The Story of Woman's Suffrage and One Vote

A One-Vote Oddity

Women’s Suffrage and One Vote

 

The battle for a woman’s right to vote was long, arduous, and filled with an amazing number of near-sighted men. But women proved equal to the challenge and finally won the day. Supporters of women’s suffrage, starting in 1849, introduced constitutional amendments at every session of Congress for half a century. But it wasn’t until the territory of Wyoming in 1869 that the movement began to take off.

The next year the Utah territory followed. In 1890,Wyoming became a state and became the first state to enfranchise women. In 1893, Colorado let women vote, followed by Idaho and the new state of Utah in 1896. Washington, 1910; California 1911; Arizona, Kansas and Oregon 1912 were the next states to allow women full partnership as citizens.

But all of these victories were in rural western states, west of the Mississippi River. Illinois, in 1913, was the first industrial state to jump on board. At President Wilson’s inauguration 5,000 women showed up to petition and marched for the right to vote. They were not well received.

 

“Police had granted a permit for the parade, but they did little to protect the determined women. … [who] had to fight their way from the start and took more than an hour to advance the first few blocks. They were spat upon, shoved, slapped, tripped, and sometimes knocked to the ground. Their banners were mutilated, their hats were pulled off, and their clothing was torn. Many of them were in tears from the assaults and insults screamed by male chauvinists who lined the route”²⁷

 

The incident hit the headlines and fueled the engine for a new constitutional amendment for women’s suffrage. Eventually, President Wilson weighed in with his support. On January 9, 1918, the House of Representatives was scheduled to vote on the amendment. The women’s advocates knew that the vote would be close, and many were worried. At what seemed the worst possible time, it was learned that four of the measure’s supporters were ill. In addition, another voter was at the bedside of his dying wife and could not be counted on.

(Continued in next post and at OneVoteOddities.blogspot.com)

Footnotes

24. P.J. Achtemeirer, Harper and Row, P., & Society of Biblical Literature (1985). Harper’s Bible Dictionary. “justice,” includes index. (1^st ed.). SanFrancisco, CA: Harper and Row.

25. Let me be perfectly clear. I am not claiming to be “righteous” in the existential sense. I am a sinner who knows only too well my tendency to wickedness and rebellion against God. But I am, and others are “righteous,” when we stand for the standards of a righteous God. To proclaim truth is a “righteous” thing to do.

             There is another type of righteousness that is the most important of all. That is the righteousness that the Apostle Paul speaks of in the book of Romans, a “declared righteousness,” given to all those who place their faith in Christ (3:21-26). That  “imputed” righteousness (read the fourth chapter of Romans), produces a change of life, without which “no one will see God” (Hebrew 12:14). In January of 1974, Christ gave me His righteousness and it (His righteousness) is my ONLY hope of glory.

26. Christianity Today “Mark Hatfield Taps into the Real Power on Capital Hill,” (October 22, 1982), 22.

27. Lindop, 72-73

President Adams, by One Vote

A One-Vote Oddity

President Adams (Continued from previous post)

Torn with doubt and confusion, Rensselaer, a devout Christian, bowed his head in prayer and asked for guidance. When he opened his eyes, they fell upon an Adams ballot on the floor. It tipped the scale. He had prayed; he had sought guidance and now he was ready. He cast his vote for Adams. The 17-17 deadlock in the New York House delegation was broken—18-16, and John Quincy Adams became the 6^th President of the United States by one vote.

This wasn’t the only “one vote” margin in the election of 1824. When all the results were tabulated, it was found that a one vote change in five other states would have deprived Adams the Presidency. Think about it. In six states, there was a deadlock in the delegates. One person in six different states tipped the scale for Adams. You could say that in this one election, Adams won the election by one vote six different times—despite the fact that Jackson had won the most states, national popular vote, and the Electoral College vote! One vote can truly make a difference.

Remember that on Election Day.

Final Note

That wasn’t the end of “Old Hickory” (Andrew Jackson) and voting controversy. But for that you will have read By a Single Vote! One-Vote Decisions that Changed American History, by Edmund Lindop.¹⁴

Footnote:

14. Lindop, Edmund. By a Single Vote! One-Vote Decisions that Changed American History. (Harrisburg, PA: Stackpole Books, 1987).

You Think Bush / Gore Was Close!

A One-Vote Oddity

You Think Bush vs Gore Was Close!

 

Few elections in the history of the country were more rancorous than that of 1824. Indeed, that election makes modern so called “negative politics” look like a pillow fight between two year olds!

The main players were the eloquent William H. Crawford from Georgia, (the favorite of outgoing president Monroe and former Presidents Jefferson and Madison), Henry Clay from Kentucky, Andrew Jackson, (a senator and former war hero from Tennessee, known as “Old Hickory,”) and John Quincy Adams, the son of the 2^nd President, from Massachusetts.

The election began on October 29 and ended on November 22 but the results were not known until mid December. There were just twenty-four states. Eighteen states selected their electors by popular vote. Six selected their Electoral College representatives in the state legislatures.

Adams carried only one state but came in second in the popular vote. Jackson carried the most States (11) and also come in first in the popular vote. In the Electoral College, the vote totals were Jackson 99, Adams 84, Crawford 41, and Clay 37. No candidate received a majority of all electoral votes and according to the 12^th Amendment, the House of Representatives had to choose the President from the three highest totals.

Clay began to work for Adams’ candidacy. Each state would cast one vote, which meant that the majority of the Congressman had to be won first and then the vote for the state would be cast. Balloting began on February 9, 1825 and with Clay’s help Adams won 12 of the 24 states. Adams had only one state’s popular vote but now he was one vote shy of becoming President!

New York was the swing state and was evenly divided between Crawford and Adams. General Stephen Van Rensselaer was the swing vote in the New York House delegation and was a staunch Crawford man. At the last minute, Clay and Daniel Webster whisked Van Rensselaer into the Speaker’s office and told him that the ill health of Crawford (he had had a series of strokes) meant that the “safety of the country depended on the election of Adams.”

(Continued in next post)

Betrayal and Defeat Comes in Many Forms

A One-Vote Oddity

How to Destroy a Nation

 

The Great Wall of China stretches like a great dragon on the northern frontier of China. It is over 30 feet high, 18 feet thick and 4,163 miles long. It was designed to protect the nation from barbaric hordes sweeping down from Mongolia in the north.

Emperor Shi Huangdi of the Gin Dynasty is regarded by most as the first ruler to conceive of a Great Wall running the length of northern China. He demanded that the wall be six horses wide at the top, eight horses wide at the bottom, and as high as five men standing on top of one another. Every 100 yards workers built watchtowers from which invading Mongols could be spotted. Scholars estimate that over one million soldiers and conscripts marched north to build the Great Wall in the sparsely populated region.

Sometimes called the “The Long Graveyard” because of the workers who were buried within it, the Great Wall was built to make the nation secure. For one thousand years, the wall did its part to protect China. Despite its colossal size, however, it wasn’t adequate to the task.

Eventually, China was invaded from the north. The wall failed. The enemy didn’t destroy the wall, tunnel under the wall, scale the wall, or go around the wall. But three times in the span of one hundred years, China was invaded nevertheless. How? It wasn’t the wall’s fault.

In all three invasions, the enemy used the same clever tactic. They  found a gatekeeper who voted for his wallet rather than his country. They bribed him and simply marched into China. One person’s “vote” led to the invasion of the nation—three times! The nation was left undefended because of a breakdown in values rather than a breakdown of the wall.

In every election, politicians of both parties regularly appeal to our greed. “Elect me and I will lower your taxes.” “Elect me and I will provide you more or bigger programs.”  The temptation is great to vote for the politician who we think can produce the greatest benefits to us. Make sure that your vote is based on what is right for the country not just what seems right for you in the short term. Jump ahead and take a look at Proverbs 25:28. It is a good commentary on what happened in China or what could happen in the United States.

One Vote From Impeachment

A One-Vote Oddity
Impeached but Not Removed

Three Presidents of the United States have the stain of impeachment associated with their names—Presidents Andrew Johnson, Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton. Nixon resigned before the house could vote on his impeachment. President Clinton and Andrew Johnson were both impeached, but it was Johnson who came closest to being removed from office—one vote close.

Impeachment is a charge of misconduct brought against a government official by a legislative body; … The accused official is then tried in the Senate, with the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court presiding at the trial.
In 1868, President Andrew Johnson was impeached over issues relating to the proper treatment of the defeated Confederate states following the Civil War. The Senate, however, fell one vote short of the two-thirds majority necessary for conviction, and Johnson completed his full term in office.9 (see endnotes)

In 1868, the Senate and Congress were upset with Johnson. His policies followed an outline laid out by President Lincoln before his death and were considered too lenient toward the southern states which had seceded from the Union. Johnson, like President Clinton, was impeached. But Johnson’s near removal from office was much closer. The Senate fell one vote shy of the two-thirds necessary to remove him from office.

Johnson retained his Presidency and fulfilled his term of office. If one more person had voted against Johnson in the Senate, anti-southern forces in the national government would have been harsher on the southern states, and our country would be even more divided between North and South than it is today. One person, unknown to us by name, played a critical role by casting a vote in favor of the President that day.

Your vote could be that important this year.

Footnote:

9. “Impeachment is considered a drastic measure, one that has been used on only rare occasions in the United States. The House of Representatives has voted articles of impeachment just 17 times in the history of the country. [Eighteen times with the recent addition of President Clinton] Thirteen of the seventeen persons who have been impeached were federal judges, as were all seven individuals convicted by the Senate.” An Outline of American Government. 1998. Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc.

Senators Who Almost Weren't

A One-Vote Oddity
Two One Vote Senators (cont. from page 34)

In 1844, the State Senators of Indiana, as in most states until the 17th Amendment,8 had the task of selecting the United States Senators. The Indiana Democrats in the state senate, thanks to the one vote victory of Daniel Kelso (see earlier post) held a one-vote majority and went into caucus to determine who to select as their next United States Senator. It gradually developed that the majority of the delegates favored a man who opposed the annexation of Texas.

Kelso, however was a long time supporter of the nation’s 6th President, Andrew Jackson. President Jackson favored Texas’ annexation, and as a Jackson man, Kelso would have no part in electing a U.S. Senator who would be an obstacle in “Old Hickory’s” plan for statehood for Texas. The democratic caucus was deadlocked between the Democratic and Whig candidates.

Things really got heated when Kelso began to threaten to vote with the Whigs and their candidate. Finally, Kelso offered a deal. He put forward the name of Edward A. Hannigan, as an alternative and then spiced up the offer with a promise: Accept Hannigan or he would vote with the Whigs. Exhausted with the deadlock, the democratic caucus accepted the bargain; Kelso voted with the Democrats and Hannigan became the U.S Senator by one vote—Daniel Kelso’s.

Hannigan went on and played a significant role on the national scene of the time wielding powerful influence over a host of issues related to the westward expansion of the nation. He had a distinguished career serving in the nation’s capitol. It was a career made possible by a one vote margin—twice. By one vote—Freeman Clark’s—Kelso had become a state senator. By one vote—Kelso’s—Hannigan had become a U.S. Senator.

Whose career might be started or ended in this year’s election because you took the time to go to the polls and vote your conscience? Go out and be a part of starting or ending someone’s career. It is both your privilege and your responsibility.

Greatest Generation Congress

A One-Vote Oddity

Did One Vote Make it Possible to Win World War II?

 

Four months before Pearl Harbor, Congress voted to lengthen the time of military service from one year of active duty and 10 years in the reserve to two and one half years of active duty. This allowed the military to begin to gear up for what many believed was the United States inevitable entrance into the war.

After war was formally declared, the term of service was amended again. This second amendment extended the term to terminate six months after the war ended. From 1940 until 1947, when the wartime selective service act expired, more than 10,000,000 men entered the service through the draft process.[1]

What would the history of the world look like today if the tour of duty of the American soldiers in World War II was one rather than two and a half years? We don’t know. “The Greatest Generation’s” parents took care of that. By a vote of 203-202, the Congress of the United States of America insured that the world would never have to find out.

 

Who was the deciding vote? Unknown.

Who cast the last vote? Unknown.

Who changed their vote at the last minute? Unknown.

 

What is know is this: 405 members of Congress decided that their vote mattered and 203 came out on the side of history with their vote and helped to create the military force without which the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans would have become Fascists lakes. They each got up, had their coffee, left their homes, organized their day and were present and accounted for with their vote. One of them tipped the scales and world history changed.

This election, your vote could do the same.

Some Friends Just Have Brain Lock!

A One-Vote Oddity

His Friend Forgot to Vote!

 

One vote counts. And one candidate in Gig Harbor, Washington found out the hard way. On Wednesday October 2, 2002, the Seattle Post-Intelligencer reported that Kevin Entze had lost the Republican nomination for the 26^th District State House to Ed Mitchell by the whopping total of one vote.

After each ballot had been counted by hand, Entze learned that he lost the Republican nomination to a State House seat by a single vote—5,870 to 5,869.

 To add insult to injury, the defeated Entze, a Gig Harbor police officer, knows who one of those potential voters who lost him the election is. The non-voter, one of the department’s reserve police officers “left his ballot on his kitchen counter and it never got sent out,” Entze said.

That one vote would have at least forced a runoff of some kind for the house seat. So in November of 2002, it was Mitchell and not Entze, who went up against the democratic incumbent Patricia Lantz.

“Both Ed and I have stories like that,” Entze said, still positive after such a heartbreaking defeat. “It’s great to see just how vital your vote is.”

 

A Final Note

All the state races in that year’s 26^th District were close in November of 2002. The Republican State Senator won his seat by a paltry 179 votes (.67% of votes cast). Democratic incumbent Patricia Lantz defeated Mitchell by a relatively narrow margin. And Democratic incumbent Brock Jackley was defeated by Republican Lois McMahan by a mere 282 votes.

Potentially, three election results could have been changed had one medium sized church rallied all of its voters to go to the polls.

The Indiana State Legislature

A One-Vote Oddity

Acquitted of Murder, He Elected a Senator 

I have searched for hours in books documenting the history of the period. I and others have spent hours searching the internet and talking to reference librarians trying to document the history of the events in question (see page 34, 38 and 62). I can’t prove or disprove the all of the events related here. Certain facts can be verified, others are hard to separate the fact from the myths that may have accrued around them. In the story below, I have left those things that I could not completely verify in small caps. From my research, I believe that every point in the story has an air of credibility to it.

(see text notes, for background)⁷

 Freeman Clark was a farmer in Indiana. He was also accused of murder. A young lawyer came to his rescue and gained Freeman’s acquittal and Freeman never forgot his debt. Some years later, his former lawyer, was running for office. It was1842 and Daniel Kelso was seeking to become the Indiana State Senator. Kelso had been an Indiana House of Representative from 1833-1835, then he had returned to private practice. Now he was seeking higher office.

Clark, Kelso’s former defendant was now old and seriously ill. From His bed he begged his sons to carry him to the county seat to cast his vote for Daniel Kelso. They were not easily convinced but finally they relented and Freeman Clark was carried to the polling booth to cast his vote. On the way home from his last public duty, Clark died.

That vote of gratitude from Freeman Clark was the deciding vote. Daniel Kelso became the Indiana State Senator in 1844—by one vote. Freeman Clark’s exercise of his constitutional privilege, his last act upon the earth tipped the scales and Daniel Kelso entered the Indiana State Senate.

But there is more to this story.

(Continued next post)

Footnotes

7. On many internet sites related to various “one-vote” elections, the information is just false. In some, half the information is true but is inaccurate in critical details. In the case of the Freeman-Kelso-Hannigan stories (see pages 34, 38, 62) there is a mixture of inaccuracy, history and unverifiable statements with just enough tantalizing tid-bits to make the whole both fascinating and befuddling. Here’s what is absolutely verifiable. Daniel (not “David,” as the websites proclaim) Kelso existed, served in the Indiana legislature, and seems to have been a friend of Hannigan who not only existed, but served as the U.S. Senator from Indiana and played a prominent role in the annexation of Texas as the internet story states. The evidence related to the election of Kelso and Hannigan by one vote has not yet been completely verified.

     Unfortunately, some of the most tantalizing “evidence” comes from a historical novel titled Magnificent Destiny, by Paul L. Wellman (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1962). One is tempted to dismiss the story about Freeman and Kelso except for a couple of facts: 1) In his forward (p. 6), Wellman writes that “all important occurrences are as accurate as a good deal of research and study can make them.” 2) Page 466, where the information related to Freeman and Kelso is laid down, appears to be a one-page digression from the novel to give legitimate historical detail. 3) Nine pages later the novel is completed and Wellman writes an Afterward that gives broad hint to the attention he paid to historical detail. And 4) all subsequent research has reinforced the significant roles that both Kelso and Hannigan played in the history of the Jacksonian period. For these reasons, I decided to include them. That, and the fact that they make a good story! Let the reader or researchers draw their own conclusions from what I have included here.