Vote For Women: How Tioga County Women Actively Participated in This Worldwide Struggle

In the year 2017 we take it for granted that the right to vote is no longer restricted to those of a particular gender.  Male and female alike enter thousands of precincts around this country and around the world to play their part in participatory democracy.  Although we trace the roots of the democratic process to ancient Greece, even here, only adult male citizens who owned land were allowed to vote.  For the two thousand year time span since, the right of citizens to actively participate in their own governance was normally brutally crushed or met with so much derision as to not draw any serious effort.

Although in the monarchical system that evolved in Europe after the fall of the Roman Empire, a variety of female monarchs often gained sway as heads of state, females were generally marginalized, treated like chattel and for generations were kept in virtual servitude and slavery.  One of the first women to question this role came from the pen of a French nun, Marie Guyart, who worked among the First Nations of Canada.  

In 1654 regarding the suffrage practices of the Six Nations in what in now New York State she wrote, “These female chieftains are women of standing amongst the savages, and they have a deciding vote in the councils. They make decisions there like the men, and it is they who even delegated the first ambassadors to discuss peace.”   

Although the Six Nations or Haudaunesaunee were eliminated from being major players in world affairs, they did not disappear as many had hoped and they kept their matrilineal kinship system. This philosophy would have an impact on the early feminists and helps explain why the women’s rights movement had its initiation in Upstate New York.  

Surprisingly, female suffrage was not that uncommon in the early days of the Republic only to be rescinded within a few years. New York revoked this privilege in 1777, Massachusetts in 1780 and New Hampshire in 1784. The U.S. Constitution of 1787 left suffrage up to the states and with the exception of New Jersey, only males could vote. The electorate of the early Republic had much in common with those who voted in Ancient Greece. New Jersey allowed females to vote in 1790 but seventeen years later in 1807 it joined the others states when it came to which gender was allowed into the voting booth.

What has been referred to as the “seed” (although it should more properly be called an “affront”) for the Seneca Falls Convention came in 1840 at the World Anti-Slavery Convention in London. Two of the would-be participants were Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Lucretia Mott. Unfortunately, they were not allowed a seat because of their gender. Eight years later, five women called for a Women’s Rights Convention in Seneca Falls, N.Y.  

The right to vote was not something that was viewed as being a desirable or even attainable goal. Stanton was the one who decided that this should be brought to the floor. When Stanton’s husband, a social reformer himself, learned of his wife’s plans he could not even bring himself to attend the Convention.  Lucretia Mott was also disturbed by such a radical idea. If not for the efforts of Frederick Douglass, who strongly supported the resolution, the stated right of women’s suffrage might have needed another day to make it into public discourse. The Seneca Falls Convention was followed by a Rochester Women’s Rights Convention two weeks later and an Ohio Women’s Rights Convention in 1850.  

The first suffrage organizations were established in 1869; one by Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton and the other by Lucy Stone. These would eventually combine into the National American Women’s Suffrage Association (NAWSA) in 1890. But in 1869, Stanton and Anthony were based in New York City. In March 1869 Anthony along with lecturer Susan F. Norton traveled to the Southern Tier first stopping in Ithaca. (Little is known about Norton except that she was a regular contributor to a variety of women’s rights publications).  

The account in the Waverly Advocate (April 2, 1869) was quite complimentary for both these women. Norton, it said, “has a good voice and speaks with energy and effect. Her lecture was well-conceived, well written, and well read.” The paper went on to say that Anthony was “self-reliant and self-possessed” with “quick perception and strong reasoning power. Her effectiveness is large, especially in the combative department, which indicates a courageous and rather aggressive tendency. Nothing delights her more than a hand-to-hand controversial tilt with an opponent, even in the midst of a lecture.”  

The paper did not give a synopsis of the lectures “but shall be content with saying that the speakers dropped many valuable thoughts; established beyond the possibility of logical refutation the doctrine that woman is by nature, the equal of man, the latter enjoys no natural, civil or political rights which does not rightfully belong also to the former.”

Norton and Anthony would speak at Wilson Hall in Owego on March 29. Anthony also spoke on temperance the day before. Although inclement weather probably hurt attendance, the account in the Owego Times (April 1, 1869) was as praiseworthy as that of the Waverly Advocate: “Mrs. Norton spoke first, from notes and we have seldom, if ever, listened to such an able address. In breadth, force, pungency and sarcasm, it has not, in our opinion, been equaled as yet in Wilson Hall.”  

Here was part of Norton’s remarks: “Women are now taught to look forward to marriage as their only hope for maintenance food and clothing, and if they fail in that, the streets, or the gutters or the work-house is all that is before them.  Woman demands equal facilities of education, and then a fair opportunity of working out her own salvation in any or all of the avocations of human industry, receiving equal pay for equal work, intellectual or physical.” It had only been recently that women were allowed to own real estate “and she is taxed, therefore, just as men, but she has no voice in deciding to what use the money she pays shall be applied.  She offers taxation without representation.” 

One of the primary objections given to women’s suffrage was the inherent nastiness and corruption found in the political arena. Norton gave these remarks, “Men object to woman mixing in the dirty pool of politics. Who made and yet keep it a dirty pool? Man and only man. Woman has had no hand in it. But open it to woman, and as she refines and beautifies the household, so will she purify the political atmosphere. And on all moral and social questions spread the renovating influence of her purity through the whole mast.”  

Anthony spoke on the history of the anti-slavery struggle, in which she was a prominent advocate, and then proceeded into the history of the women’s rights effort. Although the Times gave few details regarding her remarks it did refer to them as “very able and very convincing”. From Owego, Anthony and Norton traveled to Binghamton hence to Connecticut and then downstate New York.  

The year 1894 was pivotal for the suffrage movement. With a constitutional convention being held, it was hoped that the word “male” could be stricken from Article II allowing women access to the voting booth. Sixty meetings were being held around the state.  

According to the Owego Gazette (March 29, 1894), two days of mass meetings were being held in Tioga County. The meeting on March 28 was called to order at the courthouse by Mrs. Mary Seymour Howell of Albany. After a prayer by Mrs. John J. Belknap of Campville, Mrs. Wm. H. Hutchinson of Owego delivered an address of welcome. She alluded to two of the arguments used in suppressing the right of women to vote: first that women would be “contaminated” and that in voting they would be “out of their sphere”.  

Mrs. Howell gave some particulars of the history of the suffrage movement. After the initial meeting in Seneca Falls in 1848, the third meeting was held in a barn in Albany because no other place could be acquired due to prejudice. A fourth meeting was held in New York City presided by Lucretia Mott. It drew a mob, which included a clergyman who denounced the movement, saying that it was a blasphemy against God that women should hold conventions and that he feared God would strike him dead for attending the meeting. Sojourner Truth came upon the platform to reassure the clergyman, “Never you fear, sonny, God never hear’n tell ‘o you.” The mob would not allow Mott to proceed, which forced the convention to move to Philadelphia.  

Mrs. Howell said that she had been working in Albany for ten years to support legislation that would benefit women, but that at every turn these have been declared unconstitutional. This makes it imperative to change the constitution this year as it will be another 20 years before this kind of opportunity will present itself. She referred to this meeting as a “constitutional campaign convention” and would be establishing a committee to distribute books of signatures for men and women over age 21 for the purpose of striking the word “male” from the state constitution. Mrs. Anna Carpenter of Owego was chosen as secretary followed by a roll call of several towns, the largest delegation coming from Apalachin.  

The Gazette had this to say about Mrs. Howell, “Mrs. Howell is a fluent speaker, at times most eloquent, and speaks with such distinctness and uses such clear cut English that it is a pleasure to listen to her, whether one is fully in sympathy with her utterances or not. Before the close of the meeting the following questions, taken from a question box, were discussed: ‘What does the Bible say about women?’ and ‘Who gave man the ballot?’”

Susan B. Anthony, now in her 75th year, addressed the crowd that evening. Her address was “a most able and eloquent one”. The convention would end that evening with an address by the Rev. Anna H. Shaw, “one of the most eloquent women in the state”.  

The campaign for the vote in 1915 began three years in advance. The Owego Gazette for Oct. 24, 1912, announced “The First Invasion in Owego of the Suffragette”. This invasion was initiated by Miss Harriet May Mills of Syracuse who spoke at two gatherings – one on Main Street and the other at the courthouse. This was the first time that a woman has promoted suffrage in the street “in the true suffragette manner” and being a “product of the twentieth century”. The paper continued on to say, “She does not hesitate to go out into the highways and byways in pursuit of ‘votes for women’”. Mills spoke from the automobile of William G. Ellis with Mrs. Ellis at the steering wheel.  

The Gazette gave this appraisal of Miss Mills:

“As a public speaker few men have any advantage of Miss Mills. Clever and experienced she speaks with dash, vim, and vigor that holds her audience, whether they may be in sympathy with her or not. She appeared to make a hit with a large proportion of her hearers Saturday night. When she was about to close her talk because her voice was tiring, a male listener near the rear of the automobile, urged her to go on. And she went.”  

Miss Mills went out of her way to declare that she was not a “militant”: “She emphatically declared that she is a lover of peace, and was going to accomplish her ends by no harsher methods than moral suasion. No hurling of anathema, rocks, and vegetables of doubtful reputation in her campaign; no window-smashing nor the equivalent to prime minister baiting.” The latter being a reference to Emmeline Pankhurst and her organization known as the Women’s Franchise League. Physical confrontations, assaulting police officers and window smashing were hallmarks of this group along with hunger strikes.  

Miss Mills was absolutely convinced that women would win the vote in 1915.  The state association of suffragettes was 100,000 strong and would make every effort so that “women could be sufficiently educated and initiated into all the political mysteries.” The automobile then proceeded to the courthouse where Miss Mills covered much of the same ground in a talk lasting about three-quarters of an hour. She ended her talk with one of the most cogent arguments for giving women the right to vote “that it was an injustice that a woman should be taxed without representation.” The men were once again urged to sign pro-suffrage slips and “Votes for Women” buttons were distributed.  

Although much of the suffrage activity was concentrated in Owego, meetings of various sorts took place in other parts of the county as well. A woman by the name of Miss Mabel Yeomans of Norwich spoke at the Congregational Chapel in Newark Valley on March 30, 1914. Newark Valley’s newspaper, The Tioga County Herald, covered her presentation in the March 31 edition. Miss Yeomans was a state organizer and she spoke to an audience of “some 70 or more”.  

“Miss Yeomans makes no attempt at oratory, but is a very pleasant, earnest convincing speaker who held the close attention and judging by comments heard made quite a good many converts among the women who have been not at all interested in the subject previously. The speaker is the antithesis of the popular caricature of the suffragette – an attractive, quiet speaking young woman, with no harsh words for anybody.”   

Miss Yeomans stressed the point that a majority of men, at least in New York State, are ready to give women the right to vote except for those “outside the political cliques under the direct control of the systems of organized vice.” It is vitally important for women to become educated, openly express their desire for suffrage and engage in some activity to that end. Miss Yeomans was able to have some 50 women sign a pledge to join the Votes for Women League of Tioga County. Although this organization had not been officially established, these names will provide the nucleus for an organized effort in 1915.  

The final paragraph of the article gave two points that are especially interesting.  One was the appeal to those women who are “secure and happy” to show concern for those of their gender who are struggling and she blasted the opposing forces of “organized vice”. It is worth quoting in its entirety:

“The speaker last night, aside from devoting a little time to putting the spear squarely through most of the old moss-grown arguments put up against woman suffrage, made her argument largely to the woman who ‘don’t care,’ showing her the duty she owes to the woman who is not the happy, contented wife and mother; the women who have not a husband or any good male representative who will look out for their interests for them (as per the old argument) – the millions of wage earning, hard working women whom it must be conceded will never get their rights in a hundred ways, industrially and socially, until they are able to command them with a ballot. The period of agitation of this question has passed; it will soon be the fight, and a fight between the women and organized vice, which is the only great and powerful organization opposing them today. It is chiefly the organized liquor traffic and the white slave business they are to go up against and the speaker called upon every woman to stand ready to do her duty by her less fortunate sister who will be engaged in combat with these forces.”  

In February 1914 it was reported that both houses of the legislature in New York had voted to allow a suffrage vote for the following year. The issue of the Owego Gazette for July 16, 1914 announced, “Owego Women Open Their Suffrage Campaign”. This was the “first gun” of the suffrage campaign, but it was to be a “social gun of the highest calibre”.  

Miss Jane Olcott, a trained suffragist worker from Glencarlin, Va., is leading the attack that took place at the St. Paul parish house. Although members of the Owego Club are “fighting in the rank with true soldiery spirit – this does not mean a campaign of militancy; one the contrary it is a campaign for the diffusion of ‘sweetness and light.’ The American suffragists work by methods much more subtle than a resort to bomb, hatchets and hunger strikes; methods much more dangerous to the opponents of votes for women, and methods much better calculated to win.”

In order to entice a few males who might not be that interested in hearing another pitch for the suffrage campaign, the Owego Club engaged in a bit of subterfuge.  The cards sent out as a general invitation appeared to be simply dance cards.  “There was not a hint of speech-making and not the slightest mention of votes for anybody. But many a man who read the invitation scented a plot, thus the slow-moving masculine mind came to rescue for once, and saved him from these modern Circes and Calypsos.” A limited number of men did appear and “three brave spirits donned full regalia and bore their torture heroically.” But women were in abundance including many “antis”. The suffrage campaign knows that dispelling the negativity within their own ranks is an important step to succeeding with men when they enter the voting booth.

Miss Olcott spoke for about half an hour. Gen. I. S. Catlin, a highly decorated officer from the Civil War, had been engaged to introduce Miss Alcott, but he deferred since he had not been cognizant of the nature of the meeting. Although he had recently had a letter printed supporting the anti-suffrage philosophy, he did praise Miss Olcott for making an excellent speech. The introduction was done by the Rev. Sidney Winter. Rev. Winter had also introduced a suffragist meeting in London where he had “two large and stalwart policemen” on either side. He intimidated that the American suffragist “might hope to win with charm and intelligence what the English woman could never hope to win with bomb and hatchet.”

Miss Olcott emphasized the obvious when justifying the suffrage campaign, “There was one great reason why women should vote. This reason had existed since the foundation of the government. It had its foundation in the American principle that government is for all the people. Americans boast of their constitution, and have just reason to be proud of it. Americans are proud of that Democratic principal that whole people shall rule. This is the sum and substance of the whole argument for woman’s suffrage.”

“The difficulty is that this announced principal for rule by the whole body of the citizens had never been put in practice, and cannot be as long as the ballot is withheld from women.”

Miss Olcott then addressed three of the objections that have been brought forth to the suffrage campaign: 1) The horrible example of the militants of England; 2) Dread of the vote of the ignorant women; and 3) Dread of the vote of “bad” women.

First of all, why should American suffragists be judged by their counterparts from across the ocean? Although she stated that there were no militants in America, this would change with the establishment of the National Woman’s Party (NWP) by Alice Paul in the following year.

Regarding the second objection:

 “Who are the ignorant women? No man will admit his wife is ignorant, none his daughter, nor yet his sister. It is always somebody else’s wife or daughter or sister.  In actual fact more women can read and write than men. There are more girls in high schools than there are boys. Alien women learn their politics at social centres, while alien men learn theirs at the corner saloon.”

Regarding the “bad” women, Miss Olcott said that the number is not that large although it is said that there are 150,000 in New York City alone. Still the percentage statewide is probably not more than three percent. In her position as a settlement worker “she had come in contact with a great many of these women, and she believed that many of them might well be trusted to vote and to vote straight, that is for the right. Bad men vote; the men who own these women vote.  There are seventy-five men in jail to one woman.”  

The address was followed by dancing (as stated in the invitation) and “suffragist and anti-suffragist tangoed merrily together. There were only two crumples in the rose leaf – excessive heat and the dearth of dancing men. Fruit punch was served.”  

Miss Olcott and the Owego suffragists had busy plans for the next few days.  That afternoon was a talk by Miss Olcott in Newark Valley. The next day in the evening she would be speaking between reels at the Empire Motion Picture Theatre. Saturday evening would find her at 8 p.m. at the corner of Main and Lake Streets followed by speaking between reels at the Tioga Theatre. On Saturday afternoon at 3 p.m., the suffragists planned a meeting at the home of Mrs. William G. Ellis on Front Street. “All members of the club are requested to be present and all those who wish to join are urged to come.”

Miss Olcott had impressive credentials as a social reform advocate and an activist. She was a graduate of Mt. Holyoke College and had done social service work in New York City following graduation. She had taken up suffrage work both at Mt. Holyoke and Washington, D.C. and had also done probation work in New York City. She had just completed a two-week campaign in Binghamton. While working in Tioga County she is being entertained by various members of the suffragist club.

As 1915 came to pass suffragists geared up early to swing the vote in their direction. The first effort of this type was reported in the Feb. 18 edition of the Owego Gazette. It was a speech by the noted suffrage speaker Mrs. Frank J. Shuler of Buffalo, a former president of the New York State Federation of Women’s Clubs. She would be speaking on Feb. 20 at Ahwaga Hall on the topic “Safeguarding of the Home”. She was described as “a speaker of exceptional ability. She possesses a rare combination of keenness and logic in argument and a rare personal charm.” She emphasized the importance of good women teaming up with men for the sake of social reform. 

 “She claims that corruption, graft, and evil things can be prevented by placing ballots in the hands of women. Good men and good women together can accomplish things that good men can never accomplish alone. The American man is the finest in the world. The men who are arraying themselves with the suffragists are the men who are standing for the best in the life of their communities.”  

Mrs. Shuler was the guest of the Political Equality Club of Owego. Admission was free.

The annual convention of the suffragists took place on April 21 at the courthouse with a mass meeting at Ahwaga Hall in the evening (Owego Gazette, April 22, 1915). At the convention the following officers were elected: Mrs. Cornelius O. Seabring of Spencer (district leader); Mrs. Charles Ott (vice-leader); Mrs. William G. Ellis of Owego (secretary); and Mrs. Max Fisher of Spencer (treasurer).  

Mrs. Ray Brown of New York, president of the State Suffrage Association, addressed the mass meeting to a “fair sized audience”. The Gazette was highly complimentary, stating, “The president of the state organization is a charming woman and an accomplished and witty speaker. Her exposition of the suffragists’ cause was one of the best addresses on the subject ever delivered in Owego.”  She emphasized that 1915 was a critical year, not just in the U.S. – but also all over the world. She was convinced that the conflict in Europe would eventually lead to greater democratic governments. Currently in the U.S., ten states and one territory had granted women the right to vote and this year the vote would come before four of the states in the original commonwealth – New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Massachusetts.  

This was a key part of Mrs. Brown’s address: “The question is not the problem formerly propounded: Has woman a soul? Today it is; are we women people?  Will you allow us to be one-half the people of this country? Why didn’t we get the vote when you men did? When men organized the government, state and federal in this country, women were not people. A woman was a chattel. She could not own property. She could not sign her name to a legal paper. If she were to commit a crime, and her husband were present, she could not be held responsible to the law. Her husband was responsible and had to bear the punishment.”

Mrs. Brown addressed the infant mortality rate of various states and countries. Although New Zealand was still a colony of Great Britain, it had given women the right to vote in 1893. It had the lowest infant mortality rate of any country in the world: 56 per 1,000. Mrs. Brown decried that only recently had a child bureau been created in Washington, D.C., although bureaus for the protection of plant and animal life had been created years ago. “This country is just beginning to realize that the baby crop is the most important crop in the whole world.”  

When a committee of suffragists met with a particular legislator, it was told that the legislature was too busy with men’s affairs to be bothered with those women’s. This was Mrs. Brown’s response, “And this in face of the fact that it makes you sick to see what that legislature has done this last winter – what it has done and is attempting to do. Look at the bills it is considering that effect women!  It has tried to take away the bureau of protection in New York City, the tenement house department and the bureau of weights and measures. It has tried to take away the short Saturday for shop girls.” How can these girls hope for any success in Albany without the vote? How can they fight the manufacturer’s association? “I can only repeat that of the great number of bills considered by the legislature, a large proportion of these bills pertain to vital interests of women.”

Following Mrs. Brown’s address, she outlined what would be done for the sake of suffrage in Tioga County and asked for pledges of support. Total pledges came to over $40 with over $150 being raised over the last four months.

An item for the Owego Gazette on Sept. 16 gave a progress report. The suffragists had gone house-to-house in the fifth and seventh districts and would eventually cover every district. Street meetings were being held every Saturday, Monday and Wednesday evenings. “The local suffragists were to be congratulated on their earnestness and persistency [sic] in prosecuting their work, whatever may be the outcome at the election.”  

As the date for the November election came ever closer, one can only imagine the continued pressure and effort that the suffragists pushed themselves to continue the advocacy process to the very end. Every vote would count; every door needed a canvas; every argument against suffrage must be confronted and refuted. Every woman speaking about the vote felt that destiny would finally bring victory. The struggle to gain suffrage, which had its start in New York State, had gone on for 57 years. How could the state that began the effort still deny women their constitutional rights of “government for all the people”? And yet there were many who had serious doubts about the outcome of the vote and probably were preparing themselves for the deflation of their hopes and rejection of all their work.  

One month before the election what was probably the largest and most elaborate mass meeting to date was held on Oct. 5, 1915 at the Tioga Theatre (as reported by the Owego Gazette on Oct. 7). The speakers were Mrs. Philip Snowden, vice-president of the National Union of Suffrage Societies in Great Britain and Lt.-Governor W. Y. Morgan of Kansas. Mead’s Orchestra was engaged to play inside the theatre; Howe’s Drum Corps was retained to parade in the streets and to drum for the crowd outside the theatre doors. Of special interest was a parade of “thirteen small girls” in white dresses. Each had a yellow and black “Votes for Women” sash and each carried a placard with the name of a suffrage state. The Gazette described the parade as “highly effective”. The girls took their place on stage with their placards. The speakers then entered accompanied by Miss Pauline Angell of Waverly and Mrs. Cornelius O. Seabring of Spencer.  

In her introduction, Mrs. Seabring stated that suffrage would surely win in Tioga and hoped that the plurality would be the largest in the state. Mrs. Snowden in her initial remarks could not help but mention that these were “terrible times” no doubt referring to the devastation that World War I was causing. Still the cause of suffrage kept up her energy and resolve in which she had spoken no less than 200 times both in this country and in England. This “profound conviction of right” was her beacon. Using the words of Lincoln, “government of the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth” was a concept that applied to both genders having the right to vote.

A question raised in many circles concerned how governance, legislation and society in general might change with women’s suffrage. Were women inherently better than men? Will women move a country toward greater social reform? Just how will society change once suffrage is granted to the female sex? Judging by her remarks there seemed to be a school of feminist thought that engaged in something akin to “male bashing”. Snowden’s address raised these issues and at times she seemed to contradict herself.

The Gazette summarized some of these points in this fashion:

 “Woman suffrage will not bring the millennium. Nothing like it will come from the ballot in the hands of woman. Six years from this coming November when the ballot will be given to the women of this state, I will be surprised if much change in conditions shall be found. But the vote of women will do this. It will bring into government the woman’s point of view. Many advocates of suffrage imply that men’s point of view is a deplorable thing. I hold nothing of the kind. I do not believe in stirring up sex antagonism. I have no use whatever for those who seek to promote a hateful spirit between men and women. I believe in the co-operation of two different emphases placed upon the same proposition.”

Exactly what should be the role of the sexes? Are their tasks, life pursuits and interests that inherently fall into the realm of one sex as opposed to another? The role of women in England had certainly been disrupted in the course of the First World War. Many were working in factories or just needed to find work to maintain independence. This would be the experience of American women within two years once the U.S. became entangled in the European war and was a precursor to the role women would play in World War II.  

Snowden’s philosophy and experience was stated like this:

“War is now killing off the men. More women than ever before have got to earn their own living. I dare to prophesy – and I never prophesy unless I know – that if women shall be free to elect, ninety per cent of them will elect to enter the home. But I do believe in the ‘open door’. I ask that right for woman to compete with men, if she can.”

Snowden rejected any claims of women being the moral superior of men but did state that women would pursue legislation that would lead to a broader safety net in society:

“The value of the woman point of view is not that women are better than men.  Women really are no better than the men. For goodness, as between myself and my husband, I certainly would give the prize to him. As between men and women it is six to one to half a dozen to the other. The great majority of men are both better and worse in certain respects.

“The majority of votes by women are on the side of human life and human honor. Women have a rod by which they measure propositions on which they vote. They have a social rod, a moral rod. It will generally be found that they vote for the measures, which will make a better world for children to be born into. They vote for old age pensions. They vote to give comfort to the worn out veterans of industry. They vote for mothers’ pensions.”  

Snowden supported this view from her experience in New Zealand, “All the laws that make for human happiness and betterment are found on the statute books of New Zealand.”

Snowden closed with an eloquent plea for the men to vote for suffrage in the coming election. She was followed by Lt.- Governor Morgan who spoke on how suffrage had worked in Kansas and other western states. Rev. Warren C. Taylor spoke briefly on the subject of suffrage, and closing remarks were made by Miss Angell. The ushers who took up a collection were all young ladies who wore “Votes for Women” sashes.

Woman suffrage would not come in 1915. All the changes to the New York Constitution were defeated. There had been pre-election predictions made that the negative vote would fall between 600 and 750.  The tally was actually 634 against. Total vote was 2,577 against and 1,943 for. Who made these predictions and how they determined this number was never indicated. Suffrage was defeated in the three other states where it was on the ballot.

The Gazette had this to say about the effort (Nov. 4, 1915):

“The women back of the suffrage campaign never let up in their work until the polls had closed. At each of the polling places women handed slips to the voters as they went to the polls, importuning them to vote for the amendment.” This practice would not be legal today. All electioneering must be done 100 feet from the polling place.

Spencer was the only town in the county for vote for suffrage (153 for; 101 against) although in Newark Valley the amendment only lost by three (153 for; 156 against). There were 344 blank votes in the county indicating that these voters had no interest in expressing an opinion.  

Suffrage would again come for a vote in 1917 with the campaign starting in the spring Owego Gazette. “The Equal Suffrage Movement Agog in Owego”, March 22, 1917). To help in this effort Mrs. Flora MacDonald Denison of Toronto, Canada, would be spending a month in Owego. She was described as one of the “most distinguished exponents of the suffrage cause in Canada”.  She had been president of the Women’s Suffrage Society of Canada and was now the honorary national president.  

She had been sent to the Binghamton headquarters by the New York State Suffrage Society to specifically work in Owego. Binghamton was in charge of the Tioga County campaign. She was brought in because the people of Owego were viewed as “being the most conservative on the question of equal suffrage”. It was mentioned that her son was part of the American ambulance in France. She had already spoken at the Westminster class at the Presbyterian Church and would be speaking for the W.C.T.U. on March 27.

Mrs. Denison was a writer as well as suffrage activist and applied these talents when describing the Village of Owego: 

“I viewed with special delight the beautiful village of Owego, with its attractive tree-lined streets, splendid boulevards, and many imposing homes, its majestic river curving gracefully through a fertile valley, bounded by splendid hills. Surely nature had endowed this place with blessings of beauty and varied attractions.”  

However, these impressions faded into “unromantic insignificance” when visiting the home of Elizabeth H. Chatfield who had been secretary to Susan B. Anthony.  “As I sat by the bed of Mrs. Chatfield I felt as privileged as one who enters the Holy of Holies. I felt linked with a past generation of grand women to whom we owe so much. The refined, handsome, aged face became illumined as we talked about the wonderful victories in the United States and Canada.” Mrs. Denison then related a memorial service for Susan B. Anthony that she had attended in Copenhagen in 1906 and how her very name had sent an “electric thrill” through those that were in attendance. They had come to honor this woman “whose clear vision had seen that the mothers of humanity must be free before the race could be free.”

There were other such suffrage gatherings in 1913 that took place in Amsterdam, Berlin, Dresden, Prague, Vienna and Buda Pest. Whenever the name of Susan B. Anthony was mentioned everyone “bowed their head in reverence.”

“She was a native of New York, but the world claimed her just as it claims Shakespeare, Lincoln, or Walt Whitman. While I listened to Elizabeth Brown tell of the early struggles, the cold receptions, the abuse, the ostracism and compared it with the days when Susan B. Anthony was the honored guest of kings and queens and courts and countries, I felt that surely the law of compensation does work and her reward was great. The spirit of the greatest pioneer seemed very close in the bedroom of this gracious invalid, who sat bolstered up with pillows, a delicious old paisley shawl about her shoulders, and a dignified cap partly covering her white hair.”

Denison went on to describe the room which included a mahogany chest of drawers, steel engravings, a portrait of Washington and “a fine old rocker with cane seat and back, in which she had been rocked when a baby.” Although the progress of the women’s movement gave her joy the tragedy of the World War had the opposite effect. However, when the topic of Russia came up there was hope because the Duma (this was shortly after the March revolution) had voted for universal suffrage. Mrs. Chatfield had this reaction, “Well, surely, New York State will not lag behind Darkest Russia”.  

Denison’s beautifully written account ended this way:

“The borderland may be very close to this woman who has ‘fought the good fight’, but her faith in the ultimate triumph of right is unshaken. She has promised to let me have one of the letters written to her by Susan B. Anthony to place among my sacred treasures. As I left that bedside and walked up the charming street of this quiet, peaceful village, I felt indeed that I had received a benediction and became re-consecrated to our common cause, whose ultimate world victory will forever do away with war and the slaughter of men”.  

The annual convention of the Tioga County suffragists was held in May (Owego Gazette – May 3, 1917).  About sixty individuals from all parts of the county gathered in Owego and heard a variety of speakers after a luncheon at the Ahwaga House. These included Mrs. James Laidlow (vice-chairman of the New York Woman Suffrage Association), Rev. Warren C. Taylor (pastor of the Baptist Church), Rev. Arnold W. Bloomfield (pastor of the Presbyterian Church) and Mrs. Clarence B. Mallery of Owego. A blessing was given by Rev. Will H. Hiller, pastor of the M. E. Church. Mrs. Flora MacDonald Denison of Canada served as toastmistress at the request of Mrs. Seabring.  

In her address Mrs. Laidlow described the work of the suffrage movement. It involved “months and years of patient, plodding and inglorious work” going through election district by election district. The result is a “great volunteer, altruistic organization has grown up, regardless of class, creed, race or color. It is the getting right next to the soil in organizational work. We always realized that not only for suffrage but for any form of work, this method of organization is essential and now we are justified in our faith and our works.”

The convention was held in the morning at the courthouse where a variety of business was conducted including the election of officers. In keeping with America’s recent entry into the European war, a discussion of government service was held after the luncheon.

This same month it was learned that another pioneer in women’s rights, Belva Lockwood, had died on May 19. She too had an Owego connection having run the Owego Female Seminary from 1863 to 1866. Lockwood was a remarkable woman who overcame many obstacles in her life to advance both herself and that of women’s rights in general. She was born Belva Ann Bennett in Royalton, N.Y. in 1830, and by the age of 14 she was teaching school. At age 18 she married Uriah McNail, a local farmer, who died of tuberculosis in 1853. Although she had a daughter, she decided to attend the Genesee Wesleyan Seminary, a decision not well received by many of her friends and colleagues.  

Lockwood graduated with honors in 1857 and became headmistress of the Lockport Union School. She soon realized that whether she was teaching or working as an administrator, her pay was about half of that paid to males. Pay equity for women became one of her special causes in the field of women’s rights. She first became attracted to law while taking studies at the Genesee College. It was some time in the 1860’s that she met Susan B. Anthony and became quite concerned about the limited educational opportunities for women. She resolved to leave upstate New York and take up the study of law.

In 1866 with her daughter Lura, she opened a coeducational private school in Washington D.C., an unusual step since most private schools were single gender at the time. In 1868 Belva married the Rev. Ezekiel Lockwood, a Civil War veteran, a Baptist minister and practicing dentist. He was supportive of his wife’s desire for legal study. In spite of being rejected by the Columbian Law School, she and several other women were granted admission to the National University Law School, now part of George Washington University. Although she completed her coursework in May 1873, she was refused a diploma because of her gender.  After an appeal to President Ulysses S. Grant, she received her diploma at age 43. In late 1880 Lockwood became the first female attorney to argue a case before the U.S. Supreme Court, although her husband did not live to see this accomplishment. He had died in 1877.

Belva Lockwood ran for President of the United States in 1884 and 1888 on the ticket for the National Equal Rights Party. There is a debate as to whether she or Victoria Woodhull was the first woman to run for President. In 1885 Lockwood petitioned the U.S. Congress to have her votes counted claiming that her supporters had seen ballots ripped up or dumped into a waste basket as “false votes”.

With the war effort on the suffrage party of doing its part on the home front (“Suffrage Aid in State Wide Food Saving”. Owego Gazette. July 19, 1917). The 500,000 members of the Woman Suffrage Party were cooperating with the Federal Food Conservation Committee under the chairmanship of Herbert Hoover.  

A paper being distributed known as the “Do My Bit Pledge” read as follows:

Wishing to aid my country during the war, I promise:

1. To eat one wheat less meal a day.

2. To eat beef, mutton or pork not more than once a day.

3. To economize in the use of butter.

4. To limit my daily allowance of sugar in tea or coffee and in other ways.

5. To eat more vegetables, fruit and fish.

Suffrage organizations planned on distributing these pledges throughout the state to help advertise the conservation campaign which was promoting the following rules:

1. Buy less, and serve smaller portions.

2. Preach the “Gospel of the Clean Plate”.

3. Don’t eat a fourth meal.

4. Watch out for the waste in the community.

5. If the more fortunate of our people will avoid waste and eat no more than they need, the high cost of living problem of the less fortunate will be solved.

In many areas of the state suffrage organizations had already held mass meetings addressed by food experts on canning and preserving. These are being supplemented with a speakers bureau, a house-to-house canvas, a letter appeal, and by moving pictures.  

A suffrage rally was held on Sept. 20 at Coburn Library (Owego Gazette. Sept. 20, 1917). The speaker was Mrs. Raymond Brown, second vice-president of the New York State Woman Suffrage Party. Mrs. Brown’s speech would cover woman’s part in the war, Red Cross work, food conservation and future party plans. No doubt that the suffrage women were as patriotic as the rest of the country, but it certainly helped their cause to be out front in this effort and that they had an organization of women who were not afraid to go door to door.

Practically on the eve of the vote another suffragist, referred to as “one of the most sought after suffrage speakers in New York, spoke at the courthouse square on Oct. 24 (Owego Gazette. Oct. 18, 1917). She was Beatrice Forbes-Robertson Hale, a well-known writer, lecturer and actress. Her topic was “Woman’s Work in War Time”. She was from a noted family of stage people and had written a book entitled What Women Want. She had also published a novel entitled Nest-Builders and was planning on publishing a children’s book that fall. 

The Republican and Democratic Presidential platforms for 1916 had planks indicating their support for women’s suffrage. The Republicans emphasized the right of each state to make this determination, but the Democrats did accuse the Republicans of being soft on the issue.  

The Owego Times, which promoted the Republican Party’s philosophy, minced no words in its dislike for the suffrage movement (Oct. 18, 1917). With a headline of “Woman Suffrage Going, Not Coming”, it listed the four eastern states that had rejected suffrage in 1915 along with seventeen state legislatures that had also rejected the measure. In both Ohio and Michigan the vote had taken place twice, with the negative vote even stronger the second time around. In New York, the measure had been defeated by 194,984 in 1915.  

The paper went on to say,“Not a single popular victory for suffrage has been achieved since 1914, when the sparsely settled States of Montana and Nevada were carried because the opponents of suffrage made little organized resistance.”

“The only ‘victories’ won by the suffragists since 1914 have been ‘victories’ for Presidential suffrage – victories achieved in defiance of the people, by means of a well financed and exceedingly attractive female lobby, and therefore a lasting disgrace to the women and the legislators directly concerned.”

“The facts all show that the great majority of men and women everywhere, when their interest is aroused, are against the double electorate. POPULAR INDIFFERENCE IS THE BEST FRIEND OF WOMAN SUFFRAGE.”

When the polls closed on Nov. 6, 1917, and the vote tally was being tabulated, the women along with their male allies in Tioga County could finally uncork the champagne bottles: suffrage had passed by 114 votes. Although the upstate vote tally was still in the negative, because of a surge in pro-suffrage votes from downstate, New York became the 15th state to grant full suffrage to women. The plurality was over 100,000. It was a pivotal state in the campaign because it was the most populous state in the nation and the first state in the east to vote in favor. For the Tioga County candidates, in general, the entire Republican ticket was victorious.  

For its Nov. 8 edition, the Owego Gazette had this to say:

“The result in this county was hailed with joy by the small bands of ardent suffragists throughout the county, who had labored for more than two years, to see their efforts crowned with success. These women had made a canvass of the county and had predicted that this year the county would return a majority for their cause. It was not generally believed that their predictions would come true, but they, having inside information from the results of their canvass, it proves they knew the conditions better than the majority of people in this county.

“In each election district in this village and elsewhere two women were checking the voters as they deposited their ballots, and acting as watchers. In no district did they make any protests, but kept assiduously at work knitting for the soldiers, as each had brought her work with her, as the voting progressed.”

Although public opinion had been swinging more favorably in the suffrage direction, of special concern was the controversy being caused by Alice Paul’s organization with their picketing of the White House. It was being predicted that people would once again vote down the amendment “to enter a rebuke to the coterie of women, who have been picketing the White House at Washington, to the disgust of the people of the United States.” Such was not the case.  

Owego would have a charter election on Jan. 7, 1918. This could possibly make the women of Owego the first in the state to exercise their right to vote. There was a question regarding whether more legislation would be necessary to make this come about, but a decision by the Attorney General’s office in Albany in late December said that this would not be necessary. However, an election in Lisle would be taking place on Jan. 5. Nevertheless, the women of the Southern Tier became the first and second female voters of the state to exercise their right to vote. (Owego Gazette. Nov. 15, 1917; Dec. 20, 1917; Jan. 3, 1918)

The logistics of incorporating voting rolls that basically had doubled overnight was a formidable task. There was also legislation that needed to be passed to fill in some gaps in the election law. This was done by something called the Argetsinger bill, which was signed by Gov. Whitman (Owego Gazette. May 2, 1918). It provided for the party enrollment of women and facilitated the process of getting votes from people in the service. A rather curious provision enabled women to simply sign an affidavit that they were over the age of 30. Those under the age of 30 would need to show proof of being at least age 21. (Had this been a plank of the Women’s Suffrage Party?)

The Woman’s Suffrage Party did not simply dissolve now that the primary goal, that of getting the right to vote, had been achieved. There was still much in their general agenda that needed to be addressed which was done at their annual meeting held on May 15, 1918 (Owego Gazette. May 16, 1918). Although the keynote speaker, Mrs. Frank A. Vanderlip of New York City could not attend, there was a full slate of others: Mrs. George N. Hall of Binghamton, Mrs. F. E. Bates of Ithaca, Mars. F. G. Merson of Cayuta Park and Mr. D. J. Kelly, superintendent of the Public Schools of Binghamton.

The women speakers stressed that the suffrage party would toward the “moral uplift in its political activities.” Enrollment in a particular established party was entirely each woman’s choice. “But they were urged to be careful in voting. They were urged to make their ballots count on the side of high morals and clean living.”  

Mrs. F. G. Merson of Cayuta Park, N.Y. (this may be an older name for Cayuta, N.Y.) was a member of the Rural Problems committee of the suffrage party. “She intimated that it was the purpose of the woman to bring the Kingdom of Heaven nearer to earth by the manner in which they should exercise their right of franchise. She said that, while there were some very fine men among our state legislators, it was a rule that the biggest men of the state did not get into either the assembly or the senate. She did not want to appear critical, she said, but she could not help making such a statement of truth.” She had advocated for the passage of an act that would provide for child nurses in rural districts. The bill had been introduced but at such a late date in the legislative session that it had failed. This was the only bill sponsored by the woman’s suffrage party during that session. When a similar bill is introduced in the next legislative session, she urged her suffrage party members to support it.  

Enrollment in a party had to be complete by June 15, 1918. An unusually large number of women enrolled in the Republican party to take part in the primary which was fielding four candidates.  

The breakdown as reported by the Owego Gazette on June 27 was as follows: Republican: 2,552 men and 2,538 women; Democratic: 1,124 men and 481 women; Socialist: 60 men and seven women; Prohibition: 193 men and 503 women. The totals were 3,929 men and 3,529 women. 

In another break with tradition the Democrats announced that they would be nominating Mrs. Charlotte Steele Searles for County Clerk, the first time a woman had ever been nominated for that position (Owego Gazette, Aug. 1, 1918)

On the eve of the election the Owego Gazette blasted the Republicans for having no female candidates (Oct. 31, 1918). Democrats had not only nominated a woman for the County Clerk’s office in Tioga County, this had also been done in Broome, Chenango and Tompkins Counties. The Gazette encouraged all women, regardless of party, to vote for Mrs. Searles. 

The editorial went on to say, “The reason why the Republican have nominated no women to office in Tioga County is not difficult to answer. They have as a party been always opposed to woman suffrage. The Owego Times, the Republican County organ, has openly opposed woman suffrage and its editor has continuously and consistently fought it. The entire Republican County organization has also been in opposition. Yet when women were permitted to vote by law, they all entered into a general scramble to obtain their votes – not for women candidates, for there are no women candidates on the Republican county tickets, but for men.”  

Whether this editorial swayed any voters is hard to tell, but Tioga County would have to wait for another election to have a female county clerk. Searles lost by 813 votes.

One of the confusing aspects of coming up with a tally of suffrage states is that certain voting rights had been granted in many states but not for every electoral process. Women in New York State, for instance, had been able to vote in school elections since 1880. By 1917 the following states allowed women to vote in presidential elections only: Illinois, Indiana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Michigan and Rhode Island. In this same year Arkansas allowed women to vote in primary elections but not general elections.