After awhile Mrs. Greeley came down stairs with a baby in her arms. She had put her ap.r.o.n over its face and would not let the visitors look at it "because their magnetism might affect it unfavorably." During the evening she rang a bell and a man-servant came in. After a few words with her he retired and presently brought in a big dish of cake, one of cheese and a pile of plates, set them on the table and went out. There was a long pause and Mr. Greeley said, "Well, mother, shall I serve the cake?" "Yes, if you want to." So he went over to the table, took a piece of cake and one of cheese in his fingers, putting them on a plate and carrying to each, until all were served. The guests nibbled at them as best they could and after a long time the man brought in a pitcher of lemonade and some gla.s.ses and left the room. Mr. Greeley again asked, "Well, mother, shall I serve the lemonade?" "Yes, if you want to," she replied, so he filled the gla.s.ses, carried to each separately, and then gathered them up one at a time, instead of all together on a waiter. Both Mr. and Mrs. Greeley were thoroughly cordial and hospitable, both intellectually great, but utterly without social graces. Yet the conversation at their receptions was so brilliant that the most elegantly served refreshments would have been an unwelcome interruption.

At another time, when Miss Anthony was visiting them, she asked Mrs.

Greeley if she would marry the same man again if she were single.

"Yes," said she, "if I wanted a worthy father for my children, but for personal comfort I should prefer one who did not put his feet where I fell over them every time I went into the room, who knew how to eat, when to go to bed and how to wear his clothes."

A World's Temperance Convention had been called to meet in New York September 6 and 7, 1853, and a preliminary meeting was held May 12 in Dr. Spring's old Brick Church on Franklin Square, where the Times building now stands. The call invited "all friends of temperance" to be present. After attending the Anti-Slavery Anniversary in New York, Miss Anthony and Emily Clark went as representatives of the New York Woman's Temperance Society, and Abby Kelly Foster and Lucy Stone were sent from Ma.s.sachusetts. The meeting was organized with Hon. A.C. Barstow, mayor of Providence, chairman; Rev. R.C. Crampton, of New York, and Rev.

George Duffield, of Pennsylvania, secretaries. It was opened with prayer, asking G.o.d's blessing on the proceedings about to take place. A motion was made that all the gentlemen present be admitted as delegates. Dr. Trail, of New York City, moved that the word "ladies" be inserted, as there were delegates present from the Woman's State Temperance Society. The motion was carried, their credentials received, and every man and woman present became members of the convention. A business committee of one from each State was appointed and a motion was made that Susan B. Anthony, secretary of the Woman's Temperance Society, be added to the committee. This opened the battle with the opposition and one angry and abusive speech followed another. Abby Kelly Foster, the eloquent anti-slavery orator, tried to speak, but shouts of "order" drowned her voice and, after holding her position for ten minutes, she finally was howled down.

Almost the entire convention was composed of ministers of the Gospel.

Hon. Bradford R. Wood, of Albany, moved that, as there was a party present determined to introduce the question of woman's rights and run it into the ground, the convention adjourn sine die. He finally was persuaded to withdraw this and subst.i.tute a motion that a committee be appointed to decide who were members of the convention, although this had been settled at the opening of the meeting by the accepting of credentials. This committee consisted of Mr. Wood, Rev. John Chambers, a Presbyterian clergyman of Philadelphia, and Rev. Condit, of New Jersey. They were out fifteen minutes and reported that, as in their opinion the call for this meeting was not intended to include female delegates, and custom had not sanctioned the public action of women in similar situations, their credentials should be rejected. And this after they already had been accepted!

Rev. Thomas Wentworth Higginson, pastor of the Unitarian church in Worcester, Ma.s.s., at once resigned from the business committee and withdrew from the meeting, as did also the women delegates and such gentlemen, including several ministers, as thought the ladies had been unjustly treated. They met at Dr. Trail's office and decided to call a Whole World's Temperance Convention which should not exclude one-half the world, and that the half which was doing the most effective work for temperance.

After they left the Brick Church meeting there were many speeches made condemning the action of women in taking public part in any reforms, led by Rev. Fowler, of Utica, Rev. Hewitt, of Bridgeport, Conn., and Rev. Chambers. The last said he rejoiced that the women were gone, as they were "now rid of the sc.u.m of the convention." Mayor Barstow, who had threatened to resign rather than put the motion that Miss Anthony should be on the business committee, made a speech which the press declared too indecent to be reported. It must be remembered that this entire discussion was founded on the mere proposal to place Miss Anthony on a committee of a temperance meeting. Horace Greeley handled these men without gloves in an article in the Tribune beginning:

Rev. John! We have allowed you to be heard at full length; now you and your set will be silent and hear us. Very palpably your palaver about Mr. Higginson's motion is a dodge, a quirk, a most contemptible quibble, reluctant as we are to speak thus irreverently of the solemn utterances of a Doctor of Divinity.

Right well do you know, reverend sir, that the particular form or time or fashion in which the question came up is utterly immaterial, and you interpose it only to throw dust in the eyes of the public. Suppose a woman had been nominated at the right time and in the right way, according to your understanding of punctilios, wouldn't the same resistance have been made and the same row got up? You know right well that there would. Then what is all your pettifogging about technicalities worth? The only question that anybody cares a b.u.t.ton about is this, "Shall woman be allowed to partic.i.p.ate in your World's Temperance Convention on a footing of perfect equality with man?" If yea, the whole dispute turns on nothing, and isn't worth six lines in the Tribune. But if it was and is the purpose of those for whom you pettifog to keep woman off the platform of that convention and deny her any part in its proceedings except as a spectator, what does all your talk about Higginson's untimeliness and the committee's amount to? Why not treat the subject with some show of honesty?

The women and their friends held a grand rally in the Broadway Tabernacle the second day afterwards. Every foot of sitting and standing room was crowded, although there was an admission fee of a shilling. Miss Anthony presided and there was the strongest enthusiasm, but perfect order was maintained. The following comment was made by the New York Commercial-Advertiser:

THE BATTLE OF THE s.e.xES.--On Sat.u.r.day evening the Broadway Tabernacle reverberated with the shrill, defiant notes of Miss Lucy Stone and her "sisters," who have thrown down the gauntlet to the male friends of temperance and declared not literally "war to the knife" but conflict with tongues.... Henceforth the women's rights ladies--including among them the misses, Lucy herself, Emily Clark, Susan B. Anthony, Antoinette Brown, some Harriets and Angelinas, Melissas and Hannahs, with a f.a.n.n.y too (and more's the pity for it is a sweet name) and sundry matrons whose names are _household_ words in _newspapers_--are to be in open hostility to the regularly const.i.tuted temperance agencies, under cover of a.s.sociation with whom they have contrived to augment their notoriety. The delegates at the Brick Church, who took the responsibility of knocking off these parasites, deserve the thanks of the temperance friends the Union through.... Such a.s.sociations would mar any cause. Left to themselves such women must fall into contempt; they have used the temperance cause for a support long enough, and we are glad that the seeming alliance has been thus formally disowned by the temperance delegates.

The New York Sun, Moses Beach, editor, said:

The quiet duties of daughter, wife or mother are not congenial to those hermaphrodite spirits who thirst to win the t.i.tle of champion of one s.e.x and victor over the other. What is the love and submission of one manly heart to the woman whose ambition it is to sway the minds of mult.i.tudes as did a Demosthenes or a Cicero? What are the tender affections and childish prattle of the family circle, to women whose ears itch for the loud laugh and boisterous cheer of the public a.s.sembly?...

Could a Christian man, cherishing a high regard for woman and for the proprieties of life feel that he was promoting woman's interests and the cause of temperance by being introduced to a temperance meeting by Miss Susan B. Anthony, her ungainly form rigged out in bloomer costume and provoking the thoughtless to laughter and ridicule by her very motions upon the platform? Would he feel that he was honoring the women of his country by accepting as their representatives women whom they must and do despise? Will any pretend to say that women, whose tongues have dishonored their G.o.d and their Savior, while uttering praise of infidels and infidel theories, are worthy to receive the suffrages of their Christian sisters?...

We were much pleased with the remark made a few days since by one of the most distinguished as well as refined and polished men of the day on this very subject: "What are the rights which women seek, and have not?" said he; and answering his own question, he replied, "The right to do wrong! that alone is denied to them--that is the only right appropriated exclusively by men, and surely no true woman would seek to divide or partic.i.p.ate in such a right."

The Organ, the New York temperance paper, had this to say:

The harmony and pleasantness of the meeting were disturbed by an evidently preconcerted irruption of certain women, who have succeeded beyond doubt in acquiring notoriety, however much they may have failed in winning respect. The notorious Abby Kelly, the Miss Stone whose crusade against the Christian doctrine on the subject of marriage has shocked the better portion of society, and several other women in pantaloons were present insisting upon their right to share in the deliberations of the convention.

We wish our friends abroad to understand that the breeze got up here is nothing but an attempt to ride the woman's rights theory into respectability on the back of Temperance. And what absurd, infidel and licentious follies are not packed up under the general head of woman's rights, it would puzzle any one to say. While, however, we approve the act excluding the women at the Brick Church, we feel bound to say that we regretted what seemed to us an unnecessary acerbity on the part of some of the gentlemen opposing them. What a load of extraneous, foolish and crooked people and things the temperance cause has been burdened with during the years of its progress! To our mind this conspiracy of women to crush the cause by making it the bearer of their woman's rights absurdities, is the saddest of all the phenomena of the reform.

The New York Courier, James Watson Webb, editor, gave its readers the following Sunday article:

Anniversary week has the effect of bringing to New York many strange specimens of humanity, masculine and feminine. Antiquated and very homely females made themselves ridiculous by parading the streets in company with hen-pecked husbands, attenuated vegetarians, intemperate Abolitionists and sucking clergymen, who are afraid to say "no" to a strong-minded woman for fear of infringing upon her rights. Shameless as these females--we suppose they _were_ females--looked, we should really have thought they would have blushed as they walked the streets to hear the half-suppressed laughter of their own s.e.x and the remarks of men and boys. The Bloomers figured extensively in the anti-slavery amalgamation convention, and were rather looked up to, but their intemperate ideas would not be tolerated in the temperance meeting at the Brick Chapel....

A scene of the utmost confusion prevailed and there was a perfect warfare of tongues; but, singular to _say_, the women were compelled to hold their tongues and depart, followed by a number of male Betties and subdued husbands, wearing the apparel of manhood, but in reality emasculated by strong-minded women....

So the Bloomers put their credentials in their breeches pockets and a.s.sembled at Dr. Trail's Cold Water Inst.i.tute, where the men and Bloomers all took a bath and a drink together.

These sentiments were echoed by the newspapers, great and small, of the entire country. Not a word in regard to "women's rights" had been uttered at the Brick Church meeting except the right to have their credentials from regularly-organized temperance societies accepted, and the same privileges as other delegates granted. The continual reference to the "warfare of tongues" is rather amusing in face of the fact that no woman was allowed to speak and the talking was entirely monopolized by men. Is it a matter of surprise that only a very limited number of women had the courage to ally themselves with a movement which called down upon them and their families such an avalanche of ridicule and condemnation?

Miss Anthony, on reaching home, immediately began active preparations for the first annual meeting of the Woman's State Temperance Society, which was to be held in Rochester. As usual she wrote hundreds of letters, raised the money, printed and circulated the call, looked after the advertising, engaged the speakers and took the whole responsibility. The convention a.s.sembled in Corinthian Hall, June 1, 1853, with a large attendance. Elizabeth Cady Stanton, the president, after stating that the society had over 2,000 members, and was in a most flourishing condition, said:

It has been objected that we do not confine ourselves to the subject of temperance, but talk too much about woman's rights, divorce and the church.... We have been obliged to preach woman's rights because many, instead of listening to what we had to say on temperance, have questioned the right of woman to speak on any subject. In courts of justice and legislative a.s.semblies, if the right of any person to be there is questioned, all business waits until that point is settled. Now, it is not settled in the minds of the ma.s.ses that woman has any right to stand on an even pedestal with man, look him in the face as an equal and rebuke the sins of her day and generation. Let it be clearly understood then that we are a Woman's Rights Society; that we believe it is woman's duty to speak whenever she feels the impression to do so; that it is her right to be present in all the councils of Church and State.

Continuing, she took firm ground in favor of the right of a woman to be divorced from an habitual drunkard, a position which brought upon her a storm of censure from press, pulpit and society. She was strongly supported, however, by the most prominent women of the day and received many letters of approval, among them one from Lucy Stone, saying: "On the divorce question, I am on your side, for the reason that drunkenness so depraves a man's system that he is not fit to be a father." Gerrit Smith wrote to the convention:

I know not why it is not as much the duty of your s.e.x as of mine to establish newspapers, write books and hold public meetings for the promotion of the cause of temperance. The current idea that modesty should hold women back from such services is nonsense and wickedness. Female modesty! female delicacy! I would that I might never again hear such phrases. There is but one standard of modesty and delicacy for both men and women; and so long as different standards are tolerated, both s.e.xes will be perverse and corrupt.... The Quakers are the best people I have ever known, the most serious and chaste and yet the most brave and resisting; but there are no other people who are so little concerned lest women get out of their sphere. None make so little difference between man and woman. Others appear to think that the happiness and safety of the world consist in magnifying the difference. But when reason and religion shall rule, there will be no difference between man and woman, in respect to the intellect, the heart or the manners.

[Autograph:

Very respectfully your friend Gerrit Smith]

A stirring letter was sent by Neal Dow, expressing his great pleasure that women were taking active and decided measures for the suppression of intemperance, and closing: "It is absurd, therefore, to argue that the community has no power to control this great evil; that any citizen has the right to inflict it upon society, or that society should hesitate to exercise its right and power of self-protection against it."

Many other letters were read from friends, among them Abby Kelly Foster, who said to Miss Anthony: "So far as separate organizations for women's action in the temperance cause are concerned, I consider you the center and soul, without whom nothing could have been done heretofore and I doubt whether anything would be done now." Strong addresses were made by Rev. Channing, Frederick Dougla.s.s, Lucy Stone, Mrs. Nichols, Antoinette Brown, Mrs. Bloomer and others.

When this a.s.sociation was formed a clause was placed in the const.i.tution allowing men to become members and to speak in all meetings but making them ineligible to office. There were two reasons for this: it was desired to throw the full responsibility on woman, compelling her to learn to preside and to think, speak and act for herself, which she never would do if men were present to perform these duties for her; and it was feared that, on account of long habit, men would soon take matters into their own hands and gain control of the society, possibly to the extent of forbidding women to speak at the meetings. Many of the ladies, however, objected to this clause, among them Antoinette Brown, who refused to join the society on account of it. So, yielding to the pressure, Mrs. Stanton, on this first anniversary, said "as this seemed to many a violation of men's rights, and as the women had now learned to stand alone, it might perhaps be safe to admit men to all the privileges of the society, hoping, however, that they would modestly permit woman to continue the work she had so successfully begun."

[Autograph:

Very respectfully yours Neal Dow]

Miss Anthony, chairman of the committee on revising the const.i.tution, brought in a report in favor of admitting the men, which was vigorously discussed. Before the close of this meeting the serious mistake of such action was apparent. The men present monopolized the floor, tried to have the name changed to the People's League, insisted that the society should have nothing to do with any phase of woman's rights, and showed their hand so plainly that Miss Anthony at once took the alarm and in an indignant speech declared the men were trying to drive the women from their own society.

There was a strong undercurrent of opposition to Mrs. Stanton on account of her radical views in regard to equal rights, divorce for drunkenness and the subjection of woman to Bible authority, but those opposing her being wholly inexperienced did not know how to prevent her re-election. As the majority of the men, for obvious reasons, agreed with them in wishing to get rid of Mrs. Stanton, they proceeded to teach them political tactics, got out a printed opposition ticket and defeated her for president by three votes. She was chosen vice-president but emphatically declined. Miss Anthony was almost unanimously re-elected secretary but refused to serve, stating that "the vote showed they would not accept the principle of woman's rights and, as she believed thoroughly in standing for the equality of woman, she could not act as officer of such a society; besides, Mrs. Vaughn, the newly elected president, had openly declared that 'principle must sometimes be sacrificed to expediency.' She herself would never admit this; her doctrine was, 'Do right, and leave the consequences with G.o.d.'" Frederick Dougla.s.s and a number of others urged her in the most earnest manner to remain, paying high tribute to her services and pointing out how much they were needed, but in vain.

Miss Anthony and Mrs. Stanton at once severed all connection with the organization they had founded; it pa.s.sed into the hands of a body of conservative women, who believed they could accomplish by prayer what these two knew never could be done except through legislation with a const.i.tuency of women behind it. The society had a precarious existence of one or two years and finally went to pieces. There was not another strong, concerted movement of women in the cause of temperance for twenty years.[18] Miss Anthony, although a total abstainer all her life, was never again connected with a temperance organization. She has steadfastly held to the opinion that the vital work for women is to secure for themselves the ballot which, above all other agencies, will make them an effective power for dealing not only with this but with all moral questions.

Relieved from her onerous duties in connection with the State society, she at once set about working up the Whole World's Temperance Convention in New York, for which she felt a personal responsibility.

Many of those who had seceded from the Brick Church meeting, including Mr. Higginson himself, were beginning to doubt the propriety of holding a separate convention. Miss Anthony was strongly in favor of it and wrote Lucy Stone:

We have not the slightest reason for supposing that we shall be received at the World's Convention to be held September 5. The same men that controlled the Brick Church meeting are to be the leading spirits there. Not one of them, so far as I can learn, has expressed a regret that the women-delegates were excluded last May; how then can we entertain a hope that they will act differently in September? We may pretend to go in good faith but there will be no faith in us. If it is not too late I beg of you to see that the call is issued and for the very day that the Old Fogies hold their convention.

Lucy Stone agreed with her and, through their efforts, the committee were persuaded to send out the call. It was decided, however, to hold the meeting September 1 and 2, just before the other, and then, while the great crowds from all parts of the country were in the city, to have a regular Woman's Rights Convention on the same date as that of Rev. John Chambers et al. Miss Anthony received many cordial replies to her numerous letters, and some not so cordial. Samuel F. Gary wrote in his characteristic style: "You ask whether I will speak at a Whole World's Temperance Convention to be held in New York during the World's Fair. You will have observed that my humble name is signed to a call for such a convention at that time and place, together with Chancellor Walworth's and others of like distinction. Providence favoring, it is my purpose to partic.i.p.ate in the deliberations of that meeting and I see no sufficient reason for another convention having the same object in view." Possibly if Mr. Gary and "others of like distinction" had been refused permission to speak a word or even to serve on a committee, they might have been able to see "sufficient reason for another convention." Horace Greeley sent the following:

I may not be able to write you a long letter, as you request, but I will give you a little confidential advice. All I know on temperance (pretty nearly) I put into a tract which was long ago printed at the Organ office.... Now, as to tracts: Make it your first rule to Be Thorough. Most of our temperance tracts are too short and flimsy and not calculated to convince reasoning beings.

Let each tract take up some one aspect of the question and exhaust it, none of your fly-away five or six pages but from twelve to thirty-two, the whole case presented in all its aspects and proved up. Nothing less than this will do much good.

Now as to church matters: The short and safe way is simply to set them aside. If those who have outgrown the church do not introduce the subject by treading on the old lady's corns, they can effectually resist all interposition of shibboleths by the followers of Pusey in all sects. Do not make the reform movement a pretext for a.s.saulting the church. In short, the whole question with regard to the woman's movement is best solved by those engaged in it going quietly and effectively on with their work. That will soonest stop the mouths of gainsayers. "It does move, though," is the true answer to all cavils.

I can't be at your convention, and Mrs. Greeley is overwhelmed with moving and babies.

[Autograph:

Yours, Horace Greeley]

While Miss Anthony was thus engaged, the State Teachers' Convention was held in Corinthian Hall, Rochester, August 3, 1853, and true to her resolve made the year previous she put aside everything else in order to attend. According to the rules any one paying a dollar was ent.i.tled to all the rights and privileges of the convention; so she paid her dollar and took her seat. There were over 500 teachers in attendance, two-thirds at least being women. For two entire days Miss Anthony sat there, and during that time not a woman spoke; in all the deliberations there was not the slightest recognition of their presence, and they did not vote on any question, though all had paid the fee and were members of the a.s.sociation. In a letter describing the occasion Miss Anthony said: "My heart was filled with grief and indignation thus to seethe minority, simply because they were men, presuming that in them was vested all wisdom and knowledge; that they needed no aid, no counsel from the majority. And what was most humiliating of all was to look into the faces of those women and see that by far the larger proportion were perfectly satisfied with the position a.s.signed them."

Toward the close of the second day's session the subject under discussion was, "Why the profession of teacher is not as much respected as that of lawyer, doctor or minister?" After listening for several hours, Miss Anthony felt that the decisive moment had come and, rising in her seat, she said, "Mr. President." A bombsh.e.l.l would not have created greater commotion. For the first time in all history a woman's voice was heard in a teachers' convention. Every neck was craned and a profound hush fell upon the a.s.sembly. Charles Davies, LL. D., author of Davies' text books and professor of mathematics at West Point, was president. In full-dress costume with buff vest, blue coat and bra.s.s b.u.t.tons, he was the Great Mogul. At length recovering from the shock of being thus addressed by a woman, he leaned forward and asked with satirical politeness, "What will the lady have?" "I wish to speak to the question under discussion," said Miss Anthony calmly, although her heart was beating a tattoo. Turning to the few rows of men in front of him, for the women occupied the back seats, he inquired, "What is the pleasure of the convention?" "I move she shall be heard," said one man; this was seconded by another, and thus was precipitated a debate which lasted half an hour, although she had precisely the same right to speak as any man who was taking part in the discussion.

She stood during all this time, fearing to lose the floor if she sat down. At last a vote was taken, men only voting, and it was carried in the affirmative by a small majority. Miss Anthony then said: "It seems to me you fail to comprehend the cause of the disrespect of which you complain. Do you not see that so long as society says woman has not brains enough to be a doctor, lawyer or minister, but has plenty to be a teacher, every man of you who condescends to teach, tacitly admits before all Israel and the sun that he has no more brains than a woman?"--and sat down. She had intended to draw the conclusion that the only way to place teaching upon a level with other professions was either to admit woman to them or exclude her from teaching, but her trembling limbs would sustain her no longer.

The convention soon adjourned for the day and, as Miss Anthony went out of the hall, many of the women drew away from her and said audibly: "Did you ever see such a disgraceful performance?" "I never was so ashamed of my s.e.x." But a few of them gathered about her and said: "You have taught us our lesson and hereafter we propose to make ourselves heard."