… 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 …