The following year, and four months before Oregon men would vote on an equal suffrage amendment, the N.A.W.S.A. and Scott Duniway both returned to Washington, D.C. As might be expected under these circumstances, Abigail here reports on progress in Oregon and the prospects for success in June. She describes the behind-the-scenes campaign being waged, a “hunt” so “still” that she refuses to reveal the identities of its male supporters.
Interestingly, Scott Duniway does not discuss the upcoming election until quite late. The first three-quarters of her address is a narrative of woman’s progress that strikes several familiar themes. It reiterates that the Pacific Northwest is a special region with a unique destiny, in which equal rights for women can flourish. It celebrates the inevitable advance of progress, including the progressive enlightenment that equal rights portend. And it argues, in particularly clear terms, that the pioneer women of the region have earned these rights.
While these themes arguably appealed to the nobler instincts of (i.e., flattered) her regional audiences, they well may have struck Eastern audiences as provincial, even insulting. Possibly sensing this problem, Abigail modifies her treatment here by reinterpreting “progress.” She analyzes women’s changing fortunes in marriage and work in the modern era, changes wrought by the industrialization and urbanization of the late nineteenth century (and changes with which Eastern audiences could identify, perhaps even more than Western ones). In a world “out of joint,” she argues, the shopworn rationales for woman’s sphere no longer fit reality.
This also was a time of change for N.A.W.S.A.. This convention would be Susan B. Anthony’s last as president, and she would celebrate her eightieth birthday the day after it adjourned; a pragmatically-minded younger generation, notably Carrie Lane Chapman Catt, who would succeed Anthony as president, and Anna Howard Shaw, increasingly would determine the organization’s direction. Fittingly, Scott Duniway–who by now was 65 herself–concludes with remarks directed to her mentor and friend of nearly thirty years. Yet, at this point Abigail had been issuing confident predictions of success in the Pacific Northwest for at least twenty-seven years. The new leadership, whose patience was wearing thin, would be watching Oregon closely.
The text is taken from Scott Duniway’s autobiography, Path Breaking. ((169-78.)) The speech also was reprinted in the Portland Evening Telegram (February 13, 1900). ((A copy of which is contained in folder “Duniway family. Clippings. Duniway, Abigail S.,” Abigail Scott Duniway Papers.)) Minor discrepancies between the two ((Minor confusion attends the dating of this speech. Path Breaking says that it was delivered on February 14. However, History of Woman Suffrage records that it was given on “Monday evening,” which was the 12th (4: 363); Evening Telegram coverage on February 13 confirms.)) are noted as follows:
“[]”: in ET only
“<>”: in PB only
The Paradise of the Pacific Northwest, from whose summer lands and sun-down seas I have traveled four thousand miles to greet this brilliant gathering, was, until within the past few years, so remote in time, as well as in distance, from the older settled portions of this North American continent, that nobody living outside of our great bailiwick, except Susan B. Anthony ((Susan Brownell Anthony (1820-1906): born South Adams, Massachusetts abolitionist; leader in woman’s rights reform; teacher, c. 1835-50; joined Daughters of Temperance, 1847; organized New York State Temperance Association, 1852; publisher, Revolution, 1868-70; co-founded National Woman Suffrage Association, 1869; vice president at large, 1869-92; president, National American Woman Suffrage Association, 1892-1900; arrested and tried for voting in 1872 Presidential election, refusing to pay $100 fine; initiated History of Woman Suffrage; helped found International Woman Suffrage Alliance, 1904 (Lutz, “Anthony”; Barry; Willard and Livermore 1: 30-31).)), had discovered the woman’s side of our progressive history, with which she became acquainted by personal contact in 1871. ((At Scott Duniway’s invitation and urging, Anthony canvassed the Pacific Northwest in 1871; Scott Duniway was her business manager, making arrangements for speaking engagements, and delivered speeches of introduction (Edwards, Sowing).)) But even Miss Anthony found on reaching our shores, nearly 30 years ago, that the awakened woman of the latter half of the 19th century had, [shortly] prior to her advent, discovered herself.
When the historic expedition of discovery, headed by Lewis ((Meriwether Lewis (1774-1809): soldier; President Jefferson’s private secretary, 1801; appointed by Jefferson to lead first overland journey of exploration to Pacific, 1803, the journey taking more than two years, 1804-06; governor, Louisiana, 1806-09 (Corning 146).)) and Clark ((William Clark (1770-1838): soldier and friend of Meriwether Lewis’ in army; co-leader of overland “Expedition of Discovery” to Pacific, 1804-06; governor, Missouri Territory, 1813-21; Superintendent of Indian Affairs, 1822-38 (Corning 55).)), began its famous journey of exploration in 1804, it started westward from a point east of the Mississippi river ((Near St. Louis, Missouri.)), and extended its transcontinental travels through the almost unknown country now known as the Middle West, till it came ((ET: “and came”)), at last, to Oregon, leaving its families at home. The results of that important journey will remain through all time, to mark the tracks it left upon this nation’s topographical and commercial history. But, of the ultimate results of their researches, the men who managed it had no dream; still less did they imagine that, ere the dawn of another century, the co-existence, and necessary co-association, of wives and mothers in all the great and small affairs of life would echo back, across the Rocky Mountains, and from under the shadows of our own sea-bathed Sierras, the fact that the most important discovery of the century had been made when the woman of the great West discovered herself. If Lewis and Clark and their no less intrepid companions were with us in the flesh today, they would see vast armies of men, as valorous and adventurous as themselves, still engaged in making new discoveries in the physical geography of the United States. And they would see these modern Argonauts, reaching out, guided by a destiny they could not foresee or fathom, to raise the standard of individual and collective liberty in the gem-studded waters of the Pacific Ocean and the Asiatic seas. Then, in turning the searchlight of their expanded vision northward, they would see yet other companies of men, reaching out into the hyperborean altitudes of remote Alaska, accompanied (as Lewis and Clark’s expedition ought to have been) by mothers, wives and daughters, who are proving themselves as strong in endurance and as intrepid in danger as their fathers, husbands and sons.
They would see, too, no matter whether they turned their searchlight, from their viewpoint, toward the East or West, that whether the modern adventurer had pitched his tent upon the granite heights of Sumpter ((A town in Baker County, in eastern Oregon, bordering Idaho.)), or toward the South to the tree-clad hills of Oregon’s Bohemian district ((A mining district in eastern Lane County.)); ((ET renders this as: “And they would see, no matter whether they turned the searchlight toward the East, where the modern adventurer pitches his tent upon the granite heights of Sumpter, or toward the south to the tree-clad hills of Oregon’s Bohemian district;”)) no matter whether they bivouacked among the frozen crags of Chilkoot pass ((A difficult pass in the Klondike region of Alaska.)), or on the humid borders of Cape Nome ((A cape on the Seward Peninsula of Alaska.)); no matter if they camped under the mountain[’s] edges of modern Skagway ((A city in the Alaskan panhandle, north of Juneau.)), or rested at Metlakahtla ((Metlakatla, a town on the southern tip of the Alaskan peninsula, on the Clarence Strait.)), <that> the virtue of the forest maiden would not be disturbed as of yore–nor would the dusky wife of the aboriginal man be tempted to populate the new world with half-caste children, to become the Ishmaelites ((Outcasts, after Ishmael, son of Abraham and Hagar, who, at Sarah’s insistence, was made an outcast (with his mother) (Gen. 16:12).)) of new generations, like the son of one Argonaut I have in mind, who, when asked, after being convicted of murder, to state why sentence of death should not be pronounced upon him, turned savagely upon his pious father and cursed him roundly for having married an Indian woman.
When I was asked to include in my remarks, tonight, a brief recital of the progress made during the century by the mothers of the race, in the far-off corner of our continent from which I come, these facts crowded themselves upon me for expression; hence this introduction.
Nowhere else, upon this planet, are the inalienable rights of women as much appreciated as on the newly settled borders of the<se> United States. Men have had opportunities, in our remote countries, to see the worth of the civilized woman, who came with them, or among them, to new settlements, after the Indian woman’s day. And they have seen her, not as the parasitic woman who inherits wealth, or the equally selfish woman who lives in idleness upon her husband’s toil, but as their helpmate<s>, companion<s>, counsellor<s> and fellow-homemaker<s>, rejoicing with them in the names they have earned together, and in the sons and daughters they have reared, in the hope that each would follow, in the other’s steps, the good old plodding paths of ((ET: “in”)) industry and peace. But in spite of theories or regrets, the world is moving, and woman is moving with it–not always, maybe, in the best chosen paths, for we are no wiser than our brothers–but always moving onward, in some direction, toward a higher goal. There came a time in Oregon, in the days when Washington, Montana and Idaho were as yet a part of Oregon’s territory, when men said to the intrepid women who were helping them to subdue the wilderness, “You shall be endowed with property rights of your own, other than those dependent upon the meager possibilities of gift, devise and inheritance.” And they bestowed upon women, under an act of congress, originated by themselves, great tracts of virgin acres, making freeholders of our women pioneers.
During the limited period of the early “fifties,” while this act, known as the donation land law ((An 1850 act of Congress disbursing public lands in the Oregon Territory to settlers; provided that U.S. citizens who had resided upon and cultivated the land for four consecutive years were granted 320 acres if single or 640 acres if married, half to be held by the wife; encouraged not only settlement but also many marriages, and greatly enhanced women’s property rights and economic security (Corning 75; History of the Bench 28-30).)), was in force, large numbers of married women joined their husbands in Oregon, and availing themselves of their opportunity, became original owners of the soil; and it is safe to say, that, such is <every sane> woman’s innate love of home, not to speak of her oftentimes inordinate desire to possess a home of her own, that if the law had not been repealed unto this day, there need not be a resident man in all [of] the states of the Pacific Northwest, of which Oregon was the mother, who would not today be in joint possession, with his faithful family, of an abode having its foundation in the soil, from which no speculator could dislodge him. Woman always was and always will be, the best and truest friend of man. And I say again, as I have often said before, “God bless the men! We couldn’t do without them if we would; we wouldn’t if we could.”
And yet, it is well known that the very best men are not always the most prosperous.
I have here a copy of the transactions of the Ninth Annual Reunion of the Oregon Pioneer Association, in which I find the following testimonial from the pen of Hon. Jesse Applegate (((1811-1888): covered wagon pioneer, surveyor, legislator, publicist; born Henry County, Kentucky; deputy surveyor, St. Louis, Missouri; captain of “cow column” in “Great Migration,” 1843; instrumental in opening Southern Route into Oregon, 1846; influential in revising Provisional government, 1845, in shaping Oregon as Territory, 1849, and as member of State Constitutional convention, 1857; Whig, then Republican; moved from Willamette Valley to farm in Umpqua Valley, 1849; assembling good library, became known as writer on public issues and as “Sage of Yoncalla” (Corning 9-10; Portrait and Biographical Record of the Willamette 1415-16; Scott, History of the Oregon Country 2: 233).)), to the memory of his faithful wife ((Cynthia Ann Parker Applegate (?-1881): native of Tennessee; married Jesse Applegate, 1831, settling first on farm in Osage Valley, Missouri; twelve children (Portrait and Biographical Record of the Willamette 1415-16).)), who died in 1881. Mr. Applegate says: “She was a safe counsellor, for her untaught instincts were truer and safer rules of conduct than my better informed judgment. Had I oftener followed her advice her pilgrimage on earth might have been happier; at least, her strong desire to make all happy around her would not have been cramped by extreme penury.” Ah, many and many have been the women of my bailiwick, who, like Mrs. Applegate, have “gone to their graves in deep penury,” whose “untaught instincts,” if they had been possessed of equal rights before the law, would have accompanied their “strong desire to make their husbands and all around them happy and prosperous,”–a desire that could have been gratified to their heart’s content, if their lives had not been cramped by poverty, ((ET: “if their lives ‘had not been cramped by extreme penury,’”)) through the political ((ET: “through outside”)) suppression of the “untaught instincts” that come to woman as the gift ((ET: “as bequests”)) from God, <though often denied her by the laws of man.>
In an address made by myself before the Pioneer Society at its tenth anniversary ((Scott Duniway borrows more than she acknowledges here. Her punctuation notwithstanding, this entire paragraph, and the paragraph that precedes it, substantially repeat the beginning of her address to the Oregon Pioneer Association of eighteen years prior.)), I said, <alluding to the foregoing incident, and I repeat it here>: “It was a tardy recognition of a noble woman’s worth that brought forth the deep wail of regret that I have quoted. But no tongue or pen can depict the hopeless anguish of the bereaved husband, who frankly confessed, in his hour of desolation, that ‘her life might have been longer and happier’ if ‘he had oftener followed her advice.’” There never lived a kindlier, manlier man than Jesse Applegate, whose great bereavement opened his blinded understanding and made him, ever after, to the day of his death, an uncompromising equal suffragist, whose many relatives are now following his example; and if, with his great soul and manly goodness of heart, he was so unjust to the best and dearest friend God ever gives to man, what shall we say of the lives of many–alas ((ET: “also”)), how many–other women, with husbands less noble than he, whose toil has brought them no recompense, very little appreciation and far less of liberty?
In former times, every woman, no matter how lowly, possessed some sort of a home in which she was always toiling. She was the world’s first crude manufacturer, the world’s first homemaker; and she still desires, always, above everything else, to be her own homekeeper. But the world is changing front. Her spindle and her loom are gone. Steel and steam have despoiled her of the primitive means of livelihood which kept her comfortable, busy and content. Still, she must earn, or help to earn, a livelihood. Very few men possess the Midas touch that turns the things they handle into gold.
The woman who “keeps boarders for company” is a close second to the wife who “makes dresses for diversion,” or “teaches school for recreation,” or goes out washing “for amusement.” These words are not spoken in disparagement of the many men who are financial failures, nor would I reflect in any way upon the far lesser number who possess the Midas touch. I am simply stating facts germane to the question at issue, through the observance of which our border statesmen have grown both just and wise.
Our pioneer women had not long been property holders before they became taxpayers. Then, gradually, the truth dawned upon them, as they toiled to pay the tax-gatherer, that “taxation without representation is tyranny,” and “governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed.” By and by the son of the pioneer grew up and left the farm, with its old-fashioned, meager equipments, which satisfied the good old father, who, while he lived, had tried in vain to curb the aspirations of the boy. And the son became an inventor, an actor, a speculator, a printer, a publisher, <a lawyer, a miner, a preacher, a teacher,> a doctor, a prize-fighter, a soldier, a banker, a broker, an editor, a politician, a merchant–an anything but a plodding, half-way tiller of the soil his parents loved.
Then the daughter, finding the young man had left the farm, came also to the city, and began to crowd her brother in the race for livelihood. The young man co-operated with his fellows and built a clubhouse–and still the maiden was alone. But she would work cheaper than he, chiefly because she could not run life’s race with him except in ruinous competition. So she lived in a 7 by 9 room with an oil stove and a folding-bed; and more and more she crowded him to the wall. And it was a life of independence compared to that which she had left. Her meager wage sufficed for food and clothes and shelter. She had discovered herself, and for a time she was satisfied. She was not compelled to marry from mercenary motives, and would not wed a coronet unless love crowned the contract and cleanliness of character, equal to her own, accompanied the nuptial bond.
And so it has gone on and on, until another stage in her development has come. And, like the bird, which, tethered at the end of a short line, rejoices in its enlarged circuit when the line is lengthened, until at last nothing will satisfy it but freedom altogether, the young woman has tried her partial emancipation from old-time environments; and now, she is no longer satisfied. She sits alone at night in her little chamber and watches the career of her brother, upon whom there are fastened no political fetters, and sees him reach the United States Senate, or become the president of a bank, or the head of a great department store. She watches a sister, who became the parasitic wife of him of the Midas touch, and beholds her, sheltered in a gilded mansion, between which and herself there is a great gulf fixed; or she reads of her as presiding languidly in her palace, at a meeting called to oppose the political liberties of such toiling women as herself. She cannot have a gilded or even an humble home, for herself, because there is no man left to marry her, and her wages hardly support her daily existence. So she says, “What means that favored woman’s wealth to me? This box wherein I sleep is not a home! I toil at half wages, and I am ostracized from the society in which my favored sister and brother shine. I have no hope in posterity, for I cannot marry. But I must live, and I am not content!” So she is calling to her brother bachelor in the United States Senate, or her married brother in the Hall of Representatives, and to all men in the ballot booths of Oregon, saying, “Men and brethren! The times are out of joint! Old things have passed away, but not all things have become new. There are no fetters on you! Why should we wear manacles?” When you say, “Keep to your home,” she is compelled, alas, to answer that she has no home to keep! When you remind her that “marriage is her proper sphere,” she is confronted with the fact that the modern bachelor is not a marrying man.
So she quotes Elizabeth Cady Stanton (((1815-1902): abolitionist, suffragist; authored “Declaration of Sentiments” of 1848 Seneca Falls woman’s rights convention; publisher, Revolution, 1868-69; first president, National Woman Suffrage Association, 1869; first president, merged National American Woman Suffrage Association, 1890; co-authored first three volumes of History of Woman Suffrage, 1881-86, and Woman’s Bible (2 vols. 1895, 1898) (Lutz, “Stanton”; Campbell, “Elizabeth Cady Stanton”).)) and Susan B. Anthony, and Olive Schreiner ((Olive (Emilie Albertina) Schreiner (1855-1920): writer, born in South Africa; worked as governess in England, (1881-89) while writing successful The Story of an African Farm, 1883, the first sustained, imaginative work in English to come from Africa; later became passionate propagandist for woman’s rights, pro-Boer loyalty, and pacifism, as in Woman and Labour, 1911.)) and Charlotte Perkins Gilman ((Charlotte Anna Perkins Stetson Gilman (1860-1935): author, editor, and lecturer on social issues, influenced by British Fabian socialists; her major work, Women and Economics, 1898, an argument for economic independence for women, was published two years before Scott Duniway’s speech; edited her own magazine, Forerunner, 1909-16 (Degler; Endres, “Forerunner”).
ET refers to her as “Charlotte Perkins Stetson”; her unhappy marriage to Charles Stetson had ended (by divorce) in 1894, but she would not remarry (to George Houghton Gilman) until four months after this speech.)), in her dreams, and repairs the next morning to her schoolroom, where she teaches the Declaration of Independence to a class of 50 girls and less than half a score of boys!
Among married women and sweet girl graduates, the attempt to make the best of their present environment within the limited circle bounded by their strained lariats results in the formation of women’s clubs. ((See “Eminent Women I Have Met.”)) And while, as yet, these institutions are mere travesties upon the clubs of men, they do suffice to ease somewhat the tension of their tethers, which many of them are unconsciously, but none the less certainly, striving to snap in twain, with every prospect of success.
I [have] now come to my reasons for heading my address with the inspiring caption, “Success in Sight!” The never-fettered men of Oregon are becoming as weary as ourselves of these times that are out of joint. So they have submitted, by the vote of their representatives in the legislature, an amendment to our state constitution, in which they say, “No person shall hereafter be prohibited from voting on account of sex.” This amendment they propose to ratify at the coming June election. And, while we shall miss, in the campaign now pending, the powerful aid of the late lamented Senator<s Mitchell ((John Hipple Mitchell (1835-1905): born Washington County, Pennsylvania; came to Oregon, 1860; Portland city attorney, 1860; city council, 1861; state senator, 1862-66; U.S. Senator, 1873-79, 1885-97, 1901-05; Republican; charged with financial dishonesty, bigamy, living under an assumed name and having deserted a wife and children in Pennsylvania, he obtained a divorce from his deserted wife and legalized his assumed name, and the charges were quashed; died while appealing his conviction for bribery in land fraud prosecutions. Mitchell was Scott Duniway’s chief political ally and she defended him in the face of damning revelations, thereby becoming embroiled in “one of the most vitriolic political wrangles in Oregon history” (Corning 167-68; Portrait and Biographical Record of the Willamette 77-80: Moynihan, Rebel 173-74; Scott, History of the Oregon Country 1: 104).)) and> Dolph ((Joseph Norton Dolph (1835-1897): born Schuyler County, New York; admitted to bar, 1861; enlisted in Oregon Escort, company of militia authorized by Congress to escort emigrants to territory, 1862; married Augusta Mulkey; practiced law, Portland, 1862-83; U.S. district attorney, 1865-66; state senator, 1866-68 and 1872-76; U.S. Senator, 1883-95; Republican; John Hipple Mitchell’s law partner (Corning 74; Portrait and Biographical Record of the Willamette 180-83; Scott, History of the Oregon Country 3: 135).)), the financial backing and manly votes of Hon. W. S. Ladd ((William Sargent Ladd (1826-1893): prominent Front St. merchant, banker, philanthropist; born Holland, Vermont; came to Portland, 1851; sold liquor and consigned goods, 1852; elected to city council, 1853; erected first brick building in Portland, 1853; mayor, 1854; treasurer, Portland Academy and Female Seminary, 1854; with Charles E. Tilton, established Ladd & Tilton, first bank north of San Francisco, in Portland, 1859; Taylor St. Methodist Church, 1867; established bank at Salem, 1869; extensive farming and flour milling interests; promoted iron works, Oswego; major owner, Oregon Steam Navigation Co. and Oregon Railway and Navigation Co.; buried River View Cemetery, where grave was opened and body stolen for ransom, 1897; recovered body was reburied and grave was filled with cement (Corning 138; Portrait and Biographical Record of the Willamette 73-77; Scott, History of the Oregon Country 1: 298, 2: 272, 277; “Our Founders”).)) and J. B. Montgomery ((James Boyce Montgomery: Captain of U.S. sloop of war Portsmouth, who rescued Judge J. Quinn Thornton (who had been stranded in San Juan, Lower California, on his way to Washington, D.C.) and brought him around Cape Horn to the Eastern seaboard, enabling Judge Thornton to complete his work helping to create the Oregon Territory in 1848 (Corning 168-69).)), of revered memory; the influence ((ET: “hearty help”)) of Hon. Henry Failing (((1834-1898): pioneer Portland merchant, banker, and politician; born New York City; son of Josiah Failing; educated in public schools; came to Portland, 1851; took over family wholesaling business, 1853; married Emily Phelps Corbett, 1858; avid Republican on national issues but nonpartisan in local politics; trustee, First Baptist Church for thirty years; elected mayor of Portland, 1864; re-elected 1865, 1872; president, First National Bank, 1869-98; Portland Library Board, 1872, president, 1893; University of Oregon Board of Regents, 1882, president, 1893; chair, Portland Water Co., 1886-98; Port of Portland Commission, 1891-97; president, Northern Pacific Terminal Company; trustee and treasurer, Pacific University, deaf-mute school of Salem, and Children’s Home; director and treasurer, Oregon Pioneer Association (Corning 82; Portrait and Biographical Record of the Willamette 33-37; “Our Founders“; “Henry Failing“).)), <and his lamented father, Josiah Failing, Esq. (((1806-1877): born Fort Plain, New York; moved to New York City as young man; married Henrietta Ellison; sailed with sons Henry and Edward from New York to Portland, where they opened a lucrative wholesale business, 1851; Baptist church leader; principal architect of first Portland school district and tax with which to build a schoolhouse, 1851; mayor of Portland, 1853-54; Portland school board, 1856-61, 1864-67; delegate, Republican national conventions, 1864, 1868; known as “dean of Front Street” (Corning 82; Portrait and Biographical Record of the Willamette 47-48; Scott, History of the Oregon Country 2: 272, 5: 225-26).)),> who have ((ET: “recently”)) passed to the skies; while we no more hear the honored voice of Oregon’s Chief Justice ((ET: “great jurist”)), M. P. Deady ((Matthew Paul Deady (1824-1893): born Talbot County, Maryland; moved to Wheeling, Virginia, 1828; educated in Wheeling and Fredericktown, Maryland; moved to Belmont County, Ohio, 1838; worked on family farm and learned blacksmithing; school at Barnesville, Ohio, Academy; admitted to bar, Supreme Court of Ohio, 1847; came to Oregon, 1849; taught and practiced law at Lafayette, Yamhill County, 1850-53; elected to legislature, 1850; president, territorial council, 1851-52; married Lucy Henderson, 1852; associate justice, territorial supreme court, 1853-59; representing Douglas County, presided over state constitutional convention, 1857; U.S. District Judge for Oregon, 1859; moved to Portland, 1860; chiefly responsible for Codes of Civil and Criminal Procedure, 1860-64, and code of Oregon statutes, 1864; held terms of U.S. Circuit Court, San Francisco, 1867-68; president, Board of Regents, State University, 1873-93 (Corning 70-71; Shuck 85-109; Scott, History of the Oregon Country 2: 275).)), raised in our behalf, nor the encouraging words of the long line of our governors who have gone, in the fullness of time, to their long, long home, we have scores <and scores> of leading men yet left to speak for us, whose names I now withhold for prudential reasons, lest, as was done one time by women in the Territory of Washington, the enemy be forewarned and their defeat invited and secured, through the caucus[es] and conventions of the political machine.
For the same reason, I resist the strong temptation to name, in this connection, the many associations and fraternities of men who have signified by their votes, in their different orders <and fraternities>, their determination to give us their affirmative votes at the ballot-box next June. But I do take pride in mentioning, with no fear of disaster, the Emergency Corps and Red Cross Society of our State, organized during the mobilization of our volunteers, <during our war with Spain, ((April-December, 1898, triggered principally by the mysterious explosion of the U.S.S. Maine, in the harbor of Havana, Cuba (“Woman in Oregon History” n. 20).)) > and maintained in active working order as long as there was work for them to do. It would, indeed, humiliate our returned veterans, were they to see these noble women defeated at the June election. These women, who, though tethered ((ET: “fettered”)) at the end of the governmental lariat, have royally earned their liberties by toiling to feed and comfort the soldiers, to whom women had given life, exhibiting such largeness of liberty and such statesmanship in administration of the army ((ET: “corps’”)) affairs as has challenged the admiration, not only of our own returning volunteers from Asiatic seas, but <of> those from Idaho, Montana, Nebraska, Dakota and Washington, all of whom were cheered and feasted, and sent on their way rejoicing, amid the glad acclaim of music, guns and bells. And the homeless wife, and sweet girl graduate are hearing all this and taking courage. They do not want to rule over men ((ET: “man”)). It would be useless for any woman but an anti-suffragist to attempt to control men’s votes ((ET, more simply: “attempt it”)), and none other tries. Our ((ET: “But their”)) cry is for an equal chance with man in the great arena of work. Not many of us ((ET: “them”)) could be office-holders, and very few, in any State where women vote, aspire to office. The men of Oregon are tired of seeing their wives and daughters rated in the political category of idiots, insane persons, criminals and Chinamen. A delightful calm has settled over our political arena, but <we believe> it is the calmness that precedes the success that is in sight.
I wish that I had time to tell you of the mighty possibilities of fair young Oregon. Her capacity for homes is as unlimited as is the azure of her skies on her fairest days. Her people are prosperous and progressive, and their spirits are as free from fads as the air they breathe. They do not like professional agitators, but they love liberty. To you, Miss Anthony, our honored leader and guest, whom it is my privilege to salute, in this hour of your serene young age, I say, in conclusion, that my chief desire and prayer to God, on this great occasion, is that the government of the<se> United States shall proclaim you a free and independent citizen, as you of right ought to be, at least long enough to get used to your liberty, before you are called to the skies. Your life has been a noble example of what Ella Wheeler Wilcox (((1855-1919): poet and journalist; born Johnstown Center, Wisconsin; educated University of Wisconsin; moved to Connecticut and New York after marriage to Robert M. Wilcox, 1884; reputation made when Chicago firm refused to publish “immoral” collection of emotional love poems, Poems of Passion, 1883; syndicated columnist of prose and poetry; covered death of Queen Victoria, writing immensely popular “The Queen’s Last Ride”; belittled and ignored by serious literati; interested in Spiritualism and Theosophy (Baird; Who was Who 1344).
This bit of verse concludes a short essay entitled “Hate No One,” in which she condemns hate as a poison, urging readers to pity adversaries and competitors instead, and to work for their improvement. Only Scott Duniway’s punctuation and substitution of “Tis” for “And” depart from the original (Wilcox 249-51).)) calls “the splendid discontent of God,” <which I am honored by repeating, ere my allotted time is up:>
The splendid discontent of God
With chaos, made the world,
Set suns in place, and filled all space
With stars that shone and whirled.
If apes had been content with tails,
No thing of higher shape
Had come to birth; the king of earth
Today would be an ape.
‘Tis from the discontent of man
The world’s best ((ET: “great”)) progress springs.
Then feed the flame (from God it came)
Until you mount on wings.
NOTES
Comments are disabled for this post