Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

In order to be in Madison early enough to learn my way around, I went over on Wednesday afternoon, leaving Milwaukee on the 5:20 train. Milwaukee is a three-hour ride from Madison. On that train, as good fortune would have it, was Mrs. Harry Glicksman, whom I had met before. I discovered that she knew much about the legislature, and being the wife of a professor at the University of Wisconsin, located at Madison, and herself an instructor in parliamentary law, she knew many Madison women. I plied her with questions; she was most kind in giving me information and offers of further assistance. She told me the names of the women there who were leaders of various women's organizations, and those who were experienced in legislative work. This was most valuable information to me. Moreover, it took away the feeling of strangeness which the town had held for me; I now knew the names of some women there who might be interested in the bill and who might help me.

CHAPTER III.

Our First Public Statement.

Early Thursday morning I took to the Madison papers the following statement which on Wednesday afternoon had been sent to the Milwaukee papers and all the other dailies in the state:

The National Woman's Party is urging the Wisconsin legislature to make Wisconsin the first State to grant women equal rights with men under all the laws, as Wisconsin was first to ratify the federal suffrage amendment. Representatives of the party, led by Mrs. Frank Putnam of Milwaukee, state chairman, will appear before the Senate Judiciary committee at Madison, Thursday, May 12. They will ask the committee to report out and press to passage the following bill:

"To abolish discriminations against women on account of sex.

"Be it enacted by the Senate and Assembly of Wisconsin in regular session assembled:

"That insofar as the laws of Wisconsin confer, regulate or define the rights of (1) freedom of contract, (2) choice of residence, (3) guardianship or control of children, (4) jury service, (5) holding public office or any office or position through election, appointment or court order, (6) control, disposition or acquisition of property, there shall be no discrimination against women by reason of sex or coverture, and women shall have the same rights and privileges as men:

"Provided, that this act shall not amend nor affect any law relating to the labor of women, nor to a minimum wage for women."

"The national congress and the legislature of each of the forty-eight States," said Mrs. Putnam, "will be asked to pass a bill in substantially this form, to give women legal equality with men, as the suffrage amendment gave us political equality. President Harding and other leaders of the party in power at Washington have pledged their support to such a measure. We want Wisconsin, first to ratify the suffrage amendment, to be first in removing the legal disabilities of women. The time having passed, for this session, when a member can introduce a bill, we shall ask the Senate Judiciary committee to present it. We do not insist on the exact text of this bill. We shall be glad to have it strengthened and improved in any way the senators or assemblymen may suggest."

Nearly every paper which received this statement printed all or part of it; some even gave it editorial attention.

When I went to The Capital Times, one of Madison's two large dailies, with this statement, I talked with the editor, Mr. William T. Evjue, and told him what we planned to do. He was interested and gave me a note to a member of the Senate Judiciary committee, Mr. Henry Huber, who, Mr. Evjue said, would be a friend.

I went directly to call on Senator Huber to enlist his interest and to learn the best way and time to approach the

committee.

I was struck by his great physical likeness to Senator Robert M. La Follette, and found him very much like Senator La Follette in manner, very likeable and pleasant, courteous and always gravely sincere. He is an unusual type to find in a State legislature, a typical gentleman of the old school, and though courtly, not always able to understand the modern woman. We were always very grateful for Mr. Huber; he was our friend throughout the campaign; we often went to him for counsel. He told me what time to be at the committee meeting and said he would introduce me.

CHAPTER IV.

Governor Blaine's Good Advice.

My next step was to call on the Governor. He said, in looking over the tentative draft of the bill which I planned to present to the Judiciary committee that afternoon, that in regard to freedom of contract, "there might be some protection to a married woman in not being held liable on a note which she signs as a guarantor of her husband, and that really ought to be studied very carefully." He told me he had signed a bill a few weeks before giving women the same right of guardianship and control of children as the father. His assumption was that jury service, on the part of women, was the same as that of men, except in some cases, and he was convinced beyond any doubt that women could hold any office. He thought when the federal amendment was adopted, the striking out of the word "male" perforce gave women the same right to hold office as men. He had not studied thoroughly the question of the discrimination against women as to the disposition and acquisition of property; that he thought ought to be carefully. considered. And he agreed with the last section of the bill that the law relating to labor, as it affects women, should not be affected by a general act abolishing other discriminations.

I had gone to Governor Blaine to get his opinion on our bill, and to ask his advice on the best way to proceed. I told him we had talked with lawyers, but had not been able to learn all of the remaining legal discriminations against women in the statutes of Wisconsin, and I asked him to send me to the person who would be most likely to know all of those disabilities and who would help us draft a bill removing them. I told him, that even though jury service on the part of women might be lawful, there was a great deal of dispute in the courts about it, and we wanted to make it lawful beyond any doubt. He advised me to go to Mr. Charles Crownhart, Revisor of Statutes, saying that Mr. Crownhart had recently gone over the statutes and would be in a better position than anyone else to give me the information I wanted.

I had heard of Mr. Crownhart as a lawyer of great ability, so this was pleasing advice.

Such a satisfying interview with the Governor was encouraging. To have the interest of the chief executive of the State, a man who was the leader of a large group of the legislature, meant well for the bill. Besides, I carried away from that conversation the feeling that Governor Blaine was a man of stability, of honesty of purpose, and that he stood for the cause of woman's rights from conviction and not from political motives; and I want to say that throughout all our campaign, and I had many other interviews with him, that I never changed my opinion of him. He was ever the same. His wife also is most charming. She was much interested in our bill, and during the campaign, asked me over to tea many times, and having had much political experience, since Governor Blaine had served several terms in the Wisconsin legislature as a senator, and was Attorney General when elected Governor, she gave me many helpful suggestions.

But to go back to my first talk with the Governor. As soon as it was over I immediately went to Mr. Crownhart, and he was interested. He told me he had drawn the Conant jury

bill which had failed to pass. I told him of my plan to call on the Senate Judiciary committee that afternoon and that I would ask them to report out a bill. He said if the committee would introduce the bill that he would draw it up. Kindly, humorous, keen, always encouraging, always willing to help, he was our best friend throughout our hard campaign. We went to him at every point of difficulty. He gave us the best of advice, and coached us on legal points. I knew him to be an able lawyer of absolute integrity and I had complete confidence in his opinion. Moreover he was with us wholly from the start; he thought we had a right to insist on getting the whole bill, that we had a right to every point, and that we could get it all if we did not compromise, and we loved him for the encouragement he gave us, for his confidence in our ability. We could not have done without him.

One of our former Woman's Party members was connected with the legislative reference library. I went to see her. She was horrified at our idea of presenting a blanket bill; she was sure the legislature would never pass such a bill; she thought they wouldn't even consider it. She advised me strongly to have some lawyer go over the statutes, and draw up as many bills as were necessary, revising separately each statute as to discrimination against women.

"But," I said, "that would take so long, and we want to get a bill through this legislature. We have neither the legal learning, nor the resources necessary to employ it, to attempt the many special enactments for which a blanket bill will serve."

She said: "You will never get a blanket bill through. I advise you to lay out a campaign for four years, plan to get something done at the next legislature, and the rest at the next, and forget about this one; it is too late in the session."

My answer was: "The National Woman's Party does not work that way; we do things NOW."

« AnteriorContinuar »