Transcripts For CSPAN3 The Woman Who Would Be President 2014

Belva lockwood campaigned to be the first woman of the United States. Jill norgren chronicles her life for womens rights. This is an hourandahalf. When jill norgren sent me her manu script and asked if i would write a forward, we were just gearing up for the new term and it was not a time when i welcomed additional extra curricular assignments. But after sampling several parts of the manuscript i just said yes. Jills book tells the story of a woman who would not be put down. The book paints a vivid portrait of Belva Lockwood and should gain for her life the public attention long overdue. Jills was a prodigious effort. Women in the public eye nowadays are courted by various archives seeking to be the repository of their papers. Not so in lockwoods time. Piecing together her work and days required the relentless pursuit of a determined sleuth, and thats just what jill became in this process. A most persistent detective. In the introduction to the biography, i noted that Elizabeth Kaley stanten had compared lockwood to shakespeares portia. And lockwood does resemble the shakespear character in this respect. They were both individuals of impressive intellect who demonstrated that women can hold their own as advocates for justice. Like shakespears Portia Lockwood used wit, ingenuity and sheer force of will to unsettle societys inceptions of her sex. But portia to accomplish her mission had to impersonate a man. Lockwood in contrast used no disguise. In tackling the prevailing notions that women and lawyering no less politics do not mix. Not only did she become the first woman admitted to the bar of the Supreme Court and the first woman to argue before the court, but she ran twice both campaigns for the office of president of the United States. Her front runner status was achieved by unflagging effort. In 1869 then the mother of two and approaching her 39th birthday she embarked on her lifelong ambition to become a lawyer. Her efforts to gain admission to d. C. Area law schools were at first unsuccessful. She was initially rejected on a most familiar ground. Her presence would be likely to distract the attention of the young men. Well, she persevered until National University law school now g. W. Law school, allowed her to matriculate. She encountered yet another obstacle. When the school refused to issue her the diploma that she had earned. Men in the class were again the asserted obstacle. Women were not created for the practice of law it was widely believed and graduating with women would lessen the value of mens diplomacy. Harvard law school gave similar reasons for excluding women until 1950. Ultimately, lockwood wrote to president grant who was the head of the university at this time she wasted no words. I was passed through the curriculum of study and demand my diploma. Grant didnt answer but two weeks later in september 1973 the University Chancellor awarded lockwood her diploma. She practiced in the District Of Columbia for three years handling all manner of cases and in 1876 she qualified for and sought admission to the bar of the United States Supreme Court. Chief Justice Morrison waite reported the denial of her application. The explanation by the uniformed practice of the court and by the Fair Construction of its rules, none but men are permitted to appear before it as attorneys and counselors. It was not known at the time when the chief justice made that report that the tally was 63 and that the chief justice in fact was one of the three votes for lockwoods admission. Undaunted, she lobbied congress to grant her plea and she succeeded in february 1879. Congress decreed that any woman possessing the necessary qualifications shall on motion be admitted to practice before the Supreme Court of the United States. Lockwoods case is an example that i often give that sometimes the legislature is more in tune with the winds of change than the court is. Some 21 months after she gained admission, lockwood became the first woman to participate in oral argument at the court. She next and last argued before the court in 1906 then age 75 with three decades of experience as a claims attorney she helped to secure a multimillion dollar award for the cherkoees who had suffered removal from their Ancestral Lands and relocation without compensation. Lock wood was not content to rest on her personal achievements. She fought for not only the suffrage of women but for legal rights. She ran for that office the full course in both 1884 and 1888 pointing out that nothing in the constitution barred women from becoming president. She wrote in a letter to her future running mate Marietta Stowe, we shall never have equal rights until we take them nor respect until we command it. That same determination characterizes the first woman to serve as a justice of the court, my dear and very much missed colleague Sandra Day Oconnor. In sandras words, for both men and women the first step in getting power is to become visible to others. And then to put on an impressive show. As women achieve power, the barriers will fall. As society sees what women can do, as women see what women can do, there will be more women out there doing things and we will all be better off for it. So much has changed for the better since Belva Lockwoods years. Admission ceremonies at the court nowadays include women in numbers, and it is no longer unusual for women to represent both sides in the cases we hear. Women today serve as president s of Bar Associations, federal judges, state court judges selected representatives, and every level of local state and federal. Still, the presence of only one woman on the Current High Court indicates the need for women of lockwoods sense and steel to see the changes she helped to inaugurate through to full fruition. I am very glad to be here at the announcement of the publicication of this book and i know that all of you have the same treat in store that i had when i read the manuscript. Thank you. Justice ginsburg has to get back for an event at the court but we are so grateful to her that she was able to be here with us even briefly. I will mention that she picked up on the absence of archives back then having to do with women and one of the things that perhaps will rectify that situation even more than its already being rectified for current women is the creation of a National Womens History Museum. I want to thank the National Womens history musim and the president of it here for cosponsoring this event and i want to thank also two other cosponsors the National Womens law center and the George Washington University Womens studies program. Just the fact that we have all of those cosponsors to thank is quite indicative of how far we have come from the time of Belva Lockwood. And with that, let me turn the microphone over to jill norgren. Its a pleasure to be here. And a pleasure to thank Justice Ginsburg for the wonderful forward that she contributed to this book. Its a pleasure also to thank dr. Strum, susan nugent, dr. Cassia reed for organizing this discussion to thank the staff of the Wilson Center library and my former Wilson Center interns now spread around the world. I heard from only one of them two weeks ago who is in beijing who had seen an advertisement for the book and emailed to me what a small world we live in. I want to thank these interns in particular for the help they gave me during what was a wonderful year of fellowship residence here at the center. Its a pleasure to acknowledge the many people at the national archives, the library of congress, and the National Museum of American History who helped me to find the 19th century materials without which i could not have written this biography. Im delighted in particular to say how grateful i am to robert ellis jr. Of the national archives, a longterm supporter of this project. There would be no book without a publisher, the editors and the staff of the new York City Press stepped forward to publish this biography and they have been a joy to work with. Finally, i want to thank a 10yearold girl at ps 333 in new york city, my granddaughter elena roner who gave me my first tutorial in power point. Lets now turn to the life of Belva Lockwood born Belva Bennett in northern new york. In the winter of 1866, only months after the end of the civil war, Belva Lockwood then a of a 35yearold widowed School Teacher arrived in what was a very unformed washington, d. C. A rather rural and dusty place still, from upstate new york. Hers was a journey of reinvention. Her early life was conventional. But she harbored unconventional dreams. She had married because her family thought it foolish and inappropriate for a girl to continue on in school. However, the tragedy of becoming a widow at the age of 22 dramatically altered her life. Three years after uriah mcnalls death she left her daughter with her mother and became one of the first women students at jensy college a Methodist School south of rochester, new york. After a decade of teaching in new york state, lockwood made the decision to move to washington. She dreamed of a life in politics or in law despite certain stark realities. That women were not permitted to vote, or serve on juries, and that no woman at that time had been admitted to law school. The capitol was a hotbed of reform activity when she arrived and she was soon helping to organize a local womans Suffrage Association and later to lob by congress for legislation that would guarantee equal pay to women government employees. She remarried in 1868 only to find her marital status to ezekial lockwood a source of discrimination after she had successfully navigated law school and sought admission to the d. C. Bar. Lets pick up the story in 1873, keeping in mind the several themes of her life. Ambition, free speech, and the ideal of equality. With this discussion i hope to provoke your interest in this extraordinary woman. Her story goes beyond stanten and anthony, beyond carnegie cleveland, and the male political establishment, and demonstrates how our 19th century history can be expanded. 1873 was a critical year for lockwood. She had fought her way into law school and successfully completed the course of study only as Justice Ginsburg mentioned to be told that because she was a woman the faculty would not grant her diploma. Thus with holding from her the professional privilege of becoming a member of the District Of Columbia bar. She struggled to overcome this discrimination with patience, negotiation, and by sitting through oral examinations not required of the male candidates. When all of this failed, lockwood determined to establish her own law practice, made one last desperate appeal. The one that justice gissburg mentioned to the president of the United States who happened to also be the president exofficio of her law school. She sent two letters. The first was long and polite detailing her efforts as the law student. The second as the justice mentioned was brusk and commanding and as seen here that she says to him in effect do you have the authority here . Are you the head of this . And if so, and she ends this letter i am entitled to and i demand my diploma. She did indeed receive the diploma two weeks later, and days after that was admitted to the d. C. Bar. This permitted her then to set up the larger Legal Practice that she had intended. Her practice took advantage of the washington, d. C. Location. She specialized in claims against the government, patent claims, veterans benefits, divorces, a whole range of issues. It was a solo practice aided by her daughter laura who by then was in her early 20s. Her clients were workingclass people in the main laborers, painters, tradesmen veterans small Property Owners and a few women in distress. She had several notable cases, one she defended in criminal court a woman charged with infanticide in several other cases she in civil court helped women who wished to bring damages claims against men they said had seduced them or for breach of marriage contract which was a big thing in the 19th century. Lockwood saw her male law colleagues riding around on bicycles. She saw that it was an effective mode of transportation. That they were getting more work done more quickly, and so although no woman engaged in bicycle riding, it was completely immodest, she went out researched it, bought herself this adult tricycle and was seen on the streets of the district riding it with her bag of briefs for the court. Her practice permitted her sufficient success that by 1877 she was able to declare a certain middle class professional status by purchasing a home on f street near the mci. It was not grand. It was a mortgaged row house in the middle of a commercial district. It was her home, her office, a boarding house, and a longterm investment which she would variously use as equity against loans. Here somewhat later than the year in which she bought it you see f street, a busy commercial street. I dont know if you can read it but on the Tall Building there you can see its called the barrister building. F street was the center of law practices and also the site of the office that published one of the law reporters here in the district. It was a boarding house. Washington has a long tradition of boarding houses providing for people who are transients. Right . And here is a photograph that appeared in the New York Times in january of california representative George Miller with the gentleman from congress who boarded with him. So lockwood did something which is in the fine tradition of the hill. How do we look at her in the late 1870s . She is conventional, a wife, a mother, a homeowner, a regular church goer, she is at the same time radical and independent. She has joined and is very active in the leadership of the National Woman Suffrage Association, she has joined the most radical peace group in the United States, the philadelphia based universal peace union, a group which i think in todays language we would call a human rights organization, a group very, very committed to issues of social justice, within the Womens Movement she fights very hard for the rights of mormon women, this was something that divided the Womens Movement at the time, and she never stepped back from her support. And then she cast herself into a fiveyear battle that Justice Ginsburg referred to that begins in 1874. She was denied admission to a federal court to the u. S. Court of claims where she wished to represent a client. They turned her back for several reasons and suggested that if she was not happy with their decision that she should go to the Supreme Court. She decided instead being someone who at this point was very comfortable lobbying congress. She had come to washington and she observed and taught herself the arts of lobbying, she went to congress. She enlisted then representative Benjamin Butler well known from the civil war to introduce legislation in the house. She found a supporter in the senate. But it was just ahead of its time. And while it did fairly well in the house, it was killed in committee in the senate. She then thought she might try to have a member of the community move her admission in the u. S. Supreme court but she knew the rules of the high court demanded that any candidate have practiced for three years. So she at this point had to wait. And when she had been a member of the d. C. Bar for three years she went to albert galten riddle, an attorney here in the district who had come as a congressman from ohio and stayed on an as attorney and district attorney. He was very involved in reform movements and particularly committed to women suffrage and womens rights. He moved her admission. As Justice Ginsburg said when the court voted on the issue they were split and with six votes against her she found herself again turned back. The courts sent her back to congress of course knowing that she had not succeeded in congress the first time so they were doing her no favors sending her back there. She said when she went back to congress that nothing was too daring to attempt. She had nothing to lose. She had at this point had lost before two of the branches of the government. But again she was able to find male allies and again a bill that would prevent such discrimination was introduced. She was asked to testify and her testimony gives us some indication of why she was so committed to this. This was not some abstract legal question for her of womens rights. This was very concrete. Remember, she had spent many years as a single mother. By this