Page:History of Woman Suffrage Volume 4.djvu/1172

and those decided in other States that they can hold office, may be examined and considered."

See also Am. and Eng. Ency. of Law, Vol. 19, p. 403-4. I might add that in this State there are many women who hold the office of notary public.

 

---

 

WASHINGTON.

The following account of the unconstitutional disfranchising of the women of Washington Territory in 1888 was carefully prepared by the editors of the "Woman's Journal" (Boston). When the editors of the present volume decided to incorporate it as a part of the History of Woman Suffrage it was submitted to Judge Orange J. Jacobs of Seattle for legal inspection. He returned it with the statement that it was correct in every particular. It constitutes one of the many judicial outrages which have been committed in the United States in the determination to prevent the enfranchisement of women:

Women voted in Washington Territory for the first time in 1884, and were disfranchised by its Supreme Court in 1887.

Equal suffrage was granted by the Legislature in October, 1883. The women at once began to distinguish themselves there, as in Wyoming and elsewhere, by voting for the best man, irrespective of party. The old files of the Washington newspapers bear ample evidence to this fact. The first chance they had to vote was at the municipal elections of July, 1884. The Seattle "Mirror" said:

"The city election of last Monday was for more reasons than one the most important ever held in Seattle. The presence of women at the voting-places had the effect of preventing the disgraceful proceedings usually seen. It was the first election in the city where the women could vote, and the first where the gambling and liquor fraternity, which had so long controlled the municipal government to an enormous extent, suffered defeat."

The "Post-Intelligencer" said:

"After the experience of the late election it will not do for any one here to say the women do not want to vote. They displayed as much interest as the men, and, if anything, more. .... The result insures Seattle a first-class municipal administration. It is a warning to that undesirable class of the community who subsist upon the weaknesses and vices of society that disregard of law and the decencies of civilization will not be tolerated."

Quotations might be multiplied from the papers of other towns, testifying to the independent voting of the women, the large size of their vote, the courtesy with which they were treated, and the greater quiet and order produced by their presence at the polls.

Next came the general election of November, 1884. Again the newspapers were practically unanimous as to the result. The Olympia "Transcript", which was opposed to equal suffrage, said: "The result shows that all parties must put up good men if they expect to elect them. They can not do as they have in the past — nominate any candidates, and elect them by the force of the party lash."

The "Democratic State Journal" said: "No one could fail to see that hereafter more attention must be given at the primaries to select the purest of material, by both parties, if they would gain the female vote."

Charles J. Woodbury visited Washington about this time. In a letter to the N. Y. "Evening Post", he said: 'Whatever may be the vicissitudes of woman suffrage in Washington Territory in the future, it should now be put on record that at the election, Nov. 4, 1884, nine-tenths of its adult female population availed themselves of the right to vote with a hearty enthusiasm."