Belva Lockwood. Jill Norgren
the committee that women could expect to be enfranchised only when public opinion deemed reform advisable and the people altered state constitutions and laws, or “if established in the courts.”15
The failure of the federal enabling legislation strategy left movement leaders with little choice but to test the power of “New Departure” theory in the courts. In January 1871 Washington lawyer Albert G. Riddle, a staunch supporter of woman suffrage, told NWSA members that he would handle a test case of women’s right to vote, appealing, if necessary, to the U.S. Supreme Court.16 The National put out the message that women should attempt to register and to vote. “This action,” said the NWSA principals, “not only serves the purpose of agitation of the whole question of suffrage, but it puts upon men, our brothers, the onus of refusing the votes of their fellow citizens, and compels them to show just cause for such proceeding.”17
Washington women settled on a twofold test of their rights. They would appear before D.C. election officials and attempt to register and, on a local election day in April, they would try to vote. They believed that if the authorities refused to register them as voters, or to let them cast official ballots, they would have grounds for a test of their constitutional rights in a court of law.
On April 14, 1871, the late edition of the D.C. Evening Star announced that earlier in the day “a number of ladies of this District” had entered the City Hall. Once inside, the racially mixed group of women presented a petition to the president of the Board of Registration asking that their names be registered as qualified voters in the Territory of the District of Columbia.18 It was the second time that week that suffrage women had appeared before the members of the board, seeking to register for an upcoming election. On this afternoon, Lockwood led the “advance guard” of men and women.19 Her friend, Mary Walker, walked beside her. The two women, neither averse to publicity, carried bouquets, ready to bestow flowers on any board member who was prepared to approve the registration of women. Ezekiel stood behind his wife along with a Who’s Who of Washington’s professional and activist women. Frederick Douglass joined the demonstration. The suffragists crowded around the registration desks for two hours, taking down the names of the registrars and making speeches. At four o’clock the women received permission separately to approach the registrars. Dozens did so and, one by one, each application was rejected on the grounds that “under the law [Section 7 of the Organic Act] of the Territory [the District] none but males are entitled to register.”20
The women had marched on City Hall, in part, to orchestrate an event that, by provoking the attention of the press, would keep the issue of woman suffrage alive and before the public. The Evening Star, loyal to the aspirations of women, was respectful, while articles published by the National Republican sported complaint and sarcasm.21
To recruit additional supporters and maintain the interest of the press, the women organized an information and strategy meeting. Notices were placed in the Washington newspapers inviting “Ladies of the District” to attend a gathering on April 18 at the Ladies Department of the business college run by activist Sara Spencer and her husband.22 Sara Spencer opened the meeting by introducing A. G. Riddle. Washington was a small town, and it is likely that most of the people in the room knew him. Riddle, a former congressman, began with words of encouragement and then outlined the legal issues. He asserted that in returning their applications to the protesters, the Board of Registration had not only violated their constitutional rights but had also, he believed, committed a breach of the 1870 Enforcement Act. The act, passed out of concern for the political rights of freedmen, permitted an applicant who had been prohibited from registering to vote to go to the polls on Election Day with an affidavit stating that there had been wrongful action by the registrars. Riddle now urged the women to take copies of the affidavit that he had prepared, and to present themselves at their proper voting districts at the election on April 20.
Spencer and Lockwood each knew women who had been fired by the federal government after participating in the April 14 demonstration at City Hall.23 And while the women had protested at City Hall as a group, their lawyer was now asking the would-be voters to go out on their own to their respective polling places. Despite the honored place of voting in the United States, polling was often carried out in taverns and other places considered inappropriate for women. Politicians spoke about “[h]igh party excitement” that led to violence and rude speech at the polls.24 Ironically, men’s election day behavior had become part of the argument against women’s right to vote. One husband insisted that the polls were so vile that he would not go there to vote.25
Lockwood and her friends considered the possibility of heckling and violence, and decided they were willing to risk public ridicule. Sara Spencer made the practical suggestion that in each precinct as many ladies as possible get together “and present themselves as a body.”26 Riddle was relieved. He wanted at least some women to present themselves at the polls so that he would have two possible lawsuits, one against the Board of Registration for its refusal to register the women, and a second to challenge the anticipated rejection by the judges of election of the protesters’ ballots.
On April 20, the women headed out to their precincts, hoping to join local men in voting for the District’s delegate to Congress and member of D.C.’s governing council. Lockwood went to her polling place in the 12th District. The presiding official would not take her ballot but she stayed long enough to deliver a speech in support of women’s rights.27 As agreed among the women at their earlier meeting, she departed after saying, “I have done my duty.”28 She then accompanied her friend Lydia Hall to the 15th District, where her ballot was also refused.29 The following day the National Republican praised the citizens of Washington for the chivalry that they showed in the face of “the unwomanly conduct of the applicants,” whose action, wrote the editor, had been premeditated, “with the avowed object of testing in a court of law, the right to vote.”30
Within days Riddle and his law partner, Francis Miller, had filed two cases at the District of Columbia Supreme Court: Sara J. Spencer vs. Martin et al.(The Board of Registration) and Sarah E. Webster vs. Griffin et al.(The Judges of Election).31 Writs were served and pleadings entered. Money damages as provided by law were asked for each woman.32 Although the lawyers acted quickly, the case was given a court date for mid-September. Meanwhile, Lockwood and her friends resumed their political appeals, this time to local officials. On July 14, 1871, Lockwood appeared before the District Committee of the House of Delegates on Laws and the Judiciary. She wrote Mary Walker, temporarily out of town, with an account of the meeting where the proposed equal pay bill for women employees of the District, as well as possible changes to the Organic Act, were to be discussed. The meeting had gone well. She had delivered a short speech and, by her reckoning, “completely annihilated the 7th Sec. [the males-only clause] of the Organic Act.”33 The committee members had not been argumentative and, after listening to Lockwood’s talk, two representatives had come out in support of woman suffrage. The Morning Chronicle echoed the sentiments of her letter, describing Lockwood as having “marked ability and an earnest eloquence.”34
This talk introduced themes that would become standard fare in Lockwood’s lectures and sidewalk stumping. She quoted from English law and precedent and then recounted women’s accomplishments, one moment drawing on the examples of Elizabeth I, Catherine the Great, and Joan of Arc while in her next breath praising American women professionals. She said that women were recognized as citizens and that true government depends upon self-government by each individual. Lockwood not only advocated women’s right to vote but also prophesied the contributions women would make if elected to legislatures, where they would bring “their peculiar wisdom to bear upon the law.”35 The Morning Chronicle gave the talk a “good report,” after which friends suggested that it be published. Lockwood did this, writing Walker that she had “two thousand struck.”36
Summer over, the District Supreme Court resumed its business, hearing argument the second week of September in the Spencer and Webster cases. Riddle acknowledged the problematic language of the Organic Act’s seventh section (“all male citizens shall be entitled to vote”) but