Publisher's Synopsis
This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1922 edition. Excerpt: ... 1 For the purpose of making a clear distinction between the two amendments the name of Susan B. Anthony is permitted in this one instance for the original Federal Amendment. It is not just to the others who worked for it to give it this designation. present when we have carried one State we stop worrying about that State. The women cannot again be disfranchised except by an amendment to the State constitution, which would first have to pass a Legislature elected by the whole people. No such Legislature would dare to pass such a bill; the members who voted for it would accomplish nothing and would at once be ousted by their outraged women constituents. But under the Shafroth Amendment 8 per cent, of the voters could force a referendum on the question at any time. . . . Also a large part of the effort and money now used to gain new victories would be spent in defending what we had already won. The Rev. Olympia Brown (Wis.), a pioneer suffragist: The passage of the Shafroth Amendment is spoken of several times in the explanations and arguments for it as being an "endorsement of woman suffrage by Congress." "Federal sanction," it is said, "would dignify the movement." This is another misnomer. There is no "indorsement" by Congress and no "federal sanction" about it. There is not even a hint that Congress favors woman suffrage. The amendment merely provides for the Initiative and Referendum in the States. The Woman's Journal lately called attention to the statement twice made that "the effect of the amendment, if ratified, would be the same as if every State in the Union had passed a suffrage amendment." This is a most singular assertion. If every State adopted a suffrage amendment our work would be done. Again: "The passage of this...
