Page:History of Woman Suffrage Volume 5.djvu/483

 ber 12 came the test as to how well this had been done. The Rules Committee of the House reported the Mondell amendment, which was to come to a vote January 12. I wrote or telegraphed at once to every congressional chairman or State president asking her to bring to bear all possible pressure upon the individual members of Congress from her State. Those States which had established this machinery were able at once to send the call to the respective district chairmen and so on down the line; the other States responded through their existing machinery and the result was that thousands of letters and telegrams poured into the offices of the Congressmen during the four weeks. Meantime our lobby was busy interviewing the members and the latest expressions obtained in each case were wired back to the States, whose chairmen responded again.

This interchange and cooperation were so effective that Congressmen themselves complimented our "team work." But the real proof of its value came after the vote was taken, when by checking with our office records of the individual Congressmen we found that many uncertain, noncommittal or almost unfriendly members' attitude had so changed that they voted yes on the amendment. Such a result could not fail to show, if proof had been necessary, that the greatest need as well as the greatest opportunity in national suffrage work for the future lay in furthering to the last degree of completeness and efficiency the organization of every State by congressional districts

At a distance from Washington it is difficult to know and easy to lose sight of what a Representative does or stands for, so I prepared special reports to the State congressional chairmen whenever opportunity occurred. The first, and a most interesting one, came when the vote was taken in the House on the National Prohibition Amendment Dec. 22, 1914. This was just three weeks before the vote on our own amendment and our catalogue showed a large number of Congressmen who opposed us on the ground of State's rights. The National Prohibition Amendment is obviously as direct an assumption by the Federal Government of rights now reposing in the States as could possibly be devised. I, therefore, checked off the names of the State's rights Congressmen who voted for it but probably would not vote for national suffrage, and sent the list to our respective State chairmen, urging that they call these Representatives' attention to this inconsistency. It has been reported to me that this argument proved effective with several of them and it is a fact that after the suffrage vote was taken a number of the names on our first list had to be removed because those men had voted "aye" on suffrage. Seventy-two, however, in the final count, voted for the National Prohibition Amendment but against ours

In June I devised a special congressional district campaign which would reach the members of Congress before they left their homes to go to Washington. This was intended to impress them with the Strength of the suffrage sentiment in their districts and thus deprive them of a favorite excuse for not voting for our amendment. The