Alice Paul to Alice Stone Blackwell. 7 May 1913.
LOC. NAWSA Papers. Reel 32.
Paul attempts to convince Blackwell that the Woman's Journal, the NAWSA's newspaper, should be published in Washington, D.C. because that is where the important suffrage work is happening. Paul attempts to convince Blackwell that the NAWSA should focus on the federal suffrage amendment. This letter exemplifies the major split between CU and NAWSA caused by Paul's desire to exclusively work on suffrage at the federal level.
Anna Howard Shaw to Lucy Burns. 19 Nov. 1913.
LOC. NAWSA Papers. Reel 34.
Shaw writes in regards to Burns' being fined by police for chalking sidewalks and Burns' fight against the fine. This dispute leads to a discussion of old vs. new ways of organizing. Shaw writes, "Now, it seems to me and other suffragists who have been in the work a long time, that this is very ill-advised in the present time. What we are seeking is not to anger Congress but to plead our cause in a way which will at least gain their respect, if not their cooperation". She writes to Burns because she cares about the CU's work and does not want the NAWSA leaders to object to it. She wants both organizations to work together.
Lucy Burns to Anna Howard Shaw. 13 Dec. 1913.
LOC. NAWSA Papers. Reel 33.
Burns tells Shaw that she will only work for the newly appointed NAWSA Congressional Committee, which replaced Paul's Congressional Committee, if she can work for the CU at the same time. She thinks the NAWSA limits its power because it will not organize in a state without the permission of the state's NAWSA auxiliary leaders. It "creates great difficulties for it [NAWSA] as an organization". Regarding relations between the CU and NAWSA she writes, "And whether Miss Paul and I serve on the Congressional Committee in the future or not, I think we may work together in perfect harmony if we recognize in the other complete purity of motive".
Lucy Burns to Anna Howard Shaw. 17 Dec. 1913.
LOC. NAWSA Papers. Reel 32.
Burns declines the chairmanship of the newly appointed NAWSA Congressional Committee, which will replace Paul's Congressional Committee. She explains to Shaw that the CU is a necessary body and she and Paul will continue to lead it.
Anna Howard Shaw to Lucy Burns. 20 Dec. 1913.
LOC. NAWSA Papers. Reel 34.
Shaw explains that the CU should not organize in states if NAWSA state auxiliary leaders do not want them to do so. State auxiliaries should organize Congressional work themselves. This letter reveals a fundamental difference between NAWSA and CU organizing strategies.
Back to top
Lucy Burns to Anna Howard Shaw. 3 Jan. 1914.
LOC. NAWSA Papers. Reel 32.
Burns declines to serve on the NAWSA's new Congressional Committee because the committee will not adopt the CU's idea of holding the party in power of the Presidency (Democrats) responsible for witholding woman suffrage.
Antoinette Funk to Anna Howard Shaw. 21 Jan. 1914.
LOC. NAWSA Papers. Reel 33.
Funk explains that the CU is hurting the Congressional Committee's work. "...I think we are simply going to have to realize that the Union will take our organization for their purpose whenever they can and we must make it our business to speak first and make the situation plain in all the states."
Ruth Hanna McCormick to Anna Howard Shaw. 3 Feb. 1914.
LOC. NAWSA Papers. Reel 33.
McCormick will not continue as chair of the Congressional Committee if CU is elected as an auxiliary of the NAWSA. She claims that the CU's anti-party in power strategy is "political suicide". She describes conflict between CU and Congressional Committee about organizing Congressional work in the states. McCormick thinks the NAWSA Congressional Committee should organize states because they have the capacity to do so. The CU feels that the Congressional Committee has not organized the states well. All attempts to coordinate plans between the CU and Congressional Committee have failed.
Anna Howard Shaw to Mrs. Medill McCormick. 5 Feb. 1914.
LOC. NAWSA Papers. Reel 34.
Shaw acknowledges that the CU is dangerous to NAWSA's work. "I feel, with you, that we are facing a very grave situation in regard to the Congressional Union, and that endorsement of the Union--and certainly granting them auxiliaryship is nothing short of endorsement--would be one of the most disasterous things that has happened to our Association for many and many a day." Shaw feels that the CU's work is an attack against the NAWSA. "Miss Belmont and other women who wish to strike at the National will find them [CU] the best means through which they can do it."
Antoinette Funk to Anna Howard Shaw. 18 Feb. 1914.
LOC. NAWSA Papers. Reel 33.
Funk writes in response to a statement in the Suffragist, the CU's newspaper, that the CU will work against the election of Democratic Congressmen. She point out that representatives and senators targeted by the CU are pro-suffrage and the NAWSA must help them win their elections. "I am not trying to criticize the Union, but to make clear the reasons why we cannot endorse such a policy as this. If even by silence we endorse this action it is utterly useless for us to pursue our work here in Congress."
Antoinette Funk to Anna Howard Shaw. 4 March 1914.
LOC. NAWSA Papers. Reel 33.
Funk describes a Congressional committee hearing about woman suffrage in which CU members act disrespectful of Congressmen and threaten to work against their re-elections. Funk describes the CU's behavior as "punk".
Anna Howard Shaw to Mrs. Medill McCormick. 17 March 1914.
LOC. NAWSA Papers. Reel 34.
Shaw feels that the CU is "doing everything they can to put the suffrage movement back as many years as possible".
Wilmar Atkinson to "To whom it may concern". 8 April 1914.
LOC. NAWSA Papers. Reel 33.
Atkinson's letter urges reconciliation between the CU and NAWSA. It is titled: "For Private Circulation Only. Shall the Success of a Great Cause Be Imperiled Through Lack of Harmony Among Its Friends?" She explains that getting voters to support suffrage is the most important objective. She also explains that the CU and NAWSA do not work together because CU works at the federal level while NAWSA works with the states. She asks letter's recipients for feedback about these ideas.
Antoinette Funk to Anna Howard Shaw. 29 April 1914.
LOC. NAWSA Papers. Reel 33.
Funk claims that CU is organizationally unsound and only interested in publicity.
Antoinette Funk to Anna Howard Shaw. 8 July 1914.
LOC. NAWSA Papers. Reel 33.
Funk urges Shaw to stop CU from damaging progress made in Congress by the Congressional Committee. She writes that Congressman Baker of California, a strong suffragist, tells her that the "attitude of the Union...is injuring the cause of suffrage beyond repair". She also writes, "It is, as you say, a disheartening thing to have to spend time, energy and money in fighting something or somebody when we should be doing a piece of constructive work". She describes sentiment in Washington, D.C. "The reaction here against the Union, as I told you before, is enormous".
Alice Paul to Elizabeth Upham Yates. 17 Sept. 1914.
LOC. NAWSA Papers. Reel 34.
Paul asks Yates if CU members can come to her state (Rhode Island) NAWSA convention and recruit NAWSA members for federal work with the CU.
Anna Howard Shaw to Elizabeth Upham Yates. 22 Sept. 1914.
LOC. NAWSA Papers. Reel 34.
Shaw thanks Yates for the "tip" that Paul is trying to win Yates, the NAWSA auxiliary president of Rhode Island, to the CU's side.
Back to top
Katharine B. Day and Annie G. Porett to Carrie Chapman Catt. 29 May 1915.
LOC. NAWSA Papers. Reel 33.
Day and Porett defend the CU's strategy. In regards to the CU's semi-militant strategy they write, "We have already made our protest against tactics of this kind, and we find that the leaders of the Congressional Union are quite ready to take these protests into serious consideration".
Lavinia L. Dock to Carrie Chapman Catt. 1 June 1915.
LOC. NAWSA Papers. Reel 33.
Dock is a member of the CU who also works with the NAWSA. She believes that the press exaggerates the public's negative reaction to CU tactics and that Catt should not worry about public reaction to CU tactics. She writes, "Dear Mrs. Catt, the upper classes of men of whom you chiefly see will never let women vote if they can help it. Before the Congressional Union was ever heard of they were unalterably hostile, and tomorrow they will have forgotten the 'heckling' but will still be hostile". She also claims that the labor vote is necessary to obtaining suffrage and that labor will not support suffrage until the NAWSA unionizes its office.
Alva Belmont to Carrie Chapman Catt. 1 June 1915.
LOC. NAWSA Papers. Reel 33.
Belmont defends the CU. She thinks they are an honest, hard-working, and necessary group. She writes about their strategy, "There are women--and I am one of them--who believe it right to follow every honorable road that leads to equal suffrage".
Lucy Burns to Carrie Chapman Catt. 3 June 1915.
LOC. NAWSA Papers. Reel 33.
Burns writes in response to Catt's request that the CU stop doing federal amendment work in New York during the NAWSA's suffrage referendum campaign there. Burns declares that the CU is a bi-partisan organization.
Senator Charles S. Thomas to Mrs. Medill McCormick. 7 June 1915.
LOC. NAWSA Papers. Reel 34.
Senator Thomas is pro-suffrage. He writes about the CU's campaign against his re-election. He was able to win the election, but the campaign made him resent the CU. He writes, "The political effects of the movement [CU] have been unfavorable".
Crystal Eastmen Benedict to Carrie Chapman Catt. 8 June 1915.
LOC. NAWSA Papers. Reel 33.
Benedict claims that the CU has the "same earnestness and conviction" as NAWSA.
Mary Beard to Carrie Chapman Catt. 9 June 1915.
LOC. NAWSA Papers. Reel 33.
Beard defends the CU's strategies as being helpful and necessary to obtaining federal suffrage. She claims that President Wilson should be targeted because he holds much power over Congress.
Back to top
Carrie Chapman Catt to Lucy Anthony. 6 Jan. 1916.
Catt explains that the CU owns stock in NAWSA's publishing company and she wants to allow the Publishing Company to print CU material.
Mary Ward Dennett to Mrs. Vincent Bly. 6 April 1916.
LOC. NAWSA Papers. Reel 33.
This is an important letter. Dennett outlines the reasons why CU and NAWSA cannot work together.
Carrie Chapman Catt to Mrs. Gillette. 9 Aug. 1916.
LOC. NAWSA Papers. Reel 33.
Catt understands that CU split from NAWSA because of financial reasons. She expresses a desire for the NAWSA to increase work on the federal amendment, which she considers very important.
Back to top
Carrie Chapman Catt to Maud Wood Park. 4 Sept. 1918.
LOC. NAWSA Papers. Reel 32.
Catt discusses her desire to focus on state-by-state, non-partisan work. She writes of the NWP's anti-party in power strategy, "I note the clipping in the paper that the Woman's Party proposes to fight the Democrats. I do not think their fight will be very intensive for reasons which everybody can understand".
Margaret Clark to Carrie Chapman Catt. 11 Oct. 1918.
LOC. NAWSA Papers. Reel 33.
Clark is an employee at the Senate Office Building. She writes to tell Catt that Senators and her fellow employees were disgusted by the NWP's White House picketing. She urges the NAWSA to take a public stand against it.
Maud Wood Park to Carrie Chapman Catt. 21 Nov. 1918.
SSC. Catt Collection. Box 4, folder 39.
Park informs Catt that she has spoken with a Senator who will vote against the woman suffrage amendment, partially because he did not approve of the NWP's White House picketing.
Back to top
Carrie Chapman Catt. Letter to the Editor. New York Times. 8 Dec. 1916.
SSC. Catt Collection. Box 1, folder 6.
Catt distinguishes NAWSA and the New York Woman Suffrage Party from the NWP. She voices her disapproval of the NWP's display of a pro-suffrage banner during President Wilson's speech in the House of Representatives' chambers.
Back to top
Dennett, Mary Ware. No title. Notes taken at discussion between members of NAWSA and CU. 12 Feb. 1914.
LOC. NAWSA Papers. Reel 33.
A very important document to the study of the split between the two organizations. Women present at this contentious meeting included: Alice Paul, Lucy Burns, Ruth Hanna McCormick, Anna Howard Shaw, Antoinette Funk, Mrs. Gardener, and Mrs. Medill McCormick. The minutes are 35 pages long. The two organizations' representatives disagreed over the CU's anti-party in power policy. There was an important, lengthy discussion of the reasons for the split between the organizations and what occurred at the December 1913 NAWSA convention. During the meeting Alice Paul remarked of the NAWSA attitude toward the CU, "It seems to me that you disapprove of every one of us". The meeting ends when Anna Howard Shaw tells Alice Paul, "I do not think the National can cooperate with you in anything; if we do we shall be held responsible".
Author unknown. No title. Typed report of proceedings of 1913 NAWSA convention. 19 Feb. 1914.
LOC. NAWSA Papers. Reel 32.
Pennsylvania NAWSA leaders are unhappy with CU's press statements, which do not represent the views of Pennsylvania NAWSA members. Mary Garret Hay and the NAWSA Executive Committee decide that they must approve any policy statements by the CU in order to prevent that from happening again.
This disagreement motivates an informal meeting on December 5, 1913 between the NAWSA Executive Board, Alice Paul, and Lucy Burns at which Alice Paul was "unwilling to talk at all" about differences in policy. The NAWSA Executive Board announced its concern with the CU "organizing in states over the heads of the state organizations". An important series of meetings follows.
Back to top
Author unknown. Testimony from Western States on Anti-Party Policy of Congressional Union. 6-9 June 1915.
LOC. NAWSA Papers. Reel 33.
Representatives from Western states testified at the NAWSA mid-year conference in Chicago. They concluded that the CU's anti-Democrat policy did not work during the 1914 Congressional elections.
NAWSA. Fundamental Principles of National American Woman Suffrage Association. (Resolution adopted at National Conference held in Chicago, June 6-9, 1915.) 6-9 June 1915.
LOC. NAWSA Papers. Reel 33.
The document is important to understanding the ideology of the NAWSA in contrast to the CU. Five NAWSA principles are listed. They include non-partisanship and disapproval of militant actions. The resolution is obviously a reaction to CU's policies.
Back to top
Shaw, Anna Howard. Dr. Shaw's Outline of her Position on the Different Policies of the National Association and the Congressional Union. 27 July 1916.
LOC. NAWSA Papers. Reel 34.
A lengthy summary of Shaw's views about CU's strategies. It includes examples of other situations in which militant, anti-party policies have not affected change. Shaw tries to prove why the CU policy will not work.
White, Ruth. No title. Typed minutes of informal meeting of the National Congressional Committee. 4 Sept. 1916.
LOC. NAWSA Papers. Reel 33.
Meeting is about strategy to deal with the CU. Congressional Committee members decide that they should not work with the CU because their collaboration will not further the federal amendment.
Back to top
NAWSA Press Bureau. Mrs. Catt Protests against Miss Paul's Pickets. 25 May 1917.
LOC. NAWSA Papers. Reel 47.
Catt sent an open letter to Paul urging her to stop the pickets.
Smith, Ethel M. (Press Chairman). NAWSA Press Release. 20 June 1917.
LOC. NAWSA Papers. Reel 47.
Release includes Anna Howard Shaw's comments about NWP pickets being mobbed and attacked by crowds. She distances NAWSA from the pickets and claims that the pickets are the greatest obstacle that woman suffrage faces.
Park, Maud Wood. Special Interview with Senator Jones. 26 June 1917.
LOC. NAWSA Papers. Reel 32.
Senator Jones, a member of the Senate Woman Suffage Committee, is unwilling to report out the suffrage amendment because other committee members were angry about the NWP's pickets.
NAWSA Congressional Committee. Confidential Interviews-Washington. 3 July 1917.
LOC. NAWSA Papers. Reel 32.
Includes a report about press coverage of suffrage activities. Mr. Creel, a member of the Wilson administration, made interview appointments for the Congressional Committee with members of the press. During the interviews, NAWSA will attempt to stop the press from associating NWP activities with the NAWSA.
Back to top
Author unknown. Objections to the Policy of the Congressional Union. Date unknown.
LOC. NAWSA Papers. Reel 34.
A summary of conflict between the NAWSA and CU. Explains that party in power policy is applicable to English, not American politics. Suffragists should not oppose Democrats who are pro-suffrage. Women will not unite behind the party in power policy. CU's militancy invites opposition.
Author unknown. Reasons Why the Non-partisan Policy of the National American Woman Suffrage Association is Practical. Date unknown.
LOC. NAWSA Papers. Reel 33.
Pamphlet criticizes CU/NWP strategies. It claims that suffrage is a non-partisan matter. In regards to CU/NWP's anti-Democrat policy, "It is obviously absurd to attempt to defeat men because they belong to the majority party". Suffragists should not attempt to defeat pro-suffrage Democrats.
McCormick, Katharine Dexter. Statement by Treasurer of National American Woman Suffrage Association in regard to financial affairs between National Association and Congressional Committee during year 1913-1914. Date unknown.
LOC. NAWSA Papers. Reel 33.
Document describes financial disagreements between CU and NAWSA, which were one reason for the split between the two organizations.
NAWSA. Report of 1913 Convention Meetings where Congressional Union/Congressional Committee Role Discussed and Outline of Guidelines for Congressional Union. Date unknown.
LOC. NAWSA Papers. Reel 32.
This is an important document for understanding the reasons behind the split. NAWSA asks CU to report its activities to NAWSA. NAWSA declares that CU cannot organize in states without the permission of the state NAWSA auxiliary leaders. CU should disassociate itself from NAWSA. Document includes detailed plans of the NAWSA's disassociation from the CU. It also includes vote of Executive Council to deny CU auxiliary status.
Shaw, Anna Howard? Aims and Policies of the National American Woman Suffrage Association as Contrasted with the Congressional Union. Date unknown.
LOC. NAWSA Papers. Reel 33.
This important document is a summary of the conflict over strategies. It accuses Alice Paul of "declared her purpose of 'smashing the National'". It attempts to convince NAWSA members not to leave NAWSA to join CU. "It is heartbreaking that there should be divisions in our ranks at a time when a united strength is so greatly needed for the great cause we are all serving."
Back to top
Democratic National Committee Woman's Bureau. Sixty Years of Struggle for Suffrage. Washington, D.C.: Democratic National Committee, date unknown.
LOC. NAWSA Papers. Reel 32.
Pamphlet shows Congressional voting records in order to prove that Democrats are not enemies of suffrage. It credits Democrats for doing more for suffrage than Republicans did.
Back to top
Return to main page