Page:History of Woman Suffrage Volume 5.djvu/787

 Board asked contributions for its support through the Woman's Journal, saying: "The speedy submission of this Federal Amendment is of vital concern to every suffragist." Later it announced: "The Washington office will be occupied largely with the political end of the Federal Amendment campaign, while a Chicago office will specialize in the work of organizing the congressional districts of the United States in cooperation with the various State associations." All this, of course, was for the old, original amendment. No experienced suffragist expected it to receive the necessary two-thirds vote this session, but, as it had been reported favorably to the Senate, the desire was to have it brought to a discussion; to secure as large a vote as possible and to ascertain which members were friends and which were enemies. In spite of most unfavorable conditions this was accomplished and the amendment received a majority. There were no more negative votes than when it was acted upon in 1887 by the Senate and over twice as many favorable votes.

The opposition was based almost entirely on the doctrine of State's rights, as was to be expected; but three Southern Senators voted in the affirmative. Before another session of Congress several more States are certain to be carried for woman suffrage, thus insuring more votes for this Federal Amendment. The defeat of suffrage bills in a number of Legislatures in the South is converting the women of that section to the necessity of action by Congress. Just at the most favorable moment in the entire history of this amendment, the committee having it in charge suddenly throws it on the dust heap; has another introduced of a radically different character, and announces to the public that this is done with the sanction of the National Board and that it represents the sentiment of the 642,000 members of the National American Association!In behalf of countless members of this association, I protest against this high-handed action. IL insist that the National Board exceeded its prerogatives when it sanctioned so radical and complete a change in the time-honored policy of the association without first bringing it before a national convention and giving the delegates a chance to pass upon it. 'he proposed amendment seems undesirable from every point of view

These and all protests were answered by Miss Alice Stone Blackwell, editor of the Woman's Journal, generally recognized as high authority by the suffragists of the country. Throughout the months of controversy she kept up a vigorous defense and advocacy of the Shafroth Amendment, saying: "The old amendment has not been dropped and many of us believe that the new amendment will pave the way for the passage of the old one. Most of the suffragists are much attached to the old nation-wide amendment. If any proposal should be made at the next national convention to drop it the proposal could hardly carry, or, if it did, the resulting dissatisfaction would greatly weaken the National Association, but at present nothing of the sort is proposed." She did, however, say in mild criticism:

The National Board has authority to decide questions that come up in the interim between the national conventions. On the other hand it has never before had to pass upon anything so important as committing the association to the advocacy of a wholly new amendment to the U. S. Constitution. It would probably have been the part of wisdom to get a vote of the National Executive Council. This would not have taken long and would have saved considerable hard feeling and perplexity. The approval of the majority of the Council could probably have been had, for there is no earthly ground for objecting to the Shafroth Amendment when it is thoroughly understood. It merely furnishes a short cut to amendments in the States—a method which any State could use or not as it chose. Supposing the Shafroth Amendment to have passed Congress and been ratified, it the suffragists of any State preferred the old way of amending their State constitution, it would still be open. The Shafroth Amendment would lay no compulsion upon any State; it would only take snags out of the way of amendments in those States where the snags are now very thick.