… and if I may run back to the April of 1920, directly after
we had realized that the Amendment was not going to be ratified by the
legislature, Mrs. Valentine had asked Dr. Alderman of the University to
let us hold a citizenship meeting for women at the University of
Virginia. We thought at that time that a sufficient number of states
would have ratified, so that we would go to the University as
enfranchised women. But when we got up to the University, the meeting
having been agreed to by Dr. Alderman and promoted largely
Page 19 by Mr. Charles G. Maphis, one of the most liberal and
broadminded men at the University of Virginia and head of the extension
department, we got up to hold our citizenship meeting and found out that
the alumni were protesting violently with Dr. Alderman and asking him to
call the meeting off. In fact, we were a half hour late getting started
because of long distance telephone messages coming from the president of
the alumni association, Mr. Epper Huntin, urging that we not be allowed
to meet. The University published a very interesting bulletin on that
meeting which contains, among other things, a statement from Dr. Lyle,
who was head of the Law Department of the University, on the legal
status of women in Virginia. That is a matter of record, so I
won't bother to go into that. But we also had the attorney
general of the state, who spoke to the woman suffragists. And I remember
one of our ladies said it was the most remarkable thing that
he'd talked to the group of fifty or sixty women as if each
one of them had been sitting alone next to him on a sofa. But we did
have two or three days of discussion, and that was the launching of what
I mentioned before, the citizenship committee teaching the women how to
register.
And registration in Virginia is tricky more
than very difficult. Unless the register wishes to ask people questions,
it's fairly simple. You have to give your name and age and
date of birth and residence and various things of that sort, not much
more difficult than registering for a motor vehicle license. But then,
if the registrar wants to ask you questions about interpreting the
Constitution, he may do so. I don't remember that we had much
trouble with that.
Page 20 Our rural women had a lot of
trouble running all over the county trying to catch the registrars, who
were out plowing or fishing or doing various things. But in the towns we
nearly always had registration offices. The colored women had the most
trouble with registering. There had been so much of that sort of thing:
"If you get the vote, what about the Negro woman?" But
we had some wonderful Negro leaders, and there was one in Richmond named
Ora Stokes, the wife of a colored clergyman. And she organized the
colored women and taught them to register. But the City Hall here in
Richmond registered the colored women separately from the white, down in
the basement. And they worked out all sorts of things of having their
hours shorter than the white women. We white women had a big fight with
the electoral board, insisting on their giving the Negro women the same
privilege of hours for election. Our newspapers were perfectly terrific
about the Negro woman voting. They brought out everything that they
could of Reconstruction days, and they wrote outrageous editorials. My
very intimate friend Lenora Houston, who was an artist—and
she and I had a studio together—decided that we could not let
this terrible race condition occur. I've jumped back now to
the fall of 1920. Lenora and I decided that we had to do something to
meet the colored women, because we were really afraid there'd
be riots of sorts. And, as we didn't dare ask them to the
Equal Suffrage League—this was before the League of Women
Voters was organized—because we would have been accused of
trying to get the Negro vote out, we took advantage of being artists
(always considered a little erratic). So we had a group of the colored
women come to
Page 21 our studio one night to talk over
the whole situation with them, and to tell them that the men had been
just as much afraid of our voting as they had been of their voting, but
we wanted to assure them of our friendship. Ora Stokes and a Mrs.
Lillian Payne and several other leading Negro women, whose names we had
got from a Mrs. Walter MacNeill, a sister-in-law of Mrs.
Valentine's who had done interracial work. She told us who to
call, and we had called these colored women, and they came to our studio
and we talked over the whole situation with them. And it was decided
that on the election day that several of us white women would take
automobiles and visit all the Negro registration places to see whether
any violence was breaking out. There was a very able woman leader here,
a Miss Catherine Halls, who was most active with YWCA work. She lent her
car. Mrs. Houston's mother rented a car for us, and I
don't remember who else had automobiles at her disposal, but
there were about four of us who started off at sunrise on the election
day and visited all the Negro polling places just to see if everything
was going quietly. And everything went quite quietly; in spite of the
fact that there had been threats of bloodshed and riot and everything
else, there wasn't any rioting. The Negro women went up
quietly and voted, but I think they were very much heartened by the fact
that there were four or five white women that went to the polls to give
them their backing. And so that went through. But we never had the nerve
to enroll the Negro women in the League of Women Voters. I've
always regretted it, but we just couldn't bring
Page 22 the middle-of-the-road thinkers to the point of bringing
the Negro women in. A number of us, especially Lucy Mason, went to
groups—Negro clubs and all—and talked to the Negro
women about civic affairs. And we made as much contact with them as
possible. But we couldn't do very much about it because we
were afraid of being accused of being carpetbaggers, so that we
[Laughter] had to stay out of it to a
certain extent.
Now I don't know just what is
significant in the development of this work, except it occurs to me that
in 1921, in preparation for the 1922 General Assembly, that one of the
most significant pieces of work that women did in Virginia occurred. The
national League of Women Voters held a regional meeting in Atlanta,
Georgia, to which the presidents of all the southern leagues were
invited, and as many delegates as could go. And at that meeting in
Atlanta, as President of the Virginia League, I attended the conference.
And in talking to one of the women from Chicago, one of the women
lawyers, we were advised to organize a Children's Code
Commission, if possible, because there were so many laws that were
unfair to children. We had no child labor laws, no compulsory education
laws. We were very backward, particularly the question of juvenile
courts and that sort of thing. And we were advised to organize a Code
Commission to study what was necessary about the laws about women and
children, particularly about children, rather than try to get a number
of bills through separately. That meeting was held either in the early
spring or the very late winter of 1921; I'd have to look at
the records to make sure. But when I came back
Page 23 to
the meeting of the board of the Virginia League of Women Voters, I found
that Mrs. Houston, who was the Legislative Chairman for the League, told
me that she had been to see the Commissioner of the Board of Charities
and Corrections, now the Board of Welfare, a Dr. Maston. And he had
advocated our having a Children's Code Commission to look
over the whole field. Mrs. Louis Branlow, the wife of Louis Branlow in
Washington who was a very distinguished liberal leader (he was at that
time the City Manager of Petersburg), was our Child Welfare Chairman.
And she came to the board with the urgent recommendation that we
organize a Children's Code Commission. So from three
different angles, we decided that was our best course to pursue for the
1922 General Assembly. And we went down and asked Governor Davis if he
would appoint a Children's Code Commission, and he was
perfectly willing to do it, but he said there was no money set up to
finance the Commission. So he very generously arranged to assign Mr.
Morrissette, who is now our State Tax Commissioner and who was then the
head of the Committee on Legislative Drafting, as a member of the
Commission. He assigned a Dr. Bryden, who was on the staff of the Health
Commissioner and a state employee, to the Commission. He appointed Judge
Ricks, who was the Judge of our Juvenile Court in Richmond, and Judge
Royster in Norfolk. There were four state officials, and I've
forgotten for the moment the fifth, but he assigned five state officials
and relieved them of their work so that they could serve for the
necessary time on the Code Commission. And then he appointed four
volunteer women: a Mrs. King of Staunton; Mrs. Houston, who was the
Legislative Chairman; and two other women. I'm sorry that
Page 24 I don't remember them, but this is all
recorded history. And they began a study of the laws in Virginia with
regard to women and children, particularly with regard to children. They
worked assiduously without pay till the fall of 1921, just giving them
time to print their report. And they brought in a recommended twenty-six
laws. Believe it or not, we got about twenty of them enacted in the
General Assembly of 1922. They comprised a very good child labor law; a
compulsory education law that was very weak, but at least it was a
camel's foot in the tent; a law that registered maternity
homes; a statewide juvenile courts system. These are the things we got
through. Laws about the registration of infants in hospitals, the
infants of unmarried mothers. It's rather appalling to me
now, when the discussion comes up so much about the aid to dependent
children, ADC things that people make such a fuss about and about the
illegitimate children, to realize that they didn't even
bother whether they were killed at birth. And a great many of them were,
as the studies of this Code Commission showed. Because maternity homes
were not registered, and a great many of the women who were in great
distress over finding themselves unmarried mothers, their children were
taken away from them, and in many cases they probably were allowed to
die. We found appalling conditions about that sort of thing. Strangely
enough, the conditions were a little better among the colored women,
because they hadn't had so much of a stigma attached to
irregular living, as white women had. But the attitude toward the
illegitimate child was pretty awful. But we worked ourselves to death,
but we got about eighteen or twenty of those
Page 25 laws
enacted, including a statewide juvenile courts system, which we felt was
one of the triumphs. We got a pretty good child labor bill because the
federal child labor bill had not been declared unconstitutional at the
time. And so we met most of the standards of the federal child labor
bill that afterwards was declared unconstitutional. It had been enacted
in '20 or '21 by Congress, and the Supreme Court
did not declare it unconstitutional until 1923 or 1924. And then based
on the fact that it had been based on the interstate tax system of some
sort. Another thing we were able to get enacted that year… We
got several election laws improved, but I'd have to look over
the record to make any accurate statement. But we did push through the
1922 session a commission to study efficiency in government. And
therefore, by 1924 we had brought in a very good recommendation about
the reorganization of state government. That was also done with the
cooperation of the University of Virginia. I think the men politicians
were much more frightened of us in those early days than
they've come to be since. They were dreadfully afraid we were
going to organize a woman's party. And also they were very
much afraid that a number of us were going to become Republicans, which
we had, for gratitude, every reason to be, because when the ratification
measure had come up in the 1920 session of the legislature, six
Republicans and six Dem …