and the great
congregation filled not only all the
pews, but the aisles, the
platform, and even the
steps of the
pulpit. The ushers were young women
from the University of Upsala, wearing white uni-
versity caps with black vizors, and sashes in the
university colors. The
anthem was
composed es-
pecially for the occasion by the first woman cathe-
dral
organist in Sweden--the
organist of the cathe-
dral in Gothenburg--and she had brought with her
thirty members of her choir, all of them remarkable
singers.
The whole occasion was indescribably impressive,
and I realized in every fiber the necessity of being
worthy of it. Also, I
experienced a
sensation such
as I had never known before, and which I can only
describe as a
seeming complete
separation of my
physical self from my
spiritual self. It was as if my
body stood aside and watched my soul enter that
pulpit. There was no
uncertainty, no
nervousness,
though usually I am very
nervous when I begin to
speak; and when I had finished I knew that I had
done my best.
But all this is a long way from the early days I
was discussing, when I was making my first diffident
bows to lecture
audiences and
learning the lessons
of the
pioneer in the lecture-field. I was soon to
learn more, for in 1888 Miss Anthony persuaded me
to drop my
temperance work and
concentrate my
energies on the
suffrage cause. For a long time I
hesitated. I was very happy in my connection
with the Woman's Christian Temperance Union,
and I knew that Miss Willard was depending on me
to continue it. But Miss Anthony's
arguments
were irrefutable, and she was herself, as always,
irresistible.
``You can't win two causes at once,'' she reminded
me. ``You're merely scattering your energies. Be-
gin at the
beginning. Win
suffrage for women, and
the rest will follow.'' As an added
argument, she
took me with her on her Kansas
campaign, and after
that no further
arguments were needed. From then
until her death, eighteen years later, Miss Anthony
and I worked shoulder to shoulder.
The most interesting lecture
episode of our first
Kansas
campaign was my
debate with Senator John
J. Ingalls. Before this, however, on our arrival
at Atchison, Mrs. Ingalls gave a
luncheon for Miss
Anthony, and Rachel Foster Avery and I were also
invited. Miss Anthony sat at the right of Senator
Ingalls, and I at his left, while Mrs. Ingalls, of course,
adorned the opposite end of her table. Mrs. Avery
and I had just been entertained for several days at
the home of a vegetarian friend who did not know
how to cook vegetables, and we were both half
starved. When we were invited to the Ingalls home
we had uttered in
unison a
joyous cry, ``Now we shall
have something to eat!'' At the
luncheon, however,
Senator Ingalls kept Miss Anthony and me talking
steadily. He was not in favor of
suffrage for women,
but he wished to know all sorts of things about the
Cause, and we were
anxious to have him know them.
The result was that I had time for only an occasional
mouthful, while down at the end of the table Mrs.
Avery ate and ate, pausing only to send me glances
of heartfelt
sympathy. Also,
whenever she had an
especially toothsome
morsel on the end of her fork
she wickedly succeeded in catching my eye and thus
adding the last sybaritic touch to her enjoyment.
Notwithstanding the
wealth of knowledge we had
bestowed upon him, or perhaps because of it, the
following night Senator Ingalls made his famous
speech against
suffrage, and it fell to my lot to
answer him. In the course of his remarks he asked
this question: ``Would you like to add three million
illiterate voters to the large body of
illiterate voters
we have in America to-day?'' The
audience ap-
plauded light-heartedly, but I was disturbed by the
sophistry of the question. One of Senator Ingalls's
most discussed personal peculiarities was the parting
of his hair in the middle. Cartoonists and news-
paper writers always made much of this, so when I
rose to reply I felt justified in mentioning it.
``Senator Ingalls,'' I began, ``parts his hair in the
middle, as we all know, but he makes up for it by
parting his figures on one side. Last night he gave
you the short side of his figures. At the present time
there are in the United States about eighteen million
women of voting age. When the Senator asked
whether you wanted three million
additionalilliteratewomen voters, he forgot to ask also if you didn't want
fifteen million
additionalintelligent women voters!
We will grant that it will take the votes of three
million
intelligent women to wipe out the votes of
three million
illiterate women. But don't forget that
that would still leave us twelve million
intelligentvotes to the good!''
The
audience applauded as gaily as it had ap-
plauded Senator Ingalls when he spoke on the other
side, and I continued:
``Now women have always been
generous to men.
So of our twelve million
intelligent voters we will
offer four million to
offset the votes of the four
million
illiterate men in this country--and then
we will still have eight million
intelligent votes to
add to the other
intelligent votes which are cast.''
The
audience seemed to enjoy this.
``The anti-suffragists are fairly safe,'' I ended,
``as long as they remain on the plane of prophecy.
But as soon as they
tacklemathematics they get
into trouble!''
Miss Anthony was much pleased by the wide
publicity given to this
debate, but Senator Ingalls
failed to share her enthusiasm.
It was
shortly after this
encounter that I had
two traveling experiences which nearly cost me my
life. One of them occurred in Ohio at the time of
a spring freshet. I know of no state that can cover
itself with water as completely as Ohio can, and for
no
apparent reason. On this occasion it was break-
ing its own record. We had
driven twenty miles
across country in a buggy which was
barely out of the
water, and behind horses that at times were almost
forced to swim, and when we got near the town
where I was to lecture, though still on the opposite
side of the river from it, we discovered that the
bridge was gone. We had a good view of the town,