Susan B. Anthony Arrested for Voting

June 17, 1873    

Found here

Miss Susan B. Anthony was arrested November 18 for voting in the Presidential election in Rochester, N.Y., on November 5.

The Vote
After joining together a group of 50 women, including her own three sisters, Anthony demanded to be registered as a voter in a Rochester, N.Y., barbershop on November 1. The demand sparked debate among the men and women at the scene, but eventually the women were allowed to take the oath of registry.

It is estimated that more than 14 women voted at West End News Depot on Election Day.

Anthony’s vote was accepted on November 5 after a vote from inspectors.

“Decide which way we might, we were liable to prosecution,” voting Inspector E.T. Marsh said of the decision to allow Anthony and the other women to vote.  “We were expected...to make an infallible decision, inside of two days, of a question in which some of the best minds of the country are divided."

Anthony wrote to fellow suffragist Elizabeth Cady Stanton shortly after voting expressing excitedment for her actions.

“If only now--all the women suffrage women would work to this end of enforcing the existing constitution--supremacy of national law over state law--what strides we might make this winter,” Anthony said. “But I'm awful tired--for five days I have been on the constant run--but to splendid purpose--So all right--I hope you voted too.”

The Arrest
A warrant for Anthony’s arrest was issued on November 14, but in an attempt to avoid a scene, arrest was delayed. Anthony refused to turn herself in to Police Commissioner Storrs.

“I sent word to him that I had no social acquaintance with him and didn't wish to call on him,” Anthony said.

Anthony was arrested November 18 and is being charged with violation of the Enforcement Act of 1870, which details voting without a right to lawfully do so. maximim penalty for the crime is a fine of $500 or three years imprisonment.

Other women who successfully voted were also placed under arrest, as well as the officers who allowed the women to vote on Election Day. The arrestees refused bail and were held in Commissioner Storrs’ office until release.

The Trial
Anthony’s trial is scheduled to begin November 29. Sylvestor Lewis and Eighth Ward Inspectors are scheduled to appear as the chief witnesses against Anthony.

Anthony will be represented by John Van Voorhis. Also to be tried are the voting inspectors who allowed Anthony and the other women to vote. 

The Impact
The decision of the court is sure to have a great impact on the Women's Suffrage Movement. If Anthony were to be found guilty of voting without lawfully being able to do so, the law will remain that under the Fourteenth Amendment, women do not have the right to vote. If Anthony is found not guilty, it is likely to be agreed that the Fourteenth Amendment does in fact grant women the right to vote and will allow them to do so in the future. 

Susan B. Anthony Argues for Women's Rights Using Antithesis, Rhetorical Question

January 1, 1871
Susan B. Anthony, in her address “as a representative of the working women,” argued that men should recognize women’s legal right to vote in America.

The president of the Working Women’s Central Association used antithesis in the beginning of the speech to outline injustices in double standards among men and women.

Susan B. Anthony (photo credit)

Antithesis, the use of contrasting situations, allows for a logos appeal to be made to an audience. The argument being made, that if men have a right to vote then women should also, is harder to refute when made obvious the social and political unfairness.

“It is because of a false theory having been in the minds of the human family for ages that woman is born to be supported by man and to accept such circumstances as he chooses to accord to her,” Anthony said. “She not like him is not allowed to control her own circumstances. The pride of every man is that he is free to carve out his own destiny. A woman has no such pride.”

Anthony also uses rhetorical question to refute the preconceived counterarguments to women gaining the right to vote.

“Nowhere can woman hold head offices and the reason is this, politicians can’t afford to give an office to one who can’t pay back in votes,” Anthony said. “If in New York the women could decide the fate of elections, don’t you think they could afford to make women County Clerks or Surrogate Clerks or even Surrogate Judges?”

By using a question with an obvious answer, Anthony forces the audience to recognize the flaw in the argument that women cannot be in office because they cannot bring in votes. She argues that more women with the right to vote allows for a better campaigning opportunity for those hoping to hold office, rather than an hindrance to the cause.

This use of question allows Anthony to transition her arguments to the politician’s need for women’s votes to gain the support of the working class.

 “No political party can hope for success and oppose the interests of the working class. You can all see that neither of the great parties dated to put a plank in the platform directly opposed. Both wrote a paragraph on finance, but nobody knew what it meant,” Anthony said. “They did this not because of a desire to do justice to the workingwomen, but simply because of the power of the working men to do them harm.”

This argument subtly suggests that women have more power to do damage than is currently known, instilling fear in the audience in a non-aggressive way.

Anthony finally falls back to rhetorical question, asking women to recognize the possibility that men are less inclined to protect women as a whole, and more inclined to protect their wives, daughters, mothers, and sisters as their “property.”

The use of rhetorical question throughout is successful because it implies that all of the tough questions have obvious answers. This strategy allows for women to look at the big picture as a question with a sure answer:

1.       Will women gain the right to vote? Yes.

2.       Should you join the cause to earn it? Yes.