19th Amendment turns 90

August 23, 2010
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The following post was written by IL reporter Rebecca Berfanger.

This week and last week mark two anniversaries of women’s rights in the United States in the form of the 19th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution (finally) giving women the right to vote. The amendment was ratified by the 36th state on Aug. 18, 1920, and the ratification was certified Aug. 26, 1920. Indiana was the 26th state to ratify the amendment in January 1920.

Women had been asking for the right to vote since at least the drafting of the U.S. Constitution. Abigail Adams, wife of John Adams, is often credited for trying to convince her husband to “remember the ladies” in 1776. But women, as well as non-property owners, slaves, and other classes of people, did not receive this right in the original draft of the U.S. Constitution.

In the mid 1800s, regular women’s rights meetings began to take place following the Seneca Falls Convention in New York in July 1848. That and subsequent meetings included discussion on the right to vote for women, even though another seven decades would pass before that right was made official.

While hopefully this isn’t new information to most of our readers, it may have gone unnoticed that to get a firsthand look at the women’s suffrage movement, one need not travel farther than downtown Indianapolis.

The President Benjamin Harrison Home at 1230 N. Delaware St., Indianapolis, has an ongoing exhibit, “Bustles to Ballots” , that, according to the website, “features a display of the First Ladies from Martha Washington to Michelle Obama and a collection of women's suffrage artifacts acquired though a generous gift from the Lacy Family and the Lacy Foundation honoring the memory of Edna Balz Lacy. The suffrage collection is from the Cecelia E. Harris Collection.”

While I have been meaning to make it over there as a way to pay my respects to the women who came before me to ensure rights and opportunities that I try not to take for granted, I was intrigued by this description of the Harrison family’s contribution to women’s rights:

“(President Harrison’s wife) Caroline Harrison refused to donate any money to Johns Hopkins Medical University until they admitted women. She wrote them a check when they did so in 1891 and helped a committee raise $100,000 for the school. (Harrison’s daughter-in-law) May Saunders Harrison sat on the committee for the Women’s Building at the Columbian Exhibition in 1893. The Harrison women came from a background and family setting in which they were encouraged to be well educated.”

I also didn’t realize that President Harrison was the first president to hire a woman in a role that was not as a domestic servant: Alice B. Sanger started as the White House stenographer in 1889. There was also a female candidate running against President Harrison for the presidency.

In addition to the exhibit, which is open when the museum is open, there will be an event presented by the Indiana Women’s History Association with support from the League of Women Voters-Indianapolis. That event is Thursday from 7 to 9 p.m. and will take place at the Propylaeum, just north of the Harrison Home at 1410 N. Delaware St. Historic interpreters will perform the stories of three generations of Indiana suffragists. See their website for more details.

Are you doing anything to commemorate women’s suffrage?
 

ADVERTISEMENT
  • Indiana State University's Women's Equality Day
    Thursday, Aug. 26 marks the 90th anniversary of the ratification of the 19th amendment giving women the right to vote. The Women's Studies Program and Interdisciplinary Programs invites everyone to attend a celebration of this event on Thursday, beginning at 4 p.m. in the library's events area. This program and reception will also celebrate the 2010 Awardees of the Charlotte Zietlow Women Faculty Research Grant. Dr. Zietlow, recognizing the gender gap in tenure, determined to do something about it and created the endowment that funds grants to support pre-tenure women faculty. For more information about this grant (application process for the next round will be Spring 2011), please visit http://www.indstate.edu/wmnstudy/awards.htm.
    Following the reception, consider staying on for a showing of a powerful movie, Iron-Jawed Angels, 6:15 - 8 p.m. Please urge your students to attend this film. Starring Hilary Swank as Alice Paul and Angelica Houston as Carrie Chapman Catt, this 2004 film forcefully portrays how many women put their lives at risk to give women what is now often taken for granted: the right to vote. Students are also welcome to attend the Women's Equality Day/Zietlow function.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. The $320,000 is the amount the school spent in litigating two lawsuits: One to release the report involving John Trimble (as noted in the story above) and one defending the discrimination lawsuit. The story above does not mention the amount spent to defend the discrimination suit, that's why the numbers don't match. Thanks for reading.

  2. $160k? Yesterday the figure was $320k. Which is it Indiana Lawyer. And even more interesting, which well connected law firm got the (I am guessing) $320k, six time was the fired chancellor received. LOL. (From yesterday's story, which I guess we were expected to forget overnight ... "According to records obtained by the Journal & Courier, Purdue spent $161,812, beginning in July 2012, in a state open records lawsuit and $168,312, beginning in April 2013, for defense in a federal lawsuit. Much of those fees were spent battling court orders to release an independent investigation by attorney John Trimble that found Purdue could have handled the forced retirement better")

  3. The numbers are harsh; 66 - 24 in the House, 40 - 10 in the Senate. And it is an idea pushed by the Democrats. Dead end? Ummm not necessarily. Just need to go big rather than go home. Nuclear option. Give it to the federal courts, the federal courts will ram this down our throats. Like that other invented right of the modern age, feticide. Rights too precious to be held up by 2000 years of civilization hang in the balance. Onward!

  4. I'm currently seeing someone who has a charge of child pornography possession, he didn't know he had it because it was attached to a music video file he downloaded when he was 19/20 yrs old and fought it for years until he couldn't handle it and plead guilty of possession. He's been convicted in Illinois and now lives in Indiana. Wouldn't it be better to give them a chance to prove to the community and their families that they pose no threat? He's so young and now because he was being a kid and downloaded music at a younger age, he has to pay for it the rest of his life? It's unfair, he can't live a normal life, and has to live in fear of what people can say and do to him because of something that happened 10 years ago? No one deserves that, and no one deserves to be labeled for one mistake, he got labeled even though there was no intent to obtain and use the said content. It makes me so sad to see someone I love go through this and it makes me holds me back a lot because I don't know how people around me will accept him...second chances should be given to those under the age of 21 at least so they can be given a chance to live a normal life as a productive member of society.

  5. It's just an ill considered remark. The Sup Ct is inherently political, as it is a core part of government, and Marbury V Madison guaranteed that it would become ever more so Supremely thus. So her remark is meaningless and she just should have not made it.... what she could have said is that Congress is a bunch of lazys and cowards who wont do their jobs so the hard work of making laws clear, oftentimes stops with the Sups sorting things out that could have been resolved by more competent legislation. That would have been a more worthwhile remark and maybe would have had some relevance to what voters do, since voters cant affect who gets appointed to the supremely un-democratic art III courts.

ADVERTISEMENT