Page:History of Woman Suffrage Volume 6.djvu/172

158 HISTORY OF WOMAN SUFFRAGE printing, stenographic help, hotel bills and incidentals, was only $1,567, but it left the treasury of the association empty. The board therefore gratefully accepted the offer of William Randolph Hearst of a suffrage edition of the Chicago Examiner. He agreed to pay for the cost of publication and permit the funds raised through the sale of the papers and the advertising to go into the suffrage treasury. The women were weary from the campaign and most of the board were going away for the summer but Mrs. Trout rallied her forces, was general manager herself and persuaded Mrs. lunik to be managing editor, Miss Dobyne advertising manager and Mrs. Treadwell circulation manager. As a result of almost six weeks' work during the hottest part of the summer nearly $15,000 were raised. After all commis- sions and other expenses were paid and new and commodious suffrage headquarters in the Tower Building were furnished a fund of between $7,000 and $8,000 was left to maintain them and push organization work. The constitutionality of the law was soon attacked and Mrs. Trout consulted frequently with the officers of the Anti- Saloon League, for the attacks always emanated from the "wet" inter- ests, and most efficient service was rendered by F. Scott McBride, State Superintendent; E. J. Davis, Chicago superintendent, and Frank B. Ebbert, legal counsel for the league, who said it was also their fight. A case was brought against the Election Com- missioners of Chicago for allowing women to vote on certain questions, decided in their favor by the lower courts, appealed and brought before the Supreme Court of Illinois. A meeting of the board of the State Equal Suffrage Association was called at once, which voted to raise a defense fund and fight the case to a finish. The chairman of the committee was Mrs. George A. Soden, first vice-president, and it was largely through her efforts and the contributions of her husband that the fund was raised. Not only the legislators who had voted for the bill but also a number who voted against it sent money to help defend the law. The opponents of the law the liquor interests were represented by Levi Mayer of Chicago, counsel for the United Societies as well as for big brewery interests and considered one of the ablest constitutional lawyers in the State. It was therefore necessary