The History of Woman Suffrage Volume III Part 30

Mr. VEST: Yes, sir; I move to refer the matter to the Committee on Revolutionary Claims.

Mr. CONGER: Let the resolution be reported.

The acting secretary read the resolution.

The PRESIDENT _pro tempore_: The senator from Missouri offers an amendment, that the subject be referred to the standing Committee on Revolutionary Claims. The question is on the amendment of the senator from Missouri. [Putting the question.] The noes appear to have it.

Mr. FARLEY called for the yeas and nays, and they were ordered and taken.

Mr. BLAIR [after having voted in the negative]: I have voted inadvertently. I am paired with the senator from Alabama [Mr.

Pugh]. Were he present he would have voted "yea," as I have voted "nay." I withdraw my vote.

Mr. WINDOM: I am paired with the senator from West Virginia [Mr.

Davis], but as I understand he would vote "nay" on this question, I vote "nay."

Mr. INGALLS: I am paired with the senator from Mississippi [Mr.

Lamar].

The result was announced--yeas 22, nays 31. So the motion was not agreed to.

The PRESIDENT _pro tempore_: The question recurs on the adoption of the resolution.

Mr. BAYARD: Is it in order for me to move the reference of the subject to the Committee on the Judiciary?

The PRESIDENT _pro tempore_: It is in order to move to refer the resolution to the Committee on the Judiciary, the Chair understands.

Mr. BAYARD: Then I make a motion that the resolution be sent to the Committee on the Judiciary. I would state that I voted with some regret and hesitancy upon the motion of the senator from Missouri [Mr. Vest] to refer this matter to the Committee on Revolutionary Claims. My regret was owing to the fact that I do not wish even to seem to treat a subject of this character in a spirit of levity, or to indicate the slightest disrespect by such a reference, to those whose opinions upon this subject differ essentially from my own. I cast the vote because I considered it would be taking the subject virtually away from the consideration of congress at its present session. I do, however, hold that there is no necessity for the creation of a special committee to attend to this subject. The Committee on the Judiciary has within the last few years, upon many occasions, attempted to deal with it. Since you, sir, and I have been members of that committee--

Mr. h.o.a.r: Mr. President--

The PRESIDENT _pro tempore_: Will the senator from Delaware yield to the senator from Ma.s.sachusetts?

Mr. BAYARD: I will, if he thinks it necessary to interrupt me.

Mr. h.o.a.r: I desire to ask the senator, if he is willing, having been lately a member of the committee to which he refers, whether it is not the rule of that committee to allow no hearings to individual pet.i.tioners, a rule which is departed from only in very rare and peculiar cases?

Mr. BAYARD: I will reply to the honorable senator that the occasion which arose to my mind and caused me to remember the action of that committee was the audience given by it to a very large delegation of woman suffragists, _to wit_, the representatives of a convention held in this city, who to the number, I think, of twenty-five, came into the committee-room of the Committee on the Judiciary, and were heard, as I remember, for more than one day, or certainly had more than one hearing, before that committee, of which you, sir, and I were members.

Mr. h.o.a.r: If the senator will pardon me, however, he has not answered my question. I asked the senator not whether on one particular occasion they gave a hearing on this subject, but whether it is not the rule of that committee, occasioned by the necessity of its business, from which it departs only in very rare cases, not to give hearings?

Mr. BAYARD: I cannot answer whether a rule so defined as that suggested by the honorable senator from Ma.s.sachusetts exists in that committee. It is my impression, however, that cases are frequently, by order of that committee, argued before it. We have had very elaborate and able arguments upon subjects connected with the Pacific railroads, I remember; and we have had arguments upon various subjects. It is constantly our pleasure to hear members of the Senate upon a variety of questions before that committee. It may be only a proof that women's rights are not unrecognized nor their influence unfelt when I state the fact that if there be such a rule as is suggested by the honorable senator from Ma.s.sachusetts of excluding persons from the audience of that committee, on the occasion of the application of the ladies a hearing was granted, and they came in force,--not only force in numbers, but force in the character and intelligence of those who appeared before the committee. They were listened to with great respect, but their views were not concurred in by the committee as it was then composed. We were all entertained by the bright wit, the clever and, in my judgment, in many respects, the just sarcasm of our honorable friend from Missouri [Mr. Vest], but my habit is not to consider public measures in a jocular light; it is not to consider a question of this kind in a jocular light. Whatever may be the merits or demerits of this proposition, whatever may be the reasons for or against it, no man can doubt that it will strike at the very roots of the present organization of society, and that its consequences will be most profound and far-reaching should the advocates of the measure proposed prevail.

Therefore it is that I think this subject should not be considered separately; it should not have a special committee--either of advocates or opponents arranged for its consideration; but it should go where proposed amendments to the fundamental law of the land have always been sent for consideration,--to that committee to which judicial questions, questions of a const.i.tutional nature, have always in the history of this government been committed. There is no need, there is no justice, there is no wisdom in attempting to separate the fate of this question, which affects society so profoundly and generally, from the other questions that affect society. It cannot be made a specialty: it ought not to be. You cannot tear this question from the great contest of human pa.s.sions, affections, and interests which surround it, and treat it as a thing by itself. It has many sides from which it may be viewed, some that are not proper or fitting for this forum, and a discussion now in public. There are the claims of religion itself to be considered in connection with this case. Civil rights, social rights, political rights, religious rights, all are bound up in the consideration of a measure like this. In its consideration you cannot safely attempt to segregate this question and leave it untouched and uninfluenced by all those other questions by which it is surrounded and in the consideration of which it is bound to be connected and concerned. Therefore, without going further, prematurely, into a discussion of the merits of the proposition itself or its desirability, I say that it should take the usual course which the practice and laws of this body have given to grave public questions. Let it go to the Committee on the Judiciary, and let them, under their sense of duty, deal with it according to its gravity and importance, and if it be here returned let it be pa.s.sed upon by the grave deliberations of the Senate itself. I hope the special committee proposed will not be raised, and I trust the Senate will concur with me in thinking that the subject should be sent to the Committee on the Judiciary.

Mr. LOGAN rose.

The PRESIDENT _pro tempore_: The morning hour has expired.

Mr. LOGAN: I want to say just one word.

The PRESIDENT _pro tempore_: It requires unanimous consent.

Mr. LOGAN: I do not wish to make a speech; I merely desire to say a word in response to what the senator from Delaware [Mr. Bayard]

has said in relation to the reference to the Judiciary Committee.

Mr. HARRIS: I ask unanimous consent that the senator from Illinois may proceed.

The PRESIDENT _pro tempore_: There being no objection unanimous consent will be presumed to have been given for the senator from Illinois to make his explanation.

Mr. LOGAN: This question having been once before the Judiciary Committee, and it being a request by many ladies, who are citizens of the United States just as we are, that they should have a special committee of the Senate before which they can be heard, I deem it proper and right, without any committal whatever in reference to my own views, that they should have that committee. It is nothing but fair, just, and right that they should have a committee organized as nearly as can be in the Senate in favor of the views they desire to present. It is treating them only as other citizens would desire to be treated before a body of this character. I am, therefore, opposed to the reference of the proposition to the Judiciary Committee, and I hope the Senate will give these ladies a special committee where they can be heard, and that that committee may be so organized as that it will be as favorable to their views as possible, so that they may have a fair hearing. That is all I desire to say.

Mr. MORRILL: I hope this subject will be concluded this morning, otherwise it is to come up constantly and monopolize all the time of the morning hour. I do not think it will require many minutes more to dispose of it now.

The PRESIDENT _pro tempore_: The Chair will entertain a motion on that subject.

Mr. MORRILL: I move to set aside other business until this resolution shall be disposed of. If it should continue any length of time of course I would withdraw the suggestion.

The PRESIDENT _pro tempore_: The senator from Vermont--

Mr. VOORHEES: Mr. President, I feel constrained to call for the regular order.

DECEMBER 19, 1881.

The PRESIDENT _pro tempore_: Are there further "concurrent or other resolutions"?

Mr. h.o.a.r: I call up the resolution in regard to woman suffrage, reported by me from the Committee on Rules.

Mr. JONES of Florida: I ask for information how long the morning hour is to extend?

The PRESIDENT _pro tempore_: The regular business of the morning hour is closed. The morning hour, however, will not expire until twenty minutes past one. The senator from Ma.s.sachusetts asks to have taken up the resolution reported by him from the Committee on Rules.

Mr. h.o.a.r: I hope we may have a vote on the resolution this morning.

The PRESIDENT _pro tempore_: The question is on the amendment proposed by the senator from Delaware [Mr. Bayard], that the subject be referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.

Mr. h.o.a.r: It is not intended by the resolution to commit the Senate, or any senator in the slightest degree to any opinion upon the question of woman suffrage, but it is merely the question of a convenient mode of hearing. I hope we shall be allowed to have a vote on the resolution.

The PRESIDENT _pro tempore_: Is the Senate ready for the question on the motion of the senator from Delaware?

Mr. BAYARD and Mr. FARLEY called for the yeas and nays, and they were ordered.

Mr. BECK: Mr. President, I have received a number of communications from very respectable ladies in my own State upon this important question; but I am unable to comply with their request and support the female suffrage which they advocate. I shall vote for the reference to the Committee on the Judiciary in order that there may be a thorough investigation of the question.

I wholly disagree with the suggestion of the senator from Illinois [Mr. Logan], that a committee ought to be appointed as favorable to the views of these ladies as possible. I desire a committee that will have no views, for or against them, except what is best for the public good. Such a committee I understand the Committee on the Judiciary to be.

I desire to say only in a word that the difficulty I have and the question I desire the Committee on the Judiciary to report upon is, the effect of this question upon suffrage. By the fifteenth amendment to the Const.i.tution of the United States there can be no discrimination made in regard to voting on account of race, color or previous condition. Intelligence is properly regarded as one of the fundamental principles of fair suffrage. We have been compelled in the last ten years to allow all the colored men of the South to become voters. There is a ma.s.s of ignorance there to be absorbed that will take years and years of care in order to bring that cla.s.s up to the standard of intelligent voters. The several States are addressing themselves to that task as earnestly as possible. Now it is proposed that all the women of the country shall vote; that all the colored women of the South, who are as much more ignorant than the colored men as it is possible to imagine, shall vote. Not one perhaps in a hundred of them can read or write. The colored men have had the advantages of communication with other men in a variety of forms. Many of them have considerable intelligence; but the colored women have not had equal chances. Take them from their wash-tubs and their household work and they are absolutely ignorant of the new duties of voting citizens. The intelligent ladies of the North and the West and the South cannot vote without extending that privilege to that cla.s.s of ignorant colored people. I doubt whether any man will say that it is safe for the republic now, when we are going through the problem we are obliged to solve, to fling in this additional ma.s.s of ignorance upon the suffrage of the country.

Why, sir, a rich corporation or a body of men of wealth could buy them up for fifty cents apiece, and they would vote without knowing what they were doing for the side that paid most. Yet we are asked to confer suffrage upon them, and to have a committee appointed as favorable to that view as possible, so as to get a favorable report upon it!