will remain out of the Union a hundred years rather than come in without woman suffrage."[1]
In the Senate the fight against the suffrage article was renewed with added intensity. The bill for the admission of Wyoming was reported favorably through the chairman of the Committee on Territories, Orville H. Platt of Connecticut, in January, 1890, but was not reached on the calendar until February 17. On objection from Francis M. Cockrell of Missouri, that there was not time then for its consideration, it was postponed, but without losing its place on the calendar. Not until May 2, however, did it come up again as unfinished business, and only to be -again postponed. On May 8 the bill was set down' for the following Monday, but it was June 25 before it finally received extended consideration. The debate continued for three days and the clause conferring suffrage on women took a prominent place.
George G. Vest of Missouri led the opposition and said in the course of his lengthy oration:
I shall never vote to admit into the Union any State that adopts woman suffrage. I do not propose to discuss the sentimental side of the question. .... In my judgment woman suffrage is antagonistic to the spirit, to the institutions, of the people of the United States. It is utterly antagonistic to my ideas of the Government as the fathers made it and left it to us. If there were no other reason I would never give the right of suffrage to women because the danger to the institutions of the United States to-day is in hurried, spasmodic, sentimental suffrage. .... I believe that with universal suffrage in this country, the injecting into our suffrage of all the-women of the United States would be the greatest calamity that could possibly happen to our institutions and people.
.... If there were no other reason with me, I would vote against the admission of Wyoming because it has that feature in its constitution. I will not take the responsibility as a senator of indorsing in any way, directly or indirectly, woman suffrage. I repeat that in my judgment it would be not only a calamity but an es crime against the institutions of the people of the United States. ....
In an extended speech John H. Reagan of Texas said:
But what are we going to do, what are the people of this Territory going to do, by the adoption of this constitution? They are going to make men of women, and when they do that the correlative must
↑Miss Susan B. Anthony was an interested and anxious listener to this debate from the gallery of the House, and a joyful witness to the final passage of the bill.
