank with the Board.  We are nowhere near the November
election.  I believe we should take up one thing at a time.
When the National came in and went up and down the country
with its statement, we were obliged to come out.

DR. SHAW:  Miss Paul forgot to mention that before the National
President made any statement in Washington, she had come out
with a statement that it was the policy to defeat the Democratic
Party.  I was asked if that was the policy of the National
Association, and I said no.  What is more, I said that if
anyone attempted to defeat a woman, Democrat of Republican,
the National would help any one of them, but the policy of the
National was to defeat anyone who worked against suffrage.
Miss Paul listened to me when I gave that out as a policy.
It was reported in the Washington papers, editorials written
all over the country, and that was long before the Convention,-
and you listened (looking at Miss Paul):  Our policy would be
to defeat any man who regardless of party, persistently worked
against us and opposed our party.
-12-

MISS PAUL:  You said we should have a new bill introduced.  This was just before the new session of Congress.  I was paralyzed about a new bill being brought in.  The main thing was to save our bill.

MISS ADDAMS:  The position of Congressional Union was to defeat number of Democrats in House.

MISS DENNETT:  Democrats have no objection to fighting Democrats in our way, but that is an entirely different plan from going to states and defeating Democrats who are our friends.

BLACK HAT:  The thing for us to do here is future and not past.  I think we should make our policy clear, and that if we are clear and frank, we should make this very clear.  The bluff you admit is good.  We have three million five hundred thousand voters to whom we must go back, and if we are going to let them go on until the end of the session, we are not playing the game right.  We can carry the bluff or not, when it comes to where we say we want to defeat three senators, and if nothing is done this session, we planned to upset three Democrats.  We have not said where.  The whole thing would be taken under advisement, and the whole thing is tentative, and the Congressional Union is just as much interested as the National.  To make those Democrats feel they have not got the nerve to go back to women voters and appeal to their votes is being too humble.

MRS. FUNK:  This is a good bluff.  Women vote in Illinois.  How do you feel about this?  We are sorry that we must defeat you, but we must do it.  Where is your party?  What support can you get in Kansas?

-13-

MEMBER OF CONGRESSIONAL UNION:  The question of enfranchising their women has never come up.

MISS PAUL:  We think of course we can turn one hundred votes in such a state as Illinois as well as the National can turn them in a non-suffrage state.

MISS ADAMS:  The Congressional Union should make this ----- the National body must look at suffrage only from the point of view of its immediate effect upon Congress.  The National body must make the point clear - between the policy of the Congressional and the National.

MISS PAUL:  We believe our policy is right and have consulted men and they us.  We are right, but supposing it is wrong, now is the National going to take the position that its first duty is to kill the Union?  That during the last week has been the main idea of the National.

DR. SHAW:  We do not intend to let the Congressional Union kill us.

MRS. FITZGERALD:  It seems to me it is unnecessary to consider the question as if it were a National question.  The National is on record from its Convention as to its policy, so there is no question.  Two years ago there were hours spent on question of policy, so question of policy is not now open.

MISS PAUL:
?     Ours is actively non-partisan.  National is passably [ively] non-partisan - we defeat  a man who is in our way.

MRS. FITZGERALD:  My point is that the Board does not feel it can change a policy, even if we feel there may be a difference of interpretation; the Board feels that its policy is settled by session at the Convention.  We should get a perfect understand-

-14-

understanding from now forth as to policy of the Union, because certainly
the impression has gotten out from conversations and press
reports. If I understand you this morning, press matter has
gone out as to what is your policy. You must have an absolute
statement of what this question is, so we cannot be
quoting your policy incorrectly. It would help us all in our
work if the National Association should be given a formal statement
in writing of what is the political policy of the Congressional
Union, so it could be referred to, and in statements 
contradictory to that we could say this is a Congressional
statement as to what its policy is, and naturally we assume
they will stand by it. I think since the question arises, 
it would be suitable for the Union to send to the Board a 
signed statement. 
MISS BURNS 
SHOWS PAPER - (Argument showing statement of a political association)
- reading from paper. 
MISS FITZGERALD: Will you agree that you have no policy yet? 
You state that you have no policy. It is not a political
policy to ask for an amendment. 
WOMAN WITH THE
PURPLE HAT: If we gave out too early the fact that we were going
to defeat Democrats, it would hurt us. 
MISS RUUTZ-REES: How could the National turn round and try to change
their policy?
MISS BURNS: If you do nothing for us, it is not right to take it
for granted -----
? You have insisted that it was a policy perfectly clear
to everybody. 
-15-


MISS BURNS: The policy has been announced that if they did
nothing, we would defeat the Democrats. 
MISS RUUTZ-REES: Miss Paul says you have been trying to hide this fact. 
MISS PAUL: We tried to keep details out. 
MISS BURNS: ----- Remember we have so many women voters. 
To the public we say, of course they will help us. We ask them
to help us. We look to them to help us, but if they don't
help us we shall try to defeat them. 
MISS FITZGERALD: The policy has been known for a year past; the policy
will not be determined for a year. 
MISS DENNETT: There is a definite statement in suffrage -----
which is message to public definitely saying that it is the
policy of the Congressional Union to take the fight into the
suffrage states and defeat suffragists there. 
MISS BURNS: Miss Paul does not want to bring it in that we are
going to fight Democrats. We print in the paper that we are
only going to fight Democrats if they don't help us. (Excerpt
read from Miss Paul's speech at Miss Kent's) "of course, we
hope that this may not be necessary". "We feel quite sure 
that it will not be, because there will be ample time before
Congress adjourns to pass the amendment, and there is every
hope that this action will be taken, but if they don't, we
will do all we can to defeat the members of the Democratic
Party."
MISS RUUTZ-REES: Two points of a stick. 
DR. SHAW: The National never held anybody responsible, except
those who vote against us. You cannot separate yourselves from 
the Congressional Committee.
-16-

MISS PAUL: As we get nearer to the time, we will get more and
more specific, but now we should be vague. 
MISS FITZGERALD: I still feel quite incompetent to make clear just
what your policy is. I feel we should have an authorized
statement of the policy of the Union and beyond this we are
assured that the Union has no other policy. 
DR. SHAW: Miss Paul has said she was the Union. 
MRS. MEDILL McCORMICK: We should make a move that we should have a signed
statement by Executive Committee of Congressional Union so 
we can publish or quote it, if we are asked a verbatim 
statement as to policy of the Congressional Union. 
STRANGER (?) Where was statement made that Miss Paul said she was
the Union ----- Chance of proving it true or untrue. 
(Discussion about Miss Paul's statement). 
MISS PAUL: Everyone has told us about reports from the National 
Board (which we are told come from the Board). From our
point of view they are not true. I wonder if we could wait
until Miss Allen comes back, because we have never met you
before and probably shall never do so again. I ask to come
before this Board after the Convention. 
DR. SHAW: Didn't we summon you for a statement of your plans?
MISS PAUL: We thought you called us to make some proposition to
us. 
DR. SHAW: You would not state your plans, and what was stated
was entirely contrary to the whole work of the association. 
MISS PAUL: Until we were asked to meet the National, we could
as a Congressional Committee say nothing. 
-17


MISS PAUL: On Monday I said to Mrs. Dennett and Miss Ruutz-Rees - 
wish we could meet in Washington. Think I said to
Mrs. Dennett that I would come up here to New York to a meeting, 
because we should like to, and Mrs. Dennett, said not to
come to the meeting, as that would not come to our difficulties. 
MRS. FITZGERALD: said not to come to meeting at the first, as we
should not be ready for you until the next day, and we should
notify you. 
MISS PAUL: I was told not to come, and we were not notified
as to any subsequent meeting. It was on Monday that I met
Mrs. Dennett, and she said don't come. 
MRS. DENNETT: The first day; the next day you were telephoned. 
MISS PAUL: Mrs. Stanley telephoned and said you wished me to 
come out to Greenwich, because you represented the Board.
MISS RUUTZ-REES: It is true that I said I wanted to go through the
files, and that is why I hoped you would not have the meeting
in Washington. 
DR. SHAW: You reported that you had no opportunity to state
your policy, etc., and when we telephoned you, we waited two
days for you to come, and then Miss Burns -----
MISS PAUL (?): Asked to come on to Boston, was told not to. She 
said come later. Ruutz-Rees telephoned to come and have interview;
had no idea Board was meeting in order because we
were friendly, to get our point of view. Some time before
Saturday Mrs. Stanley McCormick was going West. Telephoned 
Wednesday would come on Thursday, and on Wednesday night I was
called up on long distance by Mrs. McCormick to take next train,
-18-

and Miss Burns to take next train. Miss Burns went.
DR. SHAW: Did you suppose the Board could wait all week for
you to come?
MISS RUUTZ-REES: I said I hoped you could come next afternoon as the
Board could not wait longer.
DR. SHAW: It is pretty hard for us to have it reported that
you had no chance to speak before the Board, after the Board
waiting two days.
MISS PAUL: I felt we should discuss future. Is your disapproval
of our policy so profound that it must drive you to attempt
to destroy us? Our devotion to our policy does not lead us
to destroy you, where as your disapproval of us leads you to destroy
us.
(?): (Can we adjourn)
DR. SHAW: I don't want this discussion to go on in my absence,
and we have a lot of business to attend to, if we can only reach
a point.
MISS BENEDICT: I object to your statement, but if I can speak 
fairly freely – I think themembers of the Board will
agree that we have tried to keep out of any publicity of difference
between Congressional and National, and any statement 
made has been forced from us in connection with things previously
stated in the Press. It seems to us that the Union, either
purposely or unintentionally, through unwise press activity,
that the case was exactly reversed, and that you were trying
to injure us, and we have only made such few statements as we
have made where we were driven to it, and it is evident that
each of us feels injured by press publicity and can we not
stop press publicity?

-19-


MISS PAUL: We have never given forth any statements.
DR. SHAW: You called the President a nice little old woman.
MRS. FITZGERALD: Even such signed statements as have been given out 
have been given out when we have been cornered, because of
something previously given to press. I know stories are
picked up, but the fact remains that we have felt that the
press was being utilized for our damage, whether purposely
or not.
MISS PAUL: This statement of Mrs. Funk's "militant organization"
– press men come in to us and say, what comment have 
you to make? and we say nothing yet.
DR. SHAW: No signed statements have ever been given out by us.
MISS PAUL: Will you show us any press clippings. I do not
think there is one press clipping, excepting the one I read
to you.
MRS. DENNETT: We assume responsibility for our Congressional
Committee.
MISS PAUL: We have these press clippings here in great number.
DR. SHAW: Miss Paul said she could not divide the report, and
you say the whole work of the year is under -----
We ask Miss Paul to turn over to the Congressional Committee
the things belonging to the Congressional Committee.
Miss Paul replied she was willing to co-operate with Mrs.
McCormick. We asked her to turn over the things belonging
to National Committee. In your paper you advertise the sale
and fact that you have on hand the reports from the hearing
last year. The reports of the Association belong to the

-20-

National Association, and not to the Congressional Union.
Miss Paul stated that everything belonged to the Congressional
Union. That is an absolutely wrong position for Miss Paul
to take, and her statement is not correct. Miss Paul stated
that the furniture was given to the Union, and that the typewriters
were loaned, and yet we find a bill in her report
of $158.00 for furniture and bill for typewriters, and this
statement does not square up.
MISS PAUL: When Mrs. McCormick came I went through our files
and showed her where they all were - everything we had accumulated.
Then when it came to the actual equipment we
had absolutely no money. Mrs. Kent loaned the bookcases;
Mrs. Wiley loaned desk. Everything has been loaned to us
and until after the season was over we bought no furniture ---
DR. SHAW: You were the Congressional Committee at that time?
You then sent out appeals in the name of Congressional Committee.
MISS PAUL: There was a duplicator that was sent down by
Mrs. Dennett and she did not take it, so we telephoned to
Mrs. Funk, and she said she did. There is one desk.
Those are the only things we can possibly transfer, even
the rooms have been given by a member. There is one thing
we did buy during the year - letter-files - that was bought
quite late and not with Congressional Committee money.
All I can say is that we offered her everything we could.
As for absolute concrete things, we cannot take up things
which do not belong to us.
-21-

MRS. DENNETT: Suppose I worked here in this office for a year, and
during part of the year I organized an association of volunteer
workers, the purpose of which was to assist. Suppose at the
end of the year I gave up the work and was not re-elected.
When my successor came into the office, would I be justified to
take the correspondence to the new association which I had
formed and say to my successor, "You can look at my files, but
I have nothing to hand over to you"
MISS PAUL: We are perfectly willing to hand over copies of our files.
MRS. DENNETT: You are responsible Chairmen of the National Association,
and it does not belong to the Congressional Union.
DR. SHAW: It is National business.
MISS PAUL: We will give you copies. We want copies for our 
own protection. I would like to take up this question of 
money: what is the accusation?
MRS. FITZGERALD: Each of us assumed that anything appearing in the 
press has been deliberately put in by the other side, but
each denies it. You say that so many of the things in the
press to which we object have not been put in by you - well,
that is all right.
MISS PAUL: We ask to see them.
MRS. FITZGERALD: Various things have been said which you deny.
Well, that is all right. Here is this article in this morning's
Tribune which you assume was given out by this office,
except the small ----- which is to call for the May demonstration.
It quotes Mrs. Stanley McCormick who did not give the interview.
-22-

That includes a statement of the conference this morning and
absolutely no mention of the fact has been given out from this 
office, and we were perfectly dumbfounded to find they knew 
it. We must remember the facts and not assume on one side.
MRS. MEDILL McCORMICK: A newspaper man asked me yesterday if there had been
any meetings of the Congressional Committee.
MRS. STANLEY McCORMICK: I was asked if the National had had a financial report 
from the Congressional Union in regard to their financial
operations during the year, and I said we had not.
MISS PAUL: I received a letter from a woman in Washington I
never head of - Reed - signs herself as chairman of some committee.
She said whereas no report has been made as to
funds ----- I said what makes you say this, and she said: 
Mrs. Stanly McCormick said that she had twice during the 
year handed in her resignation in Washington, because she
did not want her reputation sullied because she could not het
arreport. Mrs. Allender has been told by Dr. Shaw that
there has been great carelessness as to money. I know that
on the platform it had been voted that this money go to the
National Treasurer, and Mrs. Stanley McCormick said she never
had been able to get any money or report.
DR. SHAW TO
MISS PAUL: Was my statement correct?
MISS PAUL: Yes ----- Why should you say that to the Convention
before saying anything to the Committee? On Dec. 5th I
received a letter from Mrs. Dennett about money (Miss Paul
reads letter aloud) Please verify this letter, as Mrs. Medill
McCormick said I could not even be trusted to read letters
correctly.
-23-

(Reads letter)- Did not have any further letters
printed until further discussion with the Board.
On Dec. 16th letter from Mary Ware Dennett.
We had in the meantime collected $1300.00 in pledges,
that is the second letter we received just after we
had been appointed. On that same day I wrote a report
to the National Board, of which I have a carbon,
and in this report we stated: (quotes letter)
"In the nine days since we received
notice of our appointment, etc."------------
As a result of that letter we received a telegram
from Chicago, Illinois, from Mary Ware Dennett:
"National Board endorses -- Mrs. Black,
money collected to be -- National Treasurer --"
MISS PAUL TO
MISS RUUTZ-REES: I think you said Miss Ruutz-Rees that
we were to account to the National Board but not to send them money.
MISSPAUL: Next communication was in reference to
finance. Mrs. McCormick is expected every day
and as soon as she returns she will advise you what
shall be --. You will of course need a certain
amount of cash." A letter from Mrs. McCormick
as soon as she did come back (Miss Paul reads letter)
That is the only letter I have ever received from
Mrs. Stanley McCormick. I wrote January 28th the
reply to her.
-24-

"I have just received your letter regarding the financial
side -- two representatives of District of Columbia, asking
that the work should be done by the joint effort of the
District of Columbia, myself as Chairman --- giving your
letter to Miss Gillette; she is expecting full report.
In this account I deposited the money before the procession
was decided upon. This small sum has been exhausted.
All money now received against it --------"

MISS PAUL: I supposed she would say it was satisfactory or unsatisfactory.
I heard nothing and assumed she acquiesced.
After the procession was over we met and discusses finances,
and gave report to Miss Gillette and were told Mrs. Bailey
was  new treasurer and we never received any insinuation that
our financial arrangement was unsatisfactory. Our position
was this: If you were not satisfied with the arrangement
when we put it to you you could have said so. Now Mrs. Baird
has itemized -- I handled about 800.  If we had known we were
being viewed with suspicion, we should have had the books
audited. ---

DR. SHAW: I stated that the money should come through the
National treasury.  I am not the Treasurer of the Association
If the Board disapproved of our action --- I thought they
acquiesced because we received no letter.

MRS. DENNETT:  ---------- Miss Paul claimed just now that since
Mrs. McCormick did not write back saying the Board did not
accept it.  It is a poor rule that won't work both ways.
We understood she accepted them and had no word that she did
not accept them until she announced them on the platform.
-25-


Miss Paul never said we do not accept your instructions.
I remember what Mrs. McCormick said when she received that
letter -- "They are doing the thing their own way; they are
unbusinesslike, but enthusiastic so we will let them alone."

MISS PAUL:  We had a very businesslike treasurer ----
We made that report in April.  As far as we knew there was
no meeting until September.

DR. SHAW:  If you took the Congressional Committee name to
raise your money, why did you raise the money in the name of
the Congressional Committee and National?  Because it was
used for Congressional Committee work, the money should have
been reported to the Congressional Committee.

MISS PAUL:   We put the money in the hands of the Treasurer,
Mrs. Bailey.  Everything is in the report.  When I went
down there I did not know a soul in Washington.  Opened account
in my own name.  About the 2nd of January we got Miss
Gillette; she kept it until we got Mrs. Bailey; then Mrs.
Bailey and Mrs. Lockwood kept it, and there was one
Board meeting to which we did not send a report.

DR. SHAW:  We want a statement from the Union.

[MRS. DENNETT] The Board during the whole year did not think there
[*?*]  was anything dishonorable on the part of Miss Paul.  The
thing said was - people of enthusiastic type like Miss Paul -
we must put up with them where disorderly, so she let it go.
At the Convention there was no attach made upon the honor of
Miss Paul.  Mrs. McCormick said she was embarrassed.  Not a
word came out in newspapers until several weeks after the Convention
-26-

convention.  If there had been any attack, surely the newspapers, 
if they were going to make a story of it, would have 
done so instantly.  That story was saved over until several
weeks later when the new Committee had been appointed.  At
that time I was called up and said:  I have been given a story 
on an attack that has been made on Miss Paul as to her treatment 
of financial matters.  I said that is not true and gave 
him the names of the new committee.  Why was the story saved over 
several weeks?
STRANGER (?): Newspaper man called on me and said what does 
Mrs. McCormick mean, and Mrs. Stubbs implored them to keep 
it back.  They said they would until ---- when the new 
committee was formed and show there was something wrong. 
That was the reason it did not come out at once.  Mrs. Stubbs
used her influence. 
MISS PAUL: Is there some hidden thing which you are cherishing 
against us.  Mrs. Medill McCormick and Mrs. Stanley McCormick 
insist upon going around the country and saying there is. 
DR. SHAW: Shall we adjourn?  If it is desired that we go
 on with this discussion, we must go on. 
(?): Mrs. Allendale tells me she was told by Dr. Shaw
this Congressional Union must be broken up.  That National 
Treasurer and National President saying these things about us
----
DR SHAW: I said I would do everything in my power, and I shall
to prevent the policy of the Congressional Union from interfering 
with the National Association in the work of all these
-27-


years.
BENEDICT: Does the board support you in that?
DR. SHAW: I am speaking for myself. 
MISS PAUL: Can we say there is nothing at the bottom of this, 
or not?
DR. SHAW: I made a statement on the platform that you had
not made a report to the National.
MRS. DENNETT: I suggest the Board write to Miss Paul stating they 
had never questioned Miss Paul's honor and leave it to her to 
publish that letter if she wishes. 
(?) Why does it seem wise to you to make a statement
in the Convention?  Why was it wise to bring it out in
public before having said anything.
MRS. McCORMICK: I wrote exactly what you have heard read to you, 
asking for their co-operation in establishing a system of 
accounts between my office and theirs.  I got the answer
which I think should have made it clear to everybody that
there was not going to be any systematic account.  At the
end of that letter of Miss Paul's she states that she had 
made an account in her own name and deposited some money.  
And that is not a report, and unless it can be put on a businesslike 
basis ---- we cannot run accounts in that way.  
I laid the matter before the Board and asked if we should go 
on and try to do it in a businesslike way, and we came to the 
conclusion to let them do it in their own way, and at the end
of the year we could have an account.  At the Convention(you
know the Treasurer is accountable to the Convention) I had
received no report, although I had asked them to send a report
-28-

port through Mrs. Dennett.
MISS SHAW: We asked for a report of the Congressional Committee, not the report of the Congressional Union.
MISS HEPBURN (?): The only thing I protest is that with the Washington women working as hard as we do --- Mrs. Funk made statement that a great many people were giving money when they did not know to whom it was given.
MRS. FITZGERALD: Of course there were two letter-heads used. A great many people have said they thought they were giving to the Congressional Committee.
MISS BURNS: This statement has been sent out by Dr. Shaw which said to put it briefly that the members of the Congressional Committee last year who were asked to become members of the Congressional Committee this year, refused to do this, and refused to co-operate with the members of the present committee and are following to a disastrous point. -------------
MISS PAUL: I learned through the newspapers that I was no longer on the Committee. I came up to see - Miss Baird and I went down together to see. As we understood the situation we were asked to remain on the Committee. We wanted to know who the Chairman was, who the other members were, what was the policy. On those three points we were refused information and were told the Board would settle these matters. It appeared in the newspapers that the new committee had been appointed, and we said we could not go on the committee when

-29-



we didn't know anything about it. When we knew, Mrs. McCormick met all of us and made a proposition to us. We want to show you our point of view.
MRS. DENNETT: ********** First, Miss ------, that the National Board should cause to slander her. Second, that the National Board let the Congressional Committee absolutely alone. Third, that the Chairman of the Committee be allowed to appoint the other members of the committee. -----------------
MISS BURNS: Mrs. Medill McCormick has intimated, as I understand it that she has power to write a letter without submitting it to the Board.
MISS PAUL: ------------- We refused to serve because we could not find out what the policy was.
MRS. MEDILL McCORMICK: When I was first made chairman and went to Washington, my understanding was that I was offered the position of secretary and treasurer on the new committee, and Miss Burns chairman. I discussed the proposition in Chicago and understood that Miss Burns had refused to be chairman of the committee, but had not decided whether she would or would not be a member of the committee. Then Miss Addams and Miss Shaw asked to talk with me, and I went to Washington and talked with Miss Burns and Miss Paul (Miss Burns still considering). Then Dr. Shaw, Mrs. Dennett and I saw them two or three minutes and next morning we met and it was agreed almost immediately that we should ask Miss Burns to come over. A long conversation ensued, after which we all agreed Mrs. Gilson Gardner should come down. In the first conversations I had with members of the National Board, as

-30-

Miss Paul had refused to be a member of the committee, 
Miss Burns had refused to be chairman but had not decided. 
whether she would be a member of the committee.
MISS BURNS:   No I had written I would be a member of the Committee 
and stated "I will also be a member of the Congressional 
Committee and will be active". The letter stated that 
the general impression has gone abroad that we refused to 
serve, and then refused to act in co-operation. I wrote 
saying I would be a member of the Congressional Committee 
and would also serve on the Congressional Union. I received 
no answer to this letter and conferred with Mrs. McCormick, 
Mrs. Dennett and Miss Shaw. I asked Dr. Shaw - am I a member 
of the Congressional Committee. Dr. Shaw made no answer. 
Mrs. McCormick said yes you are. Received from Dr. Shaw 
this message: Will you accept membership on Congressional Committee without condition? Then learned they were to 
be separated - Congressional Union and Committee. I was on 
the point of writing Dr. Shaw that I would be - then I learned 
the personnel of the committee would be changed.
MRS. MEDILL McCORMICK:    Mrs. Dennett had your letter and you made a condition 
upon which you would be a member of the Congressional Committee. 
After our discussion at the Shorem (?) it was decided by 
Miss Shaw, Miss Burns, Mrs. Dennett and myself that Miss Burns 
should ask the members of the Executive Congressional Committee 
to meet with me and discuss a co-operative plan.

-31-


The individuals who had been asked to be members of the National 
Congressional Committee were Miss Burns, Mrs. Gilson 
Gardner, Miss Paul (who had declined), Mrs. Baird, so that 
when we met to confer we were all individuals who had been 
appointed by the National Board to serve on the same National 
Committee. I had accepted the chairmanship; Mrs. Gardner 
and Miss Burns had not yet decided. The reason you did 
not get your answer was that we wanted to thrash out your 
condition. Now the Board had not met, so Miss Shaw and 
Mrs. Dennett could not say, and it was because of the condition 
you made in accepting your condition on that committee 
that the idea was suggested that you come again and thrash 
out the joint working policy which could be presented to the 
Board apropos of your condition so that the National Board 
could meet and decide once for all upon the policy of both 
Union and Committee. Now, wasn't that it?
MISS PAUL: However, let it go.
MISS ADDAMS: The Board did not want to change the personnel, but 
did want to change chairman. We very reluctantly changed.
MISS BURNS: I understood it was the intention of the Board to 
change and separate Union and Committee.
DR. SHAW: The National constitution makes the conditions.
MRS. FITZGERALD: It had always been your custom to suggest members 
of the Committee.
MRS. MEDILL McCORMICK: We spent three or four days in thrashing out a joint 
proposition - boiled down it was this: * * * * * * * * * * * * *
 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

-32-

We met and discussed these plans, and now to the very best of my ability and memory, this was what was put in writing and four copies given to the Congressional Union.
I was trying to thrash out two things in my mind --- and of course, it would be kept in mind that anything we agreed to do had to be adopted by the National Board, so I was only noting as agent for the National Board in order to thrash out the situation. Here was the Congressional Union, which had been decided by the Convention, the same person could not be president of the Congressional Union and at the same time chairman of the National Congressional Committee.
Therefore, there would be two heads - two distinct officers in Washington. Now then, it remains that the Congressional Union was going to lobby and the National Congressional Committee was going to lobby, but what I was trying to do was to see how I could do this work with maximum efficiency, minimum expense, and with the closest co-operation. The only reason I had in my mind all the time. Now I finally worked out this proposition: that the work in Washington should be divided into four departments, namely: lobbying at the Capitol, organization, publicity and press work.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

-33-



MISS BURNS: The point of difference --- Mrs. McCormick has stated her conditions. First about point of organization. It was true she proposed this; that in those states where no adequate response was met the Congressional Union should get in. About lobbying, they wish. to carry on lobbying, but the policy is to be National. Press work divided between us, but policy approved by National Board; that is, the press bureau paid half by us, but policy dictated by National Board. Lobbyist instructed by National Board, and in those places where we sent organizer to report to National. Miss Paul said it was a tribute to our unselfishness! We made contrary proposal. In all those states where adequate responses were made we will not organize but we will organize where there is no response but our organizer shall come under our direction. We will report on state after our work is done and do no more, and not organize. We asked Mrs. McCormick if she would join the Congressional Union and said we were glad to join her Congressional Committee and thought we would work together and know what each was doing and thought combination of committees would reach harmonious policies and follow them. We put this up to Mrs. McCormick.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 
Mrs. Medill McCormick: I was committing the Association to a policy which was not approved by their Board. I represent the Board and was there as its agent and did not think I should agree to a joint committee plan which did not go to the National Board for its approval or disapproval.

-34-

PAUL:      It is not quite fair to send out circular letter giving proposed
proposition and setting forth rocks on which we split.
BURNS:    Mrs. Medill McCormick said that we must cooperate or nothing.
The final decision is up to the National Board.  We discussed as
two different associations.  Executive Committee could say we will
do so and so.
PAUL:      Am I to go on and pack this committee?
DR. SHAW:  I do not think the National can cooperate with you in anything;
if we do we shall be held responsible.

-o0o-

-35-

Two Contrasted Policies

The Congressional Union for Woman Suffrage is about to organize branches in Massachusetts and several other States. The suffragists of these States will therefore have before them very shortly the question whether to join it or not.

The Congressional Union exists for the purpose of carrying the nation-wide amendment for woman suffrage -- the so-called Susan B. Anthony amendment. With the exception of some Southern suffragists, who object to it on the ground of State's rights, practically all the suffragists of the United States would be glad to see this amendment carried. The National American Woman Suffrage Association has been working for it for many years, and with added vigor of late, since the enfranchisement of women in a large group of western States has caused the measure to be regarded in Congress with serious respect.

In their object, the National Association and the Congressional Union are at one. The main difference between them is one of method.

The National Association believes in a non-partisan policy, in the sense that it makes its appeal to all parties, believing that the votes of the justice-loving men in all parties will be needed to carry the measure. It opposes no party, as such, but opposes candidates who are opposed to equal suffrage, no matter to what party they belong.

The leaders of the Congressional Union, on the other hand, are profoundly convinced that the way to carry woman suffrage is to force whichever national party happens to be in power to make it a party question in Congress; and that the way to do this is to get the women of the enfranchised States to vote against that party's candidates for Congress, no matter what the candidates' own views on suffrage may be, until the party surrenders.

This anti-party policy has met with much disapproval among the suffragists. Organizers of the Congressional Union say that the Union is not at present opposing any party. But that is only because we are now in the interval between Congressional elections. They did it last year, and undoubtedly mean to do it next year, unless the nation-wide suffrage amendment should get the necessary two-thirds vote in the incoming Congress, and pass. Miss Alice Paul is the unquestioned leader of the Union, by her talents, her earnestness, and her personal power. Whatever line she takes, the Council of the Union is pretty sure to follow. Miss Paul is devoted to this anti-party policy, has argued for it again and again in the Union's organ, The Suffragist, and does not profess to have undergone any change of view in regard to it. No one should join the Union who does not believe in its anti-party policy, for that is what its members will infallibly find themselves again committed to as soon as the next Congressional elections come on.

The National Association has generally asked Congress not only for the Susan B. Anthony amendment, but for some subsidiary measures as well. Of some of these subsidiary measures Miss Anthony was her-


Two Contrasted Policies -2-

self a warm advocate. A new one, evolved within the last two years by the National's Congressional Committee, called the Shafroth amendment, has been the object of much criticism. Effort for this amendment has now been dropped. The Congressional Union works for the Susan B. Anthony amendment only.

Last, but not least, the National Association favors the effort to get more suffrage States, and means to aid the campaigns in such as are hopeful; while the leaders of the Congressional Union believe that there are already suffrage States enough to force the nation-wide suffrage amendment through Congress, and that it is wiser to concentrate all effort upon Congress than to try to get any more states.

Miss Alice Paul is reported in the New York Tribune of Nov. 8 as saying that the outcome of this year's four campaigns has "demonstrated the futility of the State by State method."

Eight States have given the women the ballot within the past six years, through the State by State method. Two exceedingly difficult and exceedingly important ones came very near doing it this Fall -- New York and Pennsylvania. The outcome, instead of showing the futility of trying to carry separate States, shows that even States which were long regarded as impossible have now come to the very verge of success.

Both the National Association and the Congressional Union mean to push the nation-wide suffrage amendment in Congress with all their might. No one needs to go outside of the National Association in order to work for that amendment. But, if it does not pass between now and June, nothing could give it so great a "boost" as the carrying of Iowa.
A. S. B.

From The Woman's Journal, November 13, 1915.

COMPARISON OF THE POLICY OF THE NATIONAL AMERICAN WOMAN SUFFRAGE ASSOCIATION AND OF THE CONGRESSIONAL UNION.

---------

THE POLICY OF THE NATIONAL AMERICAN WOMAN SUFFRAGE ASSN.

The policy of the National American Woman Suffrage Association is absolutely non-partisan, as established by the constitution which has governed it for half a century. The same policy was reaffirmed by the unanimous adoption of a similar article in the constitution recently adopted at the last national convention in Washington in December, 1913. The convention was composed of representative women from practically every action of the United States.
This non-partisan policy means that the women shall neither endorse nor condem any party. It means that suffrage shall be won by the co-operation of all parties alike; that members of every political party shall be solicited, as individuals, to support suffrage. In every one ot the ten suffrage states, suffrage has been won by the co-operation of all parties.
The National Congressional Committee's policy is to hold individuals responsible.

----------------------

THE POLICY OF THE CONGRESSIONAL UNION.

The policy of the Congressional Union, as stated by Miss Paul and Mrs. Beard before the National Board at the meeting of Feb. 11, 1914, held in New York, is "to hold the Democratic party, being the party in power, responsible." Miss Paul



further elucidated that it was the policy and intention of the Union to go out and defeat any and all Democrats in their power 'if the Democratic party fails to pass the pending suffrage amendment at this session of Congress." This policy is to apply even to those Democrats who favored us in the recent Democratic caucus and who favor suffrage both at home and in Congress. It would apply also to Democrats who may have previously, in their state legislatures, voted for suffrage or who helped pass suffrage in the suffrage states. The policy maintains that the sole reason for defeating a man, if suffrage fails, is that he is a member of "the party in power," in other words, the Democratic party. This is the reiterated policy, stated verbally and in the press, of the Congressional Union.

-------- ooooo  --------

- 2 -

Alternative Plans for Congressional Work presented by vote of the Board oto Miss Burns by Miss Ruutz-Rees on Dec. 11, together with comments made by Miss Burns. Plan No I was proposed by Mrs. Breckinridge, plan No. II by Mrs. McCormick with details by other members.
________________________________________

I

Whereas the work of the Congressional Union is an integral part of the work of the National Congressional Committee, and whereas whatever suffrage work is undertaken with reference to Congressional action is by the public inevitably considered as work of the National Association we therefore ask that reports of work done and work planned by the Congressional Union (which is so closely interrelated to the National Congressional Committee) be submitted thro the National Congressional Committee with the understanding
I. That no money be raised by the Congressional Union in the name of the National Association without the knowledge and consent of the National Treasurer. 
II. No organizer shall be sent into a state for Congressional work without the consent and cooperation of the presidents of State Associations.
III. And that the Congressional Union shall print its own stationery and that the official stationery of the National American Woman Suffrage Association be used only in case of definite committee business and never for raising money.
(Miss Burns does not think this would be acceptable to Miss Paul)

II

That the National Congressional Committee and the



2

Congressional Union be separated in name.
(Would hate to change name of Congressional Union. But Miss B. would take point up with Miss P. Might have been done earlier)
Separate headquarters and separate stationery.
(Agreeable to this)
That the Chairman of the National Congressional Committee be not the President of the Union.
(Could not answer. Would like to consider it. Can't really tell what Miss P's attitude would be. Would herself think it feasible)
That there be no money raising in the name of the National Congressional Committee except for strictly committee business.
(Agreeable)
Account of the National Congressional Committee shall be rendered thro' the National Treasurer.
(Agreeable)
The financial report of the National Treasurer shall contain a report of the donations of the Congressional Union to the National Congressional Committee.
( Idea Acceptable, but would substitute "report of all funds of the Congressional Committee)
That a member of the National Congressional Committee shall report personally to all regular Board meetings.
(Agreeable)
That plans undertaken by the National Congressional Committee involving the policy of National Association be submitted to the National Board.
(agreeable)

3

     That Press bulletins involving the policy of the National
Association be not issued without approval by the authorized 
representative of the National Board.
     (Idea all right but impracticable and indefinite. Would never
wish to make statement of policy without consulting Nations. Would 
carefully supervise Press bulletins. Realize the principle is essential
and would do utmost to stand by it)
     That money for headquarters and office staff of one or more 
be supplied by the N.A.W.S.A.
     (Personally Miss B. would think it might be arranged. Must
discuss with Miss Paul. Think it not insuperable.)
     That Congressional work in the states is work of the 
National Congressional Committee (Work of this kind is for the
National Association to decide upon) and not of the Congressional
Union. (This would appear inconsistent with the other provisions. 
Because idea of other provisions is that Congressional Union is an 
affiliated society which would have to consider itself what action
would be necessary in future.)

Congressional Unions vs
Natl Congressional Committee
nawsa 1913

plan of work

Ridgefield, Conn.,
August 10th, 1915.
National American Woman suffrage Association,
505 Fifth Ave., New York City.
Dear Friends:
The copy of the resolutions enclosed herewith is sent in
accordance with vote passed at a meeting of The Ridgefield Equal
Franchise League held August 4th, 1915.
These resolutions were to have gone forward with [a] check
for $50.00 but as the corresponding Secretary is absent and I am unable
to get in communication with the Treasurer send them directly to you,
Sincerely
Edna Winkinan
(Mrs. D. W. Winkinan
Recording Secretary.
Ridgefield Equal Franchise League


Ridgefield Conn.
August 4th, 1915.
National American Woman suffrage Association,
505 Fifth Ave., New York City.
Dear Friends:
The Ridgefield Equal Franchise League voted at a meeting
held August 4th, 1915 to indorse the following resolutions, a copy of
which to-gether with a copy of the resolution, adopted at the meeting
June 2nd to be forwarded to the N.A.W.S.A.
Resolved, (a) That the National Executive Council considers that it
is inconsistent and unsuitable for members of the Official Boards
of the affiliated associations to be members of the Congressional
Union, or any other suffrage organization whose policies have been
found to be in opposition to the policies of the National American 
Woman suffrage Association; (b) and that we recommend to the affiliated
associations that thay shall not permit their organization machinery
to be used in co-operation with the activities of such opposing
suffrage organizations.
Resolutions adopted by National Executive Council, Chicago, June 6.

Resolved: That The Equal Franchise League of Ridgefield will stand
loyal to the National American Woman Suffrage Association and in support
of that resolution will send the amount of $50.00 pledged at the National convention.

Respectfully submitted
Edna Winkinan
(Mrs D. W. Winkian)
Recording secretary Ridgefield Equal Franchis League

August 11th,

Mrs. D. W. Workman,
Ridgefield,
Connecticut.

My dear Mrs. Workman:

In the absence of all members of the Official Board
today, I am writing to acknowledge with thanks the copy of the resolutions
passed by the Ridgefield Equal Franchise Association, which I am sure the
National Board will be gratified to receive.

Very truly yours,

Mrs. Charles Forster Camp.
Executive Secretary.

C-B



RICAN WOMAN SUFFRAGE ASSOCIATION 
ERNATIONAL WOMAN SUFFRAGE ALLIANCE AND OF NATIONAL COUNCIL OF WOMEN 
HONORARY PRESIDENT
DR. ANNA HOWARD SHAW
3RD VICE-PRESIDENT 
MISS ESTHER G. OGDE 
RECORDING SECRETARY
MRS. THOMAS JEFFERSON SMITH
LOUISVILLE, KENTUCKY
[?]
TREASURER 
MRS. HENRY WADE ROGERS
1ST AUDITOR
MISS HELOISE MEYER
1626 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE, WASHINGTON D.C.
[?]
CORRESPONDING SECRETARY
MRS. FRANK J. SHULER
2ND AUDITOR
MRS. PATTIE RUFFNER JACOBS
ALTAMONT ROAD, BIRMINGHAM, ALA. 
[?] SUFFRAGE 
PANY, INC
YORK
NATIONAL HEADQUARTERS 
171 MADISON AVENUE 
NEW YORK
TELEPHONE, 4818 MURRAY HILL
CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE
CHAIRMAN
MRS. MAUD WOOD PARK
HEADQUARTERS
1626 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE, WASHINGTON D.C.
July 11, 1917.
[D?]ear Madam President:-
So many requests have come into Headquarters for a statement for Press purposes of the difference in policy of the National American Woman Suffrage Association and the Woman's Party, that we have made a copy of a letter to the Birmingham (Ala.) News. This was written by Mrs. Pattie Ruffner Jacobs, 2nd auditor of our association, and was sent at the time that the Woman's party was attempting to organize in Alabama. We are sending this to State Presidents hoping that it may be of value to them and to workers in local communities where such question may arise. 
Faithfully yours,
Nettie R. Shuler
(Mrs. Frank J. Shuler)
Corresponding Secretary


Copy of a letter from Mrs. Jacobs to the Press defining the difference between the National American Woman Suffrage Association and the Woman's Party

There are two distinct and separate national organizations of suffragists in America; one is the National American Woman Suffrage Association, with affiliated branches in every state in the Union, and locals in every congressional district; the other is the Woman's party, a newer group of comparatively few women, so-called militants. The policies and methods of work of the two associations are entirely different, although both are, of course, working for the same end, namely, the enfranchisement of women. 
The National Association has more than two million members; its officers are Dr. Anna Shaw and Mrs. Carrie C. Catt. This Association believes in working for the ballot by both the State and Federal routes: it is absolutely and consistently non-partisan, and it is the organization with which Alabama suffragists have been affiliated since their beginning.
The Woman's Party (whose workers are now in our midst and who are expecting to organize a branch in Alabama) is headed by Miss Alice Paul. The Party advocates only the Federal way of getting the ballot: is partisan in practice; is responsible for the banner being displayed in the House of Representatives during Presidents Wilson's addresses; for picketing the White House; it believes in "holding the party in power responsible for the passage of the Federal Amendment by Congress." This anti-party policy has resulted in several things; it has swerved to antagonize the Democrats (the party in power), from President Wilson down to the individual democratic Congressmen; in its practical application it has meant that when the Woman's Party toured the Western States where women vote, they not only campaigned vigorously against Mr. Wilson's re-election, but against the re-election for any democrats to Congress Now, the suffragists know that in the Senate and House there are many Democrats who have not only been lifelong believers in suffrage, but who have worked and voted for the Federal Amendment. To the Woman's party, however, the individual Congressman's record and vote on suffrage makes not a whit of difference, their only reason for marking him for defeat being that he is a Democrat, belongs to the party in power, hence must not return to Washington. Of course, the reading public is aware of how little effect the campaign against President Wilson's re-election had in influencing the Western women's votes, for it was their votes which kept him in the White House!
If a branch of the Woman's Party is organized in Alabama, naturally such branch will be expected to advocate the definite policies of the Executive Committee of which Miss Paul is Chairman, and to work actively against the re-election to Congress of any Alabama Democrat; or it may be that local women will no be asked to defeat the Democrats until after they receive their enfranchisement at the hands of the Democrats! There being practically no other but the Democratic Party in the State, it is not difficult to forsee political hari-kari awaiting any such group of suffrage logicians in Alabama.
But aside from the point of whether or not Alabama women approve or disapprove of the policies of the Woman's Party, another consideration must outweigh, it would seem, and that is the waste of energy and effort in maintaining two suffrage organizations, both working for the Federal Amendment.

-2-

The Suffragists are pledged to the principle of conservation
as well as the practice of elimination of waste. So much has appeared
in the press concerning these two things, especially in
reference to the food situation, that there would seem to be no
further necessity to call to the attention of the patriotic women
of Alabama their duty in these matters. But what does not at the
moment appear to be equally clear is the conservation of their 
energies and resources and the elimination of wasted effort in
securing the ballot.

For six years the Alabama Suffrage Association has been
actively at work endeavoring to obtain the vote, by means of a 
Federal Amendment through Congress, or by changing the State Constitution,
through act of the Legislature. The growth of our organization 
itself as well as the growth of suffrage sentiment in
the State, is a matter of common knowledge and is the direct result
of the self-sacrifice, intelligence and devotion of the Alabama 
suffragists. One reason we have made such headway in the
State is because we have presented an unbroken front; there has
been united effort, whether in going before the Legislature or in
presenting our cause to our Congressmen. There certainly would
seem to exist no need, in these busy times, for overlapping or 
duplication of effort, in short, no need for two groups in Alabama
making the same demands on Congress.

There is no "royal road" to suffrage; like other reforms, it
must be a gradual evolution; like other possessions worth having,
the ballot, when given the women of the South, will represent
struggle and consequent growth. Few there are, even in this "conservative" 
part of the country, who are unwilling to acknowledge
that suffrage is not only coming, but that it is almost here. It
may come by the Federal route, it very likely will, but not until
there are enough Congressmen (Democrats, Republicans, Socialists
and Prohibitionists) voting to submit the question to the various
State Legislatures, and then not until the Legislatures of thirty-six 
States have acted favorably. As everybody knows, Congress can
not alone enfranchise women; so it behooves the suffragists of
the State to continue what they have so well begun, namely, their
efforts to stir the manhood of Alabama to a realization of the injustice
being done, in continuing to keep us in the doubtful company
of incompetents, the negroes, children, lunatics and criminals. 
When we succeed in this, we will be ready for ratification
by the State Legislature of the Federal Amendment.

PATTIE RUFFNER JACOBS

FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES

OF

NATIONAL AMERICAN WOMAN SUFFRAGE ASSOCIATION.

(Resolution adopted at National Conference held in Chicago June 6-9, 1915.)

RESOLVED, that the following five principles are fundamental to the main object of the National American Woman Suffrage Association:

1. A democratic organization which duly elects its officers.
2. Strict non-partisanship interpreted to mean that it does not oppose any political party, as such, or any man because of his party affiliations.
3. Belief in State suffrage work as the fundamental means of obtaining suffrage whether in the States or through Congressional action.
4. Disapproval of heckling and other so-called militant activities.
5. Utilization of all legislative measures which, in the judgment of the National Board and Congressional Committee, acting under the authorization conferred upon them by the convention, may further the passage of the Bristow-Mondell amendment.

---------------------------------------------

A DIVIDED OPINION.

Some persons may be in a dilemma because they are not in sympathy with the whole program of either association (National American Woman Suffrage Association or Congressional Union.) They do not believe in the Union's policy of fighting the Democratic party, but neither do they believe in the Shafroth amendment. We would remind such persons that the anti-party method of the Union is the very backbone of its policy, its main feature, and its chief reason for existence as a separate organization; while the Shafroth amendment is only a minor part of the National's program. In Miss Anthony's day the National Association generally asked Congress for more than one measure at a time, and there were always some of the States that did not believe in one or the other of the minor measures, and refrained from pushing them; but those States did not feel bound to turn in actively and fight them, much less to sever their connection with the National because of them. . . . . . . 

ALICE STONE BLACKWELL.

(Editorial in the Woman's Journal, June 19, 1915.)



[*1915 *]
[*C.U.*]

THE AIMS AND POLICIES OF THE NATIONAL AMERICAN WOMAN SUFFRAGE ASSOCIATION AS CONTRASTED WITH THOSE OF THE CONGRESSIONAL UNION ARE HERE SET FORTH BY DR. ANNA HOWARD SHAW FOR THE INFORMATION AND REFERENCE OF ALL SUFFRAGISTS.

First as regards the policy of the National American Woman Suffrage Association in supporting the Shafroth amendment:- There has been some dissatisfaction among the member associations of the National in regard to the Shafroth amendment.

I am sorry, indeed, that all the members of the National Association do not agree in regard to this measure, and I believe that the opposition to it is chiefly due to misunderstanding of its nature and purpose. It has been wrenched out of its intended and true proportions in the National program and made to appear to you as a substitute for the original national amendment to which our Association is pledged. I cannot declare too emphatically that the National Association, which was founded and led by Susan B. Anthony and for forty-five years has given its unfaltering support to the amendment proposed by her, accepts NO SUBSTITUTE for that amendment. The Shafroth resolution is intended to be an instrument by which to gain the passage of that amendment. It has been used in that way only, and if, or when, it cannot be used in that way it will not be used at all. It is a minor thing in the National program, and never should be allowed to become an issue between the National Association and its members. Let me urge you not to be mislead on this point.

And again, whatever your views as to the Shafroth amendment, I urge you to remember that it is subject to the will of the National Convention. The National Association is a democratic body, governed by the majority vote of the duly chosen official representatives of every one of its branches. It lies with the convention in Washington in December to say just what shall be done with the Shafroth amendment, and your League has a voice in that decision.

Now as to certain other facts and conditions before us. To pass a national constitutional amendment, we must have not only a two-thirds majority in Congress, but the ratification of 36 state legislatures. The rapid adoption of equal suffrage in the western states, and then in Illinois two years ago, has given us sufficient leverage in Congress to make our cause a national issue, and greatly to increase its chance of early passage by Congress. This gives us, inevitably, renewed zeal and inspiration, and we rejoice in the hope that the long struggle is nearing an end. But it should not make us lose sight of the fact that members of Congress who vote for our national amendment are not voting for woman suffrage itself. They are merely voting to let their respective state legislatures decide the question. Those legislatures will decide according to the sentiment of the electorate of their states.

2. 

   I call attention to this because some suffragists seem to regard our national amendment as a means of eliminating state work, a way to avoid the appeal to the individual voter. There is no way to avoid state work and gain woman suffrage. The question must come, in the end, to the individual voter, whether he actually votes upon it or instructs his representative to vote for him. If the national amendment had already passed Congress, would not the majority of the electorate of your state have to be converted to woman suffrage before your legislature would ratify it? If those voters were not converted, if the legislature would not ratify it, yours might be the one state that would block the enfranchisement of 35 other states. 

   I ask you, therefore, which is the logical affiliation for a state suffrage organization? The Congressional Union leaders sometimes say they want to abolish state lines. I do not believe you will wish to undertake that, for the State is one of the fundamental units of our democratic form of government. The National Association believes in the State as a unit for national suffrage work, as well as in the congressional district. It believes that the power which operates all legislative machinery lies in the constituency of the legislators, not in the legislators themselves. It recognizes that we must, whether for state amendment or federal amendment, convert the state electorate, by congressional districts and states, to the principle of woman suffrage. It follows its declaration of belief on this point by swinging its forces each year into the suffrage campaign states; and it maintains its Congressional Committee in Washington with a supporting organization of the states for cooperation district by district.

   The Congressional Union, on the other hand, was organized to work exclusively for the national constitutional amendment. It declares through its chairman that no more states are necessary to the passage of this amendment in Congress or the ratification afterward. It considers state work a waste of time and energy. It follows this declaration of belief by endeavoring to persuade the state workers, in New York, for example, even while the state campaign is on, to abandon work for their state amendment and to devote themselves exclusively to the federal amendment.

   At this point, again, let us remember what is the great obstacle to woman suffrage in state legislatures everywhere, namely the corrupt interests that control politicians. Now the only power that can cope with these interests and those politicians is the power of VOTES. When a legislature passes a state amendment, it passes the responsibility on to the voters -- the legislators do not themselves vote for woman suffrage. When a legislature considers the ratification of a federal amendment it votes on the question itself. Unless the majority of the voters in the state is ready to cast votes for woman suffrage, do you believe that the legislators will by their act give votes to women?

   I have given, thus far, reasons why I think the natural, logical affiliation for a state suffrage organization is with the National American Woman Suffrage Association. Let me tell you now why I believe, quite as emphatically, that a state organization cannot wisely or consistently ally itself with the Congressional Union.


3. 

   Speakers for the Congressional Union say that their policy is based upon the principle of holding the party in power responsible for the passage of suffrage legislation, and declare that ours is a government by parties that all legislation is decreed and enacted by the dictatorship of a few leaders.

   I am quoting Mr. Lynn Haines, the Secretary of the National Voters League, which exists for the purpose of enlightening the public regarding Congressional procedure, when I say that except in questions of party spoils, and the one big issue of the tariff, practically all legislation in Congress is enacted not by a party machine but through a bi-partisan machine, skillfully directed during the last Congress by Majority Leader Underwood, Democrat, and Minority Leader Mann, Republican. Even measures that seem to pass by party vote are passed that way because their chances have been tested out behind the scenes and the leaders know the other side's votes are not required. Much more important is it, says Mr. Haines, to consolidate the independent vote, outside the machine, and work through this independent vote for a balance of power. That is the strength of the National Association's non-partisan position in regard to suffrage legislation.

   The anti-party policy of the Congressional Union, on the other hand, led last fall to a campaign against the Democratic candidates for Congress in the equal suffrage states. These candidates were opposed by the Congressional Union quite irrespective of their services to the suffrage cause in Congress, all of them being, indeed, among the most powerful friends we have, notably Senator Thomas of Colorado, Chairman of the Woman Suffrage Committee in the Senate, the committee to which all suffrage legislation must be referred before action of the Senate can be had. I am sending you copies of the Headquarters News Letter containing testimony from the West as to the unpopularity of this policy out there. Let me add some facts as to its reaction upon the suffrage cause elsewhere.

   During the 1914 campaign I spoke in every suffrage campaign state in the West. Each of these states adjoined a suffrage state. The Congressional Union propaganda "vote against the Democratic candidate," had received wide publicity, and the campaigns against Senator Thomas and other good Democratic friends of woman suffrage in Colorado, Oregon, California, Kansas, Idaho and Arizona, were known to the voters in Missouri, Nebraska, the Dakotas, Nevada and Montana almost as well as in their own states. Everywhere our speakers were challenged by Democratic men, whose votes, remember, we were seeking, with the demand: "Why should Democrats vote for suffrage, when suffragists are trying to defeat Democrats?" In some states the Democratic party as a party has declared for woman suffrage.

   Not only this in the states, but in Congress itself the effect was felt, when our National amendment came to a vote last January. The particular members who were attacked by the Congressional Union are certainly not more friendly to the cause than they were before, and the lobby work in Washington is appreciably more difficult. But even though with these particular men the principle proves bigger than the personal feeling, it

4.

is not so with other Democratic members. Some votes in Congress were certainly 
endangered, some possibly lost because, as one Democratic member
put it, on being solicited, "Why should I vote for suffrage? My friend, 
Congressman----, who sits across the aisle from me in the House, tells me 
that suffragists went into his district to defeat him, although he has
voted for them all his life!" 
     It seems plain that the policy has a dangerous rebound everywhere,
and that it is utterly suicidal in the campaign states. I am told that
suffrage workers have even recently felt the effects of last year's anti-
Democratic campaign in the Wes. And yet, some of your members still
find it difficult to understand why the two organizations, the National
Association and the Congressional Union, cannot work together. Let me
give you a few more facts as to that.
     The National American Woman Suffrage Association is a federation of
state associations, and has had for many years a standing committee called
the National Congressional Committee, the duties of which are to push
suffrage legislation in Congress. For one year, 1912-3, Miss Alice Paul
was chairman of that committee, and in that capacity organized the Congressional 
Union for Woman Suffrage as an auxiliary of the Congressional
Committee, for the purpose, ostensibly, of local work in Washington, D. C. 
Miss Paul and her vice-chairman, although American girls, are both pupils
of Mrs. Pankhurst in suffrage, having had no experience prior to their
present work except in the militant movement in England. She organized 
the Congressional Union upon the Pankhurst plan of non-elective, self-perpetuating 
officers, with the autocratic control of policies and funds,
and they tried to commit the National Association, through the Congressional 
Committee, to the policy which Mrs. Pankhurst defines as a first principle 
of militancy, namely to hold the party in power responsible for the
passage of suffrage legislation. The National Association, being always
non-partisan in the sense that it asks for the votes of all political
parties and therefore will not fight any party or candidate on account of
his party affiliations, refused to sanction Miss Paul's plans. She then
refused to obey the National Board, and was naturally not reappointed
chairman of the Congressional Committee. Subsequently the Congressional
Union was refused admission, as an affiliated body, of the National American 
Woman Suffrage Association by vote of the Executive Council because 
of its avowed policy of fighting the party in power -- at that time and
now the Democratic party.
     Now it was not until after days and weeks of discussion and effort
on the part of various national officers, especially the New National 
Congressional Committee, that the final division between the two organizations 
came. Then it was demonstrated that Miss Paul would cooperate
on one basis only, namely HER terms, including the anti-party policy;
that if the National Board objected to any activity or policy proposed 
by her, The National Board, not Miss Paul, must yield. Naturally the 
National Board could not accept such terms as these.
     At that time and since, to several of the national workers, Miss Paul


5.

Paul has declared her purpose of "smashing the National." In New York at
the Congressional Union conference in March, she called upon suffragists
everywhere to resign from the National Association. In every state where
the Congressional Union had attempted to organize branches, it has sought
first to draw to itself the workers affiliated with the National. In one
instance, failing to enlist the official cooperation of the state board, 
Miss Paul telephoned to the members individually at their homes, urging 
them to resign from their state organization and join the Congressional
Union.
     It is not pleasant to review such facts as these. It is heart-breaking 
that there should be division in our ranks at a time when a
united strength is so greatly needed for the great cause we are all
serving. For a long time the National officers refused to make public 
or to discuss these differences, or to emphasize the break. At length, 
however, convinced of the unwisdom of the new organization, and having,
perforce, to share the blame for the anti-Democratic campaign and for
such folly as the annoyance of the President of the United States, the
National Association, by its declaration at the Chicago conference in
June, determined to define its policies and make clear the issues.
     In conclusion, I want to say just this: if you believe in a
Democratic organization, if you believe in keeping our cause non-partisan, 
if you believe that women should be enfranchised through
that same national constitution which gave votes to men, and if you
desire earnestly to work for that end through the legitimate and most
effective channels, namely, state and congressional district combined -
then you have every reason for  remaining in the National American
Woman Suffrage Association and no reason at all for leaving it. For
any fault you may have to find with the National officers or the
National program, you  have redress in the National convention.

Transcribed and reviewed by contributors participating in the By The People project at crowd.loc.gov.