tured to vote had to pass. In New York a man who claims to be
a gentleman said: "If my wife undertook to vote I would trample
her under my feet." In New Rochelle the school trustee told the
women they were not entitled to vote, and tried to prevent a
meeting being held to inform them. Clergymen from the pulpit
urged women not to vote, and a mob gathered at the polls and
blocked the way. These are but samples of the difficulties under
which the new law went into operation; and it is the truth that
there was as much bulldozing of voters in New York as ever in the
South, though sometimes by other means.

In 1880 Mrs. Blake was sent by the New York society to the
Republican and Democratic presidential conventions at Chicago and
Cincinnati, and on her return a meeting was called in Republican
Hall, July 9, to hear her report as to the comparative treatment
received by the delegates in the two conventions. Soon afterwards a
delegation of ladies[242] waited on Winfield S. Hancock, the
Democratic nominee, who received them with much courtesy, saying he
was quite willing to interpret, in its broadest sense, that clause
of his letter of acceptance wherein he said: "It is only by a full
vote and a fair count that the people can rule in fact, as required
by the theory of our government." "I am willing, ladies," said the
general, "to have you say that I believe in a free ballot for all
the people of the United States, women as well as men."

Mrs. Blake, Mrs. Slocum and Mr. Wilcox made quite an extensive
canvass through many counties of the State, to rouse the women to
use their right to vote on all school matters.

The bill to prohibit disfranchisement was again introduced in the
legislature of 1881, by Joseph M. Congdon, and ordered to a third
reading May 3, by a vote of 60 to 40, and on May 11 came up for
final action, when the ladies, by special courtesy, were admitted
to the floor of the Assembly chamber to listen to the discussion.
General Francis B. Spinola and General James W. Husted made earnest
speeches in favor of the bill, and Hon. Erastus Brooks and General
George A. Sharpe in opposition. The roll-call gave 57 ayes to 55
noes--a majority of those present, but not the majority (65) of all
the members of the Assembly, which the constitution of New York
requires for the final passage of a bill. The vote astonished the
opponents, and placed the measure among the grave questions