"The Merry War Goes On": Elite Suffrage in Gilded Age Manhattan

"The Merry War Goes On":Elite Suffrage in Gilded Age Manhattan Lauren C. Santangelo1 (bio) On May 8, 1894, delegates from across the Empire State met in Albany for the state's sixth constitutional convention. New York State's constitution empowered voters to decide every twenty years whether such an assembly was necessary, and while enfranchised residents had authorized one in 1886, partisan maneuvering delayed the proceedings for nearly another decade.2 Empire State pundits expected the delegates to review a range of topics when they finally gathered to revise the state constitution—from cities' political power within the state to the need to restructure the courts. An unprecedented burst of interest in woman suffrage, though, took pundits by surprise.3 Many of the women urging delegates to support enfranchisement in 1894 were seasoned activists who had spent years fighting for women's rights. Their work would have remained routine and largely invisible to the public were it not for a coterie of wealthy white women who suddenly expressed a desire for the ballot. With surnames like Rockefeller and Sage, they drew media attention and moved suffrage from the periphery of public discourse to its center for a brief moment in 1894, marking the campaign's height in Gilded Age New York. Yet, their endorsement did little to sway the delegates meeting in Albany that summer or alter suffragists' public image. [End Page 343] Scholars have not devoted much time to studying the 1894 New York State Constitutional Convention campaign, despite a burgeoning literature tracing the battle for the vote in the Empire State.4 Ellen Carol DuBois's biographical study of Harriot Stanton Blatch is one notable exception. In her discussion of Blatch's participation in the 1894 drive, DuBois describes pro-ballot socialites' confidence in their ability to control their working-class sisters' votes if all women received the franchise.5 Nevertheless, many historians interested in class dynamics in New York have focused their attention on the early twentieth century, rather than the late nineteenth century. Most recently, Joan Marie Johnson has argued that early twentieth-century affluent women provided the resources necessary for the movement's success. While looking at the national effort, Johnson's work focuses on well-to-do New Yorkers' contributions in the Progressive Era.6 This article, however, extends our timeline backward to examine the ways in which those with the most socioeconomic and racial privilege—white, elite women—strategized to win the ballot in the Gilded Age, a period when the idea of women voting still seemed radical and remained highly unpopular. It builds on [End Page 344] DuBois's insights, while also paying particular attention to socialites' relationship with the established, white, middle-class movement, examining how class-bound concerns about respectability intersected with political organizing at century's end. A look at this campaign allows us to see the limits of moneyed women's power in the face of entrenched gender norms. These socialites championed an amendment that would have enfranchised women regardless of their economic status. They welcomed all New Yorkers into their headquarters at the elite Sherry's restaurant and publicly contested the idea that one woman's voice was more important than another's. Still, class bias informed their arguments, and concerns about propriety, respectability, and etiquette distanced them from the established campaign. Instead of a united, pro-ballot coalition, affluent supporters developed an independent organization that made class visible at a time when, strategically at least, they were working to transcend it. This decision allowed society women to participate without sacrificing their reputations, but did little to improve long-time activists' public image. That a group of elite anti-suffragists emerged to contest their peers' support further sensationalized the campaign and turned it into a dramatic account of the leisured class's political dabbling—one that drew a distinction between respectability and the established suffrage movement and failed to persuade delegates to endorse enfranchisement. Establishing the Volunteer Committee The New York State Woman Suffrage Association and the New York City Woman Suffrage League provided an institutional base for the woman suffrage movement in the Empire State and Manhattan, respectively, in the late...