Category Archives: Suffragists

A New Jersey utopia lost

In 1897, real estate huckster Silas “Si” Drake bought up a farm on the outskirts of Plainfield, New Jersey, and broke it up into building lots for a new town, which he called Lincoln. His intentions were lofty — Abraham Lincoln was his inspiration.

Obviously not one to shy away from famous people, Drake also wrote to Admiral George Dewey, the Spanish-American War hero, requesting to adopt his surname as his middle name. The Admiral consented, and thus Si became Silas Dewey Drake.

In short order, Silas D. Drake elected himself mayor of Lincoln. His town was in Middlesex County, about 28 miles south of New York City, and situated on two rail lines. His Lincoln Land Company began selling the 1,000 lots he’d carved out of the 60-acre Nelson Runyon farm. He intended the town to rival factory towns like Plainfield. He boasted that he would bring three factories to Lincoln, one of which would employ 500 men. He even petitioned the state legislature to move the state capital from Trenton to Lincoln.

A huckster or a visionary?

It’s easy to laugh at Drake. He was boastful and arrogant, and his ambitions overreaching. “He is a little man, bubbling with energy, horse sense and chivalry,” the newspapers said.* He endorsed products like Paine’s Celery Compound, a supposed cure for everything from nervousness and sleeplessness to “derangements of the liver and kidneys.”**

But when he founded Lincoln, Drake also experimented with some forward-looking social engineering. He declared Lincoln “A Town for Women” and named three women to the six-person town council: Emma Egel, president, and members Olivia Hazard and Mattie Moore.

This is where Abraham Lincoln comes in.

“I go for all sharing the privileges of the government, who assist in bearing its burdens,” Lincoln once said.***

Taking that to mean that women have a rightful place in government, Si said of his shiny new town:

“We want to practically demonstrate to the world that with municipal affairs in the hands of women the common good, the best interests of the community, will be served.”****

“It’s no longer necessary to go West, young woman!” crowed the newspapers.

Two steps back

The newspapers felt it necessary to point out that the three councilwomen were not college educated, and they had never been particularly interested in woman suffrage or women’s rights. They didn’t ride bicycles (bicycles! the horror!) nor did they wear “ultra gowns.” (Someone please explain to me what those garments were!) They were property owners, or the daughters of property owners (men) and “physically wholesome, well bred and domestic, rich in energy, enterprise and common sense.”

Predictably, not everyone was on board with Drake’s vision. Two of the men on the council resigned, not willing to serve with women. Undaunted, Drake set another election and two more women were elected to the council. He also appointed a woman to be station master for one of the town’s two railroad stations.

The vision fades

Alas, in the end, Si didn’t sell enough lots, and in 1900, the venture went bust. “It sprang up out of a corn field like a mushroom in the night and became a hamlet giving hope of future promise,” the town’s “obituary” read.***** Its buyer paid just $16,000 for the property, netting only $1,000 after settling Drake’s debts.

Yet Drake was quick to say that Lincoln’s demise wasn’t owing to the presence of women on the council. Rather, he said, it was simply due to a dip in real estate sales. Today, on a map of Plainfield, there’s a street in the outlying section of town called Lincoln Place. It’s lined with some suspiciously turn-of-the-century-looking homes.

Whatever Si’s motives — a gimmick, his storied chivalry or an honest stab at a more inclusive future — the town’s failure is a shame. In a time when women’s place was still considered to be the home and only the home, It was a worthy experiment!

____________________________

  • * “A Town for Women,” the Gloucester County Democrat (Woodbury, NJ), November 4, 1897, p. 1.
  • ** The Jersey City News (Jersey City, NJ), January 18, 1898, p. 2.
  • *** But Lincoln’s comment is often taken out of context. He went on to say that he would admit those of the white race to suffrage. He also said he backed suffrage for those who pay taxes or bear arms. He knew full well that women could not serve in the military, and that only a precious few could own property in their name. Some say this was one of his little jokes.
  • **** “A Town for Women” (this quote and the following two)
  • ***** “Lincoln to Be Sold Today,” the Courier-News (Bridgewater, NJ), July 10, 1901, p. 1.

Love in the time of suffrage hikes

In 1912, suffragists working for the woman’s vote started a new form of protest: the long hike.

In December that year, General Rosalie Jones — a military title conferred on the woman who led many of these hikes — walked with 200 women from New York City to Albany to present a suffrage petition. The 170-mile, 13-day hike is considered to be the first such hike undertaken for a cause.

A year later, in February 1913, the General again led a hike, this time a 230-mile jaunt from New York City to Washington, D.C. A few dozen women, and scores of hangers-on, completed the hike, which ended with the women joining their fellow suffragists — 8,000 in all! — on a historic march down Pennsylvania Avenue.

It’s all very lofty to present these hikes in all their dogged and determined glory, but the women who hiked were very human, and a lot of human drama attended their walk. I wrote about one such drama, a love story (maybe) that arose when the women walked into Princeton, New Jersey, on the night of February 13, 1913.

That night, a Princeton University freshman spotted a hiker who instantly captivated him. In my story, you’ll read what happened when “Wee Willie” Cator decided to hike along with the young suffragist, Phoebe Hawn, nicknamed “The Baby Suffragette” by the national papers and “The Brooklyn Baby” by her hometown paper, the Brooklyn Daily Eagle.

Love or something else?

I’ve since come to wonder whether these stories of suffrage romances were more akin to the modern-day concept of stalking. On this same hike, a Brooklyn teen by the name of Roy B. Trolsen attached himself to another hiker, Helen Bergmark, when the women stopped for the night in Bordentown, NJ.

“We’re going to be married just as soon as the hike is over and we’ll settle down in Philadelphia and I’ll get a job with some civil engineering firm,” he told the press.**

Problem was that Helen didn’t agree to this vision of her future. “No, I am not going to get married. I do not know Roy Trolsen,” she said emphatically. “Whoever started such a report was cruel. It is a hoax.”***

Trolsen’s father chimed in, declaring to the press that his son was not 21-years-old, as Roy claimed, but a 17-year-old boy who was skipping school. He vowed to go retrieve his errant son. “I will stop this foolishness at once!” he said.****

It’s suffrage, stupid

This story read to me more like a case of stalking, if it indeed happened and was not a story dreamed up by the press. The press tended to romanticize the hikers, claiming the real goal of the hike was to attract husbands. They also put words into the General’s mouth, claiming the women had all vowed not to fall victim to Cupid’s arrow for the length of the hike.

As for Roy, he led a life that suggested he was a miscreant from an early age. At age 15, he stole a necklace of his mother’s and was arrested trying to pawn it. In his 20s, his wife divorced him, citing his refusal to work. In his 30s and 40s, he passed bad checks and spent time in a mental institution. In his 50s, he was involved as a truck driver in a scheme dreamed up by a pharmacist to get cut-rate drugs for his shop.

All this to say, poor Helen — and perhaps Phoebe? — was more a victim than a willing partner in these escapades on the hike. And I imagine even more women were targeted, although I suspect they put on a brave face for the public and the newspapers. They were hiking for suffrage and suffrage only, a fact that people couldn’t accept at face value.

Notes

Oh, those myth-making suffragists!

The suffragists were heroes, right? They were saints, don’t you think? Well, maybe they were heroes, but they weren’t saints. Researching my books, I’ve found that the suffragists were stellar myth-makers. They weren’t above burnishing their reputations and their actions through exaggeration and outright lies.

Take, for example, the famous March 3, 1913 suffrage parade in Washington, D.C. Eight thousand women (and men!) marched down Pennsylvania Avenue from the U.S. Capitol Building to the Treasury Building, a distance of about two and a half miles.

People poured in from all over the country to participate in, or to watch, the parade. Railroad companies added hundreds of extra trains to accommodate the crowds. The parade organizers planned the parade for just this exact day, because not only were people coming for the suffrage parade, they were in D.C. for President-elect Woodrow Wilson’s inauguration the next day. These suffragists were savvy!

The only problem was that the inaugural crowd had been swarming into the city for a week. The mobs of mostly men spent their time frequenting the saloons and public houses, and they were drunk and rowdy. They’d thrown off the restraints of polite society, and when the parade began, they harassed and attacked the women. Three hundred women were injured, one hundred of them taken to local hospitals.

Seize the moment!

Because of the failure of the police to protect the women, a congressional hearing was called after the disastrous parade to investigate. This was a tremendous opportunity for the women to enshrine the parade in myth!

In accounts written by the suffragists after the parade, they love to relate one scene in particular. In the telling, Woodrow Wilson arrives at Union Station only to find that the station is deserted. There are no cheering crowds to greet him..

“One of the incoming president’s staff asked, ‘Where are all the people?’

“‘Watching the suffrage parade,’ the police told him.” *

Very inspirational! But, alas, very untrue. Yes, mobs of people were watching the parade, but mobs of people also showed up at Union Station to greet and cheer Wilson as he made his way from a train chartered by Princeton University students (his alma mater) to the Presidential Suite at the station. The moment was fully covered in the newspapers.

The Washington Herald was there

I know you can’t believe everything you read in the paper, but this is a very detailed, almost moment by moment account of Wilson’s arrival. I suppose it could have been dreamed up by the writer. It’s been known to happen, especially in the newspaper environment of the early 1900s. Even the Library of Congress includes the supposed ghost scene in its account of the parade.

But I tend to believe this newspaper article contains the truth of the moment. Generally, people of this era did not speak in sound bites, so I become suspicious when I see a pithy statement like this. People ascribe all sorts of sayings to Susan B. Anthony — “Independence is Happiness!” —but you have question these neat, repeatable clips. (Beware BrainyQuote!)

Nothing but the truth

In fact, here is a photo taken at Union Station on March 3, 1913. I think President Wilson got quite a hearty welcome!

In my next post, we’ll poke into what really happened when the militant suffragists picketed the White House. Did they really chain themselves to the fence? Did they set fires on the White House lawn? You decide.

  • * Both suffrage leader Carrie Chapman Catt (Woman Suffrage and Politics) and suffrage historian Doris Stevens (Jailed for Freedom) repeat this scene in their books. They go so far as to say that President Woodrow Wilson himself asked, quite forlornly, where everyone was!

Put Suffragists on the Mall!

News flash! There’s a movement afoot to construct a monument to the woman suffrage fight on the National Mall. You know… where all the monuments dedicated to men’s achievements are.

I received an email from the National Women’s History Alliance urging me to contact the appropriate congressional representatives about the location of the monument. Which I have done!

Now, I want to spread the word. If you are on board with this project — and I hope you are! — contact the House and Senate using the links in the email, which I’ve pasted below. Thanks a bunch!

National Women’s History Alliance Email

Dear friends involved with the suffrage movement,

I wanted to make sure you knew that since 2020 there has been a drive to fulfill the legislation authorizing a Women’s Suffrage National Monument in Washington D.C., https://www.womensmonument.org

This is exciting news and the effort is steadily progressing.  One early concern is that the eventual Monument should be located (like all the male-oriented ones) on the National Mall.  This very question is being debated in Congress now and your input would be most welcome, particularly before the end of June.

Please encourage your congressional representatives THIS MONTH to support or co-sponsor the bill to have the women’s suffrage monument located on the National Mall. 

If your Representative or Senators have not signed on (see list below), please reach out directly to their DC offices – and ask 10 of your closest friends to do the same!  Those calls make a huge difference. 

Now is the time to influence how this legislative effort is regarded in Congress based on the popular support shown.  Let’s show them how much we believe women’s triumph deserves official, central and permanent recognition on the National Mall.

Here are the government links, and summaries and co-sponsors are below:

Regarding House legislationhttps://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/1318?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%22HR+1318%22%5D%7D&s=1&r=1

And regarding Senate legislationhttps://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/886/cosponsors?s=3&r=2&q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%22suffrage%22%5D%7D

Thank you for voicing your support and helping this effort succeed.

Robert Cooney, National Women’s History Alliance

Monument contacts:Anna Laymon orKimberly Wallner, Women’s Suffrage National Monument Foundation   womensmonument.org   info@womensmonument.org.

HOUSE BILL        

______________________________________________________

H.R.1318 – Women’s Suffrage National Monument Location Act

118th Congress (2023-2024)

Women’s Suffrage National Monument Location Act

This bill authorizes the location of a monument on the National Mall to commemorate the women’s suffrage movement and the passage of the 19th Amendment to the Constitution.

Sponsor:Rep. Joe Neguse, [D-CO-2] (Introduced 03/01/2023)
Committees:House – Natural Resources

Co-Sponsors:                                                                                 * = Original cosponsor

Rep. Lesko, Debbie [R-AZ-8]*

Rep. Fitzpatrick, Brian K. [R-PA-1]*

Rep. Velazquez, Nydia M. [D-NY-7]*

Rep. Porter, Katie [D-CA-47]*

Rep. Wild, Susan [D-PA-7]*

Rep. McGovern, James P. [D-MA-2]*

Resident Commissioner González-Colón, Jenniffer [R-PR-At Large]*

Rep. Watson Coleman, Bonnie [D-NJ-12]*

Rep. Carter, Troy [D-LA-2]*

Rep. Lee, Susie [D-NV-3]*

Rep. Carbajal, Salud O. [D-CA-24]*

Rep. Pettersen, Brittany [D-CO-7]*

Rep. Lofgren, Zoe [D-CA-18]*

Rep. Escobar, Veronica [D-TX-16]

Rep. Bice, Stephanie I. [R-OK-5]

Rep. Green, Al [D-TX-9]

Rep. Lee, Barbara [D-CA-12]

Rep. Lawler, Michael [R-NY-17]

Rep. DeGette, Diana [D-CO-1]

Rep. Landsman, Greg [D-OH-1]

Rep. Gottheimer, Josh [D-NJ-5]

Rep. Krishnamoorthi, Raja [D-IL-8]

Rep. Chavez-DeRemer, Lori [R-OR-5]

Rep. Sherrill, Mikie [D-NJ-11]

Rep. Budzinski, Nikki [D-IL-13]

Rep. Vasquez, Gabe [D-NM-2]

Rep. Manning, Kathy E. [D-NC-6]

SENATE BILL

__________________________________________________________

S.886 – Women’s Suffrage National Monument Location Act

118th Congress (2023-2024) | 

Sponsor:Sen. Tammy Baldwin, [D-WI]    (Introduced 03/21/2023)
Committees:Senate – Energy and Natural Resources

Co-Sponsors:                                                                     * = Original cosponsor

Sen. Blackburn, Marsha [R-TN]*

Sen. Bennet, Michael F. [D-CO]*

Sen. Lummis, Cynthia M. [R-WY]*

Sen. Duckworth, Tammy [D-IL]*

Sen. Gillibrand, Kirsten E. [D-NY]*

Sen. Shaheen, Jeanne [D-NH]*

Sen. Hyde-Smith, Cindy [R-MS]

Sen. Feinstein, Dianne [D-CA]

Sen. Capito, Shelley Moore [R-WV]

It’s Women’s Equality Day!

Time out! Today we celebrate Women’s Equality Day. On August 26, 1920, the Nineteenth Amendment giving women the right to vote was signed into law.

            If you think Title IX has been a battle, you need to read up on the suffrage fight!* Women fought for 72 years just to have the word “men” deleted from the Constitution’s wording on voting rights. It took more work — and more years — to ensure all women could vote regardless of color or heritage, but we were on our way. The Voting Rights Act of 1965 finally outlawed discrimination of any kind at the polls.

            Today I want to introduce you to just one of the millions of suffragists who devoted their lives to the suffrage cause.

Mother doesn’t vote

            Carrie Chapman Catt had a political awakening when she was just 11 years old. In 1872, as her father and brothers hitched up the family wagon to go into their Iowa town to vote in the presidential election (Greeley vs. Grant), she saw that her mother wasn’t getting ready to go.

             “Why, Mother, aren’t you going to vote for Greeley?” she asked. She was interested in national affairs, and had accompanied her father to political rallies, but she didn’t realize until that day that women couldn’t vote.**

            Carrie took the office of president of the National American Woman Suffrage Association in 1900 and again in 1915. While a few states granted women the vote during her tenure — most notably New York State — she realized that a federal amendment was the real way ahead. In 1916, at an emergency meeting of NAWSA, she urged women to press on.

            “Nothing less than this nation-wide, vigilant, unceasing campaigning will win the ratification,” she told them. “The Woman’s Hour has struck! Women arise: Demand the vote!”***

Victory ahead

            The suffragists’ unceasing campaign finally paid off. The amendment passed Congress in June 1919 and went out to the states for ratification. One by one, states voted to ratify, until Carrie saw victory ahead.

            At a suffrage convention held on February 13, 1920, Carrie addressed the crowd of thousands of women. Although victory was still six months away, she was convinced the battle was won.

            Here, I’ve reprinted excerpts from her victory speech that day. It was a rousing message that drew thunderous applause. And it speaks to us today, as women continue to fight in many realms for true equality.  

Be Joyful Today

            There is no earthly power that can do more than delay by a trifle the final enfranchisement of women.

            The enemies of progress and liberty never surrender and never die. Ever since the days of cave men, they have stood ready with their sledge hammers to strike any liberal idea on the head whenever it appeared.

            Suffragists were never dismayed when they were a tiny group and all the world against them. What care they now when all the world is with them? March on, suffragists—the victory is yours!

            The trail has been long and winding; the struggle has been tedious and wearying. You made sacrifices and received many hard knocks. Be joyful today! Our final victory is due, is inevitable, is almost here.

            Some day the history of these past few months will be written and, if the writer catches the real spirit of it all, it will be a thrilling story. Ours has been a movement with a soul, a dauntless, unconquerable soul ever leading on.

            Women be glad today! Let your voices ring out the gladness in your hearts. There will never come another day like this. Let the joy be unconfined and let it speak so clearly that its echo will be heard around the world and find its way into the soul of every woman of any and every race and nationality who is yearning for opportunity and liberty still denied her sex.

                                                            ___________________

* You can start with my book! Women Win the Vote! 19 for the 19th Amendment (Norton Young Readers, 2020). I profile nineteen women whose work led to victory in the suffrage fight.

** Mary Gray Peck, Carrie Chapman Catt: A Biography (New York: H.W. Wilson, 1944), p. 28.

* Carrie Chapman Catt, “The Crisis,” Atlantic City, NJ (September 7, 1916). My excerpts come from the version printed in the Woman’s Journal and Suffrage News (September 16, 1916), p.1.

PHOTO: That’s Carrie holding the massive victory bouquet. When victory finally came, she was honored with a ticker tape parade and a banquet in New York City.

But Susan started it

In my last post, I mentioned that groundbreaking woman’s advocate Barbara Hackman Franklin and I share an alma mater — Penn State.

            That’s not all we share! We also both have a connection with the woman suffrage movement. Before I began writing about Title IX, I wrote about the women who powered the 19th Amendment to victory in 1920.*

            We’ll get to that in a minute. First, let me introduce Barbara.

Many firsts, many slights

            In the 1960s, Barbara broke gender barriers in corporate and government spheres. She was one of the first female graduates of the Harvard Business School and the first female with an MBA hired by the Singer Company. From there, she went to Citibank, and then on to the Nixon White House, where she created a path for women to be hired for leadership roles. After that, President H.W. Bush named her U.S. Secretary of Commerce.

            While Barbara was forging ahead, she ran into some of the attitudes that women have perpetually faced in a world run by men.

At Singer: “I know that the salaries being offered to us women in the [Harvard Business School] class of ‘64 were less by a rather hefty amount than those being offered to the men,” she said in an interview for Penn State’s “A Few Good Women” oral history project.**

At Citibank: “I remember being chastised mightily for wearing a red dress. I’ve always liked red but was told not to wear bright colors. There was one other time when I knew I didn’t get as much of a salary increase as the guy who worked beside me. I raised that issue and was told, ‘You don’t need that salary increase. You’re doing fine, for a girl, and, besides, you have a husband who works.’”

At the White House:  “In some of my speeches I commented about the way I was described as ‘tiny, diminutive and Dresden-doll-like.’ Would we ever talk about the ‘diminutive, Dresden-doll-like’ Henry Kissinger?”

At the Commerce Department: “Somewhere there arose the impression that I was appointed to be a ‘cheerleader,’ and not to run that department. The quiet implication was, ‘My goodness. Can a woman really run that big conglomerate of a department?’”

Teaming up with Susan B.

            And here’s where the connection with the suffrage fight comes in.

            Eventually, Barbara and a few of her co-workers dreamed up a way to call out men who held these kinds of attitudes.

            In her own words, here’s how they did it:

            “One of the things that we dreamed up in 1972 that we thought would underscore this push toward equality was a bust of Susan B. Anthony to be placed in the White House. We had to get someone to create the bust, and several women’s groups agreed to pick up the tab.

            They decided to copy the bust of Susan B. Anthony that is in the Capitol. It was done in bronze somewhere in upper New York State.

            The bust was shipped to the White House and taken to my office. Then we had to wait for some months before there was an opportunity to present her. Mrs. Nixon did the honors.

            Between the time that Susan B. was delivered and her presentation to Mrs. Nixon, she resided in a closet in my White House office on the third floor of the Old Executive Office Building.

            When someone said something that was derogatory about women, Susan B. would steal out of my closet in the dead of night and appear the next morning in the office of the guilty party to underscore her point.

            Then, of course, I had to come and rescue her and bring her back to the closet.

            It was known that the bust and the spirit of Susan B. Anthony roamed the White House on occasion at night. She just knew exactly where to go, and [White House Press Secretary] Ron Ziegler was always on the top of the list.”

            Perfect! I think that we all should have a bust of Susan B. roaming at night calling out these outdated stereotypes and attitudes, don’t you?

                                                ____________________

* Women Win the Vote! 19 for the 19th Amendment (Norton Young Readers, 2020).

** Barbara’s quotes come from “A Few Good Women,” which is part of the Penn State collection, “Advancing the Cause of Women in Government, 1969-74.” It accompanies a book by Lee Stout titled A Matter of Simple Justice: The Untold Story of Barbara Hackman Franklin and A Few Good Women (State College, PA: Penn State University Libraries, 2015).

Guest post: Author Kathleen Stone

A time out for Mary Church Terrell

Recently,  I invited Kathleen Stone, author of  They Called Us Girls:Stories of Female Ambition from Suffrage to Mad Men (Cynren Press, 2022), to talk about anything that was on her mind. Kathleen’s book chronicles the lives of seven unconventional women of the 1900s who broke out of society’s expected roles for women. Just the right topic for this blog! 

Kathleen’s eye fell on Mary Church Terrell, a woman who I also encountered while writing my book on the  woman suffrage movement, Women Win the Vote! 19 for the 19th Amendment. I’ll let Kathleen take it from here. Enjoy this guest post that touches on women’s rights from suffrage to civil rights, to, yes, even Title IX. 

Mary Church Terrell

 

            When my alma mater, Oberlin College, renamed its central library for Mary Church Terrell, I didn’t know much about her, other than that she was an alumna. Since then, I have come to understand that she was pivotal in two movements that share a complicated history — the movement for civil rights for Black Americans and the movement for women’s rights. 

            Mary Church was born in Memphis, Tennessee, in 1863, the year Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation, to parents who had been enslaved. Her mother owned a hair salon and her father was a successful businessman. Education was one of her family’s goals, an opportunity often denied to Black Americans, and Mary headed to Oberlin College in Ohio.

            Oberlin was the first college in the country to admit both men and women as well as students of color, but its embrace of equality went only so far. To women, the college offered a two-year program, and to men a four-year program, including Latin and Greek. Mary’s friends urged her to take the two-year program — if she were too educated, they warned, she would intimidate men and never find a husband. She ignored their advice and completed the four-year course, earning her bachelor’s degree in 1884 before going on to get a master’s. She taught at Wilberforce University, the first private, historically Black college in the country, and later moved to Washington, DC where she taught in the district’s segregated system.

            Despite warnings that she would scare off men, Mary did marry. Her husband, Robert H. Terrell, was her intellectual match; he was a magna cum laude graduate of Harvard College and a teacher, lawyer, justice of the peace and municipal court judge. 

A dual role in activism

            Mary stood at the intersection of the movements for women’s rights and civil rights for Black Americans. She was the founding president of the National Association of Colored Women, charter member of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, and a member of the Women’s Committee for Equal Justice, the Civil Rights Congress, and the Women’s Republican League of Washington, D.C. She was the first African American woman to serve on the D.C. Board of Education.*

            On March 3, 1913, the day before President Woodrow Wilson was inaugurated, Mary marched down Pennsylvania Avenue with thousands of women, demanding the right to vote. When Alice Paul and the National Woman’s Party staged picket lines at the White House in support of suffrage, she joined in, sometimes with her teenage daughter, even though violence and arrest were real possibilities.**

A dual disadvantage

            After the 19th Amendment was ratified in 1920, it must have been galling that some of her sisters-in-suffrage refused to involve themselves in the civil rights struggle. Mary tried to awaken them to her reality:

            “A white woman has only one handicap to overcome — that of sex. I have two — both sex and race. I belong to the only group in this country which has two such huge obstacles to overcome. Colored men have only one — that of race.”***

Her rhetoric was not only informative but also pragmatic. When she urged the National Woman’s Party to address the difficulties Black women experienced when trying to vote, she said:

“Colored women need the ballot to protect themselves because their men cannot protect them since the 14th and 15th Amendments are null and void. They are lynched and are victims of the Jim Crow Car Laws, the Convict Lease System, and other evils.”****

Despite her compelling logic, the party’s white leadership failed to take up her challenge.

That did not stop Mary. She continued her advocacy into the 1950s. At age 86, she joined a protest, ordering food at a restaurant in Washington, D.C., knowing that the segregated establishment would refuse to serve her. The subsequent lawsuit got to the U.S. Supreme Court where — a year before its landmark decision of Brown v. Board of Education —  it held that the restaurant had violated anti-discrimination laws.

A living legacy

Mary died in 1954, ten years before the Civil Rights Act of 1964 outlawed discrimination on the basis of both race and sex. It would be another eight years before Congress passed legislation, including Title IX, that outlawed discrimination in education. That, too, would have spoken to her passion. 

Not many of us will have as far reaching an impact as Mary Church Terrell did. That’s certainly true for me, but she nonetheless inspires me. She reinforces my belief that education is crucial, opening opportunities for work and ways to contribute.  

Mary also demonstrates the importance of speaking up for others. When she advocated for Black women in the South who were unable to vote and whose husbands were in prison, she was not speaking for herself, the wife of a judge appointed by the president. She was reaching beyond herself to speak for those without access to the venues where she found herself.

From Mary, I take inspiration that I can do something similar in my life, even if my actions are smaller and my words less consequential than hers. She would agree, I believe, that we all can work to make life better for others.

                                                __________________________

* Biographical information drawn from articles by Mary Church Terrell’s biographer, Alison M. Parker, and from Lisa Gulasy, “Learning from Activist Mary Church Terrell,” Oberlin College & Conservatory (February 13, 2016). For a deeper dive, see Alison Parker’s biography, Unceasing Militant: The Life of Mary Church Terrell. (Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press, 2020).

** Alison M. Parker, “Mary Church Terrell, the Forgotten ‘Face of African American Women’s Suffrage Activism,’” Ms. (February 13, 2021).

*** Mary Church Terrell, A Colored Woman in a White World (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2020), p. 29.

**** Alison M. Parker, “Mary Church Terrell: Black Suffragist and Civil Rights Activist,” National Park Service.

The Countdown to Women Win the Vote!

Women Win the Vote! 19 for the 19th Amendment from Norton Young Readers available February 11th

The calendar has finally flipped! It’s January 2020. I’ve been thinking about this year, writing about this year, waiting for it and dreaming about it, and now it’s here!

The countdown has started for the release of my book Women Win the Vote! 19 for the 19th Amendment from Norton Young Readers.  The date of February 11th has been etched on my mind for more than a year now, and finally I’ll see it on my calendar. 

Continue reading