Page:History of Woman Suffrage Volume 6.djvu/200

 In 1904 the resolution was defeated in the House and did not emerge from the Senate committee. In 1906 this program was repeated. The meeting of the Legislature was now changed to the odd years and in 1907 the above program was reversed. After this year the members omitted even the customary graciousness of an understanding that one body would pass it and the other kill it, thus keeping the women friendly and dividing the responsibility for the defeat, and both Houses in 1909 rejected it.

In 1911 the Senate treated the resolution in a most contemptuous manner by voting to strike out the enacting clause and then passing it. This was the last time it was defeated. The tide was changing and even the most confirmed opponents knew that it was a rising and not a falling tide. Fortunately most of the active workers who sat through that humiliating experience lived to see the men who were responsible for it either retired entirely from public life or so changed in sentiment as to claim a place among those who "always believed in woman suffrage."

The neighboring State of Kansas fully enfranchised its women in 1912, as did several other western States, and favorable pressure was growing very strong. In 1913 the resolution to submit the amendment passed in the House on February 20 by a vote of 81 to 26 and in the Senate on March 7 by a vote of 31 to 15. The deadlock was broken and every suffragist rejoiced.

The resolution had to pass two Legislatures and in July, 1914, the Republican State convention strongly urged the next one to pass it. In 1915 this was done, by the Senate on February 12 by a vote of 38 to 11, and by the House on the 23rd by one of 84 to 19. The date for the referendum to the voters was set at the time of the primary elections, June 5, 1916, over three years from the time the resolution was first passed. After forty-five years thus far had the workers for woman suffrage arrived.

The activities of the State association were at once turned to the education of the voters. It had been long thought by both State and national leaders that if the amendment could be brought before them they would give a large majority for it. Probably no State ever went into a campaign under more favorable auspices and until the last few weeks it seemed that victory was cer-