NAWSA Subject File Congressional Union Wiley, Anna Kelton H.W. WILEY 2345 ASHMEAD PLACE N.W. WASHINGTON, D. C. May 28, 1915 My dear Mrs. Catt: - In answer to your letter of May 20th, addressed to Miss Alice Paul and members of the Board of the Congressional Union, I beg to say that I think the newspaper accounts of the efforts of the Congressional Union to secure interviews with the President have in every instance been distorted. The Washington Post for instance characterized the visit to the White House of Mrs.Lawrence Lewis, Jr., in behalf of a notable gathering of Philadelphia women, as "heckling the President", whereas the facts in the case were a dignified visit to the White House, with a letter to the President. Mrs.Lewis was told to return the next day for an answer from Mr.Tumulty. Upon the following day receiving a negative answer to the requests of the Philadelphia women she asked for a two minutes' interview with the President. Again Mrs.Lewis was told to return the next day, which she did. Nothing could have been more in order, or more dignified. And surely the occasion for making this request was most appropriate. A visit of the President of the United States to welcome 4,000 newly enfranchised male citizens was surely a most appropriate time for him to receive a deputation of native born, patriotic and representative women asking for the ballot. These same 4,000 newly enfranchised male citizens will probably be 4,000 newly erected barriers for the Pennsylvania campaign to overcome. I feel, Mrs.Catt, that the editor of the newspaper in Schuyler county should have secured the facts in regard to this event before taking action. His attitude in regard to woman suffrage could not have been on a strong foundation and if he had not taken offence at this misrepresentation of the facts it is only a matter of time before he would have found some other pretext to show a change of heart. The incident in New York was similarly misrepresented. The Suffragist of May 22nd gives -2- a correct statement of the facts. The editorial on page 4 of the same issue states the case of the Congressional Union, and its reason for desiring to interview the President, very well. The object of the existence of the Congressional Union is to secure suffrage for the women of America in the most expeditious way possible and hence the interests of the women of the Campaign States and the interests of the members of the Union are one. We ardently hope that every one of the campaign states may be successful next fall, not only because that would mean the enfranchisement of all the women in those states, but also because it would add prestige to the work for the Federal Amendment. But while hoping for the success of the campaign states we feel that the work for the Federal Amendment must also proceed. The work achieved by the Congressional Union during its short career has been remarkable, in spite of the fact that its policies have been attacked alike by friend and foe. The election policy, which aroused so much protest, was the prime reason for the enabling vote by the Rules Committee which permitted the suffrage amendment to secure a vote in the House and also it has undoubtedly aroused the interest of the women voters of the West in behalf of their disfranchised sisters of the East as nothing else has ever done. This policy of opposing the Democratic Party was adopted only in September and October of 1914 and has not been used since. It is to be regretted that the leaders of the New York State campaign should misunderstand the spirit and aim of the Congressional Union. Its effort is always to form public opinion in favor of -3- the national amendment in the most dignified, forceful and expeditious way possible. I cannot conceive that the Union could have broken any compact. I feel that there must be some misunderstanding on that point. I cannot see any indication from Senator O'Gorman's speech on April 30th to our deputation that he is at all in favor of woman suffrage so that securing a definite statement from him in regard to his position toward the Federal Amendment could not have turned him in opposition to the amendment of the New York State constitution, whereas in the case of Mr. Husted positive good must accrue to the New York State campaign as well as to the Union, as the result of our deputation. As a single member of the Advisory Council I cannot voice any statement as to the future. Individually while hoping with all my heart that your work may prosper and succeed I believe that the work of the Congressional Union for the Federal Amendment must also proceed in order that a favorable vote may be secured by the next Congress and I cannot see how these two fields of work can in any way interfere or hinder each other. Quite to the contrary I should believe that they must inevitably strengthen and supplement each other. Sincerely yours, Anna Kelton Wiley Mrs.Carrie Chapman Catt, 303 Fifth Avenue, New York. N.Y. Transcribed and reviewed by contributors participating in the By The People project at crowd.loc.gov.