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 applauded 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 newspaper 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 additional
illiterate women voters, he forgot to ask also if you didn't want
fifteen million additional intelligent 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 intelligent votes to the good!"

The audience applauded as gaily as it had applauded 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