Page:History of Woman Suffrage Volume 5.djvu/44

 denied to her education and the free expression of her genius in literature, art or statesmanship, has been lost to man also, because it has diminished the inheritable riches of the nature from which he draws his existence. He has been less, though unhampered by the shackles which bound her, because she was less. The world is not more called upon to rejoice in the triumphs of his genius in freedom than to mourn over the wasted possibilities of hers in bonds. . ..

The forward movement of either sex is possible only when the other moves also and the obstacles to progress exist in the attitude of both sexes to it, not in that of one alone. So in this woman suffrage movement we have learned that the apathy of women to their own political freedom is as great an obstacle to our success as the unwillingness of men to grant our claims. It is of the same importance to us to educate women out of their indifference as it is to educate men out of their unwillingness. If it should happen that this education shall come to women first, they will never need the argument of force to induce men to remove the legal obstacles, for men and women cannot long think unlike on any subject.

One of the most interesting reports was that of the Press Committee, made by its efficient chairman, Mrs. Elnora Monroe Babcock (N. Y.). Illustrating its work she said: "About 50,000 suffrage articles have been sent out from the press headquarters since our last annual convention; 2,400 of these were specials; 5,155 articles and items advertising the Bazaar; many articles on prominent women were furnished to illustrated papers and newspaper syndicates; a page of plate matter was issued every six weeks and seven large press associations were supplied with occasional articles." The names of State chairmen were given and the number of papers they supplied—New York, 500; Pennsylvania, 336; Iowa, 237; Massachusetts, 97; Indiana, 91; Illinois, 85; Ohio, 63, etc. Mrs. Babcock asked for a vote of thanks, which was unanimous, to Paul Dana, proprietor and editor of the New York Sun, for having given during the past two and a half years and for still giving two columns of its Sunday issue to an article by Mrs. Ida Husted Harper, an unprecedented concession by a great metropolitan paper. Miss Anthony added her words of praise to Mr. Dana and to the department which she herself had been largely instrumental in securing.